[Federalist] How Spygate Is Turning Democrats Like Me Against Our Party

Ao do you think it's unAmerican to believe that Donald Trump isn't fit to manage the world's largest bureaucracy and command the world's most powerful military when he doesn't even have a basic grasp of the most basic level of macroeconomics, constitutional law etc and his only claim to "experience" is being nutted out of a 250 million dollar penis?

 

Spoiler

Never change far left. Never change.

 

I suggest never visiting a Marine Corps Infantry barracks.

The language might hurt your sensibilities.

Back on topic. A large portion of Americans have determined that a man was quailified to manage the world's largest bureaucracy and command the world's most powerful military because he nutted out of a 250 million dollar penis and hosted a reality TV show.

But hey, I said "nutted".

 

Oh look...your service record again. That's new.

You might consider running for office as much as you talk about it. You'd make a perfect politician.

 

So let's review here .

You imply I'm a unhinged liberal because of foul language that invokes sexual genitalia and then will turn around and state that someone kneeling during a national anthem is deeply offensive to servicemembers you imply your undying gratefulness for.

The cogntive dissonance is absurd here.

Yes, I used foul language and yes many of my peers have also and I don't you will ever call them unhinged for it.

So you want to hurt insults and be cute("liberals being liberals") and expect the individual recieving them to just take it. Damn straight I'll tell you that I heard and picked up that language while doing a job that had my leg almost severed off for the military you jack off to .

 

Let do it!

I implied you're a liberal because that's your track record here. The unhinged part....that's all your label sir. Interesting take you have on yourself .

Not sure what one has to do with the other but....sure whatever you say.

You're gonna have to describe exactly what your talking about here. You lost me.

Honestly, I really don't care if you (or any of your peers) use foul language if that's all you've got. I mean, its your image after all. Knock yourself out.

 

Sounds like you are talking to a certain crayon eater. That's why veteran status is pretty much irrelevant, every branch has disappointments that say and do really stupid things.







You can find these embarrassing types in every branch, but they'll always use their service in an attempt to justify their ridiculous comments and actions.

 

It's amazing how you try to play coy with your statement now when you state "never change far left... Never change" over a statement that had explcit language that offended your sensibilities .

And now bobby comes in comparing me to a deserter, the same guy who placed me on ignore because I called him out for stating that direct combat arms occupations in the military are for idiots. And now he's equating me to a deserter because he disagrees with me.

You imply I'm an extremist because of foul language. That is the implication from the context of how you quoted my statement. Then I replied by stating that foul language is repeated by servicemembers you worship and speak for all the time with how offended you are by kneelers but you would never call a servicemember extremist for merely using foul language would you hence the congitive dissonance. Don't be cute. You aren't intelligent enough to pull it off.

 

Don't confuse my post with "offended sensibilities". I'm very used to the foul language, especially when it comes from dealing with the left. They can't help themselves.

Mostly I was hoping to point out to a fellow Clutchfans member how poorly they were portraying themselves (in this case you).

 

Yes you equated me to an extremist because I stated that our current President's claim to "experience" stems from the notion that he nutted out of a 250 million dollar penis .

You imply extremists use that type of language. And then I stated that the people you pretend to worship and speak for because you are so offended for us when atheletes kneel because it "disrespects the troops" use that language all the time therefore the cogntive dissonance.

Let me explictly state the cogntive dissonance here. You are offended by foul sexually explicit language and equate it to extremism merely based on the fact that it goes against your political presuppositions, not because foul language was used. Foul language by people you agree with isn't extremist language.

And now that you think I'm an extremist, please express a extremist position I hold. Go ahead.

 

Again, I never called you an "extremist". Are you sure you are reading my posts?

Again, never once said "extremists". But since we're on the subject, they do when "debating". Reasonable people frown on language like this.

Oh sure they do. But there's a time for everything. I'm guessing you wouldn't find many of those folks screaming obscenities in church for example. They also don't attempt to persuade others using foul language through debate and discussion unless their true goal isn't to persuade but to offend. Which are you trying to do?

Again, as I said earlier not offended by the language. By all means please continue to represent yourself in whatever way you wish no matter how backwards it makes you look.

You do this a lot. You (falsely) accuse me of stating something I never said. Please either link me to the statement where I referred to you explicitly as "an extremist" or admit you lied. Thanks in advance.

 

"Never change far left. Never change"

Don't play coy. You don't have it in you to pull it off.

And the congitive dissonance here is that you would never call servicemembers in mass "backwards" for their excessive use of foul language because of your worship complex of them(yes worship complex due to speaking for them about how offended you are over people kneeling).

Part of me is happy for you that you are willing to call a Purple Heart reciepient an extremist who is backwards merely for using sexually explicit language.

Maybe you are growing out of your fake worship of them. Or maybe you just worship the servicemembers who agree with you politically.

 

Stop posting these fake former Dems. The woman is most likely on a payroll

 

I'm truly confused. I wish I had the certainty that so many posters on this site have. I voted for Trump. Knew it was a risk, but disdained Hilary. Now, I cringe when I hear reports about his tweets. What I don't know: what is he really doing? Is he negotiating? Out of his depth? Is it better to have a President reveal himself/herself (if that is what he is doing), or is it better to get canned TV while things may or may not be going behind the scenes that betray us?

I really don't know. I'm not being a smart aleck -- I wish I had all of your confidence. My concern is that we might fall for the right image -- and that person ends up hurting our country. Or we could have what we have: a President, like him or not, that appears willing to say what he is thinking (however he may contradict himself moment to moment), and let the voters decide in the next election. My two cents: I don't know enough to know what is right. But the far right and the far left need to figure out a way to communicate if we are going to move forward.

 

To clarify, by "spygate", we're talking about an investigation to a foreign power confirmed to have been interfering in our elections, members of a campaign team confirmed to be meeting with said foreign power, and possible collusion by the President of the United States?

I think anyone who doesn't want that investigated or brought into the sunlight is basically a traitor to the country and I think Dems would be fine losing anyone of that sort.

 

I see in your case, its true.

No need to play coy when its been pretty obvious from the start what I'm saying.

Did you learn a new phrase or something? Because you sure love saying "Cognitive Dissonance" whenever possible.

I'll have words TheresTheDagger never said for $500 Alex. Man...you do this a LOT!

If you want to call my respect for our folks in uniform and their families "worship", I can live with that. There are worse things.

Nobody cares whether you or I are happy here. You want happiness...get a dog.

Oh....and I've still never called you and extremist (although you do try really hard to own the part).

Respect for a persons service only extends so far. I certainly don't give a damn about Timothy McVeigh's service as an example. Respect (or Worship if you prefer....your word not mine) goes to those who have earned it and that includes those who can't wait to tell me about the medals they've earned. You're certainly not the only one who has earned em.

 

You keep on trying to play coy. Why? Do you not equate 'far left' with 'extremist'? So why pretend you didn't refer to me as one? Can you not stand by what you post? It's very simple. I used "naughty language" which compelled you to equate me to "the far left" because of that "naughty language". I point out that naughty language is used by a class of humans you worship and then proceed to state that my 'naughty' language gives a perception of "backwardness" and the cogntitive dissonance here is you perceiving naughty words as "backwards" and "far left" yet a class of people you worship use "naughty words" far more expressively at a high usage rate. So obviously vulgarity isn't the issue. It's vulgarity towards MAGA chief that offends you.

And yes I will throw my Purple Heart at your face to show how logically inconsistent you are aka cogntitive dissonance because apparently that is a new word to you and you can't use google to figure out the meaning of it. If you want to weaponize veterans to dismiss a sincere protest about a issue that many hold dear in this country and has nothing to do with service members, I'll weaponize my god damn Purple Heart to show how empty your rhetoric is.

 

Sometimes, but not necessarily. That's why there are 2 different terms. And in this case I'll say...no...they aren't equated.

Because I didn't and if I had, you could quote it. The simple fact that I haven't is enough for most folks. But for some stubborn reason, you won't let it go. Whatever. Believe what you like. It matters not to me.

Of course. Its just that I didn't post this. Either your too stubborn to admit it or too stupid. I'm not sure which right now.

No. Your bona fides as far left have been shown across the spectrum of different threads in the D&D. Thats why I equate you to the far left. The language thing was to make fun of your crass attempt at debate. A totally different thing but not uncommon from the left these days. Thus the spoiler.

There's that word worship again. Interesting. Maybe you wish I was worshiping you simply because you served? I can't figure it out....

If the shoe fits....

Not always, but in this case foul language was used by a far leftie.

Man...you pull things out of your behind a lot you know that? Oh well, I'll indulge you. Far higher rate than who? How do you possibly measure that? Source?

Foul language isn't the issue. Time and place is. You seem intelligent enough to know when not to use foul language and yet small minded enough to deny that a debate and discussion board is one of those places. Its a simple premise really.

Oh I know. Of all the vets I've ever met, you're the most vocal to insure EVERYONE knows it. Congrats I guess. You're one of a kind.

WTH are you talking about?

*and with that....I fade out of this specific conversation. Go ahead and make up some more conversation I didn't say if you need to keep it going. I'm done wasting my time.

 

It’s concerning to you that we have poltical mechanisms in the constitution to remove presidents from power that commit high crimes and misdemeanors?

Sounds like you don’t like Democracy that much and prefer dictatorships because that’s what you are inferring.

Nobody I know of is saying remove him for just not being unlikable. Even Tom Steyer who is the most outspoken person on impeachment, lists high crimes in his ads as justification for impeachment, and impeachment is the constitutional way to judge whether a president needs to be removed. You make it sound as though the Democratic Party is pumping out ads advocating assasination or something.

Mueller needs to be allowed to finish his investigation and Congress needs to do a better job of oversight. Trump does NOT need to be “removed” in any way outside of the mechanisms provided by our constitution.

 

There is certainly room for dissenting Democrats... (hell... isn’t that Bernie and co.), but sorry... this Federalist “blog” certainly screams propaganda. The talking points might as well come from Sarah Huckabee or Jim Jordan, and this notion that “I don’t like Trump but.... I’m going to give you every ounce of my energy defending him” jumps right out of page as Trump activism 101. This tactic is used primarily to gain credibility to gullible independents and liberals that are then opened up for dialogue to change their way of thinking to a pro Trump stance.

The methods are used here in the DD and are taken from propaganda like this from right wing funded think tanks.

If you’re looking for dissenting liberals it’s not that hard. They are pretty much all of us in 2018. This Federalist blog is almost guaranteed to be pure propaganda unfortunately and that’s just reality folks.