"Take to the streets"???

I seem to remember that Clinton did not win the popular vote and the "other side" was pretty upset. They whined about it quite a bit although I do not recall a "taking it to the streets attitude".
So now that the shoe is on the other foot it seems like a hypocrisy for the libs/dems to bring up the popular vote issue. Just as it's a hypocrisy to bring up the dui.
 
Kalifornia (the mutant inhabitants thereof) is ALWAYS ready to riot.

If a riot starts, I don't think they will be able to contain themselves of the chance to loot and commit violence in Cali.

It is true though, that "they" do not have the BALLS to really fight in the streets. These are people that don't even have the balls to take care of their own basic needs; they depend on the government to nurture them from womb to tome. The only time they will fight in the streets is as long as they have their victims outnumbered 100 to 1. These people have the courage of a pack of jackals, only attacking with a hundred timid nips when their opponent is down and outnumbered. As soon as the victims start fighting back, they will wet themselves and flee like scared poodles. And, then they will call on Big Brother to protect them from the fight they started, no less.





[This message has been edited by Red Bull (edited November 09, 2000).]
 
I really can't see a riot in Cali over a Gore loss but you are correct. It doesn't require much reason at all to steal a DVD player and burn a shoe store.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top