America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 weeks ago by Sunoverbeach. 48 replies replies.
Insurrection???
Whistlebritches Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 21,708
"You ain't seen nothing yet," Waters said from the steps of the court. "Women are going to control their bodies no matter how they try and stop us. The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them. Women will be in control of their bodies. And if they think Black women are intimidated or afraid, they got another thought coming."


Maxine Waters


Does she get a pass because she's a woman,black,a democrat???????Or should the FBI be unleashed on her............I'm leaning towards the FBI.The left makes hay with every word a conservative speaks so why not.Two can play this game and its damn well time for the right to start playing hardball.

HockeyDad Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 43,464
She’s gonna get a gun and shoot Clarence Thomas.
DrafterX Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 96,113
That's what I heard... Mellow
Mr. Jones Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 16,867
I heard the opposite....

Yes,

Clarence be goin to da' capital ready to bust some caps...
Holdin' that peeestoll sideways like a gangsta'....

The signs at the Capitol say:
"Come right in Clarence and do your stuff"
Brewha Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,761
Whistlebritches wrote:
"You ain't seen nothing yet," Waters said from the steps of the court. "Women are going to control their bodies no matter how they try and stop us. The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them. Women will be in control of their bodies. And if they think Black women are intimidated or afraid, they got another thought coming."


Maxine Waters


Does she get a pass because she's a woman,black,a democrat???????Or should the FBI be unleashed on her............I'm leaning towards the FBI.The left makes hay with every word a conservative speaks so why not.Two can play this game and its damn well time for the right to start playing hardball.


Nah, she just wants the freedom of reproductive rights.

Which flys in the face of republican aholes.

Know any?
MACS Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 75,400
I can point to the part of the constitution that guarantees our right to keep and bear arms.

Can you point to the part that says women have a right to abort a child?

For the record... what the supreme court has done is allow the states to make the call. So if democrats riot, loot and burn democrat cities in democrat states where abortions can still take place...

That would be ironical.

Also for the record... I have said that I disagree with abortion, but thought the SCOTUS should leave R v W alone. It doesn't upset me that they ruled on it. Women can still get abortions, take contraceptives and even gobble up the morning after pill.

Not sure why everyone is freaking out.
ZRX1200 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,417
Wait….Maxine Waters knows what a woman is?
Stogie1020 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 3,260
ZRX1200 wrote:
Wait….Maxine Waters knows what a woman is?

Lol, right? Suddenly they can define it?

I should get a sign that says "hands off my body"...


The irony here is that if they said the same thing to the men who impregnated them, this wouldn't be an issue.

Banning abortions is not taking away your reproductive rights, it's taking away the consequences of a poor reproductive decision.
Speyside2 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,045
They are going to violently storm the Capitol, illegally enter the building, build a guillotine, and try to show Kevin how it works. You know, basically the same as a normal tour.
Speyside2 Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,045
Oh, wait, she is only talking. Yup, we better inform her to have a rally a few blocks from the Capitol and incite her folks to storm the place and injury as many police as possible.
Speyside2 Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,045
You're killing me smalls, you could cut the irony with a knife.
JGKAMIN Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 05-08-2011
Posts: 853
Low IQ Maxine at it again. She loves encouraging others to get out there and be disruptive while she sits in her mansion away from the district she is supposed to represent.

tailgater Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 25,958
Brewha wrote:
Nah, she just wants the freedom of reproductive rights.

Which flys in the face of republican aholes.

Know any?


Brewha.
Always looking for aholes to stopper.

A giver. That boy's a giver.

RayR Online
#14 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,885
Speaking of noisy Bolshevik Lizard People like Maxine:

Mouth-Breather AOC ☭ says the Supreme Court is illegitimate and was leading the chants along with Sunsara Taylor – a leader in the Revolutionary Communist Party. ☭ The Revolutionary Communist Party ☭ called for “fury into the streets” following the “The fascist Supreme Court" overruling.
"Bob Avakian – the party’s chairman and a Maoist – declared, “Only through the revolution to overthrow this system, and uproot all the relations of exploitation and oppression that are embodied in this system, will it be possible to finally end the fundamental division in which half of humanity is subordinated to and dominated by the other half, and all the brutality and agony bound up with that.” ☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭

https://ussanews.com/2022/06/24/aoc-vilifies-supreme-courts-roe-v-wade-decision-as-illegitimate-calls-for-protests-alongside-radical-communist-leader-who-wants-to-overthrow-the-american-system/

Whistlebritches Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 21,708
Speyside2 wrote:
Oh, wait, she is only talking. Yup, we better inform her to have a rally a few blocks from the Capitol and incite her folks to storm the place and injury as many police as possible.



Isn't just talking why they are after Trump..........and the evidence against him is implied,Maxine called for chaos

Schumer had nothing to do with an attempt on Kavanaugh's life either


You're judgement is selective Spey...........look in the mirror sometime
Speyside2 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,045
Sounds rather judgemental on your part. I never mentioned Trump, though he did do all those things. When you act like this I will point it out. My mistake last time was getting personal.
Whistlebritches Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 21,708
Speyside2 wrote:
Sounds rather judgemental on your part. I never mentioned Trump, though he did do all those things. When you act like this I will point it out. My mistake last time was getting personal.



Dude you need your meds..............SERIOUSLY!!!
Sunoverbeach Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 11,736
The older I get, the earlier it gets late.
bgz Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,678
You guys keep quoting the constitution... I believe that might now be a relic of the past. Our country has an expiration date now. It's over.

At least you got what you wanted though... temporarily anyway. It's all temporary... and you all are cheering for it's demise.

So now that it's going away... what do you hope China replaces it with?
BuckyB93 Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 12,393
Ben, do you actually read what you post?
BuckyB93 Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 12,393
Sunoverbeach wrote:
The older I get, the earlier it gets late.


I'm a fan of mid day cat naps. Quick little recharge.
RayR Online
#22 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,885
bgz wrote:
You guys keep quoting the constitution... I believe that might now be a relic of the past. Our country has an expiration date now. It's over.

At least you got what you wanted though... temporarily anyway. It's all temporary... and you all are cheering for it's demise.

So now that it's going away... what do you hope China replaces it with?


So you don't like anybody quoting those wurds in the Constitution, wurds that had specific meanings to those dead guys in the 18th Century, meanings that do not jive exactly with their corrupted progressive interpretations today?
I think what really bothers you is the original meaning and intent of those wurds.

When are you going to realize that POLITICAL PROGRESSIVISM doesn't lead to PROGRESS, but only to societal decay and the eventual demise of the perpetual indivisible union? I think the Chicoms as well as their progressive counterparts in the U.S. like AOC and her Bolshevik friends mentioned in my previous post are cheering for that day, assuming they still exist also then, which is hard to believe since their progressive societies are also in a state of decay.

rfenst Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,799
Whistlebritches wrote:
"You ain't seen nothing yet," Waters said from the steps of the court. "Women are going to control their bodies no matter how they try and stop us. The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them. Women will be in control of their bodies. And if they think Black women are intimidated or afraid, they got another thought coming."


Maxine Waters


Does she get a pass because she's a woman,black,a democrat???????Or should the FBI be unleashed on her............I'm leaning towards the FBI.The left makes hay with every word a conservative speaks so why not.Two can play this game and its damn well time for the right to start playing hardball.


That is NOT insurrection. It is not a call to break the law or overthrow or interreference with government function.
It is a call to socio-political action that represents pure political free speech.

(Having said that, Maxine Waters is a shame to this country.)
bgz Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,678
BuckyB93 wrote:
Ben, do you actually read what you post?


*yawn*

bgz Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,678
RayR wrote:
So you don't like anybody quoting those wurds in the Constitution, wurds that had specific meanings to those dead guys in the 18th Century, meanings that do not jive exactly with their corrupted progressive interpretations today?
I think what really bothers you is the original meaning and intent of those wurds.

When are you going to realize that POLITICAL PROGRESSIVISM doesn't lead to PROGRESS, but only to societal decay and the eventual demise of the perpetual indivisible union? I think the Chicoms as well as their progressive counterparts in the U.S. like AOC and her Bolshevik friends mentioned in my previous post are cheering for that day, assuming they still exist also then, which is hard to believe since their progressive societies are also in a state of decay.



The original words as I remember reading them were intended to be malleable... hard to do so, and rightfully so, but malleable none the less.

You can't control what it turns in to... if we're going to just let the next generation come in and say, nah... we don't like that one, we're going to go back and undo it... and anything else we don't like.

Then we no longer have a country, not for real anyway... maybe an abstraction of one... at least while the façade holds up.

Again, that's what you want, no large system. Localized systems only that work in isolation of each other. That's what you want. Everyone to fend for themselves, f*ck everyone who doesn't think like me.

Back to the age of conquerors and raping and looting and pillaging.

To think it would devolve into anything other than that is naivety... it's devolved into that every time throughout history.

What makes this time different?
rfenst Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,799
I am :

1. American;
2. Floridian; and a
3. Seminole County, FL resident.

In that order with the overwhelming majority focused on #1.
ZRX1200 Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,417
I identified as a machine gun.
rfenst Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,799
That is no surprise.
RayR Online
#29 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,885
rfenst wrote:
I am :

1. American;
2. Floridian; and a
3. Seminole County, FL resident.

In that order with the overwhelming majority focused on #1.


Then you and the "overwhelming majority" as you claim have your priorities back azzwards.
Start with your own backyard.
What is an American anyway in Biden's Divided States of America?
Probably harder to do than that Supreme Court Justice nominee had with defining what a woman is.



RayR Online
#30 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,885
bgz wrote:
The original words as I remember reading them were intended to be malleable... hard to do so, and rightfully so, but malleable none the less.

You can't control what it turns in to... if we're going to just let the next generation come in and say, nah... we don't like that one, we're going to go back and undo it... and anything else we don't like.

Then we no longer have a country, not for real anyway... maybe an abstraction of one... at least while the façade holds up.

Again, that's what you want, no large system. Localized systems only that work in isolation of each other. That's what you want. Everyone to fend for themselves, f*ck everyone who doesn't think like me.

Back to the age of conquerors and raping and looting and pillaging.

To think it would devolve into anything other than that is naivety... it's devolved into that every time throughout history.

What makes this time different?


What's the point of putting them words on paper if those words are malleable?
Then it's no different than having no constitution at all, it's a chitshow where demagogues go about making stuff up, trying to fool the proles as they go along.
Like that shameless lying Biden when he said "It's a sad day for the court and for the country. The court has done what it has never done before: expressly take away a constitutional right that is so fundamental to so many Americans."

We are already at the peak of another age of conquerors raping and looting and pillaging, and not because of decentralized government. Even the states are too big to have a representative republican form of government, like the federal government they are just a bureaucratic morass of crooks.
Brewha Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,761
ZRX1200 wrote:
I identified as a machine gun.

I thought you were a Kawasaki…..
Sunoverbeach Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 11,736
Seriously?!? You basically think there's no point in having laws period because they can be changed, right? You do realize the entire Bill of Rights were not in the constitution originally. They were the first amendments to said document.
rfenst Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,799
Sunoverbeach wrote:
Seriously?!? You basically think there's no point in having laws period because they can be changed, right? You do realize the entire Bill of Rights were not in the constitution originally. They were the first amendments to said document.

It's RayR.
The resident Jeffersonian-libertarian-anarchist.
Speyside2 Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,045
I don't think, sorry Freudian slip. The scary part of the overturn is it nullifies precedent. Pandora's box has been opened. You dislike a federal law, take it to SCOTUS, argue well that it is not covered in the constitution, and now your precedent is Roe v Wade. If you want to go back to when the constitution and bill of rights were written it's golden, otherwise not so much.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 11,736
God gave us the brain to work out problems. However, we use it to create more problems.
RayR Online
#36 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,885
Sunoverbeach wrote:
Seriously?!? You basically think there's no point in having laws period because they can be changed, right? You do realize the entire Bill of Rights were not in the constitution originally. They were the first amendments to said document.


ToTal CoDsWaLloP! Did you know the Constitution would have never been ratified by the majority of the states to begin with if there wasn't a Bill of Rights included acknowledging the rights of the individual? You seem to think the Bill of Rights was an afterthought after it was ratified.
Did you know some of the framers of the Constitution felt there was no need for a Bill of Rights because they felt that the document already made it clear what the limits on the government’s powers were? Laughable isn't it considering the government as it turned out still doesn't seem to recognize any limits to its power in many cases when those limits get in the way of robbing and pillaging?
bgz Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,678
RayR wrote:
ToTal CoDsWaLloP! Did you know the Constitution would have never been ratified by the majority of the states to begin with if there wasn't a Bill of Rights included acknowledging the rights of the individual? You seem to think the Bill of Rights was an afterthought after it was ratified.
Did you know some of the framers of the Constitution felt there was no need for a Bill of Rights because they felt that the document already made it clear what the limits on the government’s powers were? Laughable isn't it considering the government as it turned out still doesn't seem to recognize any limits to its power in many cases when those limits get in the way of robbing and pillaging?


You know the framers weren't as smart as you think they were... their rules were only intended for white people only originally... and on top of that, they didn't even have iphones. They were basically monkeys with wigs
RayR Online
#38 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,885
bgz wrote:
You know the framers weren't as smart as you think they were... their rules were only intended for white people only originally... and on top of that, they didn't even have iphones. They were basically monkeys with wigs


I heard, later on, there were Lilly-White racist Northerners who only wanted brown and black folk counted as 3/5 human for congressional representation whereas Southerners wanted them recognized as 100% human no matter if they were slaves or not. Weird huh?
bgz Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,678
RayR wrote:
I heard, later on, there were Lilly-White racist Northerners who only wanted brown and black folk counted as 3/5 human for congressional representation whereas Southerners wanted them recognized as 100% human no matter if they were slaves or not. Weird huh?


Couldn't trust monkeys with wigs back then no matter what they said or what side they were on.

That would be a good name for a tv show, monkeys with wigs.

We learned not to trust them. We still don't trust them even though most of them don't wear wigs anymore.
RayR Online
#40 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,885
bgz wrote:
Couldn't trust monkeys with wigs back then no matter what they said or what side they were on.

That would be a good name for a tv show, monkeys with wigs.

We learned not to trust them. We still don't trust them even though most of them don't wear wigs anymore.


I've told you before and I'll tell you again, whether they are monkeys with wigs or not if they are seeking power over you with their boot stomping on your face and stealing your stuff, you can't trust them for a second.
So why do many people still consider them their legitimate government that only does lawful legitimate things for the people and the children? It truly is just like Stockholm Syndrome, irrational behavior like when Spey doesn't take his MEDS.
bgz Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,678
RayR wrote:
I've told you before and I'll tell you again, whether they are monkeys with wigs or not if they are seeking power over you with their boot stomping on your face and stealing your stuff, you can't trust them for a second.
So why do many people still consider them their legitimate government that only does lawful legitimate things for the people and the children? It truly is just like Stockholm Syndrome, irrational behavior like when Spey doesn't take his MEDS.


I see it kinda like "protection" money at a very large scale.
RayR Online
#42 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 5,885
Exactly, they are just like the MOB, an organized crime family, or as Rothbard wrote "the State is nothing more nor less than a bandit gang writ large".
CelticBomber Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,680
Awww! I read the title "Insurrection???" as an invitation. I was going to order two.
Brewha Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 10,761
Blue pills?
tailgater Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 25,958
BuckyB93 wrote:
Ben, do you actually read what you post?


That explains why his lips are always so tired.
tailgater Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 25,958
BuckyB93 wrote:
Ben, do you actually read what you post?




bgz wrote:
*yawn*





Well, there's your proof.


bgz Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 12,678
tailgater wrote:
That explains why his lips are always so tired.


He's not worth arguing with... he can only empathize by associating your experience to a walmart experience.

Something about crappy managers at walmart or something... well no sh*t Sherlock, you work at f*ckin walmart.

That's how the conversation usually ends no matter how it starts... so no point.

(You think I'm joking about that... well, I am, because it's funny, but it's also true).

You're not worth arguing with because... well, you're more entertaining than Bucky, I'll give you that.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 11,736
A doctor tells a woman she can no longer touch anything alcoholic. So she gets a divorce.
Users browsing this topic
Guest