T1B

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2011 4:29 am**

Derron wrote:

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2011 4:33 am**

Looks like Pikkkle at a Public Enemy concert.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:12 pm**

R-Jack wrote:Looks like Pikkkle at a Public Enemy concert.

Or trev's preferred method of consuming vodka.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2011 5:54 pm**

poptart wrote:

The list of things Felix talks out his ass about... grows.

your directed animosity is noted....

your article states exactly what I said in that the GOP has for a long time tried to marginalize Paul.....the problem for the Republican party is that every "flavor of the month" has been self-immolating...

if Paul were to get the nomination, I would seriously reconsider my "I'm not voting stance" because I actually think the guy could make a difference...I'm not entirely sold on all of his policy directions, but I certainly think his vision for the country's future is clearer than obama's....romney-who knows what the fuck that guy's vision is...I don't think he has any idea either....

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:46 pm**

Derron wrote:Check this out as this chick gets a blast of pepper spray..the bear variety right square in her dick sucker. This is what we have been waiting 5 fucking weeks to see here in the U & L. I want to see some baton swinging now !

...I gotta think ole Luther is wishing he wasn't retired right about now. How sweet it would be to get a few cheap shots in on those whack protesters.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:20 pm**

R-Jack wrote:Looks like Pikkkle at a Public Enemy concert.

^^^^^^

winner

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:26 pm**

Dinsdale wrote:
These people can't open their mouths without shoving their Nike-clad foot in it.

Or without getting a blast of police grade pepper spray shot in it !

Posted: **Mon Nov 21, 2011 3:39 am**

poptart wrote:GOP outsider Ron Paul gaining traction in Iowa

You're quite delusional if you think Iowa polls mean squat.

Huckabee won there in 2008, hello?

Posted: **Mon Nov 21, 2011 3:56 am**

Felix said Paul is DONE.

He's not done.

He might be done later, but it remains to be seen.

Right now he's very much a factor, just as Huckabee was at this point in '08.

A lot of things can happen.

One thing to realize is that Paul's support does not fade away.

Those who buy what he's selling very much tend to continue buying what he's selling.

And then tend to view all the others for what they are ---> deceitful pieces of shit who DO NOT have your best interests at heart.

Posted: **Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:07 am**

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/signal/shif ... 21354.html

Posted: **Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:53 pm**

Manchester, New Hampshire (CNN) – Rick Perry flubbed both the country's voting age and the date of the upcoming presidential election at a speech to a group of college students in Manchester Tuesday.

The Texas governor told students in the audience he'd appreciate their vote if they were turning 21 by Nov. 12.

But the United States' voting age is 18, and voters will weigh in on the presidential election on Nov. 6.

A few members of the audience giggled but Perry did not appear to notice his error.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:55 am**

poptart wrote:Those who buy what he's selling very much tend to continue buying what he's selling.

And the other 98% of the overall electorate thinks he's a fucking loon.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:22 am**

98%?

lol

If that's how you're going to roll it, then 47% of the electorate thought Barry was a loon in '08.

Btw, current national polls have Romney between 20-22% and Paul between 8-9%.

I think Paul will finish 2nd in both Iowa and New Hampshire.
Prolly a deep also-ran in S. Carolina, though.

Uphill battle for him ---> because people have become very much programmed to vote for more slavery.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:31 am**

poptart wrote:Btw, current national polls have Romney between 20-22% and Paul between 8-9%.

That's 8 to 9 percent of the REPUBLICAN electorate. AT BEST Paul would pull 5% of the overall electorate as a 3rd party candidate. That is why he'll never do it. Because he knows getting tards like you to buy into the "Ron Paul is John Galt" meme is worth big money.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:37 am**

Dinsdale wrote:The fact Paul isn't running away with this thing is sad -- people have become so indoctrinated with the liberal philosophy, they don't even know how to handle not having Big Brother running their lives.

liberals are to blame for Ron Paul not doing better?

liberals like ron paul more than most of the gop candidates.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:48 am**

This place needs Diogenes back now more than ever.

:(

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:51 am**

Bace wrote:liberals like ron paul more than most of the gop candidates.

Yes, because he's anti-war.

But liberals much prefer Barry, the guy who DOUBLED DOWN on the WORST (in their eyes) of GW Bush.

Funny stuff.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:35 am**

poptart wrote: But liberals much prefer Barry,

You could flail your arms around wildly in a room filled with every liberal who's enthralled with Obama and be assured you'd never hit anybody.

poptart wrote: ...the WORST (in their eyes) of GW Bush.

So...Dubya was a shit president only in the eyes of liberals?

Interesting the way your mind works. There's not much to your reasoning process at all, is there?

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:11 pm**

Now you're playing Felix' favorite *FAIL* game.

The "So you're saying..." game.

No, numbnuts, Bush was a shit president in the eyes of liberals and a whole lot of conservatives.

If liberals everywhere are not enthralled with Barry, then why are they so quiet about it on this board?

There's a whole bunch of those people posting here.
People who bought into his crazy bullshit ---> and voted for him.

People who now, if not enthralled with him, ought to be ripping him a new one - for becoming a HUGE war president, and doing countless other very grotesque things which go against liberty.

They're confused people.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:34 pm**

poptart wrote:Now you're playing Felix' favorite *FAIL* game.

The "So you're saying..." game.

so you're saying here that I'm to blame for this... :wink:

No, numbnuts, Bush was a shit president in the eyes of liberals and a whole lot of conservatives.

If liberals everywhere are not enthralled with Barry, then why are they so quiet about it on this board?

There's a whole bunch of those people posting here.
People who bought into his crazy bullshit ---> and voted for him.

I didn't vote for Obama because he was peddling some snake oil...I voted for him because I believed his was going to be different from all of the previous fuckwads that have occupied the white house in that he was actually interested in accomplishing some things....but as it turns out, he's as bad as his predecessor-worse in fact....one thing bush demonstrated was some degree of leadership, Obama has demonstrated none...

People who now, if not enthralled with him, ought to be ripping him a new one - for becoming a HUGE war president, and doing countless other very grotesque things which go against liberty.

he's not a "huge war president" (whatever that is), and maybe you could give me list of the things you believe he's done that fly in the face of "liberty"

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:01 pm**

Felix wrote:I didn't vote for Obama because he was peddling some snake oil...I voted for him because I believed his was going to be different from all of the previous fuckwads that have occupied the white house in that he was actually interested in accomplishing some things....but as it turns out, he's as bad as his predecessor-worse in fact....one thing bush demonstrated was some degree of leadership, Obama has demonstrated none...

Nice job.

That's what I'm talkin' about.

He's not gotten out of Iraq.
He's escalated Afghanistan.
He's upped drone attacks.
He unconstitutionally sent our military into action in Libya.
He kept Gitmo open.

Of course he's a huge war president.

I'll give you a little list of those things when I have the time, Felix.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:14 pm**

I admit to being a single-issue voter in the last presidential election. I voted for Obama because it was way too scary having Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency. Obama has been beyond a huge disappointment. I don’t intend to vote for him again.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:31 pm**

Felix wrote:...I voted for him because I believed his was going to be different from all of the previous fuckwads that have occupied the white house in that he was actually interested in accomplishing some things...."

That's understandable, just look at his previous accomplishments.

You're a motherfucking idiot. You and McGoober related?

.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:44 pm**

Sirfindafold is probably used to having his life run by a raging nut-bag bitch. Here’s another possibility:

(CNN) -- She may not be topping polls as a Republican presidential candidate, but Rep. Michele Bachmann has already put some thought into who she might select as her running mate or appoint to her cabinet.

Bachmann threw out a few names when asked who her potential vice-president would be, including fellow candidate Rick Santorum, businessman and reality television host Donald Trump, and influential GOP senators Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Marco Rubio of Florida.

The congresswoman from Minnesota also floated Santorum as a potential attorney general, saying his legal acumen was top notch.

"I think that Rick Santorum is a wonderful man personally, but also, I think that he's very gifted when it comes to the area of legal issues," Bachmann said on the Fox News program "On the Record w/ Greta van Susteren."

"I think I could see him as an attorney general. I think he'd do a great job. I haven't talked to Rick about that, but I think he'd be wonderful, or another cabinet position."

Bachmann also said Santorum would be on her list of potential running mates, should she win the Republican presidential nomination. Other names on her list?

"We've got a lot of wonderful candidates who would fit that bill," Bachmann said. "Easily comes to mind I think would be Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina. Marco Rubio of Florida certainly would be in that category. There's a lot of great people out there. And Donald Trump is someone that I think a lot of people would be intrigued with, too."

Bachmann has met with Trump four times during her campaign, last meeting with the mogul in mid-November at the Trump Tower in midtown Manhattan.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:48 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:I admit to being a single-issue voter in the last presidential election. I voted for Obama because it was way too scary having Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency. Obama has been beyond a huge disappointment. I don’t intend to vote for him again.

Is Mitt Romney your guy? Or are you going 3rd party?

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:53 pm**

BSmack wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:I admit to being a single-issue voter in the last presidential election. I voted for Obama because it was way too scary having Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency. Obama has been beyond a huge disappointment. I don’t intend to vote for him again.
Is Mitt Romney your guy? Or are you going 3rd party?

I'm waiting to see what develops. I might just write in mvscal.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:47 pm**

Martyred wrote:This place needs Diogenes back now more than ever.

:(

He probably choked on a swizzlestick when "Sarahcuda" crushed his dreams by not running. I'm sure he then turned his lonely eyes to the Cain Train and began savagely attacking all other candidates in the race like all the other Palin lunatics.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:54 pm**

poptart wrote: He's not gotten out of Iraq.

he's withdrawing troops as we speak...we'll be out soon enough

He's escalated Afghanistan.

yeah, just like he said he was going to do when he was running for President...or did you miss that discussion?

He's upped drone attacks.

you can argue there may be legal issues about drone attacks, and certainly moral issues, but I also recognize that the people we're fighting are about as far removed from legal and moral behavior as one can be....these are the people that without the slightest remorse will strap explosives to down syndrome child and send that child to the americans so those fucking cowards can blow the child up in the hopes of hitting some of our people....sorry, but I have absolutely no qualms about the use of drones in this particular instance....

He unconstitutionally sent our military into action in Libya.

I really couldn't care less, but it obviously has upset you a lot

He kept Gitmo open

his promise to close guantanamo hasn't been kept, but he hasn't been getting much help from congress toward that goal either.... but to be honest, I don't really have a big problem with Gitmo

Of course he's a huge war president.

good point, when he took office and had two wars dumped into his lap, well I guess you automatically become a war president so you're right

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:05 pm**

Felix wrote:...when he took office and had two wars dumped into his lap, well I guess you automatically become a war president

You certainly do when you carry on your predecessor's policies to the letter. He's leaving Iraq on Chimpy's schedule not his own. The surge in Afghanistan was a strategy borrowed from the war mongering Chimp in Chief as were the drone strikes. The fact that you aren't bothered by a blatantly unconstitutional use of military force in Libya makes you a colossal dumbfuck and far too stupid to trusted with a vote.

You idiots wailed about Bush's "illegal wars" despite the fact that those wars were, in fact, scrupulously legal and then when you get a war that actually is illegal, mums the word. You people couldn't be more pathetic if you worked at it.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:07 pm**

I'd like to address the original post in this thread-- waterboarding. While I am respectful of what McCain went through as a POW in Vietnam, I do not think that that necessarily makes his opinion the end-all to the discussion. And while he certainly has more hands on experience with torture than any of us-- with the notable exception of T1B as a whole being forced to read Goober's and Felix's posts --that does not make him an authority on what does or does not constitute torture.

Case in point: I have been watching the UCD pepper spraying incident with amusement. While the college kids who got a little spice in their eyes bitterly denounced the practice immediately following the event, I suspect given the opportunity most, if not all of them, would gladly endure a second helping of the spray after seeing themselves plastered all over Youtube and the news. Fame trumps a little discomfort any day of the week. However, the funniest part of watching that little marinating session unfold was listening to the academia and intelligensia rail against the torture of "chemical warfare" being waged against the students by facist police.

To equate a little cayenne pepper in the face as torture and then condemn the practice as chemical warfare is silly. Yes, they were slightly uncomfortable for a little while, but they did not experience real torture. And therein is the problem with McCain's proclamation that watrerboarding is definitively torture. I work with individuals who underwent waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques who claim that while is is distinctly unpleasant, it doesn't compare to, say, being beaten on the soles of your feet with wooden rods or kneeling on grains of rice for hours. Resisting such unpleasantries is largely a matter of controlling one's emotions, physical reactions, and having the mental discipline to counter your interrogator's desire to keep you, the recipient of such attention, off balance. In other words, one man's pepper spray is another man's condiment.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:18 pm**

Yes, and we all regulary sprinkle condiments in our eyes. Idiot.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:29 pm**

Goober, all of us who have served in the military have "suffered" as much, if not considerably worse during NBC training where you are forced to breathe in tear gas and do exercise with your eyes open. Then, if you are lucky, you get to experience even more interrogation techniques at SERE school.

The problem is American protesters have gotten soft after decades of no batons upside the noggin, German shepherds biting fingers, water cannons spraying miscreants into curbs, and tear gas filling the air.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:36 pm**

As for the UCD pepper spraying incident, I don’t see it as being germane to this discussion. We were talking about waterboarding. I’ve been pepper-sprayed. It’s not pleasant, but it’s not torture either. Slightly more painful than a good waxing.

And McCain didn’t arbitrarily try to dictate what constitutes torture. Again, since you obviously missed it the first time through:

Sen. John McCain said Monday he was "disappointed" that some candidates vying for the GOP presidential nomination vocally support waterboarding as a technique for interrogating suspected terrorists.

"Ask any military lawyer, ask any person who knows about the Geneva conventions that we're signatories to. We actually prosecuted Japanese war criminals specifically for the act of waterboarding against Americans," McCain said on CNN's "John King, USA."

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:46 pm**

Rooster wrote:
The problem is American protesters have gotten soft after decades of no batons upside the noggin, German shepherds biting fingers, water cannons spraying miscreants into curbs, and tear gas filling the air.

Yeah, terrible shame that American cities don't resemble 80's Soweto more...

Don't you have some dead Afghani's wallet to rifle through or something you shit-maggot?

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:57 pm**

mvscal wrote: You certainly do when you carry on your predecessor's policies to the letter. He's leaving Iraq on Chimpy's schedule not his own. The surge in Afghanistan was a strategy borrowed from the war mongering Chimp in Chief as were the drone strikes.

and....

The fact that you aren't bothered by a blatantly unconstitutional use of military force in Libya makes you a colossal dumbfuck and far too stupid to trusted with a vote.

if what Obama did was illegal, then he should be brought up on charges.....so the question is: why hasn't he been?

You idiots wailed about Bush's "illegal wars" despite the fact that those wars were, in fact, scrupulously legal

obviously you have me confused with somebody else...you've never heard me say they were illegal....I've never said we weren't justified in going to Afghanistan...I've been critical of our incursion into Iraq, but I've never once said either of those actions by Bush were illegal....stupid (in the case of Iraq) yes, but I've never questioned the legality....

and then when you get a war that actually is illegal, mums the word. You people couldn't be more pathetic if you worked at it.

if it was illegal, then somebody should start the impeachment process....given the fact that the right has pursued every conceivable avenue to try and evict him from the white house (s'up birth certificate horseshit), then why haven't the republicans ardently pursued this....if it's as open and shut as you seem to imply, I would think an impeachment would be a snap....

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:01 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:
We actually prosecuted Japanese war criminals specifically for the act of waterboarding against Americans," McCain said on CNN's "John King, USA."

That's a crock of shit. Japanese water torture had nothing do with waterboarding. They are totally different. Japanese water torture was easily capable of causing severe injury or death.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:03 pm**

Those wars were "legal" just like Germany's invasion of Russia was "legal".

Legal until May 8th 1945.

Then, by some miracle, the "law" took on a whole different interpretation...

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:09 pm**

Felix wrote:if it was illegal, then somebody should start the impeachment process...

Yeah, I'm not going to be holding my breath until the career politicians in Congress to stand up and do the right thing. Impeachment is a political process not a legal one and, without enough support, it is a waste of time. Did Billigula's acquittal by Senate mean that he was factually innocent of lying under oath?

In regards to Libya, the facts of the matter speak for themselves and the action was clearly illegal regardless of whether or not he is impeached for it.

Posted: **Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:14 pm**

mvscal wrote: In regards to Libya, the facts of the matter speak for themselves and the action was clearly illegal regardless of whether or not he is impeached for it.

Gee whiz, look at you...all concerned with crossing T's and dotting I's...

Posted: **Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:08 am**

Goober, it is germaine to this discussion. Waterboarding is to some as pepper spray is to others-- torture. Another group likely finds either or both to be uncomfortable, but knowing the outcome, tolerable, if not pleasant. What I am trying to get across is that there is no definitive line by which we can measure what is or is not torture. If the Geneva Conventions are the standard by which we will measure torture or legal act of warfare, fine. But there are battalions of lawyers who will argue that waterboarding is not torture

And Marty, I've already gone through all the pockets of nearby dead Afghanis and they are fresh out of ears, gold teeth, and easily pilferable war trophies. Perhaps I might steal yours?

T1B

Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president

Re: Right wing-nuts who would be president