7
7
0
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 12
OK, here's another perspective. If someone makes a good point, I don't give a shit who made it. If a Democrat or a liberal makes a good point, it's a good point. Period. I have up-voted a lot of posts by people here with whom I mostly disagree -- when they make a good point, I will acknowledge that good point on this social media platform.
If a Russian bot or American bot or any other bot bakes a good point on another social media, then it's a good point. Why the hell does it matter who made it? I seriously don't get why people are getting spun up about this. Maybe stupid people are getting their chains yanked by bots, but then stupid people are always getting their chains yanked anyway. (If it's not a bot, it's a Nigerian prince or a cruise company or a Russian collusion theory.) So what? So what if some old lady goes to a bot-inspired Trump rally with some of her friends? So what if people go to a bot-inspired anti-Trump rally in New York after the election? Calling it a "clear and present danger" just feeds the hyperbole and adds to the division in this country that most people saying such things decry -- they'd be far better off just ignoring it.
Maj John Bell, Capt Jeff S., Cpl (Join to see), SGT Jim Arnold, SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth, LT Brad McInnis, Sgt Randy Wilber, CW3 Harvey K., 1stSgt Glenn Brackin, SPC Robert Coventry, COL Mikel J. Burroughs, SGT Gregory Lawritson, SP5 Mark Kuzinski, PO3 John Wagner, TSgt David L., LCpl Mike Calhoun
If a Russian bot or American bot or any other bot bakes a good point on another social media, then it's a good point. Why the hell does it matter who made it? I seriously don't get why people are getting spun up about this. Maybe stupid people are getting their chains yanked by bots, but then stupid people are always getting their chains yanked anyway. (If it's not a bot, it's a Nigerian prince or a cruise company or a Russian collusion theory.) So what? So what if some old lady goes to a bot-inspired Trump rally with some of her friends? So what if people go to a bot-inspired anti-Trump rally in New York after the election? Calling it a "clear and present danger" just feeds the hyperbole and adds to the division in this country that most people saying such things decry -- they'd be far better off just ignoring it.
Maj John Bell, Capt Jeff S., Cpl (Join to see), SGT Jim Arnold, SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth, LT Brad McInnis, Sgt Randy Wilber, CW3 Harvey K., 1stSgt Glenn Brackin, SPC Robert Coventry, COL Mikel J. Burroughs, SGT Gregory Lawritson, SP5 Mark Kuzinski, PO3 John Wagner, TSgt David L., LCpl Mike Calhoun
(8)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
SPC Kevin Ford - They rioted and they looted. They attacked the police. They took out ads on craigslist looking for demonstrators. Need I say more. Please don't ask me to spoon feed you.
(0)
(0)
SSgt Christopher Brose
SPC Kevin Ford - I know what your full quote was. I'm still waiting for any kind of example, explanation, or meaning for the argument that a person can make a good point while inciting a riot.
If you're going to insert random meaningless fact-less assertions into your arguments, I'll know not to take you seriously.
If you're going to insert random meaningless fact-less assertions into your arguments, I'll know not to take you seriously.
(0)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
SSgt Christopher Brose - That's not my point but quite frankly you can look at just about any riot that happened in US history and find a "good point" being made. The 1992 Los Angeles riots, yeah people had a good point about the Rodney King verdict being unjust, the Newark and Detroit riots of 1967 on the issue of police force, heck even the stamp act riots of 1765, the people inciting that thought they had good points too, probably all did, still inciting a riot.
Pretty much any riot you can think of has someone somewhere making a "good point". That's why the law has to do with intent, not making a good point.
Pretty much any riot you can think of has someone somewhere making a "good point". That's why the law has to do with intent, not making a good point.
(0)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
Capt Jeff S. - "They" who are these "they" that you refer to? Squirrel!!!! Any other irrelevant points you want to make to derail the discussion?
(0)
(0)
Refer to Obama’s own words in Oct 16. Remember when Trump was suspicious of the rigging of the election? Obama painfully detailed how such an endeavor is ludicrous. Votes were not changed! Now since Clinton lost all of a sudden rigging was probable...by the Russians. The dems got pissed because the Russians used the dems tactics (or was it the other way around) against them.
(7)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
The Left likes to say that Donald Trump admitted Obama is natural born, but truth be told, it was not a fight that the Donald wanted to get into because there are gullible people out there that think that the birth certificate he presented was legit.
As an aside, I examined the alleged long-form birth certificate myself as soon as it was put up on the whitehouse(dot)gov website and it was a very bad fake. It was easy to tell it wasn't a scan of an original document because a scanner wouldn't be smart enough to break things into the layers that the document was composed of. The ONLY explanation for that is that human intervention on a computer was involved in its creation and that it was made from scans of other documents and pieced together.
Obama would not have released a long-form birth certificate in 2012 had Trump not threatened to investigate his eligibility and run against him. Trump was smart to not run against Obama (even though Obama had no record of accomplishment to run on) because he knew the Democrats were going to cheat and cheat they did. The Democrats had mapped out which precincts they needed to win in the Swing States and people were still blaming the GOP for Obama's lack of accomplishment. Out of sympathy, many voters gave him a second chance to make good on his promise of Hope and Change... but all they got was more of the same "failed policies." [I love it when the very words which he used to describe GW's policies best describe his own and come back to haunt!]
You have to understand Liberal terminology. Liberals like to describe themselves as tolerant, morally enlightened, academically superior, and truth be told, they are none of the above. They are the nicest people you ever met so long as you agree with everything they say, but if you disagree with them look out. They get nasty, vicious, and personal.
Everything is the opposite of what it is with Liberals. The like to describe themselves as "Progressive" as if their way leads to progress when in actuality their agenda is inherently regressive, and the solutions they propose (which sound good in theory) are neither practical nor are they sustainable. Gay people aren't gay; they're on average more depressed, suicidal, and prone to engage in selfish, self-destructive behavior (overindulgence in all kinds of vices: cigarettes, booze, drugs, sodomy, pedophilia, etc.) than the rest of society. They would like you to think there are more gay people than there are and they are very vocal when it comes to politics. They represent < 2% of the population and yet if you look at the media, they are doing their utmost to social engineer society and gain not just acceptance, but a special minority status to give themselves special protections and to promote their LGBT agenda to the detriment of the greater good of our society.
Donald Trump is an alpha male and he's rich and white. He represents everything Liberals despise about our society. Liberals need scapegoats to blame and according to Liberals, all of America's problems are due to rich, conservative, white alpha male capitalists like Donald Trump. Liberals dismissed him early on as a serious contender for President and by the time they realized he was serious, he had already built up momentum and was destroying every obstacle they threw in front of him. Initially Jeb Bush was their man, and then it was John Kasich... and when he failed, they grudgingly welcomed Ted Cruz, and finally threw their support being Marco Rubio. Both Cruz and Rubio aren't even eligible to be in the running for President because neither of them are natural born (by Vattel's definition which our Founding Fathers recognized and our courts have stupidly ignored) but I digress.
What I like about Donald Trump exceeds what I don't like about him. As far as his negatives, he is a bit of a narcissist. He loves himself just as much as Obama loves himself.
Obama was our first black gay Muslim President. Talk about conflicted. Okay, maybe he's not totally gay; he swings both ways. I sniffed him out back in 2008 when I vetted him and within 10 min of checking out his background I knew he was a piece of crap phony that shouldn't even be on the Democratic ticket. Seems the folks at the gay bathhouses knew him AND Rahm Emmanuel. Which begs the question, what were they doing there? If you can stomach Obama's narcisissism, and the stupid way he tries to act real cool and manly when deep down he's just a whiny little bitch, then you have no leg to stand on complaining about Trump's narcissism.
At least Trump can back up what he talks about with real substance and real accomplishment instead of pontificating with empty words and excuses! Trump is not just smart; he's a real man that [unlike Obama] likes real ladies. I don't know any man that hasn't engaged in locker room talk at one time or another... And yes, women do it too -- especially Liberal women! I'm sure that will piss off my liberal friends who are threatened by alpha males but it's the truth.
Love him or hate him, Trump is STILL your President. America elected him fair and square. Even though the Democrats cheated and enlisted the help of millions of illegals and counted their votes in the General Election, it wasn't enough to silence the voice of patriots in the flyover territory of America, people who grew tired of having their voice ignored, and who turned out in numbers that more than made up for all the election fraud the Democrats committed. They overestimated their ability to get their base energized with a candidate like Hillary Clinton, who rightly belongs in jail, and they underestimated the resolve of the American public to take their country back.
Socialism is not the answer and the Democratic Agenda is Progressive, which is just another name for socialism. Our Founding Fathers would not approve. They did their homework and believed a Constitutional Republic would best serve America, and they gave us the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves should the government begin serving its own interests and cease representing the people that elected it I believe God heard the prayers of this nation and gave us a reprieve. You have to ask yourself, "What do I believe in? Do I believe in "government of the people, by the people, and for the people?" Or, do I believe in government of a ruling class of socialist elitists, who with their alleged superior intellects make decisions affecting the people, decisions which the people have no voice in!" ???
As an aside, I examined the alleged long-form birth certificate myself as soon as it was put up on the whitehouse(dot)gov website and it was a very bad fake. It was easy to tell it wasn't a scan of an original document because a scanner wouldn't be smart enough to break things into the layers that the document was composed of. The ONLY explanation for that is that human intervention on a computer was involved in its creation and that it was made from scans of other documents and pieced together.
Obama would not have released a long-form birth certificate in 2012 had Trump not threatened to investigate his eligibility and run against him. Trump was smart to not run against Obama (even though Obama had no record of accomplishment to run on) because he knew the Democrats were going to cheat and cheat they did. The Democrats had mapped out which precincts they needed to win in the Swing States and people were still blaming the GOP for Obama's lack of accomplishment. Out of sympathy, many voters gave him a second chance to make good on his promise of Hope and Change... but all they got was more of the same "failed policies." [I love it when the very words which he used to describe GW's policies best describe his own and come back to haunt!]
You have to understand Liberal terminology. Liberals like to describe themselves as tolerant, morally enlightened, academically superior, and truth be told, they are none of the above. They are the nicest people you ever met so long as you agree with everything they say, but if you disagree with them look out. They get nasty, vicious, and personal.
Everything is the opposite of what it is with Liberals. The like to describe themselves as "Progressive" as if their way leads to progress when in actuality their agenda is inherently regressive, and the solutions they propose (which sound good in theory) are neither practical nor are they sustainable. Gay people aren't gay; they're on average more depressed, suicidal, and prone to engage in selfish, self-destructive behavior (overindulgence in all kinds of vices: cigarettes, booze, drugs, sodomy, pedophilia, etc.) than the rest of society. They would like you to think there are more gay people than there are and they are very vocal when it comes to politics. They represent < 2% of the population and yet if you look at the media, they are doing their utmost to social engineer society and gain not just acceptance, but a special minority status to give themselves special protections and to promote their LGBT agenda to the detriment of the greater good of our society.
Donald Trump is an alpha male and he's rich and white. He represents everything Liberals despise about our society. Liberals need scapegoats to blame and according to Liberals, all of America's problems are due to rich, conservative, white alpha male capitalists like Donald Trump. Liberals dismissed him early on as a serious contender for President and by the time they realized he was serious, he had already built up momentum and was destroying every obstacle they threw in front of him. Initially Jeb Bush was their man, and then it was John Kasich... and when he failed, they grudgingly welcomed Ted Cruz, and finally threw their support being Marco Rubio. Both Cruz and Rubio aren't even eligible to be in the running for President because neither of them are natural born (by Vattel's definition which our Founding Fathers recognized and our courts have stupidly ignored) but I digress.
What I like about Donald Trump exceeds what I don't like about him. As far as his negatives, he is a bit of a narcissist. He loves himself just as much as Obama loves himself.
Obama was our first black gay Muslim President. Talk about conflicted. Okay, maybe he's not totally gay; he swings both ways. I sniffed him out back in 2008 when I vetted him and within 10 min of checking out his background I knew he was a piece of crap phony that shouldn't even be on the Democratic ticket. Seems the folks at the gay bathhouses knew him AND Rahm Emmanuel. Which begs the question, what were they doing there? If you can stomach Obama's narcisissism, and the stupid way he tries to act real cool and manly when deep down he's just a whiny little bitch, then you have no leg to stand on complaining about Trump's narcissism.
At least Trump can back up what he talks about with real substance and real accomplishment instead of pontificating with empty words and excuses! Trump is not just smart; he's a real man that [unlike Obama] likes real ladies. I don't know any man that hasn't engaged in locker room talk at one time or another... And yes, women do it too -- especially Liberal women! I'm sure that will piss off my liberal friends who are threatened by alpha males but it's the truth.
Love him or hate him, Trump is STILL your President. America elected him fair and square. Even though the Democrats cheated and enlisted the help of millions of illegals and counted their votes in the General Election, it wasn't enough to silence the voice of patriots in the flyover territory of America, people who grew tired of having their voice ignored, and who turned out in numbers that more than made up for all the election fraud the Democrats committed. They overestimated their ability to get their base energized with a candidate like Hillary Clinton, who rightly belongs in jail, and they underestimated the resolve of the American public to take their country back.
Socialism is not the answer and the Democratic Agenda is Progressive, which is just another name for socialism. Our Founding Fathers would not approve. They did their homework and believed a Constitutional Republic would best serve America, and they gave us the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves should the government begin serving its own interests and cease representing the people that elected it I believe God heard the prayers of this nation and gave us a reprieve. You have to ask yourself, "What do I believe in? Do I believe in "government of the people, by the people, and for the people?" Or, do I believe in government of a ruling class of socialist elitists, who with their alleged superior intellects make decisions affecting the people, decisions which the people have no voice in!" ???
(3)
(0)
PO3 John Wagner
Capt Jeff S. - Its a damn fool that runs against an incumbent..
But guess who actually pulled that off. Bubba. It takes a thief!
But guess who actually pulled that off. Bubba. It takes a thief!
(0)
(0)
PO3 John Wagner
Capt Jeff S. - Its not a fight worth bothering with. We elected him twice. Fool me once..ect.
(0)
(0)
This is stupid. Having Russian bots or American bots or any other kind of bots contributing to a conversation on social media is the electoral equivalent of having a hamburger wrapper thrown at your car while driving. It would have had absolutely no effect whatsoever if half of the occupants of the car hadn't started hyperventilating & freaking out about it and never stopped.
(For anybody having trouble following the analogy, the hamburger wrapper is the bots, and the freaking out passengers are the Democrats. The guy who threw the wrapper never could have predicted how much chaos it would have caused because it was impossible to correctly estimate the gullibility and lunacy of the American left. Once a useful idiot, always a useful idiot I suppose.)
Maj John Bell, Capt Jeff S., Cpl (Join to see), SGT Jim Arnold, SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth, LT Brad McInnis, Sgt Randy Wilber, CW3 Harvey K., 1stSgt Glenn Brackin, SPC Robert Coventry, COL Mikel J. Burroughs, SGT Gregory Lawritson, SP5 Mark Kuzinski, PO3 John Wagner, TSgt David L.
(For anybody having trouble following the analogy, the hamburger wrapper is the bots, and the freaking out passengers are the Democrats. The guy who threw the wrapper never could have predicted how much chaos it would have caused because it was impossible to correctly estimate the gullibility and lunacy of the American left. Once a useful idiot, always a useful idiot I suppose.)
Maj John Bell, Capt Jeff S., Cpl (Join to see), SGT Jim Arnold, SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth, LT Brad McInnis, Sgt Randy Wilber, CW3 Harvey K., 1stSgt Glenn Brackin, SPC Robert Coventry, COL Mikel J. Burroughs, SGT Gregory Lawritson, SP5 Mark Kuzinski, PO3 John Wagner, TSgt David L.
(7)
(0)
PO3 John Wagner
SSgt Christopher Brose - It depends where your standing I suppose. To those who employ them the are useful. To the rest of us they are more than useless.
As to the appellation "Idiot"? That is pretty much an oxymoron.
Line them up behind Nancy Pelosi to spell her on the lawnmower.. Not until she has shooting pains down her left arm however.
As to the appellation "Idiot"? That is pretty much an oxymoron.
Line them up behind Nancy Pelosi to spell her on the lawnmower.. Not until she has shooting pains down her left arm however.
(2)
(0)
(3)
(0)
PO3 John Wagner
Communist, Socialist, Fascist. The end game is always the same poverty, spiritual degradation, social and family disintegration.
Some end up a little bloodier than others.... but perhaps for the survivors it's a new beginning. Turn back the Radical Islam invasion and a great start is to be made.
I place great emphasis on radical. By far the largest numbers of these folks are simply prisoners of birth. Peace and spiritual growth have little to do with affiliation.
Other religions don't come with such unholy impediments as a rule.
Some end up a little bloodier than others.... but perhaps for the survivors it's a new beginning. Turn back the Radical Islam invasion and a great start is to be made.
I place great emphasis on radical. By far the largest numbers of these folks are simply prisoners of birth. Peace and spiritual growth have little to do with affiliation.
Other religions don't come with such unholy impediments as a rule.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next