DanG

Members
  • Content

    6,580
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by DanG

  1. I wanted examples of violence at McCain or Romney rallies, not peaceful protests. Apparently there weren't any. So violence at campaign rallies is a Trump thing. But, according to you, Trump has nothing to do with it. Yeah, right. - Dan G
  2. You (intentionally) missed my point. Where are the stories of "riots" at McCain or Romney rallies? - Dan G
  3. You have a very expansive definition of rioting. So, should any protester at a political rally be treated like a rioter, regardless of what that protester does? I though you were all about treating people as individuals, and that actions matter. Since it only happens at Trump rallies, I'd say that is untrue. If, as you say, any GOP front runner would be treated the same way, I'm sure you can point out numerous stories of violence at McCain or Romney rallies from 8 and 4 years ago. I'll wait. - Dan G
  4. Ooh, they are rioters now. Holding up a sign is rioting. Nice. You never answered my question before about the other sucker punch, so I'll ask again. Was the guy who sucker punched the "rioter" correct to do so this time? - Dan G
  5. My research indicates otherwise. If it was so widely reported, I'm sure you can provide a link. Ah, but we can take your word for it because you heard it from a guy who heard it from a guy who was there. That's under investigation by the FBI. So far they haven't found anything illegal that we know of. If she was found to have committed a crime, she should be prosecuted just like anyone else. If she actually did the despicable things, I might despise her for them. As it is, I don't like her for the things she's actually done, but I try not to let my opinion be influenced by bullshit. - Dan G
  6. If those things had actually happened we would have heard about them somewhere other than a skydiving forum. - Dan G
  7. If you really cared about what you say, you'd do your little homework assignment yourself. - Dan G
  8. No, it is supposed to point out that many of your attitudes are antithetical to Christian principles. - Dan G
  9. What's telling is that you think a Muslim family moving into your neighborhood is a "fight". People like you are the reason Christianity is dying out. - Dan G
  10. So the problem isn't that we're in the last year of Obama's presidency? The problem is that we're in the last half of the current Congress? You think Congress should only do its job for a year after elections, and then wait a year until the next Congress gets elected? - Dan G
  11. No, no, no. All the conservatives have been railing for seven years that Obama is bad for the economy because of the uncertainty he generates. Businesses never know what their taxes or regulations will look like next month. But uncertainty around Trump is not a problem for the economy because he's going to make great deals. The best deals. - Dan G
  12. So then, all existing religions are out. - Dan G
  13. It is partially about faith, but mostly about political power. Just like any political organization that claims a faith basis. - Dan G
  14. So people shouldn't be allowed to support any religions at all, huh? - Dan G
  15. What bet did you offer? - Dan G
  16. I guess I don't find that very offensive. I don't even know is Nigg is black. It is a stupid joke, but I don't consider it a particularly offensive one. - Dan G
  17. I think it should be 'your', not 'you', but I suspect I'll be corrected in short order. - Dan G
  18. Regardless of the politics, can we at least agree that Merrick Garland is an awesome name? - Dan G
  19. The guy who beat up Jared was named Nigg, for anyone who didn't read the whole article. - Dan G
  20. As an aside, Obama has submitted budget proposals. The fact that the House directs them straight to the trash doesn't mean they weren't submitted. - Dan G
  21. Sounds like more crap from the LIE-beral LAME-stream media to me! - Dan G
  22. I pointed it out to Marc a few times. It won't stick. - Dan G
  23. That has got the be the most Tarzan sentence you've ever written. - Dan G
  24. There is no precedent for not considering Supreme Court nominees for a whole year. The GOP mouthpieces imply that there is, but there isn't. This is obstructionism, plain and simple. I would say the same thing if a Rep were in office. - Dan G