Total posts: 1,080
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
@Double_R
Is there a source of illegals being let into America and a reason why they were so?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Neither of those posts have anything to do with calling large swathes of people stupid. I would know, as I am the author of them.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
*you're* ... and the point of the statement was to highlight the obvious ridiculous sentiment of both the OP and your claim that entire swaths of people can be slapped a label and ostracized as putting themselves at personal risk by listening to "Buffoons" in political power.
In otherwords, you've shitposted meaningless babble in response to a sentiment that I haven't actually expressed.
And you seem to think I'm the troll?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
You're the one who posted this.
Your the one who keeps bringing up 15,000 dead liberals, as if it has any sort of point at all
GTFO with the projecting.
This just in: the world does not evolve around you. You may not have a great aunt Mabel, someone else will.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I don't care for your shitposting. Either engage with the 1 of 1000 irrelevant points you seem to bring up or don't bring them up at all. It really is that simple.
I never said I thought you should do that. People who flippantly throw about that slander are usually themselves ignorant and/or narcissistic.
So then what is your point? I think calling someone who is not a health official who advocates a particular course of treatment based on apparently hot air is a buffoon. Do you somehow disagree with this opinion?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
You mean when we didn't have to virtue signal our compliance to crony authority?Sure. I'll advocate that normality.
Your framing of it makes you seem like a petulant child, but sure, if it makes you happier that way.
Trust authority is the mantra of the left.
And the reason that you think I should call 15,000 dead liberals stupid is...?
You really haven't read most of this thread by posting that. Either that or you are purposely trolling.
The chance of getting smallpox in this day and age is lower than the occurrence of uneven distribution of vaccines.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Are you willing to call 15,000 dead liberals "stupid?"
I'm willing to call stupid people stupid certainly. I'm not sure how 15,000 dead liberals fall into it however.
No more precautious than a person under 65 with no co-morbidities that has a .003% chance of dying from Covid deciding to get a vaccine since they are sooo afraid of that risk of dying.
I agree. Getting a vaccine for that reason and that reason alone is reasonably silly if you are in the risk group that that figure is described for. However there are other reasons of course for getting the vaccine even if you are in that group. Perhaps you don't want to deal with the symptoms or any long term impacts. Perhaps you wish society to function normally again. Maybe you wish to visit your great aunt Mabel with multiple co-morbidities without giving her a death sentence.
Getting a vaccine for one of these reasons? Certainly more reasonable than getting a vaccine every 5 years for a disease where the last naturally occurring case was in 1975.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
A smallpox vaccine every 5 years? Is that not a tad precautious against a disease that has been eradicated?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Nice job. Huehuehue Cuomo bad.
Did you actually have a relevant point to make here?
Did you actually have a relevant point to make here?
Created:
-->
@MisterChris
A rushed vaccine and possible health impacts are a legitimate concern. Relying solely on the words of someone who is not a health expert, let alone a buffoon is common sense, lest we forget the hydroxychloroquine debacle. Finally, the point is moot because the various vaccines have been shown to be safe. Being able to change ones mind in the face of new information and ideas is a sign of intelligence, not hypocrisy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
If your request is sincere and in good faith, a modicum of effort is required on your part. I find it hard to believe anyone is going to spoon-feed you an analysis on each and every Biden policy that comes through without you first making some attempt to express what the policy is, what the possible impacts are, and why you feel these impacts have no tangible benefit to America/taxpayers. At the moment all you seem to be doing is expecting everyone else to do the legwork and then move the goalposts when they do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Attacking Biden does not deflect from your own deficiencies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
In that case I can only conclude poor reading comprehension. It's rather hard to read a paragraph that previously states beforehand the existence of 50 million vaccine doses and come away with the conclusion the following paragraph is an argument that there were zero vaccine doses. Let alone somehow completely missing the fact that a response related entirely to vaccine distribution and availability probably shouldn't be interpreted to be related to Biden's personal situation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
If you insist on parsing what he said that way, that's your choice
So incredible dishonesty it is.
but the fact remains, when Biden said "we" had no vaccine, even if implying we Americans, nevertheless, doses have been available since 12/14. For all Americans? No. But did everyone expect immediate availability for all? Also, no. Stop insinuating that we did expect it. That makes no sense or logic, as I've also said.
If you had read the article, you would have noted that Biden previously said that when he came into office, there were only 50 million doses available. Subsequently he states that there was nothing in the refrigerator, which I take to reference a lack of a stockpile other than than 50 million doses in the process of distribution.
Now it's quite possible that he suddenly forgot about the 50 million doses that he literally just stated before. On the otherhand, it's more likely that he was referencing the stockpile, or the lack of rather.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
To be clear, when the paragraph before relates to how many vaccine doses will be available, and the paragraph the quote is in relates to the logistics of vaccine distribution, when he says "we didn't have" is correctly parsed as "we" the government didn't "have" doses of vaccine to distribute. The entire response to the question relates to the availability and distribution logistics of the vaccine to the American populace.
The interpretation that he did not personally receive a vaccine is fine in a vacuum, but makes no sense when placed into context of vaccine availability and distribution to the American populace. The only way anyone could possibly interpret it as such is if they did not read the source and context, they are incredibly dishonest, or their cognitive abilities are impaired.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
That's interesting. The previous paragraph of that quote had the president predicting how many vaccine doses the US will have and the paragraphs in general related to the logistics of vaccinating the US population. But you seem to have ignored all the context and parsed that single sentence as him personally not having had the vaccine when he came into office.
I echo HistoryBuff in that you're rather heavy on emotion, but particularly light on logic or sense.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
But, who is the record-holder for per-year number? Extrapolated, because he has actually only been in office for 27 days: Joe Biden at 392.3 EOs per year.So, Trump is merely ordinary compared to that level of taking authority.
This is some funky stats work.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
Just look at NY, NJ, CA. Everyone’s moving away. Those that are staying are rich enough to avoid paying taxes due to business loopholes written in the tax code. They’re not going away because the politicians will lose the funding they need to campaign in major media markets. It’s pretty much a slush fund if you think about it.
But you're not escaping a federal tax increase without renunciation. While I'm sure there's a tax rate that the wealthy would want to escape from, clearly it isn't the values before the tax cut.
The bill fails if that happens. Why would rich people ever risk the status quo if it was working well for them lol. Giving them what’s equivalent to crumbs in exchange for large sums to the people that matter is a no brainer. Hell even a small reduction would make people lazy and not go through the effort of not paying taxes.
Ok, in that case why not have expiring tax breaks for corporations?
The tax bill as it is is a losing situation for the masses. You might keep more money temporarily, but ultimately the loss of tax dollars from corporations harms everyone.
Where do you think Schumer and Pelosi get all their PAC money from? Amazon, Google, MSM, Wall Street. If they were really for taxing the rich, Jeff Bezos wouldn’t be a multimillionaire in Liberal Washington State. You forget that Wall Street funded Obama in 2008 too, and nothing happened to the tax code
The argument isn't for democrats actively wishing to raise taxes on the rich. The argument is for democrats actively pushing benefits for the wealthy. Maintaining the status quo lacks any sort of active intent to push benefits towards the wealthy, and is hardly on the level of tax breaks for the wealthy.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
If I understand the tax bill correctly, taxes were lowered for the majority of the population, but the tax cuts will expire for a majority of the beneficiaries in the future. They will not expire for corporations (at least pre-biden). Hence this is an example of republicans bending over for the rich at the expense of the less wealthy.
You can’t raise taxes on the wealthy and think you’ll get more revenue. You won’t.
What evidence supports this conclusion?
He did the next best thing, lower it for both.
Why not leave the tax brackets as they are for corporations and lower them for the less wealthy?
What examples come to mind of democratic leadership doing similar things for the rich?
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
The most obvious example that comes to mind of the republicans bending over for the rich was the 2017 tax bill. What are some examples from the democratic side that roughly equate to this?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
As it turns out, unoriginal questions have unoriginal answers.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
What words, exactly, did Trump say to cause insurrection? "Fight?" Look up the numbers of Democrats, Biden to Waters, Pelosi to Schoofly, who have used that word to encourage their followers. Are they any less insurrectionists than Trump saying it? Trump told them to go "peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol to let their voices be heard." Is that insurrectionists when Waters, saying, "You got to get in their faces," and saying she "will put down Trump tonight!" is not insurrectionist, and Pelosi says "we have arrows in our quiver and we will use them?" It cuts both ways, my friend, or not at all. Shall we impeach them all?Besides, anyone who is weak enough to let words drive them to violence and destruction has not a backbone and no self-control. Words do not incite unless we're too weak to let them bounce of the ears. Argue for your limitations, they're yours.
The primary reason for motivation of the rioters was the fervent belief that the election was stolen. After-all, if you felt that your supposed democratic elections had been usurped and that the last means of legal defence, the court, had failed, violence is hardly an unsurprising result.
Since Trump was the primary and most authoritative peddler of the election was stolen conspiracy theory, it's fair to lay the blame at his feet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheMelioist
The bible is the inerrant word of God. What more evidence is needed?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
The assertion that a particular individual is attacking democracy is not equivalent to democracy being unable to survive as a whole without censorship. If you wish someone to defend their words, you ought to use their words instead of conjuring up a nonsensical boogeyman.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
If they meet the bar for terrorism, then I'm happy to call them terrorists. You could call them criminals, however criminals is a fairly generic term that doesn't really convey what type of offenses have been committed.
So I guess my question to you is, do they, or at least some of the protesters meet the bar for domestic terrorism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
You could certainly label the ones who were using unjustifiable intimidation and violence tactics against civilians, sure.
Created:
Posted in:
That riot was a culmination of Trump peddling nonsensical election theft conspiracies for weeks on end. I fail to see how he isn't entirely culpable.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
But she isn't engaging congress to enact the 25th. She's calling upon Pence to enact the 25th. This is perfectly inline with the 25th and is legally consistent.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
I don't see the point. She raised the possibility of enacting legislation for a 25th amendment committee several months ago. She's not calling for the 25th amendment now on that basis. She's calling for the vice president to enact the 25th amendment. Everything seems in accordance with the law
Would you agree that your characterisation of Pelosi's intelligence is therefore erroneous?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
So she isn't actually calling for congress to directly enact the 25th, only calling for Pence to enact the 25th, which is perfectly in line with the 25th amendment.
Would you agree that your characterisation of Pelosi's intelligence is therefore erroneous?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
I believe that she's launched an effort to call upon the vice president to declare the president incapable of executing his duties under the 25th amendment. I don't believe she's launched an effort for congress themselves to do so. Where did you hear of this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm not sure how that's relevant to this case. In this particular instance of protest, there were bombs, assault, murder, destruction of property, theft, trespassing and death threats. You had congressmen, capitol hill staffers and policemen quivering behind seats.
I do find it curious that you would not label this as terrorism. Why not?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Some were by definition no? Illegal acts of violence and/or intimidation against civilians with political purpose.
Interestingly, their banning policy has absolutely no statistical, legal, or logical correlation with their "terms of service".They can ban anyone at any time for any reason.
They certainly can and are entitled to as it's their platform. However the question is to what extent they exercise such powers in reality. In any case Trump has almost certainly violated whatever guidelines they have. His account was only kept open for so long by virtue of his presidency
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't need to. It's Twitters platform. You may peruse their terms of service and community guidelines at your leisure.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I do understand where you are coming from in that conspiratorial conversation should not be a barrier to fact based conversation. However in this instance unfettered conspiratorial nonsense has lead to unrest, death and destruction, so it's justified in this instance
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Is a description of general messaging insufficient to show usage of platform to sow civil unrest?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
How about his messaging and promotion of the conspiracy theory that the election was stolen?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Do you not think incitement of civil unrest that contributed to tangible violent actions was a sensible point to ban him?
Created:
-->
@Vader
Apparently 45% of republicans approve
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
It takes some experimentation in size to get to the point where the stones can be readily be recovered, and reiki infused stones are particularly costly.
Created:
Posted in:
I have firsthand experience that healing crystals do actually work. I was skeptical at first, but I've found that after some experimentation that inserting a mixture of polished lapis lazuli and amethyst stones into my rectal cavity has greatly improved my digestive health as well as helped me lose weight. I've even noticed that my skin tone has improved.
Using crystals like this might seem expensive, but as long as stones of sufficient size and weight are inserted, they can readily be reused once excreted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
I am demonized by politicians and scientists on a daily bases. That is 100% proof to me that their science is flawed. They cant convince me using "real science." For example: "So called science" tells me that wearing anything as a mask helps prevent the spread of a virus. This, according to all mask manufactures is a complete and total lie. Not one mask manufacturer will say this or endorse this claim if the mask you are wearing is not specifically designed to filter a virus. Mask manufactures can not and will not make this claim not now not ever. If is a bold face lie and to say otherwise would be grounds for immediate civil law suits and criminal prosecution to the mask manufactures. Who has better science and more believable science? Mask manufactures. Yet I am mocked and demonized by govt and "so called science" for questioning their science when all confirmable evidence says they are dead wrong.
Do mask manufacturer actively negate the claim of scientists, or do they just not endorse it? A lack of endorsement is not equivalent a negation. And the fact is, it is prudent to not make claims that could open you up to liability.
Created:
Posted in:
This is just anecdotal, but I had several vaccines when I was younger. After the latest one, I got such severe symptoms that I died a couple days later. Even now to this day, I'm still dead. They are definitely terrible things.
Created:
It would be silly to deny the existence of a facet of human mentality. However the term itself is excessively thrown about as a meaningless catch all rebuttal to trump criticism such that it itself means very little when used.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Is this another conspiracy theory?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
So, the science that says Nevada can have gatherings in casinos but not in churches is what? The so-called science that says you can pay money to clean the clouds?
That would not be science. That would be policy. You'll have to ask the lawmakers why they enacted such a thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
where's the scientific basis for all these "orders"? What happened to listen to the scientist?
The scientific basis is rather clear. Less contact less spread. You hardly need a scientist to tell you this. The better question is whether it's justified.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
He did not halt the vote count, he is alleging illegalities in the vote count. A president in America cannot half the count. But he can petition the court to halt the vote counting process if he believes illegalities have taken place. In your country, is a president able to halt a vote count?
And declaring himself the winner? Where might one find provisions for that
Why do we need a court when you have already judged his case bogus?
To convince stupid people?
Lol. The BLM SJW plays the "racist card". What race am I against snowflake?
Race? Where
Created:
-->
@ethang5
In my country "idiot" is not an electable office. But I'm beginning to understand better why you post what you do. Did you win? Because its clear you did win.
Analogy
I want the votes counted. But just the valid ones, not the "obvious" ones.
No evidence to dismiss vote counts
He did not halt the vote count. A president in America cannot half the count. But he can petition the court to halt the vote counting process if he believes illegalities have taken place. In your country, is a president able to halt a vote count?
Which provisions allow for the president to halt the vote count?
I'm sure he will be broken hearted to hear that you have ruled against his suit.
Rather when the courts have ruled against his suits
I don't sympathize with you at all. And when you antifa/BLM guys try this on me in RL, you do it only once.
I wouldn't want to be sympathized with by a fascist sympathizer. That sounds quite horrible.
Created: