Storming Of The Capitol Building

[Dill]

(10-11-2021, 04:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'll tell you exactly why and I'll use Trump as an example.  If Trump made comments about people being mean on twitter he would be roundly, and correctly, mocked for his blatant hypocrisy.  So, when Dino makes a post about caring about law enforcement when he's literally shit on law enforcement for years I'm going to give him the same treatment.  The guy's literal introduction to this sub forum was criticizing an officer for a bad shoot when there was actual video showing the suspect pulling a gun on the officer.  Since then he's made scores of threads and posts that consistently portray law enforcement in a horrible light.  So, when you couple that with the general shit we get on a daily basis, no, I am not going to let him make such a comment without pointing out the insane level of hypocrisy behind it.  If you don't agree, that's fine, but from what I've seen from him for years it irrefutable fact.

So for years now, and how many threads, 

you have been re-living and re-dramatizing an ur-grudge? 

[*Nately120*]

(10-11-2021, 04:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I actually think it's much more likely now then it was several months ago.  Not a fan of it, he needs to go away.  I've consistently said I hope Haley runs in 2024 and gets the nod.  I think she'd be a shoo-in.

I guess it depends on if you think Haley's praise of Trump as the face of the GOP is just for show, or not.  Either she is just lying down to the mob and kissing Trump's ass and supporting his bullshit, or she legimately believes it.  She's not going to challenge Trump in any sense, is she?

I just don't see any GOP hopeful having the ability to do anything other than kiss Trump's ass and support his ranting and keep his/her job.  It's like cancel culture, or something.

[GMDino]

(10-11-2021, 10:48 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I guess it depends on if you think Haley's praise of Trump as the face of the GOP is just for show, or not.  Either she is just lying down to the mob and kissing Trump's ass and supporting his bullshit, or she legimately believes it.  She's not going to challenge Trump in any sense, is she?

I just don't see any GOP hopeful having the ability to do anything other than kiss Trump's ass and support his ranting and keep his/her job.  It's like cancel culture, or something.

That's the crux of the matter.  So many people saying Trump wouldn't matter once he was out of office completely missed how he was before he was ever in office.  The one thing he was good at was making himself the most important thing in the room.  And the current crop of elected gop members are too into the fame and publicity or Trump and too weak willed to speak out against him.

They want his supporters to support them and there is no bottom to what they will do to get that support.

The republican party is now the party of Trump.  There is no denying it.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-11-2021, 10:37 PM)Dill Wrote: So for years now, and how many threads, 

you have been re-living and re-dramatizing an ur-grudge? 

Hardly.  When it is constantly and consistently reinforced there's no need to "re" anything.  Interestingly enough, you're one person who should know exactly what's going n.  We got along fine until I dared criticize Islam in a way you found unacceptable.  Literally like flipping a switch your attitude towards me changed to completely negative.  So much so that you completely ignored worse conduct by people who shared your newly found dislike of my posts.  So if anyone could, and should, understand this phenomena it would be you, because you're neck deep in it.

(10-11-2021, 10:48 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I guess it depends on if you think Haley's praise of Trump as the face of the GOP is just for show, or not.  Either she is just lying down to the mob and kissing Trump's ass and supporting his bullshit, or she legimately believes it.  She's not going to challenge Trump in any sense, is she?

I just don't see any GOP hopeful having the ability to do anything other than kiss Trump's ass and support his ranting and keep his/her job.  It's like cancel culture, or something.

I honestly don't care if anyone has to kiss Trump's ass.  As long as they get the nod and win the Presidency then they can act largely unfettered.  Trump is an older guy, he won't be around for a whole lot longer. 

[*Nately120*]

(10-12-2021, 11:02 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Hardly.  When it is constantly and consistently reinforced there's no need to "re" anything.  Interestingly enough, you're one person who should know exactly what's going n.  We got along fine until I dared criticize Islam in a way you found unacceptable.  Literally like flipping a switch your attitude towards me changed to completely negative.  So much so that you completely ignored worse conduct by people who shared your newly found dislike of my posts.  So if anyone could, and should, understand this phenomena it would be you, because you're neck deep in it.


I honestly don't care if anyone has to kiss Trump's ass.  As long as they get the nod and win the Presidency then they can act largely unfettered.  Trump is an older guy, he won't be around for a whole lot longer. 

So the idea is just that she's playing ball because she has to.  She has to say Trump is the best man for the job, not run in 2024 and at least keep the idea that he won in 2020 open until he croaks?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-12-2021, 11:27 AM)Nately120 Wrote: So the idea is just that she's playing ball because she has to.  She has to say Trump is the best man for the job, not run in 2024 and at least keep the idea that he won in 2020 open until he croaks?

I think there's some middle ground between denouncing Trump entirely and flat out kissing his ass.  I think Haley is smart enough to navigate that.  Also, we're talking two years before the campaign even starts, a hell of a lot can happen in that amount of time.

[*Nately120*]

(10-12-2021, 11:37 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think there's some middle ground between denouncing Trump entirely and flat out kissing his ass.  I think Haley is smart enough to navigate that.  Also, we're talking two years before the campaign even starts, a hell of a lot can happen in that amount of time.

I hear ya, it just says a lot that a reasonable candidate has to at least agree with the notion that Trump won in 2020 to avoid being cancelled by her own party. 

Trump is a toddler throwing a fit in the candy aisle and the GOP is banning anyone who doesn't accept it.  I can't see Trump not running in 2024 unless he's dead and anyone who even entertains the idea of running against him is going to need to find a new party. 

[Dill]

(10-12-2021, 11:02 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Hardly.  When it is constantly and consistently reinforced there's no need to "re" anything.  Interestingly enough, you're one person who should know exactly what's going n.  We got along fine until I dared criticize Islam in a way you found unacceptable.  Literally like flipping a switch your attitude towards me changed to completely negative.  So much so that you completely ignored worse conduct by people who shared your newly found dislike of my posts.  So if anyone could, and should, understand this phenomena it would be you, because you're neck deep in it.

????   I shouldn't bite on a red herring, but maybe I can tie it back to the current topic.

1) if you are referring to the Merkel thread, where you identified Islam as an "ideology," a threat to Western democratic values (#161), called German assimilation of refugees "cultural suicide," and referenced a "Frankenstein monster" alliance between "the left" and Islam (#11), then yes, you took an uninformed, hard right stance that I found unacceptable. But in that thread I did not subject you to constant ad hominem, charge you with plagiarism, and threaten never to speak to you again. Indeed you found my scholarly explanations/definitions and historical references "boring." So why should anyone assume I'm the one who flipped a switch?
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-With-Merkel-s-Foes-in-Disarray-Germany-Defies-the-Trump-Trend?pid=373349&highlight=merkel#pid373349

2) Same for the numerous threads before that, like "Fake News from Huffpo," in which my "utterly inane drivel"--an attempt to define 'fake news'--became "officially" boring (#55). We were "getting along fine" there?  http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Fakenews-from-HuffPo?pid=323561&highlight=austria#pid323561. And since. 

I don't call you a "blow hard," insist you are the last person I would ever want to speak to on this list, call you a racist or an ISIS supporter. So what signals when my switch was flipped--an attempt to define a term? Presentation of historical background? Defense of someone else unjustly subjected to ad hominem against the TOC? 

And I've seen no "worse conduct" anywhere on this message board than the ad hominem you've directed at me. And you cannot cite any examples the way that I can cite your misconduct.  

3) So if our posting history is littered with examples of your ad hominem against me as I am trying to sort out issues in my boring manner, and your interpretation is that I have "flipped a switch," I have to wonder at what you think Dino is "constantly and consistently reinforcing."  It just looks to me that you went off on him some years past, as you frequently go off on me, and read that grudge back into everything he posts. Yes, he posts news articles about misbehaving cops. That doesn't establish that he "hates" them and so must be engaged in an "insane level of hypocrisy" himself if he criticizes Trump cop hypocrisy. And now you have charged him with "misogyny" and a racist post on the memes thread--nothing to do with cops. Can you separate Dino from the issues on ANY topic? 

So I think I do understand the phenomenon. The people you personally attack are, in your view, themselves the cause of your attacks. 

And you aren't going to let them get away with it. Ever.

If you want to respond to this, why not take it to the special "call out" thread you created for us. The mods may have allowed that thread to stand so we could argue there and not disrupt other threads.  I don't want to write any more about this on this thread. 

[Dill]

(10-12-2021, 11:27 AM)Nately120 Wrote: So the idea is just that she's playing ball because she has to.  She has to say Trump is the best man for the job, not run in 2024 and at least keep the idea that he won in 2020 open until he croaks?

I would say that is the idea. 

Given Trump's hold over the party at the moment, no one who openly opposes him can expect nomination in 2024.

So long as "the base" doesn't see a middle ground between never Trumpers and true believers, neither will GOP politicians 
who hope to get elected in the states they dominate. 

If Trump goes to jail or dies before 2024, the GOP may choose someone trying to ape him. That may be enough to win
nomination, but not enough to win the national election. No one does "Mexican rapists" better than Trump. 

If Trump does run, though, he could again surprise by earning more votes than last time. Enough people are more worried
about "socialism" than competence to make that possible.

[*Nately120*]

(10-12-2021, 04:57 PM)Dill Wrote: If Trump does run, though, he could again surprise by earning more votes than last time. Enough people are more worried
about "socialism" than competence to make that possible.

Trump could very well win in 2024, but if he doesn't then the GOP is going to have to spend another 4 years kissing his ass because it's going to be Trump 2028 or die.

[Dill]

(10-12-2021, 05:01 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Trump could very well win in 2024, but if he doesn't then the GOP is going to have to spend another 4 years kissing his ass because it's going to be Trump 2028 or die.

LOL probably die, literally. 

But I do notice that while a large number of GOP still think the election was stolen, the same numbers don't think Trump should 
run again.  Whether he can generate the necessary enthusiasm to keep superminority control of the exec is not certain.

That will depend on the Dems. If they can get Biden's infrastructure bill passed, I feel pretty confident the Dems will win again, even
if Biden is not running.  If they don't then there is a real risk Trump could return to office on a revenge tour. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-12-2021, 04:39 PM)Dill Wrote: ????   I shouldn't bite on a red herring, but maybe I can tie it back to the current topic.

1) if you are referring to the Merkel thread, where you identified Islam as an "ideology," a threat to Western democratic values (#161), called German assimilation of refugees "cultural suicide," and referenced a "Frankenstein monster" alliance between "the left" and Islam (#11), then yes, you took an uninformed, hard right stance that I found unacceptable. But in that thread I did not subject you to constant ad hominem, charge you with plagiarism, and threaten never to speak to you again. Indeed you found my scholarly explanations/definitions and historical references "boring." So why should anyone assume I'm the one who flipped a switch?
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-With-Merkel-s-Foes-in-Disarray-Germany-Defies-the-Trump-Trend?pid=373349&highlight=merkel#pid373349

2) Same for the numerous threads before that, like "Fake News from Huffpo," in which my "utterly inane drivel"--an attempt to define 'fake news'--became "officially" boring (#55). We were "getting along fine" there?  http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Fakenews-from-HuffPo?pid=323561&highlight=austria#pid323561. And since. 

I don't call you a "blow hard," insist you are the last person I would ever want to speak to on this list, call you a racist or an ISIS supporter. So what signals when my switch was flipped--an attempt to define a term? Presentation of historical background? Defense of someone else unjustly subjected to ad hominem against the TOC? 

And I've seen no "worse conduct" anywhere on this message board than the ad hominem you've directed at me. And you cannot cite any examples the way that I can cite your misconduct.  

3) So if our posting history is littered with examples of your ad hominem against me as I am trying to sort out issues in my boring manner, and your interpretation is that I have "flipped a switch," I have to wonder at what you think Dino is "constantly and consistently reinforcing."  It just looks to me that you went off on him some years past, as you frequently go off on me, and read that grudge back into everything he posts. Yes, he posts news articles about misbehaving cops. That doesn't establish that he "hates" them and so must be engaged in an "insane level of hypocrisy" himself if he criticizes Trump cop hypocrisy. And now you have charged him with "misogyny" and a racist post on the memes thread--nothing to do with cops. Can you separate Dino from the issues on ANY topic? 

So I think I do understand the phenomenon. The people you personally attack are, in your view, themselves the cause of your attacks. 

And you aren't going to let them get away with it. Ever.

If you want to respond to this, why not take it to the special "call out" thread you created for us. The mods may have allowed that thread to stand so we could argue there and not disrupt other threads.  I don't want to write any more about this on this thread. 

Your analogy would hold water if I constantly, consistently, posted threads and made posts about Islam in a negative light.  If every time I found a story of a radical Islamist doing something awful I made a thread or a post about it we'd then be approaching what GM does with law enforcement.  Yes, I take umbrage with your dismissal of valid criticism of Islam.  Yes, I find your unwillingness to utterly condemn people who rape, torture and murder with wanton abandon reprehensible.  Yes, I find your willingness to compare people to Nazis and the Taliban both disgusting and hypocritical.  Yes, I have attacked you personally and have been attacked personally by you, Fred and GM.

Now, if your question is can I interact with Dino without rancor on any subject, the answer is yes.  Although, to be fair, he contributes to making that difficult.  But if you're talking about his using support for law enforcement as a talking point, then no, never.  I will always call that out, I will never let him hide behind any claim of support for law enforcement nor will I allow him to condemn others for a perceived lack of support without comment.

I hope that's clear.

[GMDino]

Just a little side story about the January 6 committee.

On the House floor, Liz Cheney entered this into the record calling out Jim Banks for sending letters to government agencies claiming he is the ranking member of the 1/6 committee even though he is not on the committee. pic.twitter.com/C1OxGeVhXN

— Annie Grayer (@AnnieGrayerCNN) October 21, 2021

 

[Dill]

(10-22-2021, 10:58 AM)GMDino Wrote: Just a little side story about the January 6 committee.

To be fair, though, he explains that he was not placed on the committee. He just want to be treated as if he were.

Sort of like someone claiming Trump is still president, so send him all President's Daily Briefings.

[BigPapaKain]

(10-24-2021, 12:32 AM)Dill Wrote: To be fair, though, he explains that he was not placed on the committee. He just want to be treated as if he were.

Sort of like someone claiming Trump is still president, so send him all President's Daily Briefings.

I want to be going to bed with Becky Lynch tonight, doesn't mean it's gonna happen. People in Hell want ice water.

Seems to me like some shady shit trying to be pulled.

[Dill]

(10-24-2021, 12:39 AM)BigPapaKain Wrote: I want to be going to bed with Becky Lynch tonight, doesn't mean it's gonna happen. People in Hell want ice water.

Seems to me like some shady shit trying to be pulled.

Well, yes.

He is asking that he be sent documents that he is not empowered to receive.

It might compromise the committee's work if people chose to send him materials
requested/subpoenaed by the committee. 

[GMDino]

Cowboys for Trump founder Couy Griffin blasted Trump at the QAnon conference today. He said Trump promised he would lock up Hillary, but “at the end of your 4 year time, the only ones locked up were men like me, and others like me, that have stood by the president the strongest.” pic.twitter.com/8eWzODQ1QY

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) October 24, 2021

 

[*Nately120*]

(10-25-2021, 01:28 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Cowboys for Trump founder Couy Griffin blasted Trump at the QAnon conference today. He said Trump promised he would lock up Hillary, but “at the end of your 4 year time, the only ones locked up were men like me, and others like me, that have stood by the president the strongest.” pic.twitter.com/8eWzODQ1QY

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) October 24, 2021

 

Trump admitted nearly 5 years ago that the lock her up stuff was just pre-election bluster and that he didn't care now that he was elected.  

[Au165]

Going to go ahead and point out that two of the coordinators of the event have now told journalists that they met dozens of times with members of Congress to plan the events. Blanket pardons were discussed at one point by one member of Congress, almost as if they knew the events would escalate into criminal territory. It’s almost as if there was a seditious conspiracy or something.

[Dill]

(10-25-2021, 01:28 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Cowboys for Trump founder Couy Griffin blasted Trump at the QAnon conference today. He said Trump promised he would lock up Hillary, but “at the end of your 4 year time, the only ones locked up were men like me, and others like me, that have stood by the president the strongest.” pic.twitter.com/8eWzODQ1QY

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) October 24, 2021

 

That's pretty suspicious.

If he wouldn't lock Hillary up--and we KNOW she is guilty--then maybe there is something more to this.

Maybe like Flynn, he is actually one of them--part of the child abduction satanist human trafficking cabal.

He's been PROTECTING them all this time.