Liberal Forum

It is a central tenet of 2nd Amendment Absurdism that firearms are the ultimate tool with which the citizen may temper a tyrannical government.

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest, we can't be talking about a Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Legion of a couple of hundred AR-15 toting yokels on a cannonball run to DC. It can only mean limited, and largely symbolic, acts of defiance.

Charlie Kirk was a MAGA proselityzer...MAGA isn't a coherent political or economic statement - it's a tantrum. As such it derives its popular legitimacy by triggering paranoia and hatred and stoking grievance. 


Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen. Transgenders, Science, Immigrants, Liberals, Jews and legal professionals have all served the role. This has generated an abundance of aggrieved parties.

The problem arises whem MAGA is the Oppressive Government. For the Ammosexual reading of the 2nd Amendment to have any meaning  they would have to stand with the shooter as a matter of Principle.



 

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am

It is a central tenet of 2nd Amendment Absurdism that firearms are the ultimate tool with which the citizen may temper a tyrannical government.

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest, we can't be talking about a Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Legion of a couple of hundred AR-15 toting yokels on a cannonball run to DC. It can only mean limited, and largely symbolic, acts of defiance.

Charlie Kirk was a MAGA proselityzer...MAGA isn't a coherent political or economic statement - it's a tantrum. As such it derives its popular legitimacy by triggering paranoia and hatred and stoking grievance. 

Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen. Transgenders, Science, Immigrants, Liberals, Jews and legal professionals have all served the role. This has generated an abundance of aggrieved parties.

The problem arises whem MAGA is the Oppressive Government. For the Ammosexual reading of the 2nd Amendment to have any meaning  they would have to stand with the shooter as a matter of Principle.

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

1. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah...
2. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

 
 

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am

It is a central tenet of 2nd Amendment Absurdism that firearms are the ultimate tool with which the citizen may temper a tyrannical government.

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest, we can't be talking about a Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Legion of a couple of hundred AR-15 toting yokels on a cannonball run to DC. It can only mean limited, and largely symbolic, acts of defiance.

Charlie Kirk was a MAGA proselityzer...MAGA isn't a coherent political or economic statement - it's a tantrum. As such it derives its popular legitimacy by triggering paranoia and hatred and stoking grievance. 

Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen. Transgenders, Science, Immigrants, Liberals, Jews and legal professionals have all served the role. This has generated an abundance of aggrieved parties.

The problem arises whem MAGA is the Oppressive Government. For the Ammosexual reading of the 2nd Amendment to have any meaning  they would have to stand with the shooter as a matter of Principle.

If those are your words, you are insane.....if they aren't, you're still insane.
 

RebelGator » 12 Sep 2025, 10:31 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:31 am

If those are your words, you are insane.....if they aren't, you're still insane.

Piss & moan, Polk Salad.

It's what you do best.

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:33 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:33 am

Piss & moan, Polk Salad.

It's what you do best.

Evading questions is what you do best.

This will be easy:
1. Pic...no evidence answered the first time...prove a negative...etc...blah blah blah.

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am

It is a central tenet of 2nd Amendment Absurdism that firearms are the ultimate tool with which the citizen may temper a tyrannical government.

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest, we can't be talking about a Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Legion of a couple of hundred AR-15 toting yokels on a cannonball run to DC. It can only mean limited, and largely symbolic, acts of defiance.

Charlie Kirk was a MAGA proselityzer...MAGA isn't a coherent political or economic statement - it's a tantrum. As such it derives its popular legitimacy by triggering paranoia and hatred and stoking grievance. 


Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen. Transgenders, Science, Immigrants, Liberals, Jews and legal professionals have all served the role. This has generated an abundance of aggrieved parties.

The problem arises whem MAGA is the Oppressive Government. For the Ammosexual reading of the 2nd Amendment to have any meaning  they would have to stand with the shooter as a matter of Principle.



 

 

1.  Define Ammosexual.

2.  Post whatever policy Trump has imposed, this term or his first term, that makes you feel oppressed.

3.  Charlie Kirk was a debate with bigger balls than you.  He intentionally went to places where he wa the "enemy" and had civil, sometimes contentious, debates with any one. And he did it politely.  You?  You don't have the balls for that.

People who complain about Charlie Kirk have never watched or listened to his college appearances. He is polite and respectful. He lets anybody speak and debates them civilly.

RebelGator » 12 Sep 2025, 10:31 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:31 am

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am

It is a central tenet of 2nd Amendment Absurdism that firearms are the ultimate tool with which the citizen may temper a tyrannical government.

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest, we can't be talking about a Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Legion of a couple of hundred AR-15 toting yokels on a cannonball run to DC. It can only mean limited, and largely symbolic, acts of defiance.

Charlie Kirk was a MAGA proselityzer...MAGA isn't a coherent political or economic statement - it's a tantrum. As such it derives its popular legitimacy by triggering paranoia and hatred and stoking grievance. 

Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen. Transgenders, Science, Immigrants, Liberals, Jews and legal professionals have all served the role. This has generated an abundance of aggrieved parties.

The problem arises whem MAGA is the Oppressive Government. For the Ammosexual reading of the 2nd Amendment to have any meaning  they would have to stand with the shooter as a matter of Principle.

If those are your words, you are insane.....if they aren't, you're still insane.
 

 

What it looks like he did was parse words and ideas from other topics and used for that tripe.  If you plug each of the following into google you will get multiple his for each:

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest,

Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen.

He took words of others and applied them here.

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am

It is a central tenet of 2nd Amendment Absurdism that firearms are the ultimate tool with which the citizen may temper a tyrannical government.

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest, we can't be talking about a Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Legion of a couple of hundred AR-15 toting yokels on a cannonball run to DC. It can only mean limited, and largely symbolic, acts of defiance.

Charlie Kirk was a MAGA proselityzer...MAGA isn't a coherent political or economic statement - it's a tantrum. As such it derives its popular legitimacy by triggering paranoia and hatred and stoking grievance. 


Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen. Transgenders, Science, Immigrants, Liberals, Jews and legal professionals have all served the role. This has generated an abundance of aggrieved parties.

The problem arises whem MAGA is the Oppressive Government. For the Ammosexual reading of the 2nd Amendment to have any meaning  they would have to stand with the shooter as a matter of Principle.



 

 

Another point....one of the first things a true oppressive and tyrannical government will do is attempt to restrict, if not outlaw, firearm ownership.  2 terms and nothing from Trump.  Dems on the other hand?  At the state level they o what they can to restrict and make firearm ownership tougher.  At the federal level they are always yapping about wishing to highly restrict particular guns. It is Supreme Court Judges, appointed by what you cal tyrannical and oppressive government, that are overturning Dem state restrictions and upholding the 2nd amendment.

Reality does not match your weird fantasy.  Rebel is correct.  You are insane.

 

Is there ammosexual porn?

BuckNaked » 12 Sep 2025, 2:59 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 2:59 pm

Is there ammosexual porn?

 
 

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am

It is a central tenet of 2nd Amendment Absurdism that firearms are the ultimate tool with which the citizen may temper a tyrannical government.

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest, we can't be talking about a Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Legion of a couple of hundred AR-15 toting yokels on a cannonball run to DC. It can only mean limited, and largely symbolic, acts of defiance.

Charlie Kirk was a MAGA proselityzer...MAGA isn't a coherent political or economic statement - it's a tantrum. As such it derives its popular legitimacy by triggering paranoia and hatred and stoking grievance. 


Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen. Transgenders, Science, Immigrants, Liberals, Jews and legal professionals have all served the role. This has generated an abundance of aggrieved parties.

The problem arises whem MAGA is the Oppressive Government. For the Ammosexual reading of the 2nd Amendment to have any meaning  they would have to stand with the shooter as a matter of Principle.



 

 

Just curious.....you have time to start tribute threads so I am assuming you finally have time to post what definition of an assault rifle you use.

Huey » 12 Sep 2025, 3:09 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 3:09 pm

OMG so hot 

BuckNaked » 12 Sep 2025, 3:26 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 3:26 pm

OMG so hot

Yup, conservative women.

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am

 
 

•  

 
267 notifications since Aug 17th.

Not including secondary notifications because he tagged me, repeatedly, in threads and  exchanges in which I played no part.

Even took off his @* tunic so he could violate his own rule, again.
 

I see your PG ban really worked.   

Blackvegetable » 12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:17 am

It is a central tenet of 2nd Amendment Absurdism that firearms are the ultimate tool with which the citizen may temper a tyrannical government.

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest, we can't be talking about a Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Legion of a couple of hundred AR-15 toting yokels on a cannonball run to DC. It can only mean limited, and largely symbolic, acts of defiance.

Charlie Kirk was a MAGA proselityzer...MAGA isn't a coherent political or economic statement - it's a tantrum. As such it derives its popular legitimacy by triggering paranoia and hatred and stoking grievance. 

Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen. Transgenders, Science, Immigrants, Liberals, Jews and legal professionals have all served the role. This has generated an abundance of aggrieved parties.

The problem arises whem MAGA is the Oppressive Government. For the Ammosexual reading of the 2nd Amendment to have any meaning  they would have to stand with the shooter as a matter of Principle.

I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational. 


– Event organized by TPUSA Faith, the religious arm of Kirk’s conservative group Turning Point USA, on 5 April 2023


There you go, kids....Wipe your tears and quit caterwauling.

 

to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational. 


He must have been running this circus at really **** colleges.


 

Huey » 12 Sep 2025, 10:54 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 10:54 am

What it looks like he did was parse words and ideas from other topics and used for that tripe.  If you plug each of the following into google you will get multiple his for each:

Given the technological asymmetry inherent in any such contest,

Because it lacks readily identifiable foreign enemies, it has looked inward for the necessary bogeymen.

He took words of others and applied them here.

of course he did...the POS can hardly put 3 words together, much less anything coherent...
 

Huey » 12 Sep 2025, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 11:24 am

Another point....one of the first things a true oppressive and tyrannical government will do is attempt to restrict, if not outlaw, firearm ownership.  2 terms and nothing from Trump.  Dems on the other hand?  At the state level they o what they can to restrict and make firearm ownership tougher.  At the federal level they are always yapping about wishing to highly restrict particular guns. It is Supreme Court Judges, appointed by what you cal tyrannical and oppressive government, that are overturning Dem state restrictions and upholding the 2nd amendment.

Reality does not match your weird fantasy.  Rebel is correct.  You are insane.

You notice they haven't said **** about "gun control" since Charlie Kirk was slain? Telling...
 

Huey » 12 Sep 2025, 3:09 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2025, 3:09 pm

Careful, brown's nutsack's gonna shrivel so tight he'll be singing falsetto....