Jump to content

Will Trump Sign a Six-Week Abortion Ban into Federal Law?  

7 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, robosmith said:

That's NOT an answer to the question: "if the bill reached his desk...."

Yes it is. You have no PROOF otherwise. 

Quote

I don't believe he would DARE to veto that bill.

Your BELIEF is not PROOF

Quote

How about the lives of the other children that woman is struggling to keep alive?

So you advocate killing children if the family is too big?  So if you think someone can only afford 3 kids and they have 4 you should be able to take little jimmy out back with a shotgun and 'old yeller' him?

Quote


I'm not at all surprised that you don't understand nor care about the struggles of women in poverty.

 

And you feel that infanticide is the answer?

Just now, robosmith said:

There is NOTHING which prevents it from being a Federal issue, Canuck.

Which is why the americans can never let the dems win power again. 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Yet it appears both have happened. 

WHERE did "both" appear to YOU? FOS LIES? or Canadian equivalent....

4 hours ago, West said:

Dunno. Apparently there's people in the community who's pets have went missing. 

Can't confirm that it's just what people say. 

Pix or it didn't happen....

Posted
3 hours ago, Deluge said:

That's a pretty stupid comment when we already know that he turned the country over to the cheaters back in 2021. 

You "know" crap, cause you have NO EVIDENCE, just BULLSHIT.

3 hours ago, Deluge said:

If Trump were TRULY in it for himself, and ONLY himself, he would've ordered a full scale takeover of the government while he was still President. 

He did order that takeover to stay in the WH. Duh

Fortunately he didn't count on other government officials RESPECTING THE CONSTITUTION. 

  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, robosmith said:

WHERE did "both" appear to YOU? FOS LIES? or Canadian equivalent....

Pix or it didn't happen....

You know it happened or you wouldn't freak out so much

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
2 hours ago, Deluge said:

By the military, trusted leaders - Hitler style. 

You dumbsh*ts constantly refer to him as Hitler, but he never pulled any Hitler type of shit. It was all in your deranged heads. ;) 

He TRIED and that's too much. And now he's learned and will try AGAIN if given the chance. 🤮

Posted
6 minutes ago, robosmith said:

He TRIED and that's too much. And now he's learned and will try AGAIN if given the chance. 🤮

You mean he might bring double the number of unarmed civilians to try and take over one of the most militarized nations on earth?

Yea gad! freak out! 

You literally argued that he couldn't have done it the first time because there was no way and now our arguing that he'll do it the second time because it'll be easy.

It's too bad you didn't live during the stone age, you could have made a fortune banging your heads together to create sparks to start fires for people

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

There's no evidence it's true, though. Why assume something could be true without evidence?

I'm on the fence. Not sure one way or the other. 

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You did it here for example.  Your weird man-goat-love fetish had nothing to do with the conversation but still you brought it up. 

So back to the question -  Why? Why do you do that? Do you think it makes you look better somehow to fantasize about goats?

Again, that's because you have no reading comprehension or any ability to follow the flow of the conversation.

The guy I was responding to was suggesting the pet-eating story was believable because people in the community said so, so I used an extreme example to illustrate the absurdity of that argument (there's even a Latin term for this technique). But because you're a little bedwetting b!tchboy, you saw the naughty words and immediately melted down.

I think what's going on here is you know you're outmatched so you resort to policing language and bringing up irrelevant side issues to avoid the topics at hand, at least when you're not busy calling people gay.

Edited by Black Dog
  • Thanks 1
Posted
53 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You said: "it's just what people say." You're CLAIMING people say "it."

Pretty sure you didn't hear "it" from them directly.

I did via some videos. Duhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhh

Posted
1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

Again, that's because you have no reading comprehension or any ability to follow the flow of the conversation.

 

No, it's because you have a weird man-goat-love fetish.  It's easy to say 'anyone can start a rumour". but instead your brain went straight to adding a man-goat-love fetish

If it was once, that'd be one thing.  But with you as i noted it's ALL the time. 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No, it's because you have a weird man-goat-love fetish.  It's easy to say 'anyone can start a rumour". but instead your brain went straight to adding a man-goat-love fetish

lol you're still whining about this? Mimicking the structure of the original post but making it crass to highlight the absurdity of it is the entire point and anyone who doesn't have the mind of a child and understands humour and language would get that. So it's no surprise you didn't.

Quote

If it was once, that'd be one thing.  But with you as i noted it's ALL the time. 

If your theory that me posting about these things means I've got a fetish for them is true, what does the fact you're constantly posting about me say about you. It means you've got a thing for me.

Edited by Black Dog
Posted
On 9/12/2024 at 12:13 PM, Deluge said:

By the military, trusted leaders - Hitler style. 

You dumbsh*ts constantly refer to him as Hitler, but he never pulled any Hitler type of shit. It was all in your deranged heads. ;) 

What was that mob which in a speech Trump told them to march to the capitol to prevent the election being finalized. 

Posted
22 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

What was that mob which in a speech Trump told them to march to the capitol to prevent the election being finalized. 

Just voices in your head. 

I'm guessing you hear them daily, if not hourly, yes? 

That, my friend, is Trump Derangement Syndrome. ;) 

Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

What was that mob which in a speech Trump told them to march to the capitol to prevent the election being finalized. 

Now, 

I just came across something that I wasn't even aware of, but from what I've gleaned so far, it certainly makes sense. 

Check it out, and then we'll discuss what we both learned. 

https://www.conservapedia.com/U.S._Color_Revolution

 

Edited by Deluge
Posted
54 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Now, 

I just came across something that I wasn't even aware of, but from what I've gleaned so far, it certainly makes sense. 

Check it out, and then we'll discuss what we both learned. 

https://www.conservapedia.com/U.S._Color_Revolution

 

It makes sense to you that 72% of all adult Americans are REGISTERED Republicans?  Giuliani was thrown to the wolves by Commander Trump. What a guy, what a leader. Finally do you honestly believe that Commander or should I say former Commander Giuliani failure on 62 separate occasions to show that the election was stolen was part of a great conspiracy?

Sorry I don't have enough time in my life to read the rest of that drivel, since I could see from the chart that it was so far out in la la land.

Posted
1 hour ago, Deluge said:

Now, 

I just came across something that I wasn't even aware of, but from what I've gleaned so far, it certainly makes sense. 

Check it out, and then we'll discuss what we both learned. 

https://www.conservapedia.com/U.S._Color_Revolution

lol oh my god this is the funniest thing I've ever seen it's like Warhammer 40K for divorced Boomers whose kids don't speak to them anymore.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

lol oh my god this is the funniest thing I've ever seen it's like Warhammer 40K for divorced Boomers whose kids don't speak to them anymore.

I like it, Braindead Dog. It breaks down the differences between the waste of sperm leftoids (you) and normal Americans (me) and puts it into a sort of game format. 

Check it out: We have 66,000 insurrectionists (left-wingers posing as Jan 6 patriots, Antifa shit heads, etc.), 2.3 million useless administrative state workers (FBI, IRS, and dozens of other departments) and about 12 million marxist disciples, all registered as Democrats.  

VS. 

113 million normal, hard working Americans. 

I'm sure you're one of the 12 million diaper doping pussies, but you could be one of the 2.3 million tax sucking cultists. The point is, you're all part of the same revolution -- the "Color Revolution". ;) 

 

Edited by Deluge
Posted
11 minutes ago, Deluge said:

I like it, Braindead Dog. It breaks down the differences between the waste of sperm leftoids (you) and normal Americans (me) and puts it into a sort of game format. 

Check it out: We have 66,000 insurrectionists (left-wingers posing as Jan 6 patriots, Antifa shit heads, etc.), 2.3 million useless administrative state workers (FBI, IRS, and dozens of other departments) and about 12 million marxist disciples, all registered as Democrats.  

VS. 

113 million normal, hard working Americans. 

I'm sure you're one of the 12 million diaper doping pussies, but you could be one of the 2.3 million tax sucking cultists. The point is, you're all part of the same revolution -- the "Color Revolution". ;) 

 

If the Jan 6 insurrectionists were all Antifa, why is Trump promising to pardon them? 

@reason10: “Hitler had very little to do with the Holocaust.”

 

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Rebound said:

If the Jan 6 insurrectionists were all Antifa, why is Trump promising to pardon them? 

He'll pardon the ones who were framed by the marxist a$$holes. 

Edited by Deluge
Posted
5 hours ago, Black Dog said:

lol oh my god this is the funniest thing I've ever seen it's like Warhammer 40K for divorced Boomers whose kids don't speak to them anymore.

Hmm.  Haven't been following along but that's your usual reaction when you know you're very wrong.  So he's probably right :)  

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,911
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    AlembicoEMR
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...