What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (1 Viewer)

I believe what is being conveyed is that you characterize all pro-gun people using the most extreme lunatics, but you characterize the anti-gun people by the moderate positions. In English, the way you frame the arguments is so ridiculously biased it is a waste of time to even attempt to engage in anything that even remotely resembles a half-way intelligent discussion with you.
### #### stupid ####### board and it's ####ty posting issues! ####!

ok, now that that's out if the way.

Since you seem to be having such difficulty with that pic let me break it down for you.

For the last 5+ years has the mantra been "Obama is coming for your guns"? Yes. Has that come from Obama/the left or from the right? Hint: link and link During that same span have the manufacturers reaped record profits? Hint: link

People being played.
I am not sure what is so hard for you to comprehend. Both sides play fear-mongering politics. But if you are going to characterize one-side by its fear-mongers while ignore the ones on your side, it is quite apparent you are not going to engage in a rationale discussion of the issue.

 
I believe what is being conveyed is that you characterize all pro-gun people using the most extreme lunatics, but you characterize the anti-gun people by the moderate positions. In English, the way you frame the arguments is so ridiculously biased it is a waste of time to even attempt to engage in anything that even remotely resembles a half-way intelligent discussion with you.
### #### stupid ####### board and it's ####ty posting issues! ####!

ok, now that that's out if the way.

Since you seem to be having such difficulty with that pic let me break it down for you.

For the last 5+ years has the mantra been "Obama is coming for your guns"? Yes. Has that come from Obama/the left or from the right? Hint: link and link During that same span have the manufacturers reaped record profits? Hint: link

People being played.
I am not sure what is so hard for you to comprehend. Both sides play fear-mongering politics. But if you are going to characterize one-side by its fear-mongers while ignore the ones on your side, it is quite apparent you are not going to engage in a rationale discussion of the issue.
First sentence: my thoughts exactly.

Second sentence: Seriously?! Whoa!

Third sentence: I don't have a side, other than this particular "debate". Lifelong ® voter until they went off the deep end recently.

 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:

 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Vaglnas

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Vaglnas
What's the stock symbol on that. My financial advisor wouldn't tell me. She's keeping that insider info to herself.
 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Vaglnas
What's the stock symbol on that. My financial advisor wouldn't tell me. She's keeping that insider info to herself.
Unfortunately they're privately held instead of publicly traded. Holding out hope for an IPO some day.

 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
lube

 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Abortions. Seriously, almost every political ad from a left candidate or organization would state "[insert GOP candidate] wants to take away a woman's right to choose! Even in cases of rape & incest!!!11!!1! OMG!!!" even when that was not the case. (How the #### is a councilman going to overturn Roe v. Wade?)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Abortions. Seriously, almost every political ad from a left candidate or organization would state "[insert GOP candidate] wants to take away a woman's right to choose! Even in cases of rape & incest!!!11!!1! OMG!!!" even when that was not the case. (How the #### is a councilman going to overturn Roe v. Wade?)
The statement that someone "wants to take away your right to choose" has nothing to do with whether they can actually do so. It's accurate and most Republicans would admit it publicly, unlike the statement "____ wants to take away your guns," which is almost never true about whoever _____ may be, or at least they haven't said so publicly. I've never heard a politician say they want to ban guns outright, although I'm sure a few have said it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Abortions. Seriously, almost every political ad from a left candidate or organization would state "[insert GOP candidate] wants to take away a woman's right to choose! Even in cases of rape & incest!!!11!!1! OMG!!!" even when that was not the case. (How the #### is a councilman going to overturn Roe v. Wade?)
The statement that someone "wants to take away your right to choose" has nothing to do with whether they can actually do so. It's accurate and most Republicans would admit it publicly, unlike the statement "____ wants to take away your guns," which is almost never true about whoever _____ may be, or at least they haven't said so publicly. I've never heard a politician say they want to ban guns outright, although I'm sure a few have said it.
No, I don't think most republicans would admit to wanting to ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest. In fact, despite the numerous political ads stating that __________ supported such a bill or has said so, organizations like politifact have found those claims to be untrue.

 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Abortions. Seriously, almost every political ad from a left candidate or organization would state "[insert GOP candidate] wants to take away a woman's right to choose! Even in cases of rape & incest!!!11!!1! OMG!!!" even when that was not the case. (How the #### is a councilman going to overturn Roe v. Wade?)
The statement that someone "wants to take away your right to choose" has nothing to do with whether they can actually do so. It's accurate and most Republicans would admit it publicly, unlike the statement "____ wants to take away your guns," which is almost never true about whoever _____ may be, or at least they haven't said so publicly. I've never heard a politician say they want to ban guns outright, although I'm sure a few have said it.
No, I don't think most republicans would admit to wanting to ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest. In fact, despite the numerous political ads stating that __________ supported such a bill or has said so, organizations like politifact have found those claims to be untrue.
Let me introduce you to the trio running for the top 3 offices in VA. :wall:

 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Abortions. Seriously, almost every political ad from a left candidate or organization would state "[insert GOP candidate] wants to take away a woman's right to choose! Even in cases of rape & incest!!!11!!1! OMG!!!" even when that was not the case. (How the #### is a councilman going to overturn Roe v. Wade?)
The statement that someone "wants to take away your right to choose" has nothing to do with whether they can actually do so. It's accurate and most Republicans would admit it publicly, unlike the statement "____ wants to take away your guns," which is almost never true about whoever _____ may be, or at least they haven't said so publicly. I've never heard a politician say they want to ban guns outright, although I'm sure a few have said it.
No, I don't think most republicans would admit to wanting to ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest. In fact, despite the numerous political ads stating that __________ supported such a bill or has said so, organizations like politifact have found those claims to be untrue.
Let me introduce you to the trio running for the top 3 offices in VA. :wall:
As I said, Politifact has found these claims to be untrue. Restrict <> ban.

 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Abortions. Seriously, almost every political ad from a left candidate or organization would state "[insert GOP candidate] wants to take away a woman's right to choose! Even in cases of rape & incest!!!11!!1! OMG!!!" even when that was not the case. (How the #### is a councilman going to overturn Roe v. Wade?)
The statement that someone "wants to take away your right to choose" has nothing to do with whether they can actually do so. It's accurate and most Republicans would admit it publicly, unlike the statement "____ wants to take away your guns," which is almost never true about whoever _____ may be, or at least they haven't said so publicly. I've never heard a politician say they want to ban guns outright, although I'm sure a few have said it.
No, I don't think most republicans would admit to wanting to ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest. In fact, despite the numerous political ads stating that __________ supported such a bill or has said so, organizations like politifact have found those claims to be untrue.
Let me introduce you to the trio running for the top 3 offices in VA. :wall:
As I said, Politifact has found these claims to be untrue. Restrict <> ban.
Top goal...doesn't mean it's not A goal.

Your link says: Schwerin cited various press reports and other materials saying the personhood measure would lead to a ban on all abortions and forms of birth control that prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a uterus. But this Truth-O-Meter is not about the consequences of personhood legislation. We are examining whether the GOP ticket has proclaimed that ending abortion and certain types of contraception is its top priority.

Also from your link: "Start with the priorities. Work your way down: life, family, community, world -- a lot of ways to affect the ones at the bottom," Cuccinelli said. "It gets narrower and narrower as you get to the top. None of those other rights matter a whole lot if you don’t get born."

"And that’s where the candidate’s responsibility arises. You give a campaign purpose. My purpose was to fight abortion, to shrink government, to protect life and families," Cuccinelli said.

That establishes once again that one of Cuccinelli’s key reasons for entering politics is to oppose abortion.

Fortunately, the internet has a wayback machine. From the cooch campaign website: Ken opposes abortions that are not for the purpose of saving the mother's life. link

 
Alright, since the "republicans" say "Obama is going to take their guns" to get people to buy guns and reap record profits... what is going to happen in a couple of years?

What are the democrats going to say to everyone that the Republicans are going to take away when a Republican gets voted into office? I'm trying to jump the gun here on stocks since I did not invest in the gun manufacturers. So, what can the Democrats promote in order for people to buy up stuff and get stock prices to go up?

:moneybag: :moneybag: :shark:
Abortions. Seriously, almost every political ad from a left candidate or organization would state "[insert GOP candidate] wants to take away a woman's right to choose! Even in cases of rape & incest!!!11!!1! OMG!!!" even when that was not the case. (How the #### is a councilman going to overturn Roe v. Wade?)
The statement that someone "wants to take away your right to choose" has nothing to do with whether they can actually do so. It's accurate and most Republicans would admit it publicly, unlike the statement "____ wants to take away your guns," which is almost never true about whoever _____ may be, or at least they haven't said so publicly. I've never heard a politician say they want to ban guns outright, although I'm sure a few have said it.
No, I don't think most republicans would admit to wanting to ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest. In fact, despite the numerous political ads stating that __________ supported such a bill or has said so, organizations like politifact have found those claims to be untrue.
Let me introduce you to the trio running for the top 3 offices in VA. :wall:
As I said, Politifact has found these claims to be untrue. Restrict <> ban.
Top goal...doesn't mean it's not A goal.

Your link says: Schwerin cited various press reports and other materials saying the personhood measure would lead to a ban on all abortions and forms of birth control that prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a uterus. But this Truth-O-Meter is not about the consequences of personhood legislation. We are examining whether the GOP ticket has proclaimed that ending abortion and certain types of contraception is its top priority.

Also from your link: "Start with the priorities. Work your way down: life, family, community, world -- a lot of ways to affect the ones at the bottom," Cuccinelli said. "It gets narrower and narrower as you get to the top. None of those other rights matter a whole lot if you don’t get born."

"And that’s where the candidate’s responsibility arises. You give a campaign purpose. My purpose was to fight abortion, to shrink government, to protect life and families," Cuccinelli said.

That establishes once again that one of Cuccinelli’s key reasons for entering politics is to oppose abortion.

Fortunately, the internet has a wayback machine. From the cooch campaign website: Ken opposes abortions that are not for the purpose of saving the mother's life. link
*sigh*. Yes, of course Schwerin points to some loosely based facts to stake his claim on. But let's jump down to Politifact's conclusion.

A compelling argument can be made that members of the GOP ticket will do everything possible to restrict abortions and those actions could ban certain types of birth control.
Restrict. Restrict. Restrict. Not ban. Now if you think "Restricting" = banning, then you give credence to the gun nuts who say Obama & the left are going to ban guns because it's no secret the left wants to restrict guns.

So what's it going to be? Republicans want to restrict abortions and Democrats want to restrict guns, or Republicans want to ban abortions and Democrats want to ban guns?

 
Restrict. Restrict. Restrict. Not ban. Now if you think "Restricting" = banning, then you give credence to the gun nuts who say Obama & the left are going to ban guns because it's no secret the left wants to restrict guns.

So what's it going to be? Republicans want to restrict abortions and Democrats want to restrict guns, or Republicans want to ban abortions and Democrats want to ban guns?
You said: No, I don't think most republicans would admit to wanting to ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest.

I said: let me introduce you to the trio from Va.

You said: restrict<>ban

I said: Fortunately, the internet has a wayback machine. From the cooch campaign website: Ken opposes abortions that are not for the purpose of saving the mother's life. link

So, it seems you are wrong about Cooch. He wants to ban abortion for everything but the health of the mother. And if the mother is more than 20 weeks, too bad. So your original statement was "ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest." which is exactly what he said he wants to do.

 
Oh good lord, I didn't mean to start a whole new gun conversation just by pointing out that one poster had repeatedly used the pointless phrase "Second Amendment rights." Nobody has ever successfully defended themselves from a violent crime charge by appealing to the Second Amendment. Whether you think he was guilty or properly found to be acting in self defense, he was NOT simply exercising a Constitutional right. That's stupid.

Although now that it's back from the dead, this amusing article should keep you guys going for a while.
Which Amendment lets us tip over portable toilets?

 
Oh good lord, I didn't mean to start a whole new gun conversation just by pointing out that one poster had repeatedly used the pointless phrase "Second Amendment rights." Nobody has ever successfully defended themselves from a violent crime charge by appealing to the Second Amendment. Whether you think he was guilty or properly found to be acting in self defense, he was NOT simply exercising a Constitutional right. That's stupid.

Although now that it's back from the dead, this amusing article should keep you guys going for a while.
Which Amendment lets us tip over portable toilets?
#2?

 
Oh good lord, I didn't mean to start a whole new gun conversation just by pointing out that one poster had repeatedly used the pointless phrase "Second Amendment rights." Nobody has ever successfully defended themselves from a violent crime charge by appealing to the Second Amendment. Whether you think he was guilty or properly found to be acting in self defense, he was NOT simply exercising a Constitutional right. That's stupid.

Although now that it's back from the dead, this amusing article should keep you guys going for a while.
Which Amendment lets us tip over portable toilets?
#2?
Whatever, guys. Make your jokes instead of owning up to your culture's glorification of violence and absentee parenting. It's time for white people to step and up admit that the white community and its leaders are part of the problem.

 
Oh good lord, I didn't mean to start a whole new gun conversation just by pointing out that one poster had repeatedly used the pointless phrase "Second Amendment rights." Nobody has ever successfully defended themselves from a violent crime charge by appealing to the Second Amendment. Whether you think he was guilty or properly found to be acting in self defense, he was NOT simply exercising a Constitutional right. That's stupid.

Although now that it's back from the dead, this amusing article should keep you guys going for a while.
Which Amendment lets us tip over portable toilets?
#2?
Whatever, guys. Make your jokes instead of owning up to your culture's glorification of violence and absentee parenting. It's time for white people to step and up admit that the white community and its leaders are part of the problem.
My kid plays a ton of WoW but he's no surfer so I think I've been a good parent.

 
3C said:
Good God, this is an abortion thread now. :lol:
just trying to keep it going. I'd hate for it to die so soon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi6gZU01yF8
If you think I'd going to spend more than a few seconds listening to a Canadian speak you're crazy(er than I thought).
Canadian? wtf are you talking about...

They exposed how ridiculous Feinsteins proposed bill was, but you'll claim that you haven't watched it to avoid admitting the legislation was ridiculous..

 
3C said:
Good God, this is an abortion thread now. :lol:
just trying to keep it going. I'd hate for it to die so soon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi6gZU01yF8
If you think I'd going to spend more than a few seconds listening to a Canadian speak you're crazy(er than I thought).
Canadian? wtf are you talking about...

They exposed how ridiculous Feinsteins proposed bill was, but you'll claim that you haven't watched it to avoid admitting the legislation was ridiculous..
Where was what's his name, the guy you linked, born? Now, think back to the birthers. Got it?

 
3C said:
Good God, this is an abortion thread now. :lol:
just trying to keep it going. I'd hate for it to die so soon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi6gZU01yF8
If you think I'd going to spend more than a few seconds listening to a Canadian speak you're crazy(er than I thought).
Canadian? wtf are you talking about...

They exposed how ridiculous Feinsteins proposed bill was, but you'll claim that you haven't watched it to avoid admitting the legislation was ridiculous..
Where was what's his name, the guy you linked, born? Now, think back to the birthers. Got it?
wtf does that have to do with feinstein trying to ban guns because they look scary?

 
3C said:
Good God, this is an abortion thread now. :lol:
just trying to keep it going. I'd hate for it to die so soon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi6gZU01yF8
If you think I'd going to spend more than a few seconds listening to a Canadian speak you're crazy(er than I thought).
Canadian? wtf are you talking about...

They exposed how ridiculous Feinsteins proposed bill was, but you'll claim that you haven't watched it to avoid admitting the legislation was ridiculous..
Where was what's his name, the guy you linked, born? Now, think back to the birthers. Got it?
wtf does that have to do with feinstein trying to ban guns because they look scary?
No idea what you're talking about. In this little sidebar you posted some youtube video which I did not watch. Got it?

 
3C said:
Rayderr said:
Restrict. Restrict. Restrict. Not ban. Now if you think "Restricting" = banning, then you give credence to the gun nuts who say Obama & the left are going to ban guns because it's no secret the left wants to restrict guns.

So what's it going to be? Republicans want to restrict abortions and Democrats want to restrict guns, or Republicans want to ban abortions and Democrats want to ban guns?
You said: No, I don't think most republicans would admit to wanting to ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest.

I said: let me introduce you to the trio from Va.

You said: restrict<>ban

I said: Fortunately, the internet has a wayback machine. From the cooch campaign website: Ken opposes abortions that are not for the purpose of saving the mother's life. link

So, it seems you are wrong about Cooch. He wants to ban abortion for everything but the health of the mother. And if the mother is more than 20 weeks, too bad. So your original statement was "ban abortions even in the case of rape and incest." which is exactly what he said he wants to do.
At least this one is telling the truth.

Pro-choice advocates fear that the wave of abortion restrictions sweeping through state legislatures are part of a broader strategy to completely abolish a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy – and they're right.
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/08/of_course_we_want_to_close_all.html

And this one. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/11/miss-gov-targets-last-abortion-clinic-my-goal-of-course-is-to-shut-it-down/

 
As part of the affiliate agreement that allows local stations to broadcast a network like NBC, is network's right to air local news reports nationally. When they do, the local journalist just says "this is (insert name) reporting for NBC news" even though the journalist works for the local affiliate. Pretty much any local news that gets national attention is done this way, as was the Martin/Zimmerman story.

So my previous question still stands unanswered. Would you like to answer it with the knowledge that their story was aired nationally?
I answered it :shrug: I even bolded it for easy processing this time. Next time you ask, I'll increase the font size to the max to see if that helps.

To your specific question, I'm sure some did and some didn't, but I've said that 10 times already.
I assume that's the question you are asking me to answer again. If you're wanting me to give opinion on whether or not the people who edited the piece should have been fired, I went back and found the edit and I'll say this. People have done a great deal worse and been fine. It seems like a very arbitrary line that they drew. I don't have a problem with them being fired....NBC can do what they want. But this is coming from someone who understands what the MSM's primary goals are and as a result puts zero stock in anything they say in their pieces.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top