Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Was that on a bet you never agreed to?Remember when you said she never sent or recorded classified information.
Do you remember that one?
Remember this?
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I'll do you a solid Adam and take a month off here, just to show good faith. Congrats on the win.
That did not even last four days.
Yea I reconsidered, since you never took the bet, and you were the one lying saying she never sent or received classified information, you lost.
Oh then here are all the lies you were regurgitating
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
You are asking me to speculate. The claim has not been supported, much less substantiated, so you are asking me to respond to an accusation that has no basis.Perhaps you should put forth as much effort into asking the original poster to substantiate his claim, and then we can cross the bridge of how to respond to it when it is demonstrated to be true.
Until you do that, this is merely a deflection tactic.
Dude are you not a grown up with the ability to imagine things? I'm not asking you to picture some advanced physics equation in your head.
Is your unwillingness to answer also not a deflection?
It makes zero sense to expect someone to honor a bet they never actually accepted in the first place. You can't suddenly decide you accept the bet only after you got the desired outcome. Otherwise every year I'd wait until after the Superbowl was ever and then go try to place a bet on who would win. Then I'd get rightfully beat down by a bookie.
Adam did you ghost write the first Avengers movie? Captain America gives Nick Fury $10 for a bet *he* didn't accept either.
Originally posted by MS Warehouse
You calling into question someone's objectivity while showing none on your part, combined with frequent double standards when republicans/democrats are concerned, is pretty damn funny.
Every time you reply to a post and do not address the argument presented, but instead address the character of the person making the argument, I find it incredibly funny, because it is a transparent fallacy of changing the subject in place of support, and you are either blithely unaware of it, or think the rest of us are as plainly facile as you are.
Adam the question is why can't you speculate? No offense, but you're not some politician or anything like that. It doesn't hurt anyone if you maybe guess how you'd react to a situation. For instance if you ran up and punched me in the face I can tell you how I'd react, I don't need you to actually run up and punch me for me to guess as to how I'd respond.
You will take the time to explain to us all why you can't answer a question as opposed to just answering. What is wrong with saying:
"Yes if Michelle Obama copied someone I would voice my disapproval of that as well, but I think we should be sure before we assume that."
That would of been a logical response. Unless you legitimately do not know how you would react in that situation.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Every time you reply to a post and do not address the argument presented, but instead address the character of the person making the argument, I find it incredibly funny, because it is a transparent fallacy of changing the subject in place of support, and you are either blithely unaware of it, or think the rest of us are as plainly facile as you are.
We never agree on much, but we agree this time👆
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Every time you reply to a post and do not address the argument presented, but instead address the character of the person making the argument, I find it incredibly funny, because it is a transparent fallacy of changing the subject in place of support, and you are either blithely unaware of it, or think the rest of us are as plainly facile as you are.
Oh so we agree, something is funny. You don't present any "argument", instead bitching and moaning about the right, engaging in double standards and hypocrisy. So what I did address was your inability to provide any kind of valuable insight regarding these debates and yes, I think you're incredibly facile. Good try 👆
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The speech writer just came out and accepted all responsibility and apologized profusely and took all responsibility.
Surely you don't mean this European model didn't pen every single word of her speech herself? Whaaaaat?
She should probably give back the truckload of money she was paid to give this speech. Since wait..she DID make hundreds of thousands of dollars off giving a speech, right?
Plus to be honest I have never cared what the wife of a politician has to say. Why should we? Because they are boinking someone in power?
I never even once got the impression Trump's wife would be like Hilary. When I say "like Hilary" I am not talking about the lies Hilary does and all that, what I mean is when Bill Clinton was president it was obvious we had a very active first lady as opposed to a passive one. It seemed clear this was indeed someone who could be yapping to her husband about something and have that potentially effect a decision.
The Clintons are the ones who let their spouses help run the country. If Trump wins I would legitimately just expect his wife to be all..I dunno, appearing at a charities or stuff like that? I don't expect her to be having any real say in the country and how it is run, but I could be wrong on this, Trump indeed might of said "I'm giving Melania the economy to fix".
I don't have any issues with her, but has Trump ever said he's going to be delegating serious presidential duties to her if he wins? I haven't heard anything like that.
She is also certainly far more attractive than any First Lady we've had in a long time. In a campaign that had people commenting on the dick size of candidates I think that comment is thus fair game. So keep that in mind before anyone decides to respond with "blah blah looks don't matter".
Originally posted by Surtur
Dude are you not a grown up with the ability to imagine things? I'm not asking you to picture some advanced physics equation in your head.Is your unwillingness to answer also not a deflection?
No, it is not a deflection. You are attempting to shift he burden of proof. Instead of asking the person who claimed that Obama plagiarized her speech to substantiate that claim, you are presuming it is true, and then asking me to respond to it. You are deflecting from his ability to substantiate his argument by changing the subject and trying to put the burden on me.