If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   Va lawmaker goes full President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho on the floor of the statehouse. You NEVER go full Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 239
    More: Strange, Roanoke Times, assault rifles, lawmakers  
•       •       •

14847 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Jan 2013 at 3:04 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



239 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-18 05:58:09 PM
I don't trust that ass to know if a weapon is loaded or not.
Now there is a scenario,,,
 
2013-01-18 06:03:14 PM

ProfessorOhki: But FWIW, I agree that those lines should be drawn by someone who knows what a barrel shroud is.


Personally, as a liberal gun owning Democrat, I think gun training should be required before gun purchase. This clown does no good for either side.
 
2013-01-18 06:04:55 PM

snocone: This moran is the poster child for who should not have access to weapons.


And therefore, the perfect example for the downside of the fact that they do.
 
2013-01-18 06:10:32 PM
Anyone else happen to notice that he's not holding an AK 47? That's a MAK 90, which was still quite legal for sale before the original "assault rifle" ban was lifted.
 
2013-01-18 06:20:52 PM
So...the lesson here is Politicians shouldn't be allowed to have weapons. Got it.
 
2013-01-18 06:22:19 PM

Farkage: So...the lesson here is Politicians shouldn't be allowed to have weapons. Got it.


Not if they don't know basic gun safety.
 
2013-01-18 06:25:00 PM

ThunderChicken: Anyone else happen to notice that he's not holding an AK 47? That's a MAK 90, which was still quite legal for sale before the original "assault rifle" ban was lifted.


Yes, thus my "semantics" comment. A cosmetic ban is worthless.

Now that I think of it, his "gun friends" who loaned him that weapon probably chose it for just that reason.

/used to own one exactly like the one in TFA
//preferred shooting it to one with a 'traditional' stock
///still shot like shiat. Traded it for an m1911
 
2013-01-18 06:34:24 PM

Theburner: jaybeezey: Theburner: BTW, that looks like an AK sold DURING the Clinton ban, as it has a thumb hole stock. Can anyone confirm? That would make this really funny.

Well, there is no flash hider or muzzle break, so it is possible.

It seems like everyone's shiat is getting really emotional in there right now.

Funny, the Dem's are introducing bills in the VA Senate that mimic what Obama and Feinstein are wishing for. They are being voted down. VA might have gone blue in the Federal Election, but folks around here really like their guns.


The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...

I was 'hoping' that that the gun thing was a settled issue, and we could look at some of the actual problems our country faces. Unfortunately it seems that the Democrats are now just assuming that the swing voters are permanent.

/NOVA registered republican. I don't think a single republican got my vote this time around, but next election I'm not sure I can support the same guys.
 
2013-01-18 06:37:01 PM
Ummm... Isn't he prohibited from possessing a firearm due to his assault?
 
2013-01-18 06:38:18 PM

simplicimus: ProfessorOhki: But FWIW, I agree that those lines should be drawn by someone who knows what a barrel shroud is.

Personally, as a liberal gun owning Democrat, I think gun training should be required before gun purchase. This clown does no good for either side.


I'd support a tax credit for anyone who buys a real gun safe and takes a proper storage, precaution, and maintenance course.

The problem with a lot of proposed training is that it's too concerned with teaching how to shoot well. I don't really care if you are a good shot. I care that you know WHEN to shoot, how to maintain your firearm, how to handle it safely, etc. The amount of firearm injuries due to poor aim probably number in the single digits.

Firearm safety courses shouldn't even need you to fire a gun.
 
2013-01-18 06:40:29 PM

kim jong-un: Theburner: jaybeezey: Theburner: BTW, that looks like an AK sold DURING the Clinton ban, as it has a thumb hole stock. Can anyone confirm? That would make this really funny.

Well, there is no flash hider or muzzle break, so it is possible.

It seems like everyone's shiat is getting really emotional in there right now.

Funny, the Dem's are introducing bills in the VA Senate that mimic what Obama and Feinstein are wishing for. They are being voted down. VA might have gone blue in the Federal Election, but folks around here really like their guns.

The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...

I was 'hoping' that that the gun thing was a settled issue, and we could look at some of the actual problems our country faces. Unfortunately it seems that the Democrats are now just assuming that the swing voters are permanent.

/NOVA registered republican. I don't think a single republican got my vote this time around, but next election I'm not sure I can support the same guys.


Maybe too optimistic, but I'd like to think it could have actually gone down that way if it hadn't been for Aurora and Sandy Hook. It was background noise until those two sorry excuses thrust it back into the spotlight. Not that all the "SOMETHING MUST BE DONE," crowd on either side is helping either. You can win voters with "protect our guns!" you can win voters with "protect our children," but it's really really hard to win their hearts with, "yeah, that was a really depressing story.... so anyway, let's talk about wiretapping..."
 
2013-01-18 06:51:06 PM

ProfessorOhki: spacelord321: ProfessorOhki: Holocaust Agnostic: ProfessorOhki: simplicimus: ProfessorOhki: geo9270: Xythero: So what? It was an unloaded gun that was inspected by police before enterring the chamber. What's the big deal?

The 4 Basic Rules of Gun Safety:

•Treat all guns as if they are loaded.

•Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.

•Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.

•Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.


How many did this moran violate? (Hint ALL OF THEM)

So?

So, people who have no idea how to handle a gun should not be proposing legislation on guns. I'm supposed to let idiots describe what an "assault weapon" is? All guns are assault weapons, as are my bow, crossbow and swords. Probably my cutlery.

And non-economists shouldn't make propose economic legislation, non-engineers shouldn't propose internet legislation, and non-doctors shouldn't propose medical legislation, right? If that's your argument, I'm all for it. If you think it only applies to this one topic... derp.

Cool strawman brown, but knowing not to wave a gun around a crowded room with your finger isn't gunsmith level expertise.

Again, so what? Are you suggesting that you should need to know anything about gun safety to own and brandish a gun? That's some commie pinko socio liberal nazi talk right there.

Goalpost moving as well?

That's cute; you think I actually set goalposts. Nah, the point is the more you criticize what he did with a gun, the stronger the case you make for the control of guns. If you're saying it's an absolute right, then him being a complete moron is fine because he didn't actually endanger or threaten anyone - ergo, he was just carrying openly, right? If you're saying that he shouldn't have been allowed to do it, then you're making an argument for gun control based on something.

There's basically three stances you can have:
1) Trust all John Q. Publics with guns, as is their inalienable right ...


Your initial statement had to do with legislation. You switched it to ownership and carried on as if it is the same discussion. It is not.

Also, no matter where you draw the line, someone will abuse it. I am #1.
 
2013-01-18 06:53:45 PM
But he's got a solution!
 
2013-01-18 06:56:46 PM

kim jong-un: Theburner: jaybeezey: Theburner: BTW, that looks like an AK sold DURING the Clinton ban, as it has a thumb hole stock. Can anyone confirm? That would make this really funny.

Well, there is no flash hider or muzzle break, so it is possible.

It seems like everyone's shiat is getting really emotional in there right now.

Funny, the Dem's are introducing bills in the VA Senate that mimic what Obama and Feinstein are wishing for. They are being voted down. VA might have gone blue in the Federal Election, but folks around here really like their guns.

The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...

I was 'hoping' that that the gun thing was a settled issue, and we could look at some of the actual problems our country faces. Unfortunately it seems that the Democrats are now just assuming that the swing voters are permanent.

/NOVA registered republican. I don't think a single republican got my vote this time around, but next election I'm not sure I can support the same guys.


Pick your poison.

Very good point.
 
2013-01-18 07:06:50 PM

spacelord321: Goalpost moving as well?

That's cute; you think I actually set goalposts. Nah, the point is the more you criticize what he did with a gun, the stronger the case you make for the control of guns. If you're saying it's an absolute right, then him being a complete moron is fine because he didn't actually endanger or threaten anyone - ergo, he was just carrying openly, right? If you're saying that he shouldn't have been allowed to do it, then you're making an argument for gun control based on something.

There's basically three stances you can have:
1) Trust all John Q. Publics with guns, as is their inalienable right ...

Your initial statement had to do with legislation. You switched it to ownership and carried on as if it is the same discussion. It is not.

Also, no matter where you draw the line, someone will abuse it. I am #1.


Actually my initial statement was, "so?" Regardless of that, I only went with ownership/use when someone else moved to the amount of expertise needed to know not wave a gun around. Seems like a reasonable chain of discussion. "Goalpost moving" is where I go, "X never happens" you show it does, and then I go, "but X+Y never happens!" Since you seem to clearly agree that ownership and legislation are completely unrelated, there was no goalpost moving, only two topics that you think are disjoint...

Anyway, I hate to trot out such a tired argument, but as #1, would you be cool with a civilian with a bunch of, oh let's say, FGM-148 Javelins? You know, for collecting? If you are, I can't complain about you argument, only disagree with it.
 
2013-01-18 07:07:43 PM

Theburner: BTW, that looks like an AK sold DURING the Clinton ban, as it has a thumb hole stock. Can anyone confirm? That would make this really funny.


As I said in an earlier post, that's a MAK90. It's actually classified as a sports rifle.
 
2013-01-18 07:10:11 PM

kim jong-un: The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...


I've been making this same point over and over again and getting laughed at by my fellow Democrats. I am genuinely afraid that this could be the DNC over-reach the GOP has been praying for to bring the faithful back to the flock.
 
2013-01-18 07:20:55 PM
penis
 
2013-01-18 07:23:08 PM

GRCooper: ThunderChicken: Anyone else happen to notice that he's not holding an AK 47? That's a MAK 90, which was still quite legal for sale before the original "assault rifle" ban was lifted.

Yes, thus my "semantics" comment. A cosmetic ban is worthless.

Now that I think of it, his "gun friends" who loaned him that weapon probably chose it for just that reason.

/used to own one exactly like the one in TFA
//preferred shooting it to one with a 'traditional' stock
///still shot like shiat. Traded it for an m1911


Too true. The chrome lined barrels help a little, but I don't think we'll be seeing anyone win any marksman competitions with one.
 
2013-01-18 07:27:02 PM
Just watched a cool movie where only the police and military have guns....some of you libs might even be able to fap to it enjoy
 
2013-01-18 07:42:59 PM
FTFA: "A lot of people don't know that in many locations in the commonwealth, you can take this gun, you can walk in the middle of Main Street loaded and not be in violation of the law,"

If only there were a politician that would bring this to the attention of the under informed public. Maybe in a public place, such as the floor of the state House of Delegates, so as to get more media coverage, to reach as many Virginians as possible.

/Joe Morrissey might have just received an A+ rating from the NRA.
 
2013-01-18 07:58:25 PM

Rich Cream: baka-san: Chagrin: Cheese eating surrender monkey: What the shiat is that stock?

It has a thumbhole. That makes it an assault weapon.

Wrong way around sparky, the lack of a true pistol grip made it NOT one under the original mid 90's ban.

How is that not a pistol grip? Because it connects to the stock at the bottom to make a loop? That's hi-larious. I can still hold it (comfortably) with one hand.


And was perfectly legal in the 94 AWB. That is why us gun owners laugh a people that want to re-establish that ban. It did nothing. Not having a pistol grip doesn't effectively change the performance or effectiveness of a round. Nor does limiting magazine capacity to 7-10 rounds. It takes all of a half second to change a magazine and chamber a round.
 
2013-01-18 08:18:52 PM

ProfessorOhki: spacelord321: Goalpost moving as well?

That's cute; you think I actually set goalposts. Nah, the point is the more you criticize what he did with a gun, the stronger the case you make for the control of guns. If you're saying it's an absolute right, then him being a complete moron is fine because he didn't actually endanger or threaten anyone - ergo, he was just carrying openly, right? If you're saying that he shouldn't have been allowed to do it, then you're making an argument for gun control based on something.

There's basically three stances you can have:
1) Trust all John Q. Publics with guns, as is their inalienable right ...

Your initial statement had to do with legislation. You switched it to ownership and carried on as if it is the same discussion. It is not.

Also, no matter where you draw the line, someone will abuse it. I am #1.

Actually my initial statement was, "so?" Regardless of that, I only went with ownership/use when someone else moved to the amount of expertise needed to know not wave a gun around. Seems like a reasonable chain of discussion. "Goalpost moving" is where I go, "X never happens" you show it does, and then I go, "but X+Y never happens!" Since you seem to clearly agree that ownership and legislation are completely unrelated, there was no goalpost moving, only two topics that you think are disjoint...

Anyway, I hate to trot out such a tired argument, but as #1, would you be cool with a civilian with a bunch of, oh let's say, FGM-148 Javelins? You know, for collecting? If you are, I can't complain about you argument, only disagree with it.


Ok... here is the thing. You can legally own "banned" arms such as machine guns, grenades, explosives, mortars, rpgs, etc... you just have to have the proper Federal Licensing and pay a $250 fee for a tax stamp on each piece of equipment that is covered by that law. Each hand grenade would be the price for the grenade + $250 + what ever it cost for the paperwork to go through. If I had an extra $250 million laying around I could buy an F-22 if I wanted to.
 
2013-01-18 08:33:27 PM

kim jong-un: Theburner: jaybeezey: Theburner: BTW, that looks like an AK sold DURING the Clinton ban, as it has a thumb hole stock. Can anyone confirm? That would make this really funny.

Well, there is no flash hider or muzzle break, so it is possible.

It seems like everyone's shiat is getting really emotional in there right now.

Funny, the Dem's are introducing bills in the VA Senate that mimic what Obama and Feinstein are wishing for. They are being voted down. VA might have gone blue in the Federal Election, but folks around here really like their guns.

The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...

I was 'hoping' that that the gun thing was a settled issue, and we could look at some of the actual problems our country faces. Unfortunately it seems that the Democrats are now just assuming that the swing voters are permanent.

/NOVA registered republican. I don't think a single republican got my vote this time around, but next election I'm not sure I can support the same guys.


You and me both.
 
2013-01-18 08:46:43 PM

Stone Meadow: kim jong-un: The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...

I've been making this same point over and over again and getting laughed at by my fellow Democrats. I am genuinely afraid that this could be the DNC over-reach the GOP has been praying for to bring the faithful back to the flock.


You sound concerned.

It's not an over-reach despite the hysterics of the NRA and Rand Paul and the rest of the GOP and...

I've seen no indication that the GOP will develop the balls necessary to stop kowtowing to their lunatic fringe in their march to irrelevance.
 
2013-01-18 08:48:41 PM

JSam21: Ok... here is the thing. You can legally own "banned" arms such as machine guns, grenades, explosives, mortars, rpgs, etc... you just have to have the proper Federal Licensing and pay a $250 fee for a tax stamp on each piece of equipment that is covered by that law. Each hand grenade would be the price for the grenade + $250 + what ever it cost for the paperwork to go through. If I had an extra $250 million laying around I could buy an F-22 if I wanted to.


Perhaps, but I'm guessing that's not exactly a shall-issue license? I'm also willing to wager that you'd be denied the F-22 on account of other reasons (classified hardware or whatever). Besides, in the context of believing it's an a right that can't be infringed on like spacelord321, you don't get to demand licensing because that's a form of arms control; you step over that line and you've agreed that there should be 'reasonable' restrictions. The rest is defining what's reasonable.
 
2013-01-18 08:51:13 PM
Because there will be grandfathering, this whole debate is about whether the barn door should be closed after the horses have left.
 
2013-01-18 08:51:36 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Stone Meadow: I've been making this same point over and over again and getting laughed at by my fellow Democrats. I am genuinely afraid that this could be the DNC over-reach the GOP has been praying for to bring the faithful back to the flock.

You sound concerned.

It's not an over-reach despite the hysterics of the NRA and Rand Paul and the rest of the GOP and...

I've seen no indication that the GOP will develop the balls necessary to stop kowtowing to their lunatic fringe in their march to irrelevance.


I am concerned. (Yes, I know the meme.) That aside, you don't remember the shellacking House Dems took after first Clinton and then Obama passed or attempted to pass major legislation that inflamed the GOP?
 
2013-01-18 09:13:12 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Stone Meadow: kim jong-un: The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...

I've been making this same point over and over again and getting laughed at by my fellow Democrats. I am genuinely afraid that this could be the DNC over-reach the GOP has been praying for to bring the faithful back to the flock.

You sound concerned.

It's not an over-reach despite the hysterics of the NRA and Rand Paul and the rest of the GOP and...

I've seen no indication that the GOP will develop the balls necessary to stop kowtowing to their lunatic fringe in their march to irrelevance.


Its something to be concerned about. Here we were watching the Republicans self immolate and hoping for serious realignment and instead the farkers are gonna heroic resolve themselves back onto their feet with D5 HP cause the national discourse blundered its way into the only issue on which the GoP can ever hope to put a win up on the board with.

I'm not conspiracy minded but the timing here was uncannily terrible.
 
2013-01-18 09:17:05 PM

JSam21: Ok... here is the thing. You can legally own "banned" arms such as machine guns, grenades, explosives, mortars, rpgs, etc... you just have to have the proper Federal Licensing and pay a $250 fee for a tax stamp on each piece of equipment that is covered by that law.


There are severe caviats to that. For example, unless you are a Class III FFL dealer selling to law enforcement or authorized PMC groups that have the permission from the DOJ and State Department to utilize them, you cannot own any fully automatic weapon made after 1984, even with a tax stamp.

JSam21: If I had an extra $250 million laying around I could buy an F-22 if I wanted to.


No, you could not. The FAA strictly prohibits any civilian aircraft from carrying offensive weapons of ANY kind, and Lockheed/Martin would not sell you a piece of US Military Technology which even the bolt holding the left seatbelt into the ejector seat is considered Secret, NOFOR, Compartmentalized and above.
 
Rat
2013-01-18 09:18:09 PM
i235.photobucket.com

© God Bless Texas
 
2013-01-18 09:28:54 PM

I May Be Crazy But...: I've heard a story that since it's legal to carry a concealed weapon in the Texas Capitol building, and if you do you skip the metal detector lines (because what's the point?), some reporters have gotten concealed carry licenses and pistols to speed up the process. I have no idea if I remember right or if it was true when I heard it, but it's funny anyway.


The security at the Virginia General Assembly makes you go through a metal detector and won't let you take a knife in, but if you have a concealed weapon permit you can take your firearm. The legislator spoke truly when he said that other legislators are armed on the floor of the legislature. One of them accidentally discharged his firearm through his office door; luckily, no one was hurt.

/wtf
//WWTJD?
what would Thomas Jefferson do?
 
2013-01-18 09:48:57 PM
Don't you dare infringe on his sacred 2nd amendment rights.
 
2013-01-18 10:05:39 PM
"How about this," he asked, exasperated. "How about prohibiting assholes from coming into the General Assembly?"

They should come in their mistresses like most politicians.
 
2013-01-18 10:07:09 PM

wambu: "How about this," he asked, exasperated. "How about prohibiting assholes from coming into the General Assembly?"

They should come in their mistresses like most politicians.


"The General Assembly" actually makes for a fantastic euphemism.
 
2013-01-18 11:06:54 PM

ProfessorOhki: JSam21: Ok... here is the thing. You can legally own "banned" arms such as machine guns, grenades, explosives, mortars, rpgs, etc... you just have to have the proper Federal Licensing and pay a $250 fee for a tax stamp on each piece of equipment that is covered by that law. Each hand grenade would be the price for the grenade + $250 + what ever it cost for the paperwork to go through. If I had an extra $250 million laying around I could buy an F-22 if I wanted to.

Perhaps, but I'm guessing that's not exactly a shall-issue license? I'm also willing to wager that you'd be denied the F-22 on account of other reasons (classified hardware or whatever). Besides, in the context of believing it's an a right that can't be infringed on like spacelord321, you don't get to demand licensing because that's a form of arms control; you step over that line and you've agreed that there should be 'reasonable' restrictions. The rest is defining what's reasonable.


I have agreed that reasonable restrictions should be implemented. I'm a proponent of background checks, criminal and mental health (the second part is going to be a problem with current HIPPA laws), mandatory training prior to taking posession of your gun. The training would consist of firearms safety, cleaning/maintenance, law when it comes to use of force, and lastly actually firing the gun. Only after completion of the class would you take posession of the firearm. If you don't pass the class you can either reschedule the class or get a refund for the firearm from your point of purchase, minus the cost of the class.

I would also have CCW classes involve shoot/don't shoot situations using FATS machines along with hand to hand defensive tactics and weapon rentention. It would put you in a stress situation and you can talk your way out of situations and give people techniques that can end or control situations with less force being used. I feel anyone that carries should either also have a collapsible baton or pepper spray as an alternative option.
 
2013-01-18 11:19:49 PM

kombat_unit: I need some advice. Fark has taught me that guns are all about sexing my tiny wang. I've tried to rub various firearms but failed to get excited (My Benelli M4's handle came closet but still no love). I then watched mad gun porn, similar result. Why is this not working?


Tell me sumthin' dearie.

Do ya think yer wallet is made outta 4skin?

There's yer problem.

Yer rubbin' the wrong wang, thang.
 
2013-01-18 11:28:55 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Stone Meadow: kim jong-un: The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...

I've been making this same point over and over again and getting laughed at by my fellow Democrats. I am genuinely afraid that this could be the DNC over-reach the GOP has been praying for to bring the faithful back to the flock.

You sound concerned.

It's not an over-reach despite the hysterics of the NRA and Rand Paul and the rest of the GOP and...

I've seen no indication that the GOP will develop the balls necessary to stop kowtowing to their lunatic fringe in their march to irrelevance.

Its something to be concerned about. Here we were watching the Republicans self immolate and hoping for serious realignment and instead the farkers are gonna heroic resolve themselves back onto their feet with D5 HP cause the national discourse blundered its way into the only issue on which the GoP can ever hope to put a win up on the board with.

I'm not conspiracy minded but the timing here was uncannily terrible.


About as far away from a mid-term election as you can get? Yeah, great timing for a GOP conspiracy.
 
2013-01-19 08:44:55 AM

puppetmaster745: Holocaust Agnostic: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Stone Meadow: kim jong-un: The Democrats are making some big mistakes right now in pushing so hard against guns. A lot of registered Republicans voted for them this time around (myself included) because we felt that the Republican candidates were failing on issues regarding things like FISA, etc...

I've been making this same point over and over again and getting laughed at by my fellow Democrats. I am genuinely afraid that this could be the DNC over-reach the GOP has been praying for to bring the faithful back to the flock.

You sound concerned.

It's not an over-reach despite the hysterics of the NRA and Rand Paul and the rest of the GOP and...

I've seen no indication that the GOP will develop the balls necessary to stop kowtowing to their lunatic fringe in their march to irrelevance.

Its something to be concerned about. Here we were watching the Republicans self immolate and hoping for serious realignment and instead the farkers are gonna heroic resolve themselves back onto their feet with D5 HP cause the national discourse blundered its way into the only issue on which the GoP can ever hope to put a win up on the board with.

I'm not conspiracy minded but the timing here was uncannily terrible.

About as far away from a mid-term election as you can get? Yeah, great timing for a GOP conspiracy.


"During the election, the Democrats swore they were not going to take your guns, but the very first thing Obama did in his lame duck presidency, within 60 days of the election, blah blah blah"

There's your spin

/I don't believe the above
//I don't believe any politician
///the phrase "the American people want" is D.C. speak for "I'm about to blow smoke up your ass"
 
Displayed 39 of 239 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report