101

image
image1494×840 151 KB

3 Likes
102

You’re an attorney and you don’t know the difference between immoral and illegal? That certainly explains you’re belief that Biden is a legitimate president. You also can’t distinguish the difference between a person that is stolen from against their will from a person who chooses to patronize a business that arbitrarily raised their prices? What do they teach in law school anyway?

Innocent people being executed? Yup, unfortunately it happens. Tell you what, I’ll renounce my support of the death penalty for convicted criminals when you Libs renounce you support for the death penalty for innocent unborn babies. Deal?

The couple in St. Louis didn’t lose anything? Really? You mean the right to be safe on their own property? Like being smeared by the left wing press for defending themselves? Like countless thousands of dollars and months of time defending themselves in court for nothing but protecting themselves from imminent harm?

2 Likes
103

:rofl:

Oh well. We were even having an almost polite conversation.

So you’ll care about innocents being executed by the state - if I meet your demands?

You’re a person of faith, right?

104

No, but it kept them from stealing another horse. Recidivism after execution is zero. :wink:

1 Like
105

Of course they suffered. They were persecuted (as well as prosecuted) for making it clear to a bunch of rowdy, unpredictable protesters who had just broken through a gate to gain access to a private neighborhood, that they would not be allowed on their property. It cost them time, money, reputation and privacy, and got them threats against their lives and/or well being. Furthermore, had they not intimidated (not injured) the crowd with the display of firearms, there is a chance that the couple might have been injured or had their property damaged. (I presume you recall the physical threats made by members of the mob against the couple.)

And yes, they owned (jointly with other homeowners) the broken gate.

2 Likes
106

I suppose if they had come through your neighborhood, you would have offered the protest mob cookies and cold drinks. :smirk:

107

Nice dodge!!! I point out you’re concern for the innocent is disingenuous, and every time is extended only to the criminal.

You still haven’t addressed how business owners may respond in protecting themselves and their livelihoods from criminals whom you grant the right to loot and assault at will. We know the law isn’t going to do anything anymore.

1 Like
108

They are quite like the founders.

Present day liberals (myself included) will drag the Neanderthals into the 21st century.

Always look forward.

Allan

110

As I have said many times before … you are delusional. The libs of today are NOYHING like the Liberals who founded our Country. You are dragging us alright, but not forward.

1 Like
111

We will have to disagree on this point.

The facts however are on my side of the argument.

Allan

112

Depends on the day of the year. Evidently doing so on January 6th is super baaa, baaa, baaad.

114

You aren’t a liberal.

115
Mod Note

The prohibition on using religion as a weapon in political discussions goes both ways.

116

Once again.

A modern one. Establishment liberal. Hell yes.

Just like 10% of the population.

Allan

117

Interpretation; an insane progressive…hell yes. :sunglasses: :tumbler_glass:

118

True liberals don’t need additional adjectives. You are not even a “modern one” (there’s no such thing as an establishment liberal - that’s an oxymoron).

You are a big government Democrat- aka a sheep.

1 Like
119

Not a prog.

A liberal.

Allan

120

There are no facts, only examples. And the examples of libs today do not resemble the founding liberals.

1 Like
121

Not even close. That 10% are progressive libs who are even worse than ordinary “establishment” libs.

122

Not a prog.

Sorry to disappoint.

Allan