Hero
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/...LJ59w&s=19
"We are willing to accept censure, sanction, suspension, and removal in order to see Jordan as Speaker. If what these holdouts need are a pound of our flesh, we're willing to give it to them to see Jordan as Speaker."
(10-20-2023, 10:50 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (10-20-2023, 10:38 AM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]You are so full of yourself it's nauseating.
You missed the sarcasm as well.
It was my impression of L2L's thoughts.
Not my own.
No, this really is you. You do think you're smarter than any of us. You've said it yourself.
(10-20-2023, 12:46 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-20-2023, 10:50 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You missed the sarcasm as well.
It was my impression of L2L's thoughts.
Not my own.
No, this really is you. You do think you're smarter than any of us. You've said it yourself.
Eh, I'm good at certain tasks involving math and geometry. Never claimed to be smarter than the average bear about citizenship or civics. That's L2L.
(10-20-2023, 07:45 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (10-19-2023, 08:16 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Dance, puppet.
People who disagree with me are puppets.
People who agree with me are thinking for themselves.
I am very smart.
This had nothing to do with politics, but how you moved throughout that last debate we had, before finally admitting what you refused to acknowledge earlier.
From this:
Quote:1) both Rutherford and Gaetz were OK with Scalise as speaker. Rutherford is fine with supporting who Gaetz supports. Rutherford's problem is more specific to Jordan.
To this:
Quote:Rutherford has to feel like Gaetz likes the choice less than Rutherford likes it.
You previously said Rutherford has a problem with Jordan, but he doesn't. He has a problem with Gaetz. This was my reason why I objected to his nonsensical and petty voting. You tried to equivocate this with Gaetz not liking McCarthy. It's one thing to not like the speaker you are presented with (and give reasons and set expectations), and another not to want to choose a speaker because you don't like someone else voting for him. This is why your original argument was a false equivalency, which you knew and still know. How you gonna dance now, puppet?
(10-20-2023, 02:30 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/...F9p-w&s=19
This is fine.. We have the list.
Time to primary them all.
Welcome to The Whig Party 2.0
We don't have a list, they voted in secret.
They will vote in secret again next week.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
(10-20-2023, 04:05 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (10-20-2023, 02:30 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/...F9p-w&s=19
This is fine.. We have the list.
Time to primary them all.
Welcome to The Whig Party 2.0
We don't have a list, they voted in secret.
They will vote in secret again next week.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
The original 22 is good enough. They're the ones that drug this out, creating this situation.
I'm actually fine without a Speaker right now.
(10-20-2023, 12:54 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (10-20-2023, 12:46 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]No, this really is you. You do think you're smarter than any of us. You've said it yourself.
Eh, I'm good at certain tasks involving math and geometry. Never claimed to be smarter than the average bear about citizenship or civics. That's L2L.
Mike, Mike, MIKE, mike, Mike!
Dude! You have worn that “I’m smarter than all of you badge” for years. No back pedalling now! This has been the crux of our many disagreements. You believe with all your heart that education equals intelligence. I believe there are many uneducated geniuses out there and unfortunately there is no degree for common sense.
(10-20-2023, 04:27 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (10-20-2023, 12:54 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Eh, I'm good at certain tasks involving math and geometry. Never claimed to be smarter than the average bear about citizenship or civics. That's L2L.
Mike, Mike, MIKE, mike, Mike!
Dude! You have worn that “I’m smarter than all of you badge” for years. No back pedalling now! This has been the crux of our many disagreements. You believe with all your heart that education equals intelligence. I believe there are many uneducated geniuses out there and unfortunately there is no degree for common sense.
Welp.. Sorry Mikey, now you're really [BLEEP] outta luck lololol
https://twitter.com/GOPoversight/status/...1RQKQ&s=19
1) Does he have documents proving he lent such a large sum of money to his brother and what were the terms of such financial arrangement?
2) Did he have similar financial arrangements with other family members that led them to make similar large payments to him?
3) Did he know that the same day James Biden wrote him a check for $200,000, James Biden had just received a loan for the exact same amount from business dealings with a company that was in financial distress and failing?
(10-20-2023, 02:39 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (10-20-2023, 07:45 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]People who disagree with me are puppets.
People who agree with me are thinking for themselves.
I am very smart.
This had nothing to do with politics, but how you moved throughout that last debate we had, before finally admitting what you refused to acknowledge earlier.
From this:
Quote:1) both Rutherford and Gaetz were OK with Scalise as speaker. Rutherford is fine with supporting who Gaetz supports. Rutherford's problem is more specific to Jordan.
To this:
Quote:Rutherford has to feel like Gaetz likes the choice less than Rutherford likes it.
You previously said Rutherford has a problem with Jordan, but he doesn't. He has a problem with Gaetz. This was my reason why I objected to his nonsensical and petty voting. You tried to equivocate this with Gaetz not liking McCarthy. It's one thing to not like the speaker you are presented with (and give reasons and set expectations), and another not to want to choose a speaker because you don't like someone else voting for him. This is why your original argument was a false equivalency, which you knew and still know. How you gonna dance now, puppet?
I said Rutherford has a problem with Jordan. Then I specified that the problem is Rutherford thinks Gaetz likes Jordan more than Rutherford likes Jordan. You're just playing gotcha. I did not contradict myself.
The equivalency still exists. Gaetz zapped McCarthy not because of WHAT McCarthy did, but because of WHO he did it with: Democrats. Same problem.
I don't know why you keep saying this is a false equivalency. You know a lot about political science, but this is just formal logic and zero-sum math. Maybe defer to the engineer on this.