User Profile: Grover_Standpipe


Member Since: March 09, 2013


123 To page: Go
  • June 30, 2015 at 8:07pm

    4. They read “Washingon’s Vision” and understood that only an imbecile could read the actual text that was the original source of the long-standing fable and mistake it for true story.

  • [3] June 30, 2015 at 4:48pm

    This survey is meaningless. They didn’t include White Castle!

  • [4] June 30, 2015 at 4:42pm

    Ooh, ooh, I know, is it the Jews? You think that the Jews took over Germany after World War I, don’t you?

    Anabasis, you so crazy!

  • [-6] June 30, 2015 at 11:57am

    Nice try, Elijay, but you should have checked what Snopes actually says, and whether anything that troll you linked to wrote really disproves it.

    “Claim: President Obama nominated Elena Kagan for the U.S. Supreme Court as a reward for her help in getting nine challenges to his eligibility dismissed.

    One small problem for the advocates of this political conspiracy theory: None of the nine docket items cited by WND was about “whether Obama is legally qualified to be in the White House.” The WND article simply cites the results of a non-specific search on all Supreme Court docket items containing the names “Obama” and “Kagan” and misleadingly claims them all as “involving Obama eligibility issues,” without regard for the real underlying issues of those cases. ”

    Snopes then goes on to detail what all of the cases that come up were really about:

  • June 30, 2015 at 11:33am

    Mr. Obama lied about his position on same sex marriage until the majority of Americans came around to the right side on the issue. So what? There’s nothing wrong with that if it produces the good result of the Supreme Court making the right decision much sooner than they would have if we had elected the wrong man as President.

  • [-12] June 30, 2015 at 11:14am

    Can you cite a single actual example of Snopes misinforming the public, or do you just resent it when they debunk a nugget horse manure that you wanted to believe?

    Responses (5) +
  • [1] June 30, 2015 at 2:53am

    Not as long as they ended up hating each other. That’s the first I’ve ever heard about Ted Cruz that I like.

  • [3] June 29, 2015 at 9:15pm

    It was a solidly Constitutional decision. The Tenth Amendment says that powers not designated to the federal government belong to the states or the people. The Court has long and rightly maintained that choosing whom to marry falls into the “or the people” category. Since it is an individual right, the state government has no more business restricting it unnecessarily than does the national government, and under the Fourteenth Amendment they have absolutely no business restricting the rights of some of their citizens unequally with other citizens of the same state.

  • [-7] June 29, 2015 at 8:58pm

    It’s not the same thing. A picture of a picture of Muhammad is a picture of Muhammad, but a picture of a picture of Pope Benedict made of condoms is not a picture of Pope Benedict made of condoms, it’s just picture of Pope Benedict.

    Responses (2) +
  • [2] June 29, 2015 at 8:52pm

    Wait a minute, we legalized drugs? Why wasn’t I told about this sooner? Woo, woo!

    Responses (1) +
  • [-1] June 29, 2015 at 8:45pm

    It almost worked. It was just her dumb luck to stumble across the one person in the whole country who doesn’t have enough sense to abstain from sex with Bristol Palin.

  • [-3] June 29, 2015 at 8:41pm

    You ought to spell Satan with a capital S. even if we don’t agree with his policies, we should respect the dignity of his office.

  • [-2] June 29, 2015 at 8:40pm

    I don’t know what a soul is supposed to be other than a human mind or how the soul that is supposed to reside in a small blob of human cells can entitle that blob to a greater right to life than a full grown mammal. The only thing that demonstrably exists and makes a human life more valuable than any other form of life is a human mind, and a fetus doesn’t have one. It won’t start to develop one until it is born because, until then, it has nothing to think about.

  • [7] June 29, 2015 at 6:53pm

    40 million people is less than 15% of the population. If you think that it would be right for you to assume power over the rest of us by force, I have to ask, what is it you think you love about the America that you think of as your country if you have such utter contempt for the principles on which it was founded?

  • [4] June 29, 2015 at 6:48pm

    67 votes, a two-thirds majority of the Senate, but it will never happen over a decision that you think is overreaching, a justice would have to commit a crime to be impeached.

  • [3] June 29, 2015 at 6:43pm

    Nope, the hispanics will vote Democrat because they love their families, and everybody has at least one gay cousin.

    Responses (2) +
  • [-2] June 29, 2015 at 6:31pm

    No, we, the good people of America, absolutely would not, and it is fortunate that the sinister efforts of the wicked foes of freedom to do so have been staved off at least for a time.

    Responses (2) +
  • [-2] June 29, 2015 at 6:29pm

    Abortion is a lot safer than childbirth and you’re allowed to do that any old place.

    Responses (4) +
  • June 29, 2015 at 6:23pm

    Civil rights laws that protect against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation are a separate issue. Before this ruling, businesses in states that had such statutes, but did not yet grant legal recognition to same sex marriages, were found to be in violation of the law if they refused to provide services for weddings that had no legal standing. Sixty years ago when there were no such laws it was perfectly legal for a business to discriminate against anybody they wanted, There were businesses that did not serve blacks or Jews, but even the people who ran those businesses would not have been so evil as to suggest that blacks or Jews should be forbidden by law to marry even among their own kind. These are completely separate issues so an opinion against civil rights statutes is not a valid argument against same sex marriage.

  • [2] June 29, 2015 at 2:43pm

    Marriage is not just a religious institution. The government has been marrying people for so long that judges today are marrying the great grandchildren of people who were married by judges. A third of the couples in this country choose to be married in a civil ceremony without having to seek the permission of any religious authority, and their marriages are just as real as yours.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love