We Must Ignite This Couch Message Boards

« 1 ... 34 35 36 (37) 38 39 »

 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1788
Quote:

eer_4da_beer wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
By your comment I assume you do agree that just because a journalist has a college education, and has taken an oath, they still are capable of being "ethically-challenged". At least that was the statement Strohs and Da Beer were making.


Not the point I was making at all. Stop making crap up.

I said professional journalists are held to standards, have to retract things proven to be false and can lose their jobs if found to act unethically.

Unlike Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and our current president. They say whatever lie they want and never retract anything when proven false. Your basement bloggers that you want to respect as much as professional journalism fall into that category.


So by your standards Infowars can be considered a legitimate News outlet, because they hold themselves to ethical standards, retract reports that are proven not true, and discipline reporters that cross those boundaries.

An example
[youtube=425,350][/youtube]

Thanks for helping me prove my point.


As for this comment:
Quote:
Unlike Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and our current president. They say whatever lie they want and never retract anything when proven false. Your basement bloggers that you want to respect as much as professional journalism fall into that category.


This isn't even an intelegent argument. Infowars and other News outlets are not talk shows. The Alex Jones show, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the like are talk shows. They express opinions on the news of the time. If you want to actually compare apples to apples, then you should compare them against the left leaning talk shows. The left has Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Jimmy Kimmel, and Stephen Colbert. I haven't heard any retractions from that left leaning group. Nor do I witness much in the way of ethical standards.

Posted on: 9/11 8:49 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 6675
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

eer_4da_beer wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
By your comment I assume you do agree that just because a journalist has a college education, and has taken an oath, they still are capable of being "ethically-challenged". At least that was the statement Strohs and Da Beer were making.


Not the point I was making at all. Stop making crap up.

I said professional journalists are held to standards, have to retract things proven to be false and can lose their jobs if found to act unethically.

Unlike Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and our current president. They say whatever lie they want and never retract anything when proven false. Your basement bloggers that you want to respect as much as professional journalism fall into that category.


So by your standards Infowars can be considered a legitimate News outlet, because they hold themselves to ethical standards, retract reports that are proven not true, and discipline reporters that cross those boundaries.

An example
[youtube=425,350][/youtube]

Thanks for helping me prove my point.


As for this comment:
Quote:
Unlike Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and our current president. They say whatever lie they want and never retract anything when proven false. Your basement bloggers that you want to respect as much as professional journalism fall into that category.


This isn't even an intelegent argument. Infowars and other News outlets are not talk shows. The Alex Jones show, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the like are talk shows. They express opinions on the news of the time. If you want to actually compare apples to apples, then you should compare them against the left leaning talk shows. The left has Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Jimmy Kimmel, and Stephen Colbert. I haven't heard any retractions from that left leaning group. Nor do I witness much in the way of ethical standards.


Do people still take left its talk show hosts seriously? I mean all of them compete for biggest dumpster fire on Comedy Central.

Posted on: 9/11 9:35 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1788
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
I have no doubt that the white supremacists were looking for a fight. Ironically the ones that organized it, Jason Kessler and the like, were not long ago progressives and Obama supporters.

Now this has no reflection on other Dems that supported Obama, but it does seem like someone is trying to stir up unrest and violence in our society.


Jason Kessler wasn't a progressive. The other organizers haven't ever self-identified as left as far as I know. There is a theory that the "liberal" to "conservative" plane on the political spectrum is more of a circle then it is a line. The theory goes that people at either extreme are actually closer in their beliefs than they are to moderates, who are at the other side of the circle. I have heard it referred to as the "horseshoe" theory. It makes sense if you consider someone's views on the "authoritarian" to "libertarian" plane. Kessler supposedly espoused very far left wing views that were beyond progressive and were extremely authoritarian. I think the authoritarian piece is what he truly believes in, and he is just looking for some authoritarian group to accept him.


Interesting point thanks for responding.


Kessler was an obama supporter who was a part of the occupy movement who organized the unite the right rally in an attempt to group all trump suppoerters with white supremacists.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08 ... ement-obama-supporter-8-m


Alex Jones BTFO Mr Kessler after Kessler himself admits to being an obama supporter

https://mobile.twitter.com/infowars/st ... 97269114963509249/video/1

I've been doing some digging, and finally traced this event back to its origins. Start with the Wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Unite_the_Right_Rally

It cites this article about expectations for the rally on 2017-07-21:

http://www.nbc29.com/story/35942579/s ... -park-during-august-rally

That article has a "related article link" back to 2017-06-05:

http://www.nbc29.com/story/35594532/c ... allies-in-charlottesville

Read those articles, and you can see the origins. The original application was submitted by Jason Kessler, on behalf of "Unity and Security for America".

The event was subsequently announced on Facebook by the "Traditionalist Workers Party".

Hopefully, that's enough breadcrumbs to get people started on finding the true origins of this "Unite the Right" rally.

Article from southern poverty law center. They did a lot of digging on him.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hat ... /individual/jason-kessler


I saw an add on the NBC link for a magical weight loss pill. I can't believe you would promote news stories from such charlatans! Be careful 1818, you know how easily those lefty rubes are separated from their money. You wouldn't want to encourage their poor spending habits.

Posted on: 9/11 10:24 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 6675
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
I have no doubt that the white supremacists were looking for a fight. Ironically the ones that organized it, Jason Kessler and the like, were not long ago progressives and Obama supporters.

Now this has no reflection on other Dems that supported Obama, but it does seem like someone is trying to stir up unrest and violence in our society.


Jason Kessler wasn't a progressive. The other organizers haven't ever self-identified as left as far as I know. There is a theory that the "liberal" to "conservative" plane on the political spectrum is more of a circle then it is a line. The theory goes that people at either extreme are actually closer in their beliefs than they are to moderates, who are at the other side of the circle. I have heard it referred to as the "horseshoe" theory. It makes sense if you consider someone's views on the "authoritarian" to "libertarian" plane. Kessler supposedly espoused very far left wing views that were beyond progressive and were extremely authoritarian. I think the authoritarian piece is what he truly believes in, and he is just looking for some authoritarian group to accept him.


Interesting point thanks for responding.


Kessler was an obama supporter who was a part of the occupy movement who organized the unite the right rally in an attempt to group all trump suppoerters with white supremacists.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08 ... ement-obama-supporter-8-m


Alex Jones BTFO Mr Kessler after Kessler himself admits to being an obama supporter

https://mobile.twitter.com/infowars/st ... 97269114963509249/video/1

I've been doing some digging, and finally traced this event back to its origins. Start with the Wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Unite_the_Right_Rally

It cites this article about expectations for the rally on 2017-07-21:

http://www.nbc29.com/story/35942579/s ... -park-during-august-rally

That article has a "related article link" back to 2017-06-05:

http://www.nbc29.com/story/35594532/c ... allies-in-charlottesville

Read those articles, and you can see the origins. The original application was submitted by Jason Kessler, on behalf of "Unity and Security for America".

The event was subsequently announced on Facebook by the "Traditionalist Workers Party".

Hopefully, that's enough breadcrumbs to get people started on finding the true origins of this "Unite the Right" rally.

Article from southern poverty law center. They did a lot of digging on him.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hat ... /individual/jason-kessler


I saw an add on the NBC link for a magical weight loss pill. I can't believe you would promote news stories from such charlatans! Be careful 1818, you know how easily those lefty rubes are separated from their money. You wouldn't want to encourage their poor spending habits.


Well piss! Looks like every post by someone who isnt a liberal is invalid :(

Posted on: 9/12 12:54 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 4934
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

eer_4da_beer wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
By your comment I assume you do agree that just because a journalist has a college education, and has taken an oath, they still are capable of being "ethically-challenged". At least that was the statement Strohs and Da Beer were making.


Not the point I was making at all. Stop making crap up.

I said professional journalists are held to standards, have to retract things proven to be false and can lose their jobs if found to act unethically.

Unlike Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and our current president. They say whatever lie they want and never retract anything when proven false. Your basement bloggers that you want to respect as much as professional journalism fall into that category.


So by your standards Infowars can be considered a legitimate News outlet, because they hold themselves to ethical standards, retract reports that are proven not true, and discipline reporters that cross those boundaries.

An example
...removed to save scrolling time...

Thanks for helping me prove my point.



Are you high or just trolling?

Saying that legitimate news sources are held to professional standards is not at all the same as saying that any news source that has ever held itself to a professional standard is legitimate.

Quote:


As for this comment:
Quote:
Unlike Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and our current president. They say whatever lie they want and never retract anything when proven false. Your basement bloggers that you want to respect as much as professional journalism fall into that category.


This isn't even an intelegent argument. Infowars and other News outlets are not talk shows. The Alex Jones show, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the like are talk shows. They express opinions on the news of the time. If you want to actually compare apples to apples, then you should compare them against the left leaning talk shows. The left has Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Jimmy Kimmel, and Stephen Colbert. I haven't heard any retractions from that left leaning group. Nor do I witness much in the way of ethical standards.


Just like Facebook memes, these opinion shows are absorbed as primary sources of information. The folks producing this misinformation (on both sides as our president says) know this fact and are unchecked on what they can say. Throw Olberman and Maddox in there. No arguements from me.

Posted on: 9/12 4:30 pm
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1788
Let me get this straight. First the article I posted wasn't credible, because of another article on the news site I posted from, had another article showing documentation about cloud seeding ahead of Harvey. The poster (scoffer) on this site made a false claim about what the other article was actually about.

Then the article I posted wasn't credible, because of the advertisements. I then showed that mainstream media outlets are ratings driven, and got a reply moaning about Benghazi.

Then I pointed out the shady dealings of a liberal media outlet that has blatantly been shady in their reporting. Though those dishonorable actions are actually honorable, because once the news outlet got caught, they had to take action to save face. Of course this was construed as journalistic integrity.

Then I took the standards you all proclaimed that made journalism actual credible journalism, and showed that Infowars actually went to that extent to be credible in their reporting. Though that wasn't acceptable either for some horse **** reason.


It's like trying to nail down jello with you people. You understand how unreasonable you seem to be right? Though I'm sure you will procure some antic to invert this reality as well. It's like playing with a spoiled child that insists on making up all the rules.

Posted on: 9/12 6:54 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1788
I wouldn't call it trolling. It was more like baiting. The Alex Jones video was the setting of the hook. As in hook, line, and sinker that is.

Posted on: 9/12 7:08 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 4934
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Let me get this straight. First the article I posted wasn't credible, because of another article on the news site I posted from, had another article showing documentation about cloud seeding ahead of Harvey. The poster (scoffer) on this site made a false claim about what the other article was actually about.

Then the article I posted wasn't credible, because of the advertisements. I then showed that mainstream media outlets are ratings driven, and got a reply moaning about Benghazi.


Wasn't me. Haven't had time to keep up lately and did not read the link(s) in question. Please don't assume I automatically agree with other folk's arguments.

Quote:


Then I pointed out the shady dealings of a liberal media outlet that has blatantly been shady in their reporting. Though those dishonorable actions are actually honorable, because once the news outlet got caught, they had to take action to save face. Of course this was construed as journalistic integrity.



As all the episodes able news outlets have done. Please show me the 100% perfect news source.

Again, there were repercussions for their unprofessional behavior.

Quote:


Then I took the standards you all proclaimed that made journalism actual credible journalism, and showed that Infowars actually went to that extent to be credible in their reporting. Though that wasn't acceptable either for some horse **** reason.


Really? I have to find a UFO story or some other nonsense that he hasnt retracted to show you how your example selectively applies professional standards?

Quote:

It's like trying to nail down jello with you people. You understand how unreasonable you seem to be right? Though I'm sure you will procure some antic to invert this reality as well. It's like playing with a spoiled child that insists on making up all the rules.


You people?

Remember, you support confederate monuments staying in public but don't want t be associated with the White power crowd.

Argue specifics please.

Posted on: 9/12 10:46 pm
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 4934
Quote:

EERY wrote:
I wouldn't call it trolling. It was more like baiting. The Alex Jones video was the setting of the hook. As in hook, line, and sinker that is.


...and me calling you on it was falling into your trap? Well played, Jedi.

Posted on: 9/12 10:47 pm
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1788
. (Period)

Posted on: 9/13 8:48 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1788
Quote:
Remember, you support confederate monuments staying in public but don't want t be associated with the White power crowd.


My original point was in the aspect of all monuments that Liberals are working/have worked to remove. Contrary to popular Liberal beliefs, having appreciation for ones heritage does not make that person a Nazi. It is possible to appreciate heritage and not like or support white supremacists ideals.


Still waiting on you to respond to my Bulshevik remark. I did my part and explained what I was talking about.


Posted on: 9/13 1:40 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 6675
I'll just leave this here.

Rice then, and now. Any libs want to apologize or admit they were wrong? No?

If she admits to the unmasking of Trump, why did she say she knows nothing about it?

https://youtu.be/VfRUItnjf3A

Trump was right AGAIN

Attach file:



jpg  lpz8k8av4qlz.jpg (168.52 KB)
2916_59ba5961c8e27.jpg 1472X2038 px

Posted on: 9/14 5:26 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 4934
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:
Remember, you support confederate monuments staying in public but don't want t be associated with the White power crowd.


My original point was in the aspect of all monuments that Liberals are working/have worked to remove. Contrary to popular Liberal beliefs, having appreciation for ones heritage does not make that person a Nazi. It is possible to appreciate heritage and not like or support white supremacists ideals.



Having appreciation for something doesn't make the thing that you are appreciating right or appropriate. Someone may appreciate the warmth and illumination of a burning cross...they are still on the wrong side of appreciation.

Think about it. These monuments are memorializing men that actively fought to take part of our country away and make it into another country. Those statues are tributes to the leadership of an occupying force. Celebrate that if you want.

...and just like would happen today: the greatest country on earth marched in and whooped that occupying force's ass. Period.

Participation trophies. Thought conservative real Americans hated that snowflake stuff?


Quote:

Still waiting on you to respond to my Bulshevik remark. I did my part and explained what I was talking about.



Please. I've hung around plenty of political chat rooms. I know all of the conservative greatest hits including your accusation. So I was trolling a bit there.

When I say that I support opposition to open white supremacist rallies and you go to the Bolshevik analogy it makes me want to say that since you support keeping confederate statues then you must think that hanging black people is ok. Doesn't make much sense does it?

Posted on: 9/14 8:05 pm
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 4934
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
I'll just leave this here.

Rice then, and now. Any libs want to apologize or admit they were wrong? No?

If she admits to the unmasking of Trump, why did she say she knows nothing about it?

Trump was right AGAIN


Yeah, whatever. Ten seconds of research shows that her explanation of what happened actually placated republican concerns. Even loudmouth Nunes had no comment afterwards.

Regular routine activities...or as Trumpists call it: another HUGE win for the president!

Link...actually read it if you like.


Posted on: 9/14 8:14 pm
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1788
Quote:

eer_4da_beer wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:
Remember, you support confederate monuments staying in public but don't want t be associated with the White power crowd.


My original point was in the aspect of all monuments that Liberals are working/have worked to remove. Contrary to popular Liberal beliefs, having appreciation for ones heritage does not make that person a Nazi. It is possible to appreciate heritage and not like or support white supremacists ideals.



Having appreciation for something doesn't make the thing that you are appreciating right or appropriate. Someone may appreciate the warmth and illumination of a burning cross...they are still on the wrong side of appreciation.

Think about it. These monuments are memorializing men that actively fought to take part of our country away and make it into another country. Those statues are tributes to the leadership of an occupying force. Celebrate that if you want.

...and just like would happen today: the greatest country on earth marched in and whooped that occupying force's ass. Period.

Participation trophies. Thought conservative real Americans hated that snowflake stuff?


Quote:

Still waiting on you to respond to my Bulshevik remark. I did my part and explained what I was talking about.



Please. I've hung around plenty of political chat rooms. I know all of the conservative greatest hits including your accusation. So I was trolling a bit there.

When I say that I support opposition to open white supremacist rallies and you go to the Bolshevik analogy it makes me want to say that since you support keeping confederate statues then you must think that hanging black people is ok. Doesn't make much sense does it?


It's obvious you are missing the point I was making about taking down monuments to begin with. You keep just trying to make it about confederate monuments, because you don't have a leg to stand on otherwise.

Seems to me that you are just skirting the Bulshevik remark. That's just my simple opinion. I guess your "trolling" (lol) would have worked if I didn't actually know what I was talking about. I wasn't just repeating a talking point I heard. Though whatever, I made my point, no need to drag this out.

Some liberals are working to rip the foundation of our country and our society down. They want to burn it all on the altar of political correctness. It's a bad religion if I've ever saw one, and I won't be silent about it. Today it is a confederate statue. Tomorrow it will be something else. There is always something else. You can claim the moral authority if you want. That's what people who practice political correctness do.

Posted on: 9/14 8:35 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1788
I honestly see this move by the left as more about having the ability to take a statue down, than what the statue stood for. It's more about the ability to limit what people can say than what is actually being said.

There are millions of videos taken of social justice warriors that fly off the handle saying all kind of racists things. The evidence of the movement is not so honorable if you look just below the surface. The social engineering is evident if you actually look for it.

Of course here is where you ignore what I'm actually saying, and insinuate that I'm a racist. It's okay, I have thick skin. 😘

Posted on: 9/14 9:27 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 4934
Quote:

EERY wrote:

It's obvious you are missing the point I was making about taking down monuments to begin with. You keep just trying to make it about confederate monuments, because you don't have a leg to stand on otherwise.


Or because the debate at hand is about confederate monuments? Why do you absolutely refuse to debate specifics?

Quote:

EERY wrote:

Seems to me that you are just skirting the Bulshevik remark. That's just my simple opinion. I guess your "trolling" (lol) would have worked if I didn't actually know what I was talking about. I wasn't just repeating a talking point I heard. Though whatever, I made my point, no need to drag this out.


Ok...I don't agree that your historic example fits today's reality. Not going to waste time on Google to disprove your opinion.

Glad you proved your point. I just think we disagree but you seem to think that you are schooling me somehow.

Don't let that distract you from keeping count...per your self-imposed scoring system, you are on quite a roll!

Quote:

EERY wrote:

Some liberals are working to rip the foundation of our country and our society down. They want to burn it all on the altar of political correctness. It's a bad religion if I've ever saw one, and I won't be silent about it. Today it is a confederate statue. Tomorrow it will be something else. There is always something else. You can claim the moral authority if you want. That's what people who practice political correctness do.


First thought was to respond with: "...and the rest of us liberals are stealing all of the garden gnomes! You'll never stop us!!!"

But I will apply your debate tactic of taking your statement and asking you to defend it in a different scenario:

So you support the NFL players kneeling during the anthem...or that's blasphemy because of your political correctness?

Posted on: 9/14 11:06 pm
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 4934
Quote:

EERY wrote:
I honestly see this move by the left as more about having the ability to take a statue down, than what the statue stood for. It's more about the ability to limit what people can say than what is actually being said.


What the statue stands for is 100% of the debate.

For the same reason that it is illegal to scream "fire" in a crowded theater it should also be illegal to go into public chanting "you will not replace us...Jews will not replace us...".

Posted on: 9/14 11:27 pm
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
12/9/2009 10:45 am
From durham, nc
Posts: 4934
Quote:

EERY wrote:

Of course here is where you ignore what I'm actually saying, and insinuate that I'm a racist. It's okay, I have thick skin. 😘


Actually it seems like pretty thin skin when you defend yourself from a racism accusation that I never made.

The statues that you defend are holy ground for racist elements and offensive to living human beings because of what those honored by these monuments did to earn them. That's my point in a nutshell.

Said nothing about you personally being a racist. Guilty conscience?

Posted on: 9/14 11:34 pm
_________________
Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln

I don't stand by anything. ~Donald J. Trump
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Dangerous Donald
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 6675
Quote:

eer_4da_beer wrote:
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
I'll just leave this here.

Rice then, and now. Any libs want to apologize or admit they were wrong? No?

If she admits to the unmasking of Trump, why did she say she knows nothing about it?

Trump was right AGAIN


Yeah, whatever. Ten seconds of research shows that her explanation of what happened actually placated republican concerns. Even loudmouth Nunes had no comment afterwards.

Regular routine activities...or as Trumpists call it: another HUGE win for the president!

Link...actually read it if you like.



Why did she originally lie when called out? It means Trump was right that Obama spied on Trump. How can you seriously deny it? Baby steps. Why do you choose to be ignorant on purpose?

Posted on: 9/15 10:46 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 



« 1 ... 34 35 36 (37) 38 39 »




Login
Username:

Password:

remember me





Copyright © 2004-2011 wemustignitethiscouch.com All Rights Reserved