Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 15 minutes ago, Wacka said: We didn't talk about politics at work. Why the past tense? 1 minute ago, JDHillFan said: Was. No she uses the status she has gained to crap on those of the bartender strata. Just because her behavior in this matter is repellent nobody is telling you not to defend it. It’s not like you haven’t advertised the sort of person you are well before now. Did you ever state why you feel you have earned “the right” to refer to another as an uncle tom? I am who I am..I'm Popeye the sailor man with a degree in Molecular Biology!
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 4 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Why the past tense? I am who I am..I'm Popeye the sailor man with a degree in Molecular Biology! You are no doubt white. Was Popeye a racist too?
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 9 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: You are no doubt white. Was Popeye a racist too? I don't know. watch the video and decide for yourself (psssst, but I'm not truly Popeye)...never to be censored in Florida! Edited March 9, 2023 by redtail hawk
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 6 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: I don't know. watch the video and decide for yourself (psssst, but I'm not truly Popeye)...never to be censored in Florida! You seem to have the same mental acumen so I thought maybe you were. 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 7 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: No I've said as much about releasing everything. But you want it released on your terms based on your political ideology, and complain about something completely natural in politics. Plus, the real problem is that it that the footage was withheld to begin with. Why? 7 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: I'm saying the one sided nature done by the committee was fine. The point was to show the terrible, borderline reetarded, things that happened that day. The peaceful part is irrelevant to them showing that. Overall it is irrelevant. The peaceful people for the most part suffered only fines. It wasn’t fine, and these committees really never are. They declared their bias at the start, functioned with bias through the process, and worked with media to paint a picture designed to manipulate. We saw the terrible things done that day, I agree on that. We should see them, and those people should be punished. However, I see no issues at all with acknowledging the video of the Shaman, for example, is completely different than advertised. Now, his legal team is complaining that they were prohibited from seeing that evidence, and for the life of me, I can’t understand why. I mean, I can, but it paints the govt in less than a positive light. You may not care, and probably don’t, but you should. You should care like it’s some poor kid with charges leveled against him in some city in middle America. It’s good to remember that the ideal is that justice is blind. 7 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: Tucker going one sided in the other direction is irresponsible. Go check twitter and see what most buffoons are saying. It's conspiracy city. Antifa did it. People saying virtually no violence some outright denying any. Fbi caused it. Any insane excuse you can think of rather than just saying those people, violent ones, deserve what they got. You seem to think this is something new, or that it’s unique to Tucker Carlson. Buffoons are manipulated every day, it’s conspiracy city every day, and the FBI and law enforcement were accused of systemic bias and injustice just a while back before you folks were told to do a 180 and emotionally, that appealed to yiu. See, for example, Michael Brown. Cities burn. People die. Buffoons rage. I suggest you wake up. 7 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: You may not be a conspiracy theorist yourself. Admirable and rare for your party. But those people more and more are becoming dangerous, albeit stupid, extremists. It's a bummer, conspiracies used to be fun. I’m a realist, I pay attention, ask questions, try to recognize my blind spots. I’m not always successful. Respectfully, I think people like you are a huge part of the problem in the country today, and have doppelgängers on the right, because you fail to see the interconnectedness of these issues. You said previously you didn’t care about the dem party and Russiagate, a conspiracy if there ever was one. That’s dumb, you should care, because conceptually, “Stop the Steal” was predictable. The debacle at the Capitol was something else entirely, but whichever party lost was going to claim a stolen election, for the Dems it would have been two in a row. I couldn’t tell you if a truly deep dive into election security would reveal massive systemic problems in our elections. I wouldn’t be surprised, but consider just a few short years ago millions of democrats were absolutely convinced something nefarious happened to change the outcome of an election, and remain steadfast in that belief in spite of evidence to the contrary. You people went from “ELECTIONS WERE ILLEGITIMATE!” were manipulated to “QUESTION NOTHING!” in 4 years. It’s fascinating to me, and really pretty sad. 1 1
BillsFanNC Posted March 9, 2023 Author Posted March 9, 2023 I doubt this goes anywhere given corrupt DC judges. But sunlight is always good on corruption.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 23 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Respectfully, I think people like you are a huge part of the problem in the country today, and have doppelgängers on the right, because you fail to see the interconnectedness of these issues. You said previously you didn’t care about the dem party and Russiagate, a conspiracy if there ever was one. That’s dumb, you should care, because conceptually, “Stop the Steal” was predictable. The debacle at the Capitol was something else entirely, but whichever party lost was going to claim a stolen election, for the Dems it would have been two in a row. I didn't see any Dems desecrating the Capitol after the 2016 election. Nor any call for it from a D leader. Edited March 9, 2023 by redtail hawk 1
SoCal Deek Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 I’ve tried to stay out of this discussion because I knew where it would go….as usual. But looking at it from the proverbial 35,000 feet, doesn’t anyone find it odd it that sitting members of Congress would feel this threatened by a single cable television program expressing an opinion, telling a narrative, and showing actual, unaltered video footage of an actual news event? When did America “evolve” into a country where the government controlled the way the press/media/people are allowed to see and discuss a news story? EVERYONE should be REALLY frightened by this unfortunate turn of events. It does not bode well for the future of a formerly free country.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: I’ve tried to stay out of this discussion because I knew where it would go….as usual. But looking at it from the proverbial 35,000 feet, doesn’t anyone find it odd it that sitting members of Congress would feel this threatened by a single cable television program expressing an opinion, telling a narrative, and showing actual, unaltered video footage of an actual news event? When did America “evolve” into a country where the government controlled the way the press/media/people are allowed to see and discuss a news story? EVERYONE should be REALLY frightened by this unfortunate turn of events. It does not bode well for the future of a formerly free country. They aren't afraid. They're cognizant of the millions of impressionable buffoons (as Lenny aptly coins them) that watch and are convinced. No one legislated that Fox pull Ole Tuck. Schumer appealed to Murdoch and apparently it worked to a small degree...The Russell Brand interview was mesmerizing. And we all just can't get enough of the My Pillow and chiropractor endorsed vitamin ads. Edited March 9, 2023 by redtail hawk 1
BillsFanNC Posted March 9, 2023 Author Posted March 9, 2023 2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: I’ve tried to stay out of this discussion because I knew where it would go….as usual. But looking at it from the proverbial 35,000 feet, doesn’t anyone find it odd it that sitting members of Congress would feel this threatened by a single cable television program expressing an opinion, telling a narrative, and showing actual, unaltered video footage of an actual news event? When did America “evolve” into a country where the government controlled the way the press/media/people are allowed to see and discuss a news story? EVERYONE should be REALLY frightened by this unfortunate turn of events. It does not bode well for the future of a formerly free country. Everyone is frightened and outraged over all of this. Except the commies. Twitter. Facebook. Elected representatives. The DOJ. Large media corporations. Leftists. All have become very comfortable with censorship and criminalizing opinions they don't like since oh let's say late 2016. I wonder why?
SoCal Deek Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 1 minute ago, redtail hawk said: They aren't afraid. They're cognizant of the millions of impressionable buffoons (as Lenny aptly coins them) that watch and are convinced. No one legislated that Fox pull Ole Tuck. Schumer appealed to Murdoch and apparently it worked... Not even close Hawk. It is NEVER appropriate for a member of congress to take the floor of the House or Senate and ‘appeal’ that a news organization should fire or silence a reporter. Never! If Chuck or Mitch want to say they disagree with or verbally dismiss the narrative…fine. But that’s not what Chuck did. Unbelievable that you don’t see how dangerous this is. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Not even close Hawk. It is NEVER appropriate for a member of congress to take the floor of the House or Senate and ‘appeal’ that a news organization should fire or silence a reporter. Never! If Chuck or Mitch want to say they disagree with or verbally dismiss the narrative…fine. But that’s not what Chuck did. Unbelievable that you don’t see how dangerous this is. But it is appropriate to exclusively give footage to a proven liar? This is so important and relevant, I'll post it again here: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/03/exclusive-kremlin-putin-russia-ukraine-war-memo-tucker-carlson-fox/ Edited March 9, 2023 by redtail hawk 1
SoCal Deek Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: But it is appropriate to exclusively give footage to a proven liar? Answer: It isn’t inappropriate. But the proper question is why weren’t ALL of the media given this footage when Good ‘ol Nancy had the gavel? Hmmm? When you’re the people ‘in charge’, the appropriate response to TC is to simply dismiss his opinion. Edited March 9, 2023 by SoCal Deek 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Answer: It isn’t inappropriate. But the proper question is why weren’t ALL of the media given this footage when Good ‘ol Nancy had the gavel? Hmmm? When you’re the people ‘in charge’, the appropriate response to TC is to simply dismiss his opinion. Fair enough...but I'm a believer in fighting fire with fire. Progressives (not BLM rioters, real progressives) have been passive long enough.
SoCal Deek Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 3 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Fair enough...but I'm a believer in fighting fire with fire. Progressives (not BLM rioters, real progressives) have been passive long enough. Okay…here we go…”real progressives”? This I’m dying to read. And I love how you immediately dismiss the violent attack on the seat of Executive Branch that occurred just a few months before J6. Where was the Select Committee’s report on that attack? 1
Doc Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 What we're seeing is that it was a tale of two events: the violence outside leading to the breach of the Captiol and then the mostly peaceful meandering through the Capitol as people had no plan and eventually got bored and left. The J6 committee focused solely on the former. This is showing the latter. 2 1
Tenhigh Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 3 hours ago, redtail hawk said: big deal...not. in the world of national politics, small potatoes. Nothing akin to a certain NY congressman who lied about virtually everything including his college degree. AOC actually has one from Boston U as i recall. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/tucker-carlson-fox-republicans/ now this is a big deal: "Things couldn’t be going better for Tucker Carlson—if by “better” you mean the universe unfolding to reveal his contempt for his audience and his personal and professional corruption. His hyped remix of violent January 6 insurrection footage, aired Monday night, came off like a TikTok for angry boomers, but without any dogs or funny music. It sampled more than 41,000 hours of security footage to reach its preordained conclusion: “Taken as a whole, the video record does not support the claim that January 6th was an insurrection,” Carlson declared. “In fact, it demolishes that claim.” Of course, it does no such thing." Isolated even within fox, but hey, the losers love other losers and he's their leader... Somebody posted yesterday about Billsy having multiple screenames. He seems unique to me. But how prevalent is it? How many folks are playing the good cop, bad cop game while calling people out for intellectual dishonesty? Naive? maybe but openly asking the question. First, did you just use "NOT"? Lolz. Second, are you setting AOC's bar at George Santos? This implies they are both pieces of garbage, we agree! Third, Tucker is largely doing what the Jan 6 committee did, cherry picking video from the footage that exaggerates whatever skewed points he is trying to make. The difference is that he is not the federal government, he is a partisan political talk show host. Lastly, I don't think there are many (if any) posters operating under multiple screen names here. The mods are pretty good at managing that stuff. There can be only one Billsy. Now if you want to argue about his true motivation for some of the trash he posts, I am in. Whether he was molested by a republican, whacks if to Trump porn, is a secret republican plant to rile up the right and/or is just desperate for any human interaction, regardless there is fortunately only one of him. Edited March 9, 2023 by Tenhigh 4
Wacka Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 It's the old "we know better than you do. " Commies gotta commie. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said: Okay…here we go…”real progressives”? This I’m dying to read. And I love how you immediately dismiss the violent attack on the seat of Executive Branch that occurred just a few months before J6. Where was the Select Committee’s report on that attack? Here's 2 that I admire from my state but I agree, the definition is nebulous https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Webb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Kaine 42 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: There can be only one Billsy. Agreed. He's one of a kind. But you know you love him.😉 Edited March 9, 2023 by redtail hawk
Recommended Posts