GOP Platform: A Better Way

Oh stop it TB sure you have just check this thread for your own posts. You are guilty of:

  1. Evading my three questions multiple times

  2. Not acknowledging the answering of your questions by me TWICE

  3. Contributing and in fact encouraging usmcc to repeatedly kiss your ass for support.

But I do enjoy when you play the indignant game it is so like you

It might be fun for you but I do not enjoy discussing “gun law” as you put it. I told you my thoughts on Merrick Garland once two days ago and again above. My post was never meant to discuss anything more than that. It was to comment on why I thought Garland was not a good choice and that there are better.

Now answer the three questions I posed to you time is running out.

You really do try to turn every post from just about everyone in to a federal case. I wonder if that’s why Push and others left the site. I really do I’m not kidding you are a real bore.

Catching up on this thread…

3 Likes

Excellent Alrightmiami that is the second biggest laugh I have had on this thread. The best of course was when usmcc wanted to take a poll to see if anyone else thought he was an ass kisser.

I have had a riot on this thread. I keep telling my wife this is far better than TV…of course then she wants me to take her out…can’t win

Zeb, this is not an answer to the question - it is a claim that you never said what you originally did say. A switcheroo, a moving of the goal posts. If you’ve changed your mind on what you originally said, fine, then say so - but that isn’t what you’ve said or done.

I’ll slow it down for you:

-Zeb then: Garland had four cases involving guns before him, and he got them all wrong. He had the chance to be pro-gun, but went anti-gun. (See the quotes from you I collected.)

-Zeb now: I’m not saying he got it wrong on every case, and I never said that. I am saying I think he is generally anti-gun. And me saying he is anti-gun is not the same thing as saying he got it wrong on any particular case.

You see, Zeb, those two statements are irreconcilable - you have contradicted yourself.

And you know you have. And you’ve been shown to be a fool.

At any point, you could have conceded that your first claim was shit because you don’t know shit about the subject matter and that you were simply passing along misinformation and said, “that said, I still think Garland is anti-gun.”

But no, out of pride and stupidity, and mindless partisan loyalty, you wouldn’t concede after it was clear you had no ability to back your claims that Garland got the cases wrong. You got exposed after I read the case and called you on it. Then lie piled up on top of lie, and as the pressure mounted, you have attempted to concoct a way out by now saying “hey, I never said that…” when you obviously did.

In addition, you resorted to some low-grade attempt at semantics Jedi mind trick where you thought you would obfuscate your way out of dishonesty. Your problem? You’re not sharp enough to pull it off with this crowd. Or any crowd. We’ve been laughing at you this whole time.

One small little topic - Garland’s potential views on gun rights - and you obliterate all of your credibility (what was left of it, you’ve been caught in dishonesty before) with the biggest string of lies I’ve seen in 13 years here.

Now you’re a laughingstock.

My new question to you now is at this point, why should anyone believe anything you say, or better still, why should anyone care?

1 Like

This is as thorough and rigorous an unveiling of dishonesty as I have ever seen on this board. My hat is off.

Zeb, we are all literate around here. The evidence has been arrayed. It is not ambiguous. There is no trick or escape clause or way out. If you do not respond to this post in such a way as to demonstrate humility and probity, you might as well hurry up your scheduled departure and not post here anymore as of today.

2 Likes

You have no dog in this fight but here you are with your boyfriend.

ha ha I doubt you will keep your word when Hillary loses you seem the type…“um what bet?”

Lets be honest when it comes to Garland. Obama nominated him. Would a man with such an asshole arrogance about himself nominate opposition to even one of his planks to transform America?

1 Like

My question to you is what it has always been and one you have dodged now for several posts. Where is the answer to my three questions? Amnesia TB?

I never once said that I wanted to engage in a lengthy boring debate on the finer points of Merrick Garlands decisions…any of them. And that is being honest as I have now said that three times. You couldn’t even find the first one, you’re so sharp. On the other hand if you think I said otherwise or even insinuated it find it and post it. You won’t because I never said it.

As I said he was he wrong on one, two, three or all four of the cases? Matters not to me I do know he was wrong that’s all that matters. As I have said…how many times now?

So now I answered your question not once but three times. You have yet to answer mine even once. Calling people dishonest and other such nonsense when you are dodging my question makes you look like the blowhard egomaniac that you are. Yeah…people really like that sort of thing around here ha.

It is your credibility that is in question not mine as I think it is very important to have such credibility on a message board on a bodybuilding site…oh wait. You are a joke as you argue every post as if your life depends on it. This is not entertainment to you as it is for most of us. This for some reason seems to be an important part of your life and that is the saddest thing that I could say about you.

Anyway, TB as I asked earlier I wonder if it was you with the help of your boyfriend over there that chased away some of the really good posters. Those who not only enjoyed lively debate but could also bring humor to the site. God knows you are a humorless bore. No I don’t want to dissect court cases and debate them with someone who has never one time in over 10 years admitted that he was wrong. Got that TB? 10 years and you never once admitted being wrong.

Ten years never wrong? HUH? Yeah that’s you and if you don’t think that indicates a bit of a problem then your problem is even bigger.

Well, that sums it up for me. If anyone thinks that TB is perfect then they can buy his pack of bologna above. I on the other hand know far better. I’ve seen you bully people off the site before back in the day they were liberals. But, as you’ve aged you’ve apparently grown a bit more to the left. So be it but someone who thinks they are perfect and also someone willing to drive people away from the site (and has done it repeatedly) is certainly not someone that I have any respect for.

And by the way, you never answered my three questions. And of course we all know why. Basically backing Hillary Clinton (she’s better in the short and long term) is simply ridiculous on its face. She was practically indicted you boob. Would you be saying that if she was headed to prison? Naturally you ran from that one. Claiming Trump is a bad businessman is something else that is foolish on its face. He build a 10 billion dollar empire. Do you think that most billionaires started from scratch, many did but most didn’t. Do you give any of them credit? A better question do you give anyone credit for anything if you dislike them? You are so emotional its actually been fun watching you unwind in front of everyone launching tirade after tirade against those whom you dislike. No credit is ever given from TB if his emotions are cranked and they usually are. As for Biden being a great negotiator this might be the most foolish thing you’ve ever said and I don’t blame you from running away from it as fast as you can. Are you being disingenuous? GASP you are a dishonest poster LOL you clown.

Keep thinking your the shit around here TB it might make up for something that is sorely missing in your real life. As for me I just think your word is shit and that you’ve done more damage to T Nation PWI than any 20 of the worst posters combined. Keep it up and a few years from now all that will be left are you and your lackey.

Let’s do.

Obama has already nominated (and confirmed) justices who defied him on certain issues.

It’s impossible not to.

What’s headed to SCOTUS are cases adjudicating what reasonable restrictions look like. You know, the ones Scalia said were ok. Trying to predict where justices are going to fall on this question is tough, because ideology won’t be the sole driver. One of the big keys will be have much deference will states be given, which pits conservatives against themselves in many ways.

How dare you say that without discussing in detail the finer points of each of the four cases that he ruled on. Most wrong? All wrong? Better get it right or TB the know it all bore will be asking you about the court cases. LOL. “Did you say he was right or wrong on this particular case yes or no?” Wow what a nut!

Anyway, you hit it spot on Alrightmiami. Anyone Obama appointed would have to be questionable at best. Obama has been out for America’s gun owners from day one and he would have loved to have left office picking one more anti gun Judge. But finally (at least so far) the republicans got it right and said no hearing.

Sure. I agree with you there. But unfortunately once nominated nobody can take back a SCOTUS nominee who defies the person nominating them on some issue.

I said long before in this thread that I don’t trust Garland. I think this was in response to a Tbolt post about how he has no serious track record on the 2nd one way or the other. I still stand by my post, and my distrust of Obama, but the bottom line is that Tbolt is right–we don’t have a solid track record. I would say that the fact Obama nominated him is reason to distrust him enough, but it is true that Garland isn’t an Al Franken or Nancy Pelosi wannabe so far as we can tell.

2 Likes

Good grief. This is Zeppelin level stupidity. Where are Push’s gold bars.

Translation: “I just know he’s wrong because Obama appointed him. I don’t need to read the cases and I can’t articulate a single reason why he’s wrong, but I just know it! You young whippersnappers should just accept it because I’m old. Respect me!”

Fucking absurd. You would laugh at anyone else that posted complete garbage like this.

I know, I know. Something aomething lap dog. Something something lackey. Something something low IQ.

2 Likes

I haven’t seen this level of ignorance since Pitbull’s days. It’s unreal.

Even Zeppelin’s plain corporation comment doesn’t compare to the stupidity being displayed here.

2 Likes

This thread evolution reminds me why I don’t discuss politics on facebook…

2 Likes

The fact that you can’t see the difference between what you’ve been peddling and what @Alrightmiami19c wrote is just further evidence of your stupidity.

Heh. So, we’re back to Garland got the cases wrong.

You had a chance at redemption, you chose to double down on self-beclowning and dishonesty.

I come hear for entertainment and to learn new things. I think I speak for everyone when I say l look forward to your next presentation of misinformation in the name of political hackery (and it will come) and the resulting shit show you’ll provide when you get exposed as the dishonest poltroon you are.

Also, I’ll scrape you off my boot heel now. You may go.

This quote by Zeb is the capstone of stupidity in his dumpster fire of an explanation.

1 Like

Ya, I just don’t get it. What @Alrightmiami19c wrote is perfectly reasonable. He’s an Obama appoimtee so in all reality he is probably not an ardent support of the 2A, but that doesnt mean he was wrong in any of his ruling.

To say someone is wrong and then flat out refuse to provide 1 single reason why is complete nonsense. All emotion with no substance.

That is how progressives argue.

1 Like

“Garland was wrong in the cases he decided, I’m sure of it. I can’t tell you why, I just feel it. And feels should be good enough.”

The very definition of emotionalism.

1 Like