SectionC3

I don't disagree that it's unhealthy. And I certainly agree that it's an issue. I have to say, though, I'm tired of their projection and whining. Maybe they should put down the sausage, lay off the booze, practice a little fiscal and self discipline, and see where it takes them. They're just as bad as all of these whiners here. "Libtard" this, government's fault that, left did this, and that's why I'm a loser, they say. It's a all a crutch. They're losers because they took the easy way out time and time again, watched other people get ahead of them, and now look for someone else to blame. (Mexicans, liberals, China, immigrants, women, whatever.) Guys like me outhustled and outworked and out-"disciplined" these MAGA losers, and I feel not one ounce of sympathy or concern for these unaccountable losers.

Same old show with you guys. Still waiting for my "democrat-run" city to burn, and still checking the skies looking for the Antifa Air Force. You guys should go back to banging upholstery and dolphins and keep your weird stuff to yourselves.

Hoax on both counts. Watch this. Want to peacefully protest? Go for it. It's the American way. Want to commit crimes, or trespass, or damage property, or assault others? Unacceptable in any context, and to be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law. Anyone who has done that is wrong, plain and simple. Now try that about your January 6 colleagues. Still can't bring yourself to condemn it or to condemn the violence against police that occurred that day, Phony P. Sad, sick, and weird.

There's nothing false about it. You support J6. J6 involved the beating of cops. Therefore, you support beating cops. Your logic and sick and weird position, not mine. I hope you feel shame.

Hoax. KD doesn't support beating cops. You do.

Hoax.

Hoax. Also, from what I gather in reading your posts, you are, shall we say, well versed in the art of incompetence.

JD is such a whiner. Maybe he should go raw dog a living room set to help him calm down. Weird.

Hoax. Going to a MAGA rally must really bring out the waterworks in you. It's a uniquely toxic brew of heart disease, diabetes, dumb, and weird all in one location.

Aren't you the guy who a few days ago said he doesn't care about what other people do? Why so worried about controlling women and limited bodily freedom? And you call other people commies. Weird. MAGA is a toxic stew of selfish, dumb, and weird. No doubt about it. I bet if Westside gets out of mom's basement, slaps a little duct tape on that 2011 Maxima, and gets that moderately functional pile of s to Mar-a-Lago he will be welcomed with open arms. Don Jr. might even take a break from shooting zoo animals to escort Westside to meet "45" by the pool, where they can munch fast food, text Kim Jong Un, and dance the night away to the best the 80s have to offer.

Last I checked she's not the one who tried to overthrow the government and the Constitution on January 6. I have no idea what this weird gibberish means. Hoax.

Phony P is back! Weird, actually, is supporting the bashing of cops with fire extinguishers on January 6. That's weird. That's a lot of hoax in one paragraph. You have a vivid imagination. Not a lot of smarts, but an active imagination.

Hoax. It was ineffective and It gave people a false sense of security. See above.

You must be pretty mad at yourself about all of that bum HCQ advice.

Good point. This isn't about assigning blame, but accepting responsibility. Rational people wonder what they could have done better when they have or may have involvement in a situation such as this one. Maybe leaving that hard deadline for someone else wasn't a great plan. And maybe there's a little bit of responsibility to be accepted there. And maybe, just maybe, if a rational actor had been president from 2016-2020, that person would not now exploit that situation given the possibility that they should accept some responsibility for what occurred. I don't know who is responsible for what in this scenario. But if I might have played even a small role in the deaths of 13 service members, there's no way I would be politicking in front of one of their tombstones. Not a chance. And that's the difference between rational people and the weirdos like Trump.

This too is gibberish.

Hoax. “Arm” has a definition in that time. Your construction—an impermissible exercise, according to the literalists and the traditionalists—would require a savings clause, such as, “any arms now in existence or that may come into existence.” Sure thing. Maybe you can whine a little more about inflation out of one side of your mouth and then call everyone else a commie out of the other side of your mouth. When it’s not full of HCQ, of course.

Get out your late-1700s dictionary and get to work. If you’re going to play the literalist game then you better have an explanation for how the drafters could have meant to protect something that did not at that time exist. That’s the flaw with originalism and literalism. And, far as “can’t be infringed goes,” I’ll remind you that probably the most conservative justice of his time wrote heller. He disagrees with you. Why? Likely because there’s a difference between a reasonable restriction and an infringement. He doesn’t know what the point is, either. Kind of like that K D guy here. They just make it up as they go along. So now you’re saying that a musket isn’t an arm? Totally out of your depth once again.

I have no idea what this nonsense means.

Go for it. Get your Blackstone out. Resort to name calling, because that's all you have. You're completely, utterly, entirely wrong, and you know it. Otherwise we'd get a response on the merits. But all you have is name calling. You're miles out of your depth, and you don't know what you're talking about.

That's capitalism and Jacobson for you. If you don't like it, then become a commie. What was an "arm" when the constitution was written? A musket. So if you're playing the literalist game, you get a musket. Anything that wasn't an "arm" back then you don't get today, because it couldn't have been embraced by the operative definition of "arm." So enjoy your musket, under your view of the second amendment. Also, you're so twisted up right now that you're characterizing Scalia as a member of the "left." This is rich and a new level of clueless, even for MAGA. All you have is the red ex. Because you know you're wrong.

I'm going to guess that Obama and Biden were, like, in office at the time and performing official duties, whereas Trump today is a private citizen who was playing politics in front of the graves of our fallen heroes. So there's your easy explanation.

Unfortunately MAGA doesn't feel the same way that you do. MAGA wants to regulate bodies. MAGA wants to affect the lives of others. Remember the vaccination debates? There's this little thing called Jacobson v Massachusetts that MAGA ignored then and continues to ignore now. MAGA is about freedom only on MAGA's terms and only to the extent MAGA desires. You're tap dancing down the wrong path here. If you want to play the literalist game--who wrote the Constitution and the meaning of the words at the time they were written--then enjoy your musket and be prepared to hand over every other gun you own. Also, Scalia--the guy who wrote Heller--was an arch conservative. FYI. You're out of your depth here, and you're also wrong.

Wrong. Antonin Scalia disagrees with you. Try actually reading Heller, especially this part: "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited."

Hoax. Nobody is regulating your body. The regulation is of substances outside of your body.