Mock

Who in their right mind will go around knocking on doors? Maybe in a nice neighborhood but nobody will go to the ghetto and knock on doors. Such a stupid thing to even say. But you have to remember the source, aint gonna happen..............wouldn't be prudent.

This is what Maggot defends-

I'm not defending it, my bitch is that all the other things going on across the country doesn't get half the attention at all because the Dems say they were "peacefull protests"{ when they were not. It's as if a switch gets thrown in their brains.

(07-10-2021, 10:36 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]This is what Maggot defends-

I could edit that video and you wouldn't think to call it an "insurrection". If you try to tell me it's "unedited" video, you're totally ignorant of how videography works in newscasting. They're using *multiple* vidcams, and the editors decide which ones to incorporate into what is televised. It could be edited to downplay whatever violence occurred, it could be edited to focus entirely on the violence, etc., etc.

Calling that event an "insurrection" is pure propaganda, because there was no intention on the part of the protestors to take control of the US government, and BOTH parties were negligent with respect to security. It could very easily -- and fairly -- be asserted that the violence was entirely the result of negligence and incompetence on the part of those officials responsible for maintaining security at the Capitol.

Wrong again, I never boarded the MAGA bandwagon; in fact, prior to 2016 I thought Trump should have been hanged for his conduct in Scotland.

Why don't you take off the partisan blinders and try looking at this objectively?

(07-10-2021, 03:33 PM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 03:18 PM)rothschild Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 10:36 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]This is what Maggot defends-

I could edit that video and you wouldn't think to call it an "insurrection". If you try to tell me it's "unedited" video, you're totally ignorant of how videography works in newscasting. They're using *multiple* vidcams, and the editors decide which ones to incorporate into what is televised. It could be edited to downplay whatever violence occurred, it could be edited to focus entirely on the violence, etc., etc.

Calling that event an "insurrection" is pure propaganda, because there was no intention on the part of the protestors to take control of the US government, and BOTH parties were negligent with respect to security. It could very easily -- and fairly -- be asserted that the violence was entirely the result of negligence and incompetence on the part of those officials responsible for maintaining security at the Capitol.

Yeah right. That's bullshit. Let's not call it an insurrection because they only showed the violent parts and not that most of the people were there for a peaceful "tour" of the Capitol.   I guess the news should forget the truth and focus on the boring stuff.

(07-10-2021, 04:21 PM)Clang McFly Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 03:18 PM)rothschild Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 10:36 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]This is what Maggot defends-

I could edit that video and you wouldn't think to call it an "insurrection". If you try to tell me it's "unedited" video, you're totally ignorant of how videography works in newscasting. They're using *multiple* vidcams, and the editors decide which ones to incorporate into what is televised. It could be edited to downplay whatever violence occurred, it could be edited to focus entirely on the violence, etc., etc.

Calling that event an "insurrection" is pure propaganda, because there was no intention on the part of the protestors to take control of the US government, and BOTH parties were negligent with respect to security. It could very easily -- and fairly -- be asserted that the violence was entirely the result of negligence and incompetence on the part of those officials responsible for maintaining security at the Capitol.

Yeah right. That's bullshit. Let's not call it an insurrection because they only showed the violent parts and not that most of the people were there for a peaceful "tour" of the Capitol.   I guess the news should forget the truth and focus on the boring stuff.

If you think context is "bullshit", you may be the one who's had a lobotomy. When the shoe's on the other foot you sing an entirely different tune, e.g., "peaceful protests". There's your bullshit, clangy, a big, fat shit sandwich, otherwise known as a double standard. Enjoy.

(07-10-2021, 04:37 PM)rothschild Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 04:21 PM)Clang McFly Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 03:18 PM)rothschild Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 10:36 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]This is what Maggot defends-

I could edit that video and you wouldn't think to call it an "insurrection". If you try to tell me it's "unedited" video, you're totally ignorant of how videography works in newscasting. They're using *multiple* vidcams, and the editors decide which ones to incorporate into what is televised. It could be edited to downplay whatever violence occurred, it could be edited to focus entirely on the violence, etc., etc.

Calling that event an "insurrection" is pure propaganda, because there was no intention on the part of the protestors to take control of the US government, and BOTH parties were negligent with respect to security. It could very easily -- and fairly -- be asserted that the violence was entirely the result of negligence and incompetence on the part of those officials responsible for maintaining security at the Capitol.

Yeah right. That's bullshit. Let's not call it an insurrection because they only showed the violent parts and not that most of the people were there for a peaceful "tour" of the Capitol.   I guess the news should forget the truth and focus on the boring stuff.

If you think context is "bullshit", you may be the one who's had a lobotomy. When the shoe's on the other foot you sing an entirely different tune, e.g., "peaceful protests". There's your bullshit, clangy, a big, fat shit sandwich, otherwise known as a double standard. Enjoy.

I'm all for context. As long as it doesn't involve living in Trump's Naziesque fantasy land.

(07-10-2021, 05:33 PM)Clang McFly Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 04:37 PM)rothschild Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 04:21 PM)Clang McFly Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 03:18 PM)rothschild Wrote: [ -> ]I could edit that video and you wouldn't think to call it an "insurrection". If you try to tell me it's "unedited" video, you're totally ignorant of how videography works in newscasting. They're using *multiple* vidcams, and the editors decide which ones to incorporate into what is televised. It could be edited to downplay whatever violence occurred, it could be edited to focus entirely on the violence, etc., etc.

Calling that event an "insurrection" is pure propaganda, because there was no intention on the part of the protestors to take control of the US government, and BOTH parties were negligent with respect to security. It could very easily -- and fairly -- be asserted that the violence was entirely the result of negligence and incompetence on the part of those officials responsible for maintaining security at the Capitol.

Yeah right. That's bullshit. Let's not call it an insurrection because they only showed the violent parts and not that most of the people were there for a peaceful "tour" of the Capitol.   I guess the news should forget the truth and focus on the boring stuff.

If you think context is "bullshit", you may be the one who's had a lobotomy. When the shoe's on the other foot you sing an entirely different tune, e.g., "peaceful protests". There's your bullshit, clangy, a big, fat shit sandwich, otherwise known as a double standard. Enjoy.

I'm all for context. As long as it doesn't involve living in Trump's Naziesque fantasy land.

Which is a textbook example of confirmation bias. You're "all for context" as long as it doesn't conflict with your bias, which means context is irrelevant and reason and logic are out the window. Your mind is made up and there's nothing to discuss. End of.

Maybe you and Duchess should go find a sandbox to play in.

Or share a shit sandwich in south chicago.

(07-10-2021, 09:22 PM)BigMark Wrote: [ -> ]Or share a shit sandwich in south chicago.

I'll gladly eat a shit sandwich if you can tell me what is so great about Komrade Trump besides allegedly lower gas prices and more jobs. At least Biden and Trump both have mumbling and slurring their words in common.

(07-11-2021, 01:53 AM)Clang McFly Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 09:22 PM)BigMark Wrote: [ -> ]Or share a shit sandwich in south chicago.

I'll gladly eat a shit sandwich if you can tell me what is so great about Komrade Trump besides allegedly lower gas prices and more jobs. At least Biden and Trump both have mumbling and slurring their words in common.

Nothing is great about him, and I won't be voting for him again. If he wins the nomination I'll do what I did in 2016 and not vote. It's a broken system when you have to choose between equally despicable candidates like Trump and Hilly, or Trump and Biden.

(07-11-2021, 01:16 PM)Maggot Wrote: [ -> ]

A picture's worth a thousand words...

(07-11-2021, 01:13 PM)rothschild Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-11-2021, 01:53 AM)Clang McFly Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-10-2021, 09:22 PM)BigMark Wrote: [ -> ]Or share a shit sandwich in south chicago.

I'll gladly eat a shit sandwich if you can tell me what is so great about Komrade Trump besides allegedly lower gas prices and more jobs. At least Biden and Trump both have mumbling and slurring their words in common.

Nothing is great about him, and I won't be voting for him again. If he wins the nomination I'll do what I did in 2016 and not vote. It's a broken system when you have to choose between equally despicable candidates like Trump and Hilly, or Trump and Biden.

Watch it. You're almost sounding sane and likeable. Almost.