Mini-Me
Member

In other words, bring up real reasons to not want 20,000 Haitian bio-weapons dropped in your town, so I can call you a racist and have those reasons dismissed and disregarded. These visceral reasons, like the idea that the bio-weapons will skin and eat your pet cat in the front yard, are too hard to counter because we can't prove them.

Lips that touch liquor will never touch theirs? I find their terms acceptable. Don’t think I’d care to even be in the same room with any of those sour looking shrews let alone kiss any of them. Ugh

See, this is exactly the kind of dumb government shit that goes on when the people do not take charge of their own well being. This is a legitimate effort being taken on by our own people right here, and going directly to those in need. Chip in whatever you can. https://x.com/M_C_Masters/status/1843657230786408639 1843657230786408639

Bump

And yes, I would agree, up to this point: those that are infected with the Small Hat Club's mind virus will end up like that, more than likely. The first job in lifting those people up, is to re-affirm their value as human beings. And not just any old run of the mill human beings, but exceptional human beings, part of long and amazing history of achievement and worth. That's my job now, to teach them that and instruct them in that, as much as I can do as one insignificant man anyways.

Yes, they are, but thankfully for them, most of the black communities in NC were spared the heaviest of rain, flooding and mudslides It's just a mind exercise, which would you think would be the best option for survival and coming out the other end unscathed?

Two storms of roughly equal strength, Katrina and Helene, are right in front of us to compare. Would you rather have been stuck in New Orleans with your people? Or would you rather have been stuck in North Carolina with mine?

https://x.com/iamyesyouareno/status/1842973969986777224 1842973969986777224

....

I'll take a look at it. But again, my point is not what Johnson was saying, but the fact that Johnson can, as any other ethnic spokesman can, speak candidly and unashamedly to his people, and his people alone and advocate for candidates or policies that benefit his people and his people alone. European whites are the only ethnic or racial group in America that is not allowed that right, or at least not allowed without being showered with abuse and insults and dismissal. That said, I wonder what their internal polling is showing them? The last poll with crosstabs I looked at had blacks voting Harris 83 to 17, which is about where it's been all along.

:rolleyes:

I do not advocate globalism and never have. That is a lie. You know it’s a lie. Yet you keep making the accusation. I won’t bother asking you to stop. I know how that would work out. I just wanted to point it out for anyone who might not already know how disingenuous you are.

Become Ungovernable

https://x.com/Babygravy9/status/1843193292193972566

This is from 2022. Keep in mind VT and ME are aggressively implanting bioweapons into the white populations of those states, where NH has, to certain degree, managed to hold the line. But that won't last. https://x.com/NatCon2022/status/1843312242248630653

https://x.com/nicolew100/status/1843143756494832002 1843143756494832002

https://x.com/FrankDeScushin/status/1843464271906357282 1843464271906357282

By this weekend, this will sadly be out of the public eye, so the time is now. Milton is going to fuck FL up, from what I can see.

I'll send you another $100 brother.

Careful what you say there, Swordy. People might mistake you for an advocate of economic freedom rather than the prponent of socialistic central economic planning that you actually are!

Hmmmm….

https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1843393151656243680 & https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1843393156769034602 SCOTUS’s VanDerStok Case Isn’t Just About Ghost Guns The justices are set to hear oral arguments in a challenge to the Biden administration’s ghost gun ban. If overturned, the ruling could have a chilling effect on federal regulators. https://www.thetrace.org/2024/10/supreme-court-ghost-guns-kits-vanderstok/ {Alain Stephens | 07 October 2024} The U.S Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on October 8 to determine whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives overstepped in effectively outlawing certain kits used to make homemade, untraceable ghost guns.

https://x.com/Mick_O_Keeffe/status/1843332428171227581 1843332428171227581

ETA: Beat me to it. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to acptulsa again.

https://x.com/Timcast/status/1843255567298773154 1843255567298773154 https://x.com/nbcsnl/status/1842778056781422660 1842778056781422660

The concept underlying the expression "1 + 1 = 2" is necessarily true for all people in all places at all times. The concept underlying the expression "Joe is a murderer" is not necessarily true for all people in all places at all times. All reasonable people, for all times and all places, must necessarily accept, accede to, and agree with the meaning expressed by the statement "1 + 1 = 2", regardless of whatever other particular set of symbols and system of nomenclature might be substituted at the "surface level" to denote the abstractions underlying the elements of the statement. IOW: It is always and everywhere unreasonable to reject the "ship" (i.e., the underlying meaning) of the expression "1 + 1 = 2", regardless of how the semantic deck chairs might be arranged. On the other hand, when it comes to normative and/or transcendental matters (such as those relating to the concepts of "law" and "crime"), reasonable people can and will disagree - on an essential level much more fundamental than the transient contingencies of mere symbols and nomenclature - about what "ought" to be, or about how such things "ought" to be understood. With regard to such matters, one can certainly adopt presuppositions and definitions such that - from within the context of those "axiomatic" elements - certain propositions must necessarily hold true. But other reasonable people who do not share those presuppositions and definitions will not necessarily be compelled to accept, accede to, or agree with those propositions (or the "axiomatic" elements from which they are derived). IOW: One cannot reasonably reject the concept presently denoted by the expression "1 + 1 = 2", but one might reasonably reject the concept presently denoted by the expression "Joe is a murderer". To put things in terms of Feynman's empirical/positive/non-normative discussion of magnetism, one cannot reasonably dispute that the opposite poles of magnets attract (regardless of what symbols, labels, and nomenclature one might arbitrarily adopt in order to describe or express the fact). The question of whether the opposite poles of magnets attract (and under what circumstances they might not) is an "objective" one, and is existentially bound up with the essential identity of "magnets" as distinct from other things - but the question of why they attract (in the sense in which Feynman means "why" in this particular instance) is not. To address the former question is to engage in "science" (specifically, "physics"). To address the latter question is to engage in "philosophy" (specifically, "metaphysics").

//

He never left - and apparently, he's never going to ... Migrant King Deported After Insulting Americans BUT Venezuela Says No Return. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmANBcMCGGs {Nate The Lawyer | 06 October 2024}