Republicans & Other Rightist Filth Are Mindless, Brain Dead Twats Who Fear Edcuation More Than They Fear Muslims and Gays - Donald Trump

[Robert H]

http://reverbpress.com/politics/proof-republicans-are-stupid/


5 Scientific Studies That Prove Republicans Are Plain Stupid


There are all types of statistics that could lead one to believe that liberals
are smarter than conservatives. These include the fact that “Blue States” have
higher graduation rates than “Red States” and the fact that most people who
seek higher education have liberal ideologies.

But in reality, these numbers provide circumstantial proof at best. We need
something more. Something that fully delves into the minds of conservatives
and liberals to see just what’s going on. Though the right-wingers out there
might not want you to know it, studies that do just that already exist.
Conservatism, Racism and Low IQ

“Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes” is a study performed by researchers at Brock
University, and it caused quite the commotion when its results were released.
The researchers found that having lower general intelligence in childhood
could predict conservative and racist ideas as an adult. That’s right: having
a low IQ score makes you more likely to vote conservative… and be a racist.

Now this isn’t to say that all Republicans are stupid. On the contrary: I
fully believe that rich Republicans are some of the smartest people in the
world. They literally trick poor Republicans into thinking it’s the big bad
government’s fault that they’re poor, and in doing so, they make these people
vote against their own best interests.

Even though being conservative doesn’t make you stupid, there’s no doubt that
being stupid makes you more likely to be conservative.
Fox News Makes You Less Informed

It’s not like we really needed a study to tell us this, but the survey “What
You Know Depends on What You Watch,” undertaken by Fairleigh Dickinson
University, found that watching Fox News results in knowing less about the
world. Researchers asked 1,185 respondents which news shows they consumed and
then asked general questions about newsworthy events.

Fox News less informed

Five questions were asked, and those who watch Fox News exclusively got 1.04
correct, on average. Individuals watching MSNBC, on the other hand, got 1.26.
NPR listeners? They got an impressive 1.51. The Daily Show? Surely a “fake
news” program couldn’t make you more informed than “the most watched cable
news channel in America.”

Yep, as it turns out, The Daily Show viewers scored 1.42 on average. The best
thing about this study, though? It asked questions to people who watch no news
at all, and those individuals scored 1.22 on average. That’s right: Fox News
makes you less informed than watching no news at all.
Let that sink in.
Low Effort Thought Leads to Conservatism

We live in a complex world, and understanding this world requires complex
thought. It would be easy to look at conservatives who think that all Muslims
are terrorists or all Mexicans should “go home” and say that they’re engaged
in simplistic thought. Instead of making that assumption ourselves, though,
let’s look towards science.

Researchers over at the University of Arkansas released their study [link
opens PDF] “Low-Effort Thought Promotes Political Conservatism,” and things
started to make sense. They performed four different studies, all of which
reduced subjects’ ability to use “effortful, deliberate thought,” and they
found that situations causing low-effort thought resulted in more conservative
beliefs.

Heck, one of the studies found that, as an individual becomes more intoxicated
on alcohol, their conservative beliefs increase. Which makes perfect sense,
because if you ever saw me vote for Sarah Palin, you can rest assured that I’m
drunk.

Scratch that. It’s a catch-22. The amount of alcohol it would require for me
to vote for Palin would literally kill me.

Literally.
Homophobia Linked to Low Abstract Reasoning Skills

Let’s get this out of the way first: Yes, there are “liberals” out there who
are homophobic. That being said, homophobia is a largely conservative disease.
It’s conservatives who usually hold homophobic attitudes and fight against
marriage equality. With that being said, let’s look at abstract reasoning
skills.

Conservatives are dumb.

A researcher out of Kent State University undertook a study he would
eventually title “Abstract Reasoning as a Predictor of Attitudes Toward Gay
Men.” What he found was no big surprise. Those who have lower abstract
reasoning skills experience higher levels of anti-gay prejudice.

When they looked at other predictors of anti-gay prejudice, they found that
right-wing authoritarian ideas were most strongly related to this prejudice.
So lacking abstract reasoning and being a right-wing nut job increases your
prejudice against gays. Like we couldn’t have figured that out on our own.
It’s All In The Brain, Baby

Some of the aforementioned studies show us that being dumb makes you more
likely to be conservative, and unfortunately, watching conservative channels
like Fox News can make you even more dumb. Of course, conservatives will
likely attack these studies and say that they’re biased.

Unfortunately for them, the study “Political Orientations Are Correlated with
Brain Structure in Young Adults” was released. The researchers in this study
performed MRI scans on participants. Just so you know, there’s no way to
insert liberal bias into an MRI scan.

What they found was that “conservative students had a larger amygdala than
liberals.” Conversely, the anterior cingulate cortex of liberal students had
more gray matter than their conservative counterparts. Here’s why that’s
important:

“The amygdala is… active during states of fear and anxiety. […] The
anterior cingulate cortex [is] a region of the brain that helps people cope
with complexity.”

And the best part? This is biological. There’s no arguing the point. Liberals’
brains are biologically more able to handle complex thought, and conservatives
base their beliefs on fear. This study isn’t hard to believe when one
considers the fear conservatives showcase for immigrants, Muslims, minorities
and any of the other million things they’re bigoted towards. Hence the success
of the 24-7 fear cycle of Fox News.

These are peer-reviewed studies, by scientists who cumulatively have more
degrees than I’ve got houses in my neighborhood. Conservatives can try to say
they’re biased all they want, but as we know from their beliefs on climate
change, they don’t subscribe much to the area of science.

Conservatives are dumb… it’s a scientific fact.

[james g. keegan jr.]

[followups vandalism by cocksucker repaired]

On 6/19/2016 8:57 PM, Robert H wrote:
> http://reverbpress.com/politics/proof-republicans-are-stupid/
>
>
> 5 Scientific Studies That Prove Republicans Are Plain Stupid
>
>
> There are all types of statistics that could lead one to believe that
> liberals are smarter than conservatives.

All of them are bogus - "social science" bullshit.

[FPP]

Pretty much.

However, if you take a glance at the Republican presumptive nominee,
anybody would have a hard time proving it.
--
"Sadly, the American Dream... is Dead." - Donald J. Trump
"America Has Never Stopped Being Great." - HRC

[Rudy Canoza]

On 6/20/2016 4:48 AM, FPP wrote:
> On 2016-06-20 06:08:33 +0000, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmaîl.com>
> said:
>
>> [followups vandalism by cocksucker repaired]
>>
>> On 6/19/2016 8:57 PM, Robert H wrote:
>>> http://reverbpress.com/politics/proof-republicans-are-stupid/
>>>
>>>
>>> 5 Scientific Studies That Prove Republicans Are Plain Stupid
>>>
>>>
>>> There are all types of statistics that could lead one to believe that
>>> liberals are smarter than conservatives.
>>
>> All of them are bogus - "social science" bullshit.
>
> Pretty much.
>
> However, if you take a glance at the Republican presumptive nominee,
> anybody would have a hard time proving it.

There is a whole spectrum of both liberals and conservatives. There are
very smart and very stupid people among both, with plenty in between. I
think one should not conclude anything about the average liberal or the
average conservative from what one sees in Usenet. Participants here
are decidedly *not* representative of any significant part of the
population.

I will say that at least looking at Usenet participants, the more
extreme one is either as a liberal or as a conservative, the more stupid
one is. I don't mean stupid as in not knowing anything or not being
able to learn new stuff with some mental application of oneself. What I
mean is extremists' values get in the way and color everything, and so a
lot of what they "know" simply isn't so.

I usually beat up on left-wing extremists more than right-wing ones, but
for today's exercise I'll target extreme conservatives. Most of them
don't know what "liberalism" was or is. It's just a swearword to them.
In particular, they have no idea that most of what they think of as
traditional American values *is* liberalism - at least 18th and 19th
century liberalism. In the same way that I like to rub leftists' noses
in the fact that the United States *is* a Christian nation, in the sense
of the origin of the dominant culture and sociology, I equally like to
rub conservatives' noses in the fact that we *are* a liberal western
democracy (democracy taken to mean a system in which people get to vote
in meaningful elections.) Specifically, the notion that the individual
person is competent to decide for himself what is in his interest and
has the right and the power to act on that and is responsible for his
own outcomes in life - the "rugged individualism" beloved by most
American conservatives - is *THE* fundamental bedrock idea of classical
liberalism. It's true that contemporary illiberal "liberals" -
so-called "progressives" - very much want to circumscribe the rights and
power of the individual in the name of so-called "collective" interests
(which are mythical), but despite themselves, there still is a lot of
the proggie agenda centered on the individual person.

[Tom Gardner]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:46:34 -0700, Rudy Canoza <c...@philhendrie.con>
wrote:

>On 6/20/2016 4:48 AM, FPP wrote:

>> On 2016-06-20 06:08:33 +0000, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmaīl.com>

Pfffffft! You think to much.

Tom Gardner

[Rudy Canoza]

On 6/20/2016 8:05 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:46:34 -0700, Rudy Canoza <c...@philhendrie.con>
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/20/2016 4:48 AM, FPP wrote:

>>> On 2016-06-20 06:08:33 +0000, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmaîl.com>

That's tommee at his most articulate and eloquent <chortle>


> You think to [sic] much.

You don't think at all. You are the exemplar of the unthinking
right-wing knuckle-dragger. You're a Trump supporter, of course.

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:46:34 -0700, Rudy Canoza <c...@philhendrie.con>
wrote:

>On 6/20/2016 4:48 AM, FPP wrote:

>> On 2016-06-20 06:08:33 +0000, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmaīl.com>

>> said:
>>
>>> [followups vandalism by cocksucker repaired]
>>>
>>> On 6/19/2016 8:57 PM, Robert H wrote:
>>>> http://reverbpress.com/politics/proof-republicans-are-stupid/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 5 Scientific Studies That Prove Republicans Are Plain Stupid
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are all types of statistics that could lead one to believe that
>>>> liberals are smarter than conservatives.
>>>
>>> All of them are bogus - "social science" bullshit.
>>
>> Pretty much.
>>
>> However, if you take a glance at the Republican presumptive nominee,
>> anybody would have a hard time proving it.
>
>There is a whole spectrum of both liberals and conservatives. There are
>very smart and very stupid people among both, with plenty in between. I
>think one should not conclude anything about the average liberal or the
>average conservative from what one sees in Usenet. Participants here
>are decidedly *not* representative of any significant part of the
>population.
>
>I will say that at least looking at Usenet participants, the more
>extreme one is either as a liberal or as a conservative, the more stupid
>one is. I don't mean stupid as in not knowing anything or not being
>able to learn new stuff with some mental application of oneself. What I
>mean is extremists' values get in the way and color everything, and so a
>lot of what they "know" simply isn't so.

If the weather was bad and I had nothing to do, I would have more
comments, but just looking at this one:

Ideologies have two inherent problems, but the people who adopt them
tend to be of the same type. Putting aside the problems of ideologies
themselves, the problem with ideologues is that they either have
little confidence in their own independent thinking (most of them) or
that they possess the type of anxious personality that requires
absolute systems of ideas, tied up with a bow and with built-in
defenses against distracting complications -- complications like
evidence and facts. <g> Many of the noisiest Usenet denizens have some
mixture of those two.

And what a great forum Usenet is for such people. They can cultivate
collections of copy-and-paste arguments that require enormous effort
to unravel; they can assemble tribes of supporters who bring their own
libraries of code and routines to add to the argument; and they can
resort to personal or tribal insults while hiding behind a veil of
anonymity.

All of which makes it nearly impossible to have a reasonable and
intelligent discussion such as the one you started here. It's become
the culture of interaction throughout the internet.

>
>I usually beat up on left-wing extremists more than right-wing ones, but
>for today's exercise I'll target extreme conservatives. Most of them
>don't know what "liberalism" was or is. It's just a swearword to them.
>In particular, they have no idea that most of what they think of as
>traditional American values *is* liberalism - at least 18th and 19th
>century liberalism. In the same way that I like to rub leftists' noses
>in the fact that the United States *is* a Christian nation, in the sense
>of the origin of the dominant culture and sociology, I equally like to
>rub conservatives' noses in the fact that we *are* a liberal western
>democracy (democracy taken to mean a system in which people get to vote
>in meaningful elections.) Specifically, the notion that the individual
>person is competent to decide for himself what is in his interest and
>has the right and the power to act on that and is responsible for his
>own outcomes in life - the "rugged individualism" beloved by most
>American conservatives - is *THE* fundamental bedrock idea of classical
>liberalism. It's true that contemporary illiberal "liberals" -
>so-called "progressives" - very much want to circumscribe the rights and
>power of the individual in the name of so-called "collective" interests
>(which are mythical), but despite themselves, there still is a lot of
>the proggie agenda centered on the individual person.

--
Ed Huntress

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 08:05:27 -0700, Tom Gardner <t...@marsattacks.net>
wrote:

Well at least he got most..most by some value.... of it right, and
didnt try forcing the tiny group of wild eyed religious fundies as the
"majority" of conservatives.

And yes..we are Classical Liberals. Very much true. However..the Left
has reversed the meanings about 60 yrs ago (at least here in the US)
so todays Conservative is yesterdays Classical Liberal. Which is a
very useful bit of information when reading and posting on political
subjects..as the average Leftwinger/New Liberal is as dumb as a bag of
hammers and it can be a handy bit of ammo to use.

Mark
(Grin)


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Vic Contino]

On 6/20/2016 10:52 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 08:05:27 -0700, Tom Gardner <t...@marsattacks.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:46:34 -0700, Rudy Canoza <c...@philhendrie.con>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/20/2016 4:48 AM, FPP wrote:

>>>> On 2016-06-20 06:08:33 +0000, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmaîl.com>

No, *you* aren't. No classical liberal advocates mass murder of people
who merely voice political beliefs he doesn't like.

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:44:56 -0700, Vic Contino
<kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:

>On 6/20/2016 10:52 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 08:05:27 -0700, Tom Gardner <t...@marsattacks.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:46:34 -0700, Rudy Canoza <c...@philhendrie.con>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/20/2016 4:48 AM, FPP wrote:

>>>>> On 2016-06-20 06:08:33 +0000, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmaīl.com>

Merely voice? Advocate mass murder on single individuals?

How can that be? You keep refuting yourself. Are you confused? Have a
stroke recently? (My codolences) Or are you thinking that the 2nd
American Civil War wont happen? Really?

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:52:01 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>..the Left
>has reversed the meanings about 60 yrs ago (at least here in the US)
>so todays Conservative is yesterdays Classical Liberal.

I believe a lot of things are reversed. For example people think I'm
broke but I actually have a lot of money. I can never put my hands on
it but fortunately my friend Tom says he knows where a half million of
it can be found. And once he tells me I'll get Hotel Econonline back
on the road and maybe even buy me some teeth.

> Which is a
>very useful bit of information when reading and posting on political
>subjects..as the average Leftwinger/New Liberal is as dumb as a bag of
>hammers and

Yes I'm a conservative so I'm much smarter than liberals. Maybe some
of them *appear* to have more success than I do but that's only
because of the reversal thing.

> it can be a handy bit of ammo to use.

I use that ammo to track them down and bury them with my backhoe. Or
have I actually buried myself? This reversal thing is hard to figure.
I'd know better if I wasn't so busy working. I know what you're
thinking but it only looks like I'm sitting here doing nothing again.

Gunner (posting from my new mobile office)

"A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the
polls."

[Vic Contino]

On 6/20/2016 3:39 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:44:56 -0700, Vic Contino
> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>
>> On 6/20/2016 10:52 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 08:05:27 -0700, Tom Gardner <t...@marsattacks.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:46:34 -0700, Rudy Canoza <c...@philhendrie.con>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/20/2016 4:48 AM, FPP wrote:

>>>>>> On 2016-06-20 06:08:33 +0000, "james g. keegan jr." <jgkeegan@gmaîl.com>

Yep. That's all people have done, and you've called for their murders
as part of a "cull."

Face it, boi: I run rings around you. All your pals are laughing at you.

[Gunner Asch]

Called for? Nope. Suggested, yes indeed.

Should I add your name to the List?

Id be more than happy to do just that.

[Vic Contino]

On 6/20/2016 7:25 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 18:00:10 -0700, Vic Contino
> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> No, *you* aren't. No classical liberal advocates mass murder of people
>>>> who merely voice political beliefs he doesn't like.
>>>
>>> Merely voice?
>>
>> Yep. That's all people have done, and you've called for their murders
>> as part of a "cull."
>
> Called for? Nope.

Yep.

>
> Should I add your name to the List?

No "list". No "cull". No "264mph motorcycle ride."

All bullshit. You agree.

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 23:47:08 -0700, Vic Contino

<kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:

>On 6/20/2016 7:25 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 18:00:10 -0700, Vic Contino
>> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, *you* aren't. No classical liberal advocates mass murder of people
>>>>> who merely voice political beliefs he doesn't like.
>>>>
>>>> Merely voice?
>>>
>>> Yep. That's all people have done, and you've called for their murders
>>> as part of a "cull."
>>
>> Called for? Nope.
>
>Yep.
>
>>
>> Should I add your name to the List?
>
>No "list". No "cull". No "264mph motorcycle ride."
>
>All bullshit. You agree.

Nope

[trotsky]

Gunther, what does "mass murder on single individuals" mean?

[Ubiquitous]

TROLL-O-METER

5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity

[Vic Contino]

On 6/21/2016 12:09 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 23:47:08 -0700, Vic Contino
> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>
>> On 6/20/2016 7:25 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 18:00:10 -0700, Vic Contino
>>> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, *you* aren't. No classical liberal advocates mass murder of people
>>>>>> who merely voice political beliefs he doesn't like.
>>>>>
>>>>> Merely voice?
>>>>
>>>> Yep. That's all people have done, and you've called for their murders
>>>> as part of a "cull."
>>>
>>> Called for? Nope.
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>>>
>>> Should I add your name to the List?
>>
>> No "list". No "cull". No "264mph motorcycle ride."
>>
>> All bullshit. You agree.
>
> Nope

Yep. It's all bullshit, every bit of it. You agree.

[Vic Contino]

He was just trying to be cute, but failed. gummer advocates a "cull",
and he says one is "imminent", but of course he's been saying that for
the last dozen years, at least. When someone makes him look stupid here
- for example, whoyakidding or me - gummer runs his toothless yap about
putting us on the "list" of people to be culled in a mass murder
episode. There is no "list."

[Gunner Asch]

That is indeed a very good question, isnt it?

[Vic Contino]

On 6/21/2016 12:38 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 04:10:46 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
>> On 6/20/16 5:39 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:44:56 -0700, Vic Contino
>>> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>>
>>>> No, *you* aren't. No classical liberal advocates mass murder of people
>>>> who merely voice political beliefs he doesn't like.
>>>
>>> Merely voice? Advocate mass murder on single individuals?
>>
>>
>> Gunther, what does "mass murder on single individuals" mean?
>
>
> That is indeed a very good question, isnt it?

"Advocate mass murder on single individuals" was your fuckwitted /non
sequitur/ comment, boi.

[Gunner Asch]

On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:45:30 -0700, Vic Contino

<kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:

>On 6/21/2016 12:38 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 04:10:46 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/20/16 5:39 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:44:56 -0700, Vic Contino
>>>> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> No, *you* aren't. No classical liberal advocates mass murder of people
>>>>> who merely voice political beliefs he doesn't like.
>>>>
>>>> Merely voice? Advocate mass murder on single individuals?
>>>
>>>
>>> Gunther, what does "mass murder on single individuals" mean?
>>
>>
>> That is indeed a very good question, isnt it?
>
>"Advocate mass murder on single individuals" was your fuckwitted /non
>sequitur/ comment, boi.

Caught you nicely didnt it? You are quite a fuckstick....no wonder you
hide behind other peoples names....use your own and people would pull
their kids in out of the yard when you passed by..and be pointing at
you in horror.

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:13:34 -0700, Gunner Asch
<gunne...@lightspeed.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:52:01 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>..the Left
>>has reversed the meanings about 60 yrs ago (at least here in the US)
>>so todays Conservative is yesterdays Classical Liberal.
>
>I believe a lot of things are reversed. For example people think I'm
>broke but I actually have a lot of money. I can never put my hands on
>it but fortunately my friend Tom says he knows where a half million of
>it can be found. And once he tells me I'll get Hotel Econonline back
>on the road and maybe even buy me some teeth.

Actually I got teeth nearly a year ago. (VBG)

>
>> Which is a
>>very useful bit of information when reading and posting on political
>>subjects..as the average Leftwinger/New Liberal is as dumb as a bag of
>>hammers and
>
>Yes I'm a conservative so I'm much smarter than liberals. Maybe some
>of them *appear* to have more success than I do but that's only
>because of the reversal thing.
>
>> it can be a handy bit of ammo to use.
>
>I use that ammo to track them down and bury them with my backhoe. Or
>have I actually buried myself? This reversal thing is hard to figure.
>I'd know better if I wasn't so busy working. I know what you're
>thinking but it only looks like I'm sitting here doing nothing again.
>
>Gunner (posting from my new mobile office)
>
>"A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the
>polls."

ayup. Im curious if any Democrats are going to show up this
November? And Im even more curious how much voter fraud they will be
trying. Even Bernie says the Hildabeast used voter fraud in the
primaries......and when a Democrat says that....you know its
possible...

[Eric Zerkle]

On 6/21/2016 3:23 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:45:30 -0700, Vic Contino
> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>
>> On 6/21/2016 12:38 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 04:10:46 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/20/16 5:39 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:44:56 -0700, Vic Contino
>>>>> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> No, *you* aren't. No classical liberal advocates mass murder of people
>>>>>> who merely voice political beliefs he doesn't like.
>>>>>
>>>>> Merely voice? Advocate mass murder on single individuals?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gunther, what does "mass murder on single individuals" mean?
>>>
>>>
>>> That is indeed a very good question, isnt it?
>>
>> "Advocate mass murder on single individuals" was your fuckwitted /non
>> sequitur/ comment, boi.
>
> Caught you nicely didnt it?

It didn't "catch" anyone except you shitting in your own mouth. You
advocate mass murder of people merely because they disagree with you.
You're no "liberal" of any kind. You're a knuckle-dragging neo-Nazi.

[Governor Swill]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 08:05:27 -0700, Tom Gardner wrote:

>Pfffffft! You think to much.

Spoken like a true extremist.

Swill
--
S. E. Cupp has characterized Trump as wearing the Republican party
like a rented tuxedo. When the prom is over, it's going to end up on
the floor with the liquor stains and cigarette butts.

[Governor Swill]

On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 15:25:41 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote:
>ayup. Im curious if any Democrats are going to show up this
>November? And Im even more curious how much voter fraud they will be
>trying. Even Bernie says the Hildabeast used voter fraud in the
>primaries......and when a Democrat says that....you know its
>possible...

They won't need fraud. Trump will be lucky to pull 100 EC votes - if
he gets any at all.

Swill
--
Trump has written a lot of books about business, but they all
seem to end in Chapter 11. - Hillary Clinton

[Robert Feniello]

On 6/20/2016 7:25 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 18:00:10 -0700, Vic Contino
> <kicccck.w...@all.the.time> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> No, *you* aren't. No classical liberal advocates mass murder of people
>>>> who merely voice political beliefs he doesn't like.
>>>
>>> Merely voice?
>>
>> Yep. That's all people have done, and you've called for their murders
>> as part of a "cull."
>
> Called for? Nope. Suggested, yes indeed.
>
> Should I add your name to the List?

No "list." That's settled.

[Gronk]

Heh. Gunner is making lists again...

[Ed Huntress]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:17:17 -0600, Gronk <inv...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

He had a traumatic experience as a child, involving Santa Claus.

--
Ed Huntress