>>20333685 (pb)
a very attractive candidate in 2010 or so becomes a troll and kind of a dummy, betraying secrets (?) which make him even more ridiculous.
why is someone who had such promise such a loser?
this has always baffled me.
it just goes to show: just because someone takes a good picture doesn't mean you should trust them with your vote.
and how he has morphed into the angry troll-doll looking guy from the happy handsome promise of a bright and positive voice in the halls of power.
alas.
I remember reading here yesterday about explosions in Damascus, Syria?
any more information on that?
I should look before posting.
all I could find was this:
"Head of Military Security Branch in Daraa injured "
https://hawarnews.com/en/head-of-military-security-branch-in-daraa-injured
(part 1)
once I get to the part about 'tiny brain' I say in my mind 'let me tell this person that by saying that he loses his argument with whoever he's grappling with.
but I got into trouble yesterday by forgetting that youngsters often are still stuck in that insult mode and don't understand that they will grow out of it.
maybe this person is in the heat of battle and I'm wrong to call him out for insulting someone, and I haven't looked at the other posts.
but seriously that whole 'tiny brain' bit is just a bad way to argue.
I guess I want to say 'up your game' and do better.
not 'up yours' but 'up your game'. if I post this will I rile this one? Let me review the rest of what is going on with this one.
wow, this must be a person just out of being a teenager.
crosses the line with a comment about rape and makes me say 'youngster, do you know how you sound. smarten up. no one is as you describe, everyone deserves respect. no one is a candidate for what you suggest. But when you consider who he is discussing and how vile what that one has done, and colluded with lawyers to defame a man who is well loved, I guess I can understand in this context why the poster doesn't care and just says it, and he's being sarcastic, that she is a candidate for a violent interaction of a sexual nature. But I know the poster is being facetious and ironic. the woman is rather nasty looking, looking a lot like she's in the process of a chemical peal just as she stand there in front of the camera lens. Maybe she was attractive when she was younger?
why does this poster need to prefix his statement with unsubstantiated insults? It's very bad form and makes most people want to filter him. ah, they are discussing the heroic James O'Keefe. I should look for the drop that James has promised instead of reviewing this young mind's insult-comic back-attchas.
but a young mind insulter might be a great debater and effective spokes person for good causes if he could get past his need to start every comment, and end every comment, with insults that just make the one who says them seem wrong. Not about what he is saying, but about how he is saying it.
fair statement, Free Masons are obssessed with that whole 33 thing.
back to the stupidity of an ad hominum attack. the other poster, to whom he responds, gives him polite discourse and offers that he could pony-up some better process than what James is doing. but this one has to use his 'illiterate n-word' insult.
there is a kind of social illiteracy that this one does not have a problem with. He says he does with actual illiterates. But in terms of being able to compose copy that people will actually be able to read it through to the end, this one is a social imbaccile, a kind of socially disfunctional Turret's syndrome effected persona who can't help being a jerk to everyone else, even if they are trying to pull the guy out of the self-dug ditch, that ditch he makes by constantly throwing mud in everyone else's faces (ok, this part is me being 'clever').
calls the O'Keefe stuff 'noise'. I guess that's a fair opinion that he can have. But why does he need to dig that ditch from the mud-slinging?
(part 2, review of insult comic anon)
Here we have him not insulting anyone and actually giving some insight into an important story.
he diverts into an sexual insult about sex that causes health problems. Why does he need to do this?
ah, progress, he is aware he is mean "that was a mean thing to say" he says in response to criticism from another anon.
says "He does nto offer any solutions"
I assume he means James O'Keefe.
the role of a piece like what O'Keefe does isn't to provide a solution but merely to expose the problems.
this one is bright enough to come up with some ideas on how to solve some things, but he seem more interested in his clever way he inserts the ad hominum attacks. His focus on that kind of sex probably means that he's curious about it. Message to him: dont' go there, anon, it's not a fun thing, it's a bad thing to involve yourself with that kind of behavior. You will be far more healthy in later life if you stop involving yourself with that kind of sex.
ah, he makes up something about 'learned helplessness' meanwhile he's seemingly blind to how he has made his presentations of ideas impotent through his constant lack of concern for those with whom he is debating. He says Grow up, which might be a fair thing to say but also maybe he has some growth to do as well. He's got the passion, he just doesn't have the respect.
alright, that's enough, I've reviewed enough of this guys to say he has a lot of learning to do. He needs to learn that the insults just diminish his effectiveness.
and he focuses on the sexual far too much as well, and thus makes his arguments (ironic isn't it) impotent.
Not that he is. He's probably a very passionate person and a firebrand in his lathario ways (that's me telling him that I hope he grows up and that I don't think he should just FOAD)
why do you have to go there to my privates.
that's a very weighty subject, anon (and you have no idea how weighty).
as you said to that other one 'grow up'
sexuality is all about the mind and very little, really, about the privates.
some of the most passionate things that can happen to you happen without any physical contact.
anon, obviously I think you've got some passion and that you might have great insight but you basically lose the arguement every time by going to the groin and doing the constant scurilous insult thing.
it's ineffective.
we need useful people who can make the argument and convince people that stuff ain't right.
what you are doing would be fine on a stage in front of a drunk crowd but here, it's losing it's effectiveness.
de sensitivity training? Do you really think anyone here needs it?
anyway you seem over sexed. you should practice abstinence. It will increase your passion and force you to learn how to control yourself.
gaming culture?
dude, we used to play games and smoke weed all night and we never did any insult comic stuff.
pandamonium, Twisted Metal, Tomb Raider, Leisure suit larry, the list includes those.
One day the wife of a friend said to us 'do you guys realize that you are playing the character of an evil clown ' (Sweet Tooth or the guy from Pandamonium II)
And Lara Croft comes to understand that she is a psychopath.
anyway, know your audience.
that clicked through to a secure memo with a request for campaign funds . . .
We would pass the control from one person to the next. My friend would video tape himself playing and play it back. We'd be there in front of a giant full screen television before they were common.
we'd buy a new computer when the new games would come out.
the season of it was Autumn. Eventually Lara got too violent I stopped buying the new games. It was the puzzles that I enjoyed the most, and the awesome graphics. Now it's all passe and I play a lot of driving games, or 2D games that run in Gnome.
but there is no Qanon.
and anyone claiming to be a messiah posting here would get the full-on 'you are FOS' treatment here.
FOS: full of S. . .
same thing that happened with el Paso: they blame this board.
same thing that happened on Jan 6: they blamed the board.
We will Survive
why don't they argue with the 2nd Amendment. Ah, because they don't want that ammendment anymore?
they don't want to win it that way, it seems.
two of the nails are a different color
Freddy Fender
Before the Next Teardrop Falls
you're the one sliding this.
I'm just pointing out the obviousness of what that other posted commented about.
I, for one, thought the green outfit was also an curious fashion choice.
I respect you not wanting another slide. so do that, don't slide into this.
Wasted Days and Wasted Nights
Freddy Fender
arguing with you would be a wasted day, anon.
sometimes it's like this song should be a theme song for Q Research board.
have a nice day.
The Dovels
Bristol Stomp
They are from greater Philadelphia
I didn't mean to post that to myself!
and now the one to whom I wanted to post it seems missing.
oh well.
"If You Could Read My Mind"
Gordon Lightfoot
Ripple
this song explains a lot about why people love the Grateful Dead, despite all the issues with that era of music and other things.