Sheehan shirking taxes why again?

Lash wrote:

Show me how that one local rancher constitutes "the Right" and I'll show you whatever you like.

Now you're backing off.

That rancher was clearly a member of the Right, as he made clear by his statements afterward. The guy who ran over the crosses clearly was a Rightie.

The Right likes to intimidate with guns. Look at the "pro-life" movement. They not only like to intimidate via phone call, stalking, etc, they go in and Uzi the place. Witness Salvi, Eric Rudolph, etc, (the list goes on).

0 Replies

According to the article,that rancher was on his own property.
He never left his property,and he fired a shotgun ON HIS OWN PROPERTY.

Now,if a man firing a gun ON HIS OWN PROPERTY scares these people so much,maybe they should move away from his property.

0 Replies

Yes, and isn't it a coincidence that he happened to shoot his shotgun off into the air just when the adjoining propery had scads of antiwar emonatarters in attendance.

Knock it off-he was trying to intimate the demonstrators by threatening violence, and you know it.

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

Yes, and isn't it a coincidence that he happened to shoot his shotgun off into the air just when the adjoining propery had scads of antiwar emonatarters in attendance.

Knock it off-he was trying to intimate the demonstrators by threatening violence, and you know it.

No,I dont know that.I wasnt there,and neither were you.
Tell me,what was his shotgun loaded with?
Did he aim it at anyone?
Did he make any threatening comments before he fired it?

As long as he was on his owm property,then he could legally use his shotgun.
The key there was HIS OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY.
Or,does that camp being there trump PRIVATE PROPERTY rights?

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

Yes, and isn't it a coincidence that he happened to shoot his shotgun off into the air just when the adjoining propery had scads of antiwar emonatarters in attendance.

Knock it off-he was trying to intimate the demonstrators by threatening violence, and you know it.

Again, if these folks don't like people shooting guns on their own property, a perfectly legal activity, they should get the hell out of Texas and back their habitat in San Francisco.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

kelticwizard wrote:
Yes, and isn't it a coincidence that he happened to shoot his shotgun off into the air just when the adjoining propery had scads of antiwar emonatarters in attendance.

Knock it off-he was trying to intimate the demonstrators by threatening violence, and you know it.

Again, if these folks don't like people shooting guns on their own property, a perfectly legal activity, they should get the hell out of Texas and back their habitat in San Francisco.

And maybe if that redneck doesn't like people gathering in protest, a perfectly legal activity, he ought to go down to the town dump and scare the rats with his shotgun.

0 Replies

Isn't that what he was doing? Scaring the rats?

0 Replies

LOL!!! One guy--even if he WAS trying to scare them--does not constitute the Right.

He said later they had a right to speak their opinion and he didn't have any problem with that--but even if your brother came to visit--on the fifth day or so, you'd be ready for him to go.

They've outstayed their welcome.

Trying to turn turn one disgruntled neighbor, tired of a bunch of smelly, littering hippies to the entire Republican party is so desperate. You need to eat some protein.

0 Replies

Well, the way you just described it, it sounds like you agree with his tactics, Lash. I guess he doesn't represent the whole right, but he does represent you.

So what you're saying is. scaring people off with a gun is okay, as long as the law isn't broken? Remind me never to go pool-hopping in your neighborhood.

0 Replies

Typical of the Left. Telling other people what they think, rather than allowing them to speak for themselves.

Elitist, condescending, egomaniacal.... You've already been in the wrong pool.

0 Replies

Why so sensitive Lash? I just asked a question. It would be nice if you would actually answer it directly, instead of attacking the person who asked it.

0 Replies

I can see how you'd make that mistake. Elitist, condescending, egomanical--are characteristics I assign those who think they can tell other people what they are thinking.

You DID do that. Please be more careful in the future.

I did not say whether or not I agree with his tactics, yet you take it upon yourself to make a pronouncement of what I think as if it's fact.

You should note when you do that, it will likely be meant with disagreement. That disagreement may contain multisyllabic adjectives of distain. Generally assigned, though.

0 Replies

I did not tell you what you thought. I told you what I thought you thought. Laughing

How hypersensitive of you! Either that or you are afraid to answer the question and are throwing up this righteous indignation bullshit as a smoke screen. I suspect the latter.

0 Replies

Oh. How all seeing and all-knowing of you!

Everybody, please call off the internet. There is no reason for further dialogue as Kicky already knows everything you are all going to say and why.

Kicky. Why align yourself with the Jew Hater? Do you think a shadowy Jewish organization has stamped itself with the initials PNAC and has paid/blackmailed/arm wrestled Bush into going to war to benefit Israel?

0 Replies

Again the question gets dodged. You are really a slippery little critter, aren't you? I can't get my hands around your greasy little hide long enough to pin you down! Look at her go, everyone!

All indignant that someone dared ask a question about her opinion of the guy who tried to scare off the hippies with his gun!

It's fun to see you attack as a diversionary tactic. Your fearless leader would be proud. How exactly is asking your opinion of the actions of a gun-toting pinhead "aligning myself with the Jew Hater?"

And by the way, let me ask again, just to see you squirm and squeal again to avoid it: Is it okay with you for someone to try to intimidate people with a shotgun, as long as they don't break the law?

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

Well, the way you just described it, it sounds like you agree with his tactics, Lash. I guess he doesn't represent the whole right, but he does represent you.

So what you're saying is. scaring people off with a gun is okay, as long as the law isn't broken? Remind me never to go pool-hopping in your neighborhood.

Did Kicky ASK what I thought about the hun-toting Texan, or did he tell me what I thought?

He never asked the question, and then makes personal insults and accusations because I didn't answer the question he didn't ask. Typical.

Lesson #1 for Democrats. Lying, subterfuge and general assyness. Anything but the truth.

Kicky : [ignore on]

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

So what you're saying is. scaring people off with a gun is okay, as long as the law isn't broken?

That sure looks like a question mark to me. It is a question mark, isn't it? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?

I must have really hit a nerve here. Poor Lash, didn't want to answer the question, so she attacks the questioner and then decides to ignore him. That is so f*cking lame. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

So, one gun-toting right-winger is not indicative of the "right" but one question asked by one person who probably isn't even a Democrat is "typical" of the "left". Got it.

0 Replies

If Cindy were Adolf Hitler in drag, what would that have to do with the answer to the question:

For what noble cause, are our soldiers dying?

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

So, one gun-toting right-winger is not indicative of the "right" but one question asked by one person who probably isn't even a Democrat is "typical" of the "left". Got it.

However, in Kicky World, if one gun toting Texan is= to the Right, ipsofacto, he is typical of the Left.

That is how these things work. Laughing

0 Replies

Sheehan shirking taxes why again?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know