0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
If you think that the president committing crimes is OK, then yes there was nothing to this hearing.
in the end, EMAW will always win.
Quote from: waks on July 23, 2019, 07:29:43 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 23, 2019, 06:42:05 PMQuote from: mocat on July 23, 2019, 03:58:49 PMi agree pointing out an obvious tapout is the ultimate tapoutTo point out a tapout, there must first be a tapout to point out. The Whataboutism tact in the midst of the discussion, is, indeed, the ultimate tapout. Do you understand what a logical fallacy is? Employing whataboutism is a tapout. It is you not addressing the argument being made. The argument is being addressed by reminding the LibDerp that they were/are willingly/silently complicit with a policy/policies that they (suddenly) decided to meltdown about for purely partisan reasons. Or . . . The total failure to recognize the comically shitty foreign policy left behind by the most contrarian (I’d argue purposefully so) foreign policy in the modern American presidency. If the previous administration’s foreign policy was a sitcom we’d call it: Seinfeld, a show about nothing that’s still in syndication and that we still reference for its purposeful absurdity. This is the kind of thing you get into when your discussing things with people with the ridiculous mindset that the past doesn’t matter. In politics, particularly our political system, the past matters . . . a lot. In geo-strategic issues, history has chiseled the stone of policy, that takes a lot to reverse in many cases. Again, let’s take immigration, the policies of today are firmly rooted in the policies (and words) of the previous administration(s). The change is 1. OrangeMan:Bad. 2. It’s quite obvious that LibDerp Leadership has decided to pander to the open border lobby with dreams of a permanent majority. We have the words and deeds of LibDerp Leadership on record showing that they’ve done a complete 180. Addressing this and similar is not a redirection it’s an exploration in partisan bullshit. Now back to the thread topic. Big chance for Robbie to re-explain what he tried to explain after the 400 page explanation. LOL at the NYT’s editorial calling for what the president called for years ago but perpetually enraged LibDerp Nation completely melted down about. We have the idiotic and failed “Russian Reset” and “Asian Pivot” a contrarian policy of appeasement and encroachment. Spearheaded in whole or part by the Dem front runner, ChiCom Joe to thank for this mess.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on July 23, 2019, 06:42:05 PMQuote from: mocat on July 23, 2019, 03:58:49 PMi agree pointing out an obvious tapout is the ultimate tapoutTo point out a tapout, there must first be a tapout to point out. The Whataboutism tact in the midst of the discussion, is, indeed, the ultimate tapout. Do you understand what a logical fallacy is? Employing whataboutism is a tapout. It is you not addressing the argument being made.
Quote from: mocat on July 23, 2019, 03:58:49 PMi agree pointing out an obvious tapout is the ultimate tapoutTo point out a tapout, there must first be a tapout to point out. The Whataboutism tact in the midst of the discussion, is, indeed, the ultimate tapout.
i agree pointing out an obvious tapout is the ultimate tapout
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on July 24, 2019, 06:07:35 AMQuote from: waks on July 23, 2019, 07:29:43 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 23, 2019, 06:42:05 PMQuote from: mocat on July 23, 2019, 03:58:49 PMi agree pointing out an obvious tapout is the ultimate tapoutTo point out a tapout, there must first be a tapout to point out. The Whataboutism tact in the midst of the discussion, is, indeed, the ultimate tapout. Do you understand what a logical fallacy is? Employing whataboutism is a tapout. It is you not addressing the argument being made. The argument is being addressed by reminding the LibDerp that they were/are willingly/silently complicit with a policy/policies that they (suddenly) decided to meltdown about for purely partisan reasons. Or . . . The total failure to recognize the comically shitty foreign policy left behind by the most contrarian (I’d argue purposefully so) foreign policy in the modern American presidency. If the previous administration’s foreign policy was a sitcom we’d call it: Seinfeld, a show about nothing that’s still in syndication and that we still reference for its purposeful absurdity. This is the kind of thing you get into when your discussing things with people with the ridiculous mindset that the past doesn’t matter. In politics, particularly our political system, the past matters . . . a lot. In geo-strategic issues, history has chiseled the stone of policy, that takes a lot to reverse in many cases. Again, let’s take immigration, the policies of today are firmly rooted in the policies (and words) of the previous administration(s). The change is 1. OrangeMan:Bad. 2. It’s quite obvious that LibDerp Leadership has decided to pander to the open border lobby with dreams of a permanent majority. We have the words and deeds of LibDerp Leadership on record showing that they’ve done a complete 180. Addressing this and similar is not a redirection it’s an exploration in partisan bullshit. Now back to the thread topic. Big chance for Robbie to re-explain what he tried to explain after the 400 page explanation. LOL at the NYT’s editorial calling for what the president called for years ago but perpetually enraged LibDerp Nation completely melted down about. We have the idiotic and failed “Russian Reset” and “Asian Pivot” a contrarian policy of appeasement and encroachment. Spearheaded in whole or part by the Dem front runner, ChiCom Joe to thank for this mess. So you don't understand. Got it.
Trolling the libs is really their only voting issue anymore
Dax just doesn't know how Washington works
Sorry, I didn't realize that it's super serious time in the pit
You just don't know how Washington works