ADVERTISEMENT

Gabbard a Terrorist

  • Thread starter anon_108jmb6yxelfn
  • Start date
Where was the fbi mentioned. Read the op. Read the post ribbon bet you wherein the original article was attached

Settle
Look, do you want to control the outcome here, put this all behind you today, or go in front of that mean ole' judge. Here you can have a hand in the outcome; there, you're at the whim of what he ate that day. What do you say? Give me a good faith number I can take back there, and let's see where this goes.
 
Look, do you want to control the outcome here, put this all behind you today, or go in front of that mean ole' judge. Here you can have a hand in the outcome; there, you're at the whim of what he ate that day. What do you say? Give me a good faith number I can take back there, and let's see where this goes.
And I'm the scumbag selling software...

I wish my dad could read this after I told him I wasn't going into politics or applying to law school.
 
So Tulsi goes on Fox and criticizes Kamala and goes on Terrorist watch list next day. Who the hell is the dictator?

Good grief, just a few moments ago, on CNN, Dana Bash seriously asked Senator Tammy Duckworth if Tulsi Gabbard is a “Russian asset.”

These people are certifiably insane.
 
You're a weird dude.
I’m a logical dude. You like to proclaim how Conservative you are while extolling the need for an ever growing CIA, FBI, Military, NSA.

Conservatism isn’t a la carte. You don’t get to pick the parts of government you want shrunk. You’re ideologically inconsistent and a major fraud. There is nothing Conservative about you.
 
I’m a logical dude. You like to proclaim how Conservative you are while extolling the need for an ever growing CIA, FBI, Military, NSA.

Conservatism isn’t a la carte. You don’t get to pick the parts of government you want shrunk. You’re ideologically inconsistent and a major fraud. There is nothing Conservative about you.
You some strange form of libertarian. Stop posting to me, your opinions are worthless.
 
I’m a logical dude. You like to proclaim how Conservative you are while extolling the need for an ever growing CIA, FBI, Military, NSA.

Conservatism isn’t a la carte. You don’t get to pick the parts of government you want shrunk. You’re ideologically inconsistent and a major fraud. There is nothing Conservative about you.
Wanting radical change of the statuts quo also isn't conservative, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
In the strictest definition of conservative you are correct. In the political definition you are not.
I think there is a lot of conflation of conservatives with those wanting policies favored by the right.

The philosophical underpinnings of conservatives is the recognition of a set of principles that recognize (1) a value to tradition, (2) a suspicion of unfettered "reason" based on a recognition of the limitations of human intelligence, and (3) the costs inherent in all change, with radical change perhaps being exponentially more costly, not linearly so.

Once you throw those away, I'm not sure the policy positions those on the right favor are any more defensible--maybe less so--than the ones on the left.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
I think there is a lot of conflation of conservatives with those wanting policies favored by the right.

The philosophical underpinnings of conservatives is the recognition of a set of principles that recognize (1) a value to tradition, (2) a suspicion of unfettered "reason" based on a recognition of the limitations of human intelligence, and (3) the costs inherent in all change, with radical change perhaps being exponentially more costly, not linearly so.

Once you throw those away, I'm not sure the policy proscriptions those on the right favor are any more defensible--maybe less so--than the ones on the left.
Yeah. Yeah. What you wrote is essentially Chesterton’s Fence. Chesterton didn’t account for myriad functions that at best serve no real purpose and more likely degrade quality of life.

Edit: a self serving enterprise will always grow to serve itself.
 
Yeah. Yeah. What you wrote is essentially Chesterton’s Fence. Chesterton didn’t account for myriad functions that at best serve no real purpose and more likely degrade quality of life.

Edit: a self serving enterprise will always grow to serve itself.
Nope, it's more than that.
 
Where was the fbi mentioned. Read the op. Read the post ribbon bet you wherein the original article was attached

Settle
Do judges work this hard to prevent damages for the guilty party? The entire jury seems to have sent the decision. Why is the Judge negotiating... Guilty on all account$ .
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 76-1 and mcmurtry66
Looks like TG was sure as hell on a list no one wants to be on:


Once again the Dims turn out to be doing exactly what they say the Republicans Will do...
Its been reported, right here on this site, that a list like that doesn't exist.
 
Its been reported, right here on this site, that a list like that doesn't exist.

Much like Biden has been in complete command of his faculties for the past five years...

I recall being vilified as not knowing what I was seeing (or talking about) and how I should be ashamed for mentioning dementia as a probable cause...

Pretty certain I missed any of the apologies or, at minimum, a "looks like you were right" acknowledgements about that...
 
Looks like TG was sure as hell on a list no one wants to be on:


Once again the Dims turn out to be doing exactly what they say the Republicans Will do...

Did Sen. Paul say what rationale the TSA had for this enhanced scrutiny, or do we just assume it was for nefarious political reasons?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
Did Sen. Paul say what rationale the TSA had for this enhanced scrutiny, or do we just assume it was for nefarious political reasons?
What came up in her confirmation hearings? I didn't really pay any attention to them, but would assume if she should have been on a list, those things would have been brought up there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
Looks like TG was sure as hell on a list no one wants to be on:


Once again the Dims turn out to be doing exactly what they say the Republicans Will do...
I thought we already established that she was or might have been on the Quiet Skies List and not on the Terrorist Watch List.
 
So are we to believe she was still on the list “temporarily” from a trip to Syria and Lebanon back in 2017? Why wasn’t she placed on the list until the Biden admin?

A public figure? And a patriot?

Political harassment is all it was.
Your certainty in spite of your ignorance is something to behold.
 
What came up in her confirmation hearings? I didn't really pay any attention to them, but would assume if she should have been on a list, those things would have been brought up there.

I have no idea one way or the other.

I'm not necessarily supportive of the scrutiny, but I'd need to know the "probable cause" they had for it before making up my mind. The Syria trip seems to be a stretch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hookyIU1990
Much like Biden has been in complete command of his faculties for the past five years...

I recall being vilified as not knowing what I was seeing (or talking about) and how I should be ashamed for mentioning dementia as a probable cause...

Pretty certain I missed any of the apologies or, at minimum, a "looks like you were right" acknowledgements about that...
Going forward, im’a send my post to you first.
For editing purposes, of course!
Spot on!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 76-1
I have no idea one way or the other.

I'm not necessarily supportive of the scrutiny, but I'd need to know the "probable cause" they had for it before making up my mind. The Syria trip seems to be a stretch.
I figured if anyone knew it would be you. I assumed your DVR was full of her saved confirmation hearings.
Flirt GIF by The Vibe is Right
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT