Liberal Forum

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:13 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:13 am

Nah, I just reposted your words.

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:18 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:18 am

Demonstrate that you understand what premise means.

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:18 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:18 am

Yes.

And you lied.

The PREMISE has nothing to do with Madison.

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:18 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:18 am

Keep running.

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:19 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:19 am

Post what you think is BS about what you think the premise is.  Simple.

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:21 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:21 am

No...the one running is you.

Google "premise"
 
Then we can proceed.

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:21 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:21 am

Understand  "premise".

Simpler.

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:23 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:23 am

Keep running.

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:26 am

I'm right here.

You've consistently demonstrated that you don't understand what this is about.

Make an effort to do so, or I won't bother.

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:30 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:30 am

I have already posted the premise of my post.  Deal with it or make your argument on your own.

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:34 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:34 am

It's not about "the premise of (your) post"...it's about the premise of your citation.

You don't even understand what that means.

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:37 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:37 am

Asshole, you should have stated that up front.  What a **** dick you are.  All you had to do was specify that but instead you divert for hours.

So, NOW you can explain what is wrong with the premise of the article as you play the bait and switch game,

Blackvegetable » 28 Jul 2022, 10:02 am » wrote: ↑

28 Jul 2022, 10:02 am

Absurd is, by definition, absurd.

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:40 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:40 am

Enough of that ****...

We went through this yesterday.

Don't hold me responsible for your stupid.

And don't think this is gonna substitute for you demonstrating an understanding of the word "premise".

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:41 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:41 am

Enough of your lies.  I just proved your a liar.  

Youre busted, Daddy’s little disappointment,

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:41 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:41 am

You are **** lying about the article.  Look at the post you replied to.  No article was posted.  And you lined out the post except for this:

James Madison funded development of weapons for the battlefield

You just got busted lying.  Try again you lying bastard.

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:44 am

No, you didn't.

You just spun another tale...

"......(sniff)......Because Blackvegetable.....(sob....snot bubble bursts)"

Now show me that you understand "premise" any better than you understand "decimate", "variant", of "Sharpie"...

Blackvegetable » 23 Aug 2022, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:46 am

Did you not cite THE SAME ARTICLE, twice?

**** unreal.

Huey » 23 Aug 2022, 8:50 am » wrote: ↑

23 Aug 2022, 8:50 am

When you called my comments absurd no article was posted and you were referring to this:

James Madison funded development of weapons for the battlefield

Your lies are catching up to.  What is absurd about that statement?

Huey » 28 Jul 2022, 10:00 am » wrote: ↑

28 Jul 2022, 10:00 am

James Madison funded development of weapons for the battlefield so in addition civilians can afford them.  Plus, the overlying context of the thread is the debunking the myth that framers could only envision muskets so the 2A was about muskets only.

Many weapons of the 1800s were designed for the battlefield.  There was no civilian prohibition.