Posts for: drainbamage
Dec 29, 2019 00:18:37 #
jcboy3 wrote:
I'm not sure which side of that line you are standing on, so you probably have one foot on each side.
There is no line. None whatsoever. Not for me...and not logically. Men cannot reproduce with each other. That is one of the main points. Neither can women with each other. Even though there are "other" ways of men+men/woman+woman obtaining children, nothing about it is natural. They can adopt, sure. They can have artificial insemination, sure, but nothing...nothing about that way of obtaining a child is natural.
Do you have any questions about which side of that line I am standing on? If so, please let me continue to explain it to you.
Dec 26, 2019 01:43:36 #
Perversion
Some things just are not done. There are lines that should not be crossed and limits to all of our behaviors. There is a thin line between evil and stupidity. At some point, wickedness is just dumb. Actions have consequences. We can choose our actions. But not the consequences of our actions. Reality is not amenable to our feelings. We would enjoy our lives more if we made pleasing God a priority. If we can’t please Him at least avoid displeasing Him.The bible forbids same sex relationships. Men should not have sex with men. The smell alone should be a deterrent.
I'm sure some here will want my post to be deleted, but I stand by my beliefs that man+man cannot reproduce, and any other way for man+man to have a child is not natural.
Some things just are not done. There are lines that should not be crossed and limits to all of our behaviors. There is a thin line between evil and stupidity. At some point, wickedness is just dumb. Actions have consequences. We can choose our actions. But not the consequences of our actions. Reality is not amenable to our feelings. We would enjoy our lives more if we made pleasing God a priority. If we can’t please Him at least avoid displeasing Him.The bible forbids same sex relationships. Men should not have sex with men. The smell alone should be a deterrent.
I'm sure some here will want my post to be deleted, but I stand by my beliefs that man+man cannot reproduce, and any other way for man+man to have a child is not natural.
Dec 24, 2019 03:29:27 #
canondave1 wrote:
💟💟💟 love your photo!
Thanks!
Nothing special with a camera, I just love their facial expressions!
Her: "Look what I have - want some?"
Him: "Oh boy, oh boy oh boy!!!"
Dec 24, 2019 01:43:41 #
mas24 wrote:
Adorable kids they are. I've been getting candy canes from stores, after you make a purchase. I got 5 of them. During the holidays, I buy a few packages of hard candy, and with parents permission, give them to their kids for Xmas. Peppermint wrapped rounds mostly. Along with artificially flavored ones of various colors. Kids love candy. Whether, it is hard candy or chocolate bars. Chocolate bars appear to get smaller as each year passes by. And higher in prices.
Chocolate is a lot messier than candy canes...but probably more enjoyable.
Merry Christmas to you mas24! I hope you get lots of candy canes to help you into the New Year! I found one that is cherry/peppermint flavored! It's the best candy cane I ever ate...can't find it this year.
Dec 23, 2019 23:39:39 #
My grandkids...should I enter it in a contest? (They're fraternal twins.....)
Dec 21, 2019 00:37:28 #
De Niro: Trump Needs to Be Humiliated, ‘I’d Like to See a Bag of Sh*t Right in His Face’
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/he-needs-to-be-humiliated-robert-de-niro-calls-for-someone-to-rub-a-bag-of-shit-in-trumps-face
So can anyone on the left tell me that De Niro doesn't have TDS??
A bag of shit right in our President's face??
Anyone care to defend De Niro with this?
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/he-needs-to-be-humiliated-robert-de-niro-calls-for-someone-to-rub-a-bag-of-shit-in-trumps-face
So can anyone on the left tell me that De Niro doesn't have TDS??
A bag of shit right in our President's face??
Anyone care to defend De Niro with this?
Dec 20, 2019 21:24:24 #
JohnFrim wrote:
I think Nancy is playing Trump, and it is working.
No...Nancy is trying to retain power...now that the House is done, she wants to control the Senate. She's really pissing off a lot of people, and not just McConnell, by doing this. She and Chuck are trying to run the Senate trial - doesn't that tell you something about her hunger for power? Even some of my most staunch Democrat friends are beginning to falter with this new gimmick.
Dec 20, 2019 19:45:25 #
Angmo wrote:
A false premise. There’s nothing to resolve. The senate has the sole power to the trial. There is nothing to settle. Republicans run the senate. Evil leftie Dems think they have a vote. They don’t.
Tough poop. The unfair process occurred in the house already. They can’t pollute the process in the senate. They can only poop on themselves.
Tough poop. The unfair process occurred in the house already. They can’t pollute the process in the senate. They can only poop on themselves.
Nancy and Chuck want the Senate to call more of their witnesses including acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and former national security adviser John Bolton - which Schumer claims are necessary to "ensure a fair trial." Why, then, did Schumer and Nancy NOT call those witnesses while they were conducting their own hearings? Why do they want the Senate to finish up what they did not accomplish before they took the floor vote? This is all very fishy, and I believe it is very arrogant for Shumer and Nancy to tell the Senate how to run the trial. The are trying to use the articles as leverage to interfere with the Senate's process of conducting a trial...only problem is, the Senate doesn't even want the articles - they don't want the impeachment. It's obvious that Shumer and Pelosi are so power-hungry that they think they can run the Senate....that's pretty damning for them, and the whole Democrat party, IMO.
Dec 20, 2019 19:18:21 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
That will not happen. Get real.
Send your "solution" to Mitch----I am sure he will appreciate you.
Send your "solution" to Mitch----I am sure he will appreciate you.
Why so angry? Why could it not happen? Nothing I said isn't true. The Senate can make it's own rules regarding impeachment...all they have to do is change it to make the House have a deadline...say February 1, or sometime in the Spring. Why should they allow Nancy to hold on to the articles and not give Trump his day in court...or more accurately, his due process?
Dec 20, 2019 18:32:25 #
Angmo wrote:
Just read the link. Think. Perhaps you’ll comprehend it then.
Here's one solution, Angmo, and I think this is what might happen. The current Senate rule for impeachment is this:
The first rule of impeachment procedure states that the Senate will not act on an impeachment until the House sends to the Senate its appointed "managers" - the representatives who will act as the lawyers during the impeachment trial. After the House has presented its managers to the Senate, then the Senate takes the reins and launches its trial. So can Pelosi delay an impeachment trial? Yes, as long as the Senate doesn’t change its current rules. But there’s absolutely nothing stopping it from changing this rule.
So the Senate should change its impeachment rules as follows: Once the House has impeached the president, the Senate should set a date for trial and should set a deadline for the House to present its managers to the Senate. If the House fails to meet that deadline, the Senate will either dismiss the articles of impeachment for lack of prosecution or, better yet, vote on the articles immediately in light of the evidence presented to it — in this case, no evidence, since there are no articles submitted.
It's just an opinion of mine, but I think, since the Senate can make their own rules (just like the House can) they could do something like this..
Dec 14, 2019 00:26:08 #
BigWahoo wrote:
Trump is a little upset that he wasn't named 'Pers... (show quote)
Trump has been attacked by Democrats since he announced his candidacy. He's just fighting back. And he IS right - Greta is a young girl who should be going to school, doing homework and going to the movies with friends. She is the daughter of two actors who are activists and who are using her to push their agenda. She is just a puppet, and will some day resent her parents for doing this to her. Maybe.
It's very sad...and amazing to me that the press has put this poor little girl up on a pedestal now. I guess sensationalism is better for the press than truth and realism. And if she does have Asberger's, and never understands the depth of what she is being made to do, well...that is just tragic on several levels. Very sad.
She has no reason to claim to be an "authority" on the science of climate? She's only 16 or 17! Only High Schooled! No college. No research. No grants. No knowledge whatever....and yet she is adored as the "Saint" and the "Wonder Woman". She's just a kid who has no idea what she is doing, regurgitating what she's been told to regurgitate, is being coached by not only her parents, but by major globalist activists. When she finds awareness of herself (which comes with age and knowledge), she will regret this once she realizes how she has been manipulated.
Some people believe she is not capable of realizing that she is being used, and that is the saddest part of all.
Dec 13, 2019 02:00:40 #
Kraken wrote:
He will step down from his presidency in 2025 and right into his dictatorship. 
He will step down from is presidency in 2025 and into his son, Donald Jr.'s, presidency in 2026.
Dec 12, 2019 23:05:54 #
boberic wrote:
What kind of constitutional amendments would you like to see. Here are a coupla mine. !- term limits, 3 for the house members. 2 for the senate. 2- laws passed by congress must apply to those members. But of coiurse these will never happen
All members of Congress must release their tax records to the public;
Investigate the funds that are used as hush money for members of Congress on a consistent basis;
Mandatory drug tests for all members of Congress, as well as the Judicial and Executive branches (I KNOW Trump will pass this with flying colors - he's probably one of the few who would.)
Dec 12, 2019 17:57:24 #
Kraken wrote:
Yes I know, it was all racial starting with Moscow Mitch back in 2009. Wow was he pissed when a black man got elected to the white house. And all the rest of the lowlifes followed suit.
And the Dems were so pissed that Trump blew Clinton out of the water, they started screaming "impeach... impeach" and "resist...resist" on November 9, 2016...and Pelosi just admitted it. Since they can't change the Constitution to get rid of the electoral college - THIS is what they decided to do from the very beginning.
It's starting to backfire, though. They can't use "bribery" charges because if they do, they have to admit that Joe Biden actually DID bribe Ukraine. So that's out...and they haven't defined what "abuse of power" means, which is what the Senate will want to know - it's a very vague and weak charge without something definitive. They have nothing but severe TDS, and it is blinding them to what is really going on with Americans. Americans are really pissed that they've tried so many ways (and failed) to get rid of our duly elected President.
Dec 12, 2019 16:59:56 #
Kraken wrote:
That's because 62% of the American population saw right away that the electoral college gave the white house away to an orange orangutan. 
No....the American people showed the world how much they wanted a change from the Halfrican orangutan.
(Landslide: 304-227)