(11-01-2022, 10:05 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 09:41 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]You misheard, he's a "tinker" not a "thinker", that's why he's able to self-contort that way.
What's the word for when you can think clearly enough to understand and believe experts on public health, but not experts in election security? Tanker? Stinker?
Brainwashed.. Compound word that fits nicely in this scenario.
Assign Harry Callahan to this case.
(11-01-2022, 10:05 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 09:41 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]You misheard, he's a "tinker" not a "thinker", that's why he's able to self-contort that way.
What's the word for when you can think clearly enough to understand and believe experts on public health, but not experts in election security? Tanker? Stinker?
Intelligent. It's a pretty easy word for most people so I understand why you would struggle to find it.
The SF Police came out with some info and a couple news organizations redacted some of their earlier reporting, so it's starting to at least become a reasonable story. I still don't understand why there is no security footage from the house. How did the cops get in? Is that how the glass door was broken? Why did the attacker wait until the cops were there to attack him? Body cam footage would help with that. These things just don't seem hard to dispel, and I wish our reporters would get on these stories faster. That's what allows, at least in part, for these alternative theories to gain a foothold.
(11-01-2022, 12:21 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 10:05 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]What's the word for when you can think clearly enough to understand and believe experts on public health, but not experts in election security? Tanker? Stinker?
Intelligent. It's a pretty easy word for most people so I understand why you would struggle to find it.
Which field do you know more about, spend more time thinking about, or get paid to know stuff about?
(11-01-2022, 01:41 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 12:21 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Intelligent. It's a pretty easy word for most people so I understand why you would struggle to find it.
Which field do you know more about, spend more time thinking about, or get paid to know stuff about?
Troll killing.
(11-01-2022, 01:41 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 12:21 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Intelligent. It's a pretty easy word for most people so I understand why you would struggle to find it.
Which field do you know more about, spend more time thinking about, or get paid to know stuff about?
Why don't you get back on topic instead of deflecting.
I thought that this whole story pretty much didn't pass the "smell test" from the beginning. What alleged details that have come out makes it more puzzling.
I am by far not some "conspiracy theorist", but this just seems like it's somehow "staged" or deliberate. The left wing media doesn't help matters any when they start screaming "MAGA" and "just like January 6th". It's almost like on-cue this has to be some "right wing, racist extremist".
(11-01-2022, 02:05 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 01:41 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Which field do you know more about, spend more time thinking about, or get paid to know stuff about?
Why don't you get back on topic instead of deflecting.
You're the one who got us off topic in the first place.
(11-01-2022, 01:51 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 01:41 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Which field do you know more about, spend more time thinking about, or get paid to know stuff about?
Troll killing.
The choices were "election security" and "public health".
Remember that in English the word "which" denotes a finite and closed number of choices.
(10-31-2022, 01:47 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Democrats did indeed channel funds to election deniers in the republican party.
That means they are opportunistic hypocrites.
It doesn't mean that the election deniers are "all theater".
Election deniers are an existential threat to our system of government.
No. I made a thread connected to the original post. You tried to discredit a small portion of my otherwise relevant post with that brilliant analysis (sarcasm in case that wasn't clear). In attempt to stay on point, I just dismissed your drivel.
(11-01-2022, 04:51 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (10-31-2022, 01:47 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Democrats did indeed channel funds to election deniers in the republican party.
That means they are opportunistic hypocrites.
It doesn't mean that the election deniers are "all theater".
Election deniers are an existential threat to our system of government.
No. I made a thread connected to the original post. You tried to discredit a small portion of my otherwise relevant post with that brilliant analysis (sarcasm in case that wasn't clear). In attempt to stay on point, I just dismissed your drivel.
You repeated your bad habit of replying without quoting, which turned a comment that might have been specific to the point into something that was general and directed to me as a person. That invited a comment from the "moderator" who decided to pile on with another general and personal comment about me. When I very politely retaliated against that, you blamed me for being off topic rather than yourself or the "moderator".
(11-01-2022, 05:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 04:51 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]No. I made a thread connected to the original post. You tried to discredit a small portion of my otherwise relevant post with that brilliant analysis (sarcasm in case that wasn't clear). In attempt to stay on point, I just dismissed your drivel.
You repeated your bad habit of replying without quoting, which turned a comment that might have been specific to the point into something that was general and directed to me as a person. That invited a comment from the "moderator" who decided to pile on with another general and personal comment about me. When I very politely retaliated against that, you blamed me for being off topic rather than yourself or the "moderator".
![[Image: SU1Q9P6nHU7X.gif]](https://media2.giphy.com/avatars/Tinker_Engenharia/SU1Q9P6nHU7X.gif)
(11-01-2022, 03:27 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]I thought that this whole story pretty much didn't pass the "smell test" from the beginning. What alleged details that have come out makes it more puzzling.
I am by far not some "conspiracy theorist", but this just seems like it's somehow "staged" or deliberate. The left wing media doesn't help matters any when they start screaming "MAGA" and "just like January 6th". It's almost like on-cue this has to be some "right wing, racist extremist".
Some of it was staged, at least the MAGA part as the websites were all registered in the last few months and his background all say leftist. If I remember correctly it was when he had his DUI and they were forced to charge him. Add in Nancy's family history and it's not hard to jump to he was causing too much trouble.
The story will continue to change until they find what people will believe and just move it aside.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
(11-01-2022, 05:52 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 05:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You repeated your bad habit of replying without quoting, which turned a comment that might have been specific to the point into something that was general and directed to me as a person. That invited a comment from the "moderator" who decided to pile on with another general and personal comment about me. When I very politely retaliated against that, you blamed me for being off topic rather than yourself or the "moderator".
Your moderator, ladies and gentlemen. Keeping us all on topic.
(11-01-2022, 06:44 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 05:52 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]
Your moderator, ladies and gentlemen. Keeping us all on topic.
Reminding folks about you and your trolltastic ways is an act of moderation.
(11-01-2022, 07:05 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 06:44 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Your moderator, ladies and gentlemen. Keeping us all on topic.
Reminding folks about you and your trolltastic ways is an act of moderation.
A Public Service Announcement if you will.
(11-01-2022, 07:05 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2022, 06:44 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Your moderator, ladies and gentlemen. Keeping us all on topic.
Reminding folks about you and your trolltastic ways is an act of moderation.
Looks like name calling, to me.
Was I trolling when I called democrats "opportunistic hypocrites" and election deniers "an existential threat to democracy"? You think I don't sincerely believe one or both of those things?
Bro, it doesn't matter if you're trolling or not. It's just wrong. If I'm running for office, and my platform is that Al Qaeda is a threat to Americans, then you find out that I have been funding them, would you just say I'm being a hypocrite? Either I don't believe what I'm saying, or I am a terrorist myself. If you weren't so dang gullible, you'd be able to figure this out on your own.
(11-01-2022, 07:39 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Bro, it doesn't matter if you're trolling or not. It's just wrong. If I'm running for office, and my platform is that Al Qaeda is a threat to Americans, then you find out that I have been funding them, would you just say I'm being a hypocrite? Either I don't believe what I'm saying, or I am a terrorist myself. If you weren't so dang gullible, you'd be able to figure this out on your own.
Which is why I'm not out here telling people to vote for Democrats.
Well, I want you out here acknowledging they are liars and manipulators. Not just hypocrites. We're all hypocrites.
That is not to say Republicans don't lie or they don't manipulate. I know they do. I just can't think of anything near that scale. I would have nothing to do with any Republican funding progressive candidates.