Englebert

Really? I pretty much asked a question in every post to you, and you didn't answer any of them.

I know, I know, I know. Pick me. Pick me. I know. I know. Can I answer? Actually there is some debate over whether that quote actually came from the person in question. I have no idea as to whether the attribution is correct, but the quote does sound like something the person in question would say.

Dickie V = the one who claims to tell it like it is, claims people won't answer his questions, claims people "don't want to go there", then not answer questions posed to him.

Let's expound on that. What part is a lie. Affirmative action laws give preference to blacks. Whites do not have affirmative action laws. Ah yes, let's go to that fabled "two Americas", the one in which black people can't eat in the same restaurants, stay in the same hotels, bla bla bla. Now there is a lie! Are you still on your profiling trip. I don't mind answering any of your feeble attempts at trying to paint me in the world you see, even though you won't (or can't) answer mine. I have benefited from slavery and oppression. As I have also benefited from all of my ancestors before me. I have benefited from the founding fathers. I have benefited from all of the people that made this country the greatest country the world has even known. So have you. In the last 50 years you have benefited from trillions of dollars spent of social justice. You have benefited from Affirmative Action. Will you admit that?

You won't have to wait long. I didn't say you should forget the past. What I meant by it, which I thought was obvious, is that you are trying to use the actions of the past to vilify people in the present, people that had nothing to do with those actions. The same people that over time has bent over backwards to correct those wrongs. Yet all you do is complain and hate. Why couldn't whites get rid of blacks? Why is that not possible? The obvious answer is white people do not want to, but I'm sure you'll have a different answer.

Yes, I want to go there. What makes you think I wouldn't. Profile much? You're trying to throw out things that happened 50 years and more ago (before I was born). Contrary to your unfounded beliefs, you are not public enemy number one. Blacks make up 13% of the population. If white people are as raciest as you seem to claim, black people would cease to exist in America. Raciest white people would never allow blacks to use the same facilities. Raciest white people would never allow affirmative action laws. Raciest white people would never allow black cops, or any black person in a position of authority. And raciest white people would never vote for a black politician, much less one for President. I've read about people like you. You live in the United States afforded all of the laws as everyone else (even more) and all of the opportunity as everyone else, yet all you want to do is complain about things that happened in the past. And I noticed you didn't respond to the first part of my post. Why not? You went straight to profiling. Yeah, that's how the educated act.

No, he said he was going to build a wall to protect American citizens and make Mexico PAY for it. So you think it's okay for people to be attacked just for going to hear a man speak. If that is your criteria, then you should be okay with Hillary supporters getting attacked just for going to one of her rallies. You should be okay with Bernie supporters being attacked. You should be okay with Louis Farrakhan supporters being attacked. You should be okay with Reverend Wright's church attendees being attacked when leaving the church. And you should be okay with them being attacked while the attackers are wearing white sheets and burning the American flag while waving the Confederate flag. They are illegal according to the laws of the United States of America. Period. Pretty much all land on Earth has been "stolen" at one time or another in history. So are you! Only a true hypocrite would rail against American citizens for enjoying the benefits this country has bestowed on them while enjoying these same benefits. If someone feels so strongly that the United States was founded on hate and violence, it is sure hypocritical for them to stay in this country...enjoying its bounties.

Minorities use the excuse of skin color on a daily basis. "I can't get a fair trial because too many white people are on the jury." "I can't get a job because too many white people are on the hiring committee." "The system is unfair because it is controlled by white people." Now that a white person uses the same excuse, somehow he is the racist.

By "y'all" I meant a Democrat who does not want to turn this country into a socialist nation. I took a leap and assumed you are in the "not a socialist nation" camp. I could be wrong. And I'm in complete agreement with you...I don't trust anything those two say either.

This is exactly the reason I want Hillary to explain to her minions why she made that statement. (She has made it on many occasions.) What is her motive? Why would anybody think that holding gun manufactures accountable in gun violence cases is not an attack on the 2nd amendment. She is playing to the base of the Democratic party. Therefore, the Democratic party wants to end the 2nd amendment...contrary to what Nappyroots has been saying. Let me restate that: The Liberal Progressives/Socialists want to end the 2nd Amendment. I can't tell the difference between a Democrat and a Liberal Progressive/Socialist anymore. There are a few of y'all still out there, but the numbers are shrinking dramatically. And yes, Hillary wants to ban all guns...except for her security detail protecting her lying...(I'll stop right there).

So if Hillary doesn't want to take our guns away, why does she want to hold gun manufacturers accountable in gun violence cases?

Nappy, why do you refuse to answer the question I've posed to you? I've asked numerous times, and I'll ask again: What do you think Hillary means when she says she wants to hold gun manufacturers responsible in cases of gun violence?

Does this mean I can start teeing off from the red tees?

I'm fairly certain that everyone complaining about the gorilla being shot would have begged someone to shoot the gorilla if he'd been the one in the gorilla cage.

I'm curious as to when the first person will sue, claiming they got a bladder infection, or maybe will just claim mental stress for getting "stage fright" in the restroom due to the other gender being present, preventing them from completing the task at hand.

When this happens, will white people be afforded all of the rights of a protected minority class?

You've never answered the question I've posed to you earlier. What does Hillary mean when she says she wants to hold gun manufacturers responsible in cases of gun violence? Then let's hear your educated response to TVC's post right before. Then let's hear your response to the Congressman that wants to ban guns for anyone that is going through a divorce. Then let's hear your response to Diane Feinstein's assertion that all returning military personnel should not be allowed to own guns. There are tons and tons more evidence of liberals wanting to take your guns than of Dick Cheney going to war to make money. When Republicans proposed having to show identification when voting, liberals went nuts saying that Republicans are taking away the right to vote for millions of people. They starting spouting off about Jim Crow Laws and echoing of poll taxes. But when it comes to the second amendment...whoa, now that's a situation that needs to be heavily regulated by enlightened people. You should have to be identified, studied through background checks, and pay heavy taxes to exercise that right. Just imagine what questions would be asked on background checks if Cass Sunstein was in charge of writing them.

Wow, I bet Chuck Norris was pissed. Why didn't he hit you back?

Yep, too many crazy liberals wanting free stuff to vote for a Constitutionalist. They wanted two New York liberals to run against each other and that's exactly what we got.

They also donate to Democrats. And 70 year olds do not need to be paying for birth control.

Once he starts getting attacked for being childish, he's gonna claim that he was just trying to stir the pot to get conversations going. Which in his case, might be true because most of his posts are just a parroting of liberal talking points (many being outright lies) with no inclusion of individual thought or comprehension.

So if the Republican controlled Congress does nothing (as you say), why are they constantly blamed for blocking Obama's socialist agenda?

Wow, sounds exactly like the sitting president.

So let's talk about Dick Cheney and Haliburton. The Democrats acknowledge that there is no concrete evidence that shows Haliburton received any special treatment from the government, but that looking at the circumstantial evidence dictates that the conclusion of favoritism can be drawn based on Cheney's ties with the corporation. Wow, this sounds alarmingly like Hillary and the Clinton foundation. The Cheney haters also claim that he promoted starting and/or extending the Iraq and Afghanistan wars just to make money. Wow, sounds alarmingly like Obama, Hillary, Bernie Sanders, Al Gore and many other Democrats with their climate change propaganda. I highly doubt Dick Cheney did anything except what he thought was the right for this country. I could be wrong, but see no evidence of it. Now, I'm convinced that many things that the above mentioned (and many not mentioned) Democrats are doing things that are detrimental to this country just to line their own pockets. With Cheney, you only have circumstantial evidence in which a man with no ties to Haliburton probably would have acted in the same manner. With the Democrat con artists, the evidence is beyond reproach.

Run Run...and running some more.