Discriminatory marriage laws continue to fall, the Affordable Care Act is the law of the land, the multi-trillion dollar Iraqi and Afghan nation-building fiascos will both be in the rearview mirror shortly, and deft diplomacy offers hope of avoiding further such costly quagmires in Syria and Iran. The American people failed to get their way on much-needed background checks to prevent criminals and maniacs from easily purchasing firearms as influential, special-interest lobbyists deployed their congressional goon squad. It's an issue that will, no doubt, continue to demand sensible legislation, but comprehensive immigration reform appears to be the next pressing matter for the radical obstructionists to try to block. Meanwhile, there are those who believe that the federal government throwing vast amounts of taxpayer money at the problem is the way to go - "increasing border security to include adding 20,000 new border control agents and 700 miles of fencing along the border with Mexico at an estimated cost of $46 billion." With the 2014 "mid-term" elections in the offing, the debate should be quite entertaining. With only 30 days and 14 hours left to rush out and buy Palin's book bemoaning the commercialization of Christmas for every purported Christian on your gift list, it won't be long before we can put the spirit of the season aside and go after those undocumented devils hellbent on going undetected by leading normal lives.
Because for the most radical libs its the next frontier over the horizon. When homosexuality becomes common and no longer shocking to a majority of the public libs on the margin will get bored with it and find something else to get attention with.
............................................ When it comes to the goals of "LIBERALS!", I always defer to the fantasies of those who obsess over them (whoever these unnamed multitudes are supposed to be.)
Based on what? Right wing morons said the same thing when interracial marriage was decriminalized. Look, we realize you guys have no valid arguments against homosexuality or same sex marriage. That's why you have to pathetically try to tie it to things like polygamy, pedophilia and such.
Based on observation of libs. Back in the day when homosexuals rioted in New York City gay rights meant the freedom to (*)(*)(*)(*) their buddy in the ass without any interference from the cops. If any conservative had suggested that would lead to gay marriage someday libs would have laughed at the idea as absurd. The thundering herd of mindless liberalism may not know where it's going but I certainly do.
Pretty soon we'll be just like that failed USSR. Some idiots never learn. I would argue that most don't which is why they're idiots but I guess that a chicken/egg question. - - - Updated - - - It's not hard. Just follow the feces on cop cars.
Sorry, moronic bloviating wasn't what I asked for. Based on what? Which is their right Not really, as there is no valid objection to same sex marriage. Yes, you've demonstrated your superior deduction and prediction skills many times, lol
The bloviating is yours not mine. You asked how libs could get to legalizing sex with children and I gave you a roadmap that they have traveled before.
Do you really think you'll get an infringement on the Second Amendment through the House? I doubt you'd get it through the Senate.
No, all I got was right wing bloviating. Are you under the impression that there are no "conservative" pedophiles? Are you under the impression that there are no "conservative" homosexuals? And do you know what "slippery slope fallacy" means?
Must we assume that all libs are homosexuals? They aren't but libs are the ones pushing for gay rights. Similarly most libs will not want have sex with children but when the issue takes off libs will eventually fall into line just as they did on gay marriage.
No they're not. I guess we need to do this again. Based on what? Are you under the impression there are no conservative pedophiles? Are you under the impression there are no conservative homosexuals? Do you know what a slippery slope fallacy is?
No, he asked WHERE do you get the idea that "libs" have ANY interest in LEGALIZING sex with CHILDREN! You of course changed the issue because you have NO possible reply. Your response is simply the typical Right Wing smear based on NOTHING! In fact, it has been "libs" who have fought to get protection for children from their rapists and abusers, where in fact the Right would prefer to make the male head of household the absolute dictator of their "own" children to use and abuse as they wish with NO "government interference" from authorities.
Why do Republicans always change the subject to disgusting sexual acts??? Really is this how one debates?? I guess it because at the end of the day, the policies are junk.
"Background checks are an infringement on the 2nd amendment????" Taxcutter says: Yes, they are. Most emphatically.
As to next on the agenda, I want background checks and a stop of private gun sales. I want the Senate immigration reform bill to pass. I want a new stimulus on infrastructure, education and innovation. I want more cuts on military spending (specific cuts, not across the board). I want a proper fix to SS and Medicare. I want a proper increase in minimum wage. I want capital gains to be treated as ordinary income. I want corporate welfare to be eliminated. That would be a good start. I probably can think of more.
I told him. But libs did not like my answer. I'll make it even easier for you. All it really takes is one lib judge to get the ball rolling the way it went with legalized butt (*)(*)(*)(*)ing. The public was steamrolled by the lib judges with the approval of the lib thundering heard.
