Jump to content

Bombs in Mail to Democrat Leaders?


Cinga

Recommended Posts

 

(no detonators, open circuits, and little to no explosive material)

 

This belongs here too: 

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

But the left is tolerant and non violent... 

 

 

 

This should have been the response... but thankfully the Trump supporter is a bigger man: 

 

 

 

Can't have an honest discussion about the issues unless we're being honest. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

Claim was the right is doing all the violence and I listed giffords shooter, scalises shooter, the Charleston driver (who was a nationalist not a right right/GOP), and every other take and he disagreed.

 

The only one he was too stupid to overlook was Charleston and newtown.  But I'd retort with asking him what pulse was about.  He just is ***too smart*** to get an argument

 

Funny.

 

That wasn't the claim at all.

 

You really do have your head so far up your butt, apparently you can't remember the essence of an argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Funny.

 

That wasn't the claim at all.

 

You really do have your head so far up your butt, apparently you can't remember the essence of an argument.

 

This has been your argument so far: 

2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Yikes.

 

The media didn't ignore any of that.

 

What a great example you've provided of how much twitter is ruining our society.

 

Talk about divided times.

 

 

Just to point to one example, Michelle Obama once said "when they go low, we go high."

 

Obviously a metaphor.  Obviously not in relation to physical fights.  Obviously tied to dialogue.

 

Eric Holder, very obviously responding to her metaphor and reversing it, said "when they go low, kick them."

 

Also, obviously a metaphor.  And frankly, the Democrats biggest downfall politically has been that they've been far more civil and don't get dirty the way Republicans to, in general.  

 

There's nothing about anything physical there and everyone who's even remotely informed understood that what he said was a metaphor in response to another metaphor.

 

All of those comparisons in that stupid tweet, besides the fact that they're basically apples to oranges in the types of things being said by our President, are being said by people who are NOT the President of our country.

 

And it's a poor one. 

 

Said with nothing but love: you can do better. :beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Funny.

 

That wasn't the claim at all.

 

You really do have your head so far up your butt, apparently you can't remember the essence of an argument.

How many chromosomes do you have? Just curious

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Foxx said:

wow. time to crawl out from under that rock, trans.

 

Defintely not under a rock, just don't have time for pointless political banter where everyone is completely dug in.

 

Why bother?

 

This country needs a 3rd party.  It's that simple.

 

And the Green Party and Libertarians sure as hell aren't it.

 

Didn't realize this message board had such an insanely right-hand lean to it, but I guess I should've expected that since WNY is predominantly Red.

 

Have fun with your pack.

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

This has been your argument so far: 

 

And it's a poor one. 

 

Said with nothing but love: you can do better. :beer:

 

Look at what he said in the post I responded to and go back to the argument itself.

 

Still not the claim.

 

Not spelling it out.

 

Don't have the time for this pointless political banter.

1 minute ago, Boyst62 said:

How many chromosomes do you have? Just curious

 

How many brain cells do you have remaining after being dropped on the head a lot as a child?

 

 

 

Enjoy your day. 

 

PS: Heard Alex Jones was banned from twitter and Facebook... where do you watch him now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Defintely not under a rock, just don't have time for pointless political banter where everyone is completely dug in.

 

Why bother?

 

This country needs a 3rd party.  It's that simple.

 

And the Green Party and Libertarians sure as hell aren't it.

 

Didn't realize this message board had such an insanely right-hand lean to it, but I guess I should've expected that since WNY is predominantly Red.

 

Have fun with your pack.

it's not having fun with my pack but rather understanding what is written on the wall in big giant letters, right in front of my face.

 

for the most part, i am politically agnostic. i actually believe that this is all a dog and pony show designed to divide and conquer. however i am bright enough to see that the greater evil facing me is the world the progressive liberals want me to reside in. trust me when i say, even you don't want to live in that world.

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Defintely not under a rock, just don't have time for pointless political banter where everyone is completely dug in.

 

Why bother?

 

This country needs a 3rd party.  It's that simple.

 

And the Green Party and Libertarians sure as hell aren't it.

 

Didn't realize this message board had such an insanely right-hand lean to it, but I guess I should've expected that since WNY is predominantly Red.

 

Have fun with your pack.

 

Look at what he said in the post I responded to and go back to the argument itself.

 

Still not the claim.

 

Not spelling it out.

 

Don't have the time for this pointless political banter.

 

How many brain cells do you have remaining after being dropped on the head a lot as a child?

 

 

 

Enjoy your day. 

 

PS: Heard Alex Jones was banned from twitter and Facebook... where do you watch him now?

Wasn't he the quarterback wide receiver guy from Jacksonville?

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Defintely not under a rock, just don't have time for pointless political banter where everyone is completely dug in.

 

Why bother?

 

This country needs a 3rd party.  It's that simple.

 

And the Green Party and Libertarians sure as hell aren't it.

 

Didn't realize this message board had such an insanely right-hand lean to it, but I guess I should've expected that since WNY is predominantly Red.

 

Have fun with your pack.

 

It's actually more of a Enlightenment liberal bent, with a touch of Victorian Romanticism.

 

What you think is a "right-hand lean" is actually a complete rejection of your asinine neo-progressive Jacobin tribalism.

 

None of which you'll really understand...because neo-progressive Jacobin tribalists never understand anything alien to their world-view.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

Look at what he said in the post I responded to and go back to the argument itself.

 

Still not the claim.

 

Not spelling it out.

 

Don't have the time for this pointless political banter.

 

I read what you wrote. So did everyone else. You haven't responded to the logical inconsistencies of it one bit (because you can't, and know you can't but your programming is preventing you from seeing this reality). Your argument boils down to what others said were not serious, but what Trump said was. 

 

It's not sound logic. It's rationalizing your dislike for the man. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I read what you wrote. So did everyone else. You haven't responded to the logical inconsistencies of it one bit (because you can't, and know you can't but your programming is preventing you from seeing this reality). Your argument boils down to what others said were not serious, but what Trump said was. 

 

It's not sound logic. It's rationalizing your dislike for the man. 

in other words... confirmation bias.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I read what you wrote. So did everyone else. You haven't responded to the logical inconsistencies of it one bit (because you can't, and know you can't but your programming is preventing you from seeing this reality). Your argument boils down to what others said were not serious, but what Trump said was. 

 

It's not sound logic. It's rationalizing your dislike for the man. 

 

No, that's actually NOT AT ALL what my argument boils down to.

 

It really isn't.

 

It's there for you to find it if you want.

 

PPP is definitely not where I will spend my time, but this half-day venture has been eye-opening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Foxx said:

in other words... confirmation bias.

 

No, that's a form of logical fallacy.  It requires rationality.  Neo-prog Jacobins don't think through problems, they feel their way through them.

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

No, that's actually NOT AT ALL what my argument boils down to.

 

It really isn't.

 

It's there for you to find it if you want.

 

PPP is definitely not where I will spend my time, but this half-day venture has been eye-opening.

 

Let's see...

 

3 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Just to point to one example, Michelle Obama once said "when they go low, we go high."

 

Obviously a metaphor.  Obviously not in relation to physical fights.  Obviously tied to dialogue.

 

Eric Holder, very obviously responding to her metaphor and reversing it, said "when they go low, kick them."

 

Also, obviously a metaphor.  And frankly, the Democrats biggest downfall politically has been that they've been far more civil and don't get dirty the way Republicans to, in general.  

 

 

Yes, it was your argument.  You LITERALLY said they're being metaphorical, not serious.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

No, that's actually NOT AT ALL what my argument boils down to.

 

It really isn't.

 

It's there for you to find it if you want.

 

PPP is definitely not where I will spend my time, but this half-day venture has been eye-opening.

 

These are your words. This is the argument you made (to me). Unless I'm misunderstanding you - and if I am, please expound and tell me how - you're saying that all the other calls for incivility and direct confrontation (on top of the hundreds of examples of entertainers depicting Trump's demise) isn't serious, and everyone knows it. But when Trump makes a joke, it MUST be taken literally. 

 

If that's not your position, what is? 

3 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Yikes.

 

The media didn't ignore any of that.

 

What a great example you've provided of how much twitter is ruining our society.

 

Talk about divided times.

 

 

Just to point to one example, Michelle Obama once said "when they go low, we go high."

 

Obviously a metaphor.  Obviously not in relation to physical fights.  Obviously tied to dialogue.

 

Eric Holder, very obviously responding to her metaphor and reversing it, said "when they go low, kick them."

 

Also, obviously a metaphor.  And frankly, the Democrats biggest downfall politically has been that they've been far more civil and don't get dirty the way Republicans to, in general.  

 

There's nothing about anything physical there and everyone who's even remotely informed understood that what he said was a metaphor in response to another metaphor.

 

All of those comparisons in that stupid tweet, besides the fact that they're basically apples to oranges in the types of things being said by our President, are being said by people who are NOT the President of our country.

 

 

I'm going to go and guess that over the past two years you've said or thought that Trump colluded with Russia because he made a joke at a rally about Putin finding Clinton's emails. To this day that remains "proof" for people unable to see past their own bias against the guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Yes, it was your argument.  You LITERALLY said they're being metaphorical, not serious.

 

If that's what he meant by "serious".

 

Okay.

 

Not the way I thought he meant it.

 

Pretty big difference between something that is absolutely and obviously a metaphor and something that people are trying to twist somehow into "it might have been he was joking."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

If that's what he meant by "serious".

 

Okay.

 

Not the way I thought he meant it.

 

Pretty big difference between something that is absolutely and obviously a metaphor and something that people are trying to twist somehow into "it might have been he was joking."

 

Only to those who are NPCs and can't see past their programming. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

If that's what he meant by "serious".

 

Okay.

 

Not the way I thought he meant it.

 

Pretty big difference between something that is absolutely and obviously a metaphor and something that people are trying to twist somehow into "it might have been he was joking."

 

I would like, very much, for you to make the case that the problem liberals are facing is that they aren’t fighting dirty enough, where you state that conservatives are; and that political violence isn’t being fostered and pushed as a legitimate course of action by the left in this country.

 

I’ll also note you didn’t bother responding to my post outlining very specific calls to, funding of, and actual acts of political violence being perpetrated by the left.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

If that's what he meant by "serious".

 

Okay.

 

Not the way I thought he meant it.

 

Pretty big difference between something that is absolutely and obviously a metaphor and something that people are trying to twist somehow into "it might have been he was joking."

 

No, there isn't.  You're establishing the difference with an a priori axiom that Democrats are not violent.  And you're compounding it by picking examples that only fit that axiom.

 

You think Clinton's "no civility" ***** was a metaphor?  Or Waters' call to give Republicans no peace?  The results I've experienced first-hand from Waters' ***** were not metaphorical.

 

Mainly, though, your issue is you're stuck in a dualist "good vs. evil" paradigm.  You can't see the larger non-partisan context of the environment of increasingly violent political rhetoric and acts.  And you won't see it, because the dualism is too deeply ingrained in you.  Like all neo-prog Jacobin tribalists.

Edited by DC Tom
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...