ADVERTISEMENT

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

you ARE always hot and/or always cold....relative to something that's hotter or colder. Largely the same way in politics.

Left and right and hot and cold are all relative terms. I'm always generally to the right of those who are always generally to the left. I am also generally left of those who are generally to the right of me. It ain't rocket surgery. Given the spectrum, I am to the right. I'm not 100% to the right on all issues, but given that it boils down to either/or, I have no problem deciding which one I align with close enough to pull the lever for. Apparently some special few of us see this as an unanswerable conundrum that can't be resolved by making a simple decision.

So anyway, I watched the video and as I suspected, nothing to make amends for. I got no more out of watching it than I had by just assuming what was in it from having seen his similar bits before (except for some fairly decent lines about Walker). The gist is, republicans suck balls, but they are willing to put up and support terrible candidates because dems suck balls even worse. He even confirmed what I've said any number of times here, that the dems will support not just a terrible candidate but obscene notions and stupid demands (like requiring society to learn an ever-emerging set of pronouns to describe whatever a mere handful of the population decides that they are on a given day, and like destroying a baby right up to the time of birth). They are sheep on a scale that republicans can never reasonably be accused of being. Sheepishly enabling the extremes is not a good thing. Of course, you'll respond by crying ' extreme Christian blah blah', and I'll respond that I'll take the Christian blah blah over crushing the skull of a perfectly healthy child any day.

Maher is anti-conservative, but he at the same time finds his own party to be intolerable to the point of being unelectable...so he campaigns to curb its idiocy. This video was exceptional in one respect and I already alluded to it in my previous post. He trashed republicans in this routine, whereas he normally makes the case for the conservative point of view in chiding the left for theirs.

Got your panties out of your crack yet? LOL, I hope not. I didn't waste that much of my life to make a nitwit like you happy.


AND BTW for you and CB and others....apparently your boy Bill also recognizes grooming as being part of the dem idiocy.. He makes reference to it.
Gasbag? Me?
 
literate? You?
I actually agree that it is predicated on the presence of other people, and their perspectives, or the subject at hand. But, no one is one or the other without something else to compare it against. As in, there is no hot without cold.

Someone who believes they can only have a "conservative" view, or a liberal view, is a strange choice, in my opinion.
 
I actually agree that it is predicated on the presence of other people, and their perspectives, or the subject at hand. But, no one is one or the other without something else to compare it against. As in, there is no hot without cold.

Someone who believes they can only have a "conservative" view, or a liberal view, is a strange choice, in my opinion.
yes, of course. That's why 'left' or 'right' are relative. If you were the only survivor, shipwrecked on an island, there would be no reason to say you were right OR left.....because right or left of WHO or WHAT? You would be the most liberal man and you would be the most conservative man on the island, at the same time, if you for some reason you even thought about it.

Only when you came across another survivor would you possibly compare and then pigeonhole. In real life though, there is always a hot compared to cold and vice versa. There is always a left compared to right in a society where one is free to choose. And just because as you contend no one is 100% conservative or 100% lib, that doesn't preclude being considered one or the other. Most find enough distinction to consider themselves either republican or democrat. A few are just warm though, and they are who pols lie to the most.

I wonder how many even stop to think of a bigger picture, and try to understand just what they are signing up for. Democrats are named for democracy, which connotes that the majority of people as a mass should have their way. That's what democracy is about. Republicans, based on 'republic', are for individuals being protected from the will of the masses by being represented by chosen individuals who voice their POV, and from the long arm of government.... and that's why they are so strongly defensive of the Bill of Rights, and other named rights...

When issues arise, some might be surprised to see how accurate this is politically. It is at the core of polarization, and it should be no surprise that arguments build along these lines.

Going back to those basics, which of course aren't completely chiseled in stone, might help one decide where to pitch his tent. For example, I loathe the idea that I might have to dance to the tune of several hundred million nitwits, but I will strongly defend your right to be whatever kind of nitwit you care to be....as long as I don't have to participate in the idiocy. The right to be free of the will of the masses is rapidly deteriorating, and that's why I don't care if Attila the Hun runs on a platform of independence. I'm voting for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
But then the lies I want to hear are always appreciated.
The fact is, you don’t know the difference between lies and the truth most of the time. You are so quick to label something a lie because basically, if it’s something you don’t want to hear then it’s a lie.

When you say, “lies I want to hear,” you’re talking about in the bedroom with your appeasing wife, no?
 

Pretty interesting. @Archer2 @pooponduke I think you'll find some of that interesting.

Eta: regardless of whether you feel it was peaceful tourists or orchestrated insurrectionists, the FBI & apparently SS response was either bafflingly incompetent or <insert conspiracy-level stuff here>
Good find. That timeline is pretty damming to the FBI. I was also surprised by the amount of effort Parler took to provide information and warnings. Not so far off the deep end apparently.

But this just highlights my point that I have tried to make repeatedly that while there were certainly individuals or groups that went over/past the line on 01/06 and need to be held accountable, it need not have ever happened had those "in charge" done what they were supposed to do rather than either be completely incompetent or carry a political agenda.

The responsibility for that day is not exclusive to one side of the argument and one doesn't eliminate the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
Good find. That timeline is pretty damming to the FBI. I was also surprised by the amount of effort Parler took to provide information and warnings. Not so far off the deep end apparently.

But this just highlights my point that I have tried to make repeatedly that while there were certainly individuals or groups that went over/past the line on 01/06 and need to be held accountable, it need not have ever happened had those "in charge" done what they were supposed to do rather than either be completely incompetent or carry a political agenda.

The responsibility for that day is not exclusive to one side of the argument and one doesn't eliminate the other.

This is all the Dems have - this hysteria over a small number of people, largely being nonviolent and causing very little property damage and almost no threat to anyone’s physical health.

But don’t dare bring up the Summer of George, where 100 times the number of “insurrectionists” caused property damages between $1-$2 billion and multiple people were killed and how it was encouraged by democratic elected officials. See, that was different.
 
Screenshot-2022-10-16-171518.png
 
This is all the Dems have - this hysteria over a small number of people, largely being nonviolent and causing very little property damage and almost no threat to anyone’s physical health.
This is all the MAGAtards have -- complete denial over the events of January 6 and its significance to modern-day democracy.
 
But don’t dare bring up the Summer of George, where 100 times the number of “insurrectionists” caused property damages between $1-$2 billion and multiple people were killed and how it was encouraged by democratic elected officials. See, that was different.
Who on this message board has ever tried to downplay or deny the riots involving BLM or any other liberal cause? The biggest difference is the American President wasn't on the sidelines cheerleading those riots like he was on January 6. Remember, two wrongs don't make a right.
 
The fact is, you don’t know the difference between lies and the truth most of the time. You are so quick to label something a lie because basically, if it’s something you don’t want to hear then it’s a lie.

When you say, “lies I want to hear,” you’re talking about in the bedroom with your appeasing wife, no?
if I label something you say a lie, there's a high probability that I'm right, and that's without even knowing what you said. Because you're just a liar. And a butthurt one at that. If you are so butthurt over being outed as a liar, just stop lying. It's really that easy, or it would be for most people. Of course, most people aren't compulsive liars like you are.

You can't escape the reality of me catching you in a lioe and re-posting it, and you trying to lie about having told the lie that I posted.

As to your last bit of idiocy, I'd say your humor game has gone to shit but that would be wrong because it has always been shit.

BTW, would you check your logbook and see how long I was away from the board this morning? TIA.
 
Last edited:
Who on this message board has ever tried to downplay or deny the riots involving BLM or any other liberal cause? The biggest difference is the American President wasn't on the sidelines cheerleading those riots like he was on January 6. Remember, two wrongs don't make a right.
AWaUe5t.gif


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/us/politics/trump-capitol-riot.html

"..Mr. Trump tweeted, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”

A short time later, at 3:13 p.m., Mr. Trump added a note, “I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!” "
 
Who on this message board has ever tried to downplay or deny the riots involving BLM or any other liberal cause? The biggest difference is the American President wasn't on the sidelines cheerleading those riots like he was on January 6. Remember, two wrongs don't make a right.

No, just Senators, Representatives and Presidential and VP candidates.
 
AWaUe5t.gif


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/us/politics/trump-capitol-riot.html

"..Mr. Trump tweeted, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”

A short time later, at 3:13 p.m., Mr. Trump added a note, “I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!” "

Yeah, I don’t know why the left keeps ignoring what Trump said. He made it clear he didn’t encourage violence.

“BLAH, BLAH, BLAH…dog whistle…you know what he meant…fight like hell…”

-Anonymous liberal
 
The blatant hypocrisy of Dems on full display.
I’d say 90% of people who actively participate/take sides in politics or religion are flaming hypocrites.
I had Bojangles for breakfast this morning. Haven't had it in awhile. Still good.
god the bojangles here is awful which sucks cause a chk biscuit add cheese and tomato with some dirty rice is one of my favs. (So long as I can take a nap
Afterwards)
 
Yeah, I don’t know why the left keeps ignoring what Trump said. He made it clear he didn’t encourage violence.
I don't know why MAGAtards refuse to pick up on Trump's usual M.O. which is to say something or commit a crime and then deny it. You all have had literally hundreds of opportunities to do it through the years and still you just buy in to the denial and not what led up to the denial.
 
I don't know why MAGAtards refuse to pick up on Trump's usual M.O. which is to say something or commit a crime and then deny it. You all have had literally hundreds of opportunities to do it through the years and still you just buy in to the denial and not what led up to the denial.

So he didn't say to remain peaceful? Or wait...lemme guess...you're interpreting his words to suit your desire for hysteria?
 
So he didn't say to remain peaceful? Or wait...lemme guess...you're interpreting his words to suit your desire for hysteria?
He did say it but only after working the agitated crowd into a frenzy by once again claiming the election was stolen (which by then he knew was a lie), and telling them if they didn't fight like hell they wouldn't have a country anymore, and then hanging out in the Oval office dining room for a few hours biding his time while he watched on television as his supporters stormed and entered the Capitol.

That's my point. He always does it this way so his gullible supporters like you will claim his complete innocence.
 
No, thank you for justifying my beliefs of how lowbrow and credulous you are.

“Believe them and they'll tell you all sorts of things.”
― Valentin Rasputin

Cool. I appreciate you admitting that Trump discouraged violence and that you and other hysterical Dems are lying and doing everything possible to paint him as the instigator of the small fracas that happened on January 6th.

Despite everyone here saying you were such a douchebag and a lying piece of shit, I had faith that you would come clean. You can thank me later for standing by you.
 
I’d say 90% of people who actively participate/take sides in politics or religion are flaming hypocrites.

god the bojangles here is awful which sucks cause a chk biscuit add cheese and tomato with some dirty rice is one of my favs. (So long as I can take a nap
Afterwards)
I watched a youtube on ranking the FF joints, and I was surprised at the accuracy. Bo was ranked fairly high, but they said the major knock was consistency between locations. And it's true. The one near my office is awesome, the one nearest my home sucks balls.

And this one is kind of weird. I would stop at an Arby's on the way home some evenings and I'd get a large curly fries along with whatever else. I would always think they were chintzing on the amount because they were gone in no time. That youtube said about Arby's, 'don't get the large curly fires, get the medium because they cheat you on the large', and that's what I did the next time, as hokey as that seemed....but just like it said, I got more that way. So don't get the large curly fires at Arby's.
 
Yes. You affirmed and validated my side of the issue and looked bad doing it.
To the contrary, with little effort I goaded you into exposing your simplemindedness. Furthermore, you are trying to sound brainy by using redundant big words that essentially mean the same thing. By the way, this discussion is too one-sided against you to truly be debate.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT