pfft, no, the fed holds the cards, or does the south need another lesson on that
And if they don't back down? Who will look like the enemy when the state is crushed? Who's actions do you think would have caused economic hardship on the state? I will give you a hint, it's not the governors.
Want to know what is ironic about this? You support anti-discrimination laws because no one can deny anyone service, but you support businesses boycotting and denying service. Hell, you even support forcing people to move to get service. It's pretty funny how fast you abandon your principles.
i will be very pleased to see a state of mostly bigots crushed, all good to me
my principles revolve around protecting minorities, not the bigots who oppress them, nothing more
Threatening the south worked well the last time. How many deaths was that again?
That's not the smartest move. If you crush the state with your actions everyone will know it's your fault. Do you seriously think that will work to benefit your cause?
a lot more for the south and reconstruction was rather brutal on them too. By all rights, given its geographical advantages, the south should've been the economic vitality of the nation. Instead states like MS are dead last because it's so damn regressive that no one wants to do business or live there
But those who remain never learn, and that's why they're southern
Yes, but you see this time the south has the weapons, the bases and the nukes. Good luck.
AHAHAHAHA
yeah the nukes with the launch codes attached to the president. I really don't think you want to push this, and over something so trivial as someone who *might* be attracted to you seeing your junk for all of 2 seconds
Me? Well, if I was charge I would push the button as soon the war started. Oh, and I can launch the babies without him. Never been much into war and never much cared for sending men into war, but I like winning and I like winning with killing everyone on the other side. There is no good reason to let your enemy stand after all.
you've really gone off the deep end
Hardly. You think you can make the south suffer and buckle to your will. You even went so far as to say the south would lose and suffer some more. I'm saying that if I was in charge I would end this little issue once and for all. If you think I'm crazy for saying I would destroy the enemy, so be it, but it's war, and war is hardly a game for the sane.
Suffer?? LOLLL
As i said the backlash is all north carolina's doing and in its power to put an end to, and clearly you don't give a damn about the suffering the south has inflicted on lgbt for centuries
Seriously it's this deranged mentality that makes me think it actually wouldn't be a bad to reign the south in by force so they can actually learn what real suffering is
And as I told you, if you crush the state everyone will know it's your fault. You can't very well win in the eyes of the people by being responsible for crushing an entire state. Your cause might very well be right, but there is no doubt your tactics are horrible.
And that will work to your benefit? I really have to wonder if you realize how to make people listen to you.
As springsteen said, the fans should support his decision because it's for a good cause, and those who can't accept that are not allies at all and we don't want 'support' like that
And once again, it's self inflicted by the state
I'm also opposed to giving in to people that want to try to force the states hand. The state needs to stand up for its people and handle those that want to play this game.
Does the NBA realize that the state can just not renew their lease? Do they have plans all lined up for a new place for the Hornets to play? I don't know about you guys, but I wouldn't lease out a stadium to a bunch of people that think they can push me around.
Once again...the free market speaks, but the conservatives only tout the free market when it does something they agree with....
Me? Well, if I was charge I would push the button as soon the war started. Oh, and I can launch the babies without him. Never been much into war and never much cared for sending men into war, but I like winning and I like winning with killing everyone on the other side. There is no good reason to let your enemy stand after all.
I never said they didn't have the right to do it, but there is no reason to give them what they want because of it.
That's what Adolf said. How did that go?
The weapons already exist and the south already has them. I'm also not interested in conquering anyone, and I would never start a war. All I'm saying is that because I don't like war, and I don't want anyone on my side to die, I need an action that will end the war very quickly and in a way where the enemy won't be a problem in the future.
That action would end with you being dead if you dared to push the nuclear button on the north.
Hardly. The enemy would be dead and my military personal would be home before noon to eat lunch.
Adolf thought that too. How did that go?