Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
They look to govt as their religion and salvation. This is it for them. There is nothing else.
They look to govt as their religion and salvation. This is it for them. There is nothing else.
I don't mind anyone having such a bizarre 'religion'....it's when they make the honest, hard-working, law-abiding citizen the second-class, in favor of criminals, illegals, and, as they say in the Green New Deal, "those who don't care to work" that we have a problem.
They look to govt as their religion and salvation. This is it for them. There is nothing else.
I don't mind anyone having such a bizarre 'religion'....it's when they make the honest, hard-working, law-abiding citizen the second-class, in favor of criminals, illegals, and, as they say in the Green New Deal, "those who don't care to work" that we have a problem.
I don't either but it comes into direct conflict with the US Constitution which the founders had a concise distinction of our creator. Eliminate that and you have a quick descension into depravity.
They look to govt as their religion and salvation. This is it for them. There is nothing else.
I don't mind anyone having such a bizarre 'religion'....it's when they make the honest, hard-working, law-abiding citizen the second-class, in favor of criminals, illegals, and, as they say in the Green New Deal, "those who don't care to work" that we have a problem.
I don't either but it comes into direct conflict with the US Constitution which the founders had a concise distinction of our creator. Eliminate that and you have a quick descension into depravity.
Don't you think I've given enough examples throughout the thread, to prove that the Democrat Party IS the party of depravity????
Look at the hateful posts by Democrat supporters, and they clearly know its nail on head.
It appears folks got the point about you, huh?
Let's see if she'll answer the OP.
Didn't think so.
Lardass still has not responded to the OP.
He/She is full of shit...as always.
And lardass is still a no show...except to chirp out the word Jumbo.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
They look to govt as their religion and salvation. This is it for them. There is nothing else.
I don't mind anyone having such a bizarre 'religion'....it's when they make the honest, hard-working, law-abiding citizen the second-class, in favor of criminals, illegals, and, as they say in the Green New Deal, "those who don't care to work" that we have a problem.
I don't either but it comes into direct conflict with the US Constitution which the founders had a concise distinction of our creator. Eliminate that and you have a quick descension into depravity.
Don't you think I've given enough examples throughout the thread, to prove that the Democrat Party IS the party of depravity????
Look at the hateful posts by Democrat supporters, and they clearly know its nail on head.
Let's see if she'll answer the OP.
Didn't think so.
Lardass still has not responded to the OP.
He/She is full of shit...as always.
And lardass is still a no show...except to chirp out the word Jumbo.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?Didn't think so.
Lardass still has not responded to the OP.
He/She is full of shit...as always.
And lardass is still a no show...except to chirp out the word Jumbo.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
They never do.
It is my fondest wish for a higher caliber of opposition, one that can defend and/or explain the Leftist positions. Best example is that I have asked Hussein supporters numerous times to answer this:
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Or this one...
Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????
If they actually tried to defend their vote, I bet they'd stop voting Democrat.
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?Lardass still has not responded to the OP.
He/She is full of shit...as always.
And lardass is still a no show...except to chirp out the word Jumbo.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
They never do.
It is my fondest wish for a higher caliber of opposition, one that can defend and/or explain the Leftist positions. Best example is that I have asked Hussein supporters numerous times to answer this:
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Or this one...
Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????
If they actually tried to defend their vote, I bet they'd stop voting Democrat.
A - you're wrong he didn't guarantee them nukes and B - we wouldn't be on the brink of war with Iran.
If you took your ideological blinders off maybe you'd see reality a little better. The Iranians were well on their way to amassing the uranium needed for bombs regardless of sanctions. Remember Stuxnet? It was probably unleashed by Obama.What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?And lardass is still a no show...except to chirp out the word Jumbo.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
They never do.
It is my fondest wish for a higher caliber of opposition, one that can defend and/or explain the Leftist positions. Best example is that I have asked Hussein supporters numerous times to answer this:
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Or this one...
Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????
If they actually tried to defend their vote, I bet they'd stop voting Democrat.
A - you're wrong he didn't guarantee them nukes and B - we wouldn't be on the brink of war with Iran.
"A - you're wrong he didn't guarantee them nukes "
You're lying....as usual.
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by awarding nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism
So, contrary to all of his promises not to do so, and in contravention of the non-proliferation agreement that is our policy, Hussein Obama guaranteed nuclear weapons to Iran....and you can't see a problem with that.
Gads, you're an imbecile
1. NPR wrote that they were restricted for 10 years:
"Perhaps the biggest unknown is what happens to that breakout time once some of the terms of this deal start to expire 10 and 15 years from now.
In an interview with NPR after the framework of this agreement was reached, President Obama conceded that "at that point the breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero."
But this deal, Obama argued at the time, buys the United States at least a decade."
6 Things You Should Know About The Iran Nuclear Deal
And that was written three years ago.
2. There was never....NEVER....any reason to allow the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism to have nuclear weapons.
3. The sanctions were strangling them.
This from the Left-leaning Brookings Institute...
"....the sanctions against Iran — and the context for them internationally and within Iran — have changed dramatically. Since 2010, the sanctions’ impact on Iran has been severe: its oil exports and revenues plummeted; the value of its currency eroded; trade disruptions shuttered businesses and exacerbated inflation. Quietly, a backlash emerged among Iran’s political elites against the country’s creeping isolation, and the June 2013 presidential election ushered in a moderate new president and the beginnings of a diplomatic breakthrough on the nuclear crisis — achievements that most observers attribute to the impact of sanctions."
Why “Iran Style” Sanctions Worked Against Tehran (And Why They Might Not Succeed with Moscow)
4. Hussein Obama:
March 6, 2012, press conference: "And what I have said is, is that we will not countenance Iran getting a nuclear weapon. My policy is not containment; my policy is to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon -- because if they get a nuclear weapon that could trigger an arms race in the region, it would undermine our non-proliferation goals, it could potentially fall into the hands of terrorists.
5. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-ProliferationTreaty or NPT, is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of ...
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - Wikipedia
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - Wikipedia
"war criminal.... a person who transgresses moral or civil law"
war criminal
If you took your ideological blinders off maybe you'd see reality a little better. The Iranians were well on their way to amassing the uranium needed for bombs regardless of sanctions. Remember Stuxnet? It was probably unleashed by Obama.What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
They never do.
It is my fondest wish for a higher caliber of opposition, one that can defend and/or explain the Leftist positions. Best example is that I have asked Hussein supporters numerous times to answer this:
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Or this one...
Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????
If they actually tried to defend their vote, I bet they'd stop voting Democrat.
A - you're wrong he didn't guarantee them nukes and B - we wouldn't be on the brink of war with Iran.
"A - you're wrong he didn't guarantee them nukes "
You're lying....as usual.
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by awarding nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism
So, contrary to all of his promises not to do so, and in contravention of the non-proliferation agreement that is our policy, Hussein Obama guaranteed nuclear weapons to Iran....and you can't see a problem with that.
Gads, you're an imbecile
1. NPR wrote that they were restricted for 10 years:
"Perhaps the biggest unknown is what happens to that breakout time once some of the terms of this deal start to expire 10 and 15 years from now.
In an interview with NPR after the framework of this agreement was reached, President Obama conceded that "at that point the breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero."
But this deal, Obama argued at the time, buys the United States at least a decade."
6 Things You Should Know About The Iran Nuclear Deal
And that was written three years ago.
2. There was never....NEVER....any reason to allow the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism to have nuclear weapons.
3. The sanctions were strangling them.
This from the Left-leaning Brookings Institute...
"....the sanctions against Iran — and the context for them internationally and within Iran — have changed dramatically. Since 2010, the sanctions’ impact on Iran has been severe: its oil exports and revenues plummeted; the value of its currency eroded; trade disruptions shuttered businesses and exacerbated inflation. Quietly, a backlash emerged among Iran’s political elites against the country’s creeping isolation, and the June 2013 presidential election ushered in a moderate new president and the beginnings of a diplomatic breakthrough on the nuclear crisis — achievements that most observers attribute to the impact of sanctions."
Why “Iran Style” Sanctions Worked Against Tehran (And Why They Might Not Succeed with Moscow)
4. Hussein Obama:
March 6, 2012, press conference: "And what I have said is, is that we will not countenance Iran getting a nuclear weapon. My policy is not containment; my policy is to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon -- because if they get a nuclear weapon that could trigger an arms race in the region, it would undermine our non-proliferation goals, it could potentially fall into the hands of terrorists.
5. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-ProliferationTreaty or NPT, is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of ...
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - Wikipedia
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - Wikipedia
"war criminal.... a person who transgresses moral or civil law"
war criminal
In April 2010, during the signing of the U.S.-Russia New START Treaty, President Obama said that the United States, Russia, and other nations were demanding that Iran face consequences for failing to fulfill its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, saying "We will not tolerate actions that flout the NPT, risk an arms race in a vital region, and threaten the credibility of the international community and our collective security."
Doesn't sound like you've been telling the truth here.
Repeating a lie over and over doesn't impress anyone, it only makes you appear stupid. Sorry to break it to you.What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Repeating a lie over and over doesn't impress anyone, it only makes you appear stupid. Sorry to break it to you.What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
"Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons". He gave no such guarantee. He did guarantee that Iran would NOT get nuclear weapons for the duration of the treaty. Once the treaty ended, no help and no guarantees were offered. Honesty is not your best policy, I guess you stopped reading at the 8th Commandment.Where is a lie?
"Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons". He gave no such guarantee. He did guarantee that Iran would NOT get nuclear weapons for the duration of the treaty. Once the treaty ended, no help and no guarantees were offered. Honesty is not your best policy, I guess you stopped reading at the 8th Commandment.Where is a lie?
"Obama guaranteed Iran nuclear weapons""Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons". He gave no such guarantee. He did guarantee that Iran would NOT get nuclear weapons for the duration of the treaty. Once the treaty ended, no help and no guarantees were offered. Honesty is not your best policy, I guess you stopped reading at the 8th Commandment.Where is a lie?
Obama guaranteed Iran nuclear weapons.
Fact.
"Obama Gave Iran A Faster Route To A Nuke -- And Didn't Tell Us
President Obama's deal with Iran was supposed to keep that nation's mullahs from creating a nuclear weapon with which it could intimidate and dominate the Mideast and much of Europe. Instead, it actually makes it more possible -- and in shorter time.
The Associated Press obtained a copy of a secret side deal that, in the words of the normally circumspect AP, advances "Tehran's ability to build a bomb even before the end of the pact." The accord as agreed to by the U.S. and five other nations was supposed to last 15 years. Or so we were told. Turns out, that's not the case.
...the deal as signed all but guarantees that Iran will someday get a nuclear weapon with which to terrorize its neighbors. What the AP document does is move up the time under which Iran can make a nuclear weapon. So we'll all be at risk sooner than we think.
The so-called "add-on" agreement lets Iran expand its uranium enrichment program after 10 years -- not 15 years, as the public parts of the deal suggested."
Obama Gave Iran A Faster Route To A Nuke -- And Didn't Tell Us | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD
BTW....
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by awarding nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
" Iran President Hassan Rouhani endorsed the agreement in a nationally broadcast speech Sunday, saying the accord recognizes Iran's "nuclear rights" even if that precise language was kept from the final document because of Western resistance.
"No matter what interpretations are given, Iran's right to enrichment has been recognized," said Rouhani,...."
US, Iran nuclear deal spurs bipartisan concern in Congress
Didn't think so.
Lardass still has not responded to the OP.
He/She is full of shit...as always.
And lardass is still a no show...except to chirp out the word Jumbo.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
They never do.
It is my fondest wish for a higher caliber of opposition, one that can defend and/or explain the Leftist positions. Best example is that I have asked Hussein supporters numerous times to answer this:
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Or this one...
Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????
If they actually tried to defend their vote, I bet they'd stop voting Democrat.
Lardass still has not responded to the OP.
He/She is full of shit...as always.
And lardass is still a no show...except to chirp out the word Jumbo.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
They never do.
It is my fondest wish for a higher caliber of opposition, one that can defend and/or explain the Leftist positions. Best example is that I have asked Hussein supporters numerous times to answer this:
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Or this one...
Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????
If they actually tried to defend their vote, I bet they'd stop voting Democrat.
"My Administration is also defending religious liberty, and that includes the Constitutional right to pray in public schools. In America, we do not punish prayer. We do not tear down crosses. We do not ban symbols of faith. We do not muzzle preachers and pastors. In America, we celebrate faith. We cherish religion. We lift our voices in prayer, and we raise our sights to the Glory of God!"
Trump, SOTU 2020
And lardass is still a no show...except to chirp out the word Jumbo.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
They never do.
It is my fondest wish for a higher caliber of opposition, one that can defend and/or explain the Leftist positions. Best example is that I have asked Hussein supporters numerous times to answer this:
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Or this one...
Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????
If they actually tried to defend their vote, I bet they'd stop voting Democrat.
"My Administration is also defending religious liberty, and that includes the Constitutional right to pray in public schools. In America, we do not punish prayer. We do not tear down crosses. We do not ban symbols of faith. We do not muzzle preachers and pastors. In America, we celebrate faith. We cherish religion. We lift our voices in prayer, and we raise our sights to the Glory of God!"
Trump, SOTU 2020
This will be interesting.
I applaud this effort as long as it is approached properly.
Bush really killed the discussion on Social Security by making an off-hand comment and letting the left get out in front. He has made it more difficult for us to to anything there.
Don't want the same here.
It used to surprise me that they were unable to mount a defense of the party and programs that they support, but it seems to be pro forma......
Either they learned to fear disputing....or even questioning their masters, or they need the warm embrace of the masses to feel needed.
They should understand that when you're part of the masses, sometimes the 'm' is silent.
Did lardass (candycorn) ever show up to address the OP ?
They never do.
It is my fondest wish for a higher caliber of opposition, one that can defend and/or explain the Leftist positions. Best example is that I have asked Hussein supporters numerous times to answer this:
What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Or this one...
Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????
If they actually tried to defend their vote, I bet they'd stop voting Democrat.
"My Administration is also defending religious liberty, and that includes the Constitutional right to pray in public schools. In America, we do not punish prayer. We do not tear down crosses. We do not ban symbols of faith. We do not muzzle preachers and pastors. In America, we celebrate faith. We cherish religion. We lift our voices in prayer, and we raise our sights to the Glory of God!"
Trump, SOTU 2020
This will be interesting.
I applaud this effort as long as it is approached properly.
Bush really killed the discussion on Social Security by making an off-hand comment and letting the left get out in front. He has made it more difficult for us to to anything there.
Don't want the same here.
Of course, the problem is the Supreme Court, and the KKKer that Franklin Roosevelt made his first nominee on the court.
There is no 'separation of church and state' in the Constitution....
If Trump continues to be successful in changing the judiciary, we will become America again.
1."By the numbers overall (including Phipps), Trump has nominated and had confirmed:
Supreme Court: 2
Courts of Appeals: 43
District/Specialty Courts: 85
Trump is running out of Court of Appeals vacancies to fill, in part a result of his focus on filling those critical slots:
Current and known future vacancies: 141
Courts of Appeals: 6
District/Specialty Courts*: 135
Pending nominees for current and known future vacancies: 58
Courts of Appeals: 2
District/Specialty Courts*: 56"
Liberal nightmare: Takeover of federal judiciary by "larval Scalias is devastatingly close to completion"
2.“…the advent of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh has reshaped the Supreme Court enough to stop such despondent talk. While the decisions announced at the end of the Court’s term in June, marking the first year with both new justices on the bench, don’t amount to a stampede toward the Right, they display a wholesome focus on what the Constitution and statutes actually say.
The Nine are “redirecting the judge’s interpretive task back to its roots, away from open-ended policy appeals and speculation about legislative intentions and toward the traditional tools of interpretation that judges have employed for centuries to elucidate the law’s original public meaning,” Gorsuch explained in a June opinion. “Today, it is even said that we judges are, to one degree or another, ‘all textualists now.’ ” And that’s already a quiet revolution.” The Court Moves Right
