Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:58:16 PM EDT
I'm absolutely astounded. Here it is, 11:40pm in Seattle (AR15.com's clock is about 15 minutes fast), and NOT ONE SINGLE MENTION of Rush Limbaugh's antigun vitriol from this morning (about 11:25am on Seattle's KVI-570 broadcast of Limbaugh's show). Regarding Yasser Arafat, Limbaugh said, approximately:
The only person on record to have addressed the U.N. while armed?!?!? He walked up to the podium with a gun?!?!? And they're [i]just now[/i] getting around to calling him a terrorist???
View Quote
He was nearly frothing when he equated the carrying of a firearm -- my God, in the sacred halls of the U.N., at that! -- with being a terrorist. Feel however you want about Arafat, but Limbaugh equating gun-toting with terrorism made me turn off his show. I doubt I'll listen to the antigun pig ever again.
Link Posted: 1/29/2002 11:01:52 PM EDT
You know why Limbaugh got divorced twice? Because his ex-wives wouldn't mount Rushmore.
Link Posted: 1/29/2002 11:27:37 PM EDT
So I would take this happened in New York; or at least in this country? Does he have an Alien Firearms License? I doubt it.
Link Posted: 1/29/2002 11:44:27 PM EDT
I'm sure if you called in, and got through the screeners, he'd apologize for giving that impression (maybe try on friday.) I think the general idea is it's bad form to bear arms while addressing representative bodies -- it's akin to threatening them with violence. I'm pretty sure that it's always been verboten to bear arms in the senate chambers, for example, much as you can't bear arms in a courthouse.
Link Posted: 1/29/2002 11:48:08 PM EDT
Arafat addressed the UN in New York about twenty years ago.
Link Posted: 1/29/2002 11:54:21 PM EDT
WOA! cool your jets bro! I heard the same thing, but to listen to you, we obviously didn't "hear" the same thing. Everyting Iv'e ever heard from him has been pro-gun. I don't know what the laws are for ccw at the U.N., however, given that whole organization's rabid anti-gun bent, I would venture to say it is verboten. That said, Rush was trying to make a point that Arafat, while ostensably making overtures for peace, was alowed to carry. If it IS a no-no to cary at the U.N. then why was Arafat given the green light to do so. There seems to be a double standard there. Go back and listen to previous programs, the most recent of which Rush gave a modest credit to boycotting gun owners for K-fart's current problems. While he may not be as passionate about the second as I am, he is NOT anti-gun. As for being a pig ?, well.....I think you tie that to the anti-gun thing. He went off when this McCain-Fiengold gunshow BS came out. I would think if he was an anti, he would have jumped headfirst into that one.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 12:27:04 AM EDT
While Rush isn't as actively pro-gun as I like (and I think that stems from him having seemingly little personal interest in the things), calling him anti-gun completely misses the mark. 71_Hour..not only do I think you misinterpreted his statement, I think you're completely over reacting as well. Face it, there are times when being openly armed really isn't necessary or appropriate. Legitimate diplomats (which Arafat attempts to qualify as) have little need for personal sidearms, much less when addressing a body of dignitaries. Think about it...who are the sort of VIP's (using the term loosely) who are always flaunting their weaponry...Osama, Saddam, ummm...memory failing but I'm sure the point is taken. How many times have you seen Saddam triumphantly firing a weapon off into the air? What does Osama always have with him? The fact of the matter is that legitimate democratic leaders understand that sidearms are not (or no longer, at least) the tools of their trade. Like AnotherPundit typed, Arafat's move was obviously meant as some sort of militantly defiant show of force. Rush didn't equate the carrying of a gun as the act of a terrorist, he equated the act of openly wearing a sidearm while addressing a global body of dignitaries for what it was: a threatening display meant to communicate how resigned to his militant path he is/was.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 12:28:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2002 11:16:20 AM EDT by 71-Hour_Achmed]
Why would it be "bad form" to pack heat in front of the U.N.? Personally, I'd like to have seen him open fire on those vermin. The U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms to everyone, not just citizens, and there's no language excluding the U.N. compound in the Second Amendment. If the U.N. wants to forbid it, let them set up in some third-world hellhole run by an Idi Amin wannabee. Limbaugh takes gun owners for granted as Republican voters. He and his ilk don't care about doing anything for us. No need to repeal any "reasonable" laws since the gun nuts will all toe the Party Line when it comes time to keep the Democraps out of office -- lest the nuts lose all their guns to a Gore. Remember the flintlock the NRA gave him for speaking at the convention a few years ago? Oh, can't own that in NYC without getting a permit -- didn't he give it away or throw it out or something? I recall that he sure didn't bother to get a permit and keep it. McCain -- hah. Limbaugh might make some whiny comments about the guy turning traitor on Bush, but when push comes to shove, Limbaugh will be out there backing Arizona's Republican Senator for reelection against whatever Democrap challenger comes up, no matter what the Democrap's politics really are. Just another political hack with no care for what happens, as long as "his team" keeps power. If Rush thought he could gain more votes than he'd lose by going completely anti-gun, he'd be calling for outright bans within the week. Just look at Henry Hyde of Illinois and see how much negative stuff Rush says about him -- ok, so he's antigun, sabotaged the fight against the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban, voted pro-Brady, screwed gun owners for years, but by God he's a REPUBLICAN and that's all that matters! Edited to change "grants" to "guarantees" in para 2 -- my bad, it was 2:15am, I was tired, I was pissed. I'm still pissed. Rush is an antigun pig. If you think he isn't: why doesn't he own any guns?? He's rich and powerful enough to own them no matter where he lives.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 1:39:05 AM EDT
Rush Limbaugh is not a pro-gun person. He is so weak on this issue, the only reason he says anything about guns is to not offend a large portion of his audience. Where are the "Dittos" on his pro-gun views? Lip service to Republican listeners!
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 3:58:46 AM EDT
You guys need to get a grip! Rush is as pro-gun as any other conservative talk show host, with the possible exception of G. Gordon Liddy. But considering Liddy's well-known love and ties to Israel, I suppose that pi**es off a bunch of y'all anyway! One of Rush's favorite sayings is: [b]If the liberals read the Second Amendment the way they read the First Amendment, gun ownership would be mandatory![/b] Also the NRA had him as a speaker at their annual meeting in Memphis(?) several years ago. They filled the convention center auditorium with NRA guests and had to open several other rooms to contain the overflow crowd of attendees! It was the most popular speaker they ever had at any of their annual meetings. They presented him with some custom shotgun as a token of their appreciation, and after trying to get the shotgun 'approved' to be taken to his apartment in Manhattan, he finally gave up! I think the shotgun wound up at his mother's home in Missouri. [b]Of course Rush is pro-Second Amendment![/b] What makes you say otherwise? Jealousy? Or the fact that he hates Arafat? Eric The(Hmmmm?)Hun[>]:)] PS: Does it frost you that he regained 80% of his hearing after his operation?
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 4:36:00 AM EDT
ETH - Thanks for clearing up that re: Rush. He IS definitely pro-gun. But it all makes me wonder - "Why do people round here SO ENJOY attacking conservatives?" They attack the NRA. They atack Rush. They attack GWB. They attack Ashcroft. They even show dislike for Alan Keyes. Are they so tunnel visioned they can't see the big picture?? Or are many people round here NOT REALLY conservative??? Enquiring minds want to know.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:05:13 AM EDT
1. Being conservative does not in any way mean that one need refrain from criticizing conservative organizations or public figures. 2. Why do you assume that everyone here MUST be a conservative (as you define conservative), anyway? I've said it before and I'll say it once more, the only thing we have in common here is that we all are pro-gun. That's it. Put us all together in real life and we aren't all going to get along, agree with each other, or even like each other. As much as you would like to have it otherwise, being pro-gun does not autmatically mean a person will be a pro-life, conservative, Christian, Republican. I'm not interested in hearing how anybody who is pro-gun but not all those other things (and Eric would add pro-Israel to the list)is a Marxist-Leninist dupe and a hypocrite and is pissing on the sacred memory of the Founding Fathers. You guys have said all that before and I've responded to it all before. Unless a member has identified himself as a political/cultural/fiscal/Constitutional conservative, you have no logical reason to assume he is one or to question his "credentials" to call himself one. Stop having unrealistic expectations and you'll stop being disappointed.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:05:39 AM EDT
I'm with you garandman. We've got enemies literally under every rock. There is seldom call to attack each other. Rush is 100% pro-gun. He despises gun-grabbing McCain and worships the ground Heston walks on. What's not to like?
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:15:45 AM EDT
Wow. So much of my thunder stolen! CaptainSanity Eric The Hun GarandMan 10mmFan Well said, all! [beer]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:17:51 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: ...Limbaugh equating gun-toting with terrorism made me turn off his show. I doubt I'll listen to the antigun pig ever again.
View Quote
Originally by Golgo-13: 1. Being conservative does not in any way mean that one need refrain from criticizing conservative organizations or public figures.
View Quote
Please try READING the above Achmed statement. That is NOT a criticism. It is an attack.
As much as you would like to have it otherwise, being pro-gun does not autmatically mean a person will be a pro-life, conservative, Christian, Republican
View Quote
I USED TO BE naieve in that regard. I've since learned my lessson. But that DOES NOT address my point. The names i listed above are my "friends" (as determined by their policies on the Second Amendment) Whatever else they beleive, THAT ALONE qualifies them as someone I WILL NOT attack. If I have a beef with them, i will address it with them personally, privately , via e-mail etc etc. That is a courtesy I will extend to my friends. I will NOT dress them down in a public forum like this. Regardless of their pro-life or Christian beleifs or lack of beleifs, their pro-gun stand buys them that courtesy from me. I have become a ONE ISSUE man with regard to my public policy - gun rights. All else is peripheral. They are useful to me in their fight for gun rights, and I will do NOTHING to belittle them publicly. I will NOT do the Marxist Democrats work for them in tearing down pro-Second Amendment persons.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:26:18 AM EDT
No,no and no. Rush is [b]NOT[/b] anti-gun. I cannot count the times he has come out for gun owners...you have selective hearing my friend. I've been listening to him for 9 years. He has [b]NEVER[/b] come out against guns or owners...[b]NEVER[/b]. Chill dude...wrong target. [b][blue]NAKED[/blue][/b]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:34:16 AM EDT
Post from Golgo-13 -
1. Being conservative does not in any way mean that one need refrain from criticizing conservative organizations or public figures.
View Quote
No, it doesn't. But it doesn't help the cause much, either, unless you've got some sort of constructive criticism that might. E-mail Rush with your advice! I'm certain that he will give it every bit of consideration that it deserves.
2. Why do you assume that everyone here MUST be a conservative (as you define conservative), anyway?
View Quote
I [u]used[/u] to assume that, as well. But I have had a rude awakening to just how deep the support for the Second Amendment may not be, even among some gun owners. The liberals are not friends of the RKBA in the overwhelming majority of cases. They 'feel' that the government is the answer to any and all concerns of crime, foreign invasions, civil insurrections, etc. Conservatives believe otherwise! Period. While I have known a very few liberals who support the RKBA, I know not a [u]single[/u] conservative who opposes it! There may be some 'conservative' politicians, such as Henry Hyde, who support the AW ban, but they are few and far between. But I've never considered Rep. Hyde anything other than a moderate Republican just for that and a few other reasons.
As much as you would like to have it otherwise, being pro-gun does not autmatically mean a person will be a pro-life, conservative, Christian, Republican.
View Quote
Yes, that's true. That's why I'm preaching to the Board. Being conservative, Christian and Republican are just [u]some[/u] indicators of how a person might view the RKBA! I remember Jane Fonda once said c. 1968 that: 'Any black man in America who doesn't own a gun is a g-d fool!' So I suppose that even back then, Hanoi Jane was a true believer in the RKBA! Eric The(Yeah,Right!)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:40:29 AM EDT
Addressing the UN while armed IS poor form. Unless the weapon is decorative, or ceremonial, like a Sikh's little sword. He's supposed to be up there with Statesmen. It's all posturing, too. You wouldn't get married, with a rifle slung over your tux, for the same reason. Low class. Just because one recognizes that it is inappropriate to be armed in certain settings, does not mean that one is "Anti-Gun". I bet some of you guys would wear "white bucks" and seersucker after Labor Day, too[;)].
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:43:00 AM EDT
I listened to Rush all summer and when the news about Ashcroft writtening the letter to the NRA, he was almost in tears he was so happy that we finally had someone on our side. Keving67
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:43:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: Addressing the UN while armed IS poor form. I bet some of you guys would wear "white bucks" and seersucker after Labor Day, too[;)].
View Quote
LOL!!!! Wearing seersucker AT ALL is poor form. [:D]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:52:10 AM EDT
Rush is one of the most eloquent voices in the media who thoroughly advocates the original intent of the 2nd amendment. His views on the subject reflect your own, and though he may not own a black rifle, he has us saying 'Amen'time after time. Here is where you go really off the reservation: [b] "Limbaugh takes gun owners for granted as Republican voters. He and his ilk don't care about doing anything for us. No need to repeal any "reasonable" laws since the gun nuts will all toe the Party Line when it comes time to keep the Democraps out of office -- lest the nuts lose all their guns to a Gore. Remember the flintlock the NRA gave him for speaking at the convention a few years ago? Oh, can't own that in NYC without getting a permit -- didn't he give it away or throw it out or something? I recall that he sure didn't bother to get a permit and keep it. McCain -- hah. Limbaugh might make some whiny comments about the guy turning traitor on Bush, but when push comes to shove, Limbaugh will be out there backing Arizona's Republican Senator for reelection against whatever Democrap challenger comes up, no matter what the Democrap's politics really are. Just another political hack with no care for what happens, as long as "his team" keeps power. If Rush thought he could gain more votes than he'd lose by going completely anti-gun, he'd be calling for outright bans within the week. Just look at Henry Hyde of Illinois and see how much negative stuff Rush says about him -- ok, so he's antigun, sabotaged the fight against the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban, voted pro-Brady, screwed gun owners for years, but by God he's a REPUBLICAN and that's all that matters!" [/b] It really sounds to me like you either don't listen to Rush very much, are easily offended, or buy into the 'vote your concience' philosophy. Rush Limbaugh does not need any votes, he is not elected. He does support most Republicans, and all conservatives. He does not have a single issue save conservatism. He sees all conservative issues as equally important and interconnected. He offers a lot of criticism toward more moderate Republicans, but push come to shove, he will support the more conservative [b]electable[/b] candidate. Makes sense to me. [thinking]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:52:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2002 5:52:55 AM EDT by Major-Murphy]
No way, garandman! You gotta look like a sport now and then [:)]. Poor form is wearing Camouflage EVER, if you're not in the field, or in uniform. Poor form is wearing those goofy moonlit eagle, or lone wolf T-shirts. Poor form is a backwards baseball cap. Poor form is a mullet. Poor form is NOT, however, seersucker and white bucks. Just ask William F. Buckley. [img]http://www.clpgh.org/exhibit/images/gif/buckley.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:05:09 AM EDT
I once heard Rush talking to a caller that was anti-gun and this caller brought up the subject of so called "Assault Weapons". Rush agreed with the man about "not seeing any reason for anyone needing to own an AK-47". This is another reason why Rush is a sack of shit, that and his support of bible thumping maggots.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:09:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: Poor form is NOT, however, seersucker and white bucks. Just ask William F. Buckley. [img]http://www.clpgh.org/exhibit/images/gif/buckley.gif[/img]
View Quote
"Poor form" is Buckley's haircut. [:D]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:13:29 AM EDT
Oh garandman, you're a guy from Connecticut, who now lives in the South! You, more than anyone, should understand Seersucker AND Buckley.[;)]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:15:20 AM EDT
Post from 71-hourAachmed -
but when push comes to shove, Limbaugh will be out there backing Arizona's Republican Senator for reelection against whatever Democrap challenger comes up, no matter what the Democrap's politics really are.
View Quote
So will I, so will I! If the GOP voters in Arizona don't rid us of this POS, and McCain does win the GOP primary, then almost irrespective of whom the DEMOS might offer as an opponent, I would vote for that bastid McCain, too! Why? Because the more GOP Senators that are elected will give us back control of the Senate! Period. End of story! That is, [b]71-hour_Achmed[/b], unless [u]you[/u] actually like having Sec. 'Puff Daddy' Daschle as leader of the Senate! Eric The(Well,DoYou?)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:17:23 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: Oh garandman, you're a guy from Connecticut, who now lives in the South! You, more than anyone, should understand Seersucker AND Buckley.[;)]
View Quote
I guess I can't argue with that, mostly cause I don't know what it means. [BD] Connecticut is the REASON I now live in the South. [:D]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:17:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2002 7:06:52 AM EDT by raf]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:24:58 AM EDT
Originally Posted By garandman:
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: Oh garandman, you're a guy from Connecticut, who now lives in the South! You, more than anyone, should understand Seersucker AND Buckley.[;)]
View Quote
I guess I can't argue with that, mostly cause I don't know what it means. Connecticut is the REASON I now live in the South. [:D]
View Quote
Hmmmm. Well Yale is in Connecticut. Buckley wrote: "God and Man at Yale". In the summertime, Yale types wear seersucker. In the south, Plantation types (and preachers) wear seersucker. Oh, hell.... Whatever [:)].
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:38:59 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:47:08 AM EDT
A point I have heard Rush make many times (besides being pro 2nd Amendemnt) is he views the right to own private property as being one of the most important rights US citizens have. He feels it is being eroded by government grabs by way of confiscation laws on citizens. I know I've heard him say the 2nd Amendment is just that the SECOND & as such was very important to the writers of the Constitution.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:51:21 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 7:01:13 AM EDT
[b]
Originally Posted By Paul: Paraphrasing what you think you heard someone say out of context is easy. "I know of no reason that someone would need an AK" "I know of no reason that someone would need an AK when there are plenty of better American made weapons available. Now take the AR-15 with its better..." "I know of no reason that someone would need an AK to hunt chipmunks when the .22 LR is a better suited rifle as it preserves more meat for the table and does less pelt damage" "I know of no reason that someone would need an AK while playing professional football besides where would you keep your reloads?" "I know of no reason that someone would need an AK to bake a wedding cake as flour and eggs are the primary ingredients" I've been listening to Rush for 10 years now and tyically catch a couple two or three hours a week and have never hear such words from his mouth nor read them in his books. Speaking personally I know of no reason that someone would need an AK. I have a couple dozen firearms and don't see where an AK would fit in with my NATO caliber collection unless I went with a caliber conversion of some sort.
View Quote
[/b] I know what he said, I know what the caller said, I do not need the likes of you telling me what I "think" I heard. It is apparent you have missed a broadcast or two.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 7:03:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 7:34:26 AM EDT
Post from MOLITAS -
This is another reason why Rush is a sack of shit, that and his support of bible thumping maggots.
View Quote
Well, I'd hate to disagree with [u]you[/u] about what might constitute a 'sack of sh*t', but that is simply your own miserable little opinion, which, I might add, is not shared by very many people who support the RKBA! BTW, I would ask you which 'bible thumping maggots' it might be that Rush supports, but I'm afraid that I'd get the same lame-a**ed sort of reply as you gave for Rush being anti-RKBA! Eric The(AreYou[u]Sure[/u]You'rePro-Gun?)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 7:36:37 AM EDT
Actually MOLITAS is just mostly anti "Bible thumping maggots." [:D]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 7:45:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2002 7:47:02 AM EDT by MOLITAS]
[b]
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Post from MOLITAS -
This is another reason why Rush is a sack of shit, that and his support of bible thumping maggots.
View Quote
Well, I'd hate to disagree with [u]you[/u] about what might constitute a 'sack of sh*t', but that is simply your own miserable little opinion, which, I might add, is not shared by very many people who support the RKBA! BTW, I would ask you which 'bible thumping maggots' it might be that Rush supports, but I'm afraid that I'd get the same lame-a**ed sort of reply as you gave for Rush being anti-RKBA! Eric The(AreYou[u]Sure[/u]You'rePro-Gun?)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
[/b] You should know now shouldn't you? I mean after all yourself being the chief lame a**ed moron in attendance.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 8:29:03 AM EDT
Once, again, MOLITAS, I will not question [u]your[/u] use of the word 'moron.' Those might be the two areas of expertise that you have in this world - knowing everything there is to know about: 'sacks of sh|t' and 'morons.' But you still didn't answer the question did you? Eric The(But[u]You're[/u]TheExpert!)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 8:32:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Once, again, MOLITAS, I will not question [u]your[/u] use of the word 'moron.' Those might be the two areas of expertise that you have in this world - knowing everything there is to know about: 'sacks of sh|t' and 'morons.' Eric The(But[u]You're[/u]TheExpert!)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
Now Eric - Give credit where due. He's also an expert on "Bible thumping maggots" as well. [}:D]
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 8:40:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: I'm absolutely astounded. Here it is, 11:40pm in Seattle (AR15.com's clock is about 15 minutes fast), and NOT ONE SINGLE MENTION of Rush Limbaugh's antigun vitriol from this morning (about 11:25am on Seattle's KVI-570 broadcast of Limbaugh's show). Regarding Yasser Arafat, Limbaugh said, approximately:
The only person on record to have addressed the U.N. while armed?!?!? He walked up to the podium with a gun?!?!? And they're [i]just now[/i] getting around to calling him a terrorist???
View Quote
He was nearly frothing when he equated the carrying of a firearm -- my God, in the sacred halls of the U.N., at that! -- with being a terrorist. Feel however you want about Arafat, but Limbaugh equating gun-toting with terrorism made me turn off his show. I doubt I'll listen to the antigun pig ever again.
View Quote
GO TAKE YOUR LIBERAL WHINING SOMEWHERE ELSE.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:12:55 AM EDT
71 hour-..... "The US Constitution GRANTS the right to keep and bear arms to everyone". Grants????? Your arguments might be more persuasive if you showed more knowledge of the founding documents and the concept of natural rights.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:22:22 AM EDT
...not to mention, we're talking about Arafat, right? In the UN, in NYC, armed, right? Uh huh. Okay. If you had seen Jeffrey Dahmer carrying a meat cleaver, and commented that it made him look like a psycho-cannibal..... ...Does that mean you're Anti-Cleaver?
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:30:58 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:34:06 AM EDT
Great. It's nice that I can read a topic like this and figure out that I'm a "sack of shit" because I listen to Rush. Tough words to be using on the internet aren't they?
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:39:10 AM EDT
I'm sure skeered.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:39:25 AM EDT
I read the topic then read all the replies on the second page. From the little I can gather there seems to be a need for a Bible (Titanium cover, reinforced) to survive all those thumpings. [:D] (or did I miss some point ?)
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:40:04 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:45:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:
Originally Posted By MarineGrunt: Great. It's nice that I can read a topic like this and figure out that I'm a "sack of shit" because I listen to Rush. Tough words to be using on the internet aren't they?
View Quote
Better here than face to face where you would kick their ass. [:D]
View Quote
Bet the little bitch wouldnt be so though then huh?
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:47:50 AM EDT
Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1: Your vitriole really makes me wonder what the HELL IS WRONG WITH YOUR boorish prick ? [V]
View Quote
There are those facilities that specialize in "boorish prick" repair. [:D] (Please remember I'm still practicing to be a reporter when I grow up. I never take things out of context.)
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:48:08 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 9:53:53 AM EDT
Molitas, A word from a "bible thumper"...take 2 Retro-Viagra and go phuq yourself. Whats the minimum age of using your brain in Kali??? There's stupid people..then there's phuqin' stupid. Congratulations on your elevation. [b][blue]NAKED[/blue][/b]
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top