I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

On 7/19/13 5:32 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 7/19/2013 4:01 PM, wrote:
On 19 Jul 2013 19:44:08 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

wrote:
On 19 Jul 2013 16:43:30 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I've seen dick Cheney on magazine covers ..and he is a far worse
evil man.

So was LBJ and they name government buildings after him.

So what is your point?

What is your singular obsession with Cheney when we have had so many
politicians making bad decisions that killed millions of people?


Our current POTUS gave up decades of work, blood, and treasure in the
Middle East to the Muslim Brotherhood... I guess Harry supports them too.

Say what? Are you saying you supported the Middle East Muslim
dictatorships in Egypt and Libya, the dictatorships that repressed and
murdered their own people?

I realize you righties are big fans of dictatorships that purportedly
support our foreign policy agenda, but, sooner or later, the people in
those countries revolt and if we are too closely tied to the overthrown
dictators, we then have enemies in those countries. If you need
examples, consider Cuba, Iran, Vietnam, Chile, Panama, El Salvador.

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

In article ,
says...

On 7/19/13 3:33 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 12:44:25 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:29:39 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/lzephd4

Yup the liberals are the ones who rioted in Oakland this week and are
issuing death threats against a man exonerated by the court.

This is a glam shot of another liberal magazine's current hero

http://tinyurl.com/l9ovd86

But they put Charles Manson on their cover too so who should be
surprised.

I'm sorry, just what do you links and banter about people in Oakland
have to do with the graffiti that I posted and who might have done it?

You think graffiti rises to the level of arson, theft and general
mayhem?
How about all the death threats Z has had?

I know, you think he should be murdered too.



I doubt iLoogy wants Zimmerman murdered. I don't, either, but I think it
would be appropriate for him to face the same situation he forced on
Martin, with the other guy armed, too.


Please. You said "I think." Do you often have these
kinds of "thoughts?" It's nonsense.
Just don't say "I think."
It's not "you." Leave that to others.
You take care of the thoughtless insult side of the
business, okay? You do mediocre job of that, which is
enough here.

I'll explain in the most simple terms.
It's very doubtful you can train Zimmerman to be a thug,
so if the "other guy" was a Martin clone, he would just
shoot Zimmerman dead before Zimmerman even thought to
pull out his gun.
That may be exactly what you want. Murder.
Is that what "you think?"
Or was it more like an idea of the two slowly walking
down a dusty street toward one another at high noon,
waiting for the first one to draw his Colt.
Is that really the vision dancing around barely
suppressed in your little noggin?
Hard to say, given how you "think."
If you want high-schoolers like Martin armed, get the
laws changed so they can carry too.
Maybe a Martin and a Zimmerman could fatally shoot each
other.
You appear to be a real fan of violence, so I guess that
would be the absolute best outcome for you.
A gunfight to the death of both.


In at least part of the Old West, if you confronted an unarmed man on
the street and ended up shooting him, the townfolk would string you up.

Yes, you've already been clear enough about your
preference for lynch mob "law" when it suits your
bigotry.
But that's not how the law is right now. Really, it's
2013, not 1875.
I'm afraid you're out of luck.
Now, now, don't be seeing red. You'll get over it.
Tomorrow is a new day.
Maybe a good day to renew your carry permit.
Never know when you'll run into an ultimate bad-ass like
Georgie Zimmerman.

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

On 7/19/13 6:53 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 7/19/13 3:33 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 12:44:25 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:29:39 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/lzephd4

Yup the liberals are the ones who rioted in Oakland this week and are
issuing death threats against a man exonerated by the court.

This is a glam shot of another liberal magazine's current hero

http://tinyurl.com/l9ovd86

But they put Charles Manson on their cover too so who should be
surprised.

I'm sorry, just what do you links and banter about people in Oakland
have to do with the graffiti that I posted and who might have done it?

You think graffiti rises to the level of arson, theft and general
mayhem?
How about all the death threats Z has had?

I know, you think he should be murdered too.



I doubt iLoogy wants Zimmerman murdered. I don't, either, but I think it
would be appropriate for him to face the same situation he forced on
Martin, with the other guy armed, too.


Please. You said "I think." Do you often have these
kinds of "thoughts?" It's nonsense.
Just don't say "I think."
It's not "you." Leave that to others.
You take care of the thoughtless insult side of the
business, okay? You do mediocre job of that, which is
enough here.

I'll explain in the most simple terms.
It's very doubtful you can train Zimmerman to be a thug,
so if the "other guy" was a Martin clone, he would just
shoot Zimmerman dead before Zimmerman even thought to
pull out his gun.
That may be exactly what you want. Murder.
Is that what "you think?"
Or was it more like an idea of the two slowly walking
down a dusty street toward one another at high noon,
waiting for the first one to draw his Colt.
Is that really the vision dancing around barely
suppressed in your little noggin?
Hard to say, given how you "think."
If you want high-schoolers like Martin armed, get the
laws changed so they can carry too.
Maybe a Martin and a Zimmerman could fatally shoot each
other.
You appear to be a real fan of violence, so I guess that
would be the absolute best outcome for you.
A gunfight to the death of both.


In at least part of the Old West, if you confronted an unarmed man on
the street and ended up shooting him, the townfolk would string you up.

Yes, you've already been clear enough about your
preference for lynch mob "law" when it suits your
bigotry.
But that's not how the law is right now. Really, it's
2013, not 1875.
I'm afraid you're out of luck.
Now, now, don't be seeing red. You'll get over it.
Tomorrow is a new day.
Maybe a good day to renew your carry permit.
Never know when you'll run into an ultimate bad-ass like
Georgie Zimmerman.



What a gasbag you are. Sheesh.

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

On 7/19/2013 8:25 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 7/19/13 6:53 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 7/19/13 3:33 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 12:44:25 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:29:39 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/lzephd4

Yup the liberals are the ones who rioted in Oakland this week and are
issuing death threats against a man exonerated by the court.

This is a glam shot of another liberal magazine's current hero

http://tinyurl.com/l9ovd86

But they put Charles Manson on their cover too so who should be
surprised.

I'm sorry, just what do you links and banter about people in Oakland
have to do with the graffiti that I posted and who might have done it?

You think graffiti rises to the level of arson, theft and general
mayhem?
How about all the death threats Z has had?

I know, you think he should be murdered too.



I doubt iLoogy wants Zimmerman murdered. I don't, either, but I think it
would be appropriate for him to face the same situation he forced on
Martin, with the other guy armed, too.


Please. You said "I think." Do you often have these
kinds of "thoughts?" It's nonsense.
Just don't say "I think."
It's not "you." Leave that to others.
You take care of the thoughtless insult side of the
business, okay? You do mediocre job of that, which is
enough here.

I'll explain in the most simple terms.
It's very doubtful you can train Zimmerman to be a thug,
so if the "other guy" was a Martin clone, he would just
shoot Zimmerman dead before Zimmerman even thought to
pull out his gun.
That may be exactly what you want. Murder.
Is that what "you think?"
Or was it more like an idea of the two slowly walking
down a dusty street toward one another at high noon,
waiting for the first one to draw his Colt.
Is that really the vision dancing around barely
suppressed in your little noggin?
Hard to say, given how you "think."
If you want high-schoolers like Martin armed, get the
laws changed so they can carry too.
Maybe a Martin and a Zimmerman could fatally shoot each
other.
You appear to be a real fan of violence, so I guess that
would be the absolute best outcome for you.
A gunfight to the death of both.


In at least part of the Old West, if you confronted an unarmed man on
the street and ended up shooting him, the townfolk would string you up.

Yes, you've already been clear enough about your
preference for lynch mob "law" when it suits your
bigotry.
But that's not how the law is right now. Really, it's
2013, not 1875.
I'm afraid you're out of luck.
Now, now, don't be seeing red. You'll get over it.
Tomorrow is a new day.
Maybe a good day to renew your carry permit.
Never know when you'll run into an ultimate bad-ass like
Georgie Zimmerman.



What a gasbag you are. Sheesh.

After studying boating all out's post for 1 1/2 hours, this is the best
you can come up with for a reply? Oh my. You really have lost it.

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 7/19/13 11:29 AM, iBoaterer wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/lzephd4


Probably was herring, flajim and snotty.
Sure. That's it, deadbeat.

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

On 7/20/13 1:24 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 17:19:05 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

Cheney is a criminal who should have been prosecuted. He wasn't. Why are
you so upset over a magazine cover that shows the Boston bomber, who is
far lesser of a criminal than Cheney, who appeared on many magazine covers?

Cheney is a politician who made policy decisions you don't agree with
but congress did.
The other guy is a terrorist


A terrorist makes war upon civilians. Cheney qualifies as a terrorist.

By that definition the biggest terrorists in history are FDR, Truman
and Winston Churchill.
We talk a lot about the nukes but daytime fire bombing of cities
killed far more civilians.


Nice try defending CheneySlime.

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

On 7/20/13 1:34 AM, wrote:

In the moments before the shooting, Martin was on top of and had
complete control over Zimmerman, Zimmerman not accomplishing any
effective defensive measures and was crying like a little girl yet
Martin kept beating on him.

Wow, that must be what Fox was presenting, eh?

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 17:19:05 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

Cheney is a criminal who should have been prosecuted. He wasn't. Why are
you so upset over a magazine cover that shows the Boston bomber, who is
far lesser of a criminal than Cheney, who appeared on many magazine covers?

Cheney is a politician who made policy decisions you don't agree with
but congress did.
The other guy is a terrorist


A terrorist makes war upon civilians. Cheney qualifies as a terrorist.

By that definition the biggest terrorists in history are FDR, Truman
and Winston Churchill.
We talk a lot about the nukes but daytime fire bombing of cities
killed far more civilians.

Once again, you try to deflect.

I'd bet it wasn't a liberal that did this.....
 

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 17:28:02 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 7/19/13 3:33 PM, wrote:

I doubt iLoogy wants Zimmerman murdered. I don't, either, but I think it
would be appropriate for him to face the same situation he forced on
Martin, with the other guy armed, too.

In at least part of the Old West, if you confronted an unarmed man on
the street and ended up shooting him, the townfolk would string you up.

You are leaping to the conclusion that Zimmerman, somehow confronted
Martin when even the girlfriend admits Martin probably threw the first
punch.

You DO realize, don't you, that just because Martin might have thrown
the first punch, doesn't mean that Zimmerman didn't "confront" Martin,
right?

A lot of talk was raised about a depraved mind.
In the moments before the shooting, Martin was on top of and had
complete control over Zimmerman, Zimmerman not accomplishing any
effective defensive measures and was crying like a little girl yet
Martin kept beating on him.
At that moment, who had the depraved mind?
Who was in mortal fear?
That is the definition of self defense.

Yes, Martin was self defending himself, true enough.

USA today made the statement "If Zimmerman did not have a gun, Martin
would be alive". The question is, would Zimmerman be dead?

No, Zimmerman wouldn't have ever confronted Martin, he'd have done what
the cops always say to do, what the police liaison told them to do, and
what the literature told them to do, wait for the cops.