My Connections
Not connected to anyone yet?
This answer contributed to Susan G. Komen for the Cure® What's this?
My answers support Susan G. Komen for the Cure® What's this?
Dr3amb0y1998:
2 months ago
|
Last edited at 2:49AM on 3/5/2013
I don't, but I really don't feel like getting into a political argument right now -_- let's just say I'm Conservative/Republican. And what chrisdogggg said, he's not helped our nation. I actually think he's made it worse.
Helpful
(8)
Fun
Thanks for voting
Comments (1)
Report as
You have reported this
aikenback52:
2 months ago
via iPhone
He has made it worse!
Report as
- Spam
- Offensive
- Threatening
- Off-topic
- Nonsense
- Spelling/Grammar
- Community Standards
- Offensive Username
Add a comment...
chrisdogggg:
2 months ago
via iPhone
Of corse not, he's done nothing to solve America's issues. I don't think he's made it worse but he hasn't helped anything
Report as
You have reported this
HotAndKrazy:
2 months ago
via iPhone
I do because he is actually very supportive for most good things. He actually cares for his citizens unlike some leaders where they just don't bother
Report as
You have reported this
cookieroma:
2 months ago
via iPhone
really and he demonstrates all this caring how? I mean his walk, not his talk.
Report as
You have reported this
Pro_Swimmer:
2 months ago
via Android
He doesn't care the least bit
Report as
You have reported this
aikenback52:
2 months ago
via iPhone
How does he demonstrate his caring?
Report as
You have reported this
L0stCh1ld:
2 months ago
That entire statemrnt is complete crap! He doesnt care about us and only supports bad things.
Report as
You have reported this
Arizonacharlie:
2 months ago
Im assuming by the comments that all the commenters are teenagers, in order to assess the presidents job you have to check his record and not go by "i like him because he is nice".He has actually spent more money than the last 4 presidents combined, money thats borrowed, to get the rest of his sorry performance you should go to talk radio and get the real story and stop listening to crappy rock music.
Report as
You have reported this
bathandbodybaby14:
2 months ago
It's not an easy job being the president. Many people blame Obama for the America's problems, but the truth is, those were there before Obama took office. I wouldn't have voted for Obama when he was running but he isn't too bad of a president.
Report as
You have reported this
Pro_Swimmer:
2 months ago
via Android
Your right. They were there when he came in. But guess what...he hasn't fixed them one bit. in fact he's almost doubled the nations debt.
Report as
You have reported this
L0stCh1ld:
2 months ago
Those problems were there. That much is true. But obama knew about them. And he has done nothing to make it better. In fact, it got worse! So yes it is his fault.
Report as
You have reported this
I love reading that people really think he cares about his country. The only thing he has done is raise taxes and cut programs. Yup he cares a ton.
Report as
You have reported this
Except for one minor tax increase on those who make over $400,000.00 a year, exactly what tax increases has he instituted?
Report as
You have reported this
Boo153 you need clarification. You obviously don't work because you would have seen more money taken out of your paycheck. That's called taxes. I'm assuming your with the rest of the Americans that live on handouts so you wouldn't totally understand.
Report as
You have reported this
Kimmy, grow up. I know a heck of a lot more about taxes than you do since I am a small business owner.
SS contributions HAVE RETURNED TO WHAT THEY WERE PRIOR TO OBAMAS TWO YEAR HOLIDAY.
THERE HAS BEEN A MINOR INCREASE IF YOU MAKE OVER $400,00.00 a year which I'm assuming you don't since you act more like a schoolchild.
So show me facts (look it up if you don't understand the meaning)
SS contributions HAVE RETURNED TO WHAT THEY WERE PRIOR TO OBAMAS TWO YEAR HOLIDAY.
THERE HAS BEEN A MINOR INCREASE IF YOU MAKE OVER $400,00.00 a year which I'm assuming you don't since you act more like a schoolchild.
So show me facts (look it up if you don't understand the meaning)
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Boo that business you diddent build that somebody else made that happen
Report as
You have reported this
Bud. My business was built on roads paid for by all, customs, paid for by all, Internet, phone, power, etc
If you did not understand what Obama meant then you're just being simplistic.
If you did not understand what Obama meant then you're just being simplistic.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Wow so the beige you drove on made your business happen :I
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
So I'm gonna start trapping and im gonna sell the hides I guess goverment made that happen to......
Report as
You have reported this
Boo you should look it up and you will realize your wrong! Haha you make me laugh.
Report as
You have reported this
Ps: this question is 30 days old, you may need to start getting a life. :)
Report as
You have reported this
milburdine:
2 months ago
via Android
|
Last edited at 3:11AM on 3/5/2013
Embracing division is not helping anything except foreign interest that hate us.
And yes I do like him.
Report as
You have reported this
sweetiekins:
2 months ago
via Android
I do like our president but i dont like the fact he could be doing more out of the kindness of his own money or his own power to spread words to help or guide others threw harsh news around the world and let people know everything will be okay and solved i feel alot of issues still need to be solved and i know the president is doing his best but i think the president should never be afraid to ask the citizens for help into leading our nation into a positive much safer one i feel the president cant do everything by himself but also he can try to do alot more just because thats why we call him are president. Other then that i like how he supports the stuff others may not support.
Report as
You have reported this
nancyjune561:
2 months ago
I don't usually LIKE any man saying one thing and then doing another..consistently. I don't trust (or like) any man who says they will be completely transparent, with every law, and put every plan on line before it's passed, (then doesn't) or promises to reduce the deficit, yet adds 5 trillion, in 3 years- His budgets are rejected by his own party! Promised to not have lobbyist in their cabinet.etc. (and does).
I don't like a man who lies, conceals and manipulates, because he can't be honest and say what he really wants- a socialist or even Communist country, and has been taking away freedoms and striping away the Constitution with "executive orders," and Obama Care. I don't like the brainwashing of students by leftist Union teachers..I don't like a leader who hates and apologizes for America, and wants to transform it to his personal Utopia..(whatever that may be)!
Report as
You have reported this
You do know that bush signed more executive orders... Obamacare is NOT government health care and exactly what communist/socialist things has he done?
I DO love how the anti obamas use communist and socialist interchangeably, like they're the same thing...
I DO love how the anti obamas use communist and socialist interchangeably, like they're the same thing...
Report as
You have reported this
It's mostly private insurance meeting new rules. It is not nationalized health care. That would have been the smart thing, single payer, but nooo, Obama had to give in to GOP and add individual mandate.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Oh yea and the minimum payment for Obama is 20,000 dollars a year
Report as
You have reported this
aikenback52:
2 months ago
via iPhone
What exactly has he not done to prevent socialism/ communism?
Report as
You have reported this
Sorry bud, that too has been debunked. You really need a new news source.
Aiken, still not an answer, specify please
Aiken, still not an answer, specify please
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
And nationalized health care is communist bull
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
I'm tellin ya we fought the BRITISH FOR LESS
Report as
You have reported this
From factcheck...
But the headline of the Cybercast News Service report simply jumps to the conclusion that the IRS said that the ?Cheapest Obamacare Plan Will Be $20,000 Per Family,? when there was no indication that that was the case. An opinion piece published on LifeNews.com made the same leap, claiming that ?the IRS ? has finally released a cost analysis based on ObamaCare regulations showing that the cheapest healthcare plan in 2016 will cost average American families of four or five members $20,000 per year for the so-called ?bronze plan.? ?
For one thing, the example in the proposed regulations uses the word ?average,? which means that the ?cheapest? plan could, in fact, be lower than $20,000. But more important, the regulations weren?t a ?cost analysis? at all. A spokesperson for the Treasury Department confirmed to FactCheck.org in an email that the IRS wasn?t making any declarations or projections about what prices will be.
?[Twenty thousand dollars] is a round number used by IRS for a hypothetical example,? the official wrote. ?It is not an estimate of premiums for a bronze plan for a family of five in 2016.?
But the headline of the Cybercast News Service report simply jumps to the conclusion that the IRS said that the ?Cheapest Obamacare Plan Will Be $20,000 Per Family,? when there was no indication that that was the case. An opinion piece published on LifeNews.com made the same leap, claiming that ?the IRS ? has finally released a cost analysis based on ObamaCare regulations showing that the cheapest healthcare plan in 2016 will cost average American families of four or five members $20,000 per year for the so-called ?bronze plan.? ?
For one thing, the example in the proposed regulations uses the word ?average,? which means that the ?cheapest? plan could, in fact, be lower than $20,000. But more important, the regulations weren?t a ?cost analysis? at all. A spokesperson for the Treasury Department confirmed to FactCheck.org in an email that the IRS wasn?t making any declarations or projections about what prices will be.
?[Twenty thousand dollars] is a round number used by IRS for a hypothetical example,? the official wrote. ?It is not an estimate of premiums for a bronze plan for a family of five in 2016.?
Report as
You have reported this
You got part if it right, "nationalized health care is communist bull"
Calling the ACA that is indeed bull
Calling the ACA that is indeed bull
Report as
You have reported this
Yes, why?
He understands that women's bodies belong to them
He repealed dadt
He prevented a Great Depression
He has mostly repaired our image abroad
He took down bin laden after the last admin publicly stated they no longer cared
He supports stem cell research
He supports equality in marriage
He revamped student loans
He implemented controls on bankers
I would like to see, the patriot act dumped, tsa disbanded, a return to the Reagan tax rates and a few other things but overall, not bad
Report as
You have reported this
Suzie1617:
2 months ago
via iPhone
Yes, stem cell research so the vain can be young again. Need to do something with all those aborted babies. Disgusting... Perhaps if more women and men kept their legs crossed there wouldn't be need.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
He took down Bin laden? No the seals took that muther f******** down
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Suzie thats right what they do to the unborn is discusting
Report as
You have reported this
Suzie, educate yourself on stem cell research. It shows promise for many diseases.
As for abortion, it's a personal choice and a personal decision, I'm glad Obama recognizes that.
Bud, bush gave up, Obama restarted the search, approved who and how it went down, same as any prez.
As for abortion, it's a personal choice and a personal decision, I'm glad Obama recognizes that.
Bud, bush gave up, Obama restarted the search, approved who and how it went down, same as any prez.
Report as
You have reported this
Suzie1617:
2 months ago
via iPhone
Why don't you stop being gullible. Stem cells are the fountain of youth. They'll bring in tons of money. And why should babies die for vanity?
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
And if it's personal why is it any of the presidents business
Report as
You have reported this
Stem cells are the fountain of repair. Quit being foxed. As for allowing murder of thinking, breathing human beings, no. But your definition of when life begins differs from mine. You believe what you want and I'll do the same. Why is the prez (semi) involved?
Because of congressional members who are like you and want to dictate what a woman can do with her body.
Because of congressional members who are like you and want to dictate what a woman can do with her body.
Report as
You have reported this
Suzie1617:
2 months ago
via iPhone
No boo, because unlike you there's still some people who believe in God. It is what it is, and so is he. But if you'd prefer, cause you say so, I'll nod my head up and down.
Report as
You have reported this
Until god says differently, I'll stick with my beliefs. Not some man made version of his rules
Report as
You have reported this
Suzie1617:
2 months ago
via iPhone
You know what? Even when I didn't believe I knew it was wrong. Now that I do know God I know people can be forgiven for it. But to make it a who cares kind of thing.... To use it as a form of birth control is beyond disgusting.
Report as
You have reported this
Who says its being used as birth control, except for right wingers. MOST women think long and hard snout it and try to make the best decision possible.
The fantasy right wing nuts have of a woman thinking, get my hair done, stop at the bank, pop in and grab an abortion... Is what's disgusting
The fantasy right wing nuts have of a woman thinking, get my hair done, stop at the bank, pop in and grab an abortion... Is what's disgusting
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
It's disgusting but true. We wouldn't be having these discussions if it weren't. We as right wingers know there are terrible people in this world, and capitalism is set up to allow them to suffer by their own hands
Report as
You have reported this
Is there a minority that abuse it? Sure, so lets go ahead and ban everything that anyone abuses...politics, religion, etc
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
I did not say anything about abuse. Quite frankly I do not understand the relevancy of your post
Report as
You have reported this
Since the comment was made that abortion is used as birth control, my response is quite relevant
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
I understand now. And it should not be outlawed for the reason that it is abused. But for the reason that all humans have rights, from infancy to old age. Not excluding fetuses
Report as
You have reported this
Suzie1617:
2 months ago
via iPhone
My God, when did things get so insane that the death of a baby is considered ok??? Wow!
Report as
You have reported this
Um, because A lot of us don't consider them babies... I DO love how the original question once again gets slanted by bible thumpers.
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
I am a moderately religious person, but my views are not rooted in belief. i also find that term, as well as yoi in general, offensive.
Changing of topic tends to be how a conversation moves along.
You call us complainers....
Changing of topic tends to be how a conversation moves along.
You call us complainers....
Report as
You have reported this
These aren't supposed to be conversations, they are supposed to be questions and answers and ask discourages getting off topic
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
When does getting off topic ever not happen?
Report as
You have reported this
The scary part is I don't think they've forgotten, I think they would prefer that.
Report as
You have reported this
Or old and cranky, wanting a return to the fictional "good old days"
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
Are you guys ignoring that many make exceptions in the cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother
Report as
You have reported this
The ones making those exceptions do so under protest, and many would like to ban them also.
It really doesn't matter, roe vs wade got it right and the religious meddlers need to get over it
It really doesn't matter, roe vs wade got it right and the religious meddlers need to get over it
Report as
You have reported this
Wall1:
2 months ago
are we allowing god given free choice to be usurped to appease zealots or just their sense of what is right or make it easier for them to feel they did their duty? it would be a shame to waste their valuable time - much easier to act like al queda
Report as
You have reported this
Ah wall, didn't you know that to the religious zealots our freedoms stop where THEY think they should. Otherwise they are all for it.
Hypocrisy at its best
Hypocrisy at its best
Report as
You have reported this
overtaker:
2 months ago
lol, wow, your answer is hilarious. thx for the laugh 8)
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
For the last fricking time I am not a very religious person. I base this on science
Report as
You have reported this
The only "science" supporting you is the same science that says women who are "actually" raped can't get pregnant and that we need to redefine rape as not rape or forcible rape and that if a woman gets pregnant through rape, it's gods will. . There is no credible science for the whole " life begins at conception" stuff.
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
and coma patients can't exist without the machine that sustains their life. does that machine get more rights than the patient? If they didnt want them then they shouldnt have done anything to get pregnant in the first place.
That is not remotely the same science and that comparison is the same as saying the only science that says that life /doesn't/ begin at conception is the same as what says e=mc^2. I do not believe life is immadiate, but i believe it is at the moment the heart starts beating. around day 18. at that moment there is a functioning organ sustaining life inside of a young human being. It may not look like one, but as you loudly shout your party does not discriminate based on appearance
That is not remotely the same science and that comparison is the same as saying the only science that says that life /doesn't/ begin at conception is the same as what says e=mc^2. I do not believe life is immadiate, but i believe it is at the moment the heart starts beating. around day 18. at that moment there is a functioning organ sustaining life inside of a young human being. It may not look like one, but as you loudly shout your party does not discriminate based on appearance
Report as
You have reported this
I'm also a big fan of turning off "life support" for the terminal, long term coma, etc
again YOUR BELIEF is that it's a life at day 18, etc, etc and you are welcome to your beliefs but when your beliefs start infringing upon MY body it's gone too far.
Why don't the pro lifers understand that you are quite welcome to do as you please with your body, I don't care. Just leave me out of it.
again YOUR BELIEF is that it's a life at day 18, etc, etc and you are welcome to your beliefs but when your beliefs start infringing upon MY body it's gone too far.
Why don't the pro lifers understand that you are quite welcome to do as you please with your body, I don't care. Just leave me out of it.
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
What you pro lifers don't understand is that it is also that living child's body too. You give up the right of it just being all about you when you make the choice to allow another being into it. I for one do not think it's okay to murder something just because I don't believe it's human. Obviously, the safest choice would be to not murder anything at all. So maybe it's not a human, well good thing there are laws protecting animals from being hacked apart
Report as
You have reported this
Wall1:
2 months ago
I wish it was you who had to make this choice because I think you might be better at it than a women who did not want to bring a baby up on her own. As for saying the women should have made a better choice, what about the man? Seems like all the blame is placed on the women.
However, clearly we are way off subject..
However, clearly we are way off subject..
Report as
You have reported this
Now I know why Obama is president and our country is going to crap, it is filled with many boos and walls. You guys should re read your posts, you don't sound to intelligent. Hahaha thanks for the laugh.
Report as
You have reported this
And apparently we have a right winger in kimmy. She's got nothing except name calling
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
I admit that it is a tough decision for a women to make. (if I may state sarcastically, my side would alleviate that choice, whereas your side is pro)
You are correct that it is just as much the man's fault. He should be held responsibe as well. but except for rape, it is a women's choice what er, happens to her body. If she wants to let people, er, do that to her, she needs to live with the consequences. Additionally, so should the male
You are correct that it is just as much the man's fault. He should be held responsibe as well. but except for rape, it is a women's choice what er, happens to her body. If she wants to let people, er, do that to her, she needs to live with the consequences. Additionally, so should the male
Report as
You have reported this
We agree on one thing
It IS a woman's choice what happens to her body
It IS a woman's choice what happens to her body
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
Yes, except in the cases when it affects someone else's life. Like this one
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
I cannot possibly hope to convince someone so deeply rooted in the idea that the murder of children is acceptable that doing so is wrong. I see that now. All I can do is say that a fetus is as much a human as you and I. It is merely underdeveloped. So what? Certain disabled people are underdeveloped. The human itself is not fully developed until his/her late twenties. Is any time before that acceptable to kill them? I understand it's your body and I resent your tone. But by what right is murder okay even if it is inside you? It changes nothing. Not does this have to do with religious beliefs or opinions. It is a human from the moment its heart starts beating
Report as
You have reported this
*beats head against wall*
YOUR opinion.
If you want to get scientific about it, a fetus is a parasite.
Here's the thing, until you walk a mile in a pregnant woman's shoes, don't try to decide what is right and wrong for her. You live your life your way and others will do the same. Maybe you're right, maybe I'm right, nobody knows but at least I don't have the arrogance to dictate to you how you should live
YOUR opinion.
If you want to get scientific about it, a fetus is a parasite.
Here's the thing, until you walk a mile in a pregnant woman's shoes, don't try to decide what is right and wrong for her. You live your life your way and others will do the same. Maybe you're right, maybe I'm right, nobody knows but at least I don't have the arrogance to dictate to you how you should live
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
thats like saying until I walk a mile in a murderer's shoes, I have no right to decide anything about them. Thanks for getting me out of jury duty! And while I may be right and you may be right, at least my side doesnt mean that hundreds of innocent children have been killed and torn apart if the opposing side wins
Report as
You have reported this
Again, ASSUMING "innocent children"
I can live with what choices I make, my daughter makes, any woman makes. It's up to us, thankfully, not you
I can live with what choices I make, my daughter makes, any woman makes. It's up to us, thankfully, not you
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
Your attempt at definite sounding comments really dont make a whole lot of relative sense.
The point I am trying to make, and what I believe I have stated, is as follows.
In the event that you are correct
I have merely defended things which will one day become human, and havent hurt anone
In the event that I am correct
You have defended those who murder babies and allow that process. Kudos
The point I am trying to make, and what I believe I have stated, is as follows.
In the event that you are correct
I have merely defended things which will one day become human, and havent hurt anone
In the event that I am correct
You have defended those who murder babies and allow that process. Kudos
Report as
You have reported this
You haven't hurt anyone??
Tell that to the women whose bodies you want to control
Tell that to the women whose bodies you want to control
Report as
You have reported this
Wall1:
2 months ago
And we cannot hope that those as deeply rooted into the belief that they must be the enforcers of what they believe to be God's will could possibly see how history will repeat itself if Roe V. Wade is overturned.
Would you rather see the unfortunate, scared, desperate female and fetus die than allow a legal abortion? Next you say and do almost nothing about the male who is at the least an equally quilty party. You do not to mention how she will be able to bring up a child she does not want. You may be attempting to defend the possibity of life to the point that the existing life is ended along with that possible life.
The law exists so why continue to argue your point. Do you not believe that God has the power to work this out? Or are you believing you are God's voice in this? Just look back into the facts that brought about Roe V Wade and maybe you will see why the decision was made. God was not asleep that day!
Would you rather see the unfortunate, scared, desperate female and fetus die than allow a legal abortion? Next you say and do almost nothing about the male who is at the least an equally quilty party. You do not to mention how she will be able to bring up a child she does not want. You may be attempting to defend the possibity of life to the point that the existing life is ended along with that possible life.
The law exists so why continue to argue your point. Do you not believe that God has the power to work this out? Or are you believing you are God's voice in this? Just look back into the facts that brought about Roe V Wade and maybe you will see why the decision was made. God was not asleep that day!
Report as
You have reported this
jcampbell:
2 months ago
boo153 - spoken like a true "taker"! Get a grip and get "responsible! And don't count on others to do it for you! By the way - thanks to Obama, most other countries think the US is a total "joke". Wake up!
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
Number one- I am not religious
Number two- I am not controlling anyone, I am seeking to enforce and rectify laws in place. Those against murder
Number two- I am not controlling anyone, I am seeking to enforce and rectify laws in place. Those against murder
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
rectify. as in correct ones that should not be in place
Report as
You have reported this
In YOUR opinion. In my opinion it should be illegal for men to get Viagra. Want to help me rectify this awful law?
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
You can go ahead and propose that law. I do not use it myself, but I could not imagine why you would want to ban it and impose more regulations. You keep pushing this opinion thing,it is not really an opinion.It is a living organism.That is obvious. It grows into a full sized human, therefore it is human. We do not know of anything that can turn intoa an entirely different species without going through metamorphasis, thus, it is already a human. And if you insist it is not, it is another animal. So I am sure some animal rights activists may also be disgruntled over some poor little creatures being torn limb from limb and extracted. So pick your punishment
Report as
You have reported this
It's a person like an acorn is an oak tree.
Again, your opinion that its a human being is just that.
Again, your opinion that its a human being is just that.
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
So you're going with animal abuse? Okay. Still a crime. And an acorn is not. Tree, it is an oak. It is a stage in the development of an oak. Acorn-sprout-sapling-tree. All under the species umbrella of "oak"
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
nope. But its not illegal to murder a tree either, so I mustve missed your point
Report as
You have reported this
My point, yet again, is a fetus, in my opinion, is like an acorn.
In your opinion, it's alive.
Luckily the law is on my side and I also believe guys should stay out of things they don't understand.
In your opinion, it's alive.
Luckily the law is on my side and I also believe guys should stay out of things they don't understand.
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
It is clearly alive. It goes through all necesarry life functions. Besides, your first statement does not provide anything other than stating that a fetus is like an acorn, which is an oak. So by your own reckoning, the direct correlation you have indicated states that a fetus and an adult both be human, much like an acorn and a tree are both oak.
The law is on your side, for now. If we just went along with and never tried to change laws... well I trust you can use your head]
Your last remark is frankly rather sexist and offensive. You dont have to be woman to understand the process of pregnancy and such. So i think that gender really is not a barrier when great scientists and doctors and other brilliant minds have spent their lives examining that particular area of humanity. I think they'd be rather offended too.
Additionally, you seem to use opinions more often than I do, I think that perhaps your side is more opinion-oriented quite frankly
The law is on your side, for now. If we just went along with and never tried to change laws... well I trust you can use your head]
Your last remark is frankly rather sexist and offensive. You dont have to be woman to understand the process of pregnancy and such. So i think that gender really is not a barrier when great scientists and doctors and other brilliant minds have spent their lives examining that particular area of humanity. I think they'd be rather offended too.
Additionally, you seem to use opinions more often than I do, I think that perhaps your side is more opinion-oriented quite frankly
Report as
You have reported this
Actually no, you guys use right wing opinion and call it fact.
Yes, a fetus has the POTENTIAL to be human. It is not in and of itself human.
Quite frankly I'M insulted that you deem it your place to direct my beliefs.
Yes, a fetus has the POTENTIAL to be human. It is not in and of itself human.
Quite frankly I'M insulted that you deem it your place to direct my beliefs.
Report as
You have reported this
Wall1:
2 months ago
This issue is about life. The mother's life exists while the fetus is just a possibility. You won't stop illegal abortions. Please read - http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/history_abortion.html.
Why do you want to repeat what already failed?
Why do you want to repeat what already failed?
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
And an adolescent has the possibility to become an adult. So?
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
It's not a belief. This is a scientific issue. I am trying to prevent the murder of humans, therefore, it is my duty
Report as
You have reported this
An adolescent is a living, breathing, sometimes thinking person.
You want to change laws? Change the ones that affect men and leave women to handle their own lives
You want to change laws? Change the ones that affect men and leave women to handle their own lives
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
such as Obamacare? Social Security? Unemployment? All of those and more? Maybe if you'd look you'd realize that among all of this there is a core that says that people cannot handle themselves and need protection and to be given whatever they need as seen fit by the government. I see being pro-life as not meddling in the affairs of other people, but protecting them. By allowing those who cannot yet fight for themselves to be born instead of slaughtered under the conscent of their own mother who has betrayed them
Report as
You have reported this
Ah, so you believe "people cannot handle themselves and need protection and to be given what YOU deem necessary"
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
Exactly not. It is incomrehensible how you cannot comprehend that. I believe that a person's life is their own and they deserve to make their own choiced and find their own way, for only they can. The line is drawn where such choices affect others. Ie: murder, robbery, drug use, and yes, abortion. For in this counry the young have the same rights as the old as the fit as the unfit as the sick as the healthy as the black as the white and everything in between. So you can defend the slaughter of children all you like, but fetus rights is next on my agenda. And maybe it'll be the next movement.
Report as
You have reported this
Thank god most people don't think like you. So you keep worrying more about a fetus than the living, breathing, thinking person it affects.
I'll side with the woman
All done, you can preach your religious beliefs to thin air.
I'll side with the woman
All done, you can preach your religious beliefs to thin air.
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
What may sadden me the most is your increasingly short memory. how many times must I preach that I am not a preacher? I am not a religious man by any means.
I weep that so many think as you do. What exactly about mine trouble you so?
I find the life of the mother equally as important as to that of the life of the living child within her. Equality. Dont you believe in that any more? Maybe after gay rights we will see a fetus rights movement. May be Roe vs wade will be overturned like JIm Crowe
I weep that so many think as you do. What exactly about mine trouble you so?
I find the life of the mother equally as important as to that of the life of the living child within her. Equality. Dont you believe in that any more? Maybe after gay rights we will see a fetus rights movement. May be Roe vs wade will be overturned like JIm Crowe
Report as
You have reported this
OK, I'll break my own rule. Last comment. If you have a flying fig about women you would not be proposing going back to back alley abortions and death. Of course women with lots if cash will never have an issue but the poor and the young would stand a great chance if death.
There will be a fetus movement when they can stand up and speak.
As for your supposedly not religious? Bull, your arguments are religious based "life from conception"
Have a good life and please stay out of mine.
There will be a fetus movement when they can stand up and speak.
As for your supposedly not religious? Bull, your arguments are religious based "life from conception"
Have a good life and please stay out of mine.
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
I think those of the disabled movement would take offense to the line proposing they should "stand up and speak" as many cannot do so.
Should we offer clinics to humanely kill those that also displease us to avoid those pesky backalley backstabbings? Again, I propose that if there is a significant defect, the life of the mother is threatened, incest, or rape, then abortion may be necesarry. And once again, if they can't handle the consequences then they should never have done anything to provoke them.
I am not very religious, it is not religion based. I have never stated life from conception, in fact I said that it is alive from the moment his/her heart starts beating. You may want to get your memory loss checked out.
I would gladly stay out of your life. That's a very republican thing to do. But I cannot when you insist on cutting short those of who have yet to enjoy it
Should we offer clinics to humanely kill those that also displease us to avoid those pesky backalley backstabbings? Again, I propose that if there is a significant defect, the life of the mother is threatened, incest, or rape, then abortion may be necesarry. And once again, if they can't handle the consequences then they should never have done anything to provoke them.
I am not very religious, it is not religion based. I have never stated life from conception, in fact I said that it is alive from the moment his/her heart starts beating. You may want to get your memory loss checked out.
I would gladly stay out of your life. That's a very republican thing to do. But I cannot when you insist on cutting short those of who have yet to enjoy it
Report as
You have reported this
Do I like Obama? That's like asking me if I like urinating on the floor in the middle of a school pep rally. He keeps digging us deeper into debt that we are unable to repay. Then he makes promises that he doesn't keep. Remember, in his Union Address, he said, "We have to keep the promises that we've already made."? The only promises that he's kept are the ones that have messed up this country. And people still vote for him! You know he wants to get rid of jobs with his new plan. He's going to get rid of the people that help with special needs kids. Why would he get rid of those people? they are actually helping the world and he's trying to get rid of them. He does that because he has czars in his Cabinet that don't care about them. They're like Hitler. He experimented on the special need people. Those czars don't care about those types of people. The pretty much want them eliminated. And Obama says he wants to create more jobs. How's he going to do that if he's taking them away? Well, you might say, he's trying to get us out of debt by saving money. The government just has to stop spending money! Obama could do us a huge favor by resigning. He's also taking away guns. That doesn't help anything. Guns aren't what kill people. People kill people. Taking away guns is a violation of the Second Amendment. You know, the first thing Hitler did right before he cane to power was take away every bodies guns. So they couldn't defend themselves. Obama is making everything he does look like a dictatorship. Plus, Obama is really hard to look at. His face is really ugly in my opinion. Maybe not to you, but to me? Blech!
Report as
You have reported this
I take offense at this garbage...
I work with special needs and Obama isn't taking anything away from them... The sequester will cut funds, thank congress for that one.
He is not taking our guns away, he is looking at common sense restrictions and the supreme court has already ruled that restrictions do not violate our second amendment rights.
Next, please learn history. Hitler did not take guns away, he loosened restrictions that had been put in place due to WWI.
Any job cuts that will happen in fed government is due to sequester, again, thank congress.
And by the way? CONGRESS is responsible for the budget
I work with special needs and Obama isn't taking anything away from them... The sequester will cut funds, thank congress for that one.
He is not taking our guns away, he is looking at common sense restrictions and the supreme court has already ruled that restrictions do not violate our second amendment rights.
Next, please learn history. Hitler did not take guns away, he loosened restrictions that had been put in place due to WWI.
Any job cuts that will happen in fed government is due to sequester, again, thank congress.
And by the way? CONGRESS is responsible for the budget
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Yea hitler did take hundreds of thousands of guns away because all the men that returned from WW1 still had there service rifle which was a K98K bolt action rifle And all the people who resisted guess what happend to them? they were killed
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
They made it illegal for Jews whom lived in Germany to posses firearms and if you did not have a valid reason to own it it was confiscated
Report as
You have reported this
Wiki??
THAT is considered research now?
"The truth is that no gun law was passed in Germany in 1935. There was no need for one, since a gun registration program was already in effect in Germany; it was enacted in 1928, five years before Hitler?s ascendancy. But that law did not ?outlaw? guns, it just restricted their possession to individuals who were considered law-abiding citizens, and who had a reason to own one. And there?s no reason to consider that law particularly significant, either; the NAZIs didn?t seize control of their own country with gunpowder. They used a much more potent weapon: propaganda.
Under their reign, Jews were prohibited from owning guns, just as they were prohibited from doing many things. And it has become an article of faith among the gun culture that had they been armed, the Holocaust would not have happened (that is, among those members of the gun culture who know that the Holocaust really did happen). But the concept of a handful of citizens armed with hunting rifles and Saturday night specials fending off an army is delusional hubris peculiar to gun addicts. On American soil, its most glorious day in the sun has been perhaps Waco. And we all know how well that turned out.
The gun culture is right about one thing, however. Hitler really did enact a new gun law. But it was in 1938, not 1935 ? well after the NAZIs already had the country in its iron grip. Furthermore, the new law in many ways LOOSENED gun restrictions. For example, it greatly expanded the numbers who were exempt, it lowered the legal age of possession from 20 to 18, and it completely lifted restriction on all guns except handguns, as well as on ammunition.
Given all of this, it?s pretty hard to make a case that ?gun control? played a significant role in NAZI conquest. In fact, one might well say that when gun addicts brandish Hitler as a weapon, they are unwittingly arguing against their own cause.
THAT is considered research now?
"The truth is that no gun law was passed in Germany in 1935. There was no need for one, since a gun registration program was already in effect in Germany; it was enacted in 1928, five years before Hitler?s ascendancy. But that law did not ?outlaw? guns, it just restricted their possession to individuals who were considered law-abiding citizens, and who had a reason to own one. And there?s no reason to consider that law particularly significant, either; the NAZIs didn?t seize control of their own country with gunpowder. They used a much more potent weapon: propaganda.
Under their reign, Jews were prohibited from owning guns, just as they were prohibited from doing many things. And it has become an article of faith among the gun culture that had they been armed, the Holocaust would not have happened (that is, among those members of the gun culture who know that the Holocaust really did happen). But the concept of a handful of citizens armed with hunting rifles and Saturday night specials fending off an army is delusional hubris peculiar to gun addicts. On American soil, its most glorious day in the sun has been perhaps Waco. And we all know how well that turned out.
The gun culture is right about one thing, however. Hitler really did enact a new gun law. But it was in 1938, not 1935 ? well after the NAZIs already had the country in its iron grip. Furthermore, the new law in many ways LOOSENED gun restrictions. For example, it greatly expanded the numbers who were exempt, it lowered the legal age of possession from 20 to 18, and it completely lifted restriction on all guns except handguns, as well as on ammunition.
Given all of this, it?s pretty hard to make a case that ?gun control? played a significant role in NAZI conquest. In fact, one might well say that when gun addicts brandish Hitler as a weapon, they are unwittingly arguing against their own cause.
Report as
You have reported this
CalTex:
2 months ago
@Bud: Yes, Jews were disarmed. That was a move supported by the majority of the country at the time, such was the hatred for Jews. And that was directed at a specific, minority demographic. The conspiracy theorists in the country are claiming that ALL demographics are being targeted; that no one will have guns if the government has its way. That is a scenario much different than what Hitler did.
And no one is saying that permits weren't required. It's just that Hitler made it easier to get one than it was before.
Also, I don't look up sources to support the claims of others. The burden of proof falls to the claimant.
And no one is saying that permits weren't required. It's just that Hitler made it easier to get one than it was before.
Also, I don't look up sources to support the claims of others. The burden of proof falls to the claimant.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
I'm just sayin goverments biggest enemy is a armed population hence America is one of the only country's where you can own a gun
Report as
You have reported this
And nobody is taking guns. They just want to add high capacity magazines to the same restricted list machine guns are on. They also want universal background checks which reasonable people don't object to. As for banning ak-15s, it won't happen.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Lol there is no such thing as an ak-15 shows how much you know
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
And look this up henrymakow.com/Russians learned gun control lesson
Report as
You have reported this
CalTex:
2 months ago
@Bud: We are not one of the only countries that allow gun ownership. It appears that the vast majority of countries DO allow gun ownership. Go to this link http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list and scroll down a bit to find a table entitled, "Gun murders and ownership" which give data on each country listed in the first column. Now look at the last two columns and start scrolling down. Only the countries with blank cells in those columns have no gun ownership. And for some very small countries, that may be out of choice rather than legal fiat. Certainly the U.S. has the most well armed populace in the world with about twice as many guns per capita as the country in second place (Switzerland).
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
I like how you call it gun murders as if a inanimate object can murder someone
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
And cal look that link I gave you up and read it
Report as
You have reported this
CalTex:
2 months ago
Wow! I just found something in the table that is quite interesting. We always here how safe a society Switzerland is because they have such a well armed populace. I found that you can sort each column by clicking on the column head. I clicked the one for "% of homicides by firearm" and found Switzerland quite high on the list -- right behind the West Bank & Gaza!
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
But we all know if they would just get rid of guns no one would ever die again
Report as
You have reported this
CalTex:
2 months ago
@Bud: I stopped reading the article you posted when the first sentence began with, "The Illuminati Jews and Freemasons who run the USA and Europe..." That tells me all I need to know about that website -- and about your political agenda. How very disappointing.
Report as
You have reported this
CalTex:
2 months ago
Here it is if anyone else want to read what paranoia looks like: http://www.henrymakow.com/russians-learned-gun-control-lesson.html
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
But if it's to unbareable you can't even read the thing so be it
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
At least if you give me some article il read the darn thing
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
But if you can't beat to read it this basically sums it up when the Zars were thrown out of power in Russia the populous was armed so the red army said to come and "register" your guns so all the people that came were promptly shot and then the reds could do anything they want without fear of revolt
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Gun control is not about guns it's about control
Report as
You have reported this
CalTex:
2 months ago
@Bud: And you think American citizens will be shot as they *continue* to register their firearms?
The Illuminati and the Freemasons are secret societies and favorite conspiracy subjects for fanatical right-wing conservative Christians who believe in America's exceptional place in the history of the world due to its being ordained and brought into being by God. I don't have time today for reading such tripe. I will accept your summary of the article as sufficient
But this website you cited is like looking at an angry, antisemitic, homocidal online version of the National Enquirer. I am surprised you used it as a source for us. When I am sourcing material I disregard any instances of such sites as the Huffington Post and Mother Jones that turn up in a search because I assume they will be seen as biased. How could any rational person not see this Henry Makow website as anything but biased and pushing a very specific agenda? It's just not good sourcing.
The Illuminati and the Freemasons are secret societies and favorite conspiracy subjects for fanatical right-wing conservative Christians who believe in America's exceptional place in the history of the world due to its being ordained and brought into being by God. I don't have time today for reading such tripe. I will accept your summary of the article as sufficient
But this website you cited is like looking at an angry, antisemitic, homocidal online version of the National Enquirer. I am surprised you used it as a source for us. When I am sourcing material I disregard any instances of such sites as the Huffington Post and Mother Jones that turn up in a search because I assume they will be seen as biased. How could any rational person not see this Henry Makow website as anything but biased and pushing a very specific agenda? It's just not good sourcing.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Ya that guy sounded kinda out there I dident do a very extensive web search so that was the best I could find
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
About the only conspiricy I think is going on is some bull with DHS and there macine guns armored vehicles and billions of rounds of jacketed hollow points
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Oh and conservitive Christians are considered "home grown terrorism"
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Well what can you expect from Osama oh sorry obama and the libs
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
While I despise that group, what have they find that's "terroristic"?
Report as
You have reported this
Anybody that spews the amount of hatred they do is a terrorist. Do you really think that if they could find a way to bomb a soldiers funeral, they wouldn't?
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
Quite frankly I don't think it would be a hard task. But what they are doing is nonviolent protest. I despise their hatred filled words but unless freedom of speech is the next constitutional law you want to infringe on, they're entitled to their opinion. (Just to clarify, I do not support this group in any way and feel they are a great detriment not only to society but to humanity itself)
Report as
You have reported this
NO! He is the worst president in history. He cares not about the American people as a whole. He caters to those who will give him a vote. He tells the uninformed voters what they want to hear than does something else. He's now spent more money than all presidents in history ,all together. He is a liar. When ever there's a problem he leaves and lets someone else take the fall.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Like Hillary you know how many times she's been used by the libs
Report as
You have reported this
"Spent more than all prez combined"
That little canard has been proven wrong many times
That little canard has been proven wrong many times
Report as
You have reported this
From politfact...
First, there are two common measures for debt. One, called public debt, tallies up the debt held by the public, while gross federal debt is a larger figure that combines publicly held debt plus debt held by the government itself, such as in the Social Security or Medicare trust funds. Both figures are considered legitimate, and since Palin didn?t specify which one she was referring to, we?ll run the numbers for both categories of debt.
Second, we?ll assume that all the debt accumulated under Obama should be attributed to him. In reality, this isn?t a logical allocation, since the first budget he wrote was actually for the 2010 fiscal year, and because he -- like all presidents -- inherited the fiscal legacy of his predecessor.
Still, calculating it this way is much simpler -- and as we?ll see, it won?t matter to the outcome.
We turned to the Treasury Department?s "Debt to the Penny" calculator, where we found that on Obama?s first day in office, Jan. 20, 2009, the public debt stood at $6.307 trillion; gross federal debt stood at $10.627 trillion. For the most recent date available -- May 27, 2011 -- these two debt figures stood at $9.718 trillion and $14.345 trillion, respectively.
That means that under Obama, the public debt rose by $3.411 trillion and the gross federal debt rose by $3.718 trillion. That?s a huge amount of money -- but it?s far less than what was accumulated by Obama?s 43 predecessors.
Because debt is cumulative (minus any intervening surpluses) the debt level for the previous 43 presidents is equal to the amount of debt on the day Obama was inaugurated. So even by the standards we used -- which aren?t especially favorable to Obama -- the debt he accumulated amounts to either 54 percent of his predecessors? combined debt (using the public debt figure) or 35 percent (using gross federal debt).
Neither of these figures is "more ? than all those other presidents combined," as Palin had said.
First, there are two common measures for debt. One, called public debt, tallies up the debt held by the public, while gross federal debt is a larger figure that combines publicly held debt plus debt held by the government itself, such as in the Social Security or Medicare trust funds. Both figures are considered legitimate, and since Palin didn?t specify which one she was referring to, we?ll run the numbers for both categories of debt.
Second, we?ll assume that all the debt accumulated under Obama should be attributed to him. In reality, this isn?t a logical allocation, since the first budget he wrote was actually for the 2010 fiscal year, and because he -- like all presidents -- inherited the fiscal legacy of his predecessor.
Still, calculating it this way is much simpler -- and as we?ll see, it won?t matter to the outcome.
We turned to the Treasury Department?s "Debt to the Penny" calculator, where we found that on Obama?s first day in office, Jan. 20, 2009, the public debt stood at $6.307 trillion; gross federal debt stood at $10.627 trillion. For the most recent date available -- May 27, 2011 -- these two debt figures stood at $9.718 trillion and $14.345 trillion, respectively.
That means that under Obama, the public debt rose by $3.411 trillion and the gross federal debt rose by $3.718 trillion. That?s a huge amount of money -- but it?s far less than what was accumulated by Obama?s 43 predecessors.
Because debt is cumulative (minus any intervening surpluses) the debt level for the previous 43 presidents is equal to the amount of debt on the day Obama was inaugurated. So even by the standards we used -- which aren?t especially favorable to Obama -- the debt he accumulated amounts to either 54 percent of his predecessors? combined debt (using the public debt figure) or 35 percent (using gross federal debt).
Neither of these figures is "more ? than all those other presidents combined," as Palin had said.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
But its all debt even if you break it up into bite size pieces
Report as
You have reported this
Hello??? Anyone listening???
This was posted to debunk "Obama has more debt than all others combined" NOT to say there is no debt
This was posted to debunk "Obama has more debt than all others combined" NOT to say there is no debt
Report as
You have reported this
aikenback52:
2 months ago
via iPhone
Bud, it's all baloney. Anyone that stands up for Hitler is sick indeed
Report as
You have reported this
Exactly who is standing up for hitler?
A statement was made and I posted the facts.
You need to read more and assume less
A statement was made and I posted the facts.
You need to read more and assume less
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
Not at all. It saddens me that he was elected
He is teaching America that they dont have to earn their living. He is telling us that it will al be okay as long as you're not rich. He is arrogant and has done nothing to help this country that needs to be helped
Report as
You have reported this
How is he teaching this?
In the midst of the worst economic crisis since the 20's, entitlements made up a whole 12% of the budget.
Whoopee.
In the midst of the worst economic crisis since the 20's, entitlements made up a whole 12% of the budget.
Whoopee.
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
every single handout, every single safety net, tells you that if something happens you'll be covered and provided for. Not all of these are bad, but we can certainly do without a lot of them
Report as
You have reported this
Which ones would you get rid of? And why blame Obama for programs that predate him?
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
If the next president is a republican then will it still be bushes fault?
Report as
You have reported this
Cal, quite correct. It also seems to determine which laws they want. It's always based on "what's in it for me"
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
Cal you should not polute the good name of Texas with California
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
We escaped California in the knick of time
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
You are probly one of those crazy Californians
Report as
You have reported this
CalTex:
2 months ago
Guilty as charged. I am an escapee of Texas regression-ism. But I still have faith that the progressive enclave in the middle of the state, lovingly referred to as "the People's Republic of Austin", will eventually work their progressive ways into the majority's ideology. I do love that town.
Report as
You have reported this
budthebearded:
2 months ago
But why do people that are libs live in Texas rather than going to there paradise called California?
Report as
You have reported this
vLegolasv:
2 months ago
why should someone live somewhere else because of beliefs? I am puzzled
Report as
You have reported this
shinypate1:
2 months ago
via iPhone
He's a nice guy and has a lovely family. He's also an ideologue so since his ideology and mine are at 90 degrees to each other, we won't agree on much while I respect and admire his commitment to his agenda. He is a remarkably talented campaigner but poor at actually governing. I admire his tenacity and his chutzpah.
Report as
You have reported this
mickey.cat:
2 months ago
via iPhone
Obama rules!!!
Report as
You have reported this
L0stCh1ld:
2 months ago
Yes. He rules at driving us into the ground.
Report as
You have reported this
MuseUprising:
2 months ago
via Android
look around what do you think?
Report as
You have reported this
L0stCh1ld:
2 months ago
No
Report as
You have reported this
L0stCh1ld:
2 months ago
one of us is a patriot, and the other has a polar bear as their profile picture.
Report as
You have reported this
aikenback52:
2 months ago
via iPhone
I do not like him at all. There's not enough adequate adjectives to describe how I feel about him.
Report as
You have reported this
hatman74201:
2 months ago
He is a good person, and I respect him because he is our leader, however, I don't like his vision for America and his policies.
Report as
You have reported this
caren4:
2 months ago
No. He is arrogant, rude, deceptive and not trustworthy. He released 2500 illegal immigrants; why not whites or african-americans? Hm...
Report as
You have reported this
tardismaster:
2 months ago
yes i am very democratic but with all presidents most people dont fully agree or disagree. He has great ideas one of his newer ones is a national wifi network which would cut 10 billion dollars from the debt.
Report as
You have reported this
oklahomakid:
2 months ago
He is running this country into the ground. I am concerned about my freedoms being taken away. He is on a mission to totally take away our freedoms of speech, bare arms, and worship.
Report as
You have reported this
overtaker:
2 months ago
lol, wow, you can't see that he's destroying the country? wow, lol 8)
If he really cared about this country, he would do something to fix it. But he hasn't. We're still in debt and he keeps driving us even deeper. Where are all the jobs he promised?
amuse me
If he really cared about this country, he would do something to fix it. But he hasn't. We're still in debt and he keeps driving us even deeper. Where are all the jobs he promised?
amuse me
Report as
You have reported this