Bad, Bad Intrepid. Go stand in the corner.
OmSigDAVID wrote:Intrepid wrote:OmSigDAVID wrote:
What u " feel " is only your delusional paranoia.
No doubt, brought on by nut cakes like you.
OK, at this point,
I have lost ALL respect for u, Canadian,
and I don 't care what u think about anything.
I am writing u off.
Phew!!! I was hoping you would say that.
I guess this means you won't be visiting Canada in the future?
Montana wrote:OmSigDAVID wrote:Intrepid wrote:OmSigDAVID wrote:
What u " feel " is only your delusional paranoia.
No doubt, brought on by nut cakes like you.
OK, at this point,
I have lost ALL respect for u, Canadian,
and I don 't care what u think about anything.
I am writing u off.
Phew!!! I was hoping you would say that.
I guess this means you won't be visiting Canada in the future?
Not to worry. He would be stopped at the border with his arsenal.
Oh, please take him, Canada.
edgarblythe wrote:Oh, please take him, Canada.
Hey, Edgar....what do you have against Canada?
We would love to help you out, but sadly, Oz is full, just now. But I'll let you all know when a vacancy comes up, OK? :wink:
OmSigDAVID wrote:edgarblythe wrote:Oh, please take him, Canada.
That is true liberalism
when u think that alien jurisdictions can take American citizens, Ed.
It's evidence of a true poverty of spirit when the only answer one can muster to pointed humor is more chest-beating.
OmSigDAVID wrote:Montana wrote:OmSigDAVID wrote:Intrepid wrote:OmSigDAVID wrote:
What u " feel " is only your delusional paranoia.
No doubt, brought on by nut cakes like you.
OK, at this point,
I have lost ALL respect for u, Canadian,
and I don 't care what u think about anything.
I am writing u off.
Phew!!! I was hoping you would say that.
I guess this means you won't be visiting Canada in the future?
Good guess.
I can think of no reason to go there.
David
Thanks very much. We truly do appreciate it! :-)
OmSigDAVID wrote:snood wrote:OmSigDAVID wrote:edgarblythe wrote:Oh, please take him, Canada.
That is true liberalism
when u think that alien jurisdictions can take American citizens, Ed.
It's evidence of a true poverty of spirit when the only answer one can muster to pointed humor is more chest-beating.
U r hallucinating the humor
and the beating; too much LSD ?
You don't get the joke, so
I'm hallucinating?
And David, anyone can read your posts for 5 minutes and see that you mark territory and posture like a hairy primate. All you talk about is guns, and protecting yourself. You come off like a terrified bumpkin.
snood wrote:OmSigDAVID wrote:snood wrote:OmSigDAVID wrote:edgarblythe wrote:Oh, please take him, Canada.
That is true liberalism
when u think that alien jurisdictions can take American citizens, Ed.
It's evidence of a true poverty of spirit when the only answer one can muster to pointed humor is more chest-beating.
U r hallucinating the humor
and the beating; too much LSD ?
You don't get the joke, so
I'm hallucinating?
U also hallucinated the causality of that assertion.
Quote:
And David, anyone can read your posts for 5 minutes and see
Getting a little PRESUMPTUOUS there,
are we, in representing everyone in the world ?
Did u get AUTHORIZATION for that ??
Quote:
that you mark territory and posture like a hairy primate.
I don 't know how thay posture.
I 'll leave that to u.
Quote:
All you talk about is guns, and protecting yourself.
For many decades, I have been satisfactorily protected.
What I talk about is revokation
of any laws that interfere with my FELLOW CITIZENS
being well armed in their own defense.
I am in quest of a state of being like that of Vermont
or of Alaska, for my fellow citizens,
because that will promote a government
based upon individualism, rather than collectivism.
A WELL ARMED POPULACE IS PIVOTAL
TO DOMINATION OF GOVERNMENT BY THE INDIVIDUAL,
instead of vice-versa.
Quote:
You come off like a terrified bumpkin.
I am nervous that government will degenerate
into a collectivist despotism.
The philosophy of docility
engendered by gun control supports this
together with ever improving techniques of microsurveillance.
I don t see much problem with this in my lifetime,
but altho I tend to an optimistic disposition,
I think it looks bad for future generations.
We may be the ancesters of the Borg.
I believe in the second ammendment, but it isn't enough.
Aside from the second ammendment, we clearly need a couple of new kinds of protections FROM governments and from political parties which gain and hold monopoly positions.
All candidates for national political offices, including presidents, vice presidents, senators, and members of the US house of representatives, should have to pass the same test and background check anybody else would for a top secret clearance for any sort of a position in the FBI, CIA, Defense Intel, NSA, and the like. That alone would have spared us from the KKKlinton presidency.
We need a voter's bill of rights and runoff elections, to guarantee that nobody ever holds a political office with less than 50% of the votes cast, and nobody ever fears to vote his first choice, at least on a first ballot. That would also, alone, have spared us from the KKKlinton presidency.
In all elections for public office, there needs to be a NONE-OF-THE-ABOVE choice and, in cases where that choice wins, the other candidates need to be barred for life from running for any political office and the parties which sponsored them should be barred from running candidates for that particular office for at least ten years and preferably twenty, i.e. until the entire generation of party leadership which sponsored the super loser is dead or out to pasture.
That would probably have spared us from the KKKlinton/Dole election or produced a happy ending to that election.
