Cloud_Strife
Deity
These people are ill these people are sick
2020 US Election (Part Two)
- Thread starter Lexicus
- Start date
- Status
These people are ill these people are sick
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,067
You seem be having reading comprehension problems. Although the subject matter you're addressing is imbedded within the text of my question, it is not actually the subject of inquiry of the question I'm asking. Do I REALLY have to spoonfeed this to you?
Lexicus
Deity
Try making your writing a little more varied and interesting, then people will read your posts to the end more often
Socrates99
Bottoms up!
Sure.
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
I don't give a crap which subtribe of shithead did it, it was the shitheads did it. If the other subcategory did it then you'd just see at these arsewad signs "minimum price allowed by law" and the same people would still be getting crapped on by the same people. It is not the subcategory of tribe that draws the line around abusers.
You missed the privotal point El. When confronted with "the foe" that has switched sides to exactly the activity demanded by argument, the response was still "they can't make up for it, not good enough." Which means the anger and abuse is the only point. The argument is a front, a conveyance. Nothing more. You keep talking about agents of discord. Ta - dah.
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,544
Yes we have, but it isn't any less true then than it is now. And as far as the "right sort of person" thing goes... meh, let's not get ahead of ourselves here with the circle jerking. South Carolina only banned it 5 years ago and Mississippi just dropped the flag as their state emblem 2 months ago, so the difference between "right sort of person" and whoever else is still alot more like overlapping circles than any bright clear line.
I just put down grass seed because I was sick of looking at bare dirt on the side of my house but planting sod seemed too risky (and expensive) given the amount of shade. We've had a ton of rain the past week and I've been watering the crap out of it and the seeds have started to fill in the bare spots nicely. Of course then we had a windstorm that brought down a tree that I had to get removed, and the heavy equipment to cut and remove the tree tore up my new grass... so now I've got to plant new seed.
Also, cover the seeds or the birds will eat them. I use burlap, but I've only had to cover smallish sections at a time.
It hasn't been much of an issue. I just overseed and let the birds eat whatever they want. Also, the seeds I get are coated with a fertilizer/nitrogen coating which seems to make them unappetizing to birds, plus I immediately drown them in water which makes the soil muddy and thus its much harder for the birds to snag them. The grass is actually coming in very nicely, even in spots where I was told grass wouldn't grow.
Talk about "grassroots"
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,067
Fine, then. To paraphrase the question I WAS asking, is it now, just because Trump has already done a lot of horrible, dishonest, mean-spirited, corrupt, callous, irresponsible, etc. President and person in general, the case that EVERY SINGLE NEGATIVE accusation of ANYTHING made against him by ANYONE must be taken AT FACE VALUE and regarded as ABSOLUTELY TRUE with NO BURDEN OF PROOF? And, if so, what's to stop this precedent from easily applying to horrible and unpopular public figures in the future? Is a precedent to be established for veritable "Emanuel Goldstein's with unlimited minutes of hate," to use an Orwellian cliché? This is NOT a defense of Trump, or a denial that he is at all horrible, incompetent, monstrous, callous, narcissistic, unfit for office, etc.. It is about the deterioration of the public discourse and media, and the lack of all integrity, credibility, and believability for sheer sensationalism, hyperbole, and incendiary quality. And the subject of my question is the direct flipside to Trumpists firmly believing - or least claiming and demanding everyone believe - that Trump has actually achieved and accomplished many things as a President which WOULD be signs of a national leader, but there's, indeed, no sign of such achievements, or such achievements seem to have happened without his leadership or participation - or despite Trump's opposition or attempts to sabotage. In fact the overuse and inappropriate mislabelling with the words, "Fascism,' or "Nazism," - or, though not a part of the discussion at the time - the misuse, similarily, of "Communism," and "Socialism," by many in more Right-Wing-Leaning Circles - I've brought up in several debates earlier, are also part of this issue. When the delivery of the message becomes muddied and distorted, losing integrity, the discussion of the core issue can't help but follow suit.
Moderator Action: Patine. Maintain low tones, please.
amadeus
Apply directly to the forehead
I’m just enjoying the Coneheads reference, not expressing any opinion on the moderating decision.
Quoted without comment.
Everyone else realizes that the original claim was the Maduro was claiming that Trump had snipers out to get him, right?
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,067
I realized that. But no one seems to comprehend what I'm actually asking, and the point I'm making, for some reason.
Bugfatty300
Buddha Squirrel
Bay of Piglets mercs were just armed with assault rifles (and bladders filled with fear piss), not sniper rifles. Get your facts in order guys.
Last edited:
Socrates99
Bottoms up!
Alright, I get your point but in this specific case the "bad thing" is true. You're getting in a huff over a fact being stated. I suppose Trump does have plausible deniability when its private contractors involved but it's still linked to his administration's ongoing attempt at a coup and the $15m is absolutely real.
You would be better off making the point you're trying to make when people are actually being hyperbolic. That's common enough that you shouldn't have to pick an instance when the stated "bad thing" is a real thing. The thread where your rant might land better would be the thread speculating about him attempting a coup in the US if he loses. Plenty of good fodder there.
More importantly, as feedback for your writing style, you realize that a bunch of us couldn't even tell that you realized it? Look where the breakdown happened.
It will take some retrospective analysis on your part, but if you lose people so cleanly at the beginning of your interaction, maybe it was something to do with your phrasing
Quoted without comment
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,067
The original point was stated that Maduro just "said," these things, and automatic belief seemed to be demanded, just because of whom the alleged instigator was alone. I don't recall (and still don't think I've seen) any evidence other than Maduro's word on it's own. That, too, was part of my point. Do you see, there?
- Status
