11-16-2015, 01:43 AM
bfine32 Wrote:OOOhhhh.... so your post was focused on me, who would have guessed,
Yeah, and this is your other "go-to": post something intentionally vague without a point, then when someone says "you didn't make a point", cry about how their post was focused on you. Of course, when you make a post that says nothing, it only makes sense people are going to ask you why you did that. But that's already been explained to you, countless times, which means you're doing it intentionally, likely for attention, which constitutes trolling.
Who would have guessed.
Quote:But as you require "a point", as if laughing at the debate wasn't enough. Here's 2 quick gems:
Hillary said she is only getting backing from Wall Street because of the hard work she did during 911
Ah, at last. Yes, I agree that her defense of Wall Street donations was laughable and, more importantly, false.
I wonder what Bush and Rubio's defense is. After all, they round out the top 3 of Presidential candidates who've received money from Wall Street banks. I guess we'll never know until Republicans actually care enough about corporate donations to ask about it, let alone endorse any measures to end them.
Quote:Bernie said Terrorism is increasing because of Global warming.
He was absolutely correct when he said "climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism". He further elaborated here:
Quote:"If we are going to see an increase in drought, in flood, and extreme weather disturbances as a result of climate change, what that means is that people all over the world are going to be fighting over limited natural resources," the Vermont senator said Sunday on CBS' "Face the Nation," elaborating on an arugment he made during the CBS News Democratic debate Saturday night.
This is not only transparently true in principle, but it is directly true in the case of the Syrian civil war which we all know has led to the growth of ISIS. More knowledge for you:
Quote:Drawing one of the strongest links yet between global warming and human conflict, researchers said Monday that an extreme drought in Syria between 2006 and 2009 was most likely due to climate change, and that the drought was a factor in the violent uprising that began there in 2011.
I recommend reading the whole article if you feel emotionally stable enough to handle it. Suffice it to say, Sanders made a statement that has good logical and scientific argumentation to support it, whether you like the arguments or not.
Now, here's the fun part of the game where I get to predict how you respond to this post. My guess is one of the following:
1. "It's all about me still, what a surprise! Hee hee!"
2. "Science is stupid because."
3. "Liberal media."
4. Complete silence
I'm leaning towards either 2 or 4.
