Originally posted by Tzeentch
Like Supra and his love for fox news.
Ouch, sucks when you wrong huh?
Originally posted by Time ImmemorialNope. Happens so rarely it almost feels like a birthday blowjob.
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=601169&highlight=title%3A%28fox+news%29Ouch, sucks when you wrong huh?
Originally posted by Time ImmemorialIndeed. It was an inferment based upon upon the fox news link you've presented on many occasions.
I see, so you said something you thought was true or based on some misconception. I forgive your transgressions.
As they say, "close to perfection" is still technically a long way away.
So, for clarification, past what date would we be able to call the martial law thing an unequivocal lie?
The track record for conspiracy predictions is such that this is ignorable. The ones attempting prediction hop from one to the next until one sticks (or, often, they just keep hopping). Then there's the post-diction conspiracies about past events that don't have the benefit of being objectively debunked. Those tend to stick around longer.
Ya know, some conspiracy is true. With the thousands out there, I'd say it's a statistical near-certainty. But there's so much non-empirical, rumor and speculation-filled noise that it becomes impossible to parse any of it. There's a skepticism at the heart of conspiracies that's actually admirable. But more often than not, it's merely trading one baseless idea for another, or at least latching onto one more quickly than is prudent.
..
On topic, corporations lying is nothing new (though certainly not on the martial law level of deception). I wouldn't be shocked if the plumbing thing is indeed a cover. But sitting at our computers, with so much sh*t swirling around about the topic, can anyone really claim dominion over something resembling certitude? So here we are, discussing what is likely a murky labor dispute, with very few of the facts that are likely informing the actual events. Not a good use of anyone's time.
Originally posted by Digi
So, for clarification, past what date would we be able to call the martial law thing an unequivocal lie?
After Obama is finally out-of-office might be a good time for starters if you're so determined to set some kind of time limit just so you can say "I told you so". So 2017 at the earliest. If Obama declares martial law for whatever reason then that will allow him to stay in office indefinitely. Not a pleasant thought that's for sure.
Originally posted by Star428
After Obama is finally out-of-office might be a good time for starters if you're so determined to set some kind of time limit just so you can say "I told you so". So 2017 at the earliest. If Obama declares martial law for whatever reason then that will allow him to stay in office indefinitely. Not a pleasant thought that's for sure.
Originally posted by Star428
If Obama declares martial law for whatever reason then that will allow him to stay in office indefinitely.
Just like the last 4-5 times this was stated, it's not actually true. There are set laws/rules should a President elect not exist when the sitting President's second term ends; it's not "Obama 4Ever".
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
I know you have been gone awhile, I can tell you missed me, do you want a rectal exam?
Did you know that since 1928 no Republican has won the Presidency that didn't have a Bush or Nixon on the ticket?
From the 1932 election to the present, the nine times a Republican won had a Bush or Nixon, starting in 1952.
1932-1952 were all Democrats. The Republicans had a losing streak and had two hysterically sad defeats in 32' and 36'
Here's a map: http://www.270towin.com/historical-presidential-elections/
52 & 56 = Nixon as VP
68 & 72 = Nixon as Pres
80 & 84 = Bush Sr as VP
88 = Bush Sr as Pres
00 & 04 = Bush Jr as Pres
Originally posted by Robtard
Did you know that since 1928 no Republican has won the Presidency that didn't have a Bush or Nixon on the ticket?From the 1932 election to the present, the nine times a Republican won had a Bush or Nixon, starting in 1952.
1932-1952 were all Democrats. The Republicans had a losing streak and had two hysterically sad defeats in 32' and 36'
Here's a map: http://www.270towin.com/historical-presidential-elections/
52 & 56 = Nixon as VP
68 & 72 = Nixon as Pres
80 & 84 = Bush Sr as VP
88 = Bush Sr as Pres
00 & 04 = Bush Jr as Pres
What does this have to do with Walmart Closing stores?