He Makes a Good Point....

I don't really care much about the Sharpton bit but the second part is pretty interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/01/20/pkg-orig-wilmore-goes-after-sharpton-in-new-show-colbert.cnn/video/playlists/late-night-laughs/

Dr. Jones wrote:I don't really care much about the Sharpton bit but the second part is pretty interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/01/20/pkg-orig-wilmore-goes-after-sharpton-in-new-show-colbert.cnn/video/playlists/late-night-laughs/

I refuse to watch anything to do with Al Sharpton as he is a racist.  I think anyone who gives any credence at all to Sharpton is a racist which is pretty much all liberals.  

Liberals = RACISTS

Jammer wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:I don't really care much about the Sharpton bit but the second part is pretty interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/01/20/pkg-orig-wilmore-goes-after-sharpton-in-new-show-colbert.cnn/video/playlists/late-night-laughs/

I refuse to watch anything to do with Al Sharpton as he is a racist.  I think anyone who gives any credence at all to Sharpton is a racist which is pretty much all liberals.  

Liberals = RACISTS

Nobody giving him any credibility, certainly not me.  But then you would know that if you watched the video...

Dr. Jones wrote:

Jammer wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:I don't really care much about the Sharpton bit but the second part is pretty interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/01/20/pkg-orig-wilmore-goes-after-sharpton-in-new-show-colbert.cnn/video/playlists/late-night-laughs/

I refuse to watch anything to do with Al Sharpton as he is a racist.  I think anyone who gives any credence at all to Sharpton is a racist which is pretty much all liberals.  

Liberals = RACISTS

Nobody giving him any credibility, certainly not me.  But then you would know that if you watched the video...

Sorry, liberals are RACISTS and I will not watch their chief racist.

Jammer wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Jammer wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:I don't really care much about the Sharpton bit but the second part is pretty interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/01/20/pkg-orig-wilmore-goes-after-sharpton-in-new-show-colbert.cnn/video/playlists/late-night-laughs/

I refuse to watch anything to do with Al Sharpton as he is a racist.  I think anyone who gives any credence at all to Sharpton is a racist which is pretty much all liberals.  

Liberals = RACISTS

Nobody giving him any credibility, certainly not me.  But then you would know that if you watched the video...

Sorry, liberals are RACISTS and I will not watch their chief racist.

You wouldn't have to watch Sharpton in the video, because he isn't actually in it, except for a mockup to be made fun of. But then you would know that if you watched the video...

Dr. Jones wrote:

Jammer wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Jammer wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:I don't really care much about the Sharpton bit but the second part is pretty interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/01/20/pkg-orig-wilmore-goes-after-sharpton-in-new-show-colbert.cnn/video/playlists/late-night-laughs/

I refuse to watch anything to do with Al Sharpton as he is a racist.  I think anyone who gives any credence at all to Sharpton is a racist which is pretty much all liberals.  

Liberals = RACISTS

Nobody giving him any credibility, certainly not me.  But then you would know that if you watched the video...

Sorry, liberals are RACISTS and I will not watch their chief racist.

You wouldn't have to watch Sharpton in the video, because he isn't actually in it, except for a mockup to be made fun of.  But then you would know that if you watched the video...

Unlike you, I don't associate with RACISTS.

I never cease to be amazed at the hipocricy of the libs when it come to their racism and the mistreatment of women and gays. They use them as tools for the advancement of their agenda and keeping their minions in office. They champion no one and exploit anyone who will allow it, many are simply accepting assistance of some kind and feel obligated to keep the libs lackey in office to keep getting their freebies

Dr. Evil wrote:

Gov "Moonbeam" Brown uses a cash base accounting method, a method that for-profit based businesses can't use, to "balance" California's budget. For example Brown has kicked more than $12 billion in retiree health-care costs down the road giving the public the illusion of a budget surplus. Eventually those liabilities will need to be paid and the California budget process will implode. Of course mental midget Bill Maher doesn't understand any of this ... and neither do you Fcukstik.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-04-13/how-jerry-brown-hoodwinks-reporters

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Evil wrote:

Gov "Moonbeam" Brown uses a cash bash accounting method, a method that for-profit based businesses can't use, to "balance" California's budget. For example Brown has kicked more than $12 billion in retiree health-care costs down the road giving the public the illusion of a budget surplus. Eventually those liabilities will need to be paid and the California budget process will implode. Of course mental midget Bill Maher doesn't understand any of this ... and neither do you Fcukstik.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-04-13/how-jerry-brown-hoodwinks-reporters

Those grapes sure are getting sour. This is the same BS tactic that made the USPS seem insolvent a few years back. Under Bush, congress passed a law that required the USPS to prefund their pension plans. This unnecessary burden almost "broke" the USPS. Just a silly tool used to make pensions seem impossible, and a rock star economy seem like an old Mearl Haggard song. Nothing to see here.

I wish that more liberals would frequent this site, but for those who may be out there lurkung:



Start listening very closely at 2:15.

Dr. Evil wrote:I wish that more liberals would frequent this site, but for those who may be out there lurkung:



Start listening very closely at 2:15.

What are these "sensible" gun laws Maher speaks of?

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Evil wrote:I wish that more liberals would frequent this site, but for those who may be out there lurkung:



Start listening very closely at 2:15.

What are these "sensible" gun laws Maher speaks of?

Not that I agree 100%, or that it encompasses everybody, but this makes a nice conversation piece...

https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/takingnote/2015/10/08/republicans-didnt-always-march-to-the-national-rifle-associations-drum/?referer=

Dr. Evil wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Evil wrote:I wish that more liberals would frequent this site, but for those who may be out there lurkung:



Start listening very closely at 2:15.

What are these "sensible" gun laws Maher speaks of?

Not that I agree 100%, or that it encompasses everybody, but this makes a nice conversation piece...

https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/takingnote/2015/10/08/republicans-didnt-always-march-to-the-national-rifle-associations-drum/?referer=

Paywall.

Taking Note

When Ronald Reagan Embraced Gun Control
44

Ronald Reagan with James Brady.
WALT ZEBOWSKI / ASSOCIATED PRESS
By FRANCIS X. CLINES
OCTOBER 8, 2015
The public health challenge posed by the tens of thousands of Americans shot to death each year wasn’t always the subject of such a toxic partisan divide. There used to be a bit of flexibility between the parties before the gun lobby so relentlessly targeted politicians who dared to consider compromise.

President Ronald Reagan, a Republican and proud member of the National Rifle Association, was celebrated by the gun lobby for steadfastly maintaining his opposition to handgun control even after he was critically wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt that left a bullet “an inch from my heart,” as he noted. After recovery, President Reagan went further and called for the abolition of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the enforcer of federal gun safety laws.

But once retired from politics, Mr. Reagan, unlike Republican party leaders these days, reconsidered the issue and eventually showed a willingness to embrace reasonable bipartisan proposals to protect the public from gun abusers.

Two years after he left office, Mr. Reagan surprised the nation by endorsing the proposed Brady Law that established federal background checks of firearm buyers for criminal records and histories of mental disturbance. The former president noted that the law was inspired by the case of Jim Brady, his devoted press secretary who was partially paralyzed by a gunshot wound to the head during the assassination attempt. “This nightmare might never have happened” if the Brady Law had been in effect, Mr. Reagan emphasized in an op-ed in The New York Times. His support was significant in the eventual passage of the law in 1993.

No less important was Mr. Reagan’s endorsement in 1994 of the assault weapons ban that was a major attempt to deal with efforts by domestic arms makers to sell adapted weapons of war to civilian buyers in the name of sportsmanship. “We can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals,” Mr. Reagan declared in a joint letter to Congress with former presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford. The measure banning a wide range of military style guns and large-capacity ammunition clips narrowly passed, with supporters citing the letter. One lawmaker who dropped his opposition, Representative Michael Andrews, a Democrat and hunter from Texas, declared, “Anyone that needs a 20-round clip of high-velocity ammunition to fell a duck or deer needs to look into taking up golf.”

Unfortunately, his warning against loosing war-zone firepower on the home front is relevant once more. For the ban was limited to 10 years in a final compromise and expired in 2004 despite promises from Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama to seek reenactment. The marketplace in assault weapons has since blossomed grimly, feeding the incidents of high-speed, multiple-victim shootings — the latest last week at an Oregon community college — that increasingly bedevil the nation.

Dr. Evil wrote:Taking Note

When Ronald Reagan Embraced Gun Control
44

Ronald Reagan with James Brady.
WALT ZEBOWSKI / ASSOCIATED PRESS
By FRANCIS X. CLINES
OCTOBER 8, 2015
The public health challenge posed by the tens of thousands of Americans shot to death each year wasn’t always the subject of such a toxic partisan divide. There used to be a bit of flexibility between the parties before the gun lobby so relentlessly targeted politicians who dared to consider compromise.

President Ronald Reagan, a Republican and proud member of the National Rifle Association, was celebrated by the gun lobby for steadfastly maintaining his opposition to handgun control even after he was critically wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt that left a bullet “an inch from my heart,” as he noted. After recovery, President Reagan went further and called for the abolition of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the enforcer of federal gun safety laws.

But once retired from politics, Mr. Reagan, unlike Republican party leaders these days, reconsidered the issue and eventually showed a willingness to embrace reasonable bipartisan proposals to protect the public from gun abusers.

Two years after he left office, Mr. Reagan surprised the nation by endorsing the proposed Brady Law that established federal background checks of firearm buyers for criminal records and histories of mental disturbance. The former president noted that the law was inspired by the case of Jim Brady, his devoted press secretary who was partially paralyzed by a gunshot wound to the head during the assassination attempt. “This nightmare might never have happened” if the Brady Law had been in effect, Mr. Reagan emphasized in an op-ed in The New York Times. His support was significant in the eventual passage of the law in 1993.

No less important was Mr. Reagan’s endorsement in 1994 of the assault weapons ban that was a major attempt to deal with efforts by domestic arms makers to sell adapted weapons of  war to civilian buyers in the name of sportsmanship.  “We can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals,” Mr. Reagan declared in a joint letter to Congress with former presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford. The measure banning a wide range of military style guns and large-capacity ammunition clips narrowly passed, with supporters citing the letter. One lawmaker who dropped his opposition, Representative Michael Andrews, a Democrat and hunter from Texas, declared, “Anyone that needs a 20-round clip of high-velocity ammunition to fell a duck or deer needs to look into taking up golf.”

Unfortunately, his warning against loosing war-zone firepower on the home front is relevant once more. For the ban was limited to 10 years in a final compromise and expired in 2004 despite promises from Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama to seek reenactment. The marketplace in assault weapons has since blossomed grimly, feeding the incidents of high-speed, multiple-victim  shootings — the latest last week at an Oregon community college — that increasingly bedevil the nation.

Hmmmmm. Reagan agreed with the assault weapons ban? Two years after he was out of office? Why are the libs touting that now? Didn't they claim he was incompatant while still in office because of Alzhiemers? Idiots never cease to amaze us.

Clicker wrote:

Dr. Evil wrote:Taking Note

When Ronald Reagan Embraced Gun Control
44

Ronald Reagan with James Brady.
WALT ZEBOWSKI / ASSOCIATED PRESS
By FRANCIS X. CLINES
OCTOBER 8, 2015
The public health challenge posed by the tens of thousands of Americans shot to death each year wasn’t always the subject of such a toxic partisan divide. There used to be a bit of flexibility between the parties before the gun lobby so relentlessly targeted politicians who dared to consider compromise.

President Ronald Reagan, a Republican and proud member of the National Rifle Association, was celebrated by the gun lobby for steadfastly maintaining his opposition to handgun control even after he was critically wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt that left a bullet “an inch from my heart,” as he noted. After recovery, President Reagan went further and called for the abolition of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the enforcer of federal gun safety laws.

But once retired from politics, Mr. Reagan, unlike Republican party leaders these days, reconsidered the issue and eventually showed a willingness to embrace reasonable bipartisan proposals to protect the public from gun abusers.

Two years after he left office, Mr. Reagan surprised the nation by endorsing the proposed Brady Law that established federal background checks of firearm buyers for criminal records and histories of mental disturbance. The former president noted that the law was inspired by the case of Jim Brady, his devoted press secretary who was partially paralyzed by a gunshot wound to the head during the assassination attempt. “This nightmare might never have happened” if the Brady Law had been in effect, Mr. Reagan emphasized in an op-ed in The New York Times. His support was significant in the eventual passage of the law in 1993.

No less important was Mr. Reagan’s endorsement in 1994 of the assault weapons ban that was a major attempt to deal with efforts by domestic arms makers to sell adapted weapons of  war to civilian buyers in the name of sportsmanship.  “We can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals,” Mr. Reagan declared in a joint letter to Congress with former presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford. The measure banning a wide range of military style guns and large-capacity ammunition clips narrowly passed, with supporters citing the letter. One lawmaker who dropped his opposition, Representative Michael Andrews, a Democrat and hunter from Texas, declared, “Anyone that needs a 20-round clip of high-velocity ammunition to fell a duck or deer needs to look into taking up golf.”

Unfortunately, his warning against loosing war-zone firepower on the home front is relevant once more. For the ban was limited to 10 years in a final compromise and expired in 2004 despite promises from Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama to seek reenactment. The marketplace in assault weapons has since blossomed grimly, feeding the incidents of high-speed, multiple-victim  shootings — the latest last week at an Oregon community college — that increasingly bedevil the nation.

Hmmmmm. Reagan agreed with the assault weapons ban? Two years after he was out of office? Why are the libs touting that now? Didn't they claim he was incompatant while still in office because of Alzhiemers? Idiots never cease to amaze us.

Their stupidity has no bounds. It's a terrible mental disease you know which there is no known cure.