SkyDekker

Now back to you claiming Merrick Garland is a 2nd Amendment nut. Do you think the judges who agreed with him in those two cases you brought forward are 2nd Amendment nuts as well? You may want to look through some non-biased material before answering. I don't want you to start claiming you were tricked again.

Typical Rush. Asking for some one to read the original and then linking to editorial by a website with the following mission: With a vision to: You never learn do you?

Perfect grammar and spelling. Well done!

Actually quite a few articles on Brexit to be found right now. You may just want to expand a little beyond Blaze TV. What's Brexit? Thank you for proving my point.

I am surprised you agree with this part. I mean, you know this is being driven by the teachers on said campuses, right? Some teachers yes. Like some teachers are members of KKK. And some teachers think muslims need to get banned. And some teachers think evolution should not be taught. Some teachers smoke dope and some teachers are great. Should we just not have teachers? I don't agree with much what happens in University politics. Most kids, once they grow up, see the same thing.

Yes, the spirit of the constitution was that black people are worth significantly less than white people.

Do you know that one of the other judges who voted with Merrick Garland in that case is very pro gun rights?

Isn't your god better than their god? Why would he let that happen? End time prophecy. We can't change it but right minded people must attempt to do the right thing. Oh the world is going to end unless you stop it. You go Ron, you do you!

But you also want the constitution not to be respected now, and no confirmation hearings take place until after the election. So do you want somebody who will respect and follow the constitution, or do you want someone who agrees with your "opinion" of the constitution? You show me what part of the Constitution requires any timeline to confirm or deny and appointment! (making the point in the context of this thread in case you missed it) You cant! As others have said here Elections have consequences Obama LOST the senate Now he and his followers will just have to live with that And the Senate is only doing what Biden and Schumer said when Bush was the President Not having hearings is unprecedented. It is also against the spirit of the constitution. I don't care which party does what. It will be interesting to hear your arguments once Hillary becomes President and announces she will wait with a nomination until after mid-term elections. I am also still waiting for you to back up your implication that Merrick Garland is a 2nd Amendment nut.

Actually quite a few articles on Brexit to be found right now. You may just want to expand a little beyond Blaze TV.

This is also one of the biggest points. *** Trump is not responsible for the assault. But he is responsible for refusing to condemn it. Hopefully more here will look at what is going on as you do. I doubt Bill or Sky will but that is the way it is. thanks Wendy I think Charles spells it out pretty well Actually, without needing to cherry pick points, I agree with his full editorial. Lots of blame to go around. Like Coreece you are attributing a position to me that I have never stated.

But you also want the constitution not to be respected now, and no confirmation hearings take place until after the election. So do you want somebody who will respect and follow the constitution, or do you want someone who agrees with your "opinion" of the constitution?

Isn't your god better than their god? Why would he let that happen?

And it isn't his fault, just the fault of the education system at the time. But other than that, people need to take responsibility for themselves.

Or allowing wires to be pulled, high on poles, around parts of New York to facilitate orthodox Jews.

But he already did But at least your double standard is out there for all to see. Uhm no. You making absolutely no sense is what is out there for all to see.

Yet you would vote for a "Person" that would be open to expanding the Sharia law in at least the minority's parts of the city. I mean - that is what her supporters would be willing to do to get her elected. What is good for you isn't good enough for them. Why do you hate Minorities? (Tic) Why not, you do it for Jews in New York. If people want to set up contracts under Sharia law and agree to be bound by some kind of Sharia arbitration, what is wrong with that? Similar set-ups happen all the time. Are you just opposed to the idea because it is has the word Sharia?

That has got the be the most Tarzan sentence you've ever written. Answer the question Use English in your question. What the fuck is Trump speak and what is Obama speak?

Can you in any way back this up? Any decisions you can point to?

Which statement has been fallacious? I have already shown the numerous times you have decided to either restate what I said, take it out of context, use logical fallacies to try and twist. I have given you nothing but honest answers from my side. NO real balls needed to accuse you of fallacious arguments, the average Trump supporter should have been able to see your fallacious arguments.

Then why do you keep engaging in conversation with me? Because if somebody says to me they would be more than willing to murder their entire family, but since there are safeguards in place making it very hard for them to acquire the means to do so, that would still be unsettling. Don't you think? You want to rationalize an emotion. I have given you my reasoning. You obviously don't agree, and that is just fine. Though I am not the one who thinks it is a wonderful idea for Americans to forsake their constitution because of their fear for terrorists. All while loudly supporting the constitution as to why toddlers should be able to shoot their mothers in the back.

You would have that feeling because you have absolutely no clue what goes on outside of America.

This about sums up his MO, every single time.

A great description of today democrat supporters Never seen a tea party event get violent Trump has already outlined how things will get violent if he doesn't get the nomination.

So you think CNN is radical, but Breitbart is not? I find that logic extremely flawed, but so be it. Par for the course.