You Can't Stump the Trump Volume 11 (NO COATS EDITION) Say this real fast 20 times in a row, "You can't trump the Trump stump."  Same breath. Easy!  Go back and add the periods.  I can't! I was holding my nose while reading You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump You can't trump the Trump stump  |
|
|
|
Islam doesn't view women as humans I don't know what they were expecting.
So, because of this they must be educated about culture and rules in their new countries, as Norway already started. Muslim man in European countries, like Bosnia and Albania, are different so their thinking is much more influenced by society and culture than religion. Frankly I think it should be the other way round because feminists clearly have no fucking clue about organised religion beyond screaming about white Christians, they really should take a look at the shit that's in the Qu'ran because there are a lot more Islamists that genuinely believe in the violent shit in that than Christians who believe in the bible.And yet they, those third wave feminists, never do. Check any feminist threads on any subject on any subs. It is amazing everyone fights off everyone else on a wide range of subjects, pushing back and forth, defending their political and ideological viewpoints, calling each other out, from climate change to the pope, etc, etc... The third wave feminists NEVER critic, defend, oppose, push back or have a very, very basic opinion regarding women under sharia laws. For. Ever. Dead. Silent. |
|
|
|
You Can't Stump the Trump Volume 11 (NO COATS EDITION) Say this real fast 20 times in a row, "You can't trump the Trump stump." Same breath. Easy! |
|
|
|
You Can't Stump the Trump Volume 11 (NO COATS EDITION) |
|
|
|
She will be end of american dream. she has two personality . one side represents evil the other one represents goodness.
More like: one side represents evil and the other one represents more evil. Much more accurate description. |
|
|
|
EXPLICIT PICS: Nude Cologne Protest: ‘We Are Not Fair Game, Even When We Are Naked!’A performance artist has taken to the very same square in which dozens of women were sexually assaulted, stolen from, and raped, in a bid to remind Germany and the newly arrived migrants that women are “not fair game” even when naked. Milo Moire was photographed completely nude, holding up a poster reading “Respect us! We are no fair game, even when we are naked!!!” near Cologne’s landmark Cathedral on the morning of January 8, 2016. Thirty-one suspects, including 18 asylum seekers, are under investigation over offences including assault and theft in Cologne on New Year’s Eve, Germany’s interior ministry has said, while Cologne’s chief of police is said to have been dismissed over the scandal. http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/01/08/nude-female-cologne-protest-we-are-not-fair-game-even-when-we-are-naked/
|
|
|
|
Trump Could Win It AllSo if Donald Trump proved the political universe wrong and won the Republican presidential nomination, he would be creamed by Hillary Clinton, correct? A new survey of likely voters might at least raise momentary dyspepsia for Democrats since it suggests why it wouldn't be a cakewalk. The survey by Washington-based Mercury Analytics is a combination online questionnaire and "dial-test" of Trump's first big campaign ad among 916 self-proclaimed "likely voters" (this video shows the ad and the dial test results). It took place primarily Wednesday and Thursday and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent. Nearly 20 percent of likely Democratic voters say they'd cross sides and vote for Trump, while a small number, or 14 percent, of Republicans claim they'd vote for Clinton. When those groups were further broken down, a far higher percentage of the crossover Democrats contend they are "100 percent sure" of switching than the Republicans.When the firmed showed respondents the Trump ad, and assessed their responses to each moment of it, it found "the primary messages of Trump's ad resonated more than Democratic elites would hope." About 25 percent of Democrats "agree completely" that it raises some good point, with an additional 19 percent agreeing at least "somewhat." Mercury CEO Ron Howard, a Democrat whose firm works for candidates in both parties and corporate clients, concedes, "We expected Trump's first campaign spot to strongly appeal to Republican Trump supporters, with little impact – or in fact negative impact – on Democratic or independent voters." http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-01-08/new-poll-shows-donald-trump-is-a-real-threat-to-hillary-clinton
|
|
|
|
The only safe way out is for the people to learn self-governance and do it. It doesn't have anything to do with who gets elected. I agree. The US citizens had the option of freedom in 2008 and a second chance in 2012. They chose more government. I cannot rely upon US citizens to be smart or ever support freedom so it is on me to do so for my own life, without them. Fortunately Bitcoin allows me to do so with the money part of my life, the other parts I am coordinating as well. I just find it amazing that people support Trump. I only saw one of his TV shows so maybe he has a lot of fans (obviously since the show went on for many seasons) but I haven't heard anything from his mouth to show that he has any sort of ideology or much knowledge of our Constitution or the concept of freedom. He just seems to spew hate of everything. Which is probably what America feels right now as it crashes and burns so they feel like "he says what I feel". Agree. Although I never watched any of his TV show... Amazing indeed |
|
|
|
Obama gets away with some whoppers on guns at town hall event | Fox NewsPresident Obama’s appearance at a town hall meeting Thursday night on “Guns in America” was an orchestrated performance by invitation only. But event, hosted by CNN at George Mason University, saw anchor Anderson Cooper continually surprise the president. Cooper demonstrated a deft command of the facts related to the gun issue and that came through with his guests and in his questions—though, as the evening unfolded, he continually let the president get away with untruths about his past positions. Surprisingly, both sides of the issue were present in the small room—though, judging by audience applause, most were anti-gun-freedom. Some of the moments were unintentionally revealing. Cooper began by asking President Obama if he’d ever owned a gun. Mr. Obama sat up in surprise and said “no.” But, after a search for words, the president said he shoots skeet sometimes at Camp David before adding that he’s not much “of a marksman.” When he said that anyone who enjoys the shotgun sports knew he must not have shot skeet much, as “marksmanship” is a term used for target shooting, not by those who shoot skeet, trap or sporting clays. When Cooper shifted the discussion to why the president chose to use executive actions on the gun issue, instead of working with Congress, Cooper asked the president if he would meet with the NRA. The president said, “I’m happy to meet with the NRA,” but as he said it he had this snarky smile on his face that would have been more fitting on one of his late show appearances. Now, CNN says they invited President Obama to this live “town hall” on guns at George Mason University and that they later invited the NRA. The NRA, however, said they’d rather not play along with a “public relations spectacle orchestrated by the White House.” The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for firearms manufacturers, also declined an invitation. Larry Keane, senior vice president and general counsel to the NSSF, told me, “We declined the invitation because it is a White House-orchestrated made-for-TV event and not an opportunity for a genuine dialogue or an effort to find common ground. We remain disappointed that the president has chosen to demagogue the issue for political purposes instead of providing real leadership like working to advance Rep. Tim Murphy’s bipartisan legislation to address the issue of mental health, which is the common denominator in mass shootings.” Given Obama’s—and CNN’s—attacks on the NRA and gun manufacturers in general, it is hard to blame them for passing on the invitation, but in retrospect Cooper might have made them wish they were there to help keep President Obama squirming. As squirm he did—with the facts and in his seat. Taya Kyle, the wife of the late “American Sniper” Chris Kyle, was the first person Cooper called on. Kyle recently won a gun competition using the latest in sniper technology. She is a confident straight shooter. She pointed out that while the murder rate is at an all-time low, gun ownership is at an all time high. And then she asked, “Why not celebrate who we are?” President Obama began shifting on his stool and searching for words to lawyer his way out of these basic facts. He finally pointed out that national trends don’t necessarily hold true in all locales, but he never had to answer why the areas with the strictest gun controls tend to have the highest murder rates. There was also a rape survivor, Kimberly Corban, who, when called on said, “I have been unspeakably vandalized once already” before asking why she shouldn’t be able to carry a gun to protect herself. President Obama was really uncomfortable then. He began back peddling and said his current executive actions won’t interfere with her right to carry a gun. But he never had to explain that he has supported bans on concealed-carry permits. President Obama also repeatedly said that people can “just go on the Internet and buy whatever weapon they want.” But he was never forced to explain that any gun bought from a dealer over the Internet has to be sent to a local dealer that by law has to perform a background check before they can transfer the gun. Later, Cooper actually did challenge President Obama by breaking in and asking “is it fair to call it a conspiracy” that people think he wants to take their guns away. “Yes, it is fair to call it a conspiracy,” said President Obama, who then claimed that he isn’t plotting take peoples’ guns away. But Cooper didn’t force the president to address his advocacy for a renewed “assault weapons” ban, or for his administration’s public desire to use black lists, such as the no-fly list, to take away citizens’ Second Amendment rights without giving them even the basics of due process. There were other questions that took President Obama aback, such as when Sheriff Paul Babue pushed Obama on how his proposals wouldn’t solve recent mass shootings. Cooper even broke in to say that “none of the guns used in recent mass shootings, I should point out, were purchased from legal dealers.” President Obama didn’t have a clear answer to say why he isn’t swayed by these facts. He meandered before saying, “The young man who killed those children in Newtown didn’t have a criminal record but he had access to an arsenal.” He referred to an attack in China where a person attacked people with a knife and said “the vast majority survived because he wasn’t wielding a semiautomatic.” Again, Cooper allowed President Obama to escape an obvious allusion to the fact that he would like to ban semiautomatic firearms. The president was also allowed to get away with a big lie on “smart-guns.” President Obama said, “[Smart Gun technology] has not been developed primarily because it has been blocked by the NRA” and firearms manufacturers. Cooper didn’t challenge this point and instead called on a person in the audience, which changed the topic. Nevertheless, this is a clear and provable fabrication by President Obama. As I detail, with interviews with many gun makers, law makers and gun experts in my book “The Future of the Gun,” the NRA and the NSSF, to name two pro-Second Amendment groups, have statements on their websites saying they are not opposed to “smart-gun” technology. All the manufacturers, the NRA leadership and more, point to laws that seek to mandate smart-gun technology—regulations previously backed by the Obama administration—that are what is impeding smart-gun development. Even “60 Minutes” noted this, and pointed out a New Jersey law on the books that would do this, in a recent report. President Obama said early on in the town hall event that “people occupy different realities.” Anyone who watched CNN’s “Guns in America” was certainly left with the conclusion that in Obama’s chosen reality he wishes he could, with a stroke of his pen, pass European-style gun controls in America. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/01/07/obama-gets-away-with-some-whoppers-on-guns-at-town-hall-event.html?intcmp=hpbt2
|
|
|
|
Rape Survivor Asks Obama: Why Can’t You See Gun Restrictions Make My Kids and I Less Safe? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caBzcSYLnEI------------------------------------------- Telling her, in her face, that owning a gun is more dangerous that getting rapped...
|
|
|
|
Finnish police: There was unprecedented sexual harassment by asylum seekers in Helsinki on NYE tooTell me if this sounds familiar. Then tell me why Finnish police waited a week to mention it. As in Cologne, this apparently wasn’t a case of drunken revelry leading to boorishness and assault. It was planned. Helsinki deputy police chief Ilkka Koskimaki told AFP: “There hasn’t been this kind of harassment on previous New Year’s Eves or other occasions for that matter… This is a completely new phenomenon in Helsinki.” Security guards hired to patrol the city on New Year’s Eve told police there had been “widespread sexual harassment” at a central square where around 20,000 people had gathered for celebrations. Three sexual assaults allegedly took place at Helsinki’s central railway station on New Year’s Eve, where around 1,000 mostly Iraqi asylum seekers had converged… “Ahead of New Year’s Eve, the police caught wind of information that asylum seekers in the capital region possibly had similar plans to what the men gathered in Cologne’s railway station have been reported to have had,” police said in a statement. Strikingly similar to Cologne, from the premeditation involved to the train station being selected as a target to the estimate of how many men were there. To repeat, though: Why’d it take a week for this to come out, especially given the international media attention to what happened in Germany? Forgive my cynical heart for suspecting that Finnish authorities may have held the information in hopes of quietly burying it but then changed their minds, either because the Cologne attacks gave them cover to say what happened in Helsinki isn’t a uniquely Finnish problem or because they feared a cover-up like the one attempted in Cologne would eventually be exposed. Your must-read of the day on the consequences of importing huge numbers of young, unmarried men from male-dominated cultures comes from Valerie Hudson. Hudson looked at the sex ratios in Sweden among refugees from the Middle East and was struck by how skewed they are, especially among very young (i.e. teenaged) refugees. Sweden already had a slight male skew among 16- and 17-year-olds; when you add in the overwhelming skew among refugees of the same age, you get 123 males to 100 females, a ratio more lopsided than even China’s. Bad things tend to happen in societies where a large number of men are doomed to go unmarried. Young single men are prime recruits for terrorists, sure, but the cultural symptoms of this demographic asymmetry go beyond that: As my co-author Andrea Den Boer and I argued in our book, societies with extremely skewed sex ratios are more unstable even without jihadi ideologues in their midst. Numerous empirical studies have shown that sex ratios correlate significantly with violence and property crime—the higher the sex ratio, the worse the crime rate. Our research also found a link between sex ratios and the emergence of both violent criminal gangs and anti-government movements. It makes sense: When young adult males fail to make the transition to starting a household—particularly those young males who are already at risk for sociopathic behavior due to marginalization, a common concern among immigrants—their grievances are aggravated. There are also clearly negative effects for women in male-dominated populations. Crimes such as rape and sexual harassment become more common in highly masculinized societies, and women’s ability to move about freely and without fear within society is curtailed. In addition, demand for prostitution soars; that would create a deeply ironic outcome for Sweden, which invented the path-breaking Swedish abolitionist approach to prostitution. The solution for fans of open borders is straightforward. Exclude men from the refugee pool and start admitting women only, at least until sex ratios are back in balance. The solution for opponents of open borders is also straightforward. Shut the door before Europeans are forced to conclude that mass public celebrations are effectively “no-go zones” for the wider population, particularly women. If Europe’s current leadership doesn’t choose one of those options, whatever replaces them will. And whatever replaces them is more likely to choose the second option than the first one. As for Cologne, the city’s police chief, who insisted early on that there was no evidence refugees were involved in the assault when his own deputies had reason to believe otherwise, is now out of a job. I’ll leave you with this from Deutsche Welle, reporting that Cologne police found video of some of the New Year’s harassment of women on the cell phones of two suspects, presumably as a sort of trophy: “Police also found a piece of paper with translations of phrases like ‘nice breasts,’ ‘I’ll kill you,’ and ‘I want to have sex with you,’ translated from Arabic into German, wrote the broadcaster.”http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/08/finnish-police-there-was-unprecedented-sexual-harassment-by-asylum-seekers-in-helsinki-on-nye-too/
|
|
|
|
Obomba needs to include grade "A" morons and his own peace prize buying ass because they must have failed science class. xD "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction CONTROLLED OPPOSTION."  What do you think happens to all of that heat being generated by the billions of motors, engines, exhaust manifolds ect. ? Why isn't this so called environmental movement talking about it ? The whole debate is really American so I won't take position, but I wanted to tell you that the correct enunciation of Newton's law is "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction". With love. The exact translation of Newton's 3 rd Law is actually: "To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction: or the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts." Original text: "Actioni contrariam semper et æqualem esse reactionem: sive corporum duorum actiones in se mutuo semper esse æquales et in partes contrarias dirigi." This can be simplified to: "All forces come in pairs". The "equal and directed to contrary parts" bit is more of a general rule than a law as there are cases where force pairs are concurrent. So that must explain why my ignore list is filled with sig spammers.  That user is purposely taking my quote out of context because he/she needed the easy post and/or is a climate denier and/or a controlled opposition shill. Meanwhile, this assertion of yours...
What do you think happens to all of that heat being generated by the billions of motors, engines, exhaust manifolds ect. ?
Why isn't this so called environmental movement talking about it ?Is ridiculous, the aggregate heat output of man does not and will not increase the temperature of the planet. Although in certain areaas we see effects, and it is talked about - the so called "urban heat island" effect. That's been well studied. Those controlled opposition folks are almost as creative as I am.. haha I guess you have never had the pleasure of experiencing what it is like to feel the 400-600F heat exhaust of a car/truck/bus as it washes over you while stuck at a red light. Use a bike. Fossil fuel is evil. |
|
|
|
From a natural evolution viewpoint, the likelihood of one of your ancestor using a weapon to save his life or the life of your great great grandma, contributed greatly for you to have a philosophy right now.
Agree with you, that's why we need to learn about when to use it, as i said, an evolution..., hunt or have some fun, nothing more...in the end is not about gun control, is about education. Education. I agree. That is why the NRA is such a vital organization. |
|
|
|
As long as you remember those points: - No one is your friend on any forum
- There is 99.9% no need to reply to private message invitations
- Only be passionate about your own threads
- Act and communicate on a forum the way you would in real life
- A forum is not a free psychological therapy session to exorcise your personal demons
- Be a gentleman to everyone, no matter how strong the disdain you may have against their viewpoint
- Don't forget millions of people can barely eat everyday while you remake the world typing away on your latest generation smart phone
|
|
|
|
Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markingsHas the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel. That should be game, set, and match, yes? “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” That’s an order to violate the laws handling classified material. There is no other way to read that demand. Regardless of whether or not Sullivan complied, this demolishes Hillary’s claim to be ignorant of marking issues, as well as strongly suggests that the other thousand-plus instances where this did occur likely came under her direction. Fox News also noticed the e-mail this morning, although they don’t yet have a copy of it linked: However, one email thread from June 2011 appears to include Clinton telling her top adviser Jake Sullivan to send secure information through insecure means. In response to Clinton’s request for a set of since-redacted talking points, Sullivan writes, “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton responds “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper [with] no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” Ironically, an email thread from four months earlier shows Clinton saying she was “surprised” that a diplomatic oficer named John Godfrey used a personal email account to send a memo on Libya policy after the fall of Muammar Qaddafi. It’s probably time to review the relevant criminal statutes again in this case, such as 18 USC 793: d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or (e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or (f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. Did those talking points get illegally transmitted on Hillary’s order? If so, then Sullivan may find himself in legal trouble, too. Paragraph (g) makes it clear that “each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.” This explains why more than a thousand pieces of classified information have found their way into Hillary’s unauthorized and unsecured e-mail system — and why the markings have been stripped from them. Hillary herself apparently ordered the Code Red, so to speak. http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/08/whoa-hillary-e-mail-instructs-aide-to-transmit-classified-e-mail-without-markings/
|
|
|
|
Then vote for Dr. Paul. It is that simple.
One person's vote means nothing. Every voice counts. |
|
|
|
Scarborough: Bill Clinton’s Association with Sex Offender Jeffrey Epstein ‘Big Problem’ for Hillary — Donald Trump Will UseFriday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” host Joe Scarborough warned that the association between former President Bill Clinton and convicted sex offender billionaire Jeffrey Epstein will be something the media will be forced to focus on if Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump chooses to discuss it. And that could be a “big problem” for his wife Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, Scarborough said. According to Scarborough, previous allegations of Bill Clinton’s indiscretions, particularly in the 2008 presidential cycle when Hillary Clinton ran against Barack Obama, were not discussed in public forums. However, this time will be different because of Trump’s ability to promote a story line and force the media to talk about it. “By the way, we’ll do what other news shows don’t do,” Scarborough said. “What we do all the time and we’ll actually say what people say off the air and not saying off the air and not attribute anything to the. I talking about over the past — since 2008. Leading into 2008, everybody that came on the air talked about the same three women that Bill Clinton was having an affair with in 2008 and said, ‘It’s going to destroy his campaign.’ And, ‘It’s going to this and it’s going to that and it’s going to come out and everybody can repeat, give the three women’s names, where they’re from, their positions. That’s the thing that’s kind of remained quiet. The same thing with John Edwards and the affair he was having.” “You’re right,” he continued. “Everybody was too gentile. There are some people that were smooching Hillary Clinton left-and-right right now that were running around the Washington bureau saying this is going to blow up. It’s kill her campaign. Nobody ever talked about it because everybody played by the rules. The same thing has happened in the lead up to this campaign. Everybody’s talking about, I don’t know this Jeffrey Epstein guy. Is that his right name? People in the know always talk about Jeffrey Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein. I don’t even know who that dude is but I know that people in the know that are in this media area that don’t do what I do which is go to work and go home and hang out with their kids, they talk about Jeffrey Epstein.” “There’s going to be a big problem because of Bill Clinton and there’s always a swirl and it’s not by right wingers, it’s by the most powerful people in media and they’re always going like these would be really bad, bad issues for Hillary and Bill if anybody had the guts to bring it up,” Scarborough added. “Nobody does. That’s what makes Donald Trump more dangerous than any person out there. He will bring up stuff that nobody else will bring up and anybody thinking in the Clinton campaign that they’re going to get a break because it’s Donald Trump doing this instead of Jeb Bush, you are in lala land because there are no rules when it comes to Donald Trump for any of us, for any of us, anybody, anywhere.” http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/01/08/scarborough-bill-clintons-association-with-sex-offender-jeffrey-epstein-big-problem-for-hillary-donald-trump-will-use/------------------------------------- Who is he?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHCWLtRv4Qo
|
|
|
|
|
Then vote for Dr. Paul. It is that simple.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
