cancel reply
Posting mode: Reply


Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
name e-mail subject pw(deletion)
Post and go
Bump thread?

  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Javascript must be enabled for all of our addons to work.
  • Come chat and see that we're all a bit crazy on IRC!
  • Do not post any artwork from sexyfur.com and/or
    Jeremy Bernal. This is now a bannable offense.
Flockmod!

File: 1324086489.cigarfurs_cigarskunkfinal.jpg - (132.56 KB, 1015x1280) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
135742 No.3507209

Cigar Skunk, the asshole, has been kicked off FurAffinity, due to his constant being a total asshole.
But it's not his fault! It's the liberals!!

No.3507215

took'em long enough.

this was expected, anticipated but i figured it would have gone down in 2009,not 2018

No.3507223

Nice to see something good come out of this fucking mess, even if it is for entirely wrong reasons.

No.3507224

>>3507209

What was it exactly that became the last straw? Anyone archive or screencap it before it was taken down?

No.3507227
File: wtfamireading.jpg - (62.95 KB, 600x1147) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
64465

Let's see what he has written in his Jour.....OH DEAR LAWD!!! IT'S LIKE A BEN GARRISON CARTOON IN TEXT FORM!!!

http://www.furaffinity.net/journals/cigarskunk/

No.3507229

>>3507227
He was the first person to block me on FA.

I had the temerity to inform him that the US didn't win the Vietnam War.

No.3507231

>>3507227
More like Atlas Shrugged

In the sense that it's TL;DR

No.3507235
File: cs01.jpg - (424.96 KB, 900x900) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
435155

Remember the time when he thought he was a top political investigator and tried to get some dirt on Obama? Good times!

No.3507236
File: cs02.jpg - (419.76 KB, 700x964) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
429834
No.3507244

>>3507227

Lol, I think we all knew Cigarskunk was batshit insane in levels that would make Alex Jones blush.

But his logical gymnastics to blame Mueller, Hillary and Obama indirectly for everything is top lel.

No.3507248

>>3507236
raine dog was hot

No.3507252
File: photo_2018-05-14_01-45-41.jpg - (81.83 KB, 654x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
83796

>>3507244
Eh, you have literal swathes of leftists who believed GW Bush was personally targeting them, Trump personally out to wreck their lives and otherwise believe everything bad in their lives happen "cuz Trump".

No.3507254

>>3507252

>you have literal swathes of leftists who believed GW Bush was personally targeting them

Does the phrase "literal swathes" mean "actual dearth" in your dictionary?

>Trump personally out to wreck their lives

It's easy to interpret his behavior that way, but in reality he is just out to enrich his pocketbook and/or ego, which inevitably comes at the cost of others' well-being.

No.3507302

Good morning!
Fashy furs gets the banhammer.
Let's keep it up!

No.3507329
File: Official_portrait_of_Barack_Obama.jpg - (784.67 KB, 1916x2608) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
803500

I remember how he quit working at his local welfare office because he refused to work in a place that had the official Presidential Portrait of Obama on the wall, grinning down at him.

No.3507343
File: 5110772-3x2-940x627.jpg - (102.56 KB, 940x627) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
105019

>>3507209

Cigar Skunk is an embarrassing doppelganger to the great Sylvester McCoy of Doctor Who and The Hobbit fame!

No.3507348

>>3507343 best doctor but his Radagast made me cringe.

No.3507367
File: 1496598666.cigarskunk_tent04fifi.jpg - (74.23 KB, 523x724) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
76015

I remember daring to click "watch" on his profile just become he started posting some obscure Fifi stuff. Big mistake.

No.3507404

>>3507254
I'm still laughing at the dead panels accusations against Obama, yet Trump and Co wants to cut everyone.

No.3507411
File: screen_shot_2018-02-17_at_11.28.16_am.png - (1772.04 KB, 1140x640) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
1814571

>>3507348

If the original series hadn't been cancelled in 1989 his fouth season as The Professor would have had bigger and bolder stories the likes the show had never seen before! However at least now we have this!
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/sylvester-mccoy-returns-in-titans-new-the-seventh-doctor-mini-series

No.3507416

>>3507411

Nice! Thanks for sharing <3

No.3507594

>>3507404

There's a huge difference between not wanting to pay for your care, and being sole arbiter of your care.

Private company doesn't want to operate on your neck-tumor thing? You can go to another.

Your little boy has a mitochondria disease? United Kingdom prevents you from taking your child to the United States or Israel for treatment.

When you get the government balls deep in your healthcare, you give them control of your healthcare. No thanks.

No.3507608

>>3507601

Oh, there's one who is FAR worse.
Ralph Hayes, Jr.
Fundy asshole, creationist, right-wing jackass.

No.3507612

>>3507594

>implying is it any better when somehow the insurance company finds yet another loophole to don't pay what is supposed to be covered.
>implying healthcare is accessible enough to "just go elsewhere" when your insurance gives you the finger.
No.3507619

>>3507612

In the less-government version, that little boy would have the right to try.

In the more-government version, he's dying because the government decreed he is to be put on pain management and left to die, and they will not allow anything else because they don't want to project weakness.

The more-government version is actually occurring right this minute.

No.3507633

>>3507594

>Private company doesn't want to operate on your neck-tumor thing? You can go to another.

Unless you're poor, of course.

>Your little boy has a mitochondria disease? United Kingdom prevents you from taking your child to the United States or Israel for treatment.

This is almost always not because it's a medical issue per-se, but because the UK government treats children as people rather than as the property of their parents. If children are judged to have capacity to make a decision, their views are taken into account. If children are too young, or too literally-braindead to make that decision, a panel of experts can be used to consider their interests. That's not a healthcare issue, that's a legal issue, and it's the system applied in non-healthcare situations as well. The UK could scrap the NHS tomorrow and it would still make similar decisions to avoid a Terri Schiavo style farce where the parents make a run for St. Jude's job by being too emotionally invested to make a rational decision.

No.3507636

>>3507633

>The UK could scrap the NHS tomorrow and it would still make similar decisions to avoid a Terri Schiavo style farce where the parents make a run for St. Jude's job by being too emotionally invested to make a rational decision.

But that's not a decision for the government to make in the first place. What right do they have to choose over someone else's life - even more so in your proposed scenario where they wouldn't even be paying for it.

This isn't a question about some hypothetical death panels - it's just a no-no to start with: the state should have NO case in whether an individual lives or dies. They can refuse to spend money on the terminally ill, but they cannot refuse to send them elsewhere for treatment - it's just not in their moral rights to decide.

No.3507640

>>3507636

>But that's not a decision for the government to make in the first place. What right do they have to choose over someone else's life - even more so in your proposed scenario where they wouldn't even be paying for it.

What right do you have to make that decision on their behalf, with reference only to your own interests?

>This isn't a question about some hypothetical death panels - it's just a no-no to start with: the state should have NO case in whether an individual lives or dies. They can refuse to spend money on the terminally ill, but they cannot refuse to send them elsewhere for treatment - it's just not in their moral rights to decide.

It's not in your moral right to keep suffering people who'd want to die alive just because you can't let go either, but here we are.

No.3507660

>>3507640
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

What moral rights does any government have to deny anyone the right to seek for medical assistance elsewhere that they themselves are refusing to provide?

>who'd want to die

That's begging the question.

No.3507661

>>3507640
More to the point, you're suggesting that a government has higher authority in deciding whether e.g. a child wants to die, than their very parents and closest of kin.

Article 16.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Together with article 25. it's clear that the universal declaration of human rights means the government should hold no greater power over the parents of a child as regard to the health and wellbeing of the person. They obviously cannot dictate whether someone is "fit to live": that power bestowed on the ruling elite of a society has horrible consequences.

No.3507663

>>3507660

>The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 3.

Right, so we're attacking the notion the government and law know best by... citing international law.

>What moral rights does any government have to deny anyone the right to seek for medical assistance elsewhere that they themselves are refusing to provide?

You're saying passports should be free, right? (Actually we could draw this out to borders being unjust, but hey.) What right does the government have to refuse me the right to cross a border on the basis I can't afford a document they themselves refuse to provide for free?

>that they themselves are refusing to provide?

This is irrelevant, as we've already established, because of how the UK treats capacity. The NHS isn't the only source of healthcare in the UK either, no private healthcare inside the country wanted to take up a lost cause.

>More to the point, you're suggesting that a government has higher authority in deciding whether e.g. a child wants to die, than their very parents and closest of kin.

The law is not the government. This isn't the prime minister saying "kill that fucker", it's a legal consideration of the interests of those effected. In practical and legally very pedantic terms, the people considering the relevant factors are acting on behalf of the child, not as an arm of the state. The Terri Schiavo case is very relevant because they're basically the same thing. In that case, you've got the husband acting on her behalf to the court. The court itself eventually sides with him, but it is not the government unplugging anyone. The same is true dealing with experts acting on behalf of a child.
The fact parents don't always know best is why we've got Gillick Competence to begin with. You go even further where you've got someone who can feel nothing except possibly pain, who is inevitably going to die young, and the parents want to tortuously drag out the inevitable for their own (unknowingly) selfish reasons on the basis of pure instinct. Someone has to step in and say "no" - and any normal hospital and health insurer is going to do that (Also, what fucking moral right do they have to refuse care just because I can't pay?) unless they're completely amoral and decide to bilk the parents thousands of house-mortgaging dollars to stage an elaborate funeral ritual.

>Together with article 25. it's clear that the universal declaration of human rights means the government should hold no greater power over the parents of a child as regard to the health and wellbeing of the person.

Right so let's leave abused kids with their abusive parents because fuck what they might want and fuck letting the state interfere with family life, amirite?

Now, let's play "the bits of human rights nobody remembers but that are far more practically relevant"

>(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

And yet, despite this right we have persistent unemployment, a jobs guarantee does not exist, even though it would be legislatively and administratively trivial. With unemployment extant and welfare punitive, meaningful "free choice of employment" is impossible and "protection against unemployment" paper thin at best to nonexistent if you fall through the cracks. Woo, United Nations LARPing!

No.3507680

>>3507636
Want to know the joke?

Leftists and socialist fascists will cry unholy murder about "the state" executing tried and convicted criminals and attempt to ban it, claiming "That's not the state's powers"

But then things like this, or Terry Schiavo, and it's "YES WHY ISN'T THE STATE KILLING THESE UNPEOPLE??"

Leftism really is a mental disorder.

No.3507682

>>3507680
it was the state that ridiculously delayed them killing Terry Schiavo tho

No.3507689
File: b1874714557f6c7f4cacdde5b8b36be4.jpg - (102.12 KB, 488x365) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
104569
No.3507691

>>3507689
why aren't there more lewds of the dog

No.3507692

>>3507680
Want to know what's worse? Conservatives who scream government has no right to tell you how to live your life except for things like dictating who you can marry, what goes on in your bedroom, what a woman can/can't do to her body, how your skin color automatically makes you a criminal, imprison all the gays, be the world's police force and dictate what every country in the world has to do...

No.3507713

The thing is, CS is now at Inkbunny, still bitching about "Dem Lib'ruls" of course.
They just never learn.

No.3507719

>>3507682
herbladoobafuuuh nice virtue signal faaaaaart

No.3507721

>>3507713

In all fairness, those shameless jackasses actually made him right for once.

He's now actually a victim of a mass liberal conspiracy. Gawd, he'll NEVER shut up now.

No.3507724

>>3507692

You really want to piss of conservatives? You really, really, want piss them off? Simply tell them that many left wing voters don't like Hillary and didn't really support her during the election, which is why she lost.

They will froth at the fucking mouths. I don't know why, but they get kind of nasty when you say this. For extra angry points, tell them a lot of the liberal/progressive wing of the left aren't happy with Obama.

No.3507725

>>3507724

Imagine someone said to you "I'm going to eat all the beef jerky, and I hate beef jerky, just so you can't get it." This is why they don't like it. It's the fact that they voted for Donald because they liked him, and that you or anyone else would vote for someone they hate, just to say fuck you to republicans.

No.3507726

>>3507725 For what it is worth I voted Obama in 2012, Bernie in the 2016 Primary, and Stein in the general. Been pretty happy with Trump though. Too much of the establishment is against him which I think is telling, and overall, a good sign. Really, the post 2016 election world has been wild in watching who goes left, who goes right, and, overall, who went off the rails. After the disaster that was 2000-2016, I feel hopeful again.

No.3507729

>>3507726

>Been pretty happy with Trump though.

The real test of the strenght of a government as a system is that it functions even with a monkey as a leader, and things aren't instantly breaking down or might even go better. In a well-functioning system of government, good leaders or bad leaders have very little difference because the system keeps them in check. The president for example is supposed to be the puppet of the people, just an idol or a symbol representing the collective will as far as it can be agreed on, and Americans agreed on their president. Trump won.

The left, whining about Trump, is inherently expressing their distrust towards the state system because they see it not as a tool of representation, but as a tool of social engineering and manipulation. They think its fundamental purpose is for a small number of "political specialists" to dictate what everyone else should do, which is why it's so horrible that this power should be granted to a person who doesn't understand that they're playing with fire, but most importantly, doesn't think like me.

It's yet another case of double standards. Good when we do it, bad when you do it.

No.3508935

Looks like Cigar Skunk either was kicked off Inkbunny, or left.

No.3508956

What's the deal with hate-watching people whose politics you hate? I've found it really easy to not care what he did for years.

No.3508974

>>3508956

Ditto, and its true. Without anyone here to care enough about him or whatever he was bitching about, he faded from all relevance. There was a significant chunk of time where I completely forgot he existed.

I think it's safe to say that was at least the majority of this decade.

Any bragging rights about giving him the boot expired years ago. He's been well at it since the early 2000s, at least. If anything, his sudden removal just shows how far and willing that Princess Piche is to cave to the swarm.

No.3508976
File: 4s7zrW.jpg - (40.03 KB, 711x431) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
40987

This is all an egotistical substitute for talent and community. The ugly and dejected now have a 'good cause' to live out their power fantasies safely behind computers.

No.3508978

Now I'm curious how he got banned. And where he'll go instead. And whether he'll be pursued by the furries. Oh fucksticks!

No.3508988

Which rule did he break to be banned? Being perceived as an asshole doesn't count, or else FA would have far fewer users.

No.3508990

>>3508978
>>3508988

Not really sure. I honestly doubt he did anything beyond his norm to suddenly deserve the banhammer. I mean he's been there probably since the beginning (2005) or close to it, so he's clearly been careful in how he words his rants, being ever so edgy without crossing a line. I always had the impression that he fancied himself as his own little Rush Limbaugh and merely wishes he had the audience to boot.

Honestly, it seems like it doesn't take much more than being a proud, unapologetic Trump supporter to be lumped in vaguely with hate groups by the hypocritical left, and be put at risk.

No.3509011

>>3508990

Cigar Skunk fit the stereotype of the "right-wing kook" to a T.

His sources? Faux "news," Breitbart, WND, etc.

Topics? Anything to "trigger the liberals." (Translation: Demagoguery)

Lies? Lot of 'em.

Conspiracy theories? Yup.

No.3509015

>>3509011

Says alot about Ciggie when he was still desperately clinging onto the birther conspiracy, even long after everyone else (including Trump, who started the whole damn thing to begin with) has dropped it.

No.3509020

>>3509015

Wait now you retcon shit to believe Trump started the birther thing? Hillary's campaign did in the primaries in 2008

No.3509021

>>3509020

Just TRY to get it right, dummy.

One of Hilary's campaign staff brought it up, based on wild Internet rumors.
That staffer was fired.

The rumor then continued with some guy who liked conspiracy theories, and the wack job dentest, Orly Taitz.

Trump jumped on the bandwagon, and had his own "investigators" take a trip to Hawaii.
Trump also hired his crony, "Sheriff" Joe Arpaio.
Arpaio and Taitz still are convinced that it's all this big plot, Obama's birth certificate was "faked," and such.
But they are has-beens. Actually never-was losers.

As for Trump, don't forget he is still convinced he actually got more of the popular vote, but "illegals were bused in to vote for Hilary."

These are the assholes Cigar Skunk is just all dreamy-eyed about.

No.3509022

>>3509021

And here I thought that there were only something like 700,000-800,000 illegals in America (Hispanic ones, anyways). That wouldn't have been nearly enough to make a difference if this was even remotely true. Maybe my figures are wrong?

Besides, finding (and possibly bribing) shitloads of people that are off the books to carpool in and vote sounds like a lot more effort than rigging the voting machines and counts.

Why didn't Trump just stick to accusations of voter fraud in that manner? There were news reports on loads of states during the primary election doing shady shit in favor of Hillary. After all the bullshit that's been uncovered that the DNC has done (even last month's bombshell), is it truely so hard to establish that they cheated in the vote too?

It's more like nobody cared because they probably did cheat their ass off in the votes, and it still wasn't enough for Hillary to win. Guess I answered my own question.

No.3509023

>>3507725
Weird that you mention this, considering how many people - people who lived through the '80s, mind, and who are intimately aware of how much of a notorious douchebag Donald Trump has consistently been through the decades - voted for DT just because his rhetoric was the most appalling to liberals.
It was to old guard Republicans as well, but unlike the GOP also-rans in the 2016 election, Trump actually had a chance of winning.

No.3509027

>>3509022

Because raw numbers do no thing thanks to the way the US election works.
You just need to strategically get some bastions to win the election by points and now raw numbers. That exactly what Cambridge Analytica and many other groups did.

Focus mostly on smaller states and leave big democratic bastions alone (New york, California, etc..)

No.3509079

>>3509023

>liberals

They are the busy body, can't leave other people alone, fundie bible-thumper Christians of the present day. They are illegitimate as moral authorities and their ideas are bad. They fall short of the original definition of "liberal". So, they're dummies corrupted by too much power. And the Republicans are mostly stupid. That's where all this alt-this and alt-that stuff came from. People want something different.

No.3509080
>Cigarskunk

That fucker hasn't offed himself or died of lung cancer, yet?

No.3509081

>>3509023

I'm sorry that you're so stupid and think that your vote counts during a presidential election.....I understand, the stupid,it just hurts more days than others....shhhh....shhhh momma's gonna buy you a mockingbird....

No.3509123

>>3509079
That I can understand, but in the end DT just staffed his cabinet with Neocons and has enacted little policy beyond what he thinks Obama wouldn't do.
I mean, that might've been fine, but the Rust Belt is still destroyed, the middle-class never came back, and Appalachia is as fucked as ever. Sticking it to progressives can be great schadenfreude, but it won't increase wages; small wonder that his never-questioning base is comprised so thickly of retirees and hikkikomori types.
He is certainly different, to be sure, but I'm not sure that someone who appears to essentially be a marriage between Andrew Johnson and a used-car salesman is the answer people were looking for.

>>3509081
I'm not sure what your deal is, but I'll bet it could be solved by reading a few good books.

No.3509174

>>3509022

>Besides, finding (and possibly bribing) shitloads of people that are off the books to carpool in and vote sounds like a lot more effort than rigging the voting machines and counts.

Just do what California does: Remove penalties for DMV workers from giving illegals drivers licenses so if they get caught, they won't get in trouble.

Then, make registering to vote mandatory when you get a drivers license.

Get some activist hate mongers to explain that the illegal "Should really vote democrat", sign them up to vote, give them a drivers license and wallah! Now that illegal can vote and none of the Useful Idiots will get in trouble.

That's about as easy as you can get.

No.3509182

>>3509079

>lack of proper use of plural form, which even the dumbest of English speakers can figure out
>saying a lot of stuff but not saying much at all, just trying to stir people up

Well hello there, Russian shill. Getting ready for the next election I see? Daddy Putin won't let you out of the kiddie pool (lulz.net) yet?

No.3509183

There are three types of "conservatives" nowadays.
And real conservatives like Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan would get kicked out of their ranks.

  1. Kooks.

The universe is one big conspiracy theory, their "god" is Alex Jones.
Cigar Skunk fits in here.

2. Religious wannabe dictoators.
"Believe what WE say or we'll jail/torture/kill you!"
Sounds like ISIS or the Taliban? Yup.
Talibornagains.

3. Greedheads.
All they want is more money.

No.3509191

>>3509183

>Alex Jones

Most conservative people do not know who he is. They don't spend their time online watching video.

>Religious wannabe dictoators

Who? Christians? They were thoroughly squashed over 10 years ago. The new hip and cool belief system is progressivism. Believe in police brutality against minorities, wage gap, gender inequality, identity politics. It's complete nonsense. You don't have to be conservative to see that.

>Greedheads

You are very generous, with other peoples' time, labor and money. Seems more like you are greedy.

No.3509326

>>3509191

Look up "dominism," "7 mountains," or "Christian reconstructionists."

They have little to no power now, but not for lack of trying.

No.3509366
File: goodidea.JPG - (27.02 KB, 504x415) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
27664

>>3509022 Because there weren't, the only retards stupid enough to believe that shit are conspiracy nuts like you. He abandoned the voter fraud commission because he just needed it around long enough to keep retards like you convinced that voter fraud is an actual thing.

No.3509505
File: ID-Not-Necessary.jpg - (128.51 KB, 720x540) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
131597

>>3509366

>>No voter fraud...

Its tough to prove when you are not allowed to verify the identity of the voter.

No.3509611

>>3509366
So you mean not a single illegal immigrant abused the fact that you don't need ID to vote? That none got tempted to cast a vote for the one who promised to stop persecuting violators of the immigration laws?

If there is no voter fraud, then why in the world would Liberals protest requirement for IDs for voting? After all, all citizens allowed to vote have IDs, and nobody who isn't allowed to vote would vote anyway?

No.3509614
File: EEVEE PARTY Cry More Faggot.gif - (1394.65 KB, 550x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
1428125

>>3509505 No it's not dipshit, there have been countless studies on voter fraud. Nobody can find it and the few we do find are usually conservatives.

No.3509624

>>3509614
Your denial means nothing.

No.3509634

>>3509611

>After all, all citizens allowed to vote have IDs

The problem about voter ID is that you need to have a specific kind of ID to show, which about 25% of the black voters and 8% of the white voters don't have because it costs extra money and trouble to get and you don't really need it for much else.

It's basically a "poor and black - fuck you" law.

No.3509648
File: vote for cat.gif - (33.54 KB, 450x450) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
34345

>>3509505 One thing people forget (or deliberately leave out) is that when you REGISTER to vote -- that's when you need your proof of residence. -- If you're in a 'no voter ID needed to vote' area all the residency stuff is assumed to have been taken care of in advance.

If one knows that someone has moved out of an area I assume they could 'take their identity' however when I was poll working there were plenty of local people working the polls who knew many of the residents coming into vote. -- If you went in saying, "I'm Joe Gabibble at 201 Boozler Ave" and a poll worker was like, "Hey.. I know Joe Gabibble and you're no Joe Gabibble!" the jig would be up.

No.3509655

You don't really need ID for much else??

>>3509505

No.3509675

>>3509655
There's all sorts of ID, but only some of them work as voter ID.

In Texas, you can vote with your concealed carry lisence, but not your student ID card.

No.3509687

>>3509634
Not to mention disproportionately impacting those that live in cities, and thus don't need to drive due to the readily-available public transportation.

No.3509690

>>3509634
If you can't take the time to acquire an ID card, you probably don't care enough to vote. And seeing how most Americans don't vote, it's easy enough to conclude they don't care even when they do have ID. So yes, fuck those people.

No.3509693

>>3509634

WTF are you talking about? Currently nobody needs any ID to vote. What's the problem to allow enough kinds that nobody allowed to vote is left out? If the problem is that the proposal requires a specific 'exclusive' ID then the solution is changing the kind of ID in the proposal, not throwing the proposal out altogether.

No.3509694

>>3509675

>In Texas, you can vote with your concealed carry lisence, but not your student ID card.

Because of international students. All the universities would have to agree to label IDs with "US Citizen".

No.3509695

>>3509687
Don't drive, okay. Also don't do -anything- off >>3509505 list? No alcohol, no hospital, not applying for jobs? Do they also live in sewers and eat rats?

No.3509700

>>3509695
Not everyone drinks, a lot of people tend not to visit the doctor's due to lack of finances, and Social Security cards (which are used far more often for employment) tend not to be valid for voter ID because they don't have the person's face on the ID.

No.3510155

>>3509505

>buying a firearm

Maybe in states run by fascist demonrats.


Delete Post []
Password