Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, that is what you said. What I said was "Ted has said much worse things about the President and coming so close to asking for his assassination, in the last 7 years.
Abbott and Stockman, know exactly what they are doing and it is working well to rile up the base and those independents that are as fed up as they are with the mongrel President.
You have to understand, this is Texas, where we don't take sh*t from anyone, especially a tyrannical President.
If transplanted Texans don't like it, there is a place called California, begging you to head their way."
Read what I typed, instead of between the lines.
I read what you type. When you said "we", I basically took that as meaning you. Why else would a person say "we" if not referring to one's self as well? And then you say "we don't take" well, I'm not repeating the rest, you were essentially stating that in lieu of what you said about Ted Nugent.
And the very fact that you refer to the President as "the mongrel President" tells me you think it's okay to say stuff like that.
And why shouldn't I read between the lines? It makes it easier to see what some persons really mean. There is a way of saying things in such a way as to hide the true intentions. In this case, I didn't have to read between the lines. All I had to do was look at two or three particular parts of this and gather the conclusion from there. Why else would those words be uttered in the first place?
I read what you type. When you said "we", I basically took that as meaning you. Why else would a person say "we" if not referring to one's self as well? And then you say "we don't take" well, I'm not repeating the rest, you were essentially stating that in lieu of what you said about Ted Nugent.
And the very fact that you refer to the President as "the mongrel President" tells me you think it's okay to say stuff like that.
And why shouldn't I read between the lines? It makes it easier to see what some persons really mean. There is a way of saying things in such a way as to hide the true intentions. In this case, I didn't have to read between the lines. All I had to do was look at two or three particular parts of this and gather the conclusion from there. Why else would those words be uttered in the first place?
There are many things that make me free, that you my find offensive.
There are many things that oppress only you, that I may find offensive.
If I don't keep you free, I will be next.
Did you really write it, or was this suppose to be sarcasm? A straight answer and an honest answer, no jokes, just a straight answer. I give straight answers and let be known where I stand.
Maybe he makes good music, but I've never listened to anything by him.
The thing is, it is not his music that is up for criticism. It is his bigoted comments that are up for criticism. He referred to the President by a racial slur, and that is a very repulsive thing to do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
