I come here - open a thread - use the term “Hitlery” rather than Hillary
(not exactly trying to HIDE my sentiments)
sort of saying up front from the get-gothat I am not a libbie demmie Leftwing lover anymore - but “trolling” - by what what definition?
I asked a question about the effects of a current event on the 2016 election -
got my thread moved to the BBQ Pit not at my request - it was orginally in ELECTIONS -
How am I a troll?
or is that you alleged free-thinkers cannot tolerate my viewpoint
and can only respond with ad hominems like “doesnt know the English language” - “is a RW Conspiracist” etc etc
“is not smart enough to be here”
she stupes and stoops and stups to conquer - but does not schtup
I think Hillary (or Hitlery, or Hillary Clintonitler, or Hitlery Stalinton, or Clitory Hilton Bathory or whatever) could personally mow down Tea Party protesters with an Uzi on the White House lawn and it’s not going to much affect her chances in 2016 for the simple reason that 2016 is three years away (cite) and public memory is about 90 days, if that.
Personally I don’t think she’s going to be a contender anyway due to her age and the fact she was already divisive before most people now wailing ever heard of Benghazi (I started to say before they could find it on a map, but I seriously doubt most could get within 2,000 miles of it now). If she is, though, there’ll be three years of things to drag up between now and then and a far lesser recent outrage will trump a far more major older outrage, besides which Bhengazi has way too many moving parts to the story to galvanize the Republican base. They need something far simpler to get worked up over, so even if she’s guilty as charged by the Tea Partyingest of the accusers, it won’t be this scandal that cockblocks her in '16.
What you’re saying is so dumb and hard to read that they think you’re doing this to be annoying. It’s a compliment in that they think you might be a little less stupid than you appear. I’m agnostic on the issue.
Ok, I’ll give you credit for not trolling but being so ridiculously over the top dumb and barely coherent that it comes out the same way.
I’m not sure which I’d rather be accused of: stupidity or trolling.
Case in point: you are complaining about the change in forum.
Well, guess what? Reasonably intelligent posters read the rules. If you had done so, you might realize that ANY form of political name-calling (whether left or right wing) is going to get the same treatment.
Not quit crying and grow a brain. Or at least learn to communicate effectively using the English language. The mockery you heap upon our (it’s not a 2nd language for you, is it?) mother tongue is almost more than I can bear (not really, but hyperbole is often good for the soul).
Needlessly using inflammatory language in order to elicit a response.
To clarify, you’re likely a neckbeard who grins whenever you manage to rile someone up.
If a Bush thread called him, “The Shrub” in the title, it would have been moved as well. If you aren’t able to engage intelligently, you get moved to the pit.
You’re not a free thinker. You’re a dupe who is reacting to misinformation because you don’t have the skills to evaluate what you’re hearing.
I base that on the chaotic and rambling tone you’re taking. Intelligent people try to get others to understand what they’re saying.
Thank you Sampiro - for perhaps the first direct response to the OP in two pages of shit-flinging.
Wolfie - I am not upset, do not love Bush and everything he ever did - but will get upset at disparaging remarks against David Bowie - i regret having to retire two David Bowie T-Shirts a couple years ago. I think Bowie is in trouble in the news somewhere - no - i wont answer yer frickin “points” about Bush - oldest libbie demmie dipshit trick in the book - ATTACK BUSH if anyone claims Obama is fallible - i aint fallin for it
What you *have *fallen for, but are too stupid to realize, is a different trick - the tried-and-true Republican/Fox/Rove/Luntz one of loudly blaming a Democrat for something they themselves were and are far more guilty of. It helps insulate them against being held accountable for their own bungling. And that’s why they keep telling you about Benghazi (and learn to spell while you’re at it, fool) - because of exactly the sort of thing you’ve now been shown, but didn’t hear on Fox.
Does it start to dawn on you yet how totally you’ve been played? I doubt it, but maybe there’s a glimmer of hope somewhere in all that stupe.
Now that Obama has a consulate attacked, they’re trying to pretend like it’s ten times Watergate. That’s simply insane.
[/QUOTE]
That’s “ten times Watergate and Iran-Contra combined” to be precise.
Though since most did not consider Iran-Contra that big of a deal- in fact some described it as downright heroic- the exact values of *10 (Wg + IC) *get a bit confusing.
I’ve been worse. Mea culpa. I forced myself to read the entire thread, in penance. I even went ahead and hit “find all posts by Habakkuk3”. :eek:Still, I don’t think I have atoned enough.
“It’s literally nine hundred and eleven times worse then the Holocaust.” – Some Republican, later that day, then issues an apology a day later how he didn’t mean to offend small business people, then issuing another apology the next day about offending the Jews ‘as small business people’ along with the Holocaust, but then points out that only a quarter million died, ad infinititum…"
You gotta watch out for listening to “they”. “They” will have you believing a lone gunman killed Kennedy and that we landed on the moon and 9/11 wasn’t a government plot to sell Coca-Cola.
