02/01/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

Ann Coulter's Weekly Column
Now open for public comments.
All Opinions welcome but please keep it clean and respectful.
If you want to enjoy more of what the ACOC forum has to offer, please register.
Message
Author
User avatar
Kevin
Forum Administrator
Posts: 8192
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:06 pm

02/01/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#1

#1 Post by Kevin » Wed Feb 01, 2017 7:23 pm

Ann Coulter wrote:GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...
February 1, 2017

Everything said about President Trump's "Muslim ban" is a lie -- including that it's a Muslim ban.

The New York Times wore out its thesaurus denouncing the order: "cruelty ... injury ... suffering ... bigoted, cowardly, self-defeating ... breathtaking ... inflammatory ... callousness and indifference" -- and that's from a single editorial!

Amid the hysteria over this prudent pause in refugee admissions from seven countries whose principal export is dynamite vests, it has been indignantly claimed that it's illegal for our immigration policies to discriminate on the basis of religion.

This is often said by journalists who are only in America because of immigration policies that discriminated on the basis of religion.

For much of the last half-century, Soviet Jews were given nearly automatic entry to the U.S. as "refugees." Entering as a refugee confers all sorts of benefits unavailable to other immigrants, including loads of welfare programs, health insurance, job placement services, English language classes, and the opportunity to apply for U.S. citizenship after only five years.

Most important, though, Soviet Jews were not required to satisfy the United Nations definition of a "refugee," to wit: someone fleeing persecution based on race, religion or national origin. They just had to prove they were Jewish.

This may have been good policy, but let's not pretend the Jewish exception was not based on religion.

If a temporary pause on refugee admissions from seven majority-Muslim countries constitutes "targeting" Muslims, then our immigration policy "targeted" Christians for discrimination for about 30 years.

Never heard a peep from the ACLU about religious discrimination back then!

According to the considered opinion of the Cato Institute's David J. Bier, writing in The New York Times, Trump's executive order is "illegal" because the 1965 immigration act "banned all discrimination against immigrants on the basis of national origin.”


In 1966, one year after the 1965 immigration act, immigrants from Cuba suddenly got special immigration privileges. In 1986, immigrants from Ireland did. People from Vietnam and Indochina got special immigration rights for 20 years after the end of the Vietnam War.

The 1965 law, quite obviously, did not prohibit discrimination based on national origin. (I was wondering why the Times would sully its pages with the legal opinion of a Grove City College B.A., like Bier! Any "expert" in a storm, I guess.)

In fact, ethnic discrimination is practically the hallmark of America's immigration policy -- in addition to our perverse obsession with admitting the entire Third World.

Commenting on these ethnic boondoggles back in 1996, Sen. Orrin Hatch said: "We have made a mockery" of refugee law, "because of politics and pressure." We let in one ethnic group out of compassion, then they form an ethnic power bloc to demand that all their fellow countrymen be let in, too.

As the former Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, described "diversity" in Der Spiegel: "In multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.”

That's our immigration policy -- plus a healthy dose of Emma Lazarus' insane idea that all countries of the world should send their losers to us. (Thanks, Emma!)

Americans are weary of taking in these pricey Third World immigrants, who show their gratitude by periodically erupting in maniacal violence -- in, for example, San Bernardino, Orlando, New York City, Fort Hood, Boston, Chattanooga, Bowling Green and St. Cloud.

The Muslim immigrants currently being showcased by the left are not likely to change any minds. The Times could produce only 11 cases of temporarily blocked immigrants that the newspaper would even dare mention. (Imagine what the others are like!)

For purposes of argument, I will accept the Times' glowing descriptions of these Muslim immigrants as brilliant scientists on the verge of curing cancer. (Two of the Times' 11 cases actually involved cancer researchers.)

Point one: If the Times thinks that brilliance is a desirable characteristic in an immigrant, why can't we demand that of all our immigrants?

To the contrary! Our immigration policy is more likely to turn away the brilliant scientist -- in order to make room for an Afghani goat herder, whose kid runs a coffee stand until deciding to bomb the New York City subway one day. (That was Najibullah Zazi, my featured "Immigrant of the Week," on May 1, 2012.)

Point two: I happened to notice that even the stellar Muslim immigrants dug up by the Times seem to bring a lot of elderly and sickly relatives with them. Guess who gets to support them?

House Speaker Paul Ryan's driving obsession (besides being the Koch brothers' lickspittle) is "entitlement reform," i.e., cutting benefits or raising the retirement age for Social Security and Medicare.

I have another idea. How about we stop bringing in immigrants who immediately access government programs, who bring in elderly parents who immediately access government programs, or who run vast criminal enterprises, stealing millions of dollars from government programs? (I illustrated the popularity of government scams with immigrants in Adios, America! by culling all the news stories about these crimes over a one-month period and listing the perps' names.)

Point three: Contrary to emotional blather about the horrors refugees are fleeing, a lot are just coming to visit their kids or to get free health care. One of the Times' baby seals -- an Iraqi with diabetes and "a respiratory ailment" -- was returning from performing his responsibilities as an elected official in Kirkuk.

That's not exactly fleeing the Holocaust.

While it's fantastic news that most Muslim refugees aren't terrorists, the downside is: They're not refugees, they're not brilliant, they don't have a constitutional right to come here and they're very, very expensive. Until politicians can give us more government services for less money, they need to stop bringing in the poor of the world on our dime.

COPYRIGHT 2017 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY ANDREWS MCMEEL SYNDICATION

quackquack
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 5:15 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#2

#2 Post by quackquack » Wed Feb 01, 2017 7:41 pm

if it's up to me - which it ain't - we'll take the tired, hungry, etc that are: never a threat to our citizens, educated, can appreciably and immediately add to our country, don't want/need any 'help' from the government programs, want to learn english, want to become a citizen and pay us taxes, doesn't wanna drag in any uneducated useless family members, doesn't form enclaves where they enslave their women and teach folks how to overthrow the USA - it doesn't hurt if they're squared away - support the second amendment and our President - and vote repub

Mellybell

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#3

#3 Post by Mellybell » Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:05 am

Trump won the election. He has never been secretive on his views on immigration. Clearly, the people voted for him, his views, his plans and ideas. What was voted on was to take care of America. Not every other country. I'm an American and I don't want to pay for immigrants or refugees to come into this country, have a vote, take our jobs, and pose threats to our safety. I wouldn't let someone into my home who I did not know if they were a criminal. Until WE all have jobs, until all of US have homes,until all of OUR children have food, until WE are in a position to offer the safety and security they need, we should not allow them to be here. If Hollywood and Washington Liberals are so disgusted over this, then let THEM open their homes up to the immigrants and refugees! We need to take care of America, otherwise, there won't be anything for anyone at all, let alone the immigrants. It's not about hate, it's about being smart and having common sense. If you can't feed your own children, you don't go out and adopt a bunch of orphans . It's really very simple. I don't understand why it's even up for debate. The majority elected him. The liberals LOST. Why do they feel they have the right to change what the majority have already voted for? Trump wanted to build the wall and cut back on immigration and keep illegal aliens and criminals out. He promised it, we voted for it, he won, they lost, let's just do it and move on to the next task on his agenda!


DeterminateCounsel
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#5

#5 Post by DeterminateCounsel » Thu Feb 02, 2017 9:29 pm

Great essay. Ann has been a hero of mine since I read her first column.
I was about to respond but Mellybell read my mind and I can't agree more or add to that position.
I will say that oil and water do not mix and true Christianity and devout Islam can never co-exist. When they out-breed the 1776 indigenous "Americans," it will be Sharia law or die.

Ray Gun
Posts: 14841
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#6

#6 Post by Ray Gun » Fri Feb 03, 2017 4:55 pm

And which Founder or Framer ever said anything about huddle masses.

The crap written on the Statute of the Pagan Goddess of Minerva, who looks like Apollo in drag, also known as The Statue of Liberty, was never any founding policy of the United States. The statue was a "present" from French Freemasons to American Freemasons.

User avatar
kermit
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9926
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:28 am
Location: protecting penguins at the north pole

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#7

#7 Post by kermit » Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:31 pm

Ray Gun wrote:
Fri Feb 03, 2017 4:55 pm
And which Founder or Framer ever said anything about huddle masses.

The crap written on the Statute of the Pagan Goddess of Minerva, who looks like Apollo in drag, also known as The Statue of Liberty, was never any founding policy of the United States. The statue was a "present" from French Freemasons to American Freemasons.
that's good.... :wave:

User avatar
falvegas
Posts: 8108
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#8

#8 Post by falvegas » Fri Feb 03, 2017 7:59 pm

This nonsensical Blather by the PC Left Fairyland doesn't have a damn thing to do with any legal basis to Admit Refugees into America.
The absurd PC Left Wing Congressional badgering and slandering of Cabinet Candidates is clear Obstructionism, nothing to do with Qualifications.
The DNC instigated Unconstitutional Street Riots by their Brown Shirt Street Gangs is about Obstructionism to systematically Interrupt a Constitutional Process by their opposition.
The direct Slander even Libel [Fake News] by the Joseph Goebbels theorized Media is again a frail attempt by Fake Journalists to discredit and disrupt a Constitutional Process.

This Vile Conduct, including by those who are supposed to be 'Representatives of The People' is a Direct Insult To the American Citizens who voted in this Administration ...Citizens who made a clear and unambiguous Statement that, Enough is Enough.

But the Bullies on The Block can't handle that the other Kids decided not to Play With Their Ball...so their not just whining, they're becoming Savage.
This is [for now at least] a Bloodless COUP ATTEMPT.....it is not the, Process of a Constitutional Republic.

Ray Gun
Posts: 14841
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#9

#9 Post by Ray Gun » Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:06 pm

kermit wrote:
Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:31 pm
Ray Gun wrote:
Fri Feb 03, 2017 4:55 pm
And which Founder or Framer ever said anything about huddle masses.
The crap written on the Statute of the Pagan Goddess of Minerva, who looks like Apollo in drag, also known as The Statue of Liberty, was never any founding policy of the United States. The statue was a "present" from French Freemasons to American Freemasons.
that's good.... :wave:
It's main virtue is being accurate.

The government has been driving Christianity from the public square, at least since the Supreme Court forced the Bible out of schools. This is easy in part because everyone is taught what Christian traditions look like. However, it is only self-educated who recognize the iconography of the Babylonian Mysteries. So, the idols of paganism stand unchallenged: the Statue of Liberty and her other embodiment, The Goddess Columbia. Some want to take "In God We Trust" off the money. No one is calling for retiring these Goddesses we trust.

It shouldn't take too much sense too add one and one. Once you figure out that statue is not really American, it is much easier to understand it message - allow yourself to be overrun by foreigners - is not in American's best interest.

geni-us
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 3:49 am
Location: Portland OR

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#10

#10 Post by geni-us » Sat Feb 04, 2017 6:34 am

There was a time when I did not like you (because I did not understand you).

I remember watching these videos (about 2008) on youtube with you verse someone or some group (and still do) of people who's only goal was to insult you, or make fun, or condescend, and the list goes on of the childishness and pettiness that Americans suffer from in general.

As I watched these videos and having a different world view (or so I thought at the time) from you, there was one thing about you that I could not deny and it was why I continued to watch.

You are one of the strongest people I have ever seen in my life.

I suppose others have said this before?

However, I hope I can present you with a new angle to the recognition of your "Courage Under Fire".

I am Native American and Spaniard. My life was never fair and I was homeless/on the streets for at least 13 years. I have seen things that MOST people never will see or experience.

For me there is no greater honor than to stand up for ones beliefs or to pursue a goal in the face of COMPLETE OPPOSITION, and possibly certain failure (regardless of if you are correct).

Thank you for remaining strong for so long, because know it has not been easy.

You are one of the reasons that I was able to finally let go of that COWARDLY lie that everyone deserves benefits and entitlements because it is the right thing to do.

You are an Amazing Human Being Ann. Thank you for being an unwitting "Mentor" in my life.

NO, I can't quote you, I have never read one of your books, and I don't know anything about your past to be frank.

What I do know is, if I were still living on the street, alone, cold, and hurting; it would of have been an honor to survive and eventually Thrive with you as equals.

p.s. I have nothing to add to this article, I just wanted to say my peace. I am not a very social person and I didn't join this to be a Fan Boy. Thank You Ann.

User avatar
falvegas
Posts: 8108
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#11

#11 Post by falvegas » Sat Feb 04, 2017 12:08 pm

Ray Gun wrote:
Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:06 pm
kermit wrote:
Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:31 pm
Ray Gun wrote:
Fri Feb 03, 2017 4:55 pm
And which Founder or Framer ever said anything about huddle masses.
The crap written on the Statute of the Pagan Goddess of Minerva, who looks like Apollo in drag, also known as The Statue of Liberty, was never any founding policy of the United States. The statue was a "present" from French Freemasons to American Freemasons.
that's good.... :wave:
It's main virtue is being accurate.

The government has been driving Christianity from the public square, at least since the Supreme Court forced the Bible out of schools. This is easy in part because everyone is taught what Christian traditions look like. However, it is only self-educated who recognize the iconography of the Babylonian Mysteries. So, the idols of paganism stand unchallenged: the Statue of Liberty and her other embodiment, The Goddess Columbia. Some want to take "In God We Trust" off the money. No one is calling for retiring these Goddesses we trust.

It shouldn't take too much sense too add one and one. Once you figure out that statue is not really American, it is much easier to understand it message - allow yourself to be overrun by foreigners - is not in American's best interest.

Regardless the Origins of the Statue of Liberty, even Middle East intentions; That Statue Belongs To America, AND IT STANDS FOR WHAT 'WE SAY' IT STANDS FOR.

Freedom of religion belongs in the schools [as 'the people' decide], Education is not enumerated in the Constitution [Technically belongs under the 10th not the Feds.] Regardless what the SCOTUS Opinions, Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Several hundred SCOTUS decisions have been overturned; it's about time we had more challenges.
So the US Pagans and their Incest with the SCOTUS have pizzed all over 'In God We Trust' and One Nation Under God and so on.

All this Secular Crap in order to diminish even eradicate the very Heritage and Legend of America, and yet in Washington DC almost 80% of the Monuments and Plaques have some reference to God or the Creator.

A County's mitigated decision might be for a County School District to introduce, a moment of prayer or reflection, or whatever their decision, but it's their decision. We know what the Mormons in Bountiful Utah might decide, and California may decide to worship the God Thor.....or whatever.
The decisions in the Bible Belt of Tennessee would be quite different than those of say, San Francisco.

Prohibiting the free exercise thereof [locks out the Feds] and makes no requirement for 'Uniformity'.

----------- -------------- ------------------------ -------------- ------------------------ -------------- -----------------------------------

ON POINT, the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT is Constitutionally Required to protect the Country. One can Argue 'Invasion' all they want but Core America knows all too well what it means....without getting into so galactically stupid Liberal Abstract Academic Interpretation of what some Egg Head [wants his constitution to read].

We may not declare War anymore, BUT WE ARE AT WAR, and the POTUS has every right to execute a Ban On Countries Breeding and Harboring Enemies of America.

Don't ask the Media or the Lawyers or the Congress ....ASK THE VICTIMS OF SAN BERNARDINO, PARIS, etc.

christian
Posts: 10023
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 1:09 am
Location: iowa
Contact:

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#12

#12 Post by christian » Sat Feb 04, 2017 10:59 pm

Ann was really great this morning on a talk show discussing her book and about liberals trying to turn America into a third world hell hole.

eeyore19

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#13

#13 Post by eeyore19 » Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:13 pm

Ann, people don't realize how bad the problem of extended immigrant families is, but in the medical facilities where I work, I am inundated with elderly patients who speak no English, but are on Medicare and have extremely expensive health care costs. I am assuming these people have never made any contribution to Social Security or Medicare, since they cannot even speak our language, but huge numbers of them are receiving Medicare benefits. They are not only from Mexico, but India, Philippines and everywhere else. Why are they being given a benefit that we citizens have to pay for all our working lives? They need to be deported back to their home countries, or have their relatives pay for their health care out of their own pockets.

givemethemic
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#14

#14 Post by givemethemic » Mon Feb 06, 2017 8:31 pm

Give me your young, radical minded,
Your secret masses yearning to extinguish freedom,
The wretched refuse of your plotting shore.
Send these, the ideological, hatred-filled to me,
I'll dim the lamp beside your golden door!

OscarLevant
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:14 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#15

#15 Post by OscarLevant » Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:09 am

A valid argument is never tired.

But what is tired is the continual attempt by people on the right to shame, belittle, make small, trivialize, etc,. someone who has a valid argument.

Okay, lets' take a look at this.

The Trump argument is that it will "keep us safe".

But, if that were his argument, at the very minimum, the ban would include Saudi Arabia, given
that 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from that country.

Two of them were from United Arab Emirates, and one each from Egypt and Lebanon, respectively

It is noteworthy to mention that Trump has a hotel in Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt.

None of the countries from which the 9/11 hijackers came were included in the banned list.

Trump made a huge campaign promise, "to ban Muslims until we can figure out what is going on".

He made this promise on a number of speeches. but when he became president, it was made clear to Trump by his advisors that to ban people based on religion is unconstitutional, so Trump directed his staff to frame an executive order that was legal. In my opinion, they chose the countries on an Obama list of countries with problems using the rationale that it would be difficult to counter the list since
the list was given to them by Obama. However, it really doesn't make it difficult at all. It's very easy to see this as a ruse to obfuscate his desire to ban Muslims.

No one has admitted that Trump directed them not to include the countries with his hotels in them,
but I cannot possibly believe that such a directive was not given by Trump.

The argument now, is that this is not a muslim ban, and if it were, some 48 or so other muslim predominant countries would have to be on the list, and they are not, "therefore' the list can not be argued to be a Muslim ban, or so the argument goes.

My opinion is that that argument will satisfy the legal requirement, but since we have
Trump on video, on many occasions, espousing a Muslim Ban, there is no way you can tell
me that banning Muslims was not the underlying motive for this ban, however it is crafted targeting in part, or in whole, the Muslim world.

But, let's set aside the Muslim argument, for a moment, because Trump's argument is that the list
is a ban in order to "keep America Safe". That is the argument.

But, given that 3 of the four countries that gave us the 9/11 hackers contain his hotels,
and they are not on the list. How can it possibly be true, therefore, that the ban is about 'keeping America safe' and not actually about, as best as he can, keeping a campaign promise (legally) while simultaneously not harming his hotels?
I'm sorry to point this out, but that is what the evidence points to.

User avatar
timH
Posts: 17181
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:00 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#16

#16 Post by timH » Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:34 am

OscarLevant wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:09 am
A valid argument is never tired.

But what is tired is the continual attempt by people on the right to shame, belittle, make small, trivialize, etc,. someone who has a valid argument.

Okay, lets' take a look at this.

The Trump argument is that it will "keep us safe".

But, if that were his argument, at the very minimum, the ban would include Saudi Arabia, given
that 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from that country
.

Two of them were from United Arab Emirates, and one each from Egypt and Lebanon, respectively

It is noteworthy to mention that Trump has a hotel in Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt.

None of the countries from which the 9/11 hijackers came were included in the banned list.

Trump made a huge campaign promise, "to ban Muslims until we can figure out what is going on".

He made this promise on a number of speeches. but when he became president, it was made clear to Trump by his advisors that to ban people based on religion is unconstitutional, so Trump directed his staff to frame an executive order that was legal. In my opinion, they chose the countries on an Obama list of countries with problems using the rationale that it would be difficult to counter the list since
the list was given to them by Obama. However, it really doesn't make it difficult at all. It's very easy to see this as a ruse to obfuscate his desire to ban Muslims.

No one has admitted that Trump directed them not to include the countries with his hotels in them,
but I cannot possibly believe that such a directive was not given by Trump.

The argument now, is that this is not a muslim ban, and if it were, some 48 or so other muslim predominant countries would have to be on the list, and they are not, "therefore' the list can not be argued to be a Muslim ban, or so the argument goes.

My opinion is that that argument will satisfy the legal requirement, but since we have
Trump on video, on many occasions, espousing a Muslim Ban, there is no way you can tell
me that banning Muslims was not the underlying motive for this ban, however it is crafted targeting in part, or in whole, the Muslim world.

But, let's set aside the Muslim argument, for a moment, because Trump's argument is that the list
is a ban in order to "keep America Safe". That is the argument.

But, given that 3 of the four countries that gave us the 9/11 hackers contain his hotels,
and they are not on the list. How can it possibly be true, therefore, that the ban is about 'keeping America safe' and not actually about, as best as he can, keeping a campaign promise (legally) while simultaneously not harming his hotels?
I'm sorry to point this out, but that is what the evidence points to.

You left out one small fact.

The ban list was first identified by Obama. He refused to do anything but make this list. Then tried to do everything to bring in more jihadists.

Is your argument that perhaps, Trump should have included the countries that sent terrorists of 9/11? Because I agree with you!!!

But why stop there? I submit that ANY COUNTRY, be it SAUDI ARABIA or IRELAND that sponsors terrorism should be banned.

OscarLevant
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:14 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#17

#17 Post by OscarLevant » Wed Feb 08, 2017 1:28 am

Mellybell wrote:
Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:05 am
Trump won the election. He has never been secretive on his views on immigration. Clearly, the people voted for him, his views, his plans and ideas. What was voted on was to take care of America. Not every other country. I'm an American and I don't want to pay for immigrants or refugees to come into this country, have a vote, take our jobs, and pose threats to our safety. I wouldn't let someone into my home who I did not know if they were a criminal. Until WE all have jobs, until all of US have homes,until all of OUR children have food, until WE are in a position to offer the safety and security they need, we should not allow them to be here. If Hollywood and Washington Liberals are so disgusted over this, then let THEM open their homes up to the immigrants and refugees! We need to take care of America, otherwise, there won't be anything for anyone at all, let alone the immigrants. It's not about hate, it's about being smart and having common sense. If you can't feed your own children, you don't go out and adopt a bunch of orphans . It's really very simple. I don't understand why it's even up for debate. The majority elected him. The liberals LOST. Why do they feel they have the right to change what the majority have already voted for? Trump wanted to build the wall and cut back on immigration and keep illegal aliens and criminals out. He promised it, we voted for it, he won, they lost, let's just do it and move on to the next task on his agenda!


Democrats didn't actually "lose", Trump won by a fluke in the electoral college process, it never
was intended to result in a discrepancy between the popular vote and the total delegates won.

Trump lost the popular vote by almost 3 million votes, not counting the fact that
Republicans purged 1.1 million voters with cross state duplicate names ( just first and last matched ), blacks, asians, and hispanics were purged in the "Interstate Crosscheck" program and we know that most of these people would vote for democrats ( the reason they were targeted ) with 27 red states participating, implemented by Kansas Secy of State Kris Kobach.

The reason given for the purge was they claimed that evidence of cross state duplicate names ( mindful that only first and last are matched ) "proves' that a voter intends on voting twice ( of course this is bogus ). Greg Palast, investigative reporter for The Guardian UK and Rolling Stone Magazine, uncovered the fact that in swing states, the purge count vastly exceeded ( by hundreds of thousands ) the plurality by which Trump won. This is all evidenced and verifiable, yet the corporate media largely supressed the story ( though Palast did appear on AM Joy's show ).

Democrats can, therefore, put aside the complaints of voter ID checks as a ruse to make if more difficult for poor people who have no birth certificate to vote, put aside Russian hacking, put aside the Comey letter, etc, put all these things aside, it is that but for the crosscheck program, the simple math clearly shows that she would have won the electoral college.

Now, the kneejerk response is going to be "sore loser" "get over it", etc. That would be the correct sentiment for all of the other reasons, but this is an out right criminal interference with removing voters from registration rolls. Of course the reply is going to be "they can still vote, so what is the problem?" Well, most will be given provisional ballots, and in many states, especially red states, they don't count them. This is what Jill Stein's lawsuit tried to do, to get the provisional ballots counted. They told her it would cost her $3 million ( or so ) to get a recount, and after she pays the money, they still block her from getting a recount. ( I wonder why? ).

We know what is going on, and what is going in is Jim Crow is alive and well, and this crap has got to stop, y'all cant be playing these games, we are going to find out, and we are going to blow the lid out of the water, and the world is going to find out about this crime, which repubs did in 2000 in FLA, again in 2008. amd now expanded to 27 states.

Now, on top of this we have republican state legislatures gerrymandering districts so that when there is more democrats being voted for, they get to send more republicans to congress, interestate crosscheck, and the portrait painted is Trump was, indeed, correct --- the vote was rigged........


in favor of Trump.

http://www.gregpalast.com/election-stolen-heres/

Deutsche Nazi Frau

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#18

#18 Post by Deutsche Nazi Frau » Wed Feb 08, 2017 1:40 am

Get out of our lives!

Friend or foe? - DJT asked sometimes at his election rallies.
My answer: friend; friend of truth (and justice for Germans)
DJT and AC are reasons for my little tiny reopening towards USA.

Dear Ann Coulter,
I regard you highly.
I am the same age as you are.
Still, I disagree on refugees and a couple of other issues at a very different level.
Untired arguments, which will haunt USrael for ever and ever, till justice is done:

1. "Refugees"
All "refugees" are USrael's. All wars are USrahell's.
Who gave you the right to enter WWI? What business did you have in Germany?
Who gave you and your ugly Jews the right to instigate WWII?
What rights do you have in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Lybia, Jemen, Sudan?
What rights do you have in Europe???
USrael did 9/11 and USrael is the founder of Däsch, of IS(IS). You know that!
That's why every single refugee should go to Israel and Amerika.
The Jew's hyanas, the Allies, the all lies and liars, are responsible!!!
Amerika had no right and zero reasons to enter into any war with Germany.
AmeriZion started WWI and WWII. USrael is creating havoc in the world time and again.
This is truth. No need to discuss this?! Research instead of argueing
and then accept the truth and act accordingly, by speaking the truth.
To this very day USrael is occupying our Germany and destroying our people.
Merkel and all the other vassals are only in destructive power thanks to USrahell.
Amerika has almost completely destroyed my people's soul.
Amerika, led by the most violent Jews, is responsible for the Holokaust (on my people).
And here is my fundamental criticism about you, Ann Coulter:
the historical lies USrael planted into the world are opportune to you all.
You are time and again historically dishonest!
You should study history more critically and carefully.
Without truth live is nothing.
And please, get out of Germany. Take your ugly troops back home and put them to productive use. Let em build the walls.
We have 155 thousand US-Army personell here in Germany. Never invited by the German people. But brought by your evil Jews.
You do not need the world. You have everything. And the world does not need your ugly soldiers and jewish US-Bastards.
Get out! Get out of this world!


2. "Single Parenting"
Thanks to the collateral damages and flow ons from the jewish led US wars families are destroyed and being destroyed to this very day.
I am a single parent too. Are you a parent? Your suggestion to take the children from single parents is disgustingly ignorant of parenthood and God's will as such.
Children need their parent(s). No matter how kaputt the parent(s) may be. It's is better for a child to grow up in the given circumstances, than be artificially pulled out by priests & politicians and put into something willfull. Do you understand that? Only if you are a parent yourself! Imagine you working day and night to keep everything afloat and bürokrats watch over you and when things are not smooth come and rape your child away from you. How about you are not seen fit as a parent because of your lifestyle (talking all over the US and being here and there and everywhere etc.)?


3. "Carpet bombing Germany"
Somewhere you justified the destruction of the German people like "hey, it's war".
We should debate especially this one. I would like to debate with you publicly and make Americans aware of their historical guilt, of the Holokaust and how they are feeding and keeping the evil Juda-Rom-Tibet-Mekka.

Ann Coulter, you need to study history! I do not know what you studied?! Certainly not history, I suppose propaganda of your jewish masters.

My regards to you, to DJT and only the honest Americans (excluding every single Jew, every Moslem, every New-Ager and all Christians too),
deutsche Nazifrau.

Ray Gun
Posts: 14841
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#19

#19 Post by Ray Gun » Wed Feb 08, 2017 4:56 pm

falvegas wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2017 12:08 pm
Regardless the Origins of the Statue of Liberty, even Middle East intentions; That Statue Belongs To America, AND IT STANDS FOR WHAT 'WE SAY' IT STANDS FOR.
Who are "we?" No one asked me for input.

User avatar
falvegas
Posts: 8108
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#20

#20 Post by falvegas » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:58 pm

Ray Gun wrote:
Wed Feb 08, 2017 4:56 pm
falvegas wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2017 12:08 pm
Regardless the Origins of the Statue of Liberty, even Middle East intentions; That Statue Belongs To America, AND IT STANDS FOR WHAT 'WE SAY' IT STANDS FOR.
Who are "we?" No one asked me for input.
Correct!

OscarLevant
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:14 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#21

#21 Post by OscarLevant » Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:33 pm

Okay, Ann, thank you for your opinion. I"m not going to deal with the entire comment, but I will address it's salient point, and there are two, that the ban is not a muslim ban, and it's okay to ban muslims because they are dull, not brilliant, etc.

Oh Ann, of course it was a Muslim ban. You hate muslims, your snide denigrating comments about muslims makes this obvious, you think they are dullards, so in your world view, banning them is acceptable, so you hate them, republicans in general hate them, as does Trump and his minions, any argument that this ban is not a muslim ban is a ruse to obfuscate this fact. That fact is what is driving any Trump, "ban", and you know it,

No wonder you love Trump so much, you're just like him. When it's convenient he and you both, shame, belittle, trivial your opponent or their argument, but one of these days, you'll offer some compelling logic and win an argument based on the merits of your argument, without feeding steaks to your fans, but, I won't be holding my breath.

I mean, immigrants are really bad people, right? You know, they are ragheads, camel jockeys, etc., and like you said " not brilliant" isn't that right? Because, with such feelings, you won't mind of the thousands of syrian refugees who are children will starve, or be persecuted in Syria because,well, they are all future terrorists, right? Never mind the fact that past immigrants were such dullards like Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Martina Navratilova, Bob Marley, Irving Berlin, Alexander Bell, Levi Strauss, Sean Connery, Werner Von Braun,Desi Arnaz, Natalie Portman,John Audubon, Ann-Margaret, and the list goes on, and yeah, many were liberals, but I think its' kinda amusing that so many geniuses are liberal, and not republicans, kind makes you wonder, unless, of course, you are Ann Coulter, and by the way, let's not forget your bud, Rupert Murdoch and, , Ronnie Reagan's fav gal, Ayn Rand,upon which Trickle Down Economics was ultimately derived.

Ray Gun
Posts: 14841
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#22

#22 Post by Ray Gun » Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:43 pm

OscarLevant wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:33 pm
You hate muslims
So what?
Muslims hate us. And what's more, they have their own lands. Let them hate us from over there. :)
I mean, immigrants are really bad people, right?
Some yes, some no. Common sense is to separate the wheat from the chaff.
When it's convenient he and you both, shame, belittle, trivial your opponent or their argument
So does your entire post, but not very well.

Mike7
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#23

#23 Post by Mike7 » Fri Feb 10, 2017 4:30 pm

Hello Ann,
I Pray, what I read the other day, that you are dating a Muslim? I Pray this was Fake news?

User avatar
kermit
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9926
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:28 am
Location: protecting penguins at the north pole

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#24

#24 Post by kermit » Fri Feb 10, 2017 5:03 pm

Mike7 wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 4:30 pm
Hello Ann,
I Pray, what I read the other day, that you are dating a Muslim? I Pray this was Fake news?
Please join up and get yourself out of that aol crap your listening to.

First Responder

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#25

#25 Post by First Responder » Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:31 pm

kermit wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 5:03 pm
Mike7 wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 4:30 pm
Hello Ann,
I Pray, what I read the other day, that you are dating a Muslim? I Pray this was Fake news?
Please join up and get yourself out of that aol crap your listening to.
Don't look into her eyes Mike7 ! Liberalism dies in those eyes ! Run Mike7 run ! Go date a Muslim yourself . That 72 virgins thing is
the kind of inclusiveness we could all embrace , and those Burka's around the head really do save a lot of money on beer .

OscarLevant
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:14 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#26

#26 Post by OscarLevant » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:43 am

Ray Gun wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:43 pm
OscarLevant wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:33 pm
When it's convenient he and you both, shame, belittle, trivial your opponent or their argument
So does your entire post, but not very well.

Ahh, but there's one big difference you missed, and it is this:

The targets of Ann's & Trump's vicious pens and/or vile mouths most certainly do not deserve it, but they, however, most certainly do.

Ray Gun
Posts: 14841
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#27

#27 Post by Ray Gun » Sat Feb 11, 2017 6:20 am

OscarLevant wrote:
Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:43 am
Ray Gun wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:43 pm
OscarLevant wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:33 pm
When it's convenient he and you both, shame, belittle, trivial your opponent or their argument
So does your entire post, but not very well.
Ahh, but there's one big difference you missed, and it is this:
The targets of Ann's & Trump's vicious pens and/or vile mouths most certainly do not deserve it, but they, however, most certainly do.
I have always noticed the hypocrites credo - it's different when you do it than it is when those you hate do it. It's OK for the Trump haters to hate. It's OK for the Muzzies to hate.

Haters yelling hater? How could anyone fail to notice such blatant hypocrisy?

BTW, can you give three examples of Trump's poison pen on those who don't deserve it. Exact quotes, not fake news?

OscarLevant
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:14 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#28

#28 Post by OscarLevant » Sat Feb 11, 2017 1:26 pm

Ray Gun wrote:
Sat Feb 11, 2017 6:20 am
OscarLevant wrote:
Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:43 am
Ray Gun wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:43 pm
OscarLevant wrote:
Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:33 pm
When it's convenient he and you both, shame, belittle, trivial your opponent or their argument
So does your entire post, but not very well.
Ahh, but there's one big difference you missed, and it is this:
The targets of Ann's & Trump's vicious pens and/or vile mouths most certainly do not deserve it, but they, however, most certainly do.
I have always noticed the hypocrites credo - it's different when you do it than it is when those you hate do it. It's OK for the Trump haters to hate. It's OK for the Muzzies to hate.

Haters yelling hater? How could anyone fail to notice such blatant hypocrisy?

BTW, can you give three examples of Trump's poison pen on those who don't deserve it. Exact quotes, not fake news?
hypocrisy?

You mean like how they investigated Hillary 8 times for Benghazi, found nothing they could pin on her, bitched, moaned about it, but during Bush years there were 13 embassy attacks and 60 deaths and not one investigation or peep
out of Ann, Hannity, et al etc?


You mean like when, during the campaign, Trump and repubs exclaimed "Hillary would use the presidency for profit" and we have Trump, Kelly Ann, et al, hawking stuff, recieving money for hotel and promoting hotels all on the gov's dime and not one peep out of Ann, et al.


You mean like when, during the campaign, "Hillary would be corrupt" and on day one, Trump is violation of the emoluments clause and repubs & Ann well, not one peep out of them.

You mean like when, during the campaign, Trump and repubs bitched and moaned about how Hillary was going to do "pay for play" out the gazoo and what do we have now? Many of Trump's cabinent appointments are big time donors to his campaign and not one peep out of Repubs, Ann, et all.



And I could go on for about 30 more pages, my hypocrisy meter is redlining, but why bother?

Examples

1. Judge 1
2. Judge 2
3. Media reporting on Trump lying about voter fraud, (and yes, it is a lie )and Trump calls CNN "Fake news".

And the list can easily go on, but why bother. By the way, Politifact awarded trump "liar of the year"

yeah, I know, it's all fake news, see, thats' convenient, whenever anyone points out the BS by Trump or repubs you guys call it "fake".

At some point, you're going to have to step out of the Truman show bubble, until then, I cant' help you.

Ray Gun
Posts: 14841
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#29

#29 Post by Ray Gun » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:12 pm

OscarLevant wrote:
Sat Feb 11, 2017 1:26 pm
And I could go on for about 30 more pages, my hypocrisy meter is redlining, but why bother?
I only asked for three quotes and didn't get them. I am sure you could go on, and on and on.

So, basically, it's still at square one, hypocrisy. Those you don't like can be blasted, because you say they are deplorables who deserve it - but those deplorables you don't like have no right to do the same.

Gee, I never heard that hypocrisy before.

OscarLevant
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:14 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#30

#30 Post by OscarLevant » Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:11 am

Ray Gun wrote:
Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:12 pm
OscarLevant wrote:
Sat Feb 11, 2017 1:26 pm
And I could go on for about 30 more pages, my hypocrisy meter is redlining, but why bother?
I only asked for three quotes and didn't get them. I am sure you could go on, and on and on.

So, basically, it's still at square one, hypocrisy. Those you don't like can be blasted, because you say they are deplorables who deserve it - but those deplorables you don't like have no right to do the same.

Gee, I never heard that hypocrisy before.
Please don't put words into my mouth, and I will treat you the same. (I never said deplorables don't have a right to communicate in any manner they choose.

If you want to get into a hypocrisy pissing contest, fine, that would be too easy.

But all of this is moot, really, with what is happening in Trump's administration, its' pure chaos brought about by incompetence.Trump therefore is a threat to our national security.

Ray Gun
Posts: 14841
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#31

#31 Post by Ray Gun » Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:15 am

OscarLevant wrote:
Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:11 am
Please don't put words into my mouth
I am trying to get words out of your mouth by asking questions about your hypocritical double standard and lack of facts in which it is OK for you to be vile, but not for others - but you can't answer.

You said, you can be vile because Ann and Trump deserve it, but their targets don't.
"The targets of Ann's & Trump's vicious pens and/or vile mouths most certainly do not deserve it, but they, however, most certainly do."

And I challenged you to substantiate your libel:
"...give three examples of Trump's poison pen on those who don't deserve it. Exact quotes, not fake news?"

If you can't give three examples to substantiate your claims, then you are not just vile, you are a liar.

Are you related to bluesmoke?

OscarLevant
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:14 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#32

#32 Post by OscarLevant » Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:18 pm

Ray Gun wrote:
Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:15 am
OscarLevant wrote:
Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:11 am
Please don't put words into my mouth
I am trying to get words out of your mouth by asking questions about your hypocritical double standard and lack of facts in which it is OK for you to be vile, but not for others - but you can't answer.

You said, you can be vile because Ann and Trump deserve it, but their targets don't.
"The targets of Ann's & Trump's vicious pens and/or vile mouths most certainly do not deserve it, but they, however, most certainly do."

And I challenged you to substantiate your libel:
"...give three examples of Trump's poison pen on those who don't deserve it. Exact quotes, not fake news?"

If you can't give three examples to substantiate your claims, then you are not just vile, you are a liar.

Are you related to bluesmoke?
No, but you are obviously related to blowin' smoke.


It's lines like this, which expemplifies the mental gynmastics, which, in deed,
create a circular universe, which we libs call "the bubble".


"...give three examples of Trump's poison pen on those who don't deserve it. Exact quotes, not fake news?"

What is point of this exercise? I could do it in spades, and you'll just say they did deserve it. Then what, we go into a long
debate on why they did, or did not, deserve it? If you can't grasp a simple thing like how to ask a valid question, how
can you ever find the truth? you'll always be barking up the wrong tree.

You guys on the right are fond of asking a question with an assumed premise.
No, you can't do that. A person you ask a question to with an assumed premise
must agree with the premise to answer it. Well, it the premise is flawed, (and it is) therefore
the question is flawed, and thus cannot be answered.

Well, if cannot be answered if TRUTH was the objective.

See, there just is no point.

Le't get something straight, hot shot. Let's talk about the most important issue
in America today, and that is health care.

Conservatives would not even be talking, thinking, nor doing one damn thing about health care
were it not for Obamacare.

Ray Gun
Posts: 14841
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#33

#33 Post by Ray Gun » Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:11 pm

OscarLevant wrote:
Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:29 pm
What is point of this exercise? I could do it in spades
So, go ahead. Try to prove you're not full of crap.
and you'll just say they did deserve it
Saves time when you admit to being, Mr. Hypocrite. My original point - you think you have prerogative to decide who deserves it, but no one else. You just proved it.

Free speech for you and everyone else shut up. Zweig Heil

OscarLevant
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:14 pm

Some stupid liberal...

#34

#34 Post by OscarLevant » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:34 am

A DAY IN THE LIFE OF
JOE or JILL 'CONSERVATIVE'
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of coffee, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joes employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.
If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
It's noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.
He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.
Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day.
Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."
Original source unknown

User avatar
ToddWB
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18232
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:59 am
Location: At my desk, Listening to Conservative Talk Radio

Re: 2/1/17 - GIVE ME YOUR TIRED ARGUMENTS ...

#35

#35 Post by ToddWB » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:07 am

givemethemic wrote:
Mon Feb 06, 2017 8:31 pm
Give me your young, radical minded,
Your secret masses yearning to extinguish freedom,
The wretched refuse of your plotting shore.
Send these, the ideological, hatred-filled to me,
I'll dim the lamp beside your golden door!
:clap: :clap: :clap:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest