MovieChat Forums > maixiu > Replies
maixiu's Replies
I don't feel sorry for creeps who take showers with their pre-teen daughters.
LOL!!!! My word.
Lost a step? We've been trying to tell you guys for a few years that he's <i>non compos mentis</i>, but you couldn't stop sputtering, "but dRumpf!!"
Listen, Biden's a vegetable. He's furniture. Suck it up, buttercup.
That's a standard response in our feminized world today. If something occurs once, the fallout is visited upon everyone.
If there's a car accident near a park? The speed limit gets halved and signs go up.
An octogenarian dies of the sniffles? Everyone lock themselves indoors, wear your underwear on your face, and take this experimental injection!
A couple days of above average temperatures? You vill eat ze bugs and like it!
Pablo rapes a twelve year old girl and slits her throat? Erect a giant wall on the border and deport Pablo, friends, and family. (Nah! I'm just kidding about that. What actually happens is lefty knows some dimwitted Beaner who sells tacos under the table and thinks, "hey, he's a nice guy, what's wrong with letting 50 million more come in the country?")
There are certainly more than 11,000 politicians in New Zealand, although how many of them could be considered elite is up for debate. I just want to know if that horse-faced, fascist wench of a PM took the shot.
Six hours to copy and paste? What happened, did you need to reboot?
As for Rahimi, the crux of which revolves around the right of a person to own a gun after having a restraining order put out on them, I'm not in agreement with this decision. Rahimi himself sounds like a thorough dirtbag who shouldn't have owned guns, but as a general concept I'm leery of a blanket denial of 2nd amendment rights based on a restraining order. If such orders were applied with a universal impartiality it would be one thing. But there's no shortage of instances, particularly in small municipalities, where personal connections play a part in such injunctions. Not to mention the fact that there exist any number of judges (male and female) that will rubber stamp restraining orders based solely on misandry or even misogyny.
I cringe a bit when I read exceptions like "in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings." That's allowing the camel's nose under the tent. Yes, I get the point Scalia is trying to make, but using a term like "sensitive places", which is open to any number of interpretations, will justify restrictions on legal firearm possession. I understand it's not SCOTUS' job to enumerate actual conditions in which one may carry a firearm, but I'm surprised a vague term like that was included in the decision.
An incitement to violence.
Nice deflection, Spock, but your Maginot Line of logic and fact-based arguments is a fraud.
The Bulwark are right wing? Oh, my sides...
See, leftists <i>are</i> capable of humor!
So you admit you're talking out your ass and exaggerating for effect. Not a good look for the person who fancies himself a pillar of fact-based, evidentiary debate.
Having people stand trial for demonstrable crimes is equal to demanding that people I don't "like" should be executed for treason? And you left out the "repeatedly" part.
So I'll await evidence of your fantastical claim.
"Maixiu and TVfan have repeatedly suggest leading democratic politicians (or just any) and other political figures and activists they do not are guilty of treason and should be executed."
I'll await evidence of this claim.
This post is clearly intended to incite anti-Semitism.
You know that wasn't the import of my post, but even if I was, so what?
So no answer to his evidence. Gotcha.
And if you want to talk about science deniers, let's start with persons who reject evolution and human biodiversity.
Drinking milk is only kind of WS, but making the "OK" sign with your fingers makes you literally Hitler!
Do you disagree that Jewish scripture contains extremely anti-Christian passages? Have you ever heard of the term "Chosen People"?