Jump to content

Vince_McCoy_Williams

banned
  • Posts

    393
  • Joined

Posts posted by Vince_McCoy_Williams

  1. 13 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

    I agree that all immigration should be merit based. I have a feeling we'd disagree on how to determine merit.

    "Are you a breathing not-criminal who wants to be here?"

    If the answer is "yes", you merit a quick path to citizenship.

    --

    I am too old and have too much money to be ANTIFA. The rotten and broken leftist brain I have is encased in a body and wardrobe that screams, "Compassionate conservative!"

    I just like those kids a lot.

    And I certainly don't have the muscle of this studly young person.

    Untitled-1.jpg

    You need to watch a video on immigration. We cant fix all of the world's problems by taking in anyone and everyone who wants to come here. That is a good way to dilute our country's wealth and undermine the current citizens. Think about it, hundreds of millions of people could pour into our country and we still wouldn't even put a dent in the world's poverty problem. And then our country would be flooded and ruined. 

    People can get in line and wait there turn at the discretion of our country; it is our right to determine who enters our country. I have zero sympathy for those who illegally immigrate. If you don't have borders, you don't have a country.  

    • Like 1
  2. 3 hours ago, lemonlime said:

    I gotta disagree.  My biggest concern with the Supreme Court pick is I think the only thing Trump cares about is picking someone who is loyal to Trump.  Trump doesn't give a fuck about anything, including judicial philosophy, competence, issues including Roe.  He only cares about a justice who will stop investigations, say he can't be subpoenaed, can't be called into court, and can pardon himself.   That's all Dersh.  It's also why if he can get away with it, I think he'd appoint Pirro, Tiffany, his sister, etc.  And this is a bigger problem than say, overturning Roe v. Wade.  Basic policy stuff will take years to get to the Court and can ultimately be undone.  If the court okays Trump's corruption, it could lead to a constitutional crisis that could destroy the nation.

    I think Pods is right, though, and it will be Kavanaugh.  First, because Kavanaugh is the most likely to let Trump get away with shit who can also be confirmed.  Second, because I think Trump wants a white man for the optics.

    Never forget to take your meds LOL

    • Like 2
  3. 16 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

    It’s called being at work, try it. 

    Ok I’m wrong about that instance, but for you to truly believe that trump is somehow fighting for individual rights by nominating Gorsuch, you’re an idiot. He chose from a list that others gave him. The other points still stand. How you think getting rid of the individual mandate will somehow increase prosperity is hilarious. We’ll see when everyone premiums are higher this time next year 

    I trust Gorsuch to act in a manner that favors individual rights. Hopefully that will continue to pan out.

    Also, forcing someone to buy insurance or face a mandatory penalty is an invasion of liberty. So I think you have that a bit twisted, as it has nothing to do with cost of premiums and everything to do with the government forcing you to buy a product or face a penalty. That is a step for liberty. 

    Edit: calling me an idiot after that whopper of a misfire on Gorsuch is pretty silly. Try to use less ad hominems. 

    • Like 2
  4. 8 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

     


    I’ve seen hundreds of your posts on this site and the last. You, or at least the character you play online, are irredeemable. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

     

    You view other humans who simply have a different view of politics as "irredeemable." I hope you can find peace with your life at some point. It must be heard to carry that much hate and contempt in your heart. I truly feel sorry for you. 

  5. 8 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

    Legitimately cannot even comprehend the evil one must possess to go on air and make a statement like that.

    Fox News is a terrorist organization.

    Good god. You are fucking psycho. Hannnity is a reactionary clown, like many other attention grabbing journalists. To classify Fox News as a terrorist organization just shows people you have a few screws loose. 

    • Like 2
    • Fuck You 2
  6. 5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    The congressmen getting shot event was certainly a step on this shitty path.  That's the level of dialogue, understanding, and compromise we've got.  ZERO.  There are only those on "your side," and enemies.  That doesn't end well.  You can pretend otherwise.  Which makes you part of the problem.  

    I dont view you as an enemy! I see you as a fellow countryman and I have nothing but love in my heart for this country and it's people. We may disagree on how to get there but we all want to see America be great. 

    I think that is your problem. You see Trump voters as irredeemable, or "pieces of shit," as you just put it. It allows you to enter into the deluded negative mindset known as Trump Derangement Syndrome, where you dehumanize us by thinking that we are racist "pieces of shit." You need some introspection. 

    • Like 2
  7. 9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    No.  Internet trolls don't bug me.

    Dead journalists and imprisoned kids separated from their parents do, though.  That's because I"m not a complete piece of shit, so I doubt that you and I can engage productively on this.

    Well you are overreacting to Twitter posts from a shooting, that ***gasp***, could have posted by Russian trolls to stoke division. And you are falling for it, what you are most of afraid of, you have now fallen victim to. 

    FYI, crazy dem dude shooting at our congressman is not good either, but you dont hear me saying the country is on some path to hell because a whackjob shoots someone. Get real. 

    • Fuck You 1
  8. 14 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

    I don’t know if this guy was alt right or a Trump supporter but I know a lot of both are celebrating it on Twitter. 

    Oh come the fuck on,  an extremely small minority of fucking psychopaths might be applauding this. You are a clown if you think "a lot" of trump supporters would be happy about this. Get a grip

    • Like 2
  9. 2 hours ago, SubliminalHorn said:

    And didn’t VMW’s boy Gorsuch dissent in the Carpenter case recently? Oh yeah, Gorsuch sure is for maximizing personal liberty. Like I said, never vote again. 

     

    2 hours ago, Vince_McCoy_Williams said:

    You obviously didn't read his dissent lol.

    "Although Gorsuch also wrote a dissent, his opinion is similar to a concurring opinion because he agreed with the majority’s decision but disagreed with the majority’s reasoning.[40] Gorsuch agreed that law enforcement agencies need a warrant to obtain cell phone data; however, he disagrees that the Fourth Amendment provides the right to a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” Instead, Gorsuch argues that cell phone location records are the property of cell phone owners and under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement agencies cannot search a person’s property without a warrant."

    Maybe you're the one who shouldn't vote lol

    Crickets

  10. 18 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

    I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that it's not entirely defensible to have wholly distinct roles for the House and the Senate yet have huge differences in effective leverage (either per capita or on the whole) in the two different groups.  A better blend seems prudent.  For one thing, the country is nearly 100X the size it was when the Constitution was ratified.  California is 65X larger than Wyoming.  California gets 53 Representatives and 2 Senators, and Wyoming gets 1 Representative and 2 Senators?  How is that gonna play out in an impeachment trial in the Senate?

    Still hanging on to that impeachment pipe dream lol

  11. 33 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

    And didn’t VMW’s boy Gorsuch dissent in the Carpenter case recently? Oh yeah, Gorsuch sure is for maximizing personal liberty. Like I said, never vote again. 

    You obviously didn't read his dissent lol.

    "Although Gorsuch also wrote a dissent, his opinion is similar to a concurring opinion because he agreed with the majority’s decision but disagreed with the majority’s reasoning.[40] Gorsuch agreed that law enforcement agencies need a warrant to obtain cell phone data; however, he disagrees that the Fourth Amendment provides the right to a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” Instead, Gorsuch argues that cell phone location records are the property of cell phone owners and under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement agencies cannot search a person’s property without a warrant."

    Maybe you're the one who shouldn't vote lol

    • Haha 1
  12. 14 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

    You have no argument. You threw up some vague ideas and presented those as reasons he is fighting for individual liberty and for why there is so much prosperity. You are stupid. and I thought you had a life and can’t post here often? Weird, ever since yesterday you’ve been all over the boards with your moronic posts. Sounds like the poster that said you only show up when your team has some sort of victory might be right. 

    Argumentum ad hominem, guess you gotta start somewhere when you have no substantive argument

    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 1
  13. 9 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

    So, just to keep track of it all - so far just on this thread we've seen you advocate for "changing" our racist constitution, abolishing the electoral college, and importing as many voters as possible.  That's a great platform.  Very "Common Sense".  

    This is normal for liberals, they think these are common sense positions. It's scary how blind they are. 

    • Fuck You 1
×
×
  • Create New...