leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 5 Posted January 5 22 minutes ago, Warcodered said: I thought it was a pretty good movie, I liked having a side by side comparison of Deniro's character and Dicaprio's. Basically the difference between a sociopathic/psychopathic character, can never remember which one is right, who essentially feels absolutely nothing no guilt or remorse for the evil things he does. Against a more average man who also ends up going down a path committing evil acts but does feel those things and has to find a way to rationalize things. I disliked the movie so much, I am angry at you for making me think about it again. Who knows, maybe on a different day, or a different time, i would have enjoyed it more. I generally enjoy just about any DeCaprio movie, so I was really interested in seeing it. I always like DeNiro in films, but admittedly his off-screen tirades have taken a toll on me wanting to spend money to see his performances. I was looking forward to it--my wife and I like going to movies--but part of me wished that when that house blew up in one scene, shrapnel from the blast might have blinded me and the percussion wave from the blast might render me deaf to the onscreen yammering. 1
L Ron Burgundy Posted January 5 Posted January 5 2 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I already corrected you. You asked for feedback of political matter, specially about people on one side of the aisle, and then pretended that wasn't your question. If you're incapable of framing a question without losing track of the subject, you should consider consulting with someone intellectually capable of assisting you. As for the rest of your post, I'm capable of analyzing and considering multiple events, including but not limited to timing, historical events that might be similar, what people said then, what people say now, the role of the media, accuracy of the media, the role of the government, the potential for government overreach and quite a few other factors. In fact, if you sum up the events and outcome of the period of time from 2015-2020 as political 'hyperbole', I gave you far too much credit in previous posts. It was MCarthy-esque in nature, and the only way I'm not sitting here today saying "Jesus L. Ron, the dems treated you like a simpleton" is if/when Robert Mueller established clear and convincing evidence of Trump engage in a criminal conspiracy with Putin. We know how that played out, so Jesus, L. Ron the dems treated you like a simpleton. Post election 2020, I accepted that Biden was president, thought the 1/6 riot was disgraceful, supported the office who shot an unarmed protestor, support criminal charges against trespassers/rioters and those who assaulted police. However, I think serious questions remain unanswered and think criticism of the process is fair. I didn't support any of Trump's post election activity beyond questions initially raised about potential fraud. I felt those questions needed to be answered, and that widespread fraud was certainly a possibility to content with. So did just about everyone else in the country, some just were really really really really certain the fraud was in 2016 and any question of wrongdoing beyond the pale in 2020. 2016 and 2020 were different in application and scale, but if you're proud of 2016, you're much more likely to be caught up in a fascist fervor than am I. The top secret comparison...I can't help you there. Yes, I consider the argument that Joe Biden is your poster child for classified document righteous bordering on infantile. I believe Trump acted foolishly in his version of classified documents, knowing full well the dems would burn the country to the ground on non-existent 'collusion', he should have returned the documents. You bring up the Mueller report fairly often. You read the actual report yes? To reference it as much as you do you must have taken the time to read it - rather than rely on highly biased and partisan TV personalities, or worse Bill Barr, to summarize it for you. Yes? Dems hyperbolize and say stupid things about 2016 election. The results are the usual suspects protest and in some cases riot and break things. Republicans lie, and continue to lie, and never stop lying and we get one of the most ugly events in our nations history. An attempt to interrupt the transfer of power of a new president. I hate calling it j6, let's call it the retarrd revolution. ( and lets not pretend like your counterparts do that this wasn't their intent, we heard enough people chanting 1776 to know otherwise). Even now a candidates response on these events will impact how a significant portion of the base votes. They have to lie more to corral votes. With the docs the only way to come to your conclusion is to ignore the most important facet, intent. Joe isnt the poster child for anything. Nobody on the left looks at him like your team looks at Agent Orange. Nothing i've said on any topic ever should lead you to believe I think he's the poster child for anything except mediocrity. 1
Doc Posted January 5 Posted January 5 4 hours ago, Kemp said: You said the tweet was deleted. Was it or not? Why did it take so long for him to go in front of cameras? Why did he call the rioters great people? Do you believe the rioters were Trump supporters, or are you like some who still say they were Antifa? And you still haven't answered what recourse the Supreme Court would have if a President ignored a ruling? The first tweet I mentioned wasn't deleted. It's from 22-27 minutes after the Capitol was breached. No one listened just like no one listened when he said "peacefully and patriotically." As for getting on TV, you think there were TVs in the Capitol, much less on, much less tuned to him? I have no doubt the majority were Trump supporters. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some Antifa members, covert FBI, etc. The SCOTUS has little recourse. I'm just saying we've heard the fear-mongering before and it's just more crying wolf.
BillStime Posted January 5 Posted January 5 6 minutes ago, Doc said: It's from 22-27 minutes after the Capitol was breached. Why do you keep lying?
L Ron Burgundy Posted January 5 Posted January 5 4 minutes ago, BillStime said: Why do you keep lying? They do not like admitting they are wrong. They'd rather become total embarrassments rather than just say, "I was fooled by a conman". That's the answer for most of them. Others are just conspiracy loving whackos that are forever lost. 1 1
Doc Posted January 5 Posted January 5 1 hour ago, L Ron Burgundy said: They do not like admitting they are wrong. They'd rather become total embarrassments rather than just say, "I was fooled by a conman". That's the answer for most of them. Others are just conspiracy loving whackos that are forever lost. The first rioter entered the Capitol at 2:12 PM. Trump tweeted "Stay peaceful" at 2:38 PM. Those are incontrovertible facts. Sorry.
Pokebball Posted January 5 Posted January 5 5 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: slam dunk.excellent and u? re 14th and immunity? Lower court will be overturned 1 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 5 Posted January 5 (edited) Just now, Pokebball said: Lower court will be overturned which judges? wanna bet, seriously? Just now, L Ron Burgundy said: They do not like admitting they are wrong. They'd rather become total embarrassments rather than just say, "I was fooled by a conman". That's the answer for most of them. Others are just conspiracy loving whackos that are forever lost. "Doc" and NC are def the former. oh, B man too. you left out another possibility:stupid. from a self preservation perspective they're all that. Lenny is a russian plant. not shy they used such a valuable asset in NYS but I guesss it's a global forum. good luck with that propagandist Edited January 5 by Joe Ferguson forever
BillStime Posted January 5 Posted January 5 32 minutes ago, Doc said: The first rioter entered the Capitol at 2:12 PM. Trump tweeted "Stay peaceful" at 2:38 PM. Those are incontrovertible facts. Sorry. You don't get it man - the fighting started outside the Capitol at 12:54 PM when the Proud Boys breached the restricted area of the Capitol grounds. So, this Stay peaceful Tweet was only 1 hour, 44 minutes late.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 5 Posted January 5 2 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: You bring up the Mueller report fairly often. You read the actual report yes? To reference it as much as you do you must have taken the time to read it - rather than rely on highly biased and partisan TV personalities, or worse Bill Barr, to summarize it for you. Yes? You asked me this question a while ago, in virtually the same format. It was a ham-handed attempt to bolster your argument last time, no less so today. I mentioned Mueller today in response to your carefully crafted an exquisitely delivered "Hyperbole" thesis on the election of 2016. I think it's relevant, you don't. Who cares? This new angle of shadowy, highly biased tv personalities working in concert with William Barr 'n Vlad is interesting though. 2 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: Dems hyperbolize and say stupid things about 2016 election. The results are the usual suspects protest and in some cases riot and break things. Cool story. "Hyperbole", that's a nice word, kinda catchy, like a new band you might catch at a club over across the bridge in Canada. Straight from Guelph...it's Hyperbole! I see it differently and call it what it was. It was a propaganda campaign, built on implications of treason and lies of Russians in our midst, and most certainly designed to encourage the average American to b highly distrustful of our election process. It worked very well, probably better than those in dem leadership imagined, but in fairness they had a very thirsty and axious base struggling for an explanation as to why HRC lost. And, it set the stage for what came next. 2 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: Republicans lie, and continue to lie, and never stop lying and we get one of the most ugly events in our nations history. An attempt to interrupt the transfer of power of a new president. I hate calling it j6, let's call it the retarrd revolution. ( and lets not pretend like your counterparts do that this wasn't their intent, we heard enough people chanting 1776 to know otherwise). Even now a candidates response on these events will impact how a significant portion of the base votes. They have to lie more to corral votes. Yes, Republicans lie. Democrats lie. Independents lie. Joe Biden though, there's a paragon of virtue. I see the j6 (let's call it that) participants as much, much more like you and the other far left commentators I see here. It's as simple as changing a couple names at the top, someone telling you the election was illegitimate, and you're off in an ostrich suit protesting something, maybe setting fire to a police car, whatever. 2 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: With the docs the only way to come to your conclusion is to ignore the most important facet, intent. Joe isnt the poster child for anything. Nobody on the left looks at him like your team looks at Agent Orange. Nothing i've said on any topic ever should lead you to believe I think he's the poster child for anything except mediocrity. Actually, you all looked to him as the ONE MAN who could save democracy. In fact, just about everything you've said on any topic is why I know this to be true. Don't run from it, embrace it. 2
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 5 Posted January 5 Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You asked me this question a while ago, in virtually the same format. It was a ham-handed attempt to bolster your argument last time, no less so today. I mentioned Mueller today in response to your carefully crafted an exquisitely delivered "Hyperbole" thesis on the election of 2016. I think it's relevant, you don't. Who cares? This new angle of shadowy, highly biased tv personalities working in concert with William Barr 'n Vlad is interesting though. Cool story. "Hyperbole", that's a nice word, kinda catchy, like a new band you might catch at a club over across the bridge in Canada. Straight from Guelph...it's Hyperbole! I see it differently and call it what it was. It was a propaganda campaign, built on implications of treason and lies of Russians in our midst, and most certainly designed to encourage the average American to b highly distrustful of our election process. It worked very well, probably better than those in dem leadership imagined, but in fairness they had a very thirsty and axious base struggling for an explanation as to why HRC lost. And, it set the stage for what came next. Yes, Republicans lie. Democrats lie. Independents lie. Joe Biden though, there's a paragon of virtue. I see the j6 (let's call it that) participants as much, much more like you and the other far left commentators I see here. It's as simple as changing a couple names at the top, someone telling you the election was illegitimate, and you're off in an ostrich suit protesting something, maybe setting fire to a police car, whatever. Actually, you all looked to him as the ONE MAN who could save democracy. In fact, just about everything you've said on any topic is why I know this to be true. Don't run from it, embrace it. No one cares. trump is going to jail. what odds do u see for this? interesting that no one has taken my even money bet
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 5 Posted January 5 1 minute ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: No one cares. trump is going to jail. what odds do u see for this? interesting that no one has taken my even money bet I'm not much of a betting man. What I said to friends a while back is that ultimately, when the government looks to crush a person, it usually does. Whether you like or hate the guy, that Trump is still standing is a testament to his "I don't give a ****" attitude. 2
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 5 Posted January 5 (edited) Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I'm not much of a betting man. What I said to friends a while back is that ultimately, when the government looks to crush a person, it usually does. Whether you like or hate the guy, that Trump is still standing is a testament to his "I don't give a ****" attitude. nice hedge. at least you admitted it would be a bad bet. what odds would you take? 10:1? 1000:1? Edited January 5 by Joe Ferguson forever
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 5 Posted January 5 4 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: nice hedge. at least you admitted it would be a bad bet. what odds would you take? 10:1? 1000:1? Settle down Moe Greene.
L Ron Burgundy Posted January 5 Posted January 5 28 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You asked me this question a while ago, in virtually the same format. It was a ham-handed attempt to bolster your argument last time, no less so today. I mentioned Mueller today in response to your carefully crafted an exquisitely delivered "Hyperbole" thesis on the election of 2016. I think it's relevant, you don't. Who cares? This new angle of shadowy, highly biased tv personalities working in concert with William Barr 'n Vlad is interesting though. Cool story. "Hyperbole", that's a nice word, kinda catchy, like a new band you might catch at a club over across the bridge in Canada. Straight from Guelph...it's Hyperbole! I see it differently and call it what it was. It was a propaganda campaign, built on implications of treason and lies of Russians in our midst, and most certainly designed to encourage the average American to b highly distrustful of our election process. It worked very well, probably better than those in dem leadership imagined, but in fairness they had a very thirsty and axious base struggling for an explanation as to why HRC lost. And, it set the stage for what came next. Yes, Republicans lie. Democrats lie. Independents lie. Joe Biden though, there's a paragon of virtue. I see the j6 (let's call it that) participants as much, much more like you and the other far left commentators I see here. It's as simple as changing a couple names at the top, someone telling you the election was illegitimate, and you're off in an ostrich suit protesting something, maybe setting fire to a police car, whatever. Actually, you all looked to him as the ONE MAN who could save democracy. In fact, just about everything you've said on any topic is why I know this to be true. Don't run from it, embrace it. I did ask you about the Mueller report before. And you seemed to get awfully feisty, panties in a wad alert level 10. It's obvious why. You read none of it. Your opinion is based solely on what Biily Bar said. Could have been fox I suppose, good chance it was fox but my first guess is Barr. The irony is oh so sweet that you probably bring it up more than anyone here yet you don't know what's in it! I'd respond to the rest but...you're boring. Just another "defend anything my side does" turd in the punch bowl. Sure you're less conspiracy driven than NC or bb. But they are literally full internet brain nuts so that's not saying much. You're probably only less crazy because you're not on Twitter. Don't go on Twitter it does terrible things to geriatric conservatives! 1
Pokebball Posted January 6 Posted January 6 2 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: which judges? wanna bet, seriously? I only bet with people I know, personally, sorry.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 6 Posted January 6 Just now, Pokebball said: I only bet with people I know, personally, sorry. if u knew me personally, what odds? Just now, L Ron Burgundy said: I did ask you about the Mueller report before. And you seemed to get awfully feisty, panties in a wad alert level 10. It's obvious why. You read none of it. Your opinion is based solely on what Biily Bar said. Could have been fox I suppose, good chance it was fox but my first guess is Barr. The irony is oh so sweet that you probably bring it up more than anyone here yet you don't know what's in it! I'd respond to the rest but...you're boring. Just another "defend anything my side does" turd in the punch bowl. Sure you're less conspiracy driven than NC or bb. But they are literally full internet brain nuts so that's not saying much. You're probably only less crazy because you're not on Twitter. Don't go on Twitter it does terrible things to geriatric conservatives! he's a russian troll with multiple pseudonyms here. this is the "smart" troll.
Doc Posted January 6 Posted January 6 1 hour ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: nice hedge. at least you admitted it would be a bad bet. what odds would you take? 10:1? 1000:1? I'll take the bet at 10:1 odds.
Pokebball Posted January 6 Posted January 6 29 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: if u knew me personally, what odds? What odds you willing to give
Recommended Posts