13511

yeah, but in 2016, Trumpty Dumpty was running against <ackkkk spit> Hillary Clinton. Don't think ANYBODY really liked Hillary. Pretty sure that even Daffy Duck could have beaten Hillary.

You apparently have a reading comprehension problem still... I SPECIFICALLY stated hands/feet/fists vs RIFLES. Not guns.... and apparently you have great difficulty grasping sarcasm. and the stats about the deaths that you reflect are include those that take their own lives.... guess what, someone that wants to kill themself and can't get a gun will use another means. I've worked plenty of suicides that used vehicles, either to generate carbon monoxide or ran into a solid object. In 2020 there were 45,855 persons that committed suicide. BTW, this number declined when compared to the past several years.... By the way you lash out, it is readily apparent that I was correct in that you ASSUMED that was one of those vicious assault rifles.... simply based upon the look of it with NO knowledge of the operation of it. You are one of the members of the radical anti-gun crowd. Then you have the moderate "anti-gun" crowd that are not truly anti-gun, but are "anti-assault weapon", not really knowing what that means. Remind us Paul, when the 2nd amendment was written, what weapon was in use. Was it considered state of the art at the time? Are all the amendments written to be static as to what was "state of the art" or "normal" at the time they were written? Are you a proponent of original intent then?

I don't think Trump has a chance in 2024... he's accumulating to much baggage and already he's losing traction with more and more of the Republican party, specifically because of his fixation on rehashing the 2020 election and not looking forward. Republicans have already started to show that you don't have to be anointed by Trump to get into (or keep) office. DeSantis or even Abbott would have a better chance, and I'd get behind either one of them before I would Trump in 2024.... and I'm not big Abbott or DeSantis fan. The problem with both parties is the radicalism that is present, and has really developed in the Republican party with the rise of Trumpty Dumpty. Remember... Trump thought he was going to win 2020 just because he was Trump. He didn't and then he cried about the "massive fraud", which 2 years later he nor his sycophants have been able to produce ANY evidence of. This is from April, but it is VERY telling when you consider that Texas is historically a very RED state. And it bears on what I am referring to when talking about the moderates of the parties. Frequently those moderates will vote outside their normal party choice if their party's candidate is distasteful to them. [ATTACH=full]2723._xfImport[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]2724._xfImport[/ATTACH]

Answer the question... because I've got a specific point to make that will weigh upon the way you answer. You see, I'm asking a question I want an honest answer to, not some deflection that you usually give. EDIT: Hell, I'll save you the time of trying to think up some other inadequate response.... yes, that probably DOES meet YOUR idea of an assault weapon. Never mind the fact it's a BOLT ACTION rifle, that you have to manually operate the bolt after each trigger pull, no different than any Ruger M-7 or Remington 700 bolt action rifle. It just happens to have the looks of one of those SCARY assault rifles. The same company also makes one in a pump action, which operates the same as a Remington 7600 or Model 6. And my main point is, so many of you anti-gunners base your opinions on the simple looks of how "scary" the gun is.... not on the mechanics of said gun, being one to immediately decry how this one is an assault weapon, but it's just fine to own a "hunting rifle", which operates the VERY SAME WAY, but simply looks different. Meanwhile, I guess we need to ban hands, feet and fists... since more people die annually from those than from rifles according to FBI stats. Please form a single line at your local hospital to have your hands and your feet removed.

Help, I've fallen and I can't get up.... And those look like regular Nike's he's wearing so doubt if he was wearing clip-ons and forgot to twist his foot to unlatch.

Hallucinate onward. Your "polls" can't consider other candidates on the Democrapic party. It ONLY counts as against Biden, and ONLY against Biden at this specific point in time. Last time I looked, we have over 2 years... and there's a lot of water passing under the bridge for Trump legally. Remember... we heard officially from Trump there was NO way he would, nor could lose the 2020 election.

What you showed, clearly showed that there are plenty of Republicans that will NOT vote for Trump, and a noticeable portion of them that will actually vote outside the party... so you proved exactly what I said. And I can pull up other polls that show that Biden places ahead of Trump. As the Trumpty Dumpty's have said, polling is not accurate, and as Trumpty Dumpty himself has said it's not accurate unless it supports him. And those polls are a current snapshot in time... if the economy recovers and comes back booming, then it will change drastically. Remember, there's around 2 1/2 years out for the election... and that's a long time in the political world. Remember what's going on in Trumpty Dumpty's life currently, and the criminal and civil investigations that are in process against him... losing some of those will negatively affect his "power". And I've got a sneaky suspicion that Biden's not going to be the 2024 candidate for the Democrats, even though he may want to be.

Didn't think Trump supporters believed polls... you know, those nasty MSM sources are NEVER right. :innocent: I refuse to vote for either of the idiots if they get into their party's nominated position. I'll vote 3rd party/Independent first, the same as I did in 2020. And look... those polls are already predicting "cheating"... they forecast 101% of the population voting.

May win the nomination (but may not also), but extremely unlikely (Trump at least) to win the election. I still know too many Republicans that would not vote him into office and would either refrain from voting at all or would even go so far as to vote for a Democrat if they were a somewhat moderate one. I don't put DeSantis or Abbot much below Trump... they both are playing on the Trump Train and bending a knee to the more radical sect of the Republican Party, much like what the Democrats have done to their "progressive" members. That's the thing that the Trump brigade doesn't realize... they've distanced so many moderate Republicans that they, in their encapsulated small mindset, cannot recognize the fact that other Republicans aren't a member of the lemming train, and won't vote for someone in the general election just because they have a "R" after their name. But, your reply doesn't answer the question as to why that many DEDICATED Republicans are saying that he is not fit for office... and as I said, it's especially telling when those DEDICATED Republicans had high positions in his administrative staff.... nor does it address how such a "perfect genius" had a 96% turnover rate in his "A-Team" staff members (which were recognized as STRONG conservative Republicans).

Hey @Paul, does this meet the requirements of one of those vicious AR-15 assault rifles?

Well, so far, at least 30 of Trumpty Dumpty's close inner circle while he was President are already working against him, stating he was not fit, and remains unfit to hold the office of President. And what's so telling is that those 30 don't include those that came out against him during his tenure. Kinda telling when you are a President, have a 96% "A-Team" turnover rate in your top staff, then you have that large a number of staff coming forth and stating that you aren't fit to be President.... and they should know, as they were up close and personal with him much of the time.

Well, another long time, well thought of conservative Republican has voiced an opinion on Trump (and now we cue up the "RINO/DeepState" cue card"). J. Michael Luttig made a very telling statement and Trumpty Dumpty and his psychotic followers:

Looks like one New Mexico county has added some ammunition to the Dominion lawsuit bandoleer for their cases against Mike Lindell, Sidney Powell, Rudy Tooty Fresh & Fruity, Patrick Byrne, OANN and NewsMax (oh, think FOX news is still in the running also). Anyone hear if they've decided to toss Trumpty Dumpty into the lawsuit mix? I know they were thinking about it at one time. Seems that Otero County commissioners declined to certify the results of some of their recent elections because of "concerns over they do not trust the machines". Well, I'm pretty sure they've been in office for a while, so if they didn't "trust" those machines, why didn't they use paper ballots (oh, wait, apparently they did as New Mexico uses paper ballots that can be checked later). Sounds like they are simply saying "Dominion machines used, vote must be bad because that's what our echo chamber tells us. What do you expect though when the commission consists of folks like Cowboys for Trump co-founder Couy Griffin (convicted of illegally entering the Capitol grounds on 01/06/2021). Then you have members that are swayed by David and Erin Clements (traveling advocates for the election audits), who BTW, just so happen to offer their services to provide said election audits. The irony is that they are not certified auditors, nor experts in election protocols. (Can we say yet another group of grifters, riding on the back of the Grifter in Chief?) Now, let's talk about how the all Republican commission has failed to follow their own State's laws, in particular the fact that they can show NO discrepancies to base their rejection on, other than their "feelings" that the vote wasn't fair. Nor apparently could any of the commissioners be reached by news services to provide any comment.

If some of what is coming out from Sonny Boy Hunter's laptop pans out, maybe Biden needs to join Trump. They could become best cellies.

Never could get into an Old Fashion.. to sweet for me (guess it's the sugar cube you mull with the bitters). About the only mixed drinks I'll drink is the VERY occasional tequila sunrise, and a Kentucky Mule.

Not a fan of wine... nor beer, vodka, brandy, cognac or similar. Will enjoy an occasional pour of a good bourbon or tequila. sorry, I don't consider 18-19 year olds "children". They are (by law in fact) classified as adults. Hell, why don't we call those less than 25-28 children, since science says the brain doesn't stop maturing until that age (you do realize that an adolescent is NOW considered to be anyone from 10-24 years of age by many scientist, right?)? I gave you FACTUAL data on deaths caused by those "violent assault vehicles", and the injuries by those "violent assault vehicles" FAR outweigh injuries caused by guns. Those self-same "violent assault vehicles" are also used in mass death attacks. You continue to avoid that small "fact"... and continue to try to blame the inanimate object of the gun as being at fault. You have failed to present any evidence of an unattended gun attacking anyone. Every incidence you relate has a common point to it... a person using that gun illegally. By the same token, I presented the same type of "facts" in relation to vehicles being used to commit mass deaths... but you have NO compunction to ban then from civilian ownership. Why is that? Now, remind us... has society (and it's mores) changed from the 1970/1980/1990's to today? Could those changes be having a negative impact on society that has resulted in a lot of the behaviors of violence older adolescents.

First, you miss the entire point of the post. You see, they didn't have to have a gun to perform mass killings.... a point that you try to say will "all be solved" with the banning/confiscation of firearms. Meanwhile, we reasonable adults realize that people intent on bad behavior will use whatever tool they can get their hands on. Now, maybe you need to do some further research on the numbers killed/injured by those violent assault vehicles. Here, let me give you that stat (once again). In 2021 there were 42,915 killed by those violent assault vehicles. Stats show that those violent assault vehicles injure on average 3 MILLION people in the U.S. each year (with around 2 million of them suffering permanent injury). So, your stance that it's the object (gun) that is responsible for the deaths should logically carry over to the object (the vehicle) for the others since you choose to blame an inanimate object for the results. Please feel free to elucidate on why that stance you hold should not carry over.

no gun needed... 11 killed, 15 injured. Or how about Breitscheidzplatz Christmas market? 12 killed and 48 injured... again, no gun needed. Or the Bastille day celebration in Nice where 86 were killed. Or in Manhattan where 8 were killed and 11 injured. 2018 Houston Texas, 3 injured 1 killed when driver intentionally plowed into crowd. 2017 8 people die in Lower Manhattan as result of attack by Sayfullo Saipov, who used a vehicle to run them over. 2017 Charlottesville, VA, 1 killed and 19 injured when attacked by James Fields driving his car into a group of protestors.

Oh wow... you finally acknowledging that it may be due to societal issues and not the inanimate objects? Now, can you correlate the fact that a survey in 2020 reflected 40% of respondents (or someone in their family) owned guns, down from 51% in 1978, and that during a period when MORE people reported to own guns we didn't have the issues we currently have when FEWER people report owning guns? Your segment want to continue to blame it on an inanimate object, not wanting to acknowledge that there is a MAJOR societal failure occurring, much of which can be laid at the very feet of the liberal mindset. The guns from 1970's, 1980's, 1990's and onward are no more "violent" than the guns of today. Yet your segment of society continues to want to blame the inanimate object, but then refuses to continue the logical thought process of "blaming/banning" other inanimate objects that end up causing the deaths and injury of from hundreds of thousands into the millions.

And here you PROVE the point that I (and others) make. Explain to all of us how lax enforcement deters criminal behavior and how this is a "gun issue". In fact, their father stated To go even further, one report I read on this, the father stated Now, explain to us how this is a gun problem and not an enforcement issue. Hell, the 14 year old was ALREADY on probation. Further, that 14 year old has made threats of violence on social media....

And those "growth" (actually steroidal) hormones are zero day hormones... that have shown NO affect on humans (adults). They are restricted in the hormones that are allowed, most being natural and a few "man-made". rBST is used primarily in dairy cows to enhance the production of milk. Even your "organic" milk contains hormones. FDA prohibits the use of hormones in chicken and poultry. Burying formaldehyde is different than using growth hormones in chickens (which you inferred in your post as occurring from your breadth of knowledge as a CDL driver for poultry farm). BTW, being the empathic citizen that you are, and being in California and KNOWING how strict they are, why didn't you report that behavior? I did, and raising (and breeding) food animals to produce the most bang for the buck is all part of farming. I did it when I raised rabbits (culled the runts and encouraged the breeding of the larger healthier rabbits to produce more meat) and when we were raising goats we did the same thing. My friends that run cattle do the same thing. Cull out the poorer part of the herd and encourage breeding in the healthier portion, to generate a larger animal to produce more meat.

Did I claim you did wear a man bun? I'm simply asking as many of your cries that you outpour are typical of those that do. And as for soap... you do realize that or centuries (in fact, as far back as 2800BC) soap has used fat (or oil, but usually fat) and lye for its manufacture, right? You act like it's a "new thing". And you do realize that they also feed "scraps" from beef production to chickens, right? And again, for centuries, chickens that were raised on farms with cattle would eat out of the cow offal. It may sound "nasty" (surprise, letting how something "sounds" affect impact you instead of letting facts do so), but has gone on for centuries. Also, from my understanding, use of growth hormones and/or steroids have been illegal in the commercial chicken industry in the U.S. since the 1950's. https://thehumaneleague.org/article/chicken-on-steroids So, care to continue to educate us on how chickens are grown in the U.S. poultry farms from a truck drivers extensive experience in the raising, culling and processing of chickens? BTW, within the area where I reside, we have a noticeable footprint by Sanderson Farms, from granaries, poultry "farms" and processing (in fact, Texas was 2nd in the nation for commercial chicken production).

Ah, the Trumpty Dumpy cry of "but the affidavits"!