(03-18-2026 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:19 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:13 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 09:58 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Good. He's COMPLETELY unqualified.

Based on what, other than he's a Republican?

Also, I don't recall you ever criticizing Mayorkas, who arguably was the worst head of DHS in history.

I feel it in my bones.

And I see you still can't quite get past your propensity for logical fallacy.

You need some new standardized replies. You have overused "logical fallacy."

Plus, nothing personal, but that was a ridiculous response.

He gloms on to phrases from the right and uses them all the time. I bet you can look back beyond the last 6 months at every one of his prior posts, and he has never used the term "logical fallacy." Without resorting to google he couldn't give you two examples of formal or informal fallacy.

Tom likes them because he loves him some deflection. They halt any sane dialogue in its tracks by distracting from logic and reason. This is what tommie is best at: derailing threads. That and cutting and pasting reports he doesn't understand.

(03-19-2026 06:14 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:22 AM)b2b Wrote:  Tom is confused by people from the same party disagreeing.

He simply cannot perceive that we will call out our own because the democrats never do. And you could have just stopped at tom is confused.

I bet his wife was gone for 6 months before he noticed.

(03-18-2026 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:19 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:13 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 09:58 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Good. He's COMPLETELY unqualified.

Based on what, other than he's a Republican?

Also, I don't recall you ever criticizing Mayorkas, who arguably was the worst head of DHS in history.

I feel it in my bones.

And I see you still can't quite get past your propensity for logical fallacy.

You need some new standardized replies. You have overused "logical fallacy."

Plus, nothing personal, but that was a ridiculous response.

He doesn't deserve a "nothing personal" comment.

(03-18-2026 10:31 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:25 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:19 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:13 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Based on what, other than he's a Republican?

Also, I don't recall you ever criticizing Mayorkas, who arguably was the worst head of DHS in history.

I feel it in my bones.

And I see you still can't quite get past your propensity for logical fallacy.

You need some new standardized replies. You have overused "logical fallacy."

Plus, nothing personal, but that was a ridiculous response.

Aren’t they all? At least he’s consistent.

Rand Paul is absolutely making a fool of himself.

In that same hearing, Fetterman came to Mullin's defense, and pretty much made Paul look even dumber.

Speaking of Fetterman, what a remarkable comeback from that stroke. I think it actually made him smarter.

(03-18-2026 11:41 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 11:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:27 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Speaking of Democrats and hearings, there also is a Senate Intel hearing going on now with Gabbard, Ratcliffe and Patel.

Most of the Democrats are literal morons. They say some of the dumbest things. And one word out of their mouths in every question is "Trump!"

Right. It's almost as if trump was the president who started a war with no congressional oversight or approval, no global coordination with all our allies, and no credible case made to the American public. Go figure that he would be a topic of discussion!

You mean like Obama did in Libya? You complained about that one, too, right?

He did not.. I posted the receipts on that one in another thread a week or so back.

(03-18-2026 11:41 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 11:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:27 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Speaking of Democrats and hearings, there also is a Senate Intel hearing going on now with Gabbard, Ratcliffe and Patel.

Most of the Democrats are literal morons. They say some of the dumbest things. And one word out of their mouths in every question is "Trump!"

Right. It's almost as if trump was the president who started a war with no congressional oversight or approval, no global coordination with all our allies, and no credible case made to the American public. Go figure that he would be a topic of discussion!

You mean like Obama did in Libya? You complained about that one, too, right?

Is that fool still saying Trump started a war? It's not a war; it's a total domination of an evil that had to be eradicated. Naturally tommie the tainted tyrant, is against it.

The left is completely ignoring history and apparently isn't aware that POTUS can initiate military action without congressional approval for 90 days, 30 of which are used for decamping. Only then does he have to go to congress to seek approval to continue or have them declare actual war.

But "Trump has started another war!!" sounds so much better.

(03-18-2026 09:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Wow, I have followed politics all my life, and I have never seen anything like this. Paul is chairman of the committee, and he absolutely blasted Mullin for Mullin's reaction to the injuries received by Paul when he was attacked by a neighbor.

I'm now wondering if Mullin is going to get the votes to be confirmed, since the chairman of the committee, Paul, is so adamantly opposed to him, and they're in the same party.

Did Trump not know this going in?

No link? Dude....

(03-19-2026 06:42 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:19 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:13 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 09:58 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Good. He's COMPLETELY unqualified.

Based on what, other than he's a Republican?

Also, I don't recall you ever criticizing Mayorkas, who arguably was the worst head of DHS in history.

I feel it in my bones.

And I see you still can't quite get past your propensity for logical fallacy.

You need some new standardized replies. You have overused "logical fallacy."

Plus, nothing personal, but that was a ridiculous response.

He doesn't deserve a "nothing personal" comment.

Blame my parents for raising me that way. I also still say "Yes sir" and "Yes ma'am."

(03-19-2026 06:52 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 09:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Wow, I have followed politics all my life, and I have never seen anything like this. Paul is chairman of the committee, and he absolutely blasted Mullin for Mullin's reaction to the injuries received by Paul when he was attacked by a neighbor.

I'm now wondering if Mullin is going to get the votes to be confirmed, since the chairman of the committee, Paul, is so adamantly opposed to him, and they're in the same party.

Did Trump not know this going in?

No link? Dude....

Link? That was my opinion after watching the hearing. How do I link that? And it has since changed.

Sometimes, these committees are so tight that one R no vote is enough to stall it in committee. But following the aftermath, I learned we had a little more leeway, nobody else expressed any opposition, and Fetterman is making noise like he could be a yes vote.

(03-19-2026 06:44 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:31 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:25 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-18-2026 10:19 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I feel it in my bones.

And I see you still can't quite get past your propensity for logical fallacy.

You need some new standardized replies. You have overused "logical fallacy."

Plus, nothing personal, but that was a ridiculous response.

Aren’t they all? At least he’s consistent.

Rand Paul is absolutely making a fool of himself.

In that same hearing, Fetterman came to Mullin's defense, and pretty much made Paul look even dumber.

Speaking of Fetterman, what a remarkable comeback from that stroke. I think it actually made him smarter.

He came off as the voice of rational reason in the room.

Put him and Harold Ford together and there's how you restore the Ds to the mainstream.

"Personally, I think they should let them hold an MMA match on the Senate floor. Mullin would beat his ass." AAA

Heck, even I can take this Rand Beta with one hand behind my back. Maybe even AAA, but maybe not, he's a little too old. LOL

I favor Markwayne Mullin's appointment. He will be better than Noem. I like his background, his story. He's a self-made man. I respect that.

But Rand Paul "won" the "debate" in that Mullin squirmed, looking weak and flustered in the process.

Mullin should have said one of two things:

"I find you reprehensible, Rand Paul, and I'm fully fine that you were attacked."

Or

"After time and reflection, I realize that what I said was disgusting. I sincerely apologize."

(03-19-2026 09:48 AM)olliebaba Wrote:  "Personally, I think they should let them hold an MMA match on the Senate floor. Mullin would beat his ass." AAA

Heck, even I can take this Rand Beta with one hand behind my back. Maybe even AAA, but maybe not, he's a little too old. LOL

Ha, I'm def too old. But I think you're only a year younger than I am!

Btw, Mullin just squeaked through the committee to the full Senate, where a vote will happen sometime next week.

Vote was 8-7. The dickhead Rand Paul voted no, of course, b/c his widdle feewings were hurt, but Fetterman saved the day by crossing the aisle and voting yes.

(03-19-2026 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I favor Markwayne Mullin's appointment. He will be better than Noem. I like his background, his story. He's a self-made man. I respect that.

But Rand Paul "won" the "debate" in that Mullin squirmed, looking weak and flustered in the process.

Mullin should have said one of two things:

"I find you reprehensible, Rand Paul, and I'm fully fine that you were attacked."

Or

"After time and reflection, I realize that what I said was disgusting. I sincerely apologize."

Billy Dee, I could not disagree more. Paul didn't win anything. He looked petty.

And Mullin said very clearly that he still felt exactly the same way, and refused to change his statement, or apologize, even though Paul asked him more than once.

And I have no love for Mullin. What he pulled on Sean O'Brien in that hearing was ridiculous, although they later became good friends.

Other than that, I know little about him, other than his interviews, which seem fine to me. He's fairly smart, and seems to have a backbone. Exactly what you need in that position.

(03-19-2026 10:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Billy Dee, I could not disagree more. Paul didn't win anything. He looked petty.

"Petty" is the default demeanor leftists expect from their politicians.

(03-19-2026 10:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-19-2026 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I favor Markwayne Mullin's appointment. He will be better than Noem. I like his background, his story. He's a self-made man. I respect that.

But Rand Paul "won" the "debate" in that Mullin squirmed, looking weak and flustered in the process.

Mullin should have said one of two things:

"I find you reprehensible, Rand Paul, and I'm fully fine that you were attacked."

Or

"After time and reflection, I realize that what I said was disgusting. I sincerely apologize."

Billy Dee, I could not disagree more. Paul didn't win anything. He looked petty.

And Mullin said very clearly that he still felt exactly the same way, and refused to change his statement, or apologize, even though Paul asked him more than once.

And I have no love for Mullin. What he pulled on Sean O'Brien in that hearing was ridiculous, although they later became good friends.

Other than that, I know little about him, other than his interviews, which seem fine to me. He's fairly smart, and seems to have a backbone. Exactly what you need in that position.

Paul looked petty. I give you that.

But I disagree with you (at least somewhat).

When Paul asked Mullin (if I recall this correctly) about how his opinion on violence in general, Mullin stumbled. Maybe I'm not recalling corrected and will need to change my take.

(03-19-2026 10:27 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-19-2026 10:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-19-2026 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I favor Markwayne Mullin's appointment. He will be better than Noem. I like his background, his story. He's a self-made man. I respect that.

But Rand Paul "won" the "debate" in that Mullin squirmed, looking weak and flustered in the process.

Mullin should have said one of two things:

"I find you reprehensible, Rand Paul, and I'm fully fine that you were attacked."

Or

"After time and reflection, I realize that what I said was disgusting. I sincerely apologize."

Billy Dee, I could not disagree more. Paul didn't win anything. He looked petty.

And Mullin said very clearly that he still felt exactly the same way, and refused to change his statement, or apologize, even though Paul asked him more than once.

And I have no love for Mullin. What he pulled on Sean O'Brien in that hearing was ridiculous, although they later became good friends.

Other than that, I know little about him, other than his interviews, which seem fine to me. He's fairly smart, and seems to have a backbone. Exactly what you need in that position.

Paul looked petty. I give you that.

But I disagree with you (at least somewhat).

But when Paul asked Mullin (if I recall this correctly) about how he felt about violence (in this case regarding the attack on Paul) and Mullin stumbled. Maybe I'm not recalling corrected and will need to change my take.

Mullin was a bit unclear the first time. I'm guessing he was trying to soft-peddle it a bit.

But IIRC, he later came straight out and said he wasn't apologizing or changing his mind about what he said originally. I know he said that, I just don't recall his exact words.

(03-19-2026 10:24 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(03-19-2026 10:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Billy Dee, I could not disagree more. Paul didn't win anything. He looked petty.

"Petty" is the default demeanor leftists expect from their politicians.

Wait a second...

Trump has called Cruz's wife ugly. Called reporters "piggy". Constantly has childish nicknames for his opponents. But the leftists are the people with bad demeanor? Quite clearly this is a 2 way street.

(03-19-2026 10:38 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(03-19-2026 10:24 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(03-19-2026 10:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Billy Dee, I could not disagree more. Paul didn't win anything. He looked petty.

"Petty" is the default demeanor leftists expect from their politicians.

Wait a second...

Trump has called Cruz's wife ugly.

He did that after Cruz operatives released nudes of Melania. That was dumb because the Melania nudes probably got Trump a lot more votes than they lost.

Quote:Called reporters "piggy". Constantly has childish nicknames for his opponents.

The truth will sometimes hurt


The difference between Trump and the petty left is that Trump and his target can forgive, forget, and move on. Like Cruz. Like JD Vance. The left cant. The reason the milk goes sour the moment Kamala walks her nasty crotch into the Kitchen is because she's been holding on to grudges for decades. Hell the CLintons will simply put you on a kill list.

Rand Paul's video showing Mullen challenging Sean OBrien to a fight blew up in Pauls face because Mulolen said he and Brian had gotten over that, and both agreed they could have handled the situation better.

But Paul cant against Mullen. Rand Paul is acting petty just like Kamala.

(03-19-2026 10:38 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(03-19-2026 10:24 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(03-19-2026 10:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Billy Dee, I could not disagree more. Paul didn't win anything. He looked petty.

"Petty" is the default demeanor leftists expect from their politicians.

Wait a second...

Trump has called Cruz's wife ugly. Called reporters "piggy". Constantly has childish nicknames for his opponents. But the leftists are the people with bad demeanor? Quite clearly this is a 2 way street.

When did I ever say Trump wasn't petty?