Rob's House

Can I get in on this?

When you were typing that did you feel like you were trying really hard to rationalize the absurd, or did you still think you had a plausible case for your position?

But you're the one who's in a cult.

That keeping wildlife, an amphibious rodent, for, domestic, you know, within the city - that aint legal.

I work with a guy who believes in the "fine people on both sides" hoax. I pulled up the transcript on Politico and let him read it word for word. He still wasn't convinced. Never underestimate the power of denial.

Ignored it? It was the entire point of the example I laid out for you. Apparently you were not able to connect the dots. I thought doing it in reverse would make it easier for you to understand, but perhaps it was too confusing. I'll be more direct. Bear in mind, this is a hypothetical for illustrative purposes. Jim makes $50k/yr Jack makes $250k/yr Both are taxed at 30% President Hitler signs a bill that reduces the tax rate for both of them to 25%. Jim's take home pay increased by $2500 Jack's take home pay increased by $12,500 Between the two of them Jack received 83% of the savings. Between the two of them Jack pays 83% of the taxes. Jim is a liberal who sucks at math and thinks he'd be better off if they were both still paying 30%.

You'll never get it out of him. He only has conclusions with no explanation for how he arrived at them.

Bass goes great with seasoned lentils.

Ignoring the analysis and then changing the subject is not typically a tactic of one who is secure in his position.

If you can make a compelling argument for your position that Trump is a fascist I'll shave my head and sell pictures of you at the airport.

I'll try to make it simple and see if you can connect the dots. Jim makes $50k/yr Jack makes $250k/yr They both get a 10% raise. Jim gained $5k Jack gained $25k Between the two of them Jack got 83% of the additional pay.

Confirmed. Liberals suck at math.

At this point I view a white Democrat about the same way I view a guy who would high five the dude who's dicking his wife.

Please cite the rhetoric that lead to a kid trying to defend businesses from rioters. Please explain how the authorities were successfully defending these establishments. Please explain how, by virtue of the open carrying of a firearm, does one waive his right to self defense and invite mob attacks. You seem to have thought this through and I'd love to hear the reasoning behind your assertions. Thanks in advance. Edit: If, as a bonus, you could define "assault rifle" for me I'd really appreciate it.

Pot meet kettle. As I said: "Hitler wasn't a socialist even though he described himself as such, but he was "right-wing" because liberals say so."

It's not just the left, but it's not a "both sides" situation either. Liberals are heavy on emotion and narrative and light on facts and principle. There's a reason most authoritarian regimes that have committed mass atrocities have arisen from collectivist movements. The only underlying principle that is absolute is that their side is right, no matter what their side represents.

Obviously there is no way for me to prove what goes through your mind, but if there was I would confidently bet everything I own on this being utter horseshit.

No one genuinely cares about 95% of the principled positions we argue about. It's all about what's politically convenient at the moment.

You're trying to pump a dry well.

Everyone claims to be someone who is open to changing their opinion when presented with new information. If you're a Covid Karen you are not one of those people.

Liberals suck at math.

Hitler wasn't a socialist even though he described himself as such, but he was "right-wing" because liberals say so.

Did you vote for Romney or McCain?

Dude, I started the "War on Whiteness" thread. How did I not make the cut?