I suppose you have evidence to back up these theories of yours?

You're just as crazy as "Dwbill"!

You are actually implying that all those shootings were "all made up"? YOU'RE CRAZY!!!

Why don't you talk to some of the people who survived those shootings, or had friends and/or relatives who were wounded or k**led during these crimes? Ask THEM if they think the shootings were f**ed! I'm sure every single one of them will say "NO"!!!

Why don't you try visiting the graves of those who died in these massacres? Or do you want their families to dig up the graves of their loved ones, so you can see that they're really buried there?

If there never was a 13th Amendment abolishing s***ery, then how do you explain the fact that I found it in a book containing the entire text of the Constitution and its Amendments, along with the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation? The Amendment clearly reads that there shall be no s***ery or any other sort of "involuntary servitude" except as a punishment for a crime. Explain that to me, if you can.

Exactly! That's why he's a F*****t. After all, Hitler and Mussolini did the same thing. They too labeled their opponents as "C*******ts" (especially the Jewish opponents) because they needed enemies for the people to h**e, and to blame all their problems on.

This country's White Nationalists and W***e S*********ts (the KKK, the Neo-N**is, the Aryan Brotherhood, the Aryan Nations, etc) does it too. They blame their troubles on the minorities, especially the black people, and claim that any movement or program designed to help them is a "C*******t plot." In fact, their ancestors believed that the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and '60s was C*******t-inspired, and that Martin Luther King was the head "C****e." The John Birch Society even made a so-called "documentary" film called "Anarchy USA" (1966) which was full of false "evidence" and innuendos supposedly proving that the leaders of the Civil Rights campaign were using the same tactics that C*******ts used to conquer China, Cuba, and Algeria. Of course, they threw in Vladimir Lenin's supposed speech about how the United States, "that last bastion of capitalism...will fall like an overripe fruit into our hands" (which he never said), as well as an alleged "C*******t Party Directive" from 1943 urging all party members to label their critics as "F*****ts, N**is, Anti-Semites," etc (it has since been proven to be a forgery).

It all boiled down to the same thing, branding people as "dangerous subversives" to justify hating them and/or commiting violence against them. None of that was true, and neither is this nonsense about Joe Biden being a C*******t. They just say that because Biden wants better relationships with China. Yet, they didn't mind it when Richard Nixon visited China in 1972 in order to restore those relationships in the first place. Is it probably because Nixon was a Republican, and Biden is a Democrat?

"Trump isn't a c*******t..."

No, of course, he isn't.

HE'S A F*****T!!!

If I remember correctly, Trump originally said that the C****av***s was a "fraud" by the Democrats. But, by the time he realized the v***s was real, it was too late to do anything to keep it out of the United States. So, when the v***s began spreading all over the country, Trump did what he always does, refuse to take responsibility for his mistakes, and try to blame the sickness on others, especially the Democrats. (surprise, surprise)

What movie?

Big deal! So did Wyatt Earp! Does that make him a F*****t or a N**i like Hitler, or a C*******t, like those other guys? I don't think so.

Here we go with the old "Red Menace" argument to discredit anyone whose beliefs, opinions, or policies are different.

Years ago, a lot of people, especially white people in the South, thought that the Civil Rights movement was C*******t-inspired.

The same thing was said about the protests against the Vietnam War, the anti-pollution crusade, the Women's Lib movement, the Gay Rights campaign, the efforts to pass the Equal Rights Amendment, the quest for affordable healthcare, and so on.

Now it's sensible gun control laws that are being linked with those "dirty C****es."

People like you are so paranoid about C*******m, that it's robbed you of your common sense and your ability to think clearly and reasonably. You're just as bad as J. Edgar Hoover and Senator Joseph McCarthy.

I suppose you think Wyatt Earp was a C*******t because he made a law that anyone who came into Tombstone, Arizona, had to register their guns at Earp's office. In fact, the legendary Gunfight at the OK Corral was a gun control incident, because Earp, his brothers, and his friend, "Doc" Holiday, were attempting to disarm the Clanton Brothers, who had come into town without registering their guns.

Nobody is trying to "silence the majority" or "take their weapons." They're just trying to keep them out of the hands of maniacs who would use them to k**l or injure innocent people.

I would expect crazy talk like that from a woman who looks like a Barbie doll.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! You yourself admit that you can't prove what you're saying. So, you shouldn't make wild accusations and theories like that.

The Democrats are not "afraid of the Second Amendment." They're afraid of certain misguided persons who twist and distort the Second Amendment beyond all recognition, and who think that it gives any lunatic or i***t an absolute right to have as many guns as he or she wants, for any reason. Well, nothing could be further from the t***h.

What the Second Amendment actually says is "A well regulated M*****a, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." In other words, the Amendment only applies to the right of each state and its people "to keep and bear arms" only for the purpose of maintaining a "well regulated M*****a" for their own protection, like in case of r**ting or domestic i**********n. It was never intended to give just about anybody a license to own guns, especially if he or she is the kind of person who should never be trusted with firearms, like, for example, a person with a record for violent crime, or a history of mental illness that makes that person violent, or someone with a penchant for family violence or abuse.

Unfortunately, too many people in this country just don't understand this concept, because they've been lied to, especially by groups like the National Rifle Association (N.R.A.). A lot of its members are people with very little education, including knowledge of the Constitution, and the leaders pander to that sort of ignorance. For instance, their official magazine (and no doubt their official website) list only the second part of the Second Amendment, which talks about "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," but it leaves out the first part, which mentions the "well regulated M*****a." Thus, the gullible members of the N.R.A. are tricked into believing that the Second Amendment applies to them, even if they aren't members of a state M*****a. It's this twisted mentality that makes them h**eful and suspicious of anyone who favors common sense gun laws designed to keep firearms out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them. It's people such as these that gun control laws are directed at, and not legitimate gun owners, like the anti-gun control crowd would have us all believe. As a matter of fact, legitimate gun owners are actually among the biggest SUPPORTERS of gun control! Of course, the N.R.A. will never admit that, because it would discredit their claim that they merely represent "law-abiding citizens" who just happen to own guns.

Besides, many people believe that the pro-gun groups don't really care about the Second Amendment, that they actually support the interests of gun manufacturers, who make money from making and selling guns, even to criminals! It's like how, during the so-called "Cold War," certain parties exaggerated the supposed "military buildup" by the Soviet Union in order to justify increased military spending on our part, because it was PROFITABLE for the big business defense contractors, better known as the Military-Industrial Complex, as President Eisenhower called it.

Let's face facts. CERTAIN PEOPLE JUST CAN'T BE TRUSTED WITH GUNS, like the ones responsible for all these mass shootings! (Columbine, Sandy Hook, etc) It's as simple as that.

"..'we' implies being part of something happening and being part of it."

That's redundant.

I never said that disagreement was a violation of free speech. I said that firing someone for disagreeing with his or her boss was a violation of free speech, and that's exactly what Trump used to do, not once, but several times.

And no, smarty-pants, English is not my "third language." I'm not a foreigner, or an immigrant, if that's what you're implying (I'll admit that some of my ancestors were immigrants). I was born right here, in the United States of America, as were my sister, my parents (may they rest in peace), and most of my relatives (some of whom are also deceased), and although I do know a few foreign words (not enough to hold a conversation, however), my first and foremost language is indeed ENGLISH!