+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0)
+--- Thread: A SCOTUS Opening (/Thread-A-SCOTUS-Opening)
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - bfine32 - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 12:46 PM)Dill Wrote: And if you didn't understand what those words say, you wouldn't be trying to mis-characterize them and change the subject.Answer this question honestly:
I'll sum it up in two points:
1. you cannot explain why my equivalence between the Franken photo and the Access tape is "absurd," as you claimed, and
2. Instead of conceding the point, you re-assert your right to accuse without support--a "courtesy" you don't extend to others.
So yes, it IS ok when I support claims with evidence and rational argument.
Ok when you do it too. In fact I'd rather you did.
Which would be more damning to you:
Trump bragging to a reporter as a celebrity women will just let him grab them by the vajayjay
Trump photoed grabbing a woman's vajayjay while she was sleeping.
Answer that honestly and you'll begin to see the absurdity
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 01:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Answer this question honestly:
Which would be more damning to you:
Trump bragging to a reporter as a celebrity women will just let him grab them by the vajayjay
Trump photoed grabbing a woman's vajayjay while she was sleeping.
Answer that honestly and you'll begin to see the absurdity
This is a blatantly obvious point and it amazes me that anyone would need it explained to them. Of course, explaining it would result in a dissertation citing numerous irrelevancies ultimately telling you that what is obvious is not.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - GMDino - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 01:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Answer this question honestly:
Which would be more damning to you:
Trump bragging to a reporter as a celebrity women will just let him grab them by the vajayjay
Trump photoed grabbing a woman's vajayjay while she was sleeping.
Answer that honestly and you'll begin to see the absurdity
For me (I know it wasn't asked of me) a photo is more damning than someone "just saying".
But then I don't think they "just let" Trump do it either. I think he just did it without asking and got away with it because he was famous and can out-lawyer his accusers and many of these situations never come to light for a variety of reasons.
Or he was lying because he wanted to impress...Billy Bush.
I guess I just have a problem that over 20 women have accused Trump of sexual assault. One has DNA and wants to match it with his and rather than give it to prove he is innocent he is fighting in court. That's not a good look on any account. Meanwhile Biden gets raked for standing to close to women and putting his hands on their shoulders at public events with everyone watching as if he's being "sneaky" about it. Just doesn't added up to more of a story than Trump's accusers.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - jj22 - 09-24-2020
(09-23-2020, 06:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You guys are doing a crappy job of showing how Dems hold theirs to a higher standard than the GOP hold theirs.
Pretty sure all you're showing is the Dems hold the GOP to a higher standard than they do theirs.
Trump stating that there are women that let you grab them is no way as damning as a photo of Franken actually doing it to a sleeping woman. It is what the difference was.
What would be your reaction if Trump told black folks that if you don't vote for him, you ain't really black?
But you guys keep holding yours to a higher standard.
I'm not a Democrat. But for the record let's remember Bush was fired for this conversation while Trump was elected President.
There is something very wrong when an interviewer is held at a higher standard than a Republican.
But let's be honest, we all would have lost our jobs if that came out. Who besides a Republican would have gotten a job when that came out during the interview process? Don't think there was nothing wrong with hiring someone who admitted on audio that they sexually assaulted women? Try it..... I'll be interested to see how it goes. Tell them you are a Republican first. That should help.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - jj22 - 09-24-2020
(09-23-2020, 06:26 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: These types of posts have steadily eaten away at your credibility of late. I say this as a person who knows a woman that Trump groped at a party and then laughed about it, so I'm not defending Trump. I'm pointing out how absurd this statement is. I really think the hyper partisanship of the current day is affecting you and I'm not saying that facetiously.
You want to talk about credibility. You KNOW a women who Trump groped and laughed at.... And here we are with you steady defending him (while claiming not to). And trying to point the attention to someone else.
To see how you've reacted to these accusations after knowing a women who was sexually assaulted by someone you've steadily supported in the face of sexual harassments accusations is far more damining then anything anyone else has ever said in this forum.
You wonder why I mention the character of Trump supporters...… You must forgive me if I think it's disgraceful to not stand with the victim that you know.
For those of us who have sisters, mothers, daughters. Let's hope they have better friends, or at least hope those who know what happened to them will not stand with the assaulter.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 05:42 PM)jj22 Wrote: You want to talk about credibility. You KNOW a women who Trump groped and laughed at.... And here we are with you steady defending him (while claiming not to). And trying to point the attention to someone else.
I've only defended him when I felt he was right or being unfairly attacked. Oddly enough I do the exact same thing for anyone else.
Quote:To see how you've reacted to these accusations after knowing a women who was sexually assaulted by someone you've steadily supported in the face of sexual harassments accusations is far more damining then anything anyone else has ever said in this forum.
Slow your roll. I don't support him. I generally don't like him, I'm just not a frothing nutjob who loses their shit about every single thing he doesn.
Quote:You wonder why I mention the character of Trump supporters...… You must forgive me if I think it's disgraceful to not stand with the victim that you know.
Who says I don't? Should I be doing that by posting nonsensical rants on an internet message board?
Quote: For those of us who have sisters, mothers, daughters. Let's hope they have better friends, or at least hope those who know what happened to them will not stand with the assaulter.
Ooohhh. You're getting a little personal there bud. I know your posts tend towards the extreme edge of hyperbolic but I'm going to ask you to tone down your personal attacks.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Dill - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 01:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Answer this question honestly:
Which would be more damning to you:
Trump bragging to a reporter as a celebrity women will just let him grab them by the vajayjay
Trump photoed grabbing a woman's vajayjay while she was sleeping.
Answer that honestly and you'll begin to see the absurdity
I would say a photo of Trump grabbing a woman's vajajay. By a little. The bragging, which makes it a regular practice, is not apparent in a photo.
Now if we only had a picture of Franken doing that, you'd have your point.
But we don't; and if we had, then I'd not have made the equivalence.
The photo is of a comedian PRETENDING to grab another comedian. Joking. As in NOT ACTUALLY GRABBING. Still the Dems, who hold their representatives to a higher standard, did not find it funny.
The Access tape is of Trump bragging that his celebrity allows him to violate women--ACTUALLY GRAB THEM.
SSF claims an acquaintance who will confirm he actually does it.
So the contrast is between a comedian pretending, and a sexual predator bragging of his predation.
Honestly, the sexual predator bragging is more damning. But perhaps not to Republican voters. Hence the "accountability" issue.
Back now to the questions SSF dodged cause he can't write a "dissertation" lol.
1. explain why it is credible to suppose that Franken or Biden or any Democrat holding federal office could survive the Hollywood access tape, were they in Trump's position. Who has done anything like this before, on either side of the aisle? I'd happily grant that Cruz or Rubio or Jeb could not either.
2. Or conversely, why is it credible to suppose Trump WOULD NOT survive a picture of a PRETEND-grope among voters who don't seem to care much if he REALLY gropes--voters who never take Trump literally, who always know that he is "really joking" (especially about women) when the libs don't.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Dill - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 07:23 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I've only defended him when I felt he was right or being unfairly attacked. Oddly enough I do the exact same thing for anyone else.
Slow your roll. I don't support him. I generally don't like him, I'm just not a frothing nutjob who loses their shit about every single thing he doesn.
Who says I don't? Should I be doing that by posting nonsensical rants on an internet message board?
Quote: For those of us who have sisters, mothers, daughters. Let's hope they have better friends, or at least hope those who know what happened to them will not stand with the assaulter.
Ooohhh. You're getting a little personal there bud. I know your posts tend towards the extreme edge of hyperbolic but I'm going to ask you to tone down your personal attacks.
keeper. Your reference to a groped woman doesn't qualify as "standing with the assaulter," though it was not exactly standing against him.
But your disapproval of "hyperbolic" statements and personal attacks is on record again. I like that.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Dill - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 05:42 PM)jj22 Wrote: To see how you've reacted to these accusations after knowing a women who was sexually assaulted by someone you've steadily supported in the face of sexual harassments accusations is far more damining then anything anyone else has ever said in this forum.
LOL there has been much more direct support for Trump's misogyny on this board than SSF's current postings.
But SSF is not a Trump supporter. He tell you he finds him odious. I don't think he voted for him last election.
Rather, he is a Trump defender, in the sense that he runs interference for him.
For him something called "the left" is much worse, as are its representatives. His goal is to undermine them, not help Trump.
Trump's loss tends to be their gain, hence the efforts to block that where possible--painting himself into a corner, defending the indefensible by stoking confusion about what should be indefensible.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 09:22 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL there has been much more direct support for Trump's misogyny on this board than SSF's current postings.
But SSF is not a Trump supporter. He tell you he finds him odious. I don't think he voted for him last election.
Rather, he is a Trump defender, in the sense that he runs interference for him.
Don't presume to speak for me, ever. I don't support the man, but I also don't cry and gnash my teeth at his every utterance. To someone like you that makes me an enabler. It's fascinating to me that you don't see how you don't see the ideological purity you demand, and the labels you'll happily slap on others when they fail to past your test.
Quote:For him something called "the left" is much worse, as are its representatives. His goal is to undermine them, not help Trump.
Dude, we're on an internet message board having discussions. Nothing of substance will be resolved here, ever. This kind of statement fits in with your overly pedantic and condescending style here though. You seem to think we're solving major problems here instead of having discussions with people whose views we might not otherwise be exposed to.
Quote:Trump's loss tends to be their gain, hence the efforts to block that where possible--painting himself into a corner, defending the indefensible by stoking confusion about what should be indefensible.
I suppose I should be grateful this was two sentences instead of two pages. The mirror you hold up to yourself with this post though, it's fascinating.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - GMDino - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 10:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Don't presume to speak for me, ever. I don't support the man, but I also don't cry and gnash my teeth at his every utterance. To someone like you that makes me an enabler. It's fascinating to me that you don't see how you don't see the ideological purity you demand, and the labels you'll happily slap on others when they fail to past your test.
Dude, we're on an internet message board having discussions. Nothing of substance will be resolved here, ever. This kind of statement fits in with your overly pedantic and condescending style here though. You seem to think we're solving major problems here instead of having discussions with people whose views we might not otherwise be exposed to.
I suppose I should be grateful this was two sentences instead of two pages. The mirror you hold up to yourself with this post though, it's fascinating.
Point of order:
Anyone using the word "pedantic" cannot accuse another of "condescending style".
Other than that Dill was pretty spot on. Lot of people around here "don't support Trump" but will jump in to EVERY negative thing said about him to tell the poster that THEY are over the top by mentioning the next thing Trump did or said. Those same people are simple AGHAST that someone would label them a Trump defender. Its amusing.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 10:24 PM)GMDino Wrote: Point of order:
Anyone using the word "pedantic" cannot accuse another of "condescending style".
I'm a firm believer in giving what you get.
Quote:Other than that Dill was pretty spot on. Lot of people around here "don't support Trump" but will jump in to EVERY negative thing said about him to tell the poster that THEY are over the top by mentioning the next thing Trump did or said. Those same people are simple AGHAST that someone would label them a Trump defender. Its amusing.
Wait, you support Dill!!!! OMG, stop the press, this deserves its own thread and everything.
But seriously folks, you and your buddy have tried to slap this label on me before and numerous people pointed out how wrong you were. I'll give you points for persistence though, if nothing else.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Dill - 09-25-2020
(09-24-2020, 10:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Don't presume to speak for me, ever. I don't support the man, but I also don't cry and gnash my teeth at his every utterance. To someone like you that makes me an enabler. It's fascinating to me that you don't see how you don't see the ideological purity you demand, and the labels you'll happily slap on others when they fail to past your test.
Dude, we're on an internet message board having discussions. Nothing of substance will be resolved here, ever. This kind of statement fits in with your overly pedantic and condescending style here though. You seem to think we're solving major problems here instead of having discussions with people whose views we might not otherwise be exposed to.
I suppose I should be grateful this was two sentences instead of two pages. The mirror you hold up to yourself with this post though, it's fascinating.
lol "ideological purity"! Just weak. Throughout.
You don't "cry and gnash your teeth" at ANY Trump utterance.
Different story for "the left." So yes. Enabler. Someone who contributes to the normalizing of Trump's bad behavior.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Dill - 09-25-2020
(09-24-2020, 10:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm a firm believer in giving what you get.
Wait, you support Dill!!!! OMG, stop the press, this deserves its own thread and everything.
But seriously folks, you and your buddy have tried to slap this label on me before and numerous people pointed out how wrong you were. I'll give you points for persistence though, if nothing else.
. . . except when you can't.
That's what the "won't-write-a-dissertation" dodge is about.Continuing with weak. "Where have I ever deflected a critique of Trump onto a "leftist" critic!!"
"Numerous people" have not pointed out you are not a Trump defender. At best you'll find one or two, LIKE ME, who say you are not a "supporter."
It is EXACTLY as I say--you run interference for Trump against "the left." That's what you were doing on this thread--until we got to the questions you couldn't answer. Then you went ad hominem, per your MO. No one, not you, not anyone, can point to the thread where you took Trump to task for his racism or misogyny or bad policy judgment--though threads on those subjects are full of your posts addressed to Trump critics.
Even aside from Trump, you offer no even-handed discussion of Republicans and Dems. Dems are RADICALS far from the center; nevermind whom they chose as a presidential candidate. Republicans are not; nevermind whom they chose.
Does the guy who won't write a dissertation need one to certify his own record in this forum?
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 09-25-2020
(09-25-2020, 01:32 PM)Dill Wrote: lol "ideological purity"! Just weak. Throughout.
Thank you for your opinion.
Quote:You don't "cry and gnash your teeth" at any Trump utterance.
Different story for "the left."
Nah, I don't cry and gnash my teeth over any of this. I obviously have things I feel very strongly about, but Trump saying dumb shit isn't one of them. I do feel bad that I don't meet your standards though, it will keep me awake at night.
Now, as this back and forth has absolutely nothing to do with the SCOTUS opening you'll kindly allow me to cease further discussion in this regard. Of course, if you feel the need to get in the last word I won't begrudge your the opportunity.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - jj22 - 09-28-2020
(09-24-2020, 09:22 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL there has been much more direct support for Trump's misogyny on this board than SSF's current postings.
But SSF is not a Trump supporter. He tell you he finds him odious. I don't think he voted for him last election.
Rather, he is a Trump defender, in the sense that he runs interference for him.
For him something called "the left" is much worse, as are its representatives. His goal is to undermine them, not help Trump.
Trump's loss tends to be their gain, hence the efforts to block that where possible--painting himself into a corner, defending the indefensible by stoking confusion about what should be indefensible.
Let this forum tell it there are no Trump supporters, and no one has voted for him.
I'm not going to question peoples vote (although it is hard to believe coming from those around here who spend so much time avoiding criticism of him I'll just say), but who are these 40 million people? Only about 2 or 3 of them admit to voting for him.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Fan_in_Kettering - 09-28-2020
(09-28-2020, 02:27 PM)jj22 Wrote: Let this forum tell it there are no Trump supporters, and no one has voted for him.
I'm not going to question peoples vote (although it is hard to believe coming from those around here who spend so much time avoiding criticism of him I'll just say), but who are these 40 million people? Only about 2 or 3 of them admit to voting for him.
I voted TRUMP in 2016 and I will do so again in 2020!
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - jj22 - 09-28-2020
(09-28-2020, 02:37 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: I voted TRUMP in 2016 and I will do so again in 2020!
Glad you admitted it.
I'll just say our values and character is different.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - Dill - 09-28-2020
(09-28-2020, 02:27 PM)jj22 Wrote: Let this forum tell it there are no Trump supporters, and no one has voted for him.
I'm not going to question peoples vote (although it is hard to believe coming from those around here who spend so much time avoiding criticism of him I'll just say), but who are these 40 million people? Only about 2 or 3 of them admit to voting for him.
No. Our defenders probably haven't voted for Trump and won't. No reason to suppose they are lying, though their motivation may be conflicted and confused.
But there are definitely five or six actual supporters in the forum.
Trump is difficult to defend, so they don't participate in the discussion so much,
but they do read the threads.
RE: A SCOTUS Opening - jj22 - 09-28-2020
They vote for these poor character traits to be our moral compass. I just don't get it. But not everyone has great character. The world would be a much better place if they did.
But they don't. So the fight against internet bully's, insecure egomaniacs, cons, sexual predators, frauds, and wannabe dictators will continue for the good.