Jump to content

U.S. Politics 29


The Progressive

Recommended Posts

No, he didn't "absolutely know" that. He's biased, and lot a lot of biased people, figured the facts supported him. I'll bet he was pretty shocked to find out how far off he was.

Why would someone knowingly make an untrue statement, easily disproved, that makes him her look like an idiot?

He is not a liar, he just doesnt give a shit and assumes he is always right, damn the facts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Asarlai,

Try to take my land that I have bought an paid for, try to force my children into your ideology, I'm going to fight you. How will you respond to my refusal to paticipate in your new society? With kindness, charity, or force when I continue to speak out against it and rally opposition?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying that the people calling for Weiner's resignation are obsessed with his shaft is a straw man argument. He cheated on his wife and lied about it. Ask Governor Sanford and Rep Mark Foley how they feel about it.

I know you libs have....less strict family values when it comes to fidelity in a marriage especially when it comes to your elected representatives. The prevailing thought on the conservative side has always been "If you can lie and cheat on your wife/husband, then you can lie and cheat on the American people." It's an ethics violation.

But if Weiner says, "I told Jesus I'm sorry and he told me it was okay," then we can go back to trusting him, because he's now an upstanding and wonderful human being?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if Weiner says, "I told Jesus I'm sorry and he told me it was okay," then we can go back to trusting him, because he's now an upstanding and wonderful human being?

Actually, I'm pretty sure Weiner said that he only sent women pictures of his cock because he loved America so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously.

I haven't seen the rightwing got so worked up over some penis pictures since the Clinton years.

You have hitherto unknown Clinton Cock Pics? If you have them, then the liberal media must have them as well. And therefor the libtard media is hiding them to push the communist United Nations homosexualist evolutionist agenda on our children!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't. It was a nonstory pushed by breitard, peddled here by commodore, given credence by tempra, and then got debunked by a NYTimes article.

Bad facts make shitty argument. ;)

Umm, he has admitted texting a 17 year old girl. I don't see the Breitbart article referenced by Commodore, but I also don't see any refutations by the NYT by searching for Weiner. It's possible that he was helping out a high school student with her homework, but IIRC he was saying he hadn't had any communication with anyone underage only a few days ago.

Face it, the left is having to choke down a mini-scandal right now. I know it sucks that Breitbart got the drop on you, but he'll fuck up something big sooner or later and get his wings clipped.

Compared to the GOP's wide stance/hiking on the Appalachian trail/Ensign/Vitter/Foley moral turpitude issues this is probably nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously.

I haven't seen the rightwing got so worked up over some penis pictures since the Clinton years.

When you've lost the debate on civil rights, economics, and national security, diversions are all you have left.

Oh, and slashing taxes for the rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With kindness, charity, or force when I continue to speak out against it and rally opposition?

Mind control chips. Non-leathal, non-violent, very effective. It is small, almost non-invasive, side effects are minor but might include itchy eyes, dry mouth, and some sexual dysfunction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's exactly what you are saying.

No, Shryke, it's not. I said what I said, not what you wished I had said, nor what inferences you have drawn from what I said. But to refresh your recollection, here's what I said:

No, he didn't "absolutely know" that. He's biased, and lot a lot of biased people, figured the facts supported him. I'll bet he was pretty shocked to find out how far off he was. Why would someone knowingly make an untrue statement, easily disproved, that makes him her look like an idiot?

If you want to know "exactly" what I'm saying, read it for yourself. It's why I chose those particular words, and that particular arrangement of those words. To write two completely different sentences and then say that's "exactly" what I'm saying is ridiculous.

Either Kyl was lying out his ass or he was supporting a position based on information he didn't know and, in fact, hadn't even the slightest incling of.

Which one was it?

Neither, though this isn't the issue I was addressing. There are alternatives out there other than the false dichotomy you presented. Maybe you'll think of them for yourself if you try hard enough. C'mon Shryke, I know you can do it!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how all these stories distract people from the state of the country and the world.

The political party that benefits most from distracting people from the current state of the world and economy is Weiner's own party, and in particular, the President. He always draws the most heat when the economy is in the shitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'mon Shryke, I know you can do it!!!

Yeah, c'mon Shryke! It's like FLoW says, if you're a Democrat defending Weiner, it means you're either a partisan hack or a pervert who loves Weiner's weiner. Just like if you're a Republican who tells blatant lies, it means you were just honestly mistaken.

Doncha know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Shryke, it's not. I said what I said, not what you wished I had said, nor what inferences you have drawn from what I said. But to refresh your recollection, here's what I said:

If you want to know "exactly" what I'm saying, read it for yourself. It's why I chose those particular words, and that particular arrangement of those words. To write two completely different sentences and then say that's "exactly" what I'm saying is ridiculous.

Neither, though this isn't the issue I was addressing. There are alternatives out there other than the false dichotomy you presented. Maybe you'll think of them for yourself if you try hard enough. C'mon Shryke, I know you can do it!!!

What are they then?

I mean, I know you wish that wasn't what you were saying, but there are no other alternatives.

Either he knew it wasn't 90%, in which case he was lying.

Or he didn't know it wasn't 90%, in which case he was supporting legislation and giving a speech on why it was a good idea without even having the slightest clue what Planned Parenthood actually did.

And if you think there are other options, state them.

I mean, I know what you actually wanted to say was some vague bullshit to try and weasel out of your position because it's logically untenable, but let's pretend you actually mean what you say for a second and it makes sense.

He was supporting defunding Planned Parenthood based on, according to his speech, the fact that 90% (or something in that range, since exageration or rounding is valid) of what they do was abortions. This isn't even anywhere close to true. He said something completely, 100% false.

So either he knew it was false (he's a liar) or he didn't (and he's an idiot supporting an agenda based on information that's completely false).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if Weiner says, "I told Jesus I'm sorry and he told me it was okay," then we can go back to trusting him, because he's now an upstanding and wonderful human being?

I'm not sure.

Maybe you should ask Pelosi if that would be an acceptable penance, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...