(10-22-2020 10:42 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 08:53 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Its liberals who want a war against this country.

Tom... Representatives of which party most frequently are engaging in protests against 'the system' and 'the flag', KNEELING in protest of what it represents and trying to change 230 years of the electoral college?

Unless you're paraphrasing Nikita Khrushchev, my statement has evidentiary support... and contrary to Nikita, shots HAVE been fired already (by the left) in protest of this nation.

I don't have the first damned clue what party engages in protests against any system whatever that means. Besides, protesting against institutionalized racism is hardly protesting the country itself. And WTF does the kneeling have to do with the flag much less the feelings toward ones country? In fact, it's the damned foundation rooted in the 1st Amendment! And changing the EC is hardly going to war with the country. When the EC was designed, we didn't have 2 Dakotas with 4 senators representing about a dozen people...lol

Of course maybe I just mistook your use of the word 'war' incorrectly and assumed an armed conflict rather than a war of ideas. Apologies if so.

Finally, other than maybe Portland still, where are all these protests taking place?

So, Tom, what it sounds like is that you are FOR all those things you listed. Pretty much what I expected from somebody who is clueless about what has gone on in this country for the past 8 or 9 months.

Congratulations, you are now qualified for a job as a 'journalist' in this country. Not sure if it pays more than your current trolling job, though.

Carry on.

(10-22-2020 01:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I don't have the first damned clue what party engages in protests against any system whatever that means. Besides, protesting against institutionalized racism is hardly protesting the country itself. And WTF does the kneeling have to do with the flag much less the feelings toward ones country? In fact, it's the damned foundation rooted in the 1st Amendment! And changing the EC is hardly going to war with the country. When the EC was designed, we didn't have 2 Dakotas with 4 senators representing about a dozen people...lol

Of course maybe I just mistook your use of the word 'war' incorrectly and assumed an armed conflict rather than a war of ideas. Apologies if so.

Finally, other than maybe Portland still, where are all these protests taking place?

a) Obviously you DO have a clue because you addressed it. You're merely drawing a pedantic distinction between protesting 'a country' and protesting 'the institutions and laws' that make it up.

b) Nobody was ever protesting the flag, as if they found fabric to be offensive... they were protesting the nation that is represented by that flag.

c) absolutely, protests are protected speech... never said differently. Never said there was anything wrong with it... Just said the left is badly outgunned... and I did mean 'war'... because most of the recent violence under the guise of protest has come from the left. Being a Texan, Libertarian and TRUE independent, I support secession. When in the course of Human events it becomes necessary to dissolve the ties that bind us... word to that effect mean something to me... I think more of the right would be happy to let the lefts go their merry way. While they do currently account for a lot of commerce, there is little that couldn't be replaced elsewhere if necessary... meanwhile I doubt NY is going to have much luck raising enough cattle for their population, and we don't have electric planes yet so you're going to have to ship a lot of dairy and produce from Cali across another country... so I suspect there will be a lot of easy commerce between the two.

d) Your comment about the EC is funny though...
In 1790 about the time of the EC, about 100 people represented about 4mm. Today 535 represent 350mm... so small states had SIGNIFICANTLY more representation then than they do now.

I also note that you mention the Dakotas, but leave out Vermont, Delaware, Rhode Island and Maine.

NOw if you're an independent as you claim... even as a liberal... I understand why you might not care what they people of the Dakotas, Wyoming or Alaska think... but you shouldn't support disenfranchising all of those other small states, unless of course you're actually a Democrat... because of course an independent like Bernie can get elected in tiny Vermont, but would never stand a chance against the Democratic machine in California or NY.

(10-22-2020 01:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I don't have the first damned clue what party engages in protests against any system whatever that means. Besides, protesting against institutionalized racism is hardly protesting the country itself. And WTF does the kneeling have to do with the flag much less the feelings toward ones country? In fact, it's the damned foundation rooted in the 1st Amendment! And changing the EC is hardly going to war with the country. When the EC was designed, we didn't have 2 Dakotas with 4 senators representing about a dozen people...lol

Of course maybe I just mistook your use of the word 'war' incorrectly and assumed an armed conflict rather than a war of ideas. Apologies if so.

Finally, other than maybe Portland still, where are all these protests taking place?

a) Obviously you DO have a clue because you addressed it. You're merely drawing a pedantic distinction between protesting 'a country' and protesting 'the institutions and laws' that make it up.

b) Nobody was ever protesting the flag, as if they found fabric to be offensive... they were protesting the nation that is represented by that flag.

c) absolutely, protests are protected speech... never said differently. Never said there was anything wrong with it... Just said the left is badly outgunned... and I did mean 'war'... because most of the recent violence under the guise of protest has come from the left. Being a Texan, Libertarian and TRUE independent, I support secession. When in the course of Human events it becomes necessary to dissolve the ties that bind us... word to that effect mean something to me... I think more of the right would be happy to let the lefts go their merry way. While they do currently account for a lot of commerce, there is little that couldn't be replaced elsewhere if necessary... meanwhile I doubt NY is going to have much luck raising enough cattle for their population, and we don't have electric planes yet so you're going to have to ship a lot of dairy and produce from Cali across another country... so I suspect there will be a lot of easy commerce between the two.

d) Your comment about the EC is funny though...
In 1790 about the time of the EC, about 100 people represented about 4mm. Today 535 represent 350mm... so small states had SIGNIFICANTLY more representation then than they do now.

I also note that you mention the Dakotas, but leave out Vermont, Delaware, Rhode Island and Maine.

NOw if you're an independent as you claim... even as a liberal... I understand why you might not care what they people of the Dakotas, Wyoming or Alaska think... but you shouldn't support disenfranchising all of those other small states, unless of course you're actually a Democrat... because of course an independent like Bernie can get elected in tiny Vermont, but would never stand a chance against the Democratic machine in California or NY.

Honest question...

Who doesn't know who Borat is by now? I have a hard time believing that Rudy Guliani wouldn't recognize Borat...

(10-22-2020 03:28 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  Honest question...

Who doesn't know who Borat is by now? I have a hard time believing that Rudy Guliani wouldn't recognize Borat...

I think he did recognize him pretty quickly. From what I've seen, Rudy does not have any interaction with him until he bursts into the hotel room to "rescue" his "daughter".

And I always have that same question when I watch Impractical Jokers.

(10-22-2020 08:53 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 06:47 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-22-2020 12:58 AM)gobluebigjon Wrote:  

(10-21-2020 05:29 PM)shere khan Wrote:  ^ they're idiots. Imbecility at its finest.

It's time for war.

Time for war? You want a war against your own country?

Just those hellbent on destroying our country.

Its liberals who want a war against this country.

While there are a few, it won't be the military or the police lining up to defund themselves... lining up to support criminal activities and overseas influence.... add to that all of us armed rednecks and the left doesn't stand a chance. I don't see the right taking up arms against them, but I certainly see us 'defending' ourselves and this nation... while the left kneels in protest of it.

Was it a liberal who said that? It’s strange the people who want war with their fellow Americans usually seem to be from the right. Time for war?

Guiliani should own it.
Say it was moment of stupidity and add that while embarrassing he was glad to give Borat something that's actually funny to give Americans some laughs.

If you screw up, own it and laugh it off.
The incident dies and goes away much faster.

Someone help me understand. What is the significance?

I guess this may mean that I'm not voting for Giuliani, but beyond that what?

(10-24-2020 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Someone help me understand. What is the significance?

I guess this may mean that I'm not voting for Giuliani, but beyond that what?

It doesn't mean anything really.
It was just used to try to undermine any credibility Guiliani has.

In fairness to Giuliani, I watched the movie last night and he was tucking in his shirt.

(10-24-2020 01:17 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  In fairness to Giuliani, I watched the movie last night and he was tucking in his shirt.

Yep, the freeze frame made the situation look like something it wasn't.

(10-24-2020 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Someone help me understand. What is the significance?

I guess this may mean that I'm not voting for Giuliani, but beyond that what?

Why does it have to be significant? Aren't you tired of this board being taken over by 2 or 3 people continually posting the same trump propaganda? Can't we just have a good laugh about somebody?

And FTR - I watched the actual video without sound...and it does look like he's just tucking in his shirt after the lady takes off his mic. But still odd that he lays back to do so...and he is touching her, but anyway.

If you're looking for anything significant, I guess you could say that if rudy is so easily fooled by Borat that you could see him taken in way more easily by foreign disinformation from the likes of professionals he is known to have dealt with, like the recently sanctioned Andrii Derkach.

(10-24-2020 01:17 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  In fairness to Giuliani, I watched the movie last night and he was tucking in his shirt.

Don’t be sane for a moment. You’re ruining your reputation.

(10-24-2020 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Someone help me understand. What is the significance?

I guess this may mean that I'm not voting for Giuliani, but beyond that what?

You can probably say this for half the threads on this board.

I watched it.

In no way did Giuliani do anything remotely inappropriate.

(10-26-2020 07:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-24-2020 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Someone help me understand. What is the significance?

I guess this may mean that I'm not voting for Giuliani, but beyond that what?

Why does it have to be significant? Aren't you tired of this board being taken over by 2 or 3 people continually posting the same trump propaganda?

I won't speak for numbers, but I'm betting I'm close. Did you ever consider that we don't read every thread and that most of these threads praising Trump, we might pass by because we don't care?

By far, the most consistent poster one way or another I read is you. You're in literally every thread I read saying exactly the same things.

You're not a dem, but you support every conspiracy theory they put out there, and deflect from every one that remotely makes them look bad.

(10-26-2020 12:46 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-26-2020 07:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-24-2020 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Someone help me understand. What is the significance?

I guess this may mean that I'm not voting for Giuliani, but beyond that what?

Why does it have to be significant? Aren't you tired of this board being taken over by 2 or 3 people continually posting the same trump propaganda?

I won't speak for numbers, but I'm betting I'm close. Did you ever consider that we don't read every thread and that most of these threads praising Trump, we might pass by because we don't care?

By far, the most consistent poster one way or another I read is you. You're in literally every thread I read saying exactly the same things.

You're not a dem, but you support every conspiracy theory they put out there, and deflect from every one that remotely makes them look bad.

You're funny.

Soooo.... this was nothing?

As usual.