Babs34
Well-Known Member
I reciprocated by dividing up extra profits equally (in cash).Why would you assume they're illegals? ... wrong.
That says a lot about you.
I'm guessing they couldn't find their social security card.
I reciprocated by dividing up extra profits equally (in cash).Why would you assume they're illegals? ... wrong.
That says a lot about you.
You know a lot of "legal" Mehican's that have a ranch back home to send that money to?........alrighty.You're right, it is not a huge jump. But I happen to know many many legal Mexicans so maybe for me it is a bigger jump. I wasn't commenting on anything you said, I was just commenting on how Babs made a big deal about something based on an assumption. I wash my hands of this...
Article 1. Section 8. The Congress shall have the power to...Somebody suggested to me maybe the real question should be why do we have the military in the FIRST place? Is it to defend the country from foreign invasion or is it to invade other countries and try to run other people's lives?
Gee...I wonder what the constitution says about this?
You need a new strain.FDD... I know what you wrote and I know what I wrote.
There is no crossover. You implied illegals...I did not.
I am a man of principles.... you may not always agree with them...but I do not veer from them when it suits me.
Illegal immigration is WRONG. It's cutting in line. It cheats the folks doing it the CORRECT way.
I would NEVER hire an illegal ... I'm much more likely to pick up the phone and get them a one way ticket HOME.
Oh ... and Babs is insane.
You keep repeating that.... but I have no idea what you are babbling about.You need a new strain.
was it the Greeks or the Romans??...they were crazy gay warriorsHeh.... let's just say the military drinks the kool aid and sets up an ALL GAY Division.
You know what would happen? They wouldn't get all queeny...no, they would do the exact opposite.
They would become so BUTCH, as a matter of pride, that no one could tell the difference.
They would defeat their own argument!
...just a click away.You keep repeating that.... but I have no idea what you are babbling about.
You really think that is a valid comparison? We have no choice but to accept that which is necessary for life. Heterosexual sex is necessary for their existence as well as everyone else's, so it technically can not be "in their face."Most straight people don't realize how 'in-your-face' their actions are because heterosexuality is commonly accepted.
Would you expect a woman who received flowers from her beau to hide them, too?
Man and woman kiss on a public street. Accepted.
Man and man kiss on a public street. In-your-face.
Heather has a Mommy and a Daddy. Accepted.
Heather has two Mommies. In-your-face.
That is clear thinking, you simply can't recognize it.You really think that is a valid comparison? We have no choice but to accept that which is necessary for life. Heterosexual sex is necessary for their existence as well as everyone else's, so it technically can not be "in their face."
Think clearly, not from dogma.