Bush is an idiot and Republicans suck

[240 is Back]

Ok which freedoms are those?  Please name them for me so I can show the reason behind them.  And then I'll show you the greater efforts by liberals to destroy your freedoms more than Repubs ever did or will.

Okay.  Sounds like a deal.

Warrantless wiretaps.  Secret searches we are never informed about.  Torture.

Please tell me how liberals have cost us more freedoms than these in the last 6 years.

[240 is Back]

Please, I see people question what we're doing every day at work.  Freedom of thought is allowed (almost encouraged) as long as you can still get the job done.

The military encourages freedom of thought? hahahahahahaha!

Is that why they discipline soldiers for sending each other 9/11 skeptic links?  Is that why your browsers have certain world news links blocked? hahahaha.  you are a sucker.

[Brixtonbulldog]

Actually, I was referring to the current Iraq "war":  http://www.fighting-dems.com/

I don't know the exact #'s but, from memory, I think of the approximately 50 Iraq vets (current war) who chose to run for Congress all but ~ 2-3 ran as Democrats (which could be for many other reasons than that they believe the Democratic platform - whatever the f**k that is)

So how many got elected?

I fully agree that most who are there fully believe in what they are doing and why they are doing it.

I'm not sure if they could articulate it though.  The kids that I know that are there aren't really interested (or even really aware) of the politics.

For some of us it was a very simple decision to support that effort.  Shit was getting really fucked up over there and we had the opportunity and the capability to do something about it.  People of pricipal don't puss out because it would mean a serous commitment and little followthrough.  Those are things the majority of Americans nowadays (this means you) lack.

For the rest of us:

First it was because Saddam has weapons of mass destruction that he was about to use at any moment.  Somewhere along the way this morphed into Saddam was responsible for 9-11

About to use at any moment?  If he didn't have them then how was he able to use them against his own people?  Please show me how that's possible.  Just because we couldn't find them doesn't mean they weren't there in the first place.  Once again I can't say what I want to tell everyone because I have a job and a clearance.  All I can say is that he DID have them and what happened to them made it impossible to expose where they went without openning a war on another front and comprimising Nat'l security.

Then it was to give them freedom (while ironically attempting to erode our freedom here at home)

Which we did and most Iraqis were extremely supportive of this at the time.  Erode our own freedoms?  Please, NSA listens to private citizens with links to terrorism.  And they can hold suspected terrorists for extended periods of time.  OH WHAT A HUGE IMPACT ONMY FREEDOM.  Not.

Then it was because Al Quada was in Iraq and if we didn't fight them there we would have to fight them here (the worst reason of all).

So let's see.  We're already over there and then Al Queda (or whatever Terrorist group) attacks us.  Two choices numnuts... fight or run.  I'm sure YOU would run but I would rather see hundreds/thousands of assholes slaughtered today then those same assholes getting the opportunity to kill innocent americans AGAIN tomorrow.

Now we're just stuck in the middle of Sunni's and Shia's torturing and killing each other (why? because Mumhamid was dumb enough to die without having a son from what I can tell - although it's probably mostly just revenge for stuff that's happened previously and control of the country and assets).

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.  Might as well do the right thing.  Do you not understand that these people want you dead and your family dead?  And they're not just going to GO AWAY.  No it's because Americans are so fat and happy thinking we're untouchable.

Military leader acknowledged recently that foreing fighters account for only 2-3% of the forces fighting in the country

Estimates on this vary.  But nice job just choosing the one that supports YOUR opinion.

Afghanistan is almost a lost cause and basically we (the country and the planet are worse off than we were 5 years ago).

Why?  Fighting them there with our military is far better than the streets of a major american city with firefighters.

How about the fact that this war is going to bankrupt our country.  The entire cost of this war is not even included in the budget.

Yeah right... the USA is about to go bankrupt.  Gimmie a fucking break.  Get back to me when this happens.

Our military is spread way too thin and we're actually at a greater risk now because we're unable to respond to other threats

No we're not.  You greatly underestimate our capabilities of fighting multiple fronts at once.

The real problem is that we don't know how to leave without making matters even worse.

We shouldn't leave until we're finished.  That's the point.

Big winner is all of this will most likely be IRAN.   Thanks alot GWB

I thank GWB.  I'm just glad Kerry or some other flake liberal vagina isn't in charge.
 

[Brixtonbulldog]

Okay.  Sounds like a deal.

Warrantless wiretaps.  Secret searches we are never informed about.  Torture.

Please tell me how liberals have cost us more freedoms than these in the last 6 years.

Funny thing is most democrats knew about this years ago and said nothing until election time.  I fully support wiretaps on suspected terrorists.  What you don't understand is how many people are involved in wire tapping and the amount of authorizations and check are in place to ensure they are warranted and show probable cause.

Secret searches same thing.  Although this is way more rare and even more tightly controlled.

Torture?  Oh really.  And what techniques employed have been anything other than humane?  I bet you think tickling someone is torture as long as it makes republicans/bush look bad. 

Please, this country doesn't practice severe torture.

[Brixtonbulldog]

The military encourages freedom of thought? hahahahahahaha!

Is that why they discipline soldiers for sending each other 9/11 skeptic links?  Is that why your browsers have certain world news links blocked? hahahaha.  you are a sucker.

hahaha... I can access ANY news site from work.  I can even access all your backwards ass CT sites.  Way to make an ass of yourself.

Did some CT website tell you that?  What a fucking idiot.

[Brixtonbulldog]

Okay.  Sounds like a deal.

Warrantless wiretaps.  Secret searches we are never informed about.  Torture.

Please tell me how liberals have cost us more freedoms than these in the last 6 years.

How bout excessive gun control measures, an attack against the BILL OF RIGHTS.

How bout discouraging and even punishing freedom of religion, especially in our schools, another attack on the BILL OF RIGHTS.

How bout affirmative action?  An attack on equal opportunity.

[ieffinhatecardio]

MAybe from the first Iraq war cause there certainly aren't many of those.  And most guys who come back from Iraq end up signing up for 2 or 3 tours total and going back for more.  They believe in what we're doing over there.  (for what it's worth)

This is interesting to me, from what I read and hear Bush supporters all enthusiastically point out how many soldiers are signing up again for more tours of duty in Iraq because they believe in the cause. And conversely I read and hear from Bush proponents that soldiers are complaining in record numbers and that many are being manipulated into rejoining and that many don't understand or agree with what's going on in Iraq. I also have read that recruiters are having a very hard time finding new recruits and that many recruiters are outright lying to get people enlisted and that people that would have been turned away before are being accepted now.

I don't know exactly what the truth is but I'm pretty sure it lies somewhere in the middle of both points of view.

I'd also be curious to find out the circumstances behind why soldiers do re-enlist or don't re-enlist. Do certain soldiers go back because they want to stay in the Military and make careers? Do some stay because they don't have any other options? Do they stay because they want to liberate Iraq and are behind this war?

[Cap]

Okay.  Sounds like a deal.

Warrantless wiretaps.  Secret searches we are never informed about.  Torture.
Were you tortured?  Your friends?  I'm fine with it for those that deserve it.

Please tell me how liberals have cost us more freedoms than these in the last 6 years.

How bout excessive gun control measures, an attack against the BILL OF RIGHTS.
Give me Glocks or give me death.

How bout discouraging and even punishing freedom of religion, especially in our schools, another attack on the BILL OF RIGHTS.
I agree.

How bout affirmative action?  An attack on equal opportunity.
Aff action needs to go.  It is nothing but a nice sounding quota.

[Brixtonbulldog]

This is interesting to me, from what I read and hear Bush supporters all enthusiastically point out how many soldiers are signing up again for more tours of duty in Iraq because they believe in the cause. And conversely I read and hear from Bush proponents that soldiers are complaining in record numbers and that many are being manipulated into rejoining and that many don't understand or agree with what's going on in Iraq. I also have read that recruiters are having a very hard time finding new recruits and that many recruiters are outright lying to get people enlisted and that people that would have been turned away before are being accepted now.

Rarer than you think but it DOES happen.

I don't know exactly what the truth is but I'm pretty sure it lies somewhere in the middle of both points of view.

I'd also be curious to find out the circumstances behind why soldiers do re-enlist or don't re-enlist. Do certain soldiers go back because they want to stay in the Military and make careers? Do some stay because they don't have any other options? Do they stay because they want to liberate Iraq and are behind this war?

Most people who join the military end up deciding to try and make a career of it.  That is the most common reason.  Some DO stay because they feel they have no other options.  It's not a job, it's a lifestyle and for most in the service that way of life it where it's at for them.  Also, just an interesting fact more and more sailors and airmen that are NOT near the front or deployed are ASKING to be sent to the gulf. 

[pumpster]

[Brixtonbulldog]

I'm sorry I can't stop laughing.  That was hilarious.

[pumpster]

&mode=related&search=

[Straw Man]

So how many got elected?  No Clue - The point was that most ran as Democrats -try staying focused - maybe up the Ritalin a bit.

For some of us it was a very simple decision to support that effort.  Shit was getting really fucked up over there and we had the opportunity and the capability to do something about it.  People of pricipal don't puss out because it would mean a serous commitment and little followthrough.  Those are things the majority of Americans nowadays (this means you) lack.

Uh - my first thought would be simple mind = simple decision.   Nothing about Iraq is or was simple.    I'm not quite sure how to unpack your brilliant statement "shit was getting fucked up over there"   What does that mean EXACTLY.  How was it any more fucked up when we invaded then it was in previous years.   Where else should we go next based on your "Fucked Up" Meter???   

About to use at any moment?  If he didn't have them then how was he able to use them against his own people?  Please show me how that's possible.   Are serious?  Do you know anything?  Saddam had chemical weapons because the US sold them to him and we gladly watched him run a little real world experiment for us.   You do know that right???  right?

Which we did and most Iraqis were extremely supportive of this at the time.  Erode our own freedoms?  Please, NSA listens to private citizens with links to terrorism.  And they can hold suspected terrorists for extended periods of time.  OH WHAT A HUGE IMPACT ONMY FREEDOM.  Not.  Iraqi's had more freedom under the secular government of  Saddam than they do today.  Were 3000 Iraqi's being killed each month before the war.  Yes - Saddam was an f'ng sadist and killed thousands of people but at nothing near the pace that it's happening today.   From your answer I assume that you would be OK if the governement deemed you a terrorist but didn't show you any proof, never charged you of anything and held you indefinitely.   

We're already over there and then Al Queda (or whatever Terrorist group) attacks us. You've lost me again.  Where did terrorist attack in the US AFTER we went to Iraq.  Didn't we get attacked by 19 Saudi's.  Shouldn't we have attacked Saudi Arabia.   Even today Saudi Arabia is training many more children to hate the US than any other country

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't. finally - something we agree on

Might as well do the right thing.  What would the "right" thing be EXACTLY?

Do you not understand that these people want you dead and your family dead?   Actually I'm neither a Suni nor a Shia.  I think it's those parties who want each other dead.  They (both Shia and maybe not so much Suni's) want us out of Iraq so they can set up an Islamic theocracy.  Since Shia are the majority of the nation they will be a natural ally of Iran - And our soldiers are dying to help them create it and we're (the US taxpayer) is paying for it.   

Estimates on this vary.  But nice job just choosing the one that supports YOUR opinion. That "estimate" came from US military testifying ~ a week or so ago.   I'd find the exact person, quote, date, place but I have a feeling it wouldn't matter much to you anyway.  Feel free to show me contrary data

Why?  Fighting them there with our military is far better than the streets of a major american city with firefighters Why would our firefighters be doing the fighting??  How would "they" get their huge armies over here to fight in the first place.  Do your really truly believe that if we don't fight them in Iraq or Afghanastan that the nefarious "they" will come to the US and be fighting in the streets???   This is the dumbest argument in support of staying in Iraq and it really only works on people who think everything is "simple"  If that does happen though we're sure to have hundreds of thousands of guys like you ready to fight them right???

Yeah right... the USA is about to go bankrupt.  Gimmie a fucking break.  Get back to me when this happens.  I would try to explain this to you but as I've said before I think I would have better success trying to show my dog a card trick than helping you to understand this.  You probably think we could never go broke becaue all we have to do is keep printing more money.  Simple problem - Simple solution right?

No we're not.  You greatly underestimate our capabilities of fighting multiple fronts at once. Again, OUR military leaders have raised this point.  Being the military guy that you are you understand that you actually need boots on the ground to really take and hold territory. 

We shouldn't leave until we're finished.  That's the point. What if based on the current strategy we're never finished.   I know you think we have infinite $'s to pay for all this but let's assume for now that at some point it gets too expensive to justify continuing - what then?  BTW - how will we know when the job is done and we're finished.  Please be SPECIFIC

I thank GWB.  I'm just glad Kerry or some other flake liberal vagina isn't in charge.   I'm not a fan of Kerry but maybe we can get another liberal flake vagina like Wesley Clark.   If Bush's dad hadn't been the president then Bush would be running a bait shop in Texas right now.  Something that I think you might aspire to someday.

[240 is Back]

Brix, you have been outclassed and your argument disassembled.

[Camel Jockey]

For some of us it was a very simple decision to support that effort.  Shit was getting really fucked up over there and we had the opportunity and the capability to do something about it.  People of pricipal don't puss out because it would mean a serous commitment and little followthrough.  Those are things the majority of Americans nowadays (this means you) lack.

Uh - my first thought would be simple mind = simple decision.   Nothing about Iraq is or was simple.    I'm not quite sure how to unpack your brilliant statement "shit was getting fucked up over there"   What does that mean EXACTLY.  How was it any more fucked up when we invaded then it was in previous years.   Where else should we go next based on your "Fucked Up" Meter???   

About to use at any moment?  If he didn't have them then how was he able to use them against his own people?  Please show me how that's possible.   Are serious?  Do you know anything?  Saddam had chemical weapons because the US sold them to him and we gladly watched him run a little real world experiment for us.   You do know that right???  right?

Which we did and most Iraqis were extremely supportive of this at the time.  Erode our own freedoms?  Please, NSA listens to private citizens with links to terrorism.  And they can hold suspected terrorists for extended periods of time.  OH WHAT A HUGE IMPACT ONMY FREEDOM.  Not.  Iraqi's had more freedom under the secular government of  Saddam than they do today.  We're 3000 Iraqi's being killed each month before the war.  Yes - Saddam was an f'ng sadist and killed thousands of people but at nothing near the pace that it's happening today.   From your answer I assume that you would be OK if the governement deemed you a terrorist but didn't show you any proof, never charged you of anything and held you indefinitely.   

We're already over there and then Al Queda (or whatever Terrorist group) attacks us. You've lost me again.  Where did terrorist attack in the US AFTER we went to Iraq.  Didn't we get attacked by 19 Saudi's.  Shouldn't we have attacked Saudi Arabia.   Even today Saudi Arabia is training many more children to hate the US than any other country



Do you not understand that these people want you dead and your family dead?   Actually I'm neither a Suni or a Shia.  I think it's those parties who want each other dead.  They (both Shia and maybe not so much Suni's) want us out of Iraq so they can set up an Islamic theocracy.  Since Shia are the majority of the nation they will be a natural ally of Iran - And our soldiers are dying to help them create it and we're (the US taxpayer) is paying for it.   

Estimates on this vary.  But nice job just choosing the one that supports YOUR opinion. That "estimate" came from US military testifying ~ a week or so ago.   I'd find the exact person, quote, date, place but I have a feeling it wouldn't matter much to you anyway.  Feel free to show me contrary data


Yeah right... the USA is about to go bankrupt.  Gimmie a fucking break.  Get back to me when this happens.  I would try to explain this to you but as I've said before I think I would have better success trying to show my dog a card trick than helping you to understand this.  You probably think we could never go broke becaue all we have to do is keep printing more money.  Simple problem - Simple solution right?

No we're not.  You greatly underestimate our capabilities of fighting multiple fronts at once. Again, OUR military leaders have raised this point.  Being the military guy that you are you understand that you actually need boots on the ground to really take and hold territory. 

We shouldn't leave until we're finished.  That's the point. What if based on the current strategy we're never finished.   I know you think we have infinite $'s to pay for all this but let's assume for now that at some point it gets too expensive to justify continuing - what then?  BTW - how will we know when the job is done and we're finished.  Please be SPECIFIC

Great points! When points like these have been brought up people like Mr. I simply said "exit, stage right." It'll be interesting and pathetic to see if brixton does the same thing.

[Brixtonbulldog]

So how many got elected?  No Clue - The point was that most ran as Democrats -try staying focused - maybe up the Ritalin a bit.

I wasn't argueing that you were wrong I was asking you a question.

For some of us it was a very simple decision to support that effort.  Shit was getting really fucked up over there and we had the opportunity and the capability to do something about it.  People of pricipal don't puss out because it would mean a serous commitment and little followthrough.  Those are things the majority of Americans nowadays (this means you) lack.

Uh - my first thought would be simple mind = simple decision.   Nothing about Iraq is or was simple.    I'm not quite sure how to unpack your brilliant statement "shit was getting fucked up over there"   What does that mean EXACTLY.  How was it any more fucked up when we invaded then it was in previous years.   Where else should we go next based on your "Fucked Up" Meter???   

Darfur... just an example.  You know damn well what I mean.  For someone trying to come across as superior why do you need me to explain what was fucked up. ..EVERYTHING.  Human rights, martial law, torture, etc.  I'm sorry you're too out of touch with your average american to understand.  I'll up my vocabulary for ya.

About to use at any moment?  If he didn't have them then how was he able to use them against his own people?  Please show me how that's possible.   Are serious?  Do you know anything?  Saddam had chemical weapons because the US sold them to him and we gladly watched him run a little real world experiment for us.   You do know that right???  right?

When did I say he DIDN"T have chem weapons.  I'm sorry I'll stop being so sarcastic in my posts.  I was saying he DID have them.

I know and agree.  We sat there and let him do it because we chose not to act until he invaded Kuwait.  Thank god we didn't wait until he did it again this time.

Which we did and most Iraqis were extremely supportive of this at the time.  Erode our own freedoms?  Please, NSA listens to private citizens with links to terrorism.  And they can hold suspected terrorists for extended periods of time.  OH WHAT A HUGE IMPACT ONMY FREEDOM.  Not.  Iraqi's had more freedom under the secular government of  Saddam than they do today.  Were 3000 Iraqi's being killed each month before the war.  Yes - Saddam was an f'ng sadist and killed thousands of people but at nothing near the pace that it's happening today.   From your answer I assume that you would be OK if the governement deemed you a terrorist but didn't show you any proof, never charged you of anything and held you indefinitely.   

C'mon... how many cases of that happening have we seen?  If someone has associations with terrorists it usually fucking obvious.  That's why we wire tap and search.

We're already over there and then Al Queda (or whatever Terrorist group) attacks us. You've lost me again.  Where did terrorist attack in the US AFTER we went to Iraq.  Didn't we get attacked by 19 Saudi's.  Shouldn't we have attacked Saudi Arabia.   Even today Saudi Arabia is training many more children to hate the US than any other country

When an insurgency attacked our troops.  Where did they come from?  Terrorist orgs, iranian militias, etc.  You know that.

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't. finally - something we agree on

Might as well do the right thing.  What would the "right" thing be EXACTLY?

Stay and fight with new leadership.  Re examine our strategy.  Rally the American people (if that's possible) and support the war and our troops and stay until the jub is finished and iraq has some semblance of stability.

Do you not understand that these people want you dead and your family dead?   Actually I'm neither a Suni nor a Shia.  I think it's those parties who want each other dead.  They (both Shia and maybe not so much Suni's) want us out of Iraq so they can set up an Islamic theocracy.  Since Shia are the majority of the nation they will be a natural ally of Iran - And our soldiers are dying to help them create it and we're (the US taxpayer) is paying for it.   

I was refering to the terrorist and iranian supported insurgency. 

Estimates on this vary.  But nice job just choosing the one that supports YOUR opinion. That "estimate" came from US military testifying ~ a week or so ago.   I'd find the exact person, quote, date, place but I have a feeling it wouldn't matter much to you anyway.  Feel free to show me contrary data

You would do the same if I produced any different.  Neither you or I will agree on this.

Why?  Fighting them there with our military is far better than the streets of a major american city with firefighters Why would our firefighters be doing the fighting??  How would "they" get their huge armies over here to fight in the first place.  Do your really truly believe that if we don't fight them in Iraq or Afghanastan that the nefarious "they" will come to the US and be fighting in the streets???   This is the dumbest argument in support of staying in Iraq and it really only works on people who think everything is "simple"  If that does happen though we're sure to have hundreds of thousands of guys like you ready to fight them right???

Terrorists don't need to get a battalion over here.  As has happened they only need 20 or so to kill 3000 people.  Your thinking that they need to come over here as an army is the dumbest arguement I've heard.

Yeah right... the USA is about to go bankrupt.  Gimmie a fucking break.  Get back to me when this happens.  I would try to explain this to you but as I've said before I think I would have better success trying to show my dog a card trick than helping you to understand this.  You probably think we could never go broke becaue all we have to do is keep printing more money.  Simple problem - Simple solution right?

Okay insult my intelligence.  But when it never happens you'll be left showing your dog card tricks.  Feel free to explain.

No we're not.  You greatly underestimate our capabilities of fighting multiple fronts at once. Again, OUR military leaders have raised this point.  Being the military guy that you are you understand that you actually need boots on the ground to really take and hold territory. 

Of course it's a concern but that doesn't mean it has become a problem.  This arguement is minor.

We shouldn't leave until we're finished.  That's the point. What if based on the current strategy we're never finished.   I know you think we have infinite $'s to pay for all this but let's assume for now that at some point it gets too expensive to justify continuing - what then?  BTW - how will we know when the job is done and we're finished.  Please be SPECIFIC

When the iraqi gov't can hold down rebellions and bring up a substantial police and military presence to keep the peace to a level acceptable to what WE deem necassary to leave.

I thank GWB.  I'm just glad Kerry or some other flake liberal vagina isn't in charge.   I'm not a fan of Kerry but maybe we can get another liberal flake vagina like Wesley Clark.   If Bush's dad hadn't been the president then Bush would be running a bait shop in Texas right now.  Something that I think you might aspire to someday.

I'm sure you'd love to think that I'm some redneck from bumfuck, MS who chews tobacco all day at work and all I do is clean guns all day and never pay any attention to anything more substantial, that's fine.  I have my own opinion about what kind of human garbage you probably are and the little success you might experience in life as a result of you ass backwards views.  The truth is if Bush 1 had finished this job the first time instead of buckling pressure from the left (people like yourself) to stop the Gulf war after 100 hours then we wouldn't have had to go back.  Now we went back to deal with the same problems and worthless nonpersons in society like yourself have made bush hating and war hating trendy.  Congratulations.  I don't care.  I don't do what I do or feel as I do to defend your right to be stupid.  But I will do these things to defend people that contribute and actually support thier country and livelyhood.

[Brixtonbulldog]

Brix, you have been outclassed and your argument disassembled.

You are not on a level to make that judgement.  We all know where your mind is at.

[ieffinhatecardio]

Did you honestly just blame Bush Senior's failure in Iraq during Desert Storm on the Democrats?

[Brixtonbulldog]

Did you honestly just blame Bush Senior's failure in Iraq during Desert Storm on the Democrats?

No he's the one that pussed out.  But the opposition didn't help.

[ieffinhatecardio]

No he's the one that pussed out.  But the opposition didn't help.

OK, I was a little worried you were going to go Mr. Intenseone on us and start blaming the Democrats for the failings of the Republicans.

 

[Brixtonbulldog]

OK, I was a little worried you were going to go Mr. Intenseone on us and start blaming the Democrats for the failings of the Republicans.

 

No I do at least TRY to be objective.  That was all Bush SR. bitching out.  Another example of fearing commitment.

[Straw Man]

As I was reading I was thinking how I was going to respond back but then I got to this statement and it just kind of blew my mind for a bit:

I'm sure you'd love to think that I'm some redneck from bumfuck, MS who chews tobacco all day at work and all I do is clean guns all day and never pay any attention to anything more substantial, that's fine.  I have my own opinion about what kind of human garbage you probably are and the little success you might experience in life as a result of you ass backwards views.

I have no idea if you're a redneck bumfuck or not.  I grew up in Texas and I couldn't give a rat's ass if you 're a redneck or whatever.  I don't think of anyone is human garbage.   I do think you might be borderline retarded.  No offense.   I mean that in all sincerity.

[Brixtonbulldog]

As I was reading I was thinking how I was going to respond back but then I got to this statement and it just kind of blew my mind for a bit:

I'm sure you'd love to think that I'm some redneck from bumfuck, MS who chews tobacco all day at work and all I do is clean guns all day and never pay any attention to anything more substantial, that's fine.  I have my own opinion about what kind of human garbage you probably are and the little success you might experience in life as a result of you ass backwards views.

I have no idea if you're a redneck bumfuck or not.  I grew up in Texas and I couldn't give a rat's ass if you 're a redneck or whatever.  I don't think of anyone is human garbage.   I do think you might be borderline retarded.  No offense.   I mean that in all sincerity.

Sure you do.  Please enlighten me as to why you think that so I can show you how wrong you are yet again. 

I have taken two IQ test's in my life.  The first was when I was about 16 and I scored a 130.  the second was about 4 or 5 months ago and I scored a 136.  I'll let you look up where mentally disabled falls on that scale.

[Straw Man]

no time

don't care

you know it's true

deal with it

[Brixtonbulldog]

no time

don't care

you know it's true

deal with it

Alrighty then