The DNC isn't foreign, and it's an integral ins ution of our democratic process, as disgusting I might find it to be.
What did the Obama DOJ do?
Chumpdumpster sounds like my mom. She's 75.
The DNC isn't foreign, and it's an integral ins ution of our democratic process, as disgusting I might find it to be.
What did the Obama DOJ do?
You didn't say how they screwed Bernie, Darrin.
How are you saying they screwed Bernie?
Yeah, you're dodging the question again.
How did the DNC screw Bernie.
Your own words, please?
No Google n paste.
Seriously?
stalling
Just say you don't know what you're talking about.
Or try some random insult and stamp away like a toddler.
Reopen the Shillary investigation? I don't think it made any difference in hindsight, she was just a terrible, unlikeable candidate.
He right though, Crossfire Hurricane wasn't a big factor -- was it a factor at all? -- in the 2020 race.
Comey's announcements about HRC did far more damage to HRC in 2016 than Crossfire Hurricane did to DJT before the election.
DarrinS seems incredulous that anyone might disagree with what he learned in his right wing filter bubble. He also seems to think there's something wrong with people who reach a different conclusion.
Moscow Mitch threatened Obama to keep FBI findings about Trash and Russia SECRET. Obama folded
Darrin
I think Wikileaks released some hacked DNC emails that indicated the DNC might have been trying to cast Bernie in an unfavorable light. You might need TSA to find and interpret them though. This then might lead to something else about child parts in Pizza. I don’t know.
I also believe there are some in the DNC who wanted to advertise Bernie as an atheist. This will obviously lead team Trump to bacon if Bernie is the candidate. Of course Christian orange guy will have to explain his forays into the porn star being treated like duck’s wife. But I don’t think Trumpians will mind.
(Someone says QAnon cultists are idiots)
Wow.
To me, that is a perfect example of how religious credulity hobbles your critical thinking in other areas.
You want so desperately to believe "leftists" are all idiots, or somehow defective, that you assume the worst, without a shred of evidence, just like your faith in some book written thousands of years ago.
I am on the left.
I am unwilling to believe anything without evidence. Show me reasonable evidence of child presomeone being a child predator, I will believe that, and will speak out against it.
Show me sufficient good evidence of cannibalism, I will believe that, and will speak out against it.
I already know there are Satanists out there, but that is pretty much a prank group that trolls people like you to all of the evidence I have seen. Had a few beers with one. Interesting guy.
Show me something reasonable where people are actually harmed, I will not make excuses.
Your problem is that your standard of evidence is laughable in and of itself. That is, in essence, your real beef here, i.e. that we all aren't as gullible as you are.
i stay me... you change depending on your emotions just like a girl.
you sir are one of those weak males. no need to bring trump into this but you being a bitter weak you'll do just that. i already know all you weak s hate trump; yall hate him because yall ain't him.
I’ll keep this simple because it seems like conservatives on this board can’t openly question anything without everyone on the other side of the aisle coming out of the woodwork to show their contemptuous disdain toward any of our thoughts. 6 of you all were triggered by a post in which I claim neutrality. I admit, the ending part was a bit more op-Ed, but the basic premise of my post was in line with the overall incredulity of “selling” Qanon’s legitimacy.
Your presumption that ”everyone that believes in GOD is an idiot” has been a constant throughout your entire time on this board. Funny how you can accuse me of holding beliefs that I don’t actually endorse but fail to see how your actions consistently embody the flaw you sought to project onto me.
Your entire rant about evidence is rendered moot when you’re more than willing to believe other things in the absence of concrete facts and testable truths. You who would deny personhood to a baby simply because it is in a mother’s womb while claiming that your definition of life is somehow based on science is dichotic at best and disingenuous at worst. You who would blur the lines and ignore the true science that defines our biological sex only to conveniently suit your leftist leaning ideology on gender have no objective high ground here. You who would ignore the failures of the economic experiment known as socialism as proven everywhere and anytime it’s been attempted only to endorse and justify the same morally deficient system over and and over again have no moral high ground either. The fact of the matter is that our ideologies clash. Your ideology morphs and changes to suit trans generational fluidity of thought on many areas but it is intrinsically abject of Absolute Truth. Without Absolute Truth on which to anchor your belief system what’s left is an ideology that can accept anything as truth. But if everyone can trumpet their own version of truth THEN it means that nothing can be true. Belief in a pliable truth is self defeating.
Don’t even bother responding cause I won’t.
If you could find an instance of this, it might be. You can't, and all your hand-waving to the contrary won't work.
(shrugs) More hand-waving. I would not define as a "baby" a cluster of cells that requires the life-support of another human being. My definition of "baby" differs from yours, so no, I would not deny "personhood" to "baby".You who would deny personhood to a baby simply because it is in a mother’s womb while claiming that your definition of life is somehow based on science is dichotic at best and disingenuous at worst.
I don't think forcing one person to use their body to support another is moral or ethical, any more than I would force people to provide kidneys or bone marrow to save others' lives. Pregnancy is vastly more risky than terminating a pregnancy.
More wishful thinking. I have seen enough science to know that sex is not binary. If you think that is the case, it is just another part of science you don't know about.You who would blur the lines and ignore the true science that defines our biological sex only to conveniently suit your leftist leaning ideology on gender have no objective high ground here.
A few hundred million Europeans might disagree. Lol "everywhere". I would be willing to bet you can't even define the term "socialism".You who would ignore the failures of the economic experiment known as socialism as proven everywhere and anytime it’s been attempted only to endorse and justify the same morally deficient system over and and over again have no moral high ground either.
From someone who has a book with a million different, ever evolving interpretations.The fact of the matter is that our ideologies clash. Your ideology morphs and changes to suit trans generational fluidity of thought on many areas but it is intrinsically abject of Absolute Truth. Without Absolute Truth on which to anchor your belief system what’s left is an ideology that can accept anything as truth. But if everyone can trumpet their own version of truth THEN it means that nothing can be true. Belief in a pliable truth is self defeating.
So much fail.
wait, what? i thought they were just clumps of cells?
This message is hidden because koriwhat is on your ignore list.
Transgenders are the sex they decide to be, babies aren't babies til after they're out of the womb. lol.
Also, the selective accountability that Dems seem to hold to only ideological/political opponents is farcical.
"Politicians NEED to be held accountable for the lives they're elected to represent"
"Mothers DON'T NEED to be held accountable for the lives they're creating with open willingness."
Triggered --> https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...1#post10067783
So you actively chose to be a guy.
Fascinating.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)