BBW12OG said:
Ask Civ...."That's different....she's on my team. It's OK for socialists to call for violence against Conservatives."
Civ can probably lend you his... he has it mastered already.hokiewolf said:
I'd like to read this "socialist handbook", where do I find a copy of one?
You'd have to talk to some of the socialists on here. I don't have one. I just pick up on their espousing of the rules according to it.hokiewolf said:
I'd like to read this "socialist handbook", where do I find a copy of one?
Dig deeper. You should see what they say about battery operated airplanes, cargo ships and freight trains.hokiewolf said:
Oh ok, I just couldn't find article IV, section 4, wanted to read it for myself. Seems like a real scorcher
Im guessing he's referring to a coloring bookhokiewolf said:
Oh ok, I just couldn't find article IV, section 4, wanted to read it for myself. Seems like a real scorcher
Who/what is that? is that some sort of music group?BBW12OG said:Dig deeper. You should see what they say about battery operated airplanes, cargo ships and freight trains.hokiewolf said:
Oh ok, I just couldn't find article IV, section 4, wanted to read it for myself. Seems like a real scorcher
I suggest buying stock in Lionel Trains. Only problem is the Bartender and the Flunky Bunch keep asking if we have drop cords long enough to reach from coast to coast when the trains all switch to electric and how will the conductors get in those little bitty driver's seats.
http://www.lionel.com/
Civilized said:BBW12OG said:
Ask Civ...."That's different....she's on my team. It's OK for socialists to call for violence against Conservatives."
Huh? Is there another tweet of hers I'm not seeing that calls for violence?
Congress would be better without AOC, but where is the call to violence.packgrad said:
More Democrat rhetoric/lies. Impeach AOC if violence occurs against ICE agents.
IseWolf22 said:Congress would be better without AOC, but where is the call to violence.packgrad said:
More Democrat rhetoric/lies. Impeach AOC if violence occurs against ICE agents.
She just wants to get rid of ICE. Which is dumb and it will go nowhere because the progressive fringe is the only one who'd support that.
statefan91 said:
Are they defying orders?
statefan91 said:
Appreciate the information, I'm not up to speed on how ICE is directed but it looks like Trump gave ICE Executive orders to administer how they operated. Are you saying that Biden is doing something different and his orders should not be followed by ICE whereas former President Trump's were?
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/01/30/2017-02102/enhancing-public-safety-in-the-interior-of-the-united-states
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/01/30/2017-02095/border-security-and-immigration-enforcement-improvements
The Bartender and the Flunky Bunch have been misinformed since they were elected. Have you not followed politics in America the last four years?statefan91 said:
Ok - that wasn't actually in anything you posted so good to know. I would hope that the Department would follow what the Courts instruct as to what the law is. It sounds like AOC is misinformed in that case?
statefan91 said:
Ok - that wasn't actually in anything you posted so good to know. I would hope that the Department would follow what the Courts instruct as to what the law is. It sounds like AOC is misinformed in that case?
Sounds like you are as well... but that didn't keep you from jumping to the wrong conclusion and posting before you researched... as you would quickly jump somebody else for doing.statefan91 said:
Ok - that wasn't actually in anything you posted so good to know. I would hope that the Department would follow what the Courts instruct as to what the law is. It sounds like AOC is misinformed in that case?
TheStorm said:Sounds like you are as well... but that didn't keep you from jumping to the wrong conclusion and posting before you researched... as you would quickly jump somebody else for doing.statefan91 said:
Ok - that wasn't actually in anything you posted so good to know. I would hope that the Department would follow what the Courts instruct as to what the law is. It sounds like AOC is misinformed in that case?
But at least you are consistent if nothing else...
TheStorm said:Sounds like you are as well... but that didn't keep you from jumping to the wrong conclusion and posting before you researched... as you would quickly jump somebody else for doing.statefan91 said:
Ok - that wasn't actually in anything you posted so good to know. I would hope that the Department would follow what the Courts instruct as to what the law is. It sounds like AOC is misinformed in that case?
But at least you are consistent if nothing else...
Wow....did you type that with a serious face or is that sarcasm? YOU, of all people, challenging a poster to engage in a conversation with "original" thoughts is damn funny. You won't address or answer anything. You regurgitate..."but, but, but Trump..." along with CNN/MSNBC talking points.Civilized said:TheStorm said:Sounds like you are as well... but that didn't keep you from jumping to the wrong conclusion and posting before you researched... as you would quickly jump somebody else for doing.statefan91 said:
Ok - that wasn't actually in anything you posted so good to know. I would hope that the Department would follow what the Courts instruct as to what the law is. It sounds like AOC is misinformed in that case?
But at least you are consistent if nothing else...
Why don't you try adding to the conversation with original thoughts, instead of just sniping at posters?
No shock that you wouldn't understand this because you do the exact same *****BBW12OG said:Wow....did you type that with a serious face or is that sarcasm? YOU, of all people, challenging a poster to engage in a conversation with "original" thoughts is damn funny. You won't address or answer anything. You regurgitate..."but, but, but Trump..." along with CNN/MSNBC talking points.Civilized said:TheStorm said:Sounds like you are as well... but that didn't keep you from jumping to the wrong conclusion and posting before you researched... as you would quickly jump somebody else for doing.statefan91 said:
Ok - that wasn't actually in anything you posted so good to know. I would hope that the Department would follow what the Courts instruct as to what the law is. It sounds like AOC is misinformed in that case?
But at least you are consistent if nothing else...
Why don't you try adding to the conversation with original thoughts, instead of just sniping at posters?
HYPOCRISY. It's not just a word. It's a lifestyle.
Likely so.packgrad said:statefan91 said:
Ok - that wasn't actually in anything you posted so good to know. I would hope that the Department would follow what the Courts instruct as to what the law is. It sounds like AOC is misinformed in that case?
Perhaps. I think she's just spouting her standard hyperbolic rhetoric though.
That's a blatant lie right there. You have responded to me multiple times with insults and your normal abrasiveness when I didn't remotely mention you. Edit: And unlike you and your lies about my posts at PP, I WILL provide examples of you responding to me when you weren't mentioned at all....which is the exact opposite of what you just claimed.BBW12OG said:
I have made very few replies that didn't revolve around issues. I respond when I am called out. I have NEVER instigated a conversation with a poster. I have RESPONDED when I was mentioned.
My boy brought the receipts!!!!Pacfanweb said:That's a blatant lie right there. You have responded to me multiple times with insults and your normal abrasiveness when I didn't remotely mention you. Edit: And unlike you and your lies about my posts at PP, I WILL provide examples of you responding to me when you weren't mentioned at all....which is the exact opposite of what you just claimed.BBW12OG said:
I have made very few replies that didn't revolve around issues. I respond when I am called out. I have NEVER instigated a conversation with a poster. I have RESPONDED when I was mentioned.
All you've done here since being banned at PP is name call, insult, and bait people. That's why I stopped responding to your posts for the most part shortly after you came here, it was obvious what you were doing.
But as with the lie you told about me denigrating this site over at PP, I'll make an exception for this lie, as it's just the absolute opposite of the truth.
Good grief, if ANYONE here has "instigated" or been inflammatory, it's you ahead of everyone else by a mile.