Chump finder wrote:
Crazy Talk wrote:
Then leave.
You seem like one that need a 2X4 cracked across the forehead. Funny thing is it would make you smarter.
0/10, jaminLoper.
Chump finder wrote:
Crazy Talk wrote:
Then leave.
You seem like one that need a 2X4 cracked across the forehead. Funny thing is it would make you smarter.
0/10, jaminLoper.
Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/10/strzok-page-texts-reveal-coordinated-fbi-leak-strategy-to-harm-trump-gop-congressman-claims.htmlNot a good day for flagpole. No wonder this clown got fired.
I was recently on vacation having wine with husband and wife Republican friends. They are educated and seemingly adjusted to reality. They both dislikeTrump but believe he is good for the country to clean house.
Anyhow, as the night progressed the wife said “it’s such a shame that Hillary is so money hungry, enough to suppress the cure to cancer”
I said, say what?!
She said, you know that she is in bed with the pharmaceutical CEOs to suppress the news that there is a cure for cancer, so she gets a continuous payoff.
I couldn’t believe it but yes, it’s a thing people actually believe.
The next day another acquaintance was telling my narcissistic Obama is
I just don’t no man
Fat hurts wrote:
not so sure about that wrote:
And there's the bullsh*t right there. Beneath your words: it's not about the 'sin' (as defined by Christians) it's about 'punishment', as alluded to above, and making sure that there are consequences for unmarried women if they have sex.
By providing condoms the government isn't helping someone commit the 'sin' of having sex. This'll happen whether they like it or not.
Evangelicals don't see it that way. They are not trying to be punitive. They simply don't want to promote a sinful lifestyle.
You have a very warped view of who the evangelicals are. They are generally very kind, thoughtful, and forgiving.
If you asked, most of them would say that it's better to give the free condoms than to have unwanted pregnancy. But they don't think that those are the only two choices. They want to promote celibacy until marriage.
Therefore, many evangelicals feel that handing out the free condoms promotes promiscuity. That's what they care about.
That amounts to being opposed to contraception.
‘Sinful’ is according to them. I know this is labouring the point and that most evangelicals are lovely people but it’s disingenuous to pretend that they don’t oppose contraception.
Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/10/strzok-page-texts-reveal-coordinated-fbi-leak-strategy-to-harm-trump-gop-congressman-claims.htmlNot a good day for flagpole. No wonder this clown got fired.
Word to the wise; there are 2 things wrong with that headline:
1. ‘coordinated’ in quotes means it isn’t a fact
2. ‘congressman claims’ at the end means the whole headline is opinion not fact
No point in reading any further.
not so sure about that wrote:
Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/10/strzok-page-texts-reveal-coordinated-fbi-leak-strategy-to-harm-trump-gop-congressman-claims.htmlNot a good day for flagpole. No wonder this clown got fired.
Word to the wise; there are 2 things wrong with that headline:
1. ‘coordinated’ in quotes means it isn’t a fact
2. ‘congressman claims’ at the end means the whole headline is opinion not fact
No point in reading any further.
Your 2 should be 'GOP congressman claims'
Flagpole wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
It could happen. The speaker need not be a member of congress. So they would just install Hillary as speaker in step 1.
But if they were going to do something wild like that then a better choice would be Obama. He would be eligible serve out the rest of Trump's term.
Ok...I don't need things to get that crazy. I also don't think the House would do that.
Yes, but think about it for a moment. If the president and vice president were both impeached, things would already be really, really crazy.
And if Pence went down first, Trump would nominate a replacement that must be approved by the House and Senate. I don't think there is a person on the planet who could be approved by both Trump and a Democrat-controlled House.
XY wrote:
Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/10/strzok-page-texts-reveal-coordinated-fbi-leak-strategy-to-harm-trump-gop-congressman-claims.htmlNot a good day for flagpole. No wonder this clown got fired.
I was recently on vacation having wine with husband and wife Republican friends. They are educated and seemingly adjusted to reality. They both dislikeTrump but believe he is good for the country to clean house.
Anyhow, as the night progressed the wife said “it’s such a shame that Hillary is so money hungry, enough to suppress the cure to cancer”
I said, say what?!
She said, you know that she is in bed with the pharmaceutical CEOs to suppress the news that there is a cure for cancer, so she gets a continuous payoff.
I couldn’t believe it but yes, it’s a thing people actually believe.
The next day another acquaintance was telling my narcissistic Obama is
I just don’t no man
Wow. I'd hate to see your less-educated friends.
not so sure about that wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
Evangelicals don't see it that way. They are not trying to be punitive. They simply don't want to promote a sinful lifestyle.
You have a very warped view of who the evangelicals are. They are generally very kind, thoughtful, and forgiving.
If you asked, most of them would say that it's better to give the free condoms than to have unwanted pregnancy. But they don't think that those are the only two choices. They want to promote celibacy until marriage.
Therefore, many evangelicals feel that handing out the free condoms promotes promiscuity. That's what they care about.
That amounts to being opposed to contraception.
‘Sinful’ is according to them. I know this is labouring the point and that most evangelicals are lovely people but it’s disingenuous to pretend that they don’t oppose contraception.
We have already established that they don't oppose contraception per se. They think it's hunky dory as long as you are married.
There is nothing disingenuous about it.
... is anonymous.
Crazy Talk wrote:
crazytown wrote:
This thread has so much crazy talk
Then leave.
Yes, so the Society of the Deluded can continue their one sided debate. Serious posters only.
Hey Dude! wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Yes, so the Society of the Deluded can continue their one sided debate. Serious posters only.
Hey, Lying Gary Lite is BACK!!!
Looking forward to more of your LIES, dude.
///
Lying Gary Lite
///Your momma wears army boots. Lies! Lies!
Has there ever been such an unpopular president at a time when the economy is this good?
Sub 40% approval, sub 4% unemployment, 4% or better GDP growth?
Alan
XY wrote:
I was recently on vacation having wine with husband and wife Republican friends. They are educated and seemingly adjusted to reality. They both dislikeTrump but believe he is good for the country to clean house.
Anyhow, as the night progressed the wife said “it’s such a shame that Hillary is so money hungry, enough to suppress the cure to cancer”
I said, say what?!
She said, you know that she is in bed with the pharmaceutical CEOs to suppress the news that there is a cure for cancer, so she gets a continuous payoff.
I couldn’t believe it but yes, it’s a thing people actually believe.
The next day another acquaintance was telling my narcissistic Obama is
I just don’t no man
The specifics surprise me but never the gullibility. They are willing to believe anything. I didn't grasp that until deep in the 2016 campaign. My sister is a school teacher with right wing colleagues. One day when I was visiting her she forwarded several emails that her friend was circulating. I took a quick look and couldn't stop laughing. Everything was utter preposterous. I told my sister, "Don't worry. Nobody could be stupid enough to believe that stuff."
Within 6 weeks I realized how wrong I was. Not long after the election some media sites started posting snippets of what had been making the rounds on Facebook. It was every bit as ludicrous as what my sister showed me, and what that couple told you over wine, but right wingers were gobbling it up without second thought.
That's why Trump's approval level can drop only so low, and historians/pundits are having a difficult time evaluating this era or predicting forward. You are dealing with a massive percentage of Americans who are legitimately dense people, in terms of what is fact and what is fiction. Trump figured that out via birtherism and realized he could lie 70 or 80% of the time without penalty or defection.
If it weren't so damaging it would actually be somewhat fascinating.
I know what you mean:
Awsi Dooger wrote:
XY wrote:
I was recently on vacation having wine with husband and wife Republican friends. They are educated and seemingly adjusted to reality. They both dislikeTrump but believe he is good for the country to clean house.
Anyhow, as the night progressed the wife said “it’s such a shame that Hillary is so money hungry, enough to suppress the cure to cancer”
I said, say what?!
She said, you know that she is in bed with the pharmaceutical CEOs to suppress the news that there is a cure for cancer, so she gets a continuous payoff.
I couldn’t believe it but yes, it’s a thing people actually believe.
The next day another acquaintance was telling my narcissistic Obama is
I just don’t no man
The specifics surprise me but never the gullibility. They are willing to believe anything. I didn't grasp that until deep in the 2016 campaign. My sister is a school teacher with right wing colleagues. One day when I was visiting her she forwarded several emails that her friend was circulating. I took a quick look and couldn't stop laughing. Everything was utter preposterous. I told my sister, "Don't worry. Nobody could be stupid enough to believe that stuff."
Within 6 weeks I realized how wrong I was. Not long after the election some media sites started posting snippets of what had been making the rounds on Facebook. It was every bit as ludicrous as what my sister showed me, and what that couple told you over wine, but right wingers were gobbling it up without second thought.
That's why Trump's approval level can drop only so low, and historians/pundits are having a difficult time evaluating this era or predicting forward. You are dealing with a massive percentage of Americans who are legitimately dense people, in terms of what is fact and what is fiction. Trump figured that out via birtherism and realized he could lie 70 or 80% of the time without penalty or defection.
If it weren't so damaging it would actually be somewhat fascinating.
I think it’s built into the human condition. Some percentage of the population want to follow despite the obvious. I guess Thats how Jim Jones, hitler, David koresh could attract so many followers. You just need a cult of personality
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
I know what you mean:
https://www.scribd.com/document/388284032/Letter-to-Rod
Igloi, pretend that most of rest of us are not automatically "in" on your jokes (because we are not, most of us are not living in alt-right land). So........
what is your example proving or disproving? In plain english ol' chap.
(because most of the rational people here see a letter written by Mark Meadows insisting that there are deep state conspiracies against Trump, and yes, we feel you are providing examples to support the poster's contention that right wingers will believe anything. But somehow I think you had the opposite intention.)
So I was thinking about getting Bob Woodward's new book, Fear. I looked on Amazon and read the Prologue.
Now I'm not sure I can bring myself to read any more of it. Even though I had already heard news reports about what the prologue said, I was stunned. And scared. To read Woodward's full account was a truly frightening experience.
Things are much, much worse than I thought.
Fat hurts wrote:
XY wrote:
I was recently on vacation having wine with husband and wife Republican friends. They are educated and seemingly adjusted to reality. They both dislikeTrump but believe he is good for the country to clean house.
Anyhow, as the night progressed the wife said “it’s such a shame that Hillary is so money hungry, enough to suppress the cure to cancer”
I said, say what?!
She said, you know that she is in bed with the pharmaceutical CEOs to suppress the news that there is a cure for cancer, so she gets a continuous payoff.
I couldn’t believe it but yes, it’s a thing people actually believe.
The next day another acquaintance was telling my narcissistic Obama is
I just don’t no man
Wow. I'd hate to see your less-educated friends.
Word. Educated or not, you can't fix stupid.
Fat hurts wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
Ok...I don't need things to get that crazy. I also don't think the House would do that.
Yes, but think about it for a moment. If the president and vice president were both impeached, things would already be really, really crazy.
And if Pence went down first, Trump would nominate a replacement that must be approved by the House and Senate. I don't think there is a person on the planet who could be approved by both Trump and a Democrat-controlled House.
Joe Lieberman?
Fat hurts wrote:
So I was thinking about getting Bob Woodward's new book, Fear. I looked on Amazon and read the Prologue.
Now I'm not sure I can bring myself to read any more of it. Even though I had already heard news reports about what the prologue said, I was stunned. And scared. To read Woodward's full account was a truly frightening experience.
Things are much, much worse than I thought.
Don’t worry I’ll tell you all about it and as sad as it will be you will not be surprised by any of it.