Should right start boycotting companies?

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
23,708
Reaction score
5,673
Points
113
You think it's unconstitutional for me to not want stupid people to vote?
If you codify it as law, yes.

If you're just a white hateful bigot, as you are, that is not unconstitutional, no.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,575
Reaction score
3,032
Points
113
I'm not Wally, melvy. The father was jailed for objecting to the daughter's transition therapy (he has a legitimate point) and for disclosing the child and mother's identities (not ever a good idea).

Good effort. Keep workin' on it.
I’m literally quoting from the article.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,575
Reaction score
3,032
Points
113
I am conflicted on the parent issue. I think parents should have the final say, but I think kids should also be able to petition the court for emancipation at 16 or even younger in some cases.

I think in most cases these things don't just pop up one day where your kid is a typical boy or girl and then just says out of the blue, I want to change my gender. Hopefully Catholic School keeps mine on the straight and narrow.😯😯😯😎😎😎
That’s actually exactly what is happening. Females suddenly wanting to identify as males quadrupled in a single year. It’s a trend.

the issue is courts overriding parental concerns and decisions. That is a terrible precedent. Physical abuse, sure.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,575
Reaction score
3,032
Points
113
Care to elaborate? You think it's unconstitutional for me to not want stupid people to vote? You think that violates the Constitution?
Jake could probably use a constitutional refresher course. I agree with you. Universal suffrage is not a good goal and has not led to successful societies throughout history. Obviously limiting voting by race or gender is wrong. But limiting voting to people with skin in the game and who are somewhat educated on current events and politics is a more worthy goal.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,575
Reaction score
3,032
Points
113
Woke2. Expert in All Things Transgender Issues, Dr. Suess and of course Economics.
Wally asked a question and I answered. I just can’t relate to someone who thinks the government should be arresting anyone for misgendering. But you are special Howie. You defend it. Just don’t call me a hypocrite on this issue.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
23,674
Reaction score
5,044
Points
113
Yes they did. They voted not to certify Biden as the duly elected President. WTF would you call that?

10's of millions of Trump voters questioned the results because the QOP'ers who knew better fed them The Big Lie for 2 months. No amount of signature verification or reduced drop boxes would have made those 10's of millions of cultists feel the result was legitimate. What a complete load of BS.

No one knew what was going to happen. More complete BS from you. Trump called them there. Come to DC on 1/6. It will be wild! Pence must be forced to "do the right thing." We have to "fight like hell or we won't have a country anymore!." Sure, no one knew. It was a total shock. KGF hadn't heard and didn't know much.

Keep yeahbutting about Antifa. You have nothing.

Stop trying to talk sense to KFC. Seditionists like him are a lost cause. Party over country. Nothing else matters.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
19,174
Reaction score
2,651
Points
113
Please. You can find a few people upset after every election in history.

10's of millions of Democrats didn't believe the elections weren't legitimate and they never tried to violently overthrow the government. Your false equivalency is pathetic.
There were more than a few. And it was in every Democrat presidential election loss since Bill Clinton’s presidency. The only difference is, some anti-government idiots took it a step too far albeit b/c Trump misled them.

No one predicted it though there was government intelligence that suggested a few dozen anti-govt idiots were planning it.

Your labeling all Republicans or most Republicans as complicit is disgusting and a total LIE.

11DBFA3E-B75E-4154-9220-CA7525D9A148.jpeg
1B63CEF3-E88F-41AC-8678-7B63E328EAFB.jpeg
70515D23-2516-4149-AD88-0B046E793A67.jpeg
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
53,115
Reaction score
10,612
Points
113
There were more than a few. And it was in every Democrat presidential election loss since Bill Clinton’s presidency. The only difference is, some anti-government idiots took it a step too far albeit b/c Trump misled them.

No one predicted it though there was government intelligence that suggested a few dozen anti-govt idiots were planning it.

Your labeling all Republicans or most Republicans as complicit is disgusting and a total LIE.

View attachment 12392
View attachment 12393
View attachment 12394
"As many as 10 democrats may"

147 Republicans DID vote to to overturn the election.

KGF: "Hurr durr durr. These two things are the same! MAGA!"
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
7,309
Reaction score
3,541
Points
113
"As many as 10 democrats may"

147 Republicans DID vote to to overturn the election.

KGF: "Hurr durr durr. These two things are the same! MAGA!"

Math is not their strong suit...
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
19,174
Reaction score
2,651
Points
113
"As many as 10 democrats may"

147 Republicans DID vote to to overturn the election.

KGF: "Hurr durr durr. These two things are the same! MAGA!"
Geezus howie, you’re getting as bad as stocker.

7B69520B-707C-4AEB-9431-4B004FB59DE3.jpeg
Let me quote from the above CNN article:
“The challenge was defeated 267-31 by the House and 74-1 by the Senate...The move was not designed to overturn Bush’s re-election...they wanted to draw attention to the need for aggressive election reform in the wake of what they said were widespread voter problems.”

Sound familiar?

Republicans weren’t trying to overturn the election, so stop you f’n whining and lying.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
53,115
Reaction score
10,612
Points
113
Geezus howie, you’re getting as bad as stocker.

View attachment 12395
Let me quote from the above CNN article:
“The challenge was defeated 267-31 by the House and 74-1 by the Senate...The move was not designed to overturn Bush’s re-election...they wanted to draw attention to the need for aggressive election reform in the wake of what they said were widespread voter problems.”

Sound familiar?

Republicans weren’t trying to overturn the election, so stop you f’n whining and lying.
147 vs 31. Still not the same. And the Dems didn't proceed the vote with a violent insurrection attempt, even though there was more "funny business" in Ohio in 2004 than anything the loons leading the "Big Lie" could find.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
19,174
Reaction score
2,651
Points
113
147 vs 31. Still not the same. And the Dems didn't proceed the vote with a violent insurrection attempt, even though there was more "funny business" in Ohio in 2004 than anything the loons leading the "Big Lie" could find.
I didn’t say the margin was the same. I said the objective was the same, which was not “overturning the election”. Dur hur hur. (See how dumb that sounds?)
 
Top Bottom