|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Why don't you get it? /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1563088642 Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 07/14/19 at 00:17:22 |
|
Title: Why don't you get it? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/14/19 at 00:17:22 The unborn American has no constitutional rights or protections, Because they are not born or naturalized into the country. People who have entered illegally are not born or naturalized into the country, yet the same people who are happy to see the unborn killed are demanding the illegal aliens be treated as if They are citizens... Do you even know what Roe v. Wade said? There is no Constitutional RIGHT to an abortion. There are no constitutional rights for the unborn, that's all. But lefties seem to believe that people who are here illegally are due the same considerations as citizens. That's completely without reason. Who breaks into your house and gets adopted into your family? |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Eegore on 07/14/19 at 00:43:15 Not all people who are pro-choice are pro-illegal immigration. All humans in the US are protected under the Constitution. Unborn humans are not. I imagine there are a multitude of reasons why certain rights could be extended to illegal immigrants in certain situations but funding large open groups is not a good idea. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by WebsterMark on 07/14/19 at 05:10:06 All humans in the US are protected under the Constitution. Unborn humans are not. I don't believe that's true. All humans in the US have varying forms of protection under the Constitution, not all have the same. An illegal immigrant can't legally vote for example. (not yet anyway) An unborn child in which the mother declares the child is wanted and has value has certain rights. A robber who hits a pregnant woman and kills her unborn baby but not the mother, can be charged with murder, not just assault. However, another woman who decides she does not want an unborn baby conceived on the same day as the one murdered by the robber, can legally abort (kill, murder, semantics at this point) that human. In one case, the human has the right to justice for it's murder but not in the other case. It's all because one mother declare the child has value as a human but not in the other. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Eegore on 07/14/19 at 05:15:25 "I don't believe that's true. All humans in the US have varying forms of protection under the Constitution, not all have the same." This is true, I didn't clarify. "It's all because one mother declare the child has value as a human but not in the other." Yes, since the mother has been born she has a choice, for now anyway. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by WebsterMark on 07/14/19 at 05:59:47 A choice to do what exactly? |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/14/19 at 07:25:27 All humans in the US are protected under the Constitution. Unborn humans are not. No, they are not. They , under the very same clause that SCOTUS used to deny rights to the Unborn, are NOT included in the rights and protections, because They were neither Born Nor NATURALIZED Into the country. You don't get to decide because it's how you feel. Read the constitution. Understand the way SCOTUS used its language to DENY the rights and protections of the constitution to the unborn, Natural citizens, and then explain, don't just say it's true, explain Why illegal aliens, people who are the legal equivalent of an intruder in your house, somehow is due the legal rights and protections American citizens have. I have explained why they don't. Back to you... All of "You" |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by thumperclone on 07/14/19 at 07:35:45 a tourist visiting the U.S. has the same rights as you and I AND must abide by our laws UNLESS they have diplomatic immunity |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Serowbot on 07/14/19 at 09:21:40 67787E7964635262526A78743F0D0 wrote:
Quote:
I would say that this is a Constitutional right to an abortion. SCOTUS basically ruled that an abortion is a legitimate medical procedure. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Eegore on 07/14/19 at 11:40:16 "A choice to do what exactly?" Have a legal abortion in a clinical environment. You already know this, did you want to have a semantics conversation about it? |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/14/19 at 11:50:04 Thank You for making My Point. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv SECTION 1.SECTION 2.SECTION 3.SECTION 4.SECTION 5. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.... Read it. There IS no constitutional RIGHT to abortion. The UNBORN, BECAUSE they Are Not Yet BORN Or NATURALIZED are NOT protected By the Constitution. Yet, you lefties want to pretend that the Illegal Aliens, NOT born IN AMERICA Nor NATURALIZED into the country Have constitutional rights. You don't understand how things actually work. You FEEL whatever, but truth is They have No rights. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Eegore on 07/14/19 at 11:57:34 You don't get to decide because it's how you feel. Read the constitution. I read case law and how the US Constitution is applied to actual situations, not internet articles. I'd reference 20 or 30 cases easily but historically nobody here reads them, and you specifically disregard any data you don't "care" about. First you are obviously mixing foreign policy with US Judicial law so the application of the US Constitution is not even the same. The Constitution does not have written into all of it that the rights are specific to citizens, some portions do, some don't. Illegal immigrants get the right to a speedy trial. They have the right to legal representation (contrary to popular belief this is not paid for by US tax dollars) They do not get to vote. Even at that you are talking Administrative law, not Judicial/Criminal or Civil. Administrative Court has typically been ruled immune to review by judicial standards. After Sept 11 2001 this was addressed constantly, look up why SAMs were started, look up why certain foreign nationals were sent to Cuba and not the US. Very specifically to ease burden of legal interpretation regarding their Constitutional rights. Here's some easy ones people might read: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/297/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2017/01/30/does-the-constitution-protect-non-citizens-judges-say-yes/#275d3e894f1d |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by WebsterMark on 07/14/19 at 11:58:01 1E3E3C34293E5B0 wrote:
Another way to say that would be to say a choice to end another human life. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Hiko on 07/14/19 at 11:59:29 2C302D35283D2A3B3437363D580 wrote:
So me as an alien to the US can rock up and vote? Wow how generous. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Eegore on 07/14/19 at 12:10:38 "Another way to say that would be to say a choice to end another human life." Another way to say it is that it's not a human life until it reaches a full-term birth. Want to have a semantics conversation again? Theres like five threads here going over this in circles over and over. Abortion is legal. Self-defense is legal. Capital punishment is legal. All of those end another human life. Still legal. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Serowbot on 07/14/19 at 12:39:53 By determining that abortion is private medical matter, the SCOTUS is taking the position that a fetus is not a person and does not get legal protection, up to the point that it becomes viable. History and religion has generally said a fetus becomes a person at the "quickening". This is approximately when it can be felt to kick externally and is basically viable if born at that time. Arguing that the 14th amendment does not protect abortion is like saying it doesn't protect ear piercing. It protects women's right's to determine what is done to their bodies. It is a private matter. What you want, is to give a fetus full personhood at inception. SCOTUS says not until the "quickening". So there's your beef,.. not the 14th amendment. When is an egg a chicken?... |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by thumperclone on 07/14/19 at 16:55:59 5A6F7C7870781D0 wrote:
So me as an alien to the US can rock up and vote? Wow how generous.[/quote] if you can register you can vote... |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by raydawg on 07/14/19 at 17:48:21 Perfect...... Arguing that the 14th amendment does not protect abortion is like saying it doesn't protect ear piercing. It protects women's right's to determine what is done to their bodies. It is a private matter. Even at 13 years of age, she can get a abortion with NO ONES consent, WHICH came about with sexual intercourse so with your reasoning then why can't she charge older men, selling her body, under the same reasoning its HER CHOICE to do with HER BODY and therefor guys can't be held to a legal jeopardy? You want to answer it this time? |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/14/19 at 18:11:51 There was no Constitutional Right to abortion. The fourteenth amendment says the Constitutional Rights and Protections are Reserved for those people who are Born Or NATURALIZED into the country. No constitutional RIGHTS to an abortion were created or granted. SCOTUS simply read the constitution nOT include the UNBORN, therefore, the UNBORN child could legally be killed. Even Hillary Clinton has said as much. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Serowbot on 07/14/19 at 18:14:15 Whether she can or can't is irrelevant. It would still be a crime for an adult man to have sex with her because the courts say she is a minor . Not of legal age to consent. The reason courts allow minor girls to get abortions is because of the dangers of having a child too young. Some times it's a relative that got her pregnant, other times they fear their parents, violence or being cast out. It's not a good situation, but there aren't any better alternatives. I'm sure providers encourage consulting family, but it in't legally required for the girls safety. You keep harping on why adults can't screw children. They just can't. It's illegal. I imagine,.. and hope you're thinking of a 17 yr old or something, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. There are sicko's that would molest 4 yr olds. Is that okay with you? Even if they consent?. Let's hope not. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Serowbot on 07/14/19 at 18:19:51 617E787F62655464546C7E72390B0 wrote:
So,.. if you grant Constitutional rights to the unborn,.. and a Mexican comes across the border while pregnant,.. do you grant it citizenship in the womb?... If it's born here it get's citizenship. What if it spends 8 months gestating here? or 3 months? Is it not equal to baby? ..or something less than a baby? Some cans of worms you don't want to open. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/14/19 at 18:21:47 I remember when sodomy was illegal. Someone wanted the Societal Norms changed. Gee, what's Next? Or are you lefties done? |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Serowbot on 07/14/19 at 18:32:53 It's still illegal for them to do it to you,.. if you don't consent. So don't worry. It's even illegal for you to do it to your wife,... unless she consents. BJ's too. That's also sodomy. Are you anti BJ?... |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Eegore on 07/14/19 at 19:25:10 "Even at 13 years of age, she can get a abortion with NO ONES consent, WHICH came about with sexual intercourse so with your reasoning then why can't she charge older men, selling her body, under the same reasoning its HER CHOICE to do with HER BODY and therefor guys can't be held to a legal jeopardy? You want to answer it this time?" You are clearly mixing up the difference between consent of a minor and consent of an adult and leaving out the inability for a minor to legally enter into a financial agreement. A thirteen year old can not give legal consent to have sexual intercourse with anyone. Again... Legal consent. That does not mean it is illegal for a thirteen year old to have sexual intercourse. It is however illegal for an adult to have intercourse with a 13 year old because she can't give Legal Consent. Underage humans in the US unless in rare Emancipation circumstances can not enter into a legal contract, which is why parents sign field-trip forms, or football camp waivers. A thirteen year old girl can not charge an adult male for sexual services because she can not legally enter into a financial contract. A thirteen year old girl can legally engage in a clinical abortion under a licensed provider. With a strong enough campaign you may be able to change law so that thirteen year olds can consent exclusively to sexual intercourse by means of an agent who handles the funds, or even attempt to legalize sex-act transactions for minors. Good luck getting people on board with that. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/14/19 at 19:33:10 4B5D4A574F5A574C380 wrote:
Way to dodge the point. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Eegore on 07/14/19 at 19:40:42 "I remember when sodomy was illegal. Someone wanted the Societal Norms changed. Gee, what's Next?" That sounds like someone saying: "I remember when women couldn't vote. Gee, Whats next?" It wasn't "Someone" who wanted societal norms changed, it was a lot of people, enough that more wanted change than those who actually did something to stop it. Lefties are at this time doing a better job at getting what they want, its that simple. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/14/19 at 19:43:33 706F696E73744575457D6F63281A0 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/14/19 at 19:49:58 4C5355524F4879497941535F14260 wrote:
Societal norms protect innocent humans. The example you use is not really applicable. Consensual sodomy is no different than consensual sex. You honestly think that "us lefties" will somehow change societal norms to the point of hurting the innocent? Not gonna happen. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/14/19 at 22:15:47 You don't know the damage done now. Look at what is going on. It's insanity Men competing in women's competitions. Little boys playing drag queens. Ohhh, you're gonna wreck it.. You're gonna win. Lefties really do call good evil and evil good. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 05:41:55 5D4244435E5968586850424E05370 wrote:
It's kinda sad you don't see the big picture. There's such diversity outside the old-world-provincial perspective. It's what truly makes America great. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by raydawg on 07/15/19 at 06:03:45 2606040C1106630 wrote:
No, I am not trying to push this issue, I too believe its very wrong, the connection is the lame excuse the democrat party pushes that its all about their number one party platform reason ABORTION FOR ALL.... MY GAWD this girl couldn't get a tattoo with out consent, much less a elective medical procedure without consent, but this abortion issue is the very framework and supporting structure to what the party is, they will use a 13 year old child to a a pawn to enforce it..... You say a minor can't enter a binding contract because she doesn't have the capacity to understand all the necessities, but some how a radical assault upon her body by removing life from her reproductive abilities that only a woman can do.....doesn't impact her, is to deny the facts of thousands of what women have shared otherwise.... You guys just keep your blind faith because reality scares you too much. I totally understand why a minor can't enter into anything of legal binding nature, that is what is OBVIOUS, that you guys just somehow overlook...SMH. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by WebsterMark on 07/15/19 at 06:36:24 It's kinda sad you don't see the big picture. There's such diversity outside the old-world-provincial perspective. It's what truly makes America great. 'Parents' dressing their little kids up as drag queens and filming them posing in sexually suggestive actions is your idea of diversity that makes America great? Wow..... Holy Child Abuse Batman..... |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 06:55:52 073532232435221D31223B500 wrote:
"Child abuse"? That's rich! Is that anything like the redneck's taking pics of their kids holding Bibles and firearms, with a confederate flag backdrop? Yeah, it's bad taste, but it's not "abuse". The fact is, the tables are turning - albeit slowly - for the better. People of different sexual orientations, races, religions, etc. are being accepted as just "people". Racists and bigots are going by the wayside - because at some point, they'll have no one to rally against or with. I love America and the progress we've made! |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by WebsterMark on 07/15/19 at 07:08:43 Yeah, it's bad taste, but it's not "abuse'. Yes, it is abuse. Anyone who can't see that, well let's just say maybe we need your real name to see if you've been paling around with Epstein on that Island. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/15/19 at 07:29:02 607E71707D607B66140 wrote:
I'm curious, do you condone beastality or polygamy? Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Serowbot on 07/15/19 at 07:58:34 7760666A6575070 wrote:
I'm curious, do you condone beastality or polygamy? Best regards, [/quote] Fu*k a du*k, Batman!... Are you serious?... PS.. "Best regards" doesn't ring true sometimes. ::) |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 09:04:09 4E7C7B6A6D7C6B54786B72190 wrote:
No, I'm fine, thanks for your inappropriate accusation. Posing a kid in drag (which I've yet to see) is in bad taste, not abuse. Like I said, how is it any different than a kid posing with a Bible in one hand, an AK in the other in front of a confederate flag? But yeah, you go ahead and ignore what you don't like..... |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/15/19 at 10:02:21 1007010D0212600 wrote:
I'm curious, do you condone beastality or polygamy? Best regards, [/quote] No response, imagine that.... Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/15/19 at 10:05:56 1006110C14010C17630 wrote:
I'm curious, do you condone beastality or polygamy? Best regards, [/quote] Fu*k a du*k, Batman!... Are you serious?... PS.. "Best regards" doesn't ring true sometimes. ::)[/quote] Yes, I'm serious. He said "Consensual sodomy is no different than consensual sex." What is wrong with polygamy? They are all consenting, it's just one more.... Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by WebsterMark on 07/15/19 at 10:17:18 Yeah, it's bad taste, but it's not "abuse". Valid question from PG. If you're a person who things kids dressing up as drag queens and twerking is okay, then "Lucy, you got some splanning to do...." |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Serowbot on 07/15/19 at 10:48:18 2F383E323D2D5F0 wrote:
a. Most polygamists are Mormon,... a very Conservative Republican constituency. b. Animals can't consent,... we are their stewards. Such cruelty is abhorrent. Lastly,... "sodomy" is defined as any non-procreative sexual activity. So, sodomy is sex. Anal, fellatio, cunnilingus, mutual masturbation, even heavy petting, all qualify as sodomy. Making laws against all that would be an exercise in futility. Religious Right stupidity strikes again. Are you guys screwing through holes in sheets, or what?... ;D |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by Eegore on 07/15/19 at 11:39:44 "You say a minor can't enter a binding contract because she doesn't have the capacity to understand all the necessities, but some how a radical assault upon her body by removing life from her reproductive abilities that only a woman can do.....doesn't impact her, is to deny the facts of thousands of what women have shared otherwise...." I didn't say that. I said the law prohibits minors from entering contract. Who said abortion "Doesn't impact her"? Abortion greatly impacts people involved. Can you reference a situation where anyone said abortion does not impact a child? The difference is consensual abortion by a minor is legal. Consensual sexual intercourse by a minor is legal. Consensual sexual intercourse by an Adult with a minor is illegal. The minor doesn't get charged, the Adult does which clearly means the crime is committed by the Adult. As such you are only comparing one activity that is legal for a child to do (Sex) with another legal activity a child a child can do (Abortion) to an activity an Adult can not do (Sex with a minor). This comparison makes no applicable sense because one: Nobody is claiming abortion does not impact a child. Two: You are comparing two things a child can already do under the guise that sexual intercourse is illegal for the child. Three: You are attempting to say if a child can consent to abortion why can't the child consent to sex or prostitution, which is mixing applied consent definition, as a child can consent to sex and not be charged with a crime. Again, its the adult that is charged. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 11:49:41 786F69656A7A080 wrote:
I'm curious, do you condone beastality or polygamy? Best regards, [/quote] No response, imagine that.... Best regards,[/quote] Whassa matter pro golfer, lonely? Give me some time - you know, some of us have a life.... Polygamy, I dunno. If you want more than one wife or husband (of legal age and consent), have at it I guess. Beastialty? Seriously? No. Why is it conservatives go right to that? Are you that interested in it? That's on you pro golfer, not me. Having sex with a farm animal should never be legal - you know why? Because they're innocent creatures. Like I keep saying - we liberals protect the innocent. Unlike the righties who like to bring up beatiality all the time. Sick. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 11:53:41 586A6D7C7B6A7D426E7D640F0 wrote:
For the record, I can honestly say that I've never seen anything like you describe. Which brings to mind a far more important question, mark - Why are you looking at kids dressing up and twerking?? I think that's the real issue. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by verslagen1 on 07/15/19 at 12:07:24 786E79647C69647F0B0 wrote:
a. Most polygamists are Mormon,... a very Conservative Republican constituency. [/quote] Or Arabs. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/15/19 at 12:26:16 554B444548554E53210 wrote:
So the liberals protect the innocent, is that correct? How about the late term abortion laws? It doesn't get any more innocent than that. Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 12:45:58 1304020E0111630 wrote:
So the liberals protect the innocent, is that correct? How about the late term abortion laws? It doesn't get any more innocent than that. Best regards,[/quote] A fetus is not innocent, it can't be. It's a fetus, not a baby. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/15/19 at 14:40:26 5F414E4F425F44592B0 wrote:
So the liberals protect the innocent, is that correct? How about the late term abortion laws? It doesn't get any more innocent than that. Best regards,[/quote] A fetus is not innocent, it can't be. It's a fetus, not a baby. [/quote] I said late term abortion as in 3rd trimester, Democrat Ralph Northam - "So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother." Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 14:54:27 594E48444B5B290 wrote:
So the liberals protect the innocent, is that correct? How about the late term abortion laws? It doesn't get any more innocent than that. Best regards,[/quote] A fetus is not innocent, it can't be. It's a fetus, not a baby. [/quote] I said late term abortion as in 3rd trimester, Democrat Ralph Northam - "So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother." Best regards,[/quote] Let's be clear - most dems (I being one of them) don't support late term abortions. That being - aborting a fetus that could be viable outside the mother's body. Got it? But back to your post. Not surprising, you left out the context (gee, that never happens, huh?): "[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that's nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen," Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. "The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother." The bill -- which among other things would end a state rule that requires at least three physicians confirm "that a third trimester abortion is necessary to prevent the woman's death or impairment of her mental or physical health" and ends "the need to find that any such impairment to the woman's health would be substantial and irremediable" -- is currently tabled in Virginia's legislature. Northam said he supports the bill's measures, telling WTOP that "we want the government not to be involved in these types of decisions. We want the decision to be made by the mothers and their providers." But it's OK, I understand. None of your repub heroes who tweeted about it used the context either. It must be an innate thing in conservatives. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/15/19 at 15:49:13 6D737C7D706D766B190 wrote:
Those dems sure tried to push through a number of later term abortion bills this year didn't they...... Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 15:59:37 7364626E6171030 wrote:
Those dems sure tried to push through a number of later term abortion bills this year didn't they...... Best regards, [/quote] I didn't notice. I just saw a lot of slack-jaw southern states try to ban all abortions. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/15/19 at 16:05:43 706E61606D706B76040 wrote:
Those dems sure tried to push through a number of later term abortion bills this year didn't they...... Best regards, [/quote] I didn't notice. I just saw a lot of slack-jaw southern states try to ban all abortions. [/quote] IIRC, Virginia, New York, and Mass. Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 16:12:11 382F29252A3A480 wrote:
Hmm. I see. So that's what you consider the "entire democratic party"? Got it. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/15/19 at 16:26:15 7F616E6F627F64790B0 wrote:
Hmm. I see. So that's what you consider the "entire democratic party"? Got it.[/quote] No you don't 'got it'. Did I say entire democratic party? Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/15/19 at 16:30:53 6176707C7363110 wrote:
Hmm. I see. So that's what you consider the "entire democratic party"? Got it.[/quote] No you don't 'got it'. Did I say entire democratic party? Best regards,[/quote] You said "Those dems". So, does that mean all? Some? None? Specificity pro golfer, try it. |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by thumperclone on 07/16/19 at 15:36:04 The Russians have taken over this forum and are posing as right wingers! jogoldandslowverslagenpgwebbie and more beware!!! |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by T And T Garage on 07/16/19 at 16:17:38 5E425F475A4F58494645444F2A0 wrote:
;D Oh no!!!!!! |
|
Title: Re: Why don't you get it? Post by pg on 07/16/19 at 16:56:21 796768696479627F0D0 wrote:
Hmm. I see. So that's what you consider the "entire democratic party"? Got it.[/quote] No you don't 'got it'. Did I say entire democratic party? Best regards,[/quote] You said "Those dems". So, does that mean all? Some? None? Specificity pro golfer, try it. [/quote] I named the states...… Best regards, |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |