(03-02-2023 10:22 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 10:07 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 09:55 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  He (Tanq) may or may not, but I will.... and note that although I know him personally and have for decades... we are at polar opposites on a few significant issues... particularly when it comes to Trump.... and the following is my impression only... nothing he has said nor agreed with.

Tanq is absolutely a gentleman and he doesn't tolerate liars and cheats... and long before he ran for President, Tanq had fairly close action (in a bad way) with Trump and his organization. He wants 'our side' to be better than this... apparently even if it puts us at a disadvantage. I disagree, but I understand his position and I wish it were possible. That's not failing to admit it... its simply using a personal moral compass rather than a negotiated one.

He is an extremely intelligent and informed individual and a conservative... but he is an old-school Texas gentleman... and not remotely a liberal democrat like some of you seem to feel.... and I think this forum is well served by not being an echo chamber. We don't have enough reasonable liberals to strike a match in here... so a conservative with a very different viewpoint can still add some value and perspective...

JMO

The feel I get from Tanq is he likes to look for an argument and will argue from sun up to sun down to scratch that itch. No matter the subject.

And he will give you a 10,000 word reply to something you didn't say just so he can fire whatever bullet he has in the chamber.

That's part of him being a lawyer. I've never known a lawyer to be short and to the point except in stature.

(03-02-2023 10:27 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 10:22 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 10:07 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 09:55 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  He (Tanq) may or may not, but I will.... and note that although I know him personally and have for decades... we are at polar opposites on a few significant issues... particularly when it comes to Trump.... and the following is my impression only... nothing he has said nor agreed with.

Tanq is absolutely a gentleman and he doesn't tolerate liars and cheats... and long before he ran for President, Tanq had fairly close action (in a bad way) with Trump and his organization. He wants 'our side' to be better than this... apparently even if it puts us at a disadvantage. I disagree, but I understand his position and I wish it were possible. That's not failing to admit it... its simply using a personal moral compass rather than a negotiated one.

He is an extremely intelligent and informed individual and a conservative... but he is an old-school Texas gentleman... and not remotely a liberal democrat like some of you seem to feel.... and I think this forum is well served by not being an echo chamber. We don't have enough reasonable liberals to strike a match in here... so a conservative with a very different viewpoint can still add some value and perspective...

JMO

The feel I get from Tanq is he likes to look for an argument and will argue from sun up to sun down to scratch that itch. No matter the subject.

And he will give you a 10,000 word reply to something you didn't say just so he can fire whatever bullet he has in the chamber.

That's part of him being a lawyer. I've never known a lawyer to be short and to the point except in stature.

Fair... though Tanq is probably 6'4.

I do the same... not because I am a lawyer but because I raised some very smart teenagers who like to argue with authority

(03-02-2023 12:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 10:27 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 10:22 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 10:07 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 09:55 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  He (Tanq) may or may not, but I will.... and note that although I know him personally and have for decades... we are at polar opposites on a few significant issues... particularly when it comes to Trump.... and the following is my impression only... nothing he has said nor agreed with.

Tanq is absolutely a gentleman and he doesn't tolerate liars and cheats... and long before he ran for President, Tanq had fairly close action (in a bad way) with Trump and his organization. He wants 'our side' to be better than this... apparently even if it puts us at a disadvantage. I disagree, but I understand his position and I wish it were possible. That's not failing to admit it... its simply using a personal moral compass rather than a negotiated one.

He is an extremely intelligent and informed individual and a conservative... but he is an old-school Texas gentleman... and not remotely a liberal democrat like some of you seem to feel.... and I think this forum is well served by not being an echo chamber. We don't have enough reasonable liberals to strike a match in here... so a conservative with a very different viewpoint can still add some value and perspective...

JMO

The feel I get from Tanq is he likes to look for an argument and will argue from sun up to sun down to scratch that itch. No matter the subject.

And he will give you a 10,000 word reply to something you didn't say just so he can fire whatever bullet he has in the chamber.

That's part of him being a lawyer. I've never known a lawyer to be short and to the point except in stature.

Fair... though Tanq is probably 6'4.

I do the same... not because I am a lawyer but because I raised some very smart teenagers who like to argue with authority

I got a buddy that's a lawyer and he's like 5'3. Again only time I know them to be short is in stature

(03-02-2023 09:55 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  He (Tanq) may or may not, but I will.... and note that although I know him personally and have for decades... we are at polar opposites on a few significant issues... particularly when it comes to Trump.... and the following is my impression only... nothing he has said nor agreed with.

Tanq is absolutely a gentleman and he doesn't tolerate liars and cheats... and long before he ran for President, Tanq had fairly close action (in a bad way) with Trump and his organization. He wants 'our side' to be better than this... apparently even if it puts us at a disadvantage. I disagree, but I understand his position and I wish it were possible. That's not failing to admit it... its simply using a personal moral compass rather than a negotiated one.

He is an extremely intelligent and informed individual and a conservative... but he is an old-school Texas gentleman... and not remotely a liberal democrat like some of you seem to feel.... and I think this forum is well served by not being an echo chamber. We don't have enough reasonable liberals to strike a match in here... so a conservative with a very different viewpoint can still add some value and perspective...

JMO

That's fair, thanks

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

(03-02-2023 09:55 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  He (Tanq) may or may not, but I will.... and note that although I know him personally and have for decades... we are at polar opposites on a few significant issues... particularly when it comes to Trump.... and the following is my impression only... nothing he has said nor agreed with.

Tanq is absolutely a gentleman and he doesn't tolerate liars and cheats... and long before he ran for President, Tanq had fairly close action (in a bad way) with Trump and his organization. He wants 'our side' to be better than this... apparently even if it puts us at a disadvantage. I disagree, but I understand his position and I wish it were possible. That's not failing to admit it... its simply using a personal moral compass rather than a negotiated one.

He is an extremely intelligent and informed individual and a conservative... but he is an old-school Texas gentleman... and not remotely a liberal democrat like some of you seem to feel.... and I think this forum is well served by not being an echo chamber. We don't have enough reasonable liberals to strike a match in here... so a conservative with a very different viewpoint can still add some value and perspective...

JMO

If he wants "our side" to be better, serving as a rude apologist for authoritarian action by compromised state agents seems to be an odd way of going about that.

I would like to offer myself up as someone who despises Donald Trump with virtually every cell in my body. Yet I still know the difference between right and wrong.

(03-02-2023 01:22 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  If he wants "our side" to be better, serving as a rude apologist for authoritarian action by compromised state agents seems to be an odd way of going about that.

I don't know (nor honestly care to find out) the specifics of the conversation that you are referring to... Tanq is FAR from an apoligist for authoritarian action, so there must be some other aspect that you two are not connecting on.

By Texas Gentleman, I mean someone who has no problem telling you to go eff yourself... and also one who believes what he does with his cows is none of your effing business.... but once it comes to something of a collective nature or in the presence of women and children, you'd better follow the rules and use appropriate language.

Again, this is my summary and belief about someone I've know for a very long time... and he may vehemently disagree with me.... Like me (and many of you), he can be very arrogant/bull-headed when in an area where we feel especially strong about or qualified in.... and if you knew his background (which I will not share) you would not easily lump him in with your run-of-the-mill lawyer

At any rate... thanks for accepting my defense of a good guy. We can now (including me) return to disagreeing with him on some issues, lol

(03-02-2023 01:22 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 09:55 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  He (Tanq) may or may not, but I will.... and note that although I know him personally and have for decades... we are at polar opposites on a few significant issues... particularly when it comes to Trump.... and the following is my impression only... nothing he has said nor agreed with.

Tanq is absolutely a gentleman and he doesn't tolerate liars and cheats... and long before he ran for President, Tanq had fairly close action (in a bad way) with Trump and his organization. He wants 'our side' to be better than this... apparently even if it puts us at a disadvantage. I disagree, but I understand his position and I wish it were possible. That's not failing to admit it... its simply using a personal moral compass rather than a negotiated one.

He is an extremely intelligent and informed individual and a conservative... but he is an old-school Texas gentleman... and not remotely a liberal democrat like some of you seem to feel.... and I think this forum is well served by not being an echo chamber. We don't have enough reasonable liberals to strike a match in here... so a conservative with a very different viewpoint can still add some value and perspective...

JMO

If he wants "our side" to be better, serving as a rude apologist for authoritarian action by compromised state agents seems to be an odd way of going about that.

I would like to offer myself up as someone who despises Donald Trump with virtually every cell in my body. Yet I still know the difference between right and wrong.

(03-02-2023 01:36 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 01:22 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  If he wants "our side" to be better, serving as a rude apologist for authoritarian action by compromised state agents seems to be an odd way of going about that.

I don't know (nor honestly care to find out) the specifics of the conversation that you are referring to... Tanq is FAR from an apoligist for authoritarian action, so there must be some other aspect that you two are not connecting on.
By Texas Gentleman, I mean someone who has no problem telling you to go eff yourself... and also one who believes what he does with his cows is none of your effing business.... but once it comes to something of a collective nature or in the presence of women and children, you'd better follow the rules and use appropriate language.
Again, this is my summary and belief about someone I've know for a very long time... and he may vehemently disagree with me.... Like me (and many of you), he can be very arrogant/bull-headed when in an area where we feel especially strong about or qualified in.... and if you knew his background (which I will not share) you would not easily lump him in with your run-of-the-mill lawyer
At any rate... thanks for accepting my defense of a good guy. We can now (including me) return to disagreeing with him on some issues, lol

I have not known him as long as you have, Hambone, but still have known him for several years, and my most frequent thought upon reading his posts is, "Damn, I wish I had written that."

Like you, I do not agree with him regarding Donald Trump. My difference may be based slightly differently. I am well aware that there are a number of sleazy aspects regarding Mr. Trump. Where Tanq and I differ is that he has far more trust and respect in the honesty of the federal government establishment than I do. He regards something that has been argued before a judge and determined in court as having been at least to some extent fairly decided. In the case of a number of instances involving Donald Trump, I think the circumstances are such that one must seriously question the trustworthiness of the people involved in opposing him. I would attribute that to the fact that I have had a number of occasions--between military and business/professional careers--to see behind the scenes of various and state governmental organizations and elected or non-elected officials. Bottom line, I have seen the sausage being made on several levels, and it ain't pretty on any of them. The Deep State decided that it did not want Donald Trump--probably because they saw him (correctly) as a threat to the power that they wielded, and so they decided to do everything they could to take him down. So, I don't have any love for Mr. Trump, but I do have extreme dislike and distrust for those who have opposed him.

Would I trust Donald Trump implicitly? No way. Would I trust the likes of Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer, Comey, Strzok, Mayorkas, Garland, Brennan, et al? I'd trust Trump more.

(03-02-2023 06:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 01:36 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 01:22 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  If he wants "our side" to be better, serving as a rude apologist for authoritarian action by compromised state agents seems to be an odd way of going about that.

I don't know (nor honestly care to find out) the specifics of the conversation that you are referring to... Tanq is FAR from an apoligist for authoritarian action, so there must be some other aspect that you two are not connecting on.
By Texas Gentleman, I mean someone who has no problem telling you to go eff yourself... and also one who believes what he does with his cows is none of your effing business.... but once it comes to something of a collective nature or in the presence of women and children, you'd better follow the rules and use appropriate language.
Again, this is my summary and belief about someone I've know for a very long time... and he may vehemently disagree with me.... Like me (and many of you), he can be very arrogant/bull-headed when in an area where we feel especially strong about or qualified in.... and if you knew his background (which I will not share) you would not easily lump him in with your run-of-the-mill lawyer
At any rate... thanks for accepting my defense of a good guy. We can now (including me) return to disagreeing with him on some issues, lol

I have not known him as long as you have, Hambone, but still have known him for several years, and my most frequent thought upon reading his posts is, "Damn, I wish I had written that."

Like you, I do not agree with him regarding Donald Trump. My difference may be based slightly differently. I am well aware that there are a number of sleazy aspects regarding Mr. Trump. Where Tanq and I differ is that he has far more trust and respect in the honesty of the federal government establishment than I do. He regards something that has been argued before a judge and determined in court as having been at least to some extent fairly decided. In the case of a number of instances involving Donald Trump, I think the circumstances are such that one must seriously question the trustworthiness of the people involved in opposing him. I would attribute that to the fact that I have had a number of occasions--between military and business/professional careers--to see behind the scenes of various and state governmental organizations and elected or non-elected officials. Bottom line, I have seen the sausage being made on several levels, and it ain't pretty on any of them. The Deep State decided that it did not want Donald Trump--probably because they saw him (correctly) as a threat to the power that they wielded, and so they decided to do everything they could to take him down. So, I don't have any love for Mr. Trump, but I do have extreme dislike and distrust for those who have opposed him.

Would I trust Donald Trump implicitly? No way. Would I trust the likes of Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer, Comey, Strzok, Mayorkas, Garland, Brennan, et al? I'd trust Trump more.

Fair.

Yes, he ultimately trusts the courts.... in part because he takes a 100 year view of things.... meaning (to him) sometimes you take the loss on an issue to protect the principle....

Is the Deep State a fact or a myth? I mention this because Owl brought it up a couple of Posts ago. Me, I think it's a Fact.

(03-02-2023 07:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Yes, he ultimately trusts the courts.... in part because he takes a 100 year view of things.... meaning (to him) sometimes you take the loss on an issue to protect the principle....

He does, and while I generally do, I have to admit that some of the shenanigans that went on regarding Donald Trump have caused me to doubt the integrity of the people involved.

For example, the FISA court debacle was totally improper. In an interview with, IIRC CNN, Adam Schiff said that the Steele dossier was a part but not a "major part" of the FISA court evidence and that "most of" the material in the dossier had been checked and proved true. He seemed to believe that was enough; in fact, that means that the FISA warrants were improperly obtained. The interviewer, being CNN (IIRC) failed to point that out or press the issue. If the dossier played any part, then it had to be 100% verified--so either 100% verified, or not included at all in the filings, were the only two proper possibilities. And under fruit of the poisonous tree, that means that a lot of other stuff should never have been brought up.

The best thing about Tanq Is he has enough hot air to get your Hot Air Balloon up and going!!!

I actually like Tanq but he is one that enjoys being argumentative. I do agree that he believes in the process and swallows the horse pill in accepting the despots implementing the process.

I do get a kick out of exchanging verbal barbs with him. He is easily baited into this.

(03-01-2023 06:58 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-01-2023 06:46 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  some day Tanq will realize his TDS put him on the wrong side of this......

That mofo has waaaay more than TDS issues

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

He was either given everything as a child and never told no, or he was sexually abused. I'd like to think it's the latter because the former is too obvious.

(03-02-2023 01:36 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 01:22 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  If he wants "our side" to be better, serving as a rude apologist for authoritarian action by compromised state agents seems to be an odd way of going about that.

I don't know (nor honestly care to find out) the specifics of the conversation that you are referring to... Tanq is FAR from an apoligist for authoritarian action, so there must be some other aspect that you two are not connecting on.

By Texas Gentleman, I mean someone who has no problem telling you to go eff yourself... and also one who believes what he does with his cows is none of your effing business.... but once it comes to something of a collective nature or in the presence of women and children, you'd better follow the rules and use appropriate language.

Again, this is my summary and belief about someone I've know for a very long time... and he may vehemently disagree with me.... Like me (and many of you), he can be very arrogant/bull-headed when in an area where we feel especially strong about or qualified in.... and if you knew his background (which I will not share) you would not easily lump him in with your run-of-the-mill lawyer

At any rate... thanks for accepting my defense of a good guy. We can now (including me) return to disagreeing with him on some issues, lol

I fully accept that tanq is a good guy. Mostly because solid posters like you (Hambone) and owl#’s vouch for him. But also because you can see it in his posts - - once you read past all the dismissiveness and presuming of bad faith directed at those who disagree with him.

And I likewise agree that this forum is badly in need of dissenting voices, like that of tanq. When your only counterpart is a moron like Mensa or a paid shill like RWT, it does not allow for much in the way of productive debate. Tanq is not afraid to take a position and argue it effectively - - even to the point where facts prove him near totally wrong.

The problem in this instance is that evil corruptocrats like the weasel Garland rely on the cover provided by smart people like tanq. I used to cringe a bit when reading owl#’s “enemies of my enemies” motto (which I haven’t seen in a while, showing that he - - unlike tanq - - knows how and when to adjust his argument). Just because Donald Trump is a lying p.o.s. does not necessarily mean that those who oppose him are better. In too many cases they are not. Tanq is smart enough to know that. He also is obnoxious enough to run with the weasels anyway.

If tanq were a progressive, he would qualify as a “useful idiot”. But he is not a progressive. Nor is he is not an idiot. He instead is a “useful grandstander”. I’m not sure if that’s not worse.

(03-01-2023 07:05 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(03-01-2023 06:46 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  some day Tanq will realize his TDS put him on the wrong side of this......

Tanq is among the smartest posters on this sight.

Realizing he has been wrong is not the issue. Admitting it is something entirely different.

Anyone who lacks self-awareness to the level that he does, isn’t nearly as smart as they lead on to be…

Then combine that with not knowing how to admit you’re wrong?

What a freaking jewel…