kiaghi7 
Member since Oct 23, 2009


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Recent Comments

Re: “SC Dems unveil lame anti-Nikki attack ad

Good to see the infamous Chris Haire disguising his impotent rhetoric behind his inability to do anything other than complain...

Chris, are you THAT angry that you threw your vote away on Alvin Green, only to find out that even though he had a (D) by his name it still does not mean you knew anything about him what so ever? You know, like how you apparently didn't know Clyburn was going to go hyper-fascist with the unconstitutional health-care "bill" that was illegally forced through congress?

Little pesky things like the Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 1:

"To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "

Nowhere in there is any allowance for granting itself the authority to COMPEL the citizens of the United States to partake in any activity, service, or product. More over, later in the very same article 1, Section 9, paragraph 1:

"This provision in Section 9 prohibits Congress from passing a bill of attainder, which inflicts punishment on a person through an act of legislation, without a trial. It also bars ex post facto laws, which make an action criminal after it is committed or retroactively increase the penalty for a crime. "

Now I know words like "attainder", and latin are complicated for you to understand, so I'll explain them to you in nice small words...

Basically, the Federal Government can't pass any law that would inherently punish anyone for doing ANYTHING without trial and due process, also spelled out in the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments, but that's gilding the lily at this point, the authors of the Constitution had already thought of it and written it into the Constitution itself without the need for it to be amended later, but it was done so to ensure that the States could not use the ambiguity to their advantage.


ANYWAY though, I digress, sort of like your entire article where you go on a diatribe about DeMint in what was supposedly a Nikki Haley subject...

Odd that you clearly despise republicans enough to make baseless accusations without furnishing evidence of your claims, such as DeMint's homophobia or desire for a theocracy... It's almost like you're more motivated to flagrantly slander anyone you disagree with rather than actually furnishing a counter argument to their own.

Shakespeare could have described your work best:

"It is a tale told by an idiot,
full of sound and fury,
signifying nothing" (MacBeth A5S5)

Posted by kiaghi7 on July 7, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Re: “Ice pig almost got it up the poop chute

LMAOROTF is internet lingo...

LMAO means "Laughing My Ass Off"
ROTF means "Rolling On The Floor"

sometimes phrased as ROTFL, "Rolling On The Floor Laughing"

Posted by kiaghi7 on May 16, 2010 at 6:47 PM

Re: “Ice pig almost got it up the poop chute

While the tone of ICEMAN is pretty low brow, I've got to agree with his overall sentiment.

If someone is being an ass, let them know they are an ass and don't be affray of what they think. Getting upset after the fact and venting online isn't going to solve the problem, particularly with empty threats voiced from a distance clearly without any intent of realizing them or if the opportunity even arose, no action upon the threats of now would materialize then.

If you're a lady, then simply stoke the fire in your belly to speak up for yourself and make the clueless queue klutz know that he is in the wrong and he's going to march himself to the back of the line just like anybody else, short of you inviting him in front of you.

If you're a man, then turn in your man card and be quiet. You had an opportunity to demonstrate that you had sufficient intestinal fortitude to defend your place in line from some obnoxious other who wanted "cuts", but you didn't do anything other than acquiesce.

Who's fault is that?

Sure he's partly to blame for being boorish, but who's the one who feinted away from actually making the decision for themselves and left it up to the boorish person in the first place?

Posted by kiaghi7 on May 16, 2010 at 12:06 PM

Re: “As If We Didn't Know: Study Shows Racial Resentment Fuels Teabagger Movement

Isn't it funny how the writer, Will Moredock, has an exceptionally long history of writing flagrant hate speech against those he disagrees with?

For all of his articles, suggesting racism and bias of those he deems guilty, he is yet to furnish any proof of this. Meanwhile, he rants endlessly in hyperbolic and racially charged slander drenched vitriol because he can't actually defend his own racist predisposition and assertions.

At some point it needs to be said that the one perpetually accusing everyone and everything of racism should perhaps take a moment to actually be intellectually honest enough to ask himself where he's getting this preconceived notion, because it most certainly isn't coming from even one iota of fact.

Posted by kiaghi7 on May 9, 2010 at 1:15 PM

Re: “McLeod tells Barrett to 'shove it'

"Not the further escalation of an unwinnable war in Afghanistan."

Just because your comments are vacuous and there is no such word as "unwinnable", doesn't necessarily make you utterly unqualified to write anything about any subject...

"[...]and Carrie Prejean had to return her implants to the Miss California Pageant."

What better way to demonstrate that you have a viable opinion, and that your words should carry some sort of weight than to attack someone as so many others of your mindset have based upon her expressing of her own opinion. Indeed what an enlightened faction you are from where everyone is free to express themselves so long as they don't disagree, at which point they are harangued, slandered (liable in your case), and generally disparaged on everything in any way related to that person, but simultaneously in no way able to refute her opinion which you take exception to. Bare in mind I'm hardly surprised, as that is the typical formula for those without any actual ability to argue the point so you therefore have to fall back and call people names akin to the actions of a playground reaction to some meanie who took your ball and you have no teacher to tattle to in order to get your way.

When you can't silence your opponent you simply attack them, but in the words of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi himself: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win"

"The state's more grown-up Republicans Sen. Lindsay Graham and Rep. Bob Inglis did not sign the letter."

The State's (see state is a proper noun in this case referring to S.C.) Senator Lindsay Graham is a politically expedient lap-dog who's busy falling all over himself, and trampling all over the people who (shouldn't have) elected him in an effort to gain camera time and seem relevant. If "grown up" is what you are for betraying your constituents, then you must be in love with congress (purposely not capitalized out of disrespect) as a whole who's approval ratings are not even in double digits. Regardless of party lines mind you, they are all equally culpable for the abysmal condition of things from before and since the 2008 elections, so nobody gets to lay the blame at anyone else's door without more than enough being left over to take home leftovers.

The nonsensical drivel you've cobbled together from other people's thoughts and errant daydreams of subjects you apparently aren't actually informed on is amusing up to the point that one realizes that you're actually being published, which tells me there is at least an editor, of dubious qualification, in the mix that is either equally uninformed or equally oblivious to reality as you've demonstrated yourself to be. Maybe one day, in a brighter and more educated future, people like you won't be able to purvey flagrant lies and misinformation in the guise of "news" in an effort to only tell things how you want them to be heard rather than how they actually are.

Posted by kiaghi7 on November 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM

All Comments »


Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2016, Charleston City Paper   RSS