Black Dog Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 Just now, User said: Let's be real... Trump is not purging Democrats from government. What is being pointed out is that these organizations are wildly biased and partisan and *any* firing is going to impact folks on the left disproportionately. Quote
User Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 1 minute ago, Black Dog said: No, you dishonest hack, one is claiming they are targeting Democrats, the other is not. Quote
gatomontes99 Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 1 hour ago, Hodad said: I know, I know, the Fuhrer shall not be questioned or defied under any circumstances. Absolute obedience is the only solution. Buuuuut, these people have worked "for him" for 9 days at this point, so I strongly suspect that they haven't developed any "with cause" cases for termination based on insubordinance. Let's be real. You would have been in a tizzy if Biden had come into office and purged Republicans from government, because that's simply not the way things work in a first-world democracy. You should be similarly disturbed by "your guy" taking such actions. But you'll embarrass yourself by pretending like this is normal, reasonable behavior because it's convenient in the moment. You're not fooling anybody. Awww...you poor thing. Did the whataboutism bug get you? Why would we keep these people? The Biden admin applied banana republic tactics to our legal system, tried to bypass the Republican primary process, did bypass the Democratic primary process, tried to subvert the national vote by removing Trump from the ballot in several states, forced social media companies to censor speech, jailed parents and labeled them domestic terrorists for objecting at school board meetings to boys in girls restroom and locker rooms, arrested protestors and gave them extensive jail time if they were perceived to be conservative while ignoring left wing attacks that burned down businesses, public buildings and more and so much more. If anyone participated in any of that, they are gone. 1 Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
Black Dog Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 12 minutes ago, User said: No, you dishonest hack, one is claiming they are targeting Democrats, the other is not. "They aren't targeting Democrats they are just targeting partisan employees" like dude we know what you mean even if you're too chickenshit to own up to it. Quote
User Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 2 minutes ago, Black Dog said: "They aren't targeting Democrats they are just targeting partisan employees" like dude we know what you mean even if you're too chickenshit to own up to it. When you have to lie and make up things I didn't say... Quote
impartialobserver Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 Freezing of federal grants is not the same as voting for Kamala harris. Lots of government workers voted for Trump and are facing unemployment or an uncertain future. This had to happen sometime. When the pain happens is irrelevant. Quote
Black Dog Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 4 minutes ago, User said: When you have to lie and make up things I didn't say... lol Quote Let's be real... Trump is not purging Democrats from government. What is being pointed out is that these organizations are wildly biased and partisan and *any* firing is going to impact folks on the left disproportionately. You seem to be arguing that they aren't firing people for being Democrats qua Democrats but because they are "biased and partisan" (presumably against Republicans and towards the Democrats, respectively). This is what is called a distinction without a difference. Quote
User Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 Just now, Black Dog said: You seem to be arguing that they aren't firing people for being Democrats qua Democrats but because they are "biased and partisan" (presumably against Republicans and towards the Democrats, respectively). This is what is called a distinction without a difference. No, not what I seem to be arguing at all. Again, it helps if you are honest or learn to read. Let me know which you are having issues with. Quote
Black Dog Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 3 minutes ago, User said: No, not what I seem to be arguing at all. Again, it helps if you are honest or learn to read. Let me know which you are having issues with. It's funny, that, rather than actually explain what the difference is between firing someone for being a democrat and firing someone for being "partisan" (you know: making an actual argument?), you immediately default to snuffling and whinging about being misrepresented. boo hoo hoo you're so hard done by. Quote
User Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 5 minutes ago, Black Dog said: It's funny, that, rather than actually explain what the difference is between firing someone for being a democrat and firing someone for being "partisan" (you know: making an actual argument?), you immediately default to snuffling and whinging about being misrepresented. boo hoo hoo you're so hard done by. When someone dishonest like you has proven over and over again to engage dishonestly as you do and are doing now, I am under no obligation to pretend like this is just a normal discussion. You lied. You misquoted me. How about you get some integrity and own up to that or why don't you ask for clarification instead of continuing to lie? Quote
Black Dog Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 Just now, User said: When someone dishonest like you has proven over and over again to engage dishonestly as you do and are doing now, I am under no obligation to pretend like this is just a normal discussion. You lied. You misquoted me. How about you get some integrity and own up to that or why don't you ask for clarification instead of continuing to lie? I didn't misquote you. I (barely) paraphrased you using the exact same language you did. The meaning is unchanged. Now: are you gonna make an argument or are you just gonna keep sniffling and whining about "dishonesty"? Quote
User Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 9 minutes ago, Black Dog said: I didn't misquote you. I (barely) paraphrased you using the exact same language you did. The meaning is unchanged. Now: are you gonna make an argument or are you just gonna keep sniffling and whining about "dishonesty"? When you put shit in quotes I did not say... I was already being gracious saying you misquoted me. You were an outright fu%king liar. As always. Quote
Black Dog Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 2 minutes ago, User said: When you put shit in quotes I did not say...I was already being gracious saying you misquoted me. You were an outright fu%king liar. As always. Look are you going to keep whining or are you gonna explain the difference between "targeting Democrats" and "targeting partisan employees." Quote
User Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 7 minutes ago, Black Dog said: Look are you going to keep whining or are you gonna explain the difference between "targeting Democrats" and "targeting partisan employees." Once again, you lie with the quotes. Stop making up shit, act like a normal honest person, then maybe the discussion can proceed. Quote
Hodad Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 55 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Awww...you poor thing. Did the whataboutism bug get you? Why would we keep these people? The Biden admin applied banana republic tactics to our legal system, tried to bypass the Republican primary process, did bypass the Democratic primary process, tried to subvert the national vote by removing Trump from the ballot in several states, forced social media companies to censor speech, jailed parents and labeled them domestic terrorists for objecting at school board meetings to boys in girls restroom and locker rooms, arrested protestors and gave them extensive jail time if they were perceived to be conservative while ignoring left wing attacks that burned down businesses, public buildings and more and so much more. If anyone participated in any of that, they are gone. Did you have an unprotected exchange with @WestCanMan? You seem to have caught a bad case of the Gish gallop. And a long list of bullshit claims (complete bullshit) isn't any more combine compelling coming from you. And for the record, your post is the actual example of whataboutism. Quote
gatomontes99 Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 10 minutes ago, Hodad said: Did you have an unprotected exchange with @WestCanMan? You seem to have caught a bad case of the Gish gallop. And a long list of bullshit claims (complete bullshit) isn't any more combine compelling coming from you. And for the record, your post is the actual example of whataboutism. No. Whataboutism is excusing your side's behavior by citing the other side's behavior. This is saying we are doing this because of the other side's behavior. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
Hodad Posted January 30 Report Posted January 30 11 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: No. Whataboutism is excusing your side's behavior by citing the other side's behavior. This is saying we are doing this because of the other side's behavior. Me: A politically motivated purge and personal loyalty tests in the civil service is wildly outside norms--in fact antithetical to a democratic society. You: It's fine, because what about x, y,z and other bullshit! 1 Quote
impartialobserver Posted January 30 Report Posted January 30 This probably is going to get rescinded or scaled back greatly. The feds are legally bound to appropriate and distribute certain funds. To cut the tap off so suddenly violates the law hence the lawsuits. Quote
gatomontes99 Posted January 30 Report Posted January 30 52 minutes ago, Hodad said: Me: A politically motivated purge and personal loyalty tests in the civil service is wildly outside norms--in fact antithetical to a democratic society. You: It's fine, because what about x, y,z and other bullshit! Really? So Biden didn't do that at all? Nor did Obama? Maybe they didn't do it to this level, but IGs have been replaced before. People have been fired before. Let's get down to why you don't like it and it's not because it is different or new. You don't like it because he's taking away the deep state/beaurocratic left and replacing them with right. His executive branch. His way. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
User Posted January 30 Report Posted January 30 2 hours ago, Hodad said: Me: A politically motivated purge and personal loyalty tests in the civil service is wildly outside norms--in fact antithetical to a democratic society. This thread started with you and others lying that this was targeting Democrats/Harris voters. Now you shift the goal posts to "politically motivated" No shit, everything is politically motivated to some degree. Talk about an absolutely worthless statement. Where do you get there is a personal loyalty test now? Quote
Hodad Posted January 30 Report Posted January 30 2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: Really? So Biden didn't do that at all? Nor did Obama? Maybe they didn't do it to this level, but IGs have been replaced before. People have been fired before. Let's get down to why you don't like it and it's not because it is different or new. You don't like it because he's taking away the deep state/beaurocratic left and replacing them with right. His executive branch. His way. Bullshit, and you know it. Inspectors general have occasionally been replaced--typically for cause rather than partisan politics. But the quest to purge all civil service of people who voted for one's opponent is unprecedented. Quote
CdnFox Posted January 30 Report Posted January 30 14 hours ago, Black Dog said: I hope you at least wash that between, uh, uses. Oh look, black dog is losing an argument and is decided homosexual Fantasies will save him. whodathunkit? 1 Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Nationalist Posted January 30 Report Posted January 30 19 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: @gatomontes99 is a fool. In December, he posted that he contacted the FBI, in regards to a post I made about Luigi Mangione, and stated that I would be arrested. I'm still waiting, Gato...lol. Dude...several years ago on another forum, a guy got so frustrated with me that he posted a direct death threat to me and my family. I was notified that the authorities had gotten his identity from the site and placed on an international watch list. You apparently threatened a national leader. Big brother would indeed be watching you. Have a nice day. 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
gatomontes99 Posted January 30 Report Posted January 30 8 hours ago, Hodad said: Bullshit, and you know it. Inspectors general have occasionally been replaced--typically for cause rather than partisan politics. But the quest to purge all civil service of people who voted for one's opponent is unprecedented. And those IGs didn't take politically motivated acts of lawfare either. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.