Sarah Palin

Dixie said:
Pot smoking causes some people to have the same kind of reactions, and this killer was a known pot user. Therefore, we should immediately ban any and all use of pot, and never consider any type of legalization again. Common sense dictates this, by your own argument.
Click to expand...

Pot smokers killing people? I thought they only jumped out windows trying to fly. Well, I'll be damned! :palm:
 
apple0154 said:
Back to square one. As I said at the beginning certain flashing images will cause some people to have seizures. Their brain works differently.

We know how heated political rhetoric can get. Some people take it to the extreme. Maybe not killing people but certainly provoking violence. Common sense dictates it be toned down.
Click to expand...

Pornography causes some people to become sexually stimulated, which could cause a potential rapist to act out and rape someone, therefore, all pornography should be banned and prohibited in America, and anyone in possession of it, should be convicted of a felony.
 
apple0154 said:
Pot smokers killing people? I thought they only jumped out windows trying to fly. Well, I'll be damned! :palm:
Click to expand...

Yes, I know, damn! This pot smoker killed 6 people, including a Federal judge and a 9-year-old little girl. We must act swiftly to ban pot and strike down all legal medical marijuana laws, because we wouldn't want that to be responsible for this kind of a tragedy ever again.

Hey.... it's YOUR philosophy, I am just running with it!
 
apple0154 said:
Check Charver’s post, msg. 102. “But in a video posted on her Facebook page, the unofficial leader of America's Teapot movement hit back saying she had been 'sprayed with dishonesty bullets fired from the liberal media's .357 Magnum of unfairness and America-hating'.

She added: "I've spent the past few days reflecting on what happened and shooting my prayer shotgun at God and then waiting for him to return fire with exploding bullets of wisdom from his Heckler and Koch submachine gun of everlasting grace.”

"Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own, like a brave American hunter on a lonely hillside, staring down the crosshairs of his beautifully polished Remington 750 Woodmaster as he waits patiently for something to kill."

Who would use gun metaphors to that degree other than one fixated on guns?

Furthermore, the message goes on the read, “Getting weird, Mrs Palin then said the US media had also accused her of murdering Jesus and drinking the blood of Christian children.

She continued: "How could I have killed Jesus? I'm only 46 and Jesus was born in like 3000 BC or something. And everyone knows I only drink moose blood."

Does that sound like a normal response from a mature adult or more appropriate to one who suffers from arrested development?



Even kids can tell the difference between computer games and what a politician writes on their web page. The question is, "Can you?"



If they were there to represent geological survey symbols why were they removed?



The woman who was shot, Giffords, mentioned the cross hairs prior to the incident.

Have you ever heard of certain types of visual stimuli bringing on convulsions in susceptible people? Do you think billboards showing such stimuli would be permitted on highways? If not, why not? Why should society be restricted due to "ill" people, people whose brains work differently?



Public sentiment is on our side. Whether it be a Sheriff speaking out about the dangers of political rhetoric to the removal of images from Palin's web page obviously they know something is wrong.

The discussion is not whether Palin killed the Senator. Obviously, she didn't. The discussion is regarding violent, political rhetoric and images which can be used in an ambiguous fashion. In other words, civility.

Do try and grasp the bigger concept.
Click to expand...
LOL. Um... You do know that the "newspaper" he linked to is the British version of "The Onion"... At least I hope you do.
 
People who espouse anti-government rhetoric, should be incarcerated for life... we can't risk the potential threat to our safety and security as a nation, they may act out on these anti-government sentiments and perpetrate a heinous act like Tucson.
 
Dixie said:
Pornography causes some people to become sexually stimulated, which could cause a potential rapist to act out and rape someone, therefore, all pornography should be banned and prohibited in America, and anyone in possession of it, should be convicted of a felony.
Click to expand...

The flip side is pornography assists in .....well, I'm sure you were an adolescent.
 
apple0154 said:
The flip side is pornography assists in .....well, I'm sure you were an adolescent.
Click to expand...

Doesn't "assist" in anything, except the exploitation of women. As I said, it sexually stimulates, which could be a potential danger for some, inciting rape and violence toward women. If we follow your philosophy, we have to ban it, there is no other alternative.
 
Dixie said:
Yes, I know, damn! This pot smoker killed 6 people, including a Federal judge and a 9-year-old little girl. We must act swiftly to ban pot and strike down all legal medical marijuana laws, because we wouldn't want that to be responsible for this kind of a tragedy ever again.

Hey.... it's YOUR philosophy, I am just running with it!
Click to expand...

Actually, you're tripping and falling down with it. Not once did I suggest political discourse be banned.

Stop digging and put the shovel down, Dix, before you bury yourself.
 
apple0154 said:
Actually, you're tripping and falling down with it. Not once did I suggest political discourse be banned.

Stop digging and put the shovel down, Dix, before you bury yourself.
Click to expand...

Sure you did. You've repeated your idiocy over and over for an entire week, what the hell do you mean you didn't suggest it? What the fuck do you think you are arguing here?
 
Damocles said:
LOL. Um... You do know that the "newspaper" he linked to is the British version of "The Onion"... At least I hope you do.
Click to expand...

I do now. However, in my defense it didn't surprise me considering what I've heard from Palin over the course of the last two years.
 
apple0154 said:
Pot smokers killing people? I thought they only jumped out windows trying to fly. Well, I'll be damned! :palm:
Click to expand...
Try catching the next flying pot smoker you see. It hurts and sometimes kills. Falling pot smokers are the bane of society and we should ban the ownership of them, or at the very least ban pot parties higher than the first floor.
 
Dixie said:
Doesn't "assist" in anything, except the exploitation of women. As I said, it sexually stimulates, which could be a potential danger for some, inciting rape and violence toward women. If we follow your philosophy, we have to ban it, there is no other alternative.
Click to expand...

Exploit women? Then I suppose Playgirl exploits men.
 
Dixie said:
Sure you did. You've repeated your idiocy over and over for an entire week, what the hell do you mean you didn't suggest it? What the fuck do you think you are arguing here?
Click to expand...

I'm arguing political discourse should be toned down.

No wonder you're carrying on in such a manner. You don't even know what I was proposing.

You disappoint me, Dix. :(
 
apple0154 said:
Exploit women? Then I suppose Playgirl exploits men.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's pornography as well. And why stop there? We have sex all over our TV and movies, in our music... we need to 'tone down the rhetoric' there as well... it will do us good... and it will prevent sexual perverts from acting out, according to your well-founded liberal philosophy!
 
apple0154 said:
I'm arguing political discourse should be toned down.

No wonder you're carrying on in such a manner. You don't even know what I was proposing.

You disappoint me, Dix. :(
Click to expand...

Oh, I know what you are proposing, I am proposing the same thing with pot smoking and pornography. Maybe we can combine all of these things into one bill? No more 'cross hairs' in political ads, no more language which can possibly be construed as "violent" or associated with guns or weapons, no more pot smoking or pornographic images... that should fix us right up!
 
Damocles said:
Try catching the next flying pot smoker you see. It hurts and sometimes kills. Falling pot smokers are the bane of society and we should ban the ownership of them, or at the very least ban pot parties higher than the first floor.
Click to expand...

I think Apple may be in violation of his own proposal already... Isn't he somewhat encouraging pot smokers to attempt flying? What if someone is killed by a falling pot smoker? Can we lay the blame at Apple's feet for mentioning it here? Wye, I think we can, if we use his logic and reasoning!
 
Dixie said:
Yep, that's pornography as well. And why stop there? We have sex all over our TV and movies, in our music... we need to 'tone down the rhetoric' there as well... it will do us good... and it will prevent sexual perverts from acting out, according to your well-founded liberal philosophy!
Click to expand...

Oh, please. The sexual rhetoric couldn't be any more toned down. If anything society is sexually stunted.
 
Dixie said:
Oh, I know what you are proposing, I am proposing the same thing with pot smoking and pornography. Maybe we can combine all of these things into one bill? No more 'cross hairs' in political ads, no more language which can possibly be construed as "violent" or associated with guns or weapons, no more pot smoking or pornographic images... that should fix us right up!
Click to expand...

Well, I always leave room to consider opinions but I must say I've never, ever heard of someone having sex and then wanting to go out and commit violence. Is that how it works where you live?
 
apple0154 said:
Oh, please. The sexual rhetoric couldn't be any more toned down. If anything society is sexually stunted.
Click to expand...

You used the phrase of "sexually stunted" and what would happen if someone like Mojo read that and went on a killing spree?
Should we hold you responsible for his actions; because of his perception of you mentioning his "shortcomings"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top