Posted on 08/11/2010 12:48:01 PM PDT by Second Amendment First
Thanks for the prayers.
So, what is it you're sipping this evening? Mad Dog 20-20? Maybe some Boone's Farm?
They are a grumpy lot. Mean spirited and liars.
I know you have already indicated to me that you have no problem with the Marxist agenda for the abolition of family and the use of the big government Courts to redistribute money and rights to the left-wing from American businesses and that you are in favor of trying to manipulate the TEA parties in supporting candidates on this fiscally irresponsible position of governing.
Of course then it fits if you support the pervert Ron Paul and his son.
I'm agnostic about Rand and I'd really appreciate knowing if he's a loon like his deranged father or if he is his own man and a true conservative.
It requires a direct quote and not nonsense from Mother Jones, MSNBC or other centers of misinformation dedicated to pitting conservatives against each other long enough to elect more commies to Congress.
Best I could come up with on the fly.
I don't spend a lot of time chronicling Pauls(s) lunacy.
You're pretty advanced, surely you can dig stuff up yourself.
And I'm still staying away from your tent and your camp.
Look up, to the north.. see the small firelight on the ridge?
Great, now I’ll have to wait up all night. Please bring snacks.
I ain't coming down there.
You're worse than Conan in his early years.
Send out for snacks. I've got responsibilities and can't risk capture.
Who'll feed the animals?
Your loss. Some men have actually died of regret.
Yeah.
Key word here is “died”.
Right, everyone who disagrees with you on the direction of the Tea Party is a closeted marxist big government supporter. We must all toe your line.
Welcome to reality.
Usually when you make an accusation, you need to dig up evidence to prove it, not the other way around.
Do you know the difference between an assertion and an accusation?
I assert Ron & Rand Paul are anti-Military lunatics and “truthers”.
Deal with it. Prove otherwise.
And as we see, Pablo is very wily.
I know that when you say that somebody belongs to a certain group, the burden of proof is on you.
Otherwise, I could be here all day long asserting thins I heard about you, and you would have to disprove a negative, which is impossible.
Deal with it.
You are the one that thinks having social Marxists join the TEA party is a good idea. It has nothing to do with ‘everyone who disagrees’ as you claim.
The social Marxist believes in the abolition of family thus empowering the government to put itself above family. This movement today involves using social issues such as gay marraige to redistribute wealth, power and rights in the Courts.
These are not values compatable with the TEA party no matter how much you want to insist that they are comaptible.
It also was not me at all we said that any TEA party must toe and line. I simply said that they would be hurting their movement to support social Marxists. It was you who insisted that they toe the line of being neutral to social Marxism. You insisted that over and over.
Your detachment from reality as to what it was that you even argued for is stunning.
Yeah, if you could ever find anything where I said that, you might have a point. But I didnt say that. You just cant read, and Im sorry for your condition.
So, your response is a picture that you probably didnt even make. I take it you concede that you are wrong. You cant prove your point, all you can do is make jokes. You have nothing.
I’ll just ask you then now.
Do you think that the TEA party must remain neutral in regards to the social Marxist stance on claiming that people must accept changing the defintion of marraige to include homsexual relationships or be taken to Court and punished?
I already know that you argued that they must before but I’ll ask you again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.