http://throughthesewoods.blogspot.com/2024/07/kamala-harris-our-next-president.html
The above is the latest error and lie riddled post at Dan's Blog of Lies. This post will be a response to it, and I won't be copy pasting each item on his laughable list of points contrasting Kamala Harris as a superior choice over Donald Trump for the office of POTUS. Dan had already made a fool of himself with his post advocating for the Biden/Harris ticket prior to the stolen 2020 election. We didn't need Biden/Harris' failed administration to have taken place to know it was going to be the failure it has been. Neither had records which suggested they'd improve our lot in any way. It was only a matter of how badly they'd hurt us. We'd have been so much better off if that question was to have been left a matter or speculation rather than the shit show reality it's been since they stole the election from the proven commodity of beneficially effective governance. So open a second window and follow along as I will only be providing my responses to each item on Dan's list. (BTW, I won't be providing any supporting evidence for my responses than Dan did to back up his assertions. That may come in the comments section if I feel the need.)
1. By whom and how many was Harris' DA and AG careers respected? Dan doesn't provide any testimonials, but I've read much which presents her many failures of competence.
Dan contrasts his unproven assertion by pointing to the consequences Trump suffered as a result of the political persecution of the sham trials he was made to endure. Honest people know better.
2. Harris failed her bar exam on the first try. The California exam reportedly has a 50% failure rate for first time attempts to pass it. This "demonstrably intelligent" woman wasn't intelligent enough to be among the 50% who pass on the first attempt. Since then, and especially since being picked for VP because of her sex and skin color, she's done nothing to demonstrate intelligence. On the contrary, she's seems to have done all she can to project the opposite. She was really good at that, too!
Trump, on the other hand, spent four years demonstrating remarkable intelligence as president, after spending his private professional life growing a vast personal business empire. I haven't seen his grades, but as Kamala herself said with regard to her failing to pass the bar, such things aren't the be all and end all of judging a person's intelligence.
3. I've already posted comments detailing the extent of Harris' "prowess" at prosecuting sexual predators. Not at all impressive. Certainly nothing about which one can boast to commend her. Almost comical, in fact.
There's no evidence Trump is or ever has been a sexual predator. Dan relies on unfounded allegations he regards as "credible" simply because they were alleged at all and because they were alleged of Trump. To the leftist/progressive/marxist/Democrat (same things), an allegation is equal to guilt beyond the shadow of a doubt.
4. I've covered this before as well. Harris went after an overtly corrupt operation which was so out there that it was a slam dunk situation...the very type of case Harris favored over anything which required actual work. Trump, on the other hand, made restitution when the operation bearing his name was determined to require it, but he did not run it. He merely lent his name to it and when initially approached about doing so, saw it as a venture worth an investment. Bad move on his part, but there's no proof he intended to defraud anyone. It's just one more thing Dan puts on his "I Hate Trump" list of rationalizations to pad it out.
5. While I've found some reports of Harris' going after banks, she didn't go after OneWest and those who claim to have been victimized aren't pleased. This is likely another case of Harris only presecuting slam dunk cases, avoiding the hard work required to bring justice to others.
In the meantime, I can't find a thing about Trump defrauding any homeowners. Everything I see regardless of what words I use for my search default to the shame trial about Trump "defrauding banks" to get loans. I won't hold my breath waiting for Dan to provide evidence to support his claim. That's only what his opponents are supposed to do.
6. Harris hasn't any business dealings worth mentioning. But this is a favorite of Dems, as if like divesting from one's business, there's some law requiring politicians to open up their personal affairs for scrutiny to "prove" they're not crooks. That flies in the face of our judicial principles, but "principles" is no more than a punchline to lefties like Dan.
In the meantime, Trump has released tax returns, so I don't know what Dan's trying to pull here.
7. Dan finds supporting the targeting of innocent infants for destruction is a good thing. Once again, there's no justifiable reason to ever abort a child.
Trump got a bad SCOTUS ruling overturned because it was Constitutional. Lives have been saved as a result...female lives, both those born and those about to give birth.
8. This one is true about Harris. She proved to young girls everywhere that if they spread 'em for men in power, they too can get help climbing the ladder. They simply need to ask, "Who do I have to f**k to get any attention here?" Way to go Kamala! She's not a "good" person. Aside for having an affair with married man to advance her career, she was willing to allow people to rot in prison when exculpatory evidence could have freed them. One such was on death row.
In the meantime, Dan continues to pleasure himself to the thought of Trump grabbing women by the crotch "ogling" teenage girls. Dan doesn't care about the ubiquitous desires of his homosexual community for young boys. I provided an extensive article detailing the "minor attraction" of homosexuals. Dan's only concerned about the young when it serves his agenda. The women in Trump's orbit are far better role models for young girls than harpies like Harris or Clinton or Pelosi.
9. Harris is a leftist extremist and doesn't care about American sovereignty. She ignores laws when they serve her agenda, much as Dan does and typical as leftists in general. Harris promotes voting rights for incarcerated felons. It's not surprising she would ignore lawbreakers entering illegally. There's nothing "crass" about referring to them as "illegals", "illegal aliens", "invaders" or any similar description than it is to refer to other lawbreakers by the words describing their criminal behaviors. With the amount of harm inflicted upon this nation by her and Biden's disregard for our sovereign borders, there's nothing laudable about her with regard to this point.
In the meantime, Trump's intention to deport all illegals is appropriate, particularly as he will first focus on the more hardened criminal types before moving toward the rest. Dan has a post will alleges a massive negative economic impact on the nation by ridding ourselves of those who came across illegally. I've only skimmed it thus far, but it raises quite a few questions about the methodology used to come to that conclusion. I may do a post on that soon. I don't expect respect for raising those questions at the Blog of Lies, because Dan demands evidence for even concerns, much less anything resembling a claim.
10. Harris comes from an intensely leftist state. Leftists don't get prosecuted by leftists unless they're forced to by having their own positions threatened.
Conservatives are convicted of anything for any reason on the flimsiest of reasons without allowing for any true equal evaluation of defense arguments. All of what's been alleged of Trump have been what honest people can see are bullshit charges, followed by bullshit results. Dan, being a lying fake Christian, hasn't the integrity to admit this reality. He hates Trump so strongly...and America and his family, too, by extension...to judge him fairly. Nor does he judge his preferred alternatives fairly, either.
The same is true when Dan speaks of Trump associates, who have been likewise persecuted for the crime of being a Trump associate. The lawfare waged upon Trump & Co. is about as unChristian and unAmerican an example of injustice as has ever been waged upon anyone in government. Dan loves it, because he's a scumbag with no regard for truth, facts or anything which opposes his twisted worldview.
But Dan's absolutely correct about one thing: In his final sentence he says:
"But from all appearances and given the known data, there's just no
contest between Harris and Trump as to who the better, more intelligent,
more decent candidate is."
These is indeed no contest between them. Trump has proven himself in his first term to be far better, far more intelligent and a far more decent candidate and person than Harris. Hands down. Harris is as much, if not more of, a clusterf**k than Biden. The problem is that Dan doesn't actually consider ALL the "known data" regarding either candidate. In his typical dishonest, not-Christian manner, he disregards the faults of Harris as DA, AG and VP and focuses on mostly superficial crap of no true relevance or significance in the choosing of a candidate, disregards the many, many good works and deeds of Trump as president and private citizen to focus on as much negative crap as he can find. Then he inflates it to greater importance and significance than it is.
As I said at the top, Dan made a complete fool of himself in pretending that Biden/Harris was a worthy choice for Prez and VP. He now doubles down on that world-class stupidity by fantasizing Harris is actually worthy of consideration for the job of leader of the free world. God help us if this radical leftist, who has selected just as radical a leftist as herself for VP, actually succeeds in cheating their way to the White House come Nov of this year.
As to her VP pick, I'm greatly interested in hearing Craig's take.
44 comments:
An honest appraisal of Harris would mention the controversies surrounding her work as a DA and the adulterous affair with Willie Brown which coincided with the start of her career in politics.
A less honest appraisal would gush about how Harris being "a respected prosecutor" and "a stellar role model for women, girls and all good people."
I have a strong suspicion which of the two appraisals would be more consistent with confidence about Harris as a political candidate, and it sure ain't the Pravda version.
It struck me...as it usually does when dealing with Dan...that Dan is just as keen in regarding allegations of goodness in his favored people as just as hard core reality as any allegation of evil made against his opponents. In kind, he does both with any actual consideration of what he refers to as "all appearances and given the known data". As I alluded in the post, this suggests he's not aware of either in reality, but rather of an incredibly small sampling of either regarding any candidate. The other possibility is that his sampling is subjectively gathered to serve his preconceived notions and desires for what reality should be.
In Dan's defense, he has recently admitted he's no political genius. That's clearly an understatement of epic proportions. No one who's the least bit politically aware and knowledgeable argues in favor of or against any candidate in the manner Dan does, and expect to be considered better than a clown.
**Apologies if this posts multiple time -- it wouldn't work from my iPad for some reason**
The Molech-worshipers’ #1 goal is always being able to kill children to their first breath - and beyond! So nothing they do should surprise you - lying, cheating, looting, etc. Their consciences are fully seared. That some claim to be Christians while supporting child m*rder just adds to their resume of evils.
Of course they’ll ignore that Harris was 100% a DEI candidate, forced onto Biden by Clyburn because they had the “woman of color” quota going. She was an utter failure as a candidate, but now the media and Big Tech are hiding the truth and creating a new and completely false persona of her. And the people who worship child m*rder and robbing productive people to give “free” stuff to the undeserving are too happy to believe the lies.
I mean, seriously, look at videos of Trump/Vance vs the videos of Harris/Walz.
The Harris/Walz speeches are fun, happy, joyful, laughter and lightness and general positivity. "We're all in this together and the US is great!"
The Trump/Vance speeches are, "We're all doomed, life is horrible, half of the nation is evil and awful and they hate babies. Doom. Disaster. Hate. Hate. Hate." There's almost no laughter and the forced, weak laughter that happens is, "They so stupid. it's awful. ha. ha. ha."
It's just said. WHO wants to be part of that doomsday party that Trump has turned the GOP into?
Welcome to the joyful glory party, friends. We don't have to fear doom and destruction ALL the time, in spite of what the idiot conman tells you.
From Dan with editorial alterations in brackets:
"You support the convict more than ever? Well, get used to disappointment, brother. Your" [presidential choice proven to be the best president in decades] "and his" [most excellent VP choice] "are doing all they can to make sure they lose."
Well, Dan, you contemptible pervert, I don't see how. If they do absolutely nothing and just let marxist Harris and her socialist VP choice speak, Trump...who's proven himself to be head and shoulders better than Obama, and so beneficially effective that Harris/Biden aren't worthy of carrying Trump's jockstrap in their teeth...and Vance...who would have provided a greater smackdown of Harrris in a VP debate, had the party not threatened Biden to get him out and a more lopsided debate victory than Trump had over the hapless Biden...if those two most-deserving-of-your-vote real Americans just let Harris and Walz speak, they'll win while sleeping.
It's really difficult beyond my ability to fathom, which pairing makes your support for them greater proof of your abject stupidity and moral corruption: Harris/Biden or Harris/Walz. Each comes with their own arguments in favor of denying them. But with this current duo, two racist, Jew-hating marxists with nothing to commend them, support for these two is far more a confirmation one hates their own children and nation than previous support for Harris/Biden was.
There is no clear and present danger to this nation than voters like Dan Trabue.
Dan confirms that he has no business voting in elections:
"I mean, seriously, look at videos of Trump/Vance vs the videos of Harris/Walz.
The Harris/Walz speeches are fun, happy, joyful, laughter and lightness and general positivity. "We're all in this together and the US is great!"
Happy talk! Dan votes because happy talk makes him happy.
Adults vote because of thee easy to see consequences of the current administration. In 2016, I voted for Trump because the Obama administration was a failure and Hillary promised more of the same.
In 2020, I voted for Trump because his administration had improved life for ALL Americans in ways that have been documented for all to see.
In 2024, I'm voting for Trump, because the Harris/Biden administration destroyed all the improvements made by Trump and worsened life in the United States to even worse than had Obama.
Happy talk has great influence in those whose mental capacities haven't progressed past the age of 6 years old. Such people are easily conned and those who con them know it. Kudos, sheep. You're the most ideal useful idiot.
Do you think that Trump/Vance is going to actually win? The felon and the man who hates/demonizes childless people or the happy, positive people who want to unite the US?
Again, I imagine you're going to be very disappointed. I suspect that with each week that passes, you'll see Harris/Walz increasing their likelihood in the polls.
Will you stand by the elections when your pervert/convict and his idiot sidekick lose?
"Molech worshippers..." Do you not see how bitter and repugnant and conspiratorial/insane your side sounds?
That's an honest and reasonable question.
Do I think Trump/Vance will win? Barring the usual Dem cheating, I can't see that even most Dems want to marxist losers like Harris/Walz running the country. No one has ever voted for Harris. This bitch isn't even going to run for the nomination. She won't debate any Dems for it. They just gave it to her without the people having any say after their votes were shit-canned by Biden being threatened out of the race. She was selected for VP because of her sex and skin color...not because she's worth a damn. But useful idiots buy the crap the party is selling.
You don't have a freakin' clue about these things. You have no reason to disparage Trump for president, pretending he's more pervert than you are. You have no basis for supporting Harris any more than you did Biden, except that neither are Trump, who has proven himself to have benefited the nation. What kind of fucking moron chooses two fucking morons over a proven commodity? You think you're standing for something noble by rejecting Trump due to your perverse obsession with his adulterous past? You've done no research, no vetting, no digging into the records of either side of this race. You just swallow like a cheap whore the ejaculate of your party as if it's true. Talk about a con job! When you admitted you're no political genius, that doesn't go far enough to describe your infantile understanding. Your position proves you hate your children, you hate your pervert friends, you hate your nation. How much more damage does your party have to inflict upon them before you yank your brainless head out of your ass?
It's not about whether or not I think Trump will win. It's about how stupid anyone is who chooses to support the party which has no love for the people of this country. You're my enemy. People like you are a direct and willing threat to my children and grandchildren. I don't need any candidate to tell me this. I have eyes. I can read. I pay attention to what matters. You're fucked up beyond belief. A fake Christian. Not a Christian at all, but one who exploits the name to posture as a good person. You're shit of the worst kind by doing so. You're not only dishonest, you hate honesty and truth. How can it be any other way when you are anathema to it? You're pretense and posturing sickens me and I regard you as one of many people sent by God to test me.
It's never been a matter of what I think of Trump as a person. But he's no more flawed than most. What matters is how he, as the evil demon you need to believe he is, still manages to understand how to do the job of president better than anyone from your party...especially as it is so anti-America as it is today. And better still, he gets positive things done that benefit all Americans.
What policy of his has hurt you in any way? You can't name a single one. You just hate, because that's what "embrace grace" looks like when frauds like you spew that crap. Come back when you got something intelligent to say.
As to "Molech worshippers", that only sounds "bitter and repugnant and conspiratorial/insane" to assholes like you who defend the murder of innocent people in utero. I don't give a flying fuck how such euphemisms sound to assholes like you who are aptly described as such. You target innocent children and then pretend a nation defending itself against murderers is.
Someday you might want to actually seriously and prayerfully study Scripture.
(FYI, Dan, I've seen your responses in our "dialogue," but I only have time for a quick comment here. I should have the bandwidth to post at length this evening, and I appreciate your patience.)
Myself, I'm ambivalent about partisan jargon, using words and phrases that are really just preaching to the choir. For example, I think it's quite accurate to describe the "woke" (so-called) "progressive" Left as Marxists, but I'm not sure it's always USEFUL to do so, particularly in venues such as this where who-knows is following along.
That said...
Dan, you're in no position to lecture anybody about what sounds sane, not when you refer to Trump as a felon without noting his enemies' wildly aggressive weaponization of the criminal and civil justice systems...
(Lemme guess, you DON'T denounce MLK just because the FBI had a lengthy file on him and considered him a person of interest worth investigating for criminality and ties to the Soviets.)
...not when you slanderously write that Vance "hates/demonizes childless people," and not when you say their opponents want to unite the country without mentioning the radical agenda they support -- open borders and emptying prisons, inflationary spending and crippling regulation, full-term abortion on-demand and even tampon machines in the boys' school restrooms.
(For all his faults, Bill Clinton was a triangulator, unlike his harridan of a wife, the Obamas, Harris, and Tampon Tim: supposedly Biden was more moderate, but it's not clear that we've seen an administration where he's genuinely at the helm.)
"Do you not see how bitter and repugnant and conspiratorial/insane your side sounds?"
You've VERY recently accused people like me of being oppressive and harmful RELIGIOUS EXTREMISTS and even FASCISTS merely for holding and expressing the belief that homosexual behavior is sinful; for believing that marriage is the union of one man and one woman; for opposing infanticide in the womb; and for believing that school libraries should exclude graphically explicit materials.
(From the other thread, it's not clear to me that you know just how appalling those materials are. Parents read aloud from the books in school board meetings and the board members tried to silence them; the books are not appropriate for polite adult company, much less for public schools.)
YOU'RE NOT ONE TO TALK ABOUT RHETORIC.
But, for the record, our side's invocation of Molech is hardly worse than your frequently comparing us to Pharisees and your absurd poem from way back when you accused George W. Bush of MURDERING GOD.
(Do you not know how lunatic that sounds? It's an honest and reasonable question.)
Myself, I think it's apt to describe the Left as Molech-worshipping Sodomites even if it's not always politic. It's a fair assessment considering the degree to which the Left is willing to sacrifice children and tear down the moral law in order to advance their political agenda.
Leftists only care about Leftism, even at the expense of child welfare, and I think it's entirely fair to call them out on it.
...now that I think about it, and as much as I disliked the guy at the time, I genuinely think this country would benefit if the Democrats had a triangulating moderate like Bill Clinton.
There IS an obvious choice for the role, but he decided to run as a Republican when he famously descended that escalator to announce his running for President.
Yup, Donald Trump isn't the next Reagan, he's a Republican Clinton. Just so.
And I say that as someone who has supported his running since he won the 2016 GOP nomination.
Nah, Bubba. Trump's no Clinton. Clinton was a wet finger in the air guy who got in front of whatever sentiment he thought was trending, much of which was trending due to Newt and that Contract With America. When folks talk of Clinton's accomplishments, much of it...maybe most of it...flowed from there.
Trump's his own man in the sense that he knows what course is best in a way Clinton never did. He has an inherent awareness of such things...a degree of wisdom, if you will...which results in him cutting through the crap to get the results he seeks. To put it another way, Trump leads. Clinton led when that trending sentiment told him where to go.
Marshal...
I can't see that even most Dems want to marxist losers like Harris/Walz running the country.
Um, have you SEEN the enthusiasm amongst Democrats? Amongst so-called independents? Open your eyes.
Bubba...
Dan, you're in no position to lecture anybody about what sounds sane, not when you refer to Trump as a felon without noting his enemies' wildly aggressive weaponization of the criminal and civil justice
Bubba, he is literally a felon, convicted NOT by a "weaponized criminal and justice system" (thereagain, sounding conspiratorial and lacking in reason or common sense) but by a jury of his peers.
Look, you may not like that he IS a convicted felon on dozens of counts. It may hurt your feelings that this overtly corrupt, dishonest conman has been convicted by our justice system, but it is a fact. There's nothing insane about noting simple reality.
Bubba...
You've VERY recently accused people like me of being oppressive and harmful RELIGIOUS EXTREMISTS and even FASCISTS merely for holding and expressing the belief that homosexual behavior is sinful
Well, opposition to LGBTQ folks and calling them "sinful" simply for being who they are IS religious extremism. We find that commonality in extreme religious conservatives, whether it's Muslim extremists, Mormon extremists or Christian fundamentalist extremists. It's literally a common rallying cry and attack amongst religious extremists.
How is that mistaken?
And telling people they can't marry, or adopt children, or identify your own gender... IF you are part of LGBTQ identities, that's literally the kind of thing that fascists have done in the past. You're familiar with Hitler's pink triangles, right?
You can't espouse religious extremist and fascist or fascist-leaning values and not find yourself associated with those categories.
"Molech-worshipers"
" What kind of fucking moron chooses two fucking morons over a proven commodity?"
"Cat ladies don't care about the future"
"Harris isn't black!"
THAT outrageous, abusive, low-IQ sorts of attacks vs the joyous, inclusive, welcoming, intelligent message from Harris-Walz. Even with your past abusive language, they'd still welcome you to join the positive march for progressive improvements in our nation.
All that anger and bile can't be good for you all. Let it go, dear brothers.
I get the feeling that Trump's nationalist instincts may generally be right on what's best for the country, but back in 2016, I wondered if he's just been a good salesman who saw an underserved market to whom he could make a fairly uncontested appeal -- namely, Middle America.
Working backwards thru the previous GOP nominees -- Romney, McCain, W., Dole, Bush 41 -- I think it's VERY easy to see that Trump has had a unique appeal to (pardon all the color references!) blue-collar workers, rednecks, blacks, and yellow-dog Democrats in a way that hasn't been seen in literally forty years.
Either way, Trump is definitely worth my vote: I had always argued that, had he betrayed the grassroots supporters, it would have only made him as bad as the typical establishment Republican! :-)
August 8, 2024 at 8:31 PM
"Um, have you SEEN the enthusiasm amongst Democrats? Amongst so-called independents?"
No. I've seen only ongoing, confusing polliing data which flips according to what day it is, all of which is based on responses from around 1000-2000 people at best, as well as rallies with no wide-screen shots of the "jubilant" crowd in order to see just how small...uh...I mean, "massive" it is. In both cases, support from these two morons is coming from complete morons and/or liars. People just like you. People who have no business near an election ballot or voting booth.
"he is literally a felon"
No. He's "technically" a person convicted of a crime who has not been sentenced, nor has any appeal been made to a higher court. YOU, however, are definitionally a pervert, and a liar overflowing with hatred for a man on whose shorts you're not worthy of chewing.
"convicted NOT by a "weaponized criminal and justice system" (thereagain, sounding conspiratorial and lacking in reason or common sense) but by a jury of his peers."
This Vox article goes through some of the main criticisms of the sham trial against Trump. Despite the conclusion of the author that it wasn't political persecution rather than a desire for justice, to read the criticisms belies that partisan crap. Of course it was a manifestation of a weaponized criminal justice system. And if we pretend the "jury of his peers" were all solidly honest, Trump-worshiping sycophants dedicated to the proposition that defendants must be judged guilty beyond any shadow of doubt, they're still making their decisions based on the fraudulent nature of the prosecution's arguments.
But like all progressive liars, you orgasm at the thought of being able to refer to Trump in a manner you think is now actually and legitimately justified. This was the minimum America-hating progressives hoped to enjoy by this charade.
But of course, what's most important and decidedly factual about your perversion, is that you make no effort to discern with regard to any attempt to harm this man. It's all good to assholes like you, for reasons you've invented more than for reasons which can possibly matter.
And no, I don't like that this man, who's been a blessing to this nation as president after the failures of the Obama administration, has been railroaded on the flimsiest of charges, mostly made up out of whole cloth, as has been described in the above lefty link. No honest actual Christian "should" like it. But you're neither honest nor an actual Christian, so...
"Well, opposition to LGBTQ folks and calling them "sinful" simply for being who they are IS religious extremism."
This isn't merely untrue. It's an abject lie intentionally told to deceive. By a liar who's not really Christian. The behavior of these people is, factually, sinful. For them to willfully engage in that which is blatantly factually sinful makes them sinful people, and a more distinctly factual manner than your claims about Trump. And given it's plainly revealed to us as such in Scripture with absolutely no caveat or scenario provided therein in which the behavior can be indulged without it being sinful, it stands a basic stuff from Christianity 101, and in no way a manifestation of Christian "extremism"....except to be one who is extremely devoted to clearly revealed Will of God should be something to which all followers of Christ should strive to be. That is, a true Christian "extremist" is an incredibly good thing, and likely well ahead of us in the line of those being granted entry into God's presence come judgement. I still believe Christ will say to you, "I never knew you."
"And telling people they can't marry, or adopt children, or identify your own gender... IF you are part of LGBTQ identities, that's literally the kind of thing that fascists have done in the past."
We're not talking about fascists or fascism here. You're dishonest mention of such so as to elicit a more compliant response doesn't work here. You lie about anyone telling queers they can't marry, if you mean committing their perverse selves to each other in a traditionally monogamous one-to-one relationship for life forsaking all others. They can do that. But it's not an actual definitional marriage which provides no benefit to the culture or society as does actual marriages and as such there was never any justification for legally pretending they are.
Children do best with both a mother and a father and to allow two queers to adopt is not in the best interest of the children. Kids do NOT do better with pervs pretending they're just like other normal mother/father parents.
A perv can call him or herself anything they want. The problem is when they get cowards in positions of authority to force others to play along with their fiction. If some dweeb comes into my sphere of influence and says, "My pronouns are she, tree and Fido", I'm going to tell them to get the fuck out of my space. I don't want to deal with blatant liars.
Nothing I've stated causes any harm. The pervs only say they're harmed by normal, honest people choosing not to abide their fantasies. Boo-fucking-hoo.
"You can't espouse religious extremist and fascist or fascist-leaning values and not find yourself associated with those categories."
You can't come here and denigrate good, honest people seeking to devote themselves to the Will of God by calling them "extremists", with the clear intent of making that a bad thing parallel with fascism or false religious haters like muslims. This is an intentional lie. A lie told with malicious and malevolent purpose. It's perversion of the notion of "extremism" and true Christian devotion.
Of course, you're not a Christian, so you might not understand that obvious distinction.
I've been going hard against Pervert Dan's comments, and I feel good about having demonstrated remarkable restraint given what a fucking lying pervert he is. But as regards his amazement that I expect Trump to win, the real issue is why anyone...even vile, fake Christian haters like Dan...would pretend we'd be better off with a couple of straight up marxists like Kackling Kamala and Tampon Tim. Dan, being a pervert, tries hard to paint them as wonderful people when their actual words and records prove otherwise. Even if Dan's most vile attacks on Trump are true, we're still talking about radical marxists. This just confirms my opinion of Dan being a marxist, too. Marxism...and anything remotely similar to it (like modern progressivism)...is anathema to American principles. Trump's record and current notions for his presidency, reflect American principles. Dan's a piece of shit who can't support his unAmerican or non-Christian positions. We're seeing that on the other thread.
Here's yet another bit of info Pervert Dan either won't bother reading or will read it and provide a perverted rebuttal to it:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/06/essential_information_for_understanding_why_trump_s_appeal_will_succeed.html
Notable is the bit about trying for a change of venue knowing that in Manhattan...a cesspool of Trump-hating progressive assholes...an impartial "jury of his peers" is an impossibility.
the man who hates/demonizes childless people
Dan is one of the worst liars out there, which is saying a lot! Dan, Have you even listened the speech where JD talked about the "cat ladies"? Of course not, because then you'd know the context was about women who DON'T want children and he even explains who he is NOT talking about.
You are a fool who sucks up everything lying media tells you.
Marshal,
I'm really afraid that the Demokrats will win because of all the cheating. I sincerely doubt that we will ever have a Republican government again.
"that in Manhattan...a cesspool of Trump-hating progressive assholes..."
What rational people recognize as neighbors and fellow citizens.
But Marshal thinks it's not insane to demonize and entire city.
A jury of one's neighbors and peers is a jury of one's peers.
This sweeping demonization of millions of people just because of where they live is not rational.
Dan
Glenn,
In response to both of your last two comments,...
Dan not only hasn't listened to Vance's speeches or full interviews, he doesn't even read the links he provides in his attempts to support his false positions. Being a world-class sheep and useful idiot of the marxist Democrats, he simply repeats what little he receives from them.
The Dem election cheating is a given. They do it all the time, have been doing it more than ever with each passing election and will do all they can to engage in it this time around, as they've already begun by disenfranchising 14 million Dem primary voters who cast their vote for Biden, after he and his kept truly challenging primary opponents like RFK Jr off the ballots and debate stages. Lying and cheating is what they do...it's who they are...and few of their useful idiots are as determined to model that behavior than our own Dan Trabue. And herein lies a significant problem for us if he's the only person against whom we will debate and lay down challenges. Each of us has Dem voters in our lives. We know which of them have some semblance of individual thought and righteous intention, despite their horribly poor political positions and choices. We must be willing to risk losing our relationships with such people to challenge them with the facts, insisting they defend their positions against those facts. It's a similar challenge to us as was Christ's in Luke 14:26. Do we care about Christ more than the favor of others? Do we care about truth more than the favor of others? We must say "yes" to both and live accordingly. If ten percent of us can persuade just one likely Dem voter to either not vote Dem or to vote instead for the GOP, it's hard to believe the Dems can cheat their way to a win.
August 9, 2024 at 11:10 AM
Pervert Dan said,
"What rational people recognize as neighbors and fellow citizens.
But Marshal thinks it's not insane to demonize and entire city."
Not the entire city, but only the massive percentage who are Trump-hating progressive assholes. And it's not "demonizing" them as such if that what they are. YOU certainly are a Trump-hating progressive asshole, among other despicable things. By your logic, calling a thief a thief is "demonizing" thieves.
"A jury of one's neighbors and peers is a jury of one's peers."
Only a Trump-hating progressive asshole would regard a Trump-hating progressive asshole as a "peer" of Trump.
"This sweeping demonization of millions of people just because of where they live is not rational."
Again, not the whole city, but the Trump-hating progressive assholes which comprise a large percentage of it. A change of venue was denied Trump by the Trump-hating progressive asshole who was the judge in this case.
And speaking of that particular Trump-hating progressive asshole, he instructed this alleged jury of Trump's peers improperly as to the 34 counts against Trump. The law requires that a guilty verdict must come from unanimous agreement among the jury on each charge. The Trump-hating progressive asshole judge allowed that unanimity wasn't necessary to bring a guilty verdict on any of them. And would an honest jury of Trump's peers convict him when 23 of the charges on which Trump was convicted didn’t actually involve him?
Clearly you don't know anything about the case except that it resulted in the conviction which Trump-hating progressive assholes like you hatefully hoped he'd receive so that you Trump-hating progressive assholes could at least have the word "convicted felon" to apply to him along with all the other hateful, unjust words you've already been using to demonize him.
You're hateful, anti-Christ piece of shit.
And you're a delightful drop of sunshine and rainbows. I want to join what happy campground party you're a part of, li'l buttercup.
Dan
And so you persist in your unjust demonizing. I can't expect any better from the likes of you and your kind.
So if you'd really like to the happy campground where I live, you'll have to repent of your nonstop lying, support of sexual perversion, child molestation, and widespread murder. Oh, yeah....and you'd have to become a Christian.
I don't believe you're up for any of that.
I don't know who's posing as Dan to submit comments which are clearly not from him. Stop doing this. Be a man and submit comments under your own name, instead of being a cowardly little bitch.
Walz has been an average governor at best. He was slow in dealing with the burning of Minneapolis, then blamed others for his failures.
He lied about the timing and amount of his use of a massive surplus to buy votes.
He's clearly lied about his military service.
He pushed through "free school lunch" for rich families.
His bizarre tampons me men's rooms program is simply another waste of money.
The fact that he literally doesn't won a home, has no private investment/retirement accounts demonstrates that he's totally dependent on the public for far too much and has little or no insight on a part of the financial world that the majority of people are involved with.
I saw a video of a red faced, angry Walz screaming about something just yesterday. Of course Harris just repeats vacuous platitudes and catchphrases in her speeches.
Craig,
I've seen no one produce anything Walz has done as governor which justifies support for him for another term as governor, or worse, to have him anywhere near the White House.
He really hasn't done much beyond the men's room tampon thing, spending a historic budget surplus instead of returning it to taxpayers, and free food for the rich. People seem to like him, but he's not particularly notable for having any significant, deeply held, positions.
His handling of the "Walz Checks" fiasco was masterful on his part. Prior to the election he promised checks of a particular amount would be sent to everyone, after the election his tune changed considerably. It was a pretty standard vote buying scheme, where it was basically a bait and switch and the voters didn't care that he'd lied about it.
Craig, what do you imagine is wrong with Wal and the Walz checks? From all I can find, they seem to be popular in Minnesota, including among GOP voters.
https://www.newsweek.com/tim-walzs-progressive-policies-popular-republicans-swing-states-1936477
As to supporting more accessible tampons... do you REALLY think that's a winning attack for y'all?
I'm telling you, coming across as anti-woman and anti-lgbtq is not going to be a winning tack for y'all.
Who cares, besides religious conservative extremists, if there are tampons in the bathrooms? Do you imagine that high school boys are upset or freaked out about it?
Menstrual blood is just a normal fact of life.
That there are trans guys who still have periods is just a normal fact of life.
MENSTRUAL BLOOD!
Does that scare you?
If so, just grow up.
Dan
Dan
Dan,
I got about 2/3 to 3/4 of the way through the actual polling data of a tiny amount of people across several swing states, which is always impressive. At the point I gave it up due to constraints on my time and attention at the moment, I saw nothing about Walz checks, so I don't know what that is.
What I did find was that as usual, many of the questions are in a vacuum and I'll need to study it more deeply (assuming I'll continue to give a shit...which is unlikely) to see how they came to ask their questions how they did. Where I saw questions related to things like the wealthy paying "their fair share", I find it hard to believe the percentages attributed to Republicans. Thus I suspect there's something missing. But it should be noted that bad ideas aren't made good by how many people like them.
I also didn't get to the part where they provide just how many respondents were of which political affiliation. Typically, we find Dems are the higher percentage and Indies the least. Thus, to say 100% of two people tells us nothing about the more widespread sentiment among the greater population of the ideology to which the two respondents aligned themselves.
So I set aside this notion that lots of Republicans like Walz's or Dem policies.
Then comes the tampon issue. Leave it to a freak pervert like you to criticize honest people opposing a practice so rife with dishonesty. Many people beside real Christians and actual people of faith oppose the practice of putting feminine hygiene products in boys' rest rooms or locker rooms in schools. They also oppose biological boys in girls' facilities. There's no such thing as "trans guys". They're chicks who pretend their dudes or are mentally/emotionally disordered in believing themselves to be boys.
It's not menstrual blood which scares good, decent, honest people. It's assholes like you defending all the lies which flow like menstrual blood out your mouths. We are grown up. Grown up adults don't lie like progressives do.
But perverts like you do constantly.
Marshal, when he's right, he's right, and here Dan has a point.
There's a stigma to menstrual blood so powerful in our society that we practically have to encourage teenage boys to be interested in sex. If we were one of those backwards civilizations where teenage promiscuity was common enough to warrant sex education in the classroom, it would be absurd to suggest that opposition to tampons in the boys room is rooted in a deep-seated fear of people who happen to menstruate.
But we're not such a society, clearly you really are afraid of menstruating people, and you need to take Dan's constructive criticism seriously.
"Craig, what do you imagine is wrong with Wal and the Walz checks?"
1. He lied about the amount and the timing. He (pre election) promised larger checks sooner. He (post election) cut the amounts, limited the recipients, and dragged out the distribution.
2. Conservatives supported giving the majority or entirety of the 17 billion dollar tax surplus (overcharging) back to the taxpayers immediately. We were less impressed with the final result and the massive amounts of new spending.
I never said it was an attack or winning. You may not be aware of this little bit of obscure biology, but the need for tampons in boy's bathrooms is infinitesimal. Put all you want in girl's bathrooms, or both gender bathrooms, no problem. But the placements in boy's bathrooms is about pushing an agenda, not helping people.
"I'm telling you, coming across as anti-woman and anti-lgbtq is not going to be a winning tack for y'all."
But coming across as por-biology should be a good plan. But excellent straw man.
"Who cares, besides religious conservative extremists, if there are tampons in the bathrooms?"
Again with the misrepresentation of the position of others, and on your straw man construction.
"Do you imagine that high school boys are upset or freaked out about it?"
Don't know, don't care. It's a pointless political gesture to hide the tampons in places where they are not needed and won't be used.
"That there are trans guys who still have periods is just a normal fact of life."
"Guys" is such a vague term. based on your context, it seems that you are using the word "guys" to mean adolescent/teenage males or young men. Maybe you slept through biology, but "guys/young men/boys" do not have the appropriate organs to menstruate. That's just basic biology.
The point of my answer is that Walz hasn't done much noteworthy (positively) and that his accomplishments are being overblown by the Harris campaign.
"Does that scare you?"
Walz and vice president or president isn't particularly attractive. But unlike you, I'm not really scared on much.
Art,
The short version of Walz checks is that he promised checks (pre election) of @600/person that would be send out quickly. He literally ran on this as if he'd actually done it. Post election, they checks shrank @$250/person and there was a limit to who got them. In short it was a large wealth transfer from those who pay the majority of taxes, to those who don't. This was combined with spending billions of surplus dollars on programs that will magically appear on the budget after the surplus money runs out, and a failure to address the root of the problem which is high taxes.
In short, Walz isn't particularly honest and like many on the left campaigns on things he hasn't done as if he'd actually done them.
Craig...
Don't know, don't care. It's a pointless political gesture to hide the tampons in places where they are not needed and won't be used.
based on your context, it seems that you are using the word "guys" to mean adolescent/teenage males or young men. Maybe you slept through biology, but "guys/young men/boys" do not have the appropriate organs to menstruate.
?
Trans guys - guys who were identified as female at birth but who are guys and will often use the guys bathroom if it's safe - may still have periods. Trans guys in school systems/under 18, have not transitioned yet, so they still have the original vagina and those vaginas WILL menstruate, EVEN though they are dressing their male identity and using the boys bathrooms because they are boys.
Do you understand trans issues at all?
Maybe some charts and pictures would help? Or, I know, maybe you could benefit from one of those LGBTQ books that so many conservatives are trying to block from libraries.
Craig...
The point of my answer is that Walz hasn't done much noteworthy (positively)
LGBTQ folks disagree with you, at least in part.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/minnesota-became-trans-refuge-thanks-191542790.html
That a positive action for many doesn't personally impact you doesn't mean he hasn't made a huge impact. Can you celebrate with these LGBTQ families (and their allies) who found a HUGE impact in Walz' policies?
August 15, 2024 at 4:05 PM
"Trans guys - guys who were identified as female at birth..."
You pervs are supposed to say their sex was "assigned" at birth. You can't properly promote the lie if you mess up the narrative like that.
...but who are guys..."
Such are most certainly, factually and biologically NOT guys. They're girls with serious mental/emotional issues which are not honestly addressed by psychiatric/psychological "professionals", who are really just perv activists.
"... and will often use the guys bathroom if it's safe - may still have periods."
...because they're chicks and always will be.
"Trans guys..."
...mentally/emotional disordered girls who think they're dudes...
"....in school systems/under 18, have not transitioned yet,..."
...will not have submitted themselves to useless butchery yet...
"...so they still have the original vagina..."
...because they're chicks...
"and those vaginas WILL menstruate,..."
...because a typical chick menstruates once a month. Boys never do. Ever.
""""EVEN though they are dressing their male identity and using the boys bathrooms because they are boys."
No. They're girls to whom assholes lied in a most heinous way.
"Do you understand trans issues at all?"
Very well. It's all bullshit. Believing one is the opposite sex, wishing one was the opposite sex, exploiting the concept of being of the opposite sex for personal gain...none of that can be confirmed as actually being of the opposite sex. The "do no harm" progressive assholes are doing great harm to people by perpetuating this abhorrent lie, and to enable minors in this delusion is especially satanic in its evil. That's otherwise known as "embracing grace."
"Maybe some charts and pictures would help? Or, I know, maybe you could benefit from one of those LGBTQ books that so many conservatives are trying to block from libraries."
Ah...these are books and charts Dan regards as more authoritative than Scripture. Yeah...sure...we're gonna have to get really stoned to even pretend to buy what those pervs books are selling. No thanks, Pervert Dan. I'll stick with actual science and the Will of God.
August 15, 2024 at 5:21 PM
Craig...
"The point of my answer is that Walz hasn't done much noteworthy (positively)"
"LGBTQ folks disagree with you, at least in part."
Well, they're mentally/emotionally disordered, so that doesn't affirm anything.
"That a positive action for many doesn't personally impact you doesn't mean he hasn't made a huge impact."
"Many"? The entire alphabet mafia remains a tiny percentage of the population. The "T" portion of that population is even smaller. There's nothing truly positive in perpetuating the lie which leads so many to self-mutilation and a lifetime of suffering. But hey, when progressives aren't murdering their own children in the womb, they're butchering them once they're outside of it. It's what progressives do, because...you know..."embracing grace."
" Can you celebrate with these LGBTQ families (and their allies) who found a HUGE impact in Walz' policies?"
I can. But then I'd be a fucking moron, too, so I'll pass. I care too much for the mentally ill than to enable them in their delusions. That's why I give you so much crap, Pervert Dan!
You're welcome.
Dan asks Craig, "Can you celebrate with these LGBTQ families (and their allies) who found a HUGE impact in Walz' policies?"
That's what it's all about, being an ally and celebrating the fact that Approved Victim Groups celebrate a politician's actions, no matter how radical or absurd those actions are.
The Right People like the policies, that's all that matters.
Trans guys - guys who were identified as female at birth but who are guys
Dan has accepted these lies to the point he is 100% propagandized."
Girls will never become boys and boys will never become girls. No matter how much medical manipulating and body mutiliation takes place, they can never chang their actual biology. People like Dan foster this fraud which has become socially contagious.
It is against God who is our Creator, it is against biology, it is against common sense but those who foster perversion don't care how much psychological and emotional damage they do to these young people.
It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world, except for Lola.
Post a Comment