moonbattery logo

Sep 12 2017

Open Thread

muslim-lgbtq-support-group

On a tip from Spiny Norman.



  • Maurice Miner

    OK, that sign is just completely fucking hilarious.

    It just exemplifies the total lack of cognisance by the “support group”, who are all no doubt complete fucking moonbats…

  • Moonbats fall for the claim that “global warming” causes heat waves, cold spells, droughts and deluges. Actually that’s just weather and CO2 has nothing to do with it. Generally there is a complex interplay of high and low pressure systems involved. Here is one such example:

    http://www.weatherdudes.com/facts_display.php?fact_id=53

    The Bermuda High is a high pressure area that is usually centered in the vicinity of Bermuda during the spring and summer. This high pressure area is responsible for the prolonged heat waves in the Eastern part of the country. Since winds blow clockwise around high pressure areas in the northern hemisphere, a south to south-westerly wind transports heat and humidity into the Mid-Atlantic States. During the late spring and summer, cold fronts from the north and west have trouble making inroads into the Hampton Roads area due to the persistent Bermuda Highs influence. The high migrates east and west which causes fluctuations in our weather. There are times when it builds westward and is configured in such a way to change our winds to a south-southeasterly direction. This sometimes brings in a tropical air mass and lots of moisture. The interaction of the warm moist air moving over the land causes shower and thunderstorms that can dump copious amounts of rain. Two factors cause the air to rise. The friction of the land and the heat from the land causes the air to rise high into the atmosphere, This causes condensation which then leads to showers and thunderstorms. The position of the Bermuda High also is a player in steering tropical cyclones towards the west and then northwest. If the high is further out in the Atlantic, the odds are that the cyclones will curve and go out to sea. If the high is further west, there is a good chance that the cyclones can impact the East or Gulf Coasts of the United States.

  • PERFECT EXAMPLE OF A “STRAW MAN” ARGUMENT:

    CELEBRITIES TURN HURRICANE BENEFIT CONCERT INTO LEFT-WING SERMON
    ‘Anyone who believes that there is no such thing as global warming must be blind’

    https://news.grabien.com/story-celebrities-turn-hurricane-benefit-concert-left-wing-sermon

    Do you ever notice that it’s always lunatic left wing moonbats claiming anyone says there’s no such thing as global warming?

    That was never the issue. Of course “global warming” is real. So is “global cooling” and the more inclusive term “climate change”.

    The lies come in when they claim humans are a primary driving factor of any of these, or when they try to claim weather events are “proof” humans have somehow altered the climate.

    Climate change is real. And it may cause us problems down the road, mostly if an ice age sets in. Warming – warming would actually be good at this point.

    Think about this:

    The natural tendency of the Earth is to cool. There are still vast areas of the Earth covered with persistent snow and ice. Deserts have been greening as the alleged human-caused global warming has been happening. It’s a fact – anyone can look it up.

    https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=1804

    Even moonbatty NPR knows it:

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1128514

    And yet they try to spin milder winters and/or earlier springs/longer growing seasons as something bad.

  • Obama’s time in office was characterized by more people going on public assistance programs as enrollment in such programs hit historic levels.

    Trump hasn’t even been in office a whole year and the tone is already set for his time in office – in fact once it became clear he was going to win incomes started to rise and wound up setting records. Numbers of people on public assistance have declined sharply.

  • Moving forward, finally, with securing our borders:

    http://www.kvoa.com/story/36348146/waiver-issued-so-construction-of-border-wall-can-begin

    Waiver issued so construction of border wall can begin

    The troublemakers are planning to disrupt:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-warns-border-wall-construction-could-spark-large-scale-protests-1505263853

    The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is worried that planned construction of short stretches of border wall prototypes near San Diego could spark large-scale protests and violence, according to an intelligence alert described to The Wall Street Journal by two law-enforcement officials.

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection warned state and local law enforcement that protests “may arise with little or no warning” and could pose a “threat to U.S. personnel and infrastructure” along the border, according to the three-page memo dated Sept. 6.

    The agency advised that protesters may try to block construction and U.S. Border Patrol vehicles along undeveloped stretches of land near the edge of a secondary fence near San Diego.

  • WHEN MOONBATS ATTACK… OTHER MOONBATS:

    http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article172899151.html

    Berkeley police get to use pepper spray at violent protests

    The Berkeley City Council on Tuesday gave police permission to use pepper spray to repel demonstrators attacking officers and others during violent protests of the kind that have repeatedly hit the city this year.

    The 6-3 vote by the council came ahead of another planned speech Thursday at the University of California, Berkeley.

    The city banned pepper spray in 1997 as a crowd-control weapon, though most law enforcement agencies permit officers to use it to disburse violent crowds, Berkeley police Chief Andrew Greenwood said.

    Greenwood sought such permission at an emergency council meeting, saying it is preferable to batons and tear gas, which the city is allowed to use but disburses far wider than pepper spray.

  • GLOBAL COOLING????

    https://www.iceagenow.info/new-glacier-forming-california/

    New glacier forming in California?

    This report is a bit premature. Let’s see if this continues to form over a 5 or 10 year period. Snow staying there over one summer is not a new glacier forming, but it is rather remarkable, only from the angle that they had a lot of snow this year, much more than average, the main cause this is happening.

  • Bitter Hillary can’t figure out who to blame – Back to blaming Crazy Bernie “B.S.” Sanders…

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/hurt-clinton-says-sanders-dragged-nomination-fight-135139249.html

    Hillary Clinton says Bernie Sanders’s reluctance to concede the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination before the party’s convention was disrespectful, hurtful and stood in stark contrast to the way she handled her primary loss to Barack Obama in 2008.

    That’s because Obama beat Clinton fair and square in 2008, while it was plain to everyone 2016 was rigged and Crazy Bernie “B.S.” Sanders never had a chance.

    Instead of writing a book, Hillary’s “What Happened” could have been summed up in 2 words on a poster:

    I LOST!

    That’s really all there was to it.

    And

    I SUCKED!

    would have worked, too.

  • The same sort of folks who would have imprisoned or executed Copernicus and Galileo for telling the truth are trying to suppress the truth again:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/11/climate-change-activists-want-punishment-for-skept/

    Calls to punish skeptics rise with links to climate change, hurricanes

    What links? They’re imaginary.

    Calls to punish global warming skepticism as a criminal offense have surged in the aftermath of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, but it hasn’t discouraged climate scientists like Judith Curry.
    A retired Georgia Tech professor, she argued on her Climate Etc. website that Irma, which hit Florida as a Category 4 hurricane on Saturday, was fueled in large part by “very weak” wind shear and that the hurricane intensified despite Atlantic Ocean temperatures that weren’t unusually warm.
    That is the kind of talk that could get policymakers who heed her research hauled before the justice system, if some of those in the climate change movement have their way.
    “Climate change denial should be a crime,” declared the Sept. 1 headline in the Outline. Mark Hertsgaard argued in a Sept. 7 article in the Nation, titled “Climate Denialism Is Literally Killing Us,” that “murder is murder” and “we should punish it as such.”
    The suggestion that those who run afoul of the climate change consensus, in particular government officials, should face charges comes with temperatures flaring over the link between hurricanes and greenhouse gas emissions.

    More lies. There is no such “consensus” in favor of AGW theories – the actual consensus that does exist runs AGAINST such claims.

    Nobody is dying because of OPINIONS expressed about climate change. People die when they ignore warnings to get out of the path of bad weather. It’s that simple.

    Anthony Watts, who runs the Watts Up With That blog, listed some of the threats to criminalize skeptics under the headline, “Hate on Display — climate activists go bonkers over #Irma and nonexistent climate connection.”
    Climate Depot’s Marc Morano said the heightened vitriol aimed at those who dispute the link between climate change and extreme weather events is a sign that the global warming narrative is losing steam with the public and policymakers.
    “Activists have been frustrated with record number of polar bears, no acceleration of sea level, the Pause, no trends or declining trends in extreme weather and the public’s apathy,” said Mr. Morano, whose book “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change” is slated to be released in February.

  • Extreme Poverty USA: The True Cost of Climate Madness

    While various US governments continue to waste unimaginable sums of public money on pointless climate schemes, real problems ranging from third world poverty in Alabama to an explosion of the skid row population of Los Angeles are being allowed to fester.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/09/12/extreme-poverty-usa-the-true-cost-of-climate-madness/

  • What do you know… more CO2 in the atmosphere is actually GOOD for the biosphere (as I have been saying for decades now):

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/09/12/study-plants-are-globally-getting-more-efficient-thanks-to-rising-carbon-dioxide/

    Plants are globally getting more efficient thanks to rising carbon dioxide

    Researchers led by Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego have determined that major changes in plant behavior have occurred over the past 40 years, using measurements of subtle changes in the carbon dioxide (CO2) currently found in the atmosphere.

    The two main isotopes, or atomic forms, of carbon are carbon-12 (12C) and carbon-13 (13C). As CO2 has risen since the late 19th century, the ratio of 13C to 12C in atmospheric CO2 has decreased. That’s in part because the CO2 produced by the combustion of fossil fuels has a low 13C/12C ratio. There are other factors in nature as well, however, that have influenced the rate of decrease in the isotopic ratio. The measured rate of decrease in the isotopic ratio turns out to be different than what scientists previously expected.

    The Scripps-led team updated the record of CO2 isotopic ratios that has been made at Scripps since 1978 using air samples collected at Hawaii’s Mauna Loa and the South Pole. The researchers confirmed that the discrepancy exists and considered several reasons for it. They concluded that no combination of factors could plausibly explain the changes in the CO2 isotopic ratio unless plant behavior was changing in a way that influences how much water plants need for growth.

    The work helps to understand the details of how leaves are responding to changes in CO2. Prior to this study, it was already clear that plants behave differently when they are exposed to higher atmospheric CO2 levels because CO2 influences the behavior of stomata, the microscopic holes in leaves that allow a leaf to take up CO2. These holes also allow water to evaporate from the leaf, which must be replenished by water supplied to the roots to avoid drying out. With more CO2 in the atmosphere, a plant can afford to have smaller or fewer stomata, thus allowing more photosynthesis for the same amount of water.

    The research supports a long-standing hypothesis introduced by plant biologists, that posits plants will achieve an optimum response to rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere.

  • Still Out of Service
  • George Lortz

    Personally, I believe a Ma Deuce (50 cal. machine gun) is a much better crowd control option.

  • Mr. Freemarket

    See…we can tell that your information is all wrong because we don’t have tropical cyclones in the US.

    Unless….of course…a hurricane self-identifies as a cyclone.

  • Mr. Freemarket

    The simple truth is that Hillary is not a likable person, nor did she have any positive ideas to present.

    She was out of gas before the campaign started.

    And yes…she sucked.

  • Mr. Freemarket

    Didn’t help any that Al Gore’s latest attempts to rev up climate alarms bombed.

  • Mr. Freemarket

    “California’s push for 100% renewables is a major factor driving up the cost of living.”

    Californians should take a good look at Venezuela. That is where they are going.

  • StephaneDumas

    That photo of Trotsky on his death bed. It’s hard to resist to the temptation to turn it into a meme. ^^;
    https://imgflip.com/i/1vs40a

  • Wilberforce

    “People Rescue Air Jordans from Foot Locker During Hurricane Irma”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6-xokjS4PE

  • Silence Dogood

    Anyone that has gotten a passing grade in biology knows that more CO2 in the air makes for more lush plant growth. IF they’d only stop cutting down the amazon rain forest and quick dumping sewage and drugs in the oceans….

  • Silence Dogood

    Either that or one of those Microwave MRADS that cook someone from outside in… LOL

  • Ol’ Uncle Lar

    According to John Podesta, Hillary had a more than ample supply of “gas”.

  • Unfortunately moonbats only know what they’ve been programmed to regurgitate mindlessly, like trained parrots, not what reality actually demonstrates, not what real science actually shows is true.

    There’s no money or glory in saving tropical rainforests – you can’t sue the poor countries or the poor farmers doing the cutting down and expect to be enriched.

  • http://www.naturalnews.com/053992_Inconvenient_Truth_climate_change_hoax_Al_Gore_fraud.html

    Ten years later, Al Gore’s ‘Inconvenient Truth’ propaganda film turns out to be total bunk… How is his profit from carbon taxes not criminal FRAUD?

    http://climatechangedispatch.com/al-gore-outsold-on-kindle-by-an-e-book-debunking-an-inconvenient-sequel/

    Al Gore Outsold On Kindle By An E-Book Debunking ‘An Inconvenient Sequel’

    https://www.ihatethemedia.com/25-anti-global-warming-videos-al-gore-does-not-want-you-to-see

    25 Global Warming Debunking Videos Al Gore Doesn’t Want You To See

    The names of the videos are there… not sure the links work, might have to search for them but the point is he’s been debunked over and over.

  • Torcer

    Why are there some around here who obsess over non-existent issues? Most if not all of the people here are decidedly anti-Communist and thus opposed the actions of the nation’s Socialist Left. But there are those that incessantly carp about the same non-existent issue even though it was resolved almost a year ago. Why continue to impugn the actions of some based on that which they have no control?

    It should be readily obvious that most around here oppose the immoral and parasitic organized evil that is Socialism. Despite the mendacity of some candidates it should be clear that is their base ideology. And it is beyond absurd that most if not all around here would even consider supporting those that are by definition, Socialist:

    Definitions of left
    2 Relating to a person or group favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views.
    2 (often the Left) [treated as singular or plural] A group or party favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views:
    Origin Old English lyft, left ‘weak’ (the left-hand side being regarded as the weaker side of the body), of West Germanic origin.
    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/left

    Left
    ideology
    Encyclopædia Britannica
    Alternative Title: left wing
    They tend to regard social welfare as the most important goal of government. Socialism is the standard leftist ideology.
    https://www.britannica.com/topic/left

    So why are those who still obsess over something that doesn’t exist?
    Why try to imply the impossible based on random data disconnected from the issue?

  • https://www.yahoo.com/news/amazon-steps-trump-supporters-trash-130010734.html

    Amazon deletes one-star reviews of Hillary Clinton’s new book

    Amazon has been monitoring and deleting reviews after Hillary Clinton’s new book was greeted with a torrent of criticism on the day it was released.

  • https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4457688/rapper-xxxtentacion-sparks-outrage-with-music-video-showing-him-hanging-a-white-child

    Rapper XXXTentacion sparks outrage with music video showing him HANGING a white child
    The Florida based hip hop artist has prompted an outpouring of rage on Twitter with people calling for his YouTube account to be demonetised

  • Obama trying desperately to remain relevant – apparently returning to his former rabble rousing… excuse me… “community organizing” roots.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/news/350419-obama-gathering-civic-leaders-for-obama-foundation-summit

    He’s still trying to assemble a private army… and with the help of Soros funding it he did have some measure of success with antifa – that fascist group that claims to be against their own tactics.

  • Torcer

    Does that mean all of them?

  • The next moonbat lawsuit coming on this?

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-visas-exclusive/exclusive-u-s-wont-issue-some-visas-in-four-nations-in-deportation-crackdown-idUSKCN1BO1W4

    The U.S. State Department on Wednesday will stop issuing certain kinds of visas to some citizens of Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea and Sierra Leone because the nations are not taking back their citizens the United States wants to deport.

    The new policies, laid out in State Department cables sent on Tuesday and reviewed by Reuters, are the latest example of U.S. President Donald Trump’s effort to crack down on immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

    The cables, sent by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to consular officials around the world, said the four countries were “denying or unreasonably delaying” the return of their citizens from the United States, and that visa restrictions would be lifted in a country if it accepted its deportees.

    The Trump administration has made it a priority to pressure reluctant countries to take back their citizens. As of July, the 12 nations deemed “recalcitrant” were China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Iran, Cambodia, Burma, Morocco, Hong Kong, South Sudan, Guinea and Eritrea.

    According to 2016 congressional testimony by Michele Bond, former assistant secretary of state for consular affairs, Cuba was the “most recalcitrant country on repatriation of its nationals,” although she did not give numbers.

    Other countries then at the top of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) list of recalcitrant countries were China, Somalia and India, Bond said at the time. None of those countries are facing visa sanctions.

  • I’ll see your attempts to force a raise in minimum wage and raise you automation!

    http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2017/09/13/robot-fast-food-burger/

    As fast food employees across the U.S. continue to protest for higher wages, a California chain restaurant has decided to hire a new staff member that works for free. The competition for the company’s low-wage workers: a burger-flipping robot named “Flippy.”

  • Although it’s behind a paywall, so I won’t be sharing the link, there’s a report that yet another city in Maryland has decided to let otherwise non-eligible voters take part in their local elections. I know that would be a disaster here in California – it IS a disaster here because they already do, legally or not, plus they illegally vote in ALL elections (how do you think Hillary did so well in California and New York) and things are going to HELL even faster as a result.

  • Torcer

    BREAKING: Shooting at Spokane County high school, multiple casualties reported https://twitchy.com/sd-3133/2017/09/13/breaking-shooting-at-spokane-county-high-school-multiple-casualties-reported/ via @twitchyteam

    Watch for these steps from the Anti-Self defense playbook

    #1:DON’T HESITATE TO SPEAK OUT.
    The truth is, the most powerful time to communicate is when concern and emotions are running at their peak.
    #3:DON’T ASSUME THE FACTS – AND DON’T WAIT FOR THEM
    The smartest thing to do is avoid linking our message and arguments to any one set of partially-revealed facts.
    #8:DON’T LET POLICYSPEAK DRAIN THE EMOTION FROM THE MOMENT.
    There is often a compelling case to be made for immediate action, pivoting from the emotion of a high-profile incident to calls for legislative action or specific policy changes. Those who seek to make that pivot have to be careful not to drain the emotional power out of the moment. An emotionally-driven conversation about what can be done to prevent incidents such as the one at hand is engaging.
    http://gunssavelives.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Gun-ViolenceMessaging-Guide-PDF-1.pdf

  • Torcer

    Try searching for the same headline from another site, there may be one that is also covering the story.

  • Anonymous

    Even if a bolt-action rifle or knife’s involved, blame “assault weapon” AR-15s…

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    The instant they don’t need to fool progressives any longer…

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth How did that score? Let’s review the checklist:
    ● “Cogent point”…check.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87755#comment-3514306041

    Really..
    And that was what exactly? Please do everyone the courtesy of writing it out.

  • KirklesWorth

    Going to carry on the grudge match? So be it. As much as you would like to abandon your comments and dragging old grudges into new threads without references and context, lets review:

    Torcer: Will some of a certain cult following admit their mistake?

    This is contrary to your newly-revered minutia[e] of the past directive, your what does that matter anyway? query, and your only according to your opinion claim. But lets move on…

    KirklesWorth: What “mistake”? Not letting Hillary win?
    Torcer: No, the mistake of choosing the wrong candidate.
    KirklesWorth: So you mean pre-July-20th-2016 Trump supporters.
    Torcer: I was referring to those who did not listen when they were warned last spring.

    So my previous statement was right, but you rephrased it instead of just saying I was correct. What happened to brevity? It’s just another rule for other people that somehow justifies lecturing people against “transgressions” you had previously committed.

    So your “wrong candidate” claim is your opinion unless you can prove that Cruz could have won the presidency. Then perhaps you could persuade those pre-July-20th-2016 Trump supporters to admit their mistake…?

  • Torcer

    Could you please answer the question without the incessant recitation of the past.

    KirklesWorth How did that score? Let’s review the checklist:
    ● “Cogent point”…check.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87755#comment-3514306041

    Really..
    And that was what exactly? Please do everyone the courtesy of writing it out.

  • KirklesWorth

    Problems with reading comprehension?

    KirklesWorth: Oh no…who would dare question Torcer lest be lectured about how to act like an adult? Good thing I just asked you to clarify if not electing Hillary was a mistake…at least we can all agree it wasn’t.

  • Torcer

    No, that was referring to the previous question.
    Perhaps you shouldn’t be one to talk of having having ‘Problems with reading comprehension?’

    Are your links supposed to prove something?

    You made a statement that has to be backed with facts, and yet you failed to do so, it that why you play your little link game?

    Are you having trouble actually debating the issues?

  • KirklesWorth
  • Torcer

    Projection at it’s finest.

  • KirklesWorth

    As much fun as it is to reminisce about old times and regardless if someone considers themselves to be 100% conservative, I will defend those who refused to surrender to a Hillary presidency – especially against those who worked in her favor like you. I guess trying to be subtle to you is pointless.

  • Torcer

    The question now becomes one of whether or not incorrect behaviour should be reinforced?

    BF Skinner: Operant Conditioning
    Skinner is regarded as the father of Operant Conditioning, but his work was based on Thorndike’s (1905) law of effect. Skinner introduced a new term into the Law of Effect – Reinforcement. Behavior which is reinforced tends to be repeated (i.e. strengthened); behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out-or be extinguished (i.e. weakened).
    https://simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

  • KirklesWorth

    And what is this so-called “incorrect behavior” and what makes you its arbiter?

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth

    As much fun as it is to reminisce about old times and regardless if someone considers themselves to be 100% conservative, I will defend those who refused to surrender to a Hillary presidency – especially against those who worked in her favor like you. I guess trying to be subtle to you is pointless.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87795#comment-3516162672

    Why do you keep on referring to that?
    Why are you obsessing over a non-existent issue?

    You expended a great deal of effort analyzing the selections made by the site owner on the random eventualities in the news desperately trying to put forward some nefarious implications.

    What are you trying to imply with meaningless data based on random events?

    Most if not all of the people here are decidedly anti-Communist and thus opposed the actions of the nation’s Socialist Left. But you keeps on carping about the same issue even though it was resolved almost a year ago.

    Why is this the case?

    Why continue to impugn the actions of some based on that which they have no control?

    It should be readily obvious that most around here oppose the immoral and parasitic organized evil that is Socialism. And despite the prevarication’s of some candidates of the national Socialist Left, that is their base ideology. Therefore it is beyond absurd that most if not all would support those that are by definition, Socialist:

    Definitions of left
    2 Relating to a person or group favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views.
    2 (often the Left) [treated as singular or plural] A group or party favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views:
    Origin Old English lyft, left ‘weak’ (the left-hand side being regarded as the weaker side of the body), of West Germanic origin.
    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/left

    Left
    ideology
    Encyclopædia Britannica
    Alternative Title: left wing
    They tend to regard social welfare as the most important goal of government. Socialism is the standard leftist ideology.
    https://www.britannica.com/topic/left

  • Torcer

    Perhaps you should become more familiar with current events instead of wasting people’s time while they are trying to do their part in preserving liberty.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth especially against those who worked in her favor like you.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87795#comment-3516162672

    Sicne you made that incendiary accusation, you will be required to back it up with facts.

    And don’t go AWOL on us..

  • KirklesWorth

    Ah ah ah…you are transgressing your own rules, remember? But I will answer your foolish questions and remind you of your own rules at the bottom:

    Why do you keep on referring to that?

    Referring to what? Be specific. You mean your Hillary help or you trying to impugn your unnamed “cult following”? Because I was following your comment “Will some of a certain cult following admit their mistake?”…was that unclear?

    Why are you obsessing over a non-existent issue?

    Who is “obsessing”? Who asked “Will some of a certain cult following admit their mistake?” (Just one guess).

    What are you trying to imply with meaningless data based on random events?

    I’m not implying anything – I’m stating it outright. Keeping Hillary from the presidency was not a mistake especially after you tried to get Hillary elected all because your cult leader was scorned.

    Why is this the case?

    You haven’t made any “case”. Your vague innuendo means squat.

    Why continue to impugn the actions of some based on that which they have no control?

    So you were under duress when you stated “Will some of a certain cult following admit their mistake?”…sorry that someone forced you to type that.

    And now your “rules” that you don’t bother to follow:

    Torcer: (09/11/2017) 1. Have a cogent point in mind that you can articulate in a few sentences instead of trying to pad your responses.

    2. Write out your response instead of playing games with links and phrases designed to Bernie Sanders your way out of forgetting rule number one.

    3. Stick to the important issues of the day instead of the minutia of the past.

    4. Keep the phrase ‘Brevity is the soul of wit’ forefront in your mind, no one wants to have to wade through long dissertations or convoluted posts that jump around haphazardly.

    5. While you may have enjoyed playing the binary choice game and accusing others of supporting others based on information you do not have, please understand that the events have proceeded from that time frame and are now pointless falsehoods.

  • KirklesWorth
  • Torcer

    Perhaps you are not old and wise enough to understand that it’s never a good idea to deliberately antagonize those who are you allies without any discernible reason.

    You’ve mentioned that little jib of your several times so it wasn’t a mistake on your part.

    Do you realize that your little echo chamber exercise of charting data based on random events and the actions of someone else proves nothing?

    Or did you fail to realize that until now?

  • Torcer

    Perhaps you are not old and wise enough to understand that it’s never a good idea to deliberately antagonize those who are you allies without any discernible reason.

    You’ve mentioned that little jib of your several times so it wasn’t a mistake on your part.

    Do you realize that your little echo chamber exercise of charting data based on random events and the actions of someone else proves nothing?

    Or did you fail to realize that until now?

  • KirklesWorth

    Yeah, you’ve got nothing. Funny how you can’t follow your own directives:

    Sicne [sic] you made that incendiary accusation, you will be required to back it up with facts.

  • Torcer

    What exactly does that prove?
    News events are random and the site owner’s posting of those items are out of my control, so it proves NOTHING.

    What FACTUAL items do you have?

  • KirklesWorth

    Perhaps you are not old and wise enough to understand that it’s never a good idea to deliberately antagonize those who are you allies without any discernible reason.

    Odd, that was your M.O. when I first started chiming in – it certainly didn’t bother you. Chalk another one up to preaching what you don’t practice.

    Do you realize that your little echo chamber exercise of charting data based on random events and the actions of someone else proves nothing?

    Yeah, I remember telling somebody that poll data wasn’t to be believed, and yet I was chastised for it. The data is what it is – I formulated no conclusions – readers can decide for themselves. I was just accommodating the demands you don’t make of yourself…”echo chamber” notwithstanding:

    Sicne [sic] you made that incendiary accusation, you will be required to back it up with facts.

    Or did you fail to realize that until now?

    I don’t have to “realize” anything – just posting the “data based on random events”…got a problem with that?

  • KirklesWorth

    The lists are facts. Where were they wrong? They prove whatever the reader decides they prove – I made no claims that you dictated to Dave Blount what to post – it’s all “coincidence” about the Trump-to-Hillary ratio, right?

  • Torcer

    You can dispense with trying to pad you responses.

    KirklesWorth You mean your Hillary

    KirklesWorth I’m not implying anything – I’m stating it outright. Keeping Hillary from the presidency was not a mistake especially after you tried to get Hillary elected all because your cult leader was scorned.

    Did you miss the part where I stated that was Meaningless data based on random events and the actions of someone else?

    KirklesWorth You haven’t made any “case”. Your vague innuendo means squat.

    Oh, I’m going to have to keep that one – sadly you are now projecting on all cylinders.

  • Torcer

    *sigh*

    White House: We’ll give away this priority to sign a DACA bill https://hotair.com/archives/2017/09/12/white-house-well-sign-daca-bill-without-key-demand/

    White House: We’ll give away this priority to sign a DACA bill
    Remember when Donald Trump promised his immigration-hardline supporters that they would get tired of all the winning? Good times, good times. Not only has Trump extended the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and pushed Congress to make it permanent, the White House announced that it won’t push funding for the border wall as a trade-off over concerns it might derail DACA.

    No, seriously:

    White House legislative affairs director Marc Short told reporters on Tuesday that President Trump would not demand that border wall funding is tied to a legislative fix for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

    Speaking at a roundtable event hosted by the Christian Science Monitor, Short said the administration didn’t want to “bind” itself by making a demand that would likely be a nonstarter for many lawmakers.

    “We’re interested in getting border security and the president has made the commitment to the American people that a barrier is important to that security,” Short said. “Whether it’s part of DCA or another legislative vehicle, I don’t want to bind us into a construct that would make the conclusion on DACA impossible.”

    Let that one sink in for a moment. The Department of Justice has already announced that DACA-related actions won’t be a priority even if the program somehow manages to expire. Trump himself assured DACA recipients that there will be “no action!” after Nancy Pelosi urged him to do so on Twitter.

    Even with all of those assurances of non-action in place, the White House values a DACA deal so much that they have pre-emptively taken Trump’s biggest promise of the election cycle off the table in order to get it. Now, perhaps there was a chapter in Art of the Deal that most missed, but taking big asks off the table before negotiations begin in earnest does not seem to be the path to “winning so much that we’ll get sick of winning.” So much for the nationalists and populists, eh?
    https://hotair.com/archives/2017/09/12/white-house-well-sign-daca-bill-without-key-demand/

    White House: Border wall funding doesn’t have to be tied to DACA legislation http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/350196-white-house-border-wall-funding-doesnt-have-to-be-tied-to-daca

    Disaster: Trump Looks to Follow Democrats to Abolish Debt Ceiling Altogether
    In a move that should surprise no one who understood who Donald Trump was before the 2016 election cycle commenced, it seems the President is actually open to working with Democrats to eliminate the “debt ceiling” altogether. This would, ostensibly, allow the U.S. government to do what it does best – spend money it doesn’t have thereby racking up more debt – with no corresponding vote by Congress to allow it.

    A violation of the Constitution’s Article I designation of Congress as the branch that controls all government spending? Yes. A violation of basic fiscal morality? Absolutely. The exact opposite of everything conservatives have been saying for decades now about the irresponsible, out-of-control debt accumulation of Washington, D.C.? Uh-huh. An economic death sentence for our children and grandchildren? You bet.

    And Donald Trump seems totally open to it:

    “It could be discussed,” Trump said. “For many years, people have been talking about getting rid of [the] debt ceiling altogether.” … Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has suggested scrapping the existing debt-limit process and replacing it with one that automatically lifts the borrowing limit every time Congress appropriates future spending.

    This gleeful Washington Post report subtitle read, “Trump confounds conservatives by siding with Democrats.” The only conservatives confounded by it are those who willfully suspended their principles and reason during the campaign. The rest of us saw this coming a mile away.
    http://theresurgent.com/disaster-trump-looks-to-follow-democrats-to-abolish-debt-ceiling-altogether/

  • KirklesWorth

    Go ahead and bluff…no skin off my nose. You make demands of others you won’t abide by, so it’s just more fun pointing out your hypocrisy. Just going back to the good ol’ days of you making unsubstantiated claims like:

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/22/2016) Is there some reason you would rather focus your efforts on trying to intimating others into acquiescing to your bad choice than defeating the national socialist left in November?

    Ha! Classic! And especially ironic after you just stated:

    Perhaps you are not old and wise enough to understand that it’s never a good idea to deliberately antagonize those who are you allies without any discernible reason.

    But now I’m sure you so much older and wiser!

  • Torcer

    So there goes your credibility – you make spurious accusations without any factual proof.

  • KirklesWorth

    Rule failures:

    Torcer: (09/11/2017) 2. Write out your response instead of playing games with links and phrases designed to Bernie Sanders your way out of forgetting rule number one.

    Torcer: (09/11/2017) 4. Keep the phrase ‘Brevity is the soul of wit’ forefront in your mind, no one wants to have to wade through long dissertations or convoluted posts that jump around haphazardly.

    Where did I say anything about DACA? What would your Hillary have done about DACA…or all the other myriad of issues? Are you saying that the DACA issue makes Hillary a preferable president? Notice how I don’t fall into your trap about changing the subject from “will some of a certain cult following admit their mistake?” into defending something I never commented on? Nice try though.

  • Torcer

    No, that is data based on random events and the actions of someone else.

    They prove NOTHING.

    TRY AGAIN.

    KirklesWorth especially against those who worked in her favor like you.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87795#comment-3516162672

    Since you made that incendiary accusation, you will be required to back it up with facts.
    Those FACTS will be in the form of excerpts and links (you’ve proven capable in that regard) that prove your contention.

  • Torcer

    No, that is data based on random events and the actions of someone else.

    They prove NOTHING.

    TRY AGAIN.

    KirklesWorth especially against those who worked in her favor like you.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87795#comment-3516162672

    Since you made that incendiary accusation, you will be required to back it up with facts.
    Those FACTS will be in the form of excerpts and links (you’ve proven capable in that regard) that prove your contention.

  • Torcer

    Changing the subject now?
    Again:The question now becomes one of whether or not incorrect behaviour should be reinforced?

    BF Skinner: Operant Conditioning
    Skinner is regarded as the father of Operant Conditioning, but his work was based on Thorndike’s (1905) law of effect. Skinner introduced a new term into the Law of Effect – Reinforcement. Behavior which is reinforced tends to be repeated (i.e. strengthened); behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out-or be extinguished (i.e. weakened).
    https://simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

  • KirklesWorth

    Hahaha! Like I’m going to get lectured about “credibility” from a poll-spouting Hillary-helping so-called “conservative”. I’ll just continue to review our history together and post it accordingly. Too bad Fiberal isn’t around, he/she had your number:

    Fiberal►NotKennedy: After KirklesWorth posted his anti-trump data, Torcer went all castrada. So it seems to me that a little quantification might go a long way here on MB.
    Fiberal►Torcer: Kirklesworth’s list is quite a response to your question. So just what kind of discretion have you exhibited? Meaning that you were, are now and will always be a never-trumper with one mindless mission in life– to criticize Trump. You are with her. (BTW can you try and clean up your grammar? It’s painful to read.)

    But let’s review your polls-obsession to try and get people to allow a Hillary presidency. First, let’s review what you don’t answer and some comments I have made:

    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (08/02/2016) Regarding polls, Where is your candidate polling?
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (08/09/2016) I like what Ann Coulter says: “the left uses polls to manipulate public opinion, rather than find out what it is.”
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (08/20/2016) My answer? I am a Trump supporter who isn’t concerned with polls and campaigns at this stage of the game.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (08/10/2016) Where are the polls on Torcer’s candidate Darrell Castle?

    And now, your poll obsession in a desperate attempt to sway voters away from Trump:

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/10/2016) How is Trump doing in the polls?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/10/2016) And I’ve answered your questions – now it YOUR turn: Do you believe the polls? Shouldn’t Trump and his followers try something different?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/10/2016) Now that I’ve answered your questions – now it YOUR turn: Do you believe the polls? Shouldn’t Trump and his followers try something different?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/10/2016) Apparently they haven’t begun polling for him, so what is your point aside from dodging the question? Now that I’ve answered your questions – now it YOUR turn: Do you believe the polls? Shouldn’t Trump and his followers try something different?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/19/2016) Let’s see – the discussion is on polls and I posted an article on one – have trouble figuring that out?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/18/2016) That a candidate who champions liberty wins…Now that I’ve answered your question – you answer mine – Do you believe the polls?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/18/2016) And I’ve answered your questions – now it YOUR turn: Do you believe the polls? Shouldn’t Trump and his followers try something different?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/18/2016) Apparently they haven’t begun polling for him, so what is your point aside from dodging the question? Now that I’ve answered your questions – now it YOUR turn:
    Do you believe the polls? Shouldn’t Trump and his followers try something different?

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/18/2016) Now that I’ve answered your questions – now it YOUR turn: Do you believe the polls? Shouldn’t Trump and his followers try something different?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/20/2016) What exactly do you mean by that? Are you claiming the polls are ‘false’?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/20/2016) Merely stating disbelief while making vague allusions to other purposes is hardly an answer.
    Please cite how the polls are incorrect with facts and logic – If you can.

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/20/2016) Again Merely stating disbelief while making vague allusions to other purposes is hardly an answer.
    Please cite how the polls are incorrect with facts and logic – If you can.

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/20/2016) Again Merely stating disbelief while making vague allusions to other purposes is hardly an answer.
    Please cite how the polls are incorrect with facts and logic – If you can.

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/20/2016) Are you denying the reality of trump’s dreadful polls?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/21/2016) Again, that is not a reasoned argument – TRY AGAIN. Merely stating disbelief while making vague allusions to other purposes is hardly an answer. Please cite how the polls are incorrect with facts and logic – If you can.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorthThe lists are facts.

    Do you even understand the meanings of the words I used or that random data is based on the actions of someone else?

    KirklesWorth They prove whatever the reader decides they prove

    [My emphasis]
    Hahahahahaha!!

    Wow! You really said that!
    Given that they are based on random events and the actions of someone else they don’t prove anything.

    What else do you have?
    Or is the sum total of your case a repetition of the same thing?
    Because:

    You haven’t made any “case”. Your vague innuendo means squat.

  • KirklesWorth

    I’m sorry…what was your subject du jour? You tried to change it to DACA…good for you! I’m still back with the showing how you wanted a Hillary presidency.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth I don’t have to “realize” anything – just posting the “data based on random events”

    That’s all you’ve posted.

    And to quote you one more time:

    You haven’t made any “case”. Your vague innuendo means squat.

  • KirklesWorth

    I’ve provided plenty of facts, but will continue to produce. Just for the record…who did you want to win the 2016 election?

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorthThe lists are facts.

    Do you even understand the meanings of the words I used or that random data is based on the actions of someone else?

    KirklesWorth They prove whatever the reader decides they prove

    [My emphasis]
    Hahahahahaha!!

    Wow! You really said that!
    Given that they are based on random events and the actions of someone else they don’t prove anything.

    What else do you have?
    Or is the sum total of your case a repetition of the same thing?
    Because:

    You haven’t made any “case”. Your vague innuendo means squat.

  • KirklesWorth

    Given that they are based on random events and the actions of someone else they don’t prove anything.

    Sure, whatever you say. Yet somehow your first comment to me was:

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/22/2016) Is there some reason you would rather focus your efforts on trying to intimating others into acquiescing to your bad choice than defeating the national socialist left in November?

    Your reverence for “proof” is/was heartwarming. Who did you want to win the 2016 election?

  • Mr. Freemarket

    There used to be laws against criminal gains.

    Of course, that doesn’t apply to democrats.

  • Torcer

    No that was data based on random events and the actions of someone else.

    How many times do I have to repeat that?

    And as to you second question – it should be obvious that it was Trump given that my opinion of Comrade Hillary and her immoral and parasitic base ideology.

    Was that supposed to trip me up or something?

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth And what is this so-called “incorrect behavior”

    Again:The question now becomes one of whether or not incorrect behaviour should be reinforced?

    BF Skinner: Operant Conditioning
    Skinner is regarded as the father of Operant Conditioning, but his work was based on Thorndike’s (1905) law of effect. Skinner introduced a new term into the Law of Effect – Reinforcement. Behavior which is reinforced tends to be repeated (i.e. strengthened); behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out-or be extinguished (i.e. weakened).
    https://simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

    KirklesWorth I’m still back with the showing how you wanted a Hillary presidency.

    And once again we’re back to your abject FAILURE to prove that with Facts.

    Did you miss the part where I was trying to kindly provide you with some wisdom in NOT deliberately antagonizing those who are ostensibly your allies?

  • Torcer

    So have you realized you have NOTHING?

    Or to use your words:

    You haven’t made any “case”. Your vague innuendo means squat.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth And what is this so-called “incorrect behavior”

    White House: We’ll give away this priority to sign a DACA bill https://hotair.com/archives/2017/09/12/white-house-well-sign-daca-bill-without-key-demand/

    White House: We’ll give away this priority to sign a DACA bill
    Remember when Donald Trump promised his immigration-hardline supporters that they would get tired of all the winning? Good times, good times. Not only has Trump extended the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and pushed Congress to make it permanent, the White House announced that it won’t push funding for the border wall as a trade-off over concerns it might derail DACA.

    No, seriously:

    White House legislative affairs director Marc Short told reporters on Tuesday that President Trump would not demand that border wall funding is tied to a legislative fix for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

    Speaking at a roundtable event hosted by the Christian Science Monitor, Short said the administration didn’t want to “bind” itself by making a demand that would likely be a nonstarter for many lawmakers.

    “We’re interested in getting border security and the president has made the commitment to the American people that a barrier is important to that security,” Short said. “Whether it’s part of DCA or another legislative vehicle, I don’t want to bind us into a construct that would make the conclusion on DACA impossible.”

    Let that one sink in for a moment. The Department of Justice has already announced that DACA-related actions won’t be a priority even if the program somehow manages to expire. Trump himself assured DACA recipients that there will be “no action!” after Nancy Pelosi urged him to do so on Twitter.

    Even with all of those assurances of non-action in place, the White House values a DACA deal so much that they have pre-emptively taken Trump’s biggest promise of the election cycle off the table in order to get it. Now, perhaps there was a chapter in Art of the Deal that most missed, but taking big asks off the table before negotiations begin in earnest does not seem to be the path to “winning so much that we’ll get sick of winning.” So much for the nationalists and populists, eh?
    https://hotair.com/archives/2017/09/12/white-house-well-sign-daca-bill-without-key-demand/

    White House: Border wall funding doesn’t have to be tied to DACA legislation http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/350196-white-house-border-wall-funding-doesnt-have-to-be-tied-to-daca

    Disaster: Trump Looks to Follow Democrats to Abolish Debt Ceiling Altogether
    In a move that should surprise no one who understood who Donald Trump was before the 2016 election cycle commenced, it seems the President is actually open to working with Democrats to eliminate the “debt ceiling” altogether. This would, ostensibly, allow the U.S. government to do what it does best – spend money it doesn’t have thereby racking up more debt – with no corresponding vote by Congress to allow it.

    A violation of the Constitution’s Article I designation of Congress as the branch that controls all government spending? Yes. A violation of basic fiscal morality? Absolutely. The exact opposite of everything conservatives have been saying for decades now about the irresponsible, out-of-control debt accumulation of Washington, D.C.? Uh-huh. An economic death sentence for our children and grandchildren? You bet.

    And Donald Trump seems totally open to it:

    “It could be discussed,” Trump said. “For many years, people have been talking about getting rid of [the] debt ceiling altogether.” … Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has suggested scrapping the existing debt-limit process and replacing it with one that automatically lifts the borrowing limit every time Congress appropriates future spending.

    This gleeful Washington Post report subtitle read, “Trump confounds conservatives by siding with Democrats.” The only conservatives confounded by it are those who willfully suspended their principles and reason during the campaign. The rest of us saw this coming a mile away.
    http://theresurgent.com/disaster-trump-looks-to-follow-democrats-to-abolish-debt-ceiling-altogether/

  • KirklesWorth

    (#1) You restarted again at the top contrary to your “write out your response instead of playing games with links and phrases designed to Bernie Sanders your way out of forgetting rule number one” rule you don’t follow. The recap is there.

  • KirklesWorth

    (#2) You restarted again at the top contrary to your “write out your response instead of playing games with links and phrases designed to Bernie Sanders your way out of forgetting rule number one” rule you don’t follow. The recap is there.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth

    Given that they are based on random events and the actions of someone else they don’t prove anything.

    Sure, whatever you say. Yet somehow your first comment to me was:

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/22/2016) Is there some reason you would rather focus your efforts on trying to intimating others into acquiescing to your bad choice than defeating the national socialist left in November?

    And that proves what exactly?
    Are you that desperate to find something.. Anything.. that will bolster your incendiary accusations?

    So have you realized you have NOTHING?

    Or to use your words:

    You haven’t made any “case”. Your vague innuendo means squat.

  • KirklesWorth

    (#3) You restarted again at the top contrary to your “write out your response instead of playing games with links and phrases designed to Bernie Sanders your way out of forgetting rule number one” rule you don’t follow. The recap is there.

  • KirklesWorth

    (#4) You restarted again at the top contrary to your “write out your response instead of playing games with links and phrases designed to Bernie Sanders your way out of forgetting rule number one” rule you don’t follow. The recap is there.

  • KirklesWorth

    (#5) You restarted again at the top contrary to your “write out your response instead of playing games with links and phrases designed to Bernie Sanders your way out of forgetting rule number one” rule you don’t follow. The recap is there.

  • Torcer

    No that’s just to make sure everyone knows how badly you’re doing. 🙂

  • Torcer

    Hahahaha!!!

  • Torcer

    Hahahaha!!!!

  • Torcer

    Hahahahaha!!!

  • Torcer

    Jajajajajajajaj!!!

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth

    Given that they are based on random events and the actions of someone else they don’t prove anything.

    Sure, whatever you say. Yet somehow your first comment to me was:

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/22/2016) Is there some reason you would rather focus your efforts on trying to intimating others into acquiescing to your bad choice than defeating the national socialist left in November?

    And that proves what exactly?
    Are you that desperate to find something.. Anything.. that will bolster your incendiary accusations?

    So have you realized you have NOTHING?

    Or to use your words:

    You haven’t made any “case”. Your vague innuendo means squat.

  • Torcer

    Wow, are you getting that desperate to have to quote others?

    So what is the idea here – throw a bunch of BS up against the wall and hope some of it sticks?

  • Talcum X

    The tosser and cocklesworth thread is a waste of time.

  • KirklesWorth

    Torcer wants to re-hash the good old days, so let’s do it! Torcer thinks that it wasn’t obvious that he/she was trying to defeat Trump in order to get Hillary elected so that hopefully it would trigger a convention of states.

    Whether Torcer’s goals were ultimately magnanimous the-end-justifies-the means return-our-country-to-conservative-values or not, the attempt was made to try and get Trump defeated for Hillary’s benefit, which was a catastrophe waiting to happen.

    it just so happens I know of Torcer’s Moonbattery post stash in the Open Thread of December 14, 2015. On that thread, Torcer has accumulated over 8,200 posts and of those posts 1070 posts have “Hillary” in the text and 3077 posts have “Trump” in the text.

    Next we want to determine which are articles and what the “flavour” of what was being collected. For brevity’s sake, these are the articles Torcer collected after July 20th, 2016 when Donald Trump was the declared candidate through August 7th, 2016.

    07/22/2016: “No, #NeverTrumpers Aren’t Morally Responsible For Hillary Clinton. Here’s Why.”
    07/22/2016: “Trump: I wouldn’t accept Cruz endorsement”
    07/22/2016: “Donald Trump accepts nomination to run against Hillary, but first he still isn’t finished with Ted Cruz”
    07/25/2016: Clinton Campaign: ‘Plenty of Evidence’ Putin Wants Trump to Win Election
    07/25/2016: Is the Russian Government Helping Trump Win the Election?
    07/25/2016: FLASHBACK: When Hillary MOCKED Romney for calling Russians a THREAT! LOL!!
    07/25/2016: Trump Calls Christians to Come Bow Before Their Idol
    07/25/2016: Former Ambassador to Russia says Putin has a PERSONAL VENDETTA against Hillary, prefers Trump
    07/27/2016: Media has a ‘cry wolf’ problem with Trump
    07/27/2016: Peyton Manning for President
    07/27/2016: INCREDIBLE: Trump just encouraged Russia to KEEP HACKING until they find Hillary’s emails
    07/27/2016: VIDEO: Trump Openly Asking for Russia to Breach American Sovereignty
    07/27/2016: Trump Says He Hopes Russian Hackers Find Clinton?s Deleted Emails
    07/28/2016: Brad Thor for President
    07/28/2016: Democrats Try to Slam Trump For Saying He Hopes Putin Has Hillary’s Emails. There’s Just One SMALL Problem
    07/28/2016: Gaffes and Cover-ups: The Nightmare of a Trump Candidacy
    07/28/2016: EVEN Trump doesn’t know HOW BRILLIANT he was to ask Russians to hack Hillary!!
    07/29/2016: Hillary Clinton is demolishing Donald Trump among hedge-fund donors — so far
    07/29/2016: Poll: 13 percent prefer meteor hitting earth over Clinton, Trump
    07/30/2016: The 10 stages of Trump excuse-ism
    07/31/2016: CBS battleground poll: Hillary 43, Trump 41
    07/31/2016: Hillary’s self awareness is deleted in latest shot at Donald Trump
    08/02/2016: Hillary Still Destroying Trump in Fundraising
    08/02/2016: Does Donald Trump really want to win the White House?
    08/02/2016: 7 Steps To Defending Donald Trump: A Guide
    08/02/2016: Giuliani: Trump Should Attack Hillary, I’ll ‘Attack Everybody Else’
    08/02/2016: There is something very wrong with Donald Trump
    08/02/2016: Trump Responds to Hillary’s Massive ‘Infrastructure’ Boondoggle; Conservatives Will Be Livid
    08/02/2016: Trump on Hillary’s bounce: There’s something phony about these polls
    08/03/2016: Clinton and Trump lay groundwork for pitched battle over Colorado
    08/03/2016: Newt HITS Trump: ‘He is helping Hillary win by proving he is more UNACCEPTABLE than she is!’
    08/03/2016: Trump Probably Has Just One More Chance to Get His Sh*t Together
    08/04/2016: UPDATED — If Hillary keeps saying this, Trump might actually win the election!
    08/04/2016: Who Will Be Blamed If Trump Implodes?
    08/04/2016: ANOTHER DREADFUL POLL FOR DISASTROUS DONALD…
    08/04/2016: New National McClatchy Poll Shows Hillary Clinton with Her Biggest Lead Yet
    08/04/2016: NBC/WSJ Poll: Hillary Clinton Jumps to Nine Point Lead Over Donald Trump
    08/05/2016: Don’t Blame Us. Blame Yourselves
    08/05/2016: Trump’s Campaign Being Outspent by a Third Party Candidate
    08/07/2016: Why Clinton can thank Trump for her polling bump

  • Normally exactly what I do… but I had obligations to attend to so left it to the readers who were interested enough to pursue it.

    Why here is a free link now!

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/13/illegal-immigrants-get-ok-to-vote-in-maryland-citys-elections.html

  • And speaking of rooftop action…

    Was he gay?

    A California grandfather took matters into his own hands when a stranger jumping on rooftops caused an hours-long police standoff on Tuesday.

    Willard Burgess, 83, was at his La Puenta house when the suspect police were chasing stood on his roof, refusing their orders to come down for hours.

    Burgess, fed up with the ordeal, eventually grabbed his neighbor’s ladder and told officers he was climbing onto the roof, KABC reported.

    “That sucker’s coming off,” he told police.

    The grandfather then shoved the man off his roof, ending the hours-long standoff.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/13/california-grandpa-throws-man-off-roof-to-end-hours-long-police-standoff.html

  • Pretty much…

  • Let’s not dwell on the past. Put it behind us. Let’s look at NOW and consider the FUTURE.

  • Well actually all hurricanes are tropical cyclones, but not all tropical cyclones are called hurricanes… though your point is understood. What if a hurricane doesn’t wish to be referred to as a topical cyclone? What then?

  • Mr. Freemarket

    Your descriptions of weather phenomena is so judgmental.

  • Ah yes, the Browning M2. Some might call it a relic since it was designed nearly 100 years ago at this point. I prefer to call it a legend as it is still in use, today the primary heavy machine gun of NATO countries, also used by many other countries as well. The M2 has been in use longer than any other firearm in U.S. inventory except the .45 ACP M1911 pistol, another Browning designed product. Effective against infantry, unarmored or lightly armored vehicles and boats, light fortifications and low-flying aircraft, the Ma Deuce is more than just legendary. It’s almost mythical.

    And the way things are going with moonbats, sadly I would agree that they will leave us no choice but to resort to using it “when the time comes”.

  • JoyWCarrera

    Boost your earnings on Google & make $99/hour by working from a home computer.
    on friday I bought a gorgeous Chrysler when I got my check for $9277 this munth. it’s actualy the most comfortable job Ive ever had . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away got over $99, per/hr . check
    !si297:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GooglePerfectWallJobsEasyJobs/find/jobs ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!si327..,…

  • Mr. Freemarket

    I have a hard time watching anything with Robin Williams in it.

    RIP RW

  • Torcer

    Yes, I kind of guessed that was your SOP, but I figured I would at least make the suggestion. 🙂

  • Torcer

    I’ve heard some reading excerpts, so it’s that is entirely understandable.

  • Torcer

    The Single-Payer Insanity http://politi.co/2wX5ilP #EveryonePays #SocialismSucks #Resist #NationalSocialistLeft

  • Torcer

    Gun Test: Henry AR-7 Survival Rifle http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/12/gun-test-henry-ar-7-survival-rifle/? #GunSense=NonSense #2a #NRA
    Boot @MomsDemand from @Everytown

  • Torcer

    The Democratic Party Has Finally Embraced Single-Payer http://theresurgent.com/the-democratic-party-has-finally-embraced-single-payer/ #EveryonePays #SocialismSucks #Resist #NationalSocialistLeft

    Sanders’s ‘Medicare for All’ Plan Draws Criticism From Health Care Advocates, Experts, Lawmakers http://freebeacon.com/politics/sanderss-medicare-plan-draws-criticism-health-care-advocates-experts-lawmakers/

    Bernie Sanders: Why We Need Medicare for All
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/opinion/bernie-sanders-medicare-single-payer.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion

    Soviet Sanders’ Single Payer Commie Care Scheme Offers Free Health Care to Illegal Aliens
    http://thepolitistick.com/soviet-sanders-single-payer-commie-care-scheme-offers-free-health-care-illegal-aliens/

  • Torcer

    That was the point I was trying to make all along:

    But it is an entirely pointless exercise in arguing the past.

    I would rather spend my time trying defend liberty against the onslaught of collectivism. At present we have Bernie Sanders pushing for ‘Single payer’ national socialist healthcare while at the same time we have a leader who is willing to make what ever deals he can to gain some in the ‘win’ column. Not to mention that Trump has mentioned support for similar types of schemes.

    There are those around here who have a somewhat unique method of debate that can be tiresome at times. Especially when it doesn’t actually put forward an intellectual argument and instead incessantly attacks with lies and falsehoods. I have much better things to do than having to respond to arguments over minutia, and its doubly infuriating when someone uses projection in their accusations.

    There is also a sense of sadness of it is displaying a decided lack of moral integrity. I loath to sound like those from 30 – 40 years ago who railed against the ‘younger generation’ but that going to have to be the case. I find their lack of honesty in dealings with many here and elsewhere to be a disturbing trend.

  • KirklesWorth

    There are those around here who have a somewhat unique method of debate that can be tiresome at times. Especially when it doesn’t actually put forward an intellectual argument and instead incessantly attacks with lies and falsehoods. I have much better things to do than having to respond to arguments over minutia, and its doubly infuriating when someone uses projection in their accusations.

    Beautiful…I couldn’t have said it better myself.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth

    Torcer wants to re-hash the good ol’ days, so let’s do it! Torcer thinks that it wasn’t obvious that he/she was trying to defeat Trump in order to get Hillary elected so that hopefully it would trigger a convention of states or something.

    Whether Torcer’s goals were ultimately magnanimous the-end-justifies-the-means return-our-country-to-conservative-values or not, the attempt was made to try and get Trump defeated for Hillary’s benefit, which was a catastrophe waiting to happen.

    it just so happens I know of Torcer’s Moonbattery post stash in the Open Thread of December 14, 2015. On that thread, Torcer has accumulated over 8,200 posts and of those posts 1070 posts have “Hillary” in the text and 3077 posts have “Trump” in the text.

    Next we want to determine which are articles and what the “flavour” of what was being collected. For brevity’s sake, these are the articles Torcer collected after July 20th, 2016 when Donald Trump was the declared candidate through August 7th, 2016.

    07/22/2016: “No, #NeverTrumpers Aren’t Morally Responsible For Hillary Clinton. Here’s Why.”
    07/22/2016: “Trump: I wouldn’t accept Cruz endorsement”
    07/22/2016: “Donald Trump accepts nomination to run against Hillary, but first he still isn’t finished with Ted Cruz”
    07/25/2016: Clinton Campaign: ‘Plenty of Evidence’ Putin Wants Trump to Win Election
    07/25/2016: Is the Russian Government Helping Trump Win the Election?
    07/25/2016: FLASHBACK: When Hillary MOCKED Romney for calling Russians a THREAT! LOL!!
    07/25/2016: Trump Calls Christians to Come Bow Before Their Idol
    07/25/2016: Former Ambassador to Russia says Putin has a PERSONAL VENDETTA against Hillary, prefers Trump
    07/27/2016: Media has a ‘cry wolf’ problem with Trump
    07/27/2016: Peyton Manning for President
    07/27/2016: INCREDIBLE: Trump just encouraged Russia to KEEP HACKING until they find Hillary’s emails
    07/27/2016: VIDEO: Trump Openly Asking for Russia to Breach American Sovereignty
    07/27/2016: Trump Says He Hopes Russian Hackers Find Clinton?s Deleted Emails
    07/28/2016: Brad Thor for President
    07/28/2016: Democrats Try to Slam Trump For Saying He Hopes Putin Has Hillary’s Emails. There’s Just One SMALL Problem
    07/28/2016: Gaffes and Cover-ups: The Nightmare of a Trump Candidacy
    07/28/2016: EVEN Trump doesn’t know HOW BRILLIANT he was to ask Russians to hack Hillary!!
    07/29/2016: Hillary Clinton is demolishing Donald Trump among hedge-fund donors — so far
    07/29/2016: Poll: 13 percent prefer meteor hitting earth over Clinton, Trump
    07/30/2016: The 10 stages of Trump excuse-ism
    07/31/2016: CBS battleground poll: Hillary 43, Trump 41
    07/31/2016: Hillary’s self awareness is deleted in latest shot at Donald Trump
    08/02/2016: Hillary Still Destroying Trump in Fundraising
    08/02/2016: Does Donald Trump really want to win the White House?
    08/02/2016: 7 Steps To Defending Donald Trump: A Guide
    08/02/2016: Giuliani: Trump Should Attack Hillary, I’ll ‘Attack Everybody Else’
    08/02/2016: There is something very wrong with Donald Trump
    08/02/2016: Trump Responds to Hillary’s Massive ‘Infrastructure’ Boondoggle; Conservatives Will Be Livid
    08/02/2016: Trump on Hillary’s bounce: There’s something phony about these polls
    08/03/2016: Clinton and Trump lay groundwork for pitched battle over Colorado
    08/03/2016: Newt HITS Trump: ‘He is helping Hillary win by proving he is more UNACCEPTABLE than she is!’
    08/03/2016: Trump Probably Has Just One More Chance to Get His Sh*t Together
    08/04/2016: UPDATED — If Hillary keeps saying this, Trump might actually win the election!
    08/04/2016: Who Will Be Blamed If Trump Implodes?
    08/04/2016: ANOTHER DREADFUL POLL FOR DISASTROUS DONALD…
    08/04/2016: New National McClatchy Poll Shows Hillary Clinton with Her Biggest Lead Yet
    08/04/2016: NBC/WSJ Poll: Hillary Clinton Jumps to Nine Point Lead Over Donald Trump
    08/05/2016: Don’t Blame Us. Blame Yourselves
    08/05/2016: Trump’s Campaign Being Outspent by a Third Party Candidate
    08/07/2016: Why Clinton can thank Trump for her polling bump

  • Torcer

    Then why do you insist on continuing to do that?

  • KirklesWorth
  • Torcer

    Are you denying you actions on a previous thread? Yes or No?
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87654#disqus_thread

  • KirklesWorth

    I don’t have to deny what you haven’t proven.

  • Torcer

    You are proving right now.
    Are you denying you present actions? Yes or No?

    Why do you waste everyone’s time with these endless attacks?

  • KirklesWorth

    My response is here since [you] prefer to discuss these matters on an active thread instead of having to deal with pointless arguments on old an [sic] thread.

  • Torcer

    Again, you are proving my point, keep it up.

  • KirklesWorth

    My latest response is here since [you] prefer to discuss these matters on an active thread instead of having to deal with pointless arguments on old an [sic] thread.

  • Torcer

    You are proving it right now.
    Are you denying you present actions? Yes or No?

    Why do you waste everyone’s time with these endless attacks?

  • KirklesWorth

    My latest response is here since [you] prefer to discuss these matters on an active thread instead of having to deal with pointless arguments on old an thread.

  • Yeah we don’t need to sniping, it does get old AND I’VE SAID SO RATHER CONSISTENTLY.

    I was subject to some of that from various people, I didn’t bother remembering who, when or over what because it was mostly misinformed and misguided anyway.

    It looks like KirklesWorth agrees with you and so maybe you two could be the examples and lead the way with no sniping and backbiting and maybe anyone who’s doing it will see the light and stop? Several of us have been asking for that for some time from everyone yet it keeps cropping up.

  • Torcer

    It looks like KirklesWorth agrees with you

    I thought that was the case as well, but it is apparent from the responses I’m getting that actions taken against me, that really isn’t the case.

    Particularly with regard to the tactic of initiating attacks against me in old threads. This has no discernible purpose than the punish someone out of sight so that she looks reasonable.

    Why does KirklesWorth attack those ostensibly on it’s side?
    Back during the cold war there curious phenomena of Anti-Anti-Communism whereby there were those who were opposed to those opposed to communism. Ostensibly they weren’t ‘pro- communist’ but the effect was the same.

    And plese note that given a golden opportunity to debate recent events KirklesWorth failed to do so and instead fell back on trying to dredge up the past.

    In response to my posting

    The problem is that Trump doesn’t have the underlying Conservative principles to maintain an even keel. Being a populist, he has a tendency to want to have one in the ‘win’ column no matter what that is.

    Everyone should note that KirklesWorth has to avoid putting forward an intellectual argument, lest it reveal too much. It’s MO is to attack and repeatedly pester one with questions to avoid being having to back up it’s spurious assertions. So let’s turn it over to KirklesWorth and see if it can actually address the point with an intellectual argument.

    KirklesWorth began with denying what I had just done, and instead of addressing the present issue, went back to the old standby of trying to imply something based on meaningless out of contest data based on random events and the actions of others.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth

    Ha! The propagandist demands what he/she is incapable of producing – an intellectual argument. Let’s start with what I have demonstrated so far:

    ● 2.75-to-1 ratio of Trump-to-Hillary article tips to Dave Blount
    ● 2.875-to-1 ratio of articles contained in an accumulated stash of 8200+ posts where 1070 posts have “Hillary” in the text and 3077 have “Trump” in the text.
    ● obsession with polls used by leftists as a manipulation tool.
    ● eyewitness and character witness testimony of Torcer

    So let’s move on to the allegations…

    Everyone should note that KirklesWorth has to avoid putting forward an intellectual argument, lest it reveal too much. It’s MO is to attack and repeatedly pester one with questions to avoid being having to back up it’s spurious assertions.

    This is a tactic Torcer is familiar with, as Torcer started this feud from the start:

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/22/2016) So why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/22/2016) Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/22/2016) Do you really think that these types of heavy handed tactics will get people to support your candidate?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/22/2016) Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?

    Since it was clear to anyone with a brain that the 2016 election was either Trump or Hillary, the opportunity was given to Torcer to explain how not voting for Trump would not result in a Hillary victory. The only way would be for another candidate that had a snowball’s chance in hell (and not the SMOD). I had to hound Torcer to try and get a response:

    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) And your superior candidate is…?
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) Your question is loaded and subjective. You have no proof of this supposed “working against trying to win”. If the nominees are Trump and Hillary, I would be working for Trump. Now answer my question….your superior candidate is?
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) Nice evade. Your non-answer answer was expected. You have no better candidate, therefore you aren’t even “trying to win in November” – you are wasting your time criticizing us for wasting our time.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) As I have rejected your straw man argument as well. Your first question was “Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”. I posed the next question “And your superior candidate is…?”, but you refused to answer until I answered your first question, which I did. I even answered your second question, to which you incorrectly labeled as a “straw man”. But there will be no more answers from me until you do the same demand you made of me by answering my first question.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) You either can’t or won’t answer my simple 5-word question: “And your superior candidate is…?”, and your “I never mentioned the term you are using” word-play games are irrelevant.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) Unnecessary and irrelevant, thus the straw man. I posed a question to you that was not contingent on anything you had previously said. But here you are, still balking at my simple 5-word question: “And your superior candidate is…?” I didn’t realize it was going to be so tough for you…well, actually I did.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) Still not answering my simple 5-word question: “And your superior candidate is…?” And somehow I am the one demonstrating “childish invective”…that’s a good one! So you are blaming me to justify your not answering my questions because of this so-called “childish invective”? Classic!
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) “Heavy handed tactics”? Are you joking? Who is the one plastering anti-Trump rhetoric all over these comments? But then again, you have no stated candidate, so your primary goal here is not to support any particular candidate but to disrupt support for Trump. Is that part of your theory I’m confirming?
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) But just to keep you from stalling the conversation…the fact that you didn’t use the word “superior” is irrelevant and immaterial to the question. Pick any adjective you like: “better”, “improved”, “preferred”, “worthier”…take your pick. Your rhetoric is that Trump is an inferior candidate, so the logical 5-word follow-up question is “And your superior (or any other synonym) candidate is…?” (Jeopardy theme)
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) You sure put a lot of work and effort in evading my simple 5-word question: “And your superior candidate is…?” All you simply had to do is state a name or say “I don’t know”, but apparently that was too much for you. Did you use the word “superior”? Nope. Did that fact have any relevancy? Nope, which I continuously stated to no avail. It’s not all that abstract, really. So, with that excuse of the way, the $64,000 question still stands: “And your superior candidate is…?”
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) I’ll go further and say your question lacks foundation. You have no idea who will win in November, nor that it is my intention to work against trying to win. So if I wasn’t clear before, I refute the premise and require you to prove (1) that my candidate will lose in November, and (2) that he and I are working against trying to win. Your question is like “when did you stop beating your wife?”, which means I should probably change my classification of your question from the straw man logical fallacy to the loaded question logical fallacy. “Loaded question” – a question with a false or questionable presupposition, and it is “loaded” with that presumption.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) Sorry, still waiting for your answer for “And your superior candidate is…?”. I’m not going round-and-round in circles again because you didn’t grasp an answer the first time.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) Shout all you want, throw a tantrum, whatever…but you have to wait in line and follow the rules like all the rest of us. It’s your turn to answer your first question “And your superior candidate is…?”
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/22/2016) I was typing up this huge response, but I’m tired and I’d like to make it simple so I’ll rephrase the “And your superior candidate is…?” question this way: “Do you have a superior candidate and who would it be?”
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (07/25/2016) I don’t know where my previous comment went, but what you are complaining about is that you think “And your superior candidate is…?” is a “loaded question”, not a “strawman”. I’ll reword it to match your delicate sensibilities with “Do you have a superior candidate and who would that be?” Any childish evasions this time?

    Finally, Torcer came up with some non-responsive “answers”:

    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (07/25/2016) There were several candidates Tom Coburn, Scott Walker, Ted Cruz or for that matter just about any Conservative picked at random from the Denver phone book would be a good choice. At this point in time AFTER the RNC convention there are in essence 4 – 5 choices: Trump, SMOD, Not voting that part of the ticket, Gary Johnson and the comrade from the national socialist left.
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/01/2016) Endorsement: Darrell castle, Constitution Party [This is not Torcer’s endorsement but a reference to Dave Blount’s Moonbattery article: Endorsement: Darrell Castle, Constitution Party]
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/08/2016) (A post of Evan McMullin’s candidacy without comment), and here.
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/10/2016) Again: That a candidate who champions liberty wins…
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/11/2016) Did you miss the part where I said I hadn’t decided yet?
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (08/16/2016) At least I can articles supporting a candidate…[Even McMullin], and again.

    And that was it. Only Torcer could explain how any of it would have defeated Hillary. So the person without a candidate demanded I defend the only person capable of defeating Hillary:

    ● “Face it, you cannot explain the man’s actions can you?”
    ● “Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”
    ● “Then explain why Trump keeps on reviving controversies instead of focusing on getting his message out and winning?”
    ● “Why do you keep on wasting time criticizing postings from before the convention?”
    ● “From BEFORE the convention… What is the point in wasting time on this now?”
    ● “Do you really think that these types of heavy handed tactics will get people to support your candidate?”
    ● You are the one supposedly advocating the Trump candidacy not I. You are the one who should be selling the his candidacy and yet you are here haranguing for it. Do you you really think that people will respond positively to that kind of onslaught?
    ● “You are also aptly demonstrating that you would rather attack Conservative than try to sell Trump’s candidacy.”
    ● “You are also aptly demonstrating that you would rather attack Conservative than try to sell Trump’s candidacy. Why don’t you try doing that without invoking the name ‘Hillary'”
    ● “Since you purport to be a supporter of his, why don’t you lay out you case for his candidacy without invoking the name of Comrade Clinton?”
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87873#comment-3520151683

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth

    Torcer wants to re-hash the good ol’ days, so let’s do it! Torcer thinks that it wasn’t obvious that he/she was trying to defeat Trump in order to get Hillary elected so that hopefully it would trigger a convention of states or something.

    Whether Torcer’s goals were ultimately magnanimous the-end-justifies-the-means return-our-country-to-conservative-values or not, the attempt was made to try and get Trump defeated for Hillary’s benefit, which was a catastrophe waiting to happen.

    it just so happens I know of Torcer’s Moonbattery post stash in the Open Thread of December 14, 2015. On that thread, Torcer has accumulated over 8,200 posts and of those posts 1070 posts have “Hillary” in the text and 3077 posts have “Trump” in the text.

    Next we want to determine which are articles and what the “flavour” of what was being collected. For brevity’s sake, these are the articles Torcer collected after July 20th, 2016 when Donald Trump was the declared candidate through August 7th, 2016.

    07/22/2016: “No, #NeverTrumpers Aren’t Morally Responsible For Hillary Clinton. Here’s Why.”
    07/22/2016: “Trump: I wouldn’t accept Cruz endorsement”
    07/22/2016: “Donald Trump accepts nomination to run against Hillary, but first he still isn’t finished with Ted Cruz”
    07/25/2016: Clinton Campaign: ‘Plenty of Evidence’ Putin Wants Trump to Win Election
    07/25/2016: Is the Russian Government Helping Trump Win the Election?
    07/25/2016: FLASHBACK: When Hillary MOCKED Romney for calling Russians a THREAT! LOL!!
    07/25/2016: Trump Calls Christians to Come Bow Before Their Idol
    07/25/2016: Former Ambassador to Russia says Putin has a PERSONAL VENDETTA against Hillary, prefers Trump
    07/27/2016: Media has a ‘cry wolf’ problem with Trump
    07/27/2016: Peyton Manning for President
    07/27/2016: INCREDIBLE: Trump just encouraged Russia to KEEP HACKING until they find Hillary’s emails
    07/27/2016: VIDEO: Trump Openly Asking for Russia to Breach American Sovereignty
    07/27/2016: Trump Says He Hopes Russian Hackers Find Clinton?s Deleted Emails
    07/28/2016: Brad Thor for President
    07/28/2016: Democrats Try to Slam Trump For Saying He Hopes Putin Has Hillary’s Emails. There’s Just One SMALL Problem
    07/28/2016: Gaffes and Cover-ups: The Nightmare of a Trump Candidacy
    07/28/2016: EVEN Trump doesn’t know HOW BRILLIANT he was to ask Russians to hack Hillary!!
    07/29/2016: Hillary Clinton is demolishing Donald Trump among hedge-fund donors — so far
    07/29/2016: Poll: 13 percent prefer meteor hitting earth over Clinton, Trump
    07/30/2016: The 10 stages of Trump excuse-ism
    07/31/2016: CBS battleground poll: Hillary 43, Trump 41
    07/31/2016: Hillary’s self awareness is deleted in latest shot at Donald Trump
    08/02/2016: Hillary Still Destroying Trump in Fundraising
    08/02/2016: Does Donald Trump really want to win the White House?
    08/02/2016: 7 Steps To Defending Donald Trump: A Guide
    08/02/2016: Giuliani: Trump Should Attack Hillary, I’ll ‘Attack Everybody Else’
    08/02/2016: There is something very wrong with Donald Trump
    08/02/2016: Trump Responds to Hillary’s Massive ‘Infrastructure’ Boondoggle; Conservatives Will Be Livid
    08/02/2016: Trump on Hillary’s bounce: There’s something phony about these polls
    08/03/2016: Clinton and Trump lay groundwork for pitched battle over Colorado
    08/03/2016: Newt HITS Trump: ‘He is helping Hillary win by proving he is more UNACCEPTABLE than she is!’
    08/03/2016: Trump Probably Has Just One More Chance to Get His Sh*t Together
    08/04/2016: UPDATED — If Hillary keeps saying this, Trump might actually win the election!
    08/04/2016: Who Will Be Blamed If Trump Implodes?
    08/04/2016: ANOTHER DREADFUL POLL FOR DISASTROUS DONALD…
    08/04/2016: New National McClatchy Poll Shows Hillary Clinton with Her Biggest Lead Yet
    08/04/2016: NBC/WSJ Poll: Hillary Clinton Jumps to Nine Point Lead Over Donald Trump
    08/05/2016: Don’t Blame Us. Blame Yourselves
    08/05/2016: Trump’s Campaign Being Outspent by a Third Party Candidate
    08/07/2016: Why Clinton can thank Trump for her polling bump

  • KirklesWorth

    Good to see you aren’t busying creating lesson plans and writing papers, and we don’t have time to waste arguing minutia.

    You can’t seem to tell the truth for the life of you. You have instigated all attacks, started all threads (except for your response to geeknerd below). If you want to be provocative then so be it – but don’t be a baby pretending to be a “victim” when you are challenged.

    Torcer: (09/09/2017) Can anyone figure what exactly her point is here – aside from arguing minutia? Perhaps some people should put some effort into articulating a cogent point instead of wasting time constructing convoluted posts such as this:
    Torcer: (09/09/2017) Can anyone figure what exactly her point is here – aside from arguing minutia? Perhaps some people should put some effort into articulating a cogent point instead of wasting time constructing convoluted posts such as this:
    Torcer: (09/13/2017) KirklesWorth How did that score? Let’s review the checklist: ● “Cogent point”…check. Really.. And that was what exactly? Please do everyone the courtesy of writing it out.
    Torcer: (09/19/2017) Some of us are busying creating lesson plans and writing papers, and we don’t have time to waste arguing minutia. KirklesWorth
    Torcer: (09/19/2017) Once again KirklesWorth is incapable of debating current events in an intellectual level and instead was off to the races posting a long screed steeped in past events.
    Torcer: (09/15/2017) The problem is that Trump doesn’t have the underlying Conservative principles to maintain an even keel. Being a populist, he has a tendency to want to have one in the ‘win’ column no matter what that is. Everyone should note that KirklesWorth has to avoid putting forward an intellectual argument, lest it reveal too much. It’s MO is to attack and repeatedly pester one with questions to avoid being having to back up it’s spurious assertions. So let’s turn it over to KirklesWorth and see if it can actually address the point with an intellectual argument.

    Even when I agree with you, you can’t control yourself:

    Torcer: (09/15/2017) Does anyone else find it extremely disturbing that there are those here who have no moral compunction over a disingenuous mischaracterization of someone’s position?
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) Yes, yes it is very disturbing.
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (09/15/2017) Considering that you are the primary purveyor of the practice..
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) In what way? Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (09/15/2017) KirklesWorth Huh…who’d have thought someone here would want Hillary? Where did he say that? Please provide an except and directly answer the question for once.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) Sure…as soon as you provide an except for your very first comment on Moonbattery to me: [Edited for brevity]
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (09/15/2017) stop dodging the question: KirklesWorth Huh…who’d have thought someone here would want Hillary? Where did he say that? Please provide an except and directly answer the question for once. You really should be mindful of your previous comments so you doing that in the future. [Ironic that I was referring to Torcer as well but mentioned nobody by name]
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) Are you sure you want me to “stop dodging the question”? I’ve just recently posted: [Edited for brevity].
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (09/15/2017) stop dodging the question: KirklesWorth Huh…who’d have thought someone here would want Hillary? Where did he say that? Please provide an except and directly answer the question for once. You really should be mindful of your previous comments so you doing that in the future.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) Okay, you asked for it. He didn’t say “I want Hillary”, nor did you say “I, Torcer, hereby serve notice that I want Hillary”. Penguin showed the same preference for Hillary as you:

    daPenguin►Skip: (05/09/2016) As I read earlier today from another blog. If shillary is elected she will be bad for America, but if trump is elected he will be bad for America and he will destroy the republican party,
    daPenguin►CTsOpinion: (06/24/2016) so when el trumpo chooses SCOTUS nominees that are not principled conservatives, will you then admit the whole thing was a mistake?

    So under what scenario would Hillary not have been elected president except by Trump defeating her (SMOD doesn’t count)?

    Then of course there was your starting point:

    geeknerd: Will the NeverTrumpsters start shouting “See!, We told you so!”? You know they’re just waiting to say it.
    Torcer: Will some of a certain cult following admit their mistake?
    TrojanMan [immediately recognizes the scenario and states:] Here we go again… LOL
    KirklesWorth: What “mistake”? Not letting Hillary win?
    Torcer: No, the mistake of choosing the wrong candidate. But it is an entirely pointless exercise in arguing the past. The question now becomes one of whether or not incorrect behaviour should be reinforced? [Irrelevant BF Skinner posting to irrelevant question edited for brevity and “link games” rendered moot with “what does that matter anyway?” and “minutia [sic] of the past”. Within two comments of each other, Torcer argued the past and then condemned arguing the past]
    KirklesWorth: [Ignoring irrelevant question and link] So you mean pre-July-20th-2016 Trump supporters.
    [Torcer’s evasive questions edited for brevity]
    [KirklesWorth’s response to evasive and hypocritical questions edited for brevity]
    Torcer: Do you have some innate need to argue over minutia? That question was in response to the initial question from geeknerd: Will the NeverTrumpsters start shouting “See!, We told you so!”? You know they’re just waiting to say it. To which you could apply the same criticisms. I was referring to those who did not listen when they were warned last spring.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth
    Good to see you aren’t busying creating lesson plans and writing papers, and we don’t have time to waste arguing minutia. But yet you are hypocritically acting the way you criticized me:

    Torcer►Bodhisattva: (09/04/2016) Fortunately you haven’t been plagued by KirklesWorth – but for some odd reason it tends to go after people on old threads seemingly trying to waste their time for unknown reasons.

    You can’t seem to tell the truth for the life of you. You have instigated all attacks, started all threads (except for your response to geeknerd below). If you want to be provocative then so be it – but don’t be a baby pretending to be an “innocent victim” when you are challenged.

    Torcer: (09/09/2017) Can anyone figure what exactly her point is here – aside from arguing minutia? Perhaps some people should put some effort into articulating a cogent point instead of wasting time constructing convoluted posts such as this:
    Torcer: (09/13/2017) KirklesWorth How did that score? Let’s review the checklist: ● “Cogent point”…check. Really.. And that was what exactly? Please do everyone the courtesy of writing it out.
    Torcer: (09/19/2017) Some of us are busying creating lesson plans and writing papers, and we don’t have time to waste arguing minutia. KirklesWorth
    Torcer: (09/19/2017) Once again KirklesWorth is incapable of debating current events in an intellectual level and instead was off to the races posting a long screed steeped in past events.
    Torcer: (09/15/2017) The problem is that Trump doesn’t have the underlying Conservative principles to maintain an even keel. Being a populist, he has a tendency to want to have one in the ‘win’ column no matter what that is. Everyone should note that KirklesWorth has to avoid putting forward an intellectual argument, lest it reveal too much. It’s MO is to attack and repeatedly pester one with questions to avoid being having to back up it’s spurious assertions. So let’s turn it over to KirklesWorth and see if it can actually address the point with an intellectual argument.

    Even when I agree with you, you can’t control yourself:

    Torcer: (09/15/2017) Does anyone else find it extremely disturbing that there are those here who have no moral compunction over a disingenuous mischaracterization of someone’s position?
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) Yes, yes it is very disturbing.
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (09/15/2017) Considering that you are the primary purveyor of the practice..
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) In what way? Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (09/15/2017) KirklesWorth Huh…who’d have thought someone here would want Hillary? Where did he say that? Please provide an except and directly answer the question for once.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) Sure…as soon as you provide an except for your very first comment on Moonbattery to me: [Edited for brevity]
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (09/15/2017) stop dodging the question: KirklesWorth Huh…who’d have thought someone here would want Hillary? Where did he say that? Please provide an except and directly answer the question for once. You really should be mindful of your previous comments so you doing that in the future. [Ironic that I was referring to Torcer as well but mentioned nobody by name]
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) Are you sure you want me to “stop dodging the question”? I’ve just recently posted: [Edited for brevity].
    Torcer►KirklesWorth: (09/15/2017) stop dodging the question: KirklesWorth Huh…who’d have thought someone here would want Hillary? Where did he say that? Please provide an except and directly answer the question for once. You really should be mindful of your previous comments so you doing that in the future.
    KirklesWorth►Torcer: (09/15/2017) Okay, you asked for it. He didn’t say “I want Hillary”, nor did you say “I, Torcer, hereby serve notice that I want Hillary”. Penguin showed the same preference for Hillary as you:

    daPenguin►Skip: (05/09/2016) As I read earlier today from another blog. If shillary is elected she will be bad for America, but if trump is elected he will be bad for America and he will destroy the republican party,
    daPenguin►CTsOpinion: (06/24/2016) so when el trumpo chooses SCOTUS nominees that are not principled conservatives, will you then admit the whole thing was a mistake?

    So under what scenario would Hillary not have been elected president except by Trump defeating her (SMOD doesn’t count)?

    [Followed by the best part – a list of eyewitnesses and character witnesses. A must see!].

    Then of course there was your starting point:

    geeknerd: Will the NeverTrumpsters start shouting “See!, We told you so!”? You know they’re just waiting to say it.
    Torcer: Will some of a certain cult following admit their mistake?
    TrojanMan [immediately recognizes the scenario and states:] Here we go again… LOL
    KirklesWorth: What “mistake”? Not letting Hillary win?
    Torcer: No, the mistake of choosing the wrong candidate. But it is an entirely pointless exercise in arguing the past. The question now becomes one of whether or not incorrect behaviour should be reinforced? [Irrelevant BF Skinner posting to irrelevant question edited for brevity and “link games” rendered moot with “what does that matter anyway?” and “minutia [sic] of the past”. Within two comments of each other, Torcer argued the past and then condemned arguing the past]
    KirklesWorth: [Ignoring irrelevant question and link] So you mean pre-July-20th-2016 Trump supporters.
    ● [Torcer’s evasive questions edited for brevity]
    ● [KirklesWorth’s response to evasive and hypocritical questions edited for brevity]
    Torcer: Do you have some innate need to argue over minutia? That question was in response to the initial question from geeknerd: Will the NeverTrumpsters start shouting “See!, We told you so!”? You know they’re just waiting to say it. To which you could apply the same criticisms. I was referring to those who did not listen when they were warned last spring.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=87795#comment-3525453275

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy