Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 6 minutes ago, LA Grant said: If you say so, Sir Thomas! We should take your word for it — that article is definitely not at all similar to accusing the kids of being crisis actors. It's merely accusing the kids of acting as crisis exploiters, that's all! Totally different. You need to learn to read better. It's not accusing the kids of being crisis exploiters nor am I. Hence why I said it's not in the same category. It's accusing the machine behind the kids of exploiting the victims for a political agenda. One that doesn't really care about solving the problem, just furthering the divide so the money keeps rolling in when the next tragedy strikes. You should know this side well. You've been carrying the water for them since you came down here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: You need to learn to read better. It's not accusing the kids of being crisis exploiters nor am I. Hence why I said it's not in the same category. It's accusing the machine behind the kids of exploiting the victims for a political agenda. One that doesn't really care about solving the problem, just furthering the divide so the money keeps rolling in when the next tragedy strikes. You should know this side well. You've been carrying the water for them since you came down here. Rhino, the only problem with your conclusion is that it makes very little sense. Who do you think stands to lose money when gun tragedies strike? Who do you think doesn't really care about solving the problem? Who do you think is furthering the divide to keep money rolling in? And how in the world would you conclude the answers to those questions is "George Clooney and Oprah Winfrey"?? Or even Debbie Wasserman Schultz?? You occasionally seem rational but you are really, really turned around backwards on this. The problems & solutions here are not complicated; what is complicated is the path to solutions. Hope you see it. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/970402289742618624 Edited March 6, 2018 by LA Grant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, LA Grant said: Rhino, the only problem with your conclusion is that it makes very little sense. Who do you think stands to lose money when gun tragedies strike? Both sides of the aisle raise money on this issue. Do you deny that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Both sides of the aisle raise money on this issue. Do you deny that? I do not. Do both sides of the aisle raise the same amount of money? Come on, man. Think it through. Can you think of any industry that makes a lot of money that may potentially lose money when mass shooting tragedies strike? Any industry at all that might be incentivized to "further the divide to keep money rolling in"? Can you think of any industry that might fit that description?? btw — Quote You need to learn to read better. It's not accusing the kids of being crisis exploiters nor am I Take a look at the comments on the Federalist article. It would appear that most of the readers of the article are happily inviting the comparison. Exactly like I said — this was the article's intent. It gives you all of the pieces to come to the "don't trust the kids" conclusion but knows enough to avoid outright calling them actors. You claim to be skeptical of media but thus far haven't demonstrated any skepticism on this one. Why not? Edited March 6, 2018 by LA Grant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 (edited) 31 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Do both sides of the aisle raise the same amount of money? Come on, man. Think it through. That's not what I said. It's called intellectual honesty. Try it. Then we can have a discussion. Edited March 6, 2018 by Deranged Rhino mobile f-up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: That's not what I said. It's called intellectual honesty. Try it. Then we can have a discussion. Haha. We could also have a discussion whenever you're ready to answer any of the multitude of questions I asked you. But if the coward's way works for you.... you do you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 2 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Haha. We could also have a discussion whenever you're ready to answer any of the multitude of questions I asked you. But if the coward's way works for you.... you do you. You literally rephrased the question I asked you and then tried to argue against a position I never espoused. That's cowardly, asshat. If you had the courage of your convictions you'd stand by them. You don't. You're here to laugh at people for positions you assume they hold rather than actually try to have a conversation. That's fine. That's your right. But it's also a shame because you clearly are misinformed and could benefit from taking a step back and honestly considering positions that go against your own. If for no other reason than to validate your own positions by testing their merit. You're too chickenshit to do that though. Shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: You literally rephrased the question I asked you and then tried to argue against a position I never espoused. You sound surprised. He's been doing that for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 2 minutes ago, DC Tom said: You sound surprised. He's been doing that for years. I'm slow apparently. If only because if this dude lives in LA I've almost certainly had beers with him at the Bills bar during games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm slow apparently. If only because if this dude lives in LA I've almost certainly had beers with him at the Bills bar during games. I doubt he'd have beers with a conservative like you. (I couldn't even type that without laughing.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 Just now, DC Tom said: I doubt he'd have beers with a conservative like you. (I couldn't even type that without laughing.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: You literally rephrased the question I asked you and then tried to argue against a position I never espoused. That's cowardly, asshat. Shame. 1 hour ago, DC Tom said: You sound surprised. He's been doing that for years. Let's not put that on LA Rant, that is the standard operating procedure for ALL the libs on this board and elsewhere. If they don't, then they would have to face the weakness of their beloved narratives....................and they just cannot do that. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 45 minutes ago, B-Man said: Let's not put that on LA Rant, that is the standard operating procedure for ALL the libs on this board and elsewhere. If they don't, then they would have to face the weakness of their beloved narratives....................and they just cannot do that. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/05/world/asia/south-korea-kim-jong-un-talks.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: You literally rephrased the question I asked you and then tried to argue against a position I never espoused. That's cowardly, asshat. If you had the courage of your convictions you'd stand by them. You don't. You're here to laugh at people for positions you assume they hold rather than actually try to have a conversation. That's fine. That's your right. But it's also a shame because you clearly are misinformed and could benefit from taking a step back and honestly considering positions that go against your own. If for no other reason than to validate your own positions by testing their merit. You're too chickenshit to do that though. Shame. This is what I just said in the Nunes thread. He's just a douche, and he's trolling you because he thinks you're a conservative. Why does he think you're a conservative? Because you disagree with him. That makes you a target. Why? Because he's a douche, and not worth your time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LA Grant Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: You literally rephrased the question I asked you and then tried to argue against a position I never espoused. That's cowardly, asshat. If you had the courage of your convictions you'd stand by them. You don't. You're here to laugh at people for positions you assume they hold rather than actually try to have a conversation. That's fine. That's your right. But it's also a shame because you clearly are misinformed and could benefit from taking a step back and honestly considering positions that go against your own. If for no other reason than to validate your own positions by testing their merit. You're too chickenshit to do that though. Shame. Absurd. The rephrased question was as simple and innocent as yours... and just as pointed. PPP seems to be full of guys who think asking rhetorical questions prove their point. They don't. It's why I asked a rhetorical question in return. Of course, I also asked several other questions that went completely ignored. Repeatedly, I asked you to clarify the convictions you claim to hold so courageously. Repeatedly, they were ignored. Why is it wrong to be skeptical of the Federalist article? Why do you keep insisting that it is not implying what is is clearly implying, an implication that all of the article's commenters made explicit? Why do you keep dodging this line of questioning, particularly when just the other day you were jawing on about how it was every American's responsibility to question their media? It'd be very fair to question the courage of those convictions, but I guess I can't do that since you said it first, huh? Quote But it's also a shame because you clearly are misinformed and could benefit from taking a step back and honestly considering positions that go against your own. If for no other reason than to validate your own positions by testing their merit. You're too chickenshit to do that though. Shame. It really is some kind of phenomenon, this thing of making an accusation that is a confused confession. This is the exact advice that you need to be taking, you nutso conspiracy theorist. It's like how Roy More and all of the other weirdo hardcore anti-gay Republicans always turn out to be weird pedophiles or something f***ed up. Trump does it constantly, at least one other person on PPP tried it with me recently, and now this from you. Seriously, what is up with that? Is it like how the brain processes information when it's completely lacking in self-awareness, or what? 5 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: I'm slow apparently. If only because if this dude lives in LA I've almost certainly had beers with him at the Bills bar during games. Oof. Yeah. I dunno. Maybe in the same room. 5 hours ago, DC Tom said: I doubt he'd have beers with a conservative like you. (I couldn't even type that without laughing.) For you, I'm betting you fancy yourself as an "independent," right? Others here I'm sure insist they're not really conservative, more "libertarian." Just a bunch of independents & libertarians who all just so happen to have a totally healthy passion for destructive conservative propaganda. (Gah, sorry!! I don't want to keep bruising any egos.) I meant... a totally healthy passion for journalism with deep integrity. Yeah, that's the ticket. Great journalistic sources like The Federalist... y'know, that widely respected blog, the one started in 2013 by the idiot who got fired by The Washington Post after only 3 days for multiple accusations of plagiarism. That's what the smart guys are reading. Edited March 6, 2018 by LA Grant 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, LA Grant said: Absurd. The rephrased question was as simple and innocent as yours... and just as pointed. PPP seems to be full of guys who think asking rhetorical questions prove their point. They don't. It's why I asked a rhetorical question in return. Of course, I also asked several other questions that went completely ignored. Repeatedly, I asked you to clarify the convictions you claim to hold so courageously. Repeatedly, they were ignored. Why is it wrong to be skeptical of the Federalist article? Why do you keep insisting that it is not implying what is is clearly implying, an implication that all of the article's commenters made explicit? Why do you keep dodging this line of questioning, particularly when just the other day you were jawing on about how it was every American's responsibility to question their media? It'd be very fair to question the courage of those convictions, but I guess I can't do that since you said it first, huh? It really is some kind of phenomenon, this thing of making an accusation that is a confused confession. This is the exact advice that you need to be taking, you nutso conspiracy theorist. It's like how Roy More and all of the other weirdo hardcore anti-gay Republicans always turn out to be weird pedophiles or something f***ed up. Trump does it constantly, at least one other person on PPP tried it with me recently, and now this from you. Seriously, what is up with that? Is it like how the brain processes information when it's completely lacking in self-awareness, or what? Oof. Yeah. I dunno. Maybe in the same room. For you, I'm betting you fancy yourself as an "independent," right? Others here I'm sure insist they're not really conservative, more "libertarian." Just a bunch of independents & libertarians who all just so happen to have a totally healthy passion for destructive conservative propaganda. (Gah, sorry!! I don't want to keep bruising any egos.) I meant... a totally healthy passion for journalism with deep integrity. Yeah, that's the ticket. Great journalistic sources like The Federalist... y'know, that widely respected blog, the one started in 2013 by the idiot who got fired by The Washington Post after only 3 days for multiple accusations of plagiarism. That's what the smart guys are reading. You take too much pleasure in being smug. It's a thin veneer, and unbecoming. Edited March 6, 2018 by OJABBA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TtownBillsFan Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 On 2/27/2018 at 4:58 AM, Nanker said: Agreed. After a relatively short amount of time that becomes quite apparent. At a certain point people have to recognize that they’re not worth getting into a dialogue with. The shutdown of the BBMB did us no favors. Now that's just not fair. Yeah, I'm sure some trolls made their way over, but I'd not have found this site at all, the Bills news and PPP and all. I'm sure ya'll had trolls before the shutdown I'm glad I found this place! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 2 hours ago, TtownBillsFan said: Now that's just not fair. Yeah, I'm sure some trolls made their way over, but I'd not have found this site at all, the Bills news and PPP and all. I'm sure ya'll had trolls before the shutdown I'm glad I found this place! No, when BBMB shut down we had new trolls here coming out of the wall. There was even some suggestions on their part that we change our rules here. I can attest that they made this place less enjoyable. More recently we have seen some additional trolls but they are actually longer term members of PPP who lay dormant until they think that there are issues they can exploit, ie. LA Grant's crusade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 https://nypost.com/2018/03/05/facebook-survey-asks-users-if-they-condone-pedophilia/ Who's surprised? You shouldn't be... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts