Gun-Nut Outside Obama Townhall Linked to GOP 'Stop ObamaCare' Effort

[HAL 9000 96]

perhaps you can show me where i said you did use the word violent. no, you can't.....because i never did say it. instead, you're going along with the change of words that steven used and then trying to make something out of it. nor am i the one trying to force anything terror related into this topic - you can blame that on steven for bringing up the subject. i'm just answering his questions.

but again, you'll find fault with me for that somehow.

No Charles, this is called using parallel logic. If only you would realize what a potential security threat may arise from... then you wouldn't be meandering the obvious logic here.

parallel logic must be hal machine language for put words in other's posts........

best non answer of the day

and yes, you did say individual rights are suspended:

At a place where the President of the United States will be present. Yeah. I'm not buying the innocent defender of Freedom bit. It may be his right to carry, but it may also be someone else's right to stay alive should the guy have turned out to be another lunatic.

Hint: ask an appropriate question, get an appropriate answer.

Hmmm... so... do you personally believe someone with a 'spill blood' poster should be allowed, armed, to come into proximity with the sitting US President?

Or are you just being obtuse in your lack of logic just to disagree?

Just curious.

so much for the 1st and 2nd amendment in your eyes.

Yep... and someone was whining about non-answers.

Since you misquoted something I wrote, perhaps you can try a second time and find something I wrote in this thread that says something about how he was within his rights.

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

perhaps you can show me where i said you did use the word violent. no, you can't.....because i never did say it. instead, you're going along with the change of words that steven used and then trying to make something out of it. nor am i the one trying to force anything terror related into this topic - you can blame that on steven for bringing up the subject. i'm just answering his questions.

but again, you'll find fault with me for that somehow.

No Charles, this is called using parallel logic. If only you would realize what a potential security threat may arise from... then you wouldn't be meandering the obvious logic here.

parallel logic must be hal machine language for put words in other's posts........

best non answer of the day

and yes, you did say individual rights are suspended:

At a place where the President of the United States will be present. Yeah. I'm not buying the innocent defender of Freedom bit. It may be his right to carry, but it may also be someone else's right to stay alive should the guy have turned out to be another lunatic.

Hint: ask an appropriate question, get an appropriate answer.

Hmmm... so... do you personally believe someone with a 'spill blood' poster should be allowed, armed, to come into proximity with the sitting US President?

Or are you just being obtuse in your lack of logic just to disagree?

Just curious.

so much for the 1st and 2nd amendment in your eyes.

Yep... and someone was whining about non-answers.

Since you misquoted something I wrote, perhaps you can try a second time and find something I wrote in this thread that says something about how he was within his rights.

i think you've said enough already, given your posted dislike of the 1st and 2nd amendment.

[HAL 9000 96]

perhaps you can show me where i said you did use the word violent. no, you can't.....because i never did say it. instead, you're going along with the change of words that steven used and then trying to make something out of it. nor am i the one trying to force anything terror related into this topic - you can blame that on steven for bringing up the subject. i'm just answering his questions.

but again, you'll find fault with me for that somehow.

No Charles, this is called using parallel logic. If only you would realize what a potential security threat may arise from... then you wouldn't be meandering the obvious logic here.

parallel logic must be hal machine language for put words in other's posts........

best non answer of the day

and yes, you did say individual rights are suspended:

At a place where the President of the United States will be present. Yeah. I'm not buying the innocent defender of Freedom bit. It may be his right to carry, but it may also be someone else's right to stay alive should the guy have turned out to be another lunatic.

Hint: ask an appropriate question, get an appropriate answer.

Hmmm... so... do you personally believe someone with a 'spill blood' poster should be allowed, armed, to come into proximity with the sitting US President?

Or are you just being obtuse in your lack of logic just to disagree?

Just curious.

so much for the 1st and 2nd amendment in your eyes.

Yep... and someone was whining about non-answers.

Since you misquoted something I wrote, perhaps you can try a second time and find something I wrote in this thread that says something about how he was within his rights.

i think you've said enough already, given your posted dislike of the 1st and 2nd amendment.

Where did I say that?

Answer:

Nowhere.

Kind of like with all the lies being propagated about this health care reform by people that resort to Thomas Jefferson slogans that would likely make the Founder himself cringe at how inappropriately his words have been twisted.

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

i think you've said enough already, given your posted dislike of the 1st and 2nd amendment.

Where did I say that?

Answer:

Nowhere.

Kind of like with all the lies being propagated about this health care reform by people that resort to Thomas Jefferson slogans that would likely make the Founder himself cringe at how inappropriately his words have been twisted.

oh really? how soon you forget!

Hmmm... so... do you personally believe someone with a 'spill blood' poster should be allowed, armed, to come into proximity with the sitting US President?

No Charles, this is called using parallel logic. If only you would realize what a potential security threat may arise from... then you wouldn't be meandering the obvious logic here.

now what is your next question that you have that i need to remind you of your previous statements?

Edited August 13, 2009 by charles!

[HAL 9000 96]

i think you've said enough already, given your posted dislike of the 1st and 2nd amendment.

Where did I say that?

Answer:

Nowhere.

Kind of like with all the lies being propagated about this health care reform by people that resort to Thomas Jefferson slogans that would likely make the Founder himself cringe at how inappropriately his words have been twisted.

oh really? how soon you forget!

Hmmm... so... do you personally believe someone with a 'spill blood' poster should be allowed, armed, to come into proximity with the sitting US President?

No Charles, this is called using parallel logic. If only you would realize what a potential security threat may arise from... then you wouldn't be meandering the obvious logic here.

now what is your next question that you have that i need to remind you of your previous statements?

Umm... what?

(You could just answer the very easy question ya know. I already agree that that guy was within his rights, so get over it.)

[HAL 9000 96]

But just in case the Jefferson quote continues to be taken out of context by those ironically supporting tyrannical health care practices by very greedy companies:

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.

The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is

wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts

they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,

it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...

And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not

warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of

resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as

to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost

in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from

time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

It is its natural manure."

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

i think you've said enough already, given your posted dislike of the 1st and 2nd amendment.

Where did I say that?

Answer:

Nowhere.

Kind of like with all the lies being propagated about this health care reform by people that resort to Thomas Jefferson slogans that would likely make the Founder himself cringe at how inappropriately his words have been twisted.

oh really? how soon you forget!

Hmmm... so... do you personally believe someone with a 'spill blood' poster should be allowed, armed, to come into proximity with the sitting US President?

No Charles, this is called using parallel logic. If only you would realize what a potential security threat may arise from... then you wouldn't be meandering the obvious logic here.

now what is your next question that you have that i need to remind you of your previous statements?

Umm... what?

(You could just answer the very easy question ya know. I already agree that that guy was within his rights, so get over it.)

i'm well aware that he was within his rights. it's been you and steven making all kinds of hypothetical what ifs - to include racial profiling.

[HAL 9000 96]

i think you've said enough already, given your posted dislike of the 1st and 2nd amendment.

Where did I say that?

Answer:

Nowhere.

Kind of like with all the lies being propagated about this health care reform by people that resort to Thomas Jefferson slogans that would likely make the Founder himself cringe at how inappropriately his words have been twisted.

oh really? how soon you forget!

Hmmm... so... do you personally believe someone with a 'spill blood' poster should be allowed, armed, to come into proximity with the sitting US President?

No Charles, this is called using parallel logic. If only you would realize what a potential security threat may arise from... then you wouldn't be meandering the obvious logic here.

now what is your next question that you have that i need to remind you of your previous statements?

Umm... what?

(You could just answer the very easy question ya know. I already agree that that guy was within his rights, so get over it.)

i'm well aware that he was within his rights. it's been you and steven making all kinds of hypothetical what ifs - to include racial profiling.

Take that up with Steven. Not me.

I asked the question that would have settled the matter- and Danno answered it succinctly.

Ironically there are 'what if's and other kind of though experiments here in OT on a daily basis. I don't see you in a wad over them always and I don't expect you to have an even hand anyway. And guess what? I could care less. You're just making a big deal over something that is based on other people's irrational drive to protest things that are not based on reality. Period.

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

i think you've said enough already, given your posted dislike of the 1st and 2nd amendment.

Where did I say that?

Answer:

Nowhere.

Kind of like with all the lies being propagated about this health care reform by people that resort to Thomas Jefferson slogans that would likely make the Founder himself cringe at how inappropriately his words have been twisted.

oh really? how soon you forget!

Hmmm... so... do you personally believe someone with a 'spill blood' poster should be allowed, armed, to come into proximity with the sitting US President?

No Charles, this is called using parallel logic. If only you would realize what a potential security threat may arise from... then you wouldn't be meandering the obvious logic here.

now what is your next question that you have that i need to remind you of your previous statements?

Umm... what?

(You could just answer the very easy question ya know. I already agree that that guy was within his rights, so get over it.)

i'm well aware that he was within his rights. it's been you and steven making all kinds of hypothetical what ifs - to include racial profiling.

Take that up with Steven. Not me.

I asked the question that would have settled the matter- and Danno answered it succinctly.

Ironically there are 'what if's and other kind of though experiments here in OT on a daily basis. I don't see you in a wad over them always and I don't expect you to have an even hand anyway. And guess what? I could care less. You're just making a big deal over something that is based on other people's irrational drive to protest things that are not based on reality. Period.

i'm not the one that is making it a big deal - i'm not the op

[HAL 9000 96]

True.

My bad.