WingsOfGold
Well-Known Member
Pesky 2A assshole
Okay, JD Vance is growing on me
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
WingsOfGold
Well-Known Member
Dept of welfare, immigration and free shiit?
Wait... are you saying all those ads against Larry are lies?
Tech
Well-Known Member
Well, they are from the democrats.
Okay, I think I like him now. He is fearless and doesn't give these pompous Leftist respect they don't deserve and I appreciate that. I always thought that "my good friend across the aisle" was bullshit and unity with psychos is overrated.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
WATCH: JD Vance Leaves an Angry Jake Tapper Stunned After Exposing the Reason Ex-Trump Officials are Targeting Trump and Then Destroys Him Over CNN's Lies About Trump | The Gateway Pundit | by Cullen Linebarger
Senator JD Vance (R-OH) put on yet another masterclass performance during the Sunday talk shows, once again proving why President Trump’s decision to select him as his running mate was a stroke of genius.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
LtownTaxpayer
Well-Known Member
So let me see if I understand you. Harris continues to flip flop on various issues and you believe the latest drivel that passes as her position. But Vance will be held accountable for every opinion he has ever espoused. Point of fact Trump has openly reiterated he will NOT support a national ban on abortion. Vance has said he supports the Trump (no national ban) platform.
Presidents going back to Washington and Lincoln have had to deal with egocentric military leaders who think they’re in charge (like Haig) and detest the idea of answering to a civilian.
I think any current military should face at least some disciplinary action for disparaging a commander in chief - or a former one. I mean it. That goes for Clinton, Obama and Biden.
But every last one has had at least one prima donna they’ve had to FIRE. Hell, Washington had those BEFORE the war ended.
I am amused at Democrats finding the opinions of generals worthwhile - they have a very long history of declaring “military intelligence” being a contradiction.
I think any current military should face at least some disciplinary action for disparaging a commander in chief - or a former one. I mean it. That goes for Clinton, Obama and Biden.
But every last one has had at least one prima donna they’ve had to FIRE. Hell, Washington had those BEFORE the war ended.
I am amused at Democrats finding the opinions of generals worthwhile - they have a very long history of declaring “military intelligence” being a contradiction.
JUST saw yet another commercial damning Trump over Project 2025 - which he has nothing to do with.
If you tell a lie often enough....
And then they have the nerve to call Trump voters uneducated and misinformed
Saw that too watching the football game, the narrator clearly states "Trump's project 2025"
At the end of the ad there was Kamala announcing " I'm Kamala Harris and I approve of this message.
(there goes the old excuse that the campaign did not produce that ad, some unaffiliated PAC did it)
Guess she enjoys confirming the lie... sad
We’re both watching the Ravens.
lol... The Bengals & Eagles... Been living in southwest Ohio since 1978
(left the Baltimore area in 1966 when I joined the Marines)
Last edited:
LtownTaxpayer
Well-Known Member
Abortion is not a constitutional right. Owning a gun IS a constitutional as expressed in the 2nd amendment. The Supreme Court that approved Roe v. Wade actually wrote law - something they are not supposed to do. Ginsberg even acknowledged it. If the left want it to be a constitutional right, they need to legally amend the constitution.
Grumpy
Well-Known Member
Saw that commercial at least 4 times during the football games today..Made my blood boil that a candidate can flat out lie with no repercussions.
I don’t believe it is legally possible to enact a nationwide BAN on abortion without an amendment to the Constitution. The best way to achieve it otherwise is for all fifty states to ban it separately and that’s never gonna happen.
To “codify” it as an inviolable right, a future SCOTUS has to “find” a right to abortion somewhere in the Constitution. Or via amendment - which probably won’t happen either. Either way, a simple majority in Congress can’t do anything either way.
To “codify” it as an inviolable right, a future SCOTUS has to “find” a right to abortion somewhere in the Constitution. Or via amendment - which probably won’t happen either. Either way, a simple majority in Congress can’t do anything either way.
According to the Constitution:
The end.
The end.
It's amazing that so many democrats are unable to read and then comprehend that sentence. It's right up there with the words "such not be infringed" that they just pass over with glazes eyes.
Where in the Constitution do women have the right to MURDER their unborn children
Article 27: It's written in invisible ink.