Trump catches himself saying the quiet part out loud

[RockLobster]

21 hours ago, RockLobster said:

First - you replied to your own post (look above), which is kind of weird in the US.

We get it, you have the Chinese opinion on gay Americans. Which is that it is unacceptable.

Being gay is OK. You better hide in the basement if you think activism will make you gay. Or maybe in a closet.

Or maybe, just maybe, activism will bring the discussion to a higher level where we realize being gay is OK.

 

15 hours ago, jross said:

Another misconstruction... joining WKN and Bernie...

What part of my words said gay is unacceptable or that activism will make you gay.

You try so hard to right, yet being wrong just keeps slapping you in the face.

• I never claimed that you said that activism will make you gay. Read it again to be sure.
• I specifically used the word "if", which is a conditional clause.
• In other words "if" you think that way - then <what follows>
• This is NOT the same as claiming that you actually think that way (None of us are mind readers.)
• I agree with your other point. Activism has brought in more gay characters. Maybe not a bad thing.

You'd do well to take a time out when your emotions cloud your ability to use logic.

[RockLobster]

15 hours ago, JimmyBT said:

Go “slow” with that one. Comprehension is not a strength 

Read my last post. You incorrectly chiming in on an incorrect post is exactly what I expect from you.

[RockLobster]

15 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

Holy crap...reading the last couple pages, this is exactly what I was thinking.  People's reading comprehension is atrocious!   It is such a weak and tiresome approach to any debate, take what someone has said/written and twist it to try and mean something it absolutely didn't in order to make a stupid/idiotic point.   SMH  I long for the days of when people would just listen and try to understand what someone is actually saying.  You may not like it, but you move on.  

My favorite on the last couple of pages was how someone was belly aching that "conservatives" were trying to cancel them for being "pro-Palestinian"...never mind the fact that he was camped out on a campus (illegally), chanting hate speech and probably leaving a ton of garbage and causing damage to the campus...NO, that isn't why he is going to get canceled, it's because he is just "pro-Palestinian".  Absolute idiot!

Oh boy. You are one special kind of numskull.

When you read 'your pages' you should think seriously about separating the comments made from one poster to the next.

If you lump them all together... then you get the kind of nonsensical post you just made here. It's 'shouting at the sky' type stuff.

Read my post just above about reading comprehension. It applies at least equally to you.

I'm criticizing you, but I'm not condemning you. You're OK, you're fine. But there is clearly space to learn. You can be a much better poster.

Edited June 13 by RockLobster

[JimmyBT]

4 hours ago, RockLobster said:

Read my last post. You incorrectly chiming in on an incorrect post is exactly what I expect from you.

Your tears are the best. Bahahhahahahaha. 

[JimmyBT]

This Lobster guy is just another TPT/RV/Braves.  Almost to 100 on that burner account. 

Edited June 13 by JimmyBT

[WrestlingRasta]

13 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

like when Biden completely fabricated his college resume?

or when he plagiarized every speech during his first embarrassing presidential campaign?

or when he wrote the 1994 crime bill and then bragged about it for 15 years?

or when he opposed school integration because it would make children grow up 'in a racial jungle'?

which part/s did you agree with when he showed you 'who he is' that made you vote for him?

Let’s be honest here Willie. If you’re voting for either one of these clowns, it’s a matter of which lies, corruption, and self enhancing grifting you are okay with to cast your vote.  Let’s not act like there’s only one douchebag on the ballot. 

[Paul158]

1 hour ago, JimmyBT said:

This Lobster guy is just another TPT/RV/Braves.  Almost to 100 on that burner account. 

100 percent. We should be able to screen the new posters ( or non thinking older posters). There should be a (non thinking topics) section for some of them. This will be fun. Incoming.

[Paul158]

1 hour ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Let’s be honest here Willie. If you’re voting for either one of these clowns, it’s a matter of which lies, corruption, and self enhancing grifting you are okay with to cast your vote.  Let’s not act like there’s only one douchebag on the ballot. 

Actually we are voting for the nominee that actually can live long enough to serve his full term. We also are voting for his replacement in the event he dies (which is very likely). I will say it. Kamala Harris. I would rather have any poster on this forum as vice president (or president) over Kamala Harris. I WILL REPEAT, any poster on this forum. Not a joke. I'm serious. I am not being facetious. Incoming.

Edited June 13 by Paul158
missed a word

[WrestlingRasta]

35 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Actually we are voting for the nominee that actually can live long enough to serve his full term. We also are voting for his replacement in the event he dies (which is very likely). I will say it. Kamala Harris. I would rather have any poster on this forum as vice president (or president) over Kamala Harris. I WILL REPEAT, any poster on this forum. Not a joke. I'm serious. I am not being facetious. Incoming.

To be honest I haven't really paid much attention to Kamala.  I know alot of people talk about her not so well, but I haven't dug into her at all.   I do pretty much agree with with the sentiment regarding who ya'll are voting for.

[Bigbrog]

8 hours ago, RockLobster said:

Oh boy. You are one special kind of numskull.

When you read 'your pages' you should think seriously about separating the comments made from one poster to the next.

If you lump them all together... then you get the kind of nonsensical post you just made here. It's 'shouting at the sky' type stuff.

Read my post just above about reading comprehension. It applies at least equally to you.

I'm criticizing you, but I'm not condemning you. You're OK, you're fine. But there is clearly space to learn. You can be a much better poster.

Sure says a lot about a person who thinks every post is about only them and then tries to call my post nonsensical after laying down this doozy.  LOL  Keep the humorous post coming RL.

[Threadkilla]

1 hour ago, WrestlingRasta said:

To be honest I haven't really paid much attention to Kamala.  I know alot of people talk about her not so well, but I haven't dug into her at all.   I do pretty much agree with with the sentiment regarding who ya'll are voting for.

You don't have to dig very deep,  even Biden callng her a diversity hire.     Look up her Interview on Kimmel where she got screamed off the stage.  It's a thing of beauty. 

[ionel]

1 hour ago, WrestlingRasta said:

To be honest I haven't really paid much attention to Kamala.  I know alot of people talk about her not so well, but I haven't dug into her at all.   I do pretty much agree with with the sentiment regarding who ya'll are voting for.

Do you like salad?   

[WrestlingRasta]

I tend to dig deep into these kinds of things, as opposed to running with the first one or two headlines I came across.  

 

To each their own...

[WrestlingRasta]

2 minutes ago, ionel said:

Do you like salad?   

Another item that's on each of the candidates' menus.

[headshuck]

Oh boy. You are one special kind of numskull.

It’s numbskull. Just saying.

[jross]

8 hours ago, RockLobster said:

 

You try so hard to right, yet being wrong just keeps slapping you in the face.

• I never claimed that you said that activism will make you gay. Read it again to be sure.
• I specifically used the word "if", which is a conditional clause.
• In other words "if" you think that way - then <what follows>
• This is NOT the same as claiming that you actually think that way (None of us are mind readers.)
• I agree with your other point. Activism has brought in more gay characters. Maybe not a bad thing.

You'd do well to take a time out when your emotions cloud your ability to use logic.

I read the statement as an attack because the confrontational directive comes before the conditional clause placement.  Given your history of labeling, criticizing, and confronting me (rather than my ideas), my lizard brain took the negative directive as the primary message, making the hypothetical condition seem like an afterthought.

I was wrong.  Sorry.

[Paul158]

22 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I tend to dig deep into these kinds of things, as opposed to running with the first one or two headlines I came across.  

 

To each their own...

You will need a lot of time and really large track hoe. Maybe a Cat. 336 or a 6090S.

[Wrestleknownothing]

17 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

like when Biden completely fabricated his college resume?

or when he plagiarized every speech during his first embarrassing presidential campaign?

or when he wrote the 1994 crime bill and then bragged about it for 15 years?

or when he opposed school integration because it would make children grow up 'in a racial jungle'?

which part/s did you agree with when he showed you 'who he is' that made you vote for him?

A couple of thoughts:

• You are right that when presented with two, and only two, choices you often have to hold your nose and choose the "less bad" one.
• The first two in your list (college resume fabrication, plagiarized speech) are yawners for me.
• I am not sure what you are getting at about the 1994 crime bill. But if it the mass incarceration issue, at the time it was supported by the Congressional Black Caucus (2/3rds of members voted for passage). While in hindsight it had flaws, it was supported in its day. (https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-the-1994-crime-bill-cause-mass-incarceration/)
• Biden's history of racist remarks certainly does bother me.

When I voted for Biden in 2020 it was a vote against Trump, rather than a vote for Biden. I felt strongly enough about this that I voted against what I believed to be my economic interests. While I like a tax cut as much as the next guy, and worry about the Democrat's penchant for expanding the government through taxation and entitlement payments, I was willing to take a hit in the wallet to vote against Trump. That I have never been wealthier than at the end of Biden's first term is pretty shocking to me.

I know inflation is a hot button topic for everyone, and it is for me. But this is not either a Trump or a Biden induced problem. The money supply grew astronomically under Trump, and then it grew by a similar amount under Biden initially. Against that reality, inflation was inevitable. Rather than putting it on a single politician, it is down to an exogenous shock. Shutting down the economy due to COVID is the proximate cause. Who do you blame for that? Democrats for pressuring for it, or Trump for agreeing to it? Yes.

Finally, my third rail is January 6. I cannot, will not, vote for someone who attempted to cause an insurrection. 

[Threadkilla]

54 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I tend to dig deep into these kinds of things, as opposed to running with the first one or two headlines I came across.  

 

To each their own...

There is plenty of information out there,  years worth.   I just quoted Kimmel because it was last week.  Here I'll help you out.

 

 

[jross]

1 hour ago, jross said:

I read the statement as an attack because the confrontational directive comes before the conditional clause placement.  Given your history of labeling, criticizing, and confronting me (rather than my ideas), my lizard brain took the negative directive as the primary message, making the hypothetical condition seem like an afterthought.

I was wrong.  Sorry.

@RockLobster I went back and reread your post.  Your previous statement below was negative, wrong, and without merit.... you know... misconstrued the meaning of what I said. 

Quote

We get it, you have the Chinese opinion on gay Americans. Which is that it is unacceptable.

I stand by my apology for the misunderstanding on your activism comment and affirm my comment that you misconstrued what I said in your post.

[WrestlingRasta]

42 minutes ago, Threadkilla said:

There is plenty of information out there,  years worth.   I just quoted Kimmel because it was last week.  Here I'll help you out.

 

 

I will probably not go to YouTube, or tick tock, or Twitter, or anywhere where the only information I am going to get is extremely biased opinion on either side. 

[WrestlingRasta]

1 hour ago, Paul158 said:

You will need a lot of time and really large track hoe. Maybe a Cat. 336 or a 6090S.

I’m guessing you’re saying that, as opposed to any other politician right?  Because all of the others are so clean? 

[Paul158]

2 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I’m guessing you’re saying that, as opposed to any other politician right?  Because all of the others are so clean? 

I think you will be surprised when you start digging. 

[WrestlingRasta]

Just now, Paul158 said:

I think you will be surprised when you start digging. 

Avoiding the question?

[Offthemat]

2 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

 

Finally, my third rail is January 6. I cannot, will not, vote for someone who attempted to cause an insurrection.