Wow! Even democrats think Obama is a Muslim

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Dream on, dipshits.

Our numbnuts that think Obama is a Muslim just don't get this!

[andymarksman]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Lookee here folks! A fine example of how completely fucked up the libtards are in arguing against the death penalty.

The US Supreme Court has ruled the death penalty is constitutional wherever state law prescribes it. In those states where the death penalty opponents have lost the argument at the ballot box or in the state legislature, they proceed to gum up the system by filing endless frivolous legal appeals for death row inmates, slowing down the wheels of justice, thwarting the will of the people, and driving up the cost of executions. Then they have the chutzpah to tell us it's cheaper to incarcerate the bad guys for life!

Reminds me of the kid who murdered his parents, then begged the judge for mercy on the grounds that he was an orphan... If it costs more to carry out the death penalty than it does to imprison someone for life, it's because you libtards have made it that way!

Libtard "logic" exposed, folks!

(No hijack intended.... now let's return to discussing Obama's Muslim roots.)

.

Your argument seems quite persuasive at first glance, but upon further examination, it's a flawed one. All death sentences, be they at federal or state level, are automatically appealed. And the SCOTUS would have reviewed virtually all of them, thus the due process itself is a long, tedious one. The litigants, whether liberal or conservative, would have little or no effects on the length of such legal proceedings involving life and death. Unless you want to argue that all death penalties should be carried out immediately after sentencing. But I suppose you wouldn't sink yourself this low to the likes of the North Koreans and ISIS, right?

[The Black Tornado]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

sit down Malcolm. no one asked you

Screw you white boy

[timpage]

So? You and the little lady went to Wal-Mart? And?

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I was at Walmart yesterday getting lawn supplies when I spotted this behind me;


I thought it was my stalker but then I realized....this is Walmart, still.....

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by The Black Tornado

Screw you white boy

well look who got outta the dog house! someone call animal control we have a rabid dog on the loose!



actually that's just a really ugly dog but what's the difference?

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

You said you had a 1947 model produced by International Harvester. That is an outright lie as they did not make models during that time period. Anything else is you covering up your lie.

I looked it up to see what the effective range was, that's when I discovered that IH never made rifles during that time period and that you were a liar.

We aren't talking about Obama or Clinton, but in my book you're no better than either one of them. Just a garden-variety liar.

I'm in the middle of grading essays so I can't spend the time to spank you again. You looked up the range...of a Garand? Really? Don't you think you should say you looked up the range of a 30.06 instead............because that is what really counts when it comes to range. The bullet and not the weapon. A crappy marksmen such as yourself (I'm assuming here) can have the best, most expensive weapon in the world but can't hit a can of beans at 50 yards. A good marksman can take an old .22 bolt action rifle and hit a playing card at 100 yards nearly every time. I think you've outed yourself again in your ignorance and stupidity.

I haven't looked, have you answered my question yet....gutless?

[TheDaliLama]

I could create havoc in this town with just a bb gun.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Lookee here folks! A fine example of how completely fucked up the libtards are in arguing against the death penalty.

The US Supreme Court has ruled the death penalty is constitutional wherever state law prescribes it. In those states where the death penalty opponents have lost the argument at the ballot box or in the state legislature, they proceed to gum up the system by filing endless frivolous legal appeals for death row inmates, slowing down the wheels of justice, thwarting the will of the people, and driving up the cost of executions. Then they have the chutzpah to tell us it's cheaper to incarcerate the bad guys for life!

Reminds me of the kid who murdered his parents, then begged the judge for mercy on the grounds that he was an orphan... If it costs more to carry out the death penalty than it does to imprison someone for life, it's because you libtards have made it that way!

Libtard "logic" exposed, folks!

(No hijack intended.... now let's return to discussing Obama's Muslim roots.)

.

Originally Posted by andymarksman

Your argument seems quite persuasive at first glance, but upon further examination, it's a flawed one. All death sentences, be they at federal or state level, are automatically appealed. And the SCOTUS would have reviewed virtually all of them, thus the due process itself is a long, tedious one. The litigants, whether liberal or conservative, would have little or no effects on the length of such legal proceedings involving life and death. Unless you want to argue that all death penalties should be carried out immediately after sentencing. But I suppose you wouldn't sink yourself this low to the likes of the North Koreans and ISIS, right?

Most of his arguments are flawed.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

Why, exactly, does any increase have to be happening about the same regardless of party? What is this rule called? Where do you see these numbers? You post a five-fucking year old poll and then proceed to say that any increase HAS to be happening in both parties at the same rate. Why is that? Please explain to us, oh admiral turd cutter.

Originally Posted by WombRaider

This might be your stupidest post yet and you've had some real winners. Firstly, you said the shift in democrats would be proportional to the shift in republicans. Now you say a 'portion'. So you're backpedaling on that one.

As for the rest of your bullshit, I reiterate; no one gives a fuck who you are or what guns you have. YOU volunteered that information. YOU told us what year it was. Then you were shown to be a liar. International Harvester didn't make that model during that year. You lied. And instead of owning up to it, you have concocted this 'stalker' fantasy of yours to cover it up. I don't give a shit who you are. Don't care where you live, don't care one goddamn thing about you. You said you owned the gun, not me.

And now we learn that you freely stood in front of someone firing a loaded gun, holding the target for them. You almost make me question natural selection... almost.


Your posts:

My Garand was produced in 1947 by International Harvester. I bought it at an estate sale and I am the only shooter. I had to clean out the cosmoline after I got it home. Care to come within 600 yards of me sometime?


This is where you threaten tim by asking him if he wants to come within 600 yards of you sometime, having already stated that it was your weapon of choice for 400 plus yards. You also clearly state that it is a 1947 model, produced by International Harvester, neither of which are true statements. You volunteered this information. No one asked you for it. You are a liar.

Originally Posted by lustylad

Hahahahaha.... you lose again, sewer rat. First, you questioned whether there was any increase for democrats. Then, you hedged yourself (because you're lazy and can't read polls) by arguing the increase (if there was one) wasn't "about the same". Now that I pointed out the rate of increase since 2010 was slightly greater for dems, you desperately try to save face by saying but, but, but - the increases were not exactly "proportional"!

Give it up, sewer rat. You lose. Again. And you forgot to mention that the poll also tells you (not me) that 29% of all independents must be "stupid". Those are the folks in the middle who swing elections. Please don't hesitate to call them stupid as often as possible between now and Nov. 2016. I'm sure they will return the compliment on election day.


.

Here is every post I made in this thread pursuant to the poll that Admiral Turd Cutter posted. Would you care to point out where I questioned an increase? I questioned a proportional increase in my very first post, dumbass. He claimed there was an increase in republicans so there must be a proportional increase in democrats. I simply asked him why that was logical to assume. My point from the beginning was that they weren't the same. Learn to read, dipshit.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Like the Pope you admire?

We've had this discussion, idiot. Do I need to quote you Aristotle again? The fact you are unable to entertain an idea without fully accepting it yourself is your own shortcoming, not mine.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

How many Christian " loons " have declared "Death to ( name a country ) " and have beheaded droves of people, shot "non-believers" en mass, enslaved and RAPED young girls and young women and declared where their at to be the beginning's of a theocracy where only THEIR views will be allowed . all in the name of your hero odummer says is a "peaceful religion " ? That's what I thought.... mebbe you "left wing loons " will be the first ones that the muzzie slaughter "for demonstration purposes only , of course" so that the rest of us will abide by their way. You all are used to bending over all the time anyway, so your temporary conversion to Islam to temporarily save your lying, sorry, worthless, infidel asses will be real easy for you all. Don't forget to say " BAAAA" if you want to be their favorite !

The Crusades...

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'm in the middle of grading essays so I can't spend the time to spank you again. You looked up the range...of a Garand? Really? Don't you think you should say you looked up the range of a 30.06 instead............because that is what really counts when it comes to range. The bullet and not the weapon. A crappy marksmen such as yourself (I'm assuming here) can have the best, most expensive weapon in the world but can't hit a can of beans at 50 yards. A good marksman can take an old .22 bolt action rifle and hit a playing card at 100 yards nearly every time. I think you've outed yourself again in your ignorance and stupidity.

I haven't looked, have you answered my question yet....gutless?

That same ignorance and stupidity is what outed him as a eunuch homo on here with all of his dick related posts and saying things like his "boyfriend doesn't complain about his dicks length, just it's width" and similar posts. So he just keeps stepping in it !

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'm in the middle of grading essays so I can't spend the time to spank you again. You looked up the range...of a Garand? Really? Don't you think you should say you looked up the range of a 30.06 instead............because that is what really counts when it comes to range. The bullet and not the weapon. A crappy marksmen such as yourself (I'm assuming here) can have the best, most expensive weapon in the world but can't hit a can of beans at 50 yards. A good marksman can take an old .22 bolt action rifle and hit a playing card at 100 yards nearly every time. I think you've outed yourself again in your ignorance and stupidity.

I haven't looked, have you answered my question yet....gutless?

Admiral Turd Cutter. You never cease to amaze me with how much stupidity you put on display with each post.

The M1 Garand was ONLY chambered for 30.06, you fucking dumbass. So no, I don't need to look up the bullet, since that's the only bullet it fires, you shitstain. You out your own ignorance with every goddamn post. Now, when are you going to answer MY motherfucking question and let us ALL in on why you lied about what year your rifle was?

"The M1 Garand (officially designated as U. S. rifle, caliber .30, M1, later simply called Rifle, Caliber .30, M1, also abbreviated as US Rifle, Cal. .30, M1) is a semi-automatic rifle chambered for the .30-06 Springfield rifle cartridge, used by the United States Army from 1936 to 1957."


You are, without fail, consistently incorrect in all matters. Whether it's a rifle or a 777, you just can't help but be stuck on stupid. Nice try, admiral shitass. Keep up the crappy work

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

That same ignorance and stupidity is what outed him as a eunuch homo on here with all of his dick related posts and saying things like his "boyfriend doesn't complain about his dicks length, just it's width" and similar posts. So he just keeps stepping in it !

You just WK'd for an incorrect shitass. Nice going, dickless. You just stepped in it, turd nugget.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

Admiral Turd Cutter. You never cease to amaze me with how much stupidity you put on display with each post.

The M1 Garand was ONLY chambered for 30.06, you fucking dumbass. So no, I don't need to look up the bullet, since that's the only bullet it fires, you shitstain. You out your own ignorance with every goddamn post. Now, when are you going to answer MY motherfucking question and let us ALL in on why you lied about what year your rifle was?

"The M1 Garand (officially designated as U. S. rifle, caliber .30, M1, later simply called Rifle, Caliber .30, M1, also abbreviated as US Rifle, Cal. .30, M1) is a semi-automatic rifle chambered for the .30-06 Springfield rifle cartridge, used by the United States Army from 1936 to 1957."


You are, without fail, consistently incorrect in all matters. Whether it's a rifle or a 777, you just can't help but be stuck on stupid. Nice try, admiral shitass. Keep up the crappy work

Go back to Wikipedia and do the research. The final variant of the Garand did indeed shoot the 30.06 cartridge but it didn't start there. So do I call you a liar or just stupid for getting it wrong. I know what you'll do next, you're going to nitpick the details and struggle to extract your foot from your mouth. Pity you don't do that same due diligence to your master in the Oval Orifice. Since I realized that you get your info from Wiki then I am not interested in your opinion (which is actually someone else's) I have my letter from Guns and Ammo, the letter appeared in print years ago, it states what I said. You put your wiki up against that and you come in a poor second place. Why don't you spend some of your valuable time and do some real research with some real data from a real source. In the meantime....piss off you loser piece of shit.

Since you have such respect for Wiki;

Garand's rifle was originally chambered for the .276 Pedersen cartridge,[25] charged by means of 10-round clips. Later, it was chambered for the then-standard .30-06 Springfield. With this new cartridge, the M1 had a maximum effective range of 440 yards (400 m), with the capability of inflicting a casualty with armor-piercing ammunition well beyond 875 yards (800 m). Because of the larger diameter of the .30-06 cartridge, the modified clip held only eight rounds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Garand