Search results

Note to self: Adding "clueless" and "gripless", as well as "troll" and "leveler of pathetic accusations", not to mention "waster of time" and (oh, the shame of it all) "dude". Apparently your vocabulary also degrades as you get angrier.

Then why won't you do it? Does it help you to speak in third person, as if you're not the one engaging in such hyperbole?

Do you not see calling someone able to formulate reasonable enough sentence structure, so as to get such a message across to one so erudite as yourself, a doofus as hyperbolic? And have you noticed that the angrier you get, the more grammatical/typing mistakes you make?

Indeed. And supporting policies or policy makers that want to destroy a country is certainly substantive. If I were doing so, I wouldn't like it if someone told me the truth about it, but calling the person doofus and nut completely obscures the issue in favor of a shutdown in communication...

You making a statement restating a previous statement of yours is supposed to show that you know what you're talking about?

"Doofus"? "nut"? Have you nothing substantial to argue with? Amazing.

I can see how good you are at proving a point by how often you call people names.

Paul said this: Romans 7:14 KJV — For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. "I am" is present tense first person singular. Paul is talking specifically about himself, not in the past, but currently (when he was writing the letter to the Roman church). He goes on to...

Enjoy a vacuous answer to a specific question? not really. It makes conversation nigh impossible.

Well, at least you added some material to keep it from being a total repost. But why are you tagging me on this? You certainly didn't address @7djengo7's point.

He'd like to. Misery loves company, after all.

Paul did. You must be newer, better than Paul.

No, his country is already ruined.

Non-sinners in spirit, and being sanctified as we fight the flesh.

You just quoted the part you wanted for your interpretation. That's dishonest. In Colorado you wouldn't be censured, however, because you're doing it for the "right" reasons. But it does make one wonder how you can live with yourself, when you so vehemently object to Jenna Ellis doing it.

Where he says solving the election fraud of 2020 is the single most important thing for republicans to do?

Why would you want that from anyone? Disenfranchise much? The issue is that most republicans get involved too late and too ignorantly, but you would have them stay ignorant and not get involved at all. I guess you're trying to get the republicans down to your level.

We can, but then we have to admit when we sin the next time, else we lie. 1 John 1:8 KJV — If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we lie by saying we no longer sin, then He can't forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness--we're...

Which also won't bode well for free and fair elections.

She's trying to save her career from an extreme leftist Colorado government.