how can you judge her beauty when she has make up and a wig onKisses wrote:
-short and petite
-young
-curved upper lip
-cute voice
-slim body
-chest not too big and not too small
-no flaws whatsoever, k thnx bai
I'm fine with being a creepy stalker :^)winber1 wrote:
you missed a flaw
she's not with you :^)
10/10 would pay for that name changeRaspberriel wrote:
Raspberreol
None of the points I've made have anything to do with makeup though I kinda get what you meanJordan wrote:
how can you judge her beauty when she has make up and a wig on
although i sound hypocritical because the mentally ill qt in my ava has tons of make up too
You forgot she is untermenschKisses wrote:
-short and petite
-young
-curved upper lip
-cute voice
-slim body
-chest not too big and not too small
-no flaws whatsoever, k thnx bai
only stupid people protestJordan wrote:
the tolerant left strikes again faaaaaammmmmmmmm
only dumbasses say thisColdTooth wrote:
only stupid people protest
can you prove the black-clothed masked people had anything to do with the peaceful protest?Jordan wrote:
the tolerant left strikes again faaaaaammmmmmmmm
that's betterjohnmedina999 wrote:
Only stupid people give themselves and what they are protesting for a bad image.
jesus, your avatar creeps me out, idk whyjohnmedina999 wrote:
I guess we're all criticizing B1rd now.
I like B1rd and respect his ideas, but I don't want to be like him much. I'm trying to not piss people off here.
Dude, c'mon. He has the "all right good, all left bad" line of thinking.Kisses wrote:
I like Bird, he treats people fairly and equally
It's actually a reference to a popular youtuber I used to watch, and I'm hoping somebody will get it.Raspberriel wrote:
jesus, your avatar creeps me out, idk why
I know very little about politics so I don't read too much of these posts or get involved. Bird isn't really aggressive nor does he get overly angry and hurl insults when people disagree with him. He also treats other people's posts with respect and will reply with equal effort without coming off as too condescending if he it's in refute. Because I don't get involved in all the heated debates this is how it comes across to me, from a 3rd persons prospective.Raspberriel wrote:
Dude, c'mon. He has the "all right good, all left bad" line of thinking.Kisses wrote:
I like Bird, he treats people fairly and equally
Um whatKisses wrote:
He also treats other people's posts with respect and will reply with equal effort without coming off as too condescending if he it's in refute.
ye olde OTabraker wrote:
Strange, I am trying piss people off here and I failing at itjohnmedina999 wrote:
I'm trying to not piss people off here.
Who said I was pissed off, I love hate. Hate is what makes me stronger.abraker wrote:
Strange, I am trying piss people off here and I failing at itjohnmedina999 wrote:
I'm trying to not piss people off here.
Though I think I managed to piss Blitzfrog off in this post in the most ironic context, so I guess I have one win after all these tries.
you're literally a fucking faggotBlitzfrog wrote:
Who said I was pissed off, I love hate. Hate is what makes me stronger.
Cool, that's me but only slightly about upper left of it..Dawnsday wrote:
This is me, I'm perfectly central. I simply believe free speech is a necessity. I also believe the protests against Milo's speech was counter intuitive and wrong on a fundamental level.
Finding B1rd to be correct doesn't put me under any label. Do not try to force me under one.
Jordan wrote:
whom'st
You should have replied with a comebackBlitzfrog wrote:
Who said I was pissed off, I love hate. Hate is what makes me stronger.abraker wrote:
Strange, I am trying piss people off here and I failing at it
Though I think I managed to piss Blitzfrog off in this post in the most ironic context, so I guess I have one win after all these tries.
Top tier opinions there. Don't worry about Mahogany too much, for some reason he hates me and will always leave nasty comments whenever something is about me. I used to have arguments with him about various things, but due to his unpleasant attitude whenever it comes to people with differing viewpoints I've stopped engaging with him.Dawnsday wrote:
This is me, I'm perfectly central. I simply believe free speech is a necessity. I also believe the protests against Milo's speech was counter intuitive and wrong on a fundamental level.
Finding B1rd to be correct doesn't put me under any label. Do not try to force me under one.
I have reasons behind all my beliefs, I don't just get out my partisan bible when it comes to deciding my opinion on issues.Raspberriel wrote:
Dude, c'mon. He has the "all right good, all left bad" line of thinking.
No one said or implied that at allMahogany wrote:
ITT: Disagreeing with B1rd is having an "unpleasant attitude".
from the man himself:Kisses wrote:
No one said or implied that at all
You really didn't need to look far to find that.B1rd wrote:
I used to have arguments with him about various things, but due to his unpleasant attitude whenever it comes to people with differing viewpoints I've stopped engaging with him.
But my dad never came back, why should I?abraker wrote:
You should have replied with a comeback
ni🅱🅱a dont u know j 🅱oleRaspberriel wrote:
what is this trend of putting 🅱️ emojis everywhere
Because unlike your father heaven nor hell is ready to accept you.Blitzfrog wrote:
But my dad never came back, why should I?abraker wrote:
You should have replied with a comeback
I'm assuming you mean neither is ready to accept me. Obviously Earth decided creating me was a good idea, because look, I click circles everyday. I am more useful than Einsteinabraker wrote:
Because unlike your father heaven nor hell is ready to accept you.
Earth should now regret its decision because of that.Blitzfrog wrote:
I'm assuming you mean neither is ready to accept me. Obviously Earth decided creating me was a good idea, because look, I click circles everyday. I am more useful than Einsteinabraker wrote:
Because unlike your father heaven nor hell is ready to accept you.
Holy heck, you google searched that image, thirsty as FaustFaust wrote:
Kiyorami can look good in anything.
The heat? You mean that stink from your shit. Even Donald's poop has better value than your crap.Blitzfrog wrote:
I'm warming it up though, can't you tell the heat due to it's excitement?abraker wrote:
Earth should now regret its decision because of that.
This.B1rd wrote:
Nothing was overturned. Just blocked, from doing what Trump was voted into office to do. And the federal judge was overstepping was overstepping his boundaries.
8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
"Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
It should be overturned soon. And I'm curious as to why you're so desperate to allow immigrants from a fundamentalist Muslim country in which women are treated like property.
Maybe women like being treated like property /sB1rd wrote:
And I'm curious as to why you're so desperate to allow immigrants from a fundamentalist Muslim country in which women are treated like property.
Because the US loves their good relations with SA, for a good reason; it's not even unique to Trump or Republicans in general.Hika wrote:
Only thing I'll say is why he didn't ban SA? What a joke.
While oil’s collapse has deepened concern that Saudi Arabia will need to liquidate its Treasuries to raise cash, a more troubling worry has also emerged: the specter of the kingdom using its outsize position in the world’s most important debt market as a political weapon, much as it did with oil in the 1970s.
In April, Saudi Arabia warned it would start selling as much as $750 billion in Treasuries and other assets if Congress passes a bill allowing the kingdom to be held liable in U.S. courts for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, according to the New York Times. The threat comes amid a renewed push by presidential candidates and legislators from both the Democratic and Republican parties to declassify a 28-page section of a 2004 U.S. government report that is believed to detail possible Saudi connections to the attacks. The bill, which passed the Senate on May 17, is now in the House of Representatives.
Saudi Arabia’s Finance Ministry declined to comment on the potential selling of Treasuries in response. The Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency didn’t immediately answer requests for details on the total size of its U.S. government debt holdings.
“Let’s not assume they’re bluffing” about threatening to retaliate, said Marc Chandler, the global head of currency strategy at Brown Brothers Harriman. “The Saudis are under a lot of pressure. I’d say that we don’t do ourselves justice if we underestimate our liabilities” to big holders.
Don't be so picky with your topicspicky picky wrote:
holy shit what a non interesting topic
Actually in this case it's a very bad thingB1rd wrote:
I'm just glad that for once we have a president who actually sticks to his campaign promises and gets stuff done.
Like Hitler. Hail Hitler.Mahogany wrote:
Actually in this case it's a very bad thingB1rd wrote:
I'm just glad that for once we have a president who actually sticks to his campaign promises and gets stuff done.
This would be a positive for literally any other president <3
This is a perfect example of checks and balances. God bless.Mahogany wrote:
pretty much the same ppl tbh
Edit: US Federal court blocked donny's request to reinstate the travel ban! (for now) Hallelujah! This is why we have systems of checks and balances. Justice prevails, for now.
How do you know it wouldn't have stopped the terrorists before they came into the country? Same as with the illegal immigrant and multiple time felons who murdered someone the tenth time they reentered the country. It's just a temporary ban until a vetting processes is established.ahsoka08 wrote:
I would just like to say that this new bullshit order would have stopped no terrorist attacks if it were in place before
That is literally the purpose of checks and balances you dimwit. It's the entire reason the US isn't living under a fascist dictatorship. Yet.B1rd wrote:
As I've already said, checks and balances does not mean straight up blocking an order the President has jurisdiction over.
Thize wrote:
So you're only pissed about this because the people you don't like happen to enjoy the team. What a great reason. What about the fact that the Patriots won on overtime and the Falcons horribly choked, while everyone else was expecting them to win because NOBODY every wins on overtime? Are you going to blame it on Brady for doing a great job because he's friends with Trump and Trump openly supported him?Raspberriel wrote:
tbh the only reason I'm this upset is because I don't want to ever see Trump or his prominent supporters (see: Richard Spencer), who all happened to be cheering for the Pats, happy ever again
