Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Calm down man, don't you see your own double standard?
I am calm, and again I say: you seem to lack intelligence. The double standard would be if I was okay with Trump doing it, but b*tching and moaning about this example. Except I wasn't, I laughed at the hysteria of Democrats.
Now do you legitimately not grasp that or are you trolling? I'd feel better if it was trolling.
Originally posted by Surtur
Rob, I knew you or someone else would of course come back with this. Here is the thing: I'm just laughing. It's funny, pathetic, and sad. Denounce Trump, but when it comes to it? Behave like him. The loony liberal way.
Gald you knew 👆 But you avoided my question by making it about something I didn't ask about.
Do you not see it odd that you're "laughing" at Olberman for behavior** that you seemingly had no problem with Trump doing and even welcomed during the election? Could you answer this directly please?
**Never mind that commentator Olberman asking a foreign power to release info is very different than Trump (the contender at the time) asking a foreign power to illegally hack his rival.
Originally posted by Robtard
Gald you knew 👆 But you avoided my question by making it about something I didn't ask about.Do you not see it odd that you're "laughing" at Olberman for behavior** that you seemingly had no problem with Trump doing and even welcomed during the election? Could you answer this directly please?
**Never mind that commentator Olberman asking a foreign power to release info is very different than Trump (the contender at the time) asking a foreign power to illegally hack his rival.
First this was that I had a "problem" with what he was doing, as in his specific acts. No, I was laughing at him. Now it's odd that I laughed? Yeah, nope.
No, I don't see it as odd that I'm laughing at a hysterical liberal for being hysterical. This is part of a bigger picture of people like this going crazy over the Comey thing. Trump wasn't acting like a hysterical nut when he did what he did. So why would I have found it funny?
Now my question is if you'll be able to genuinely separate the differences between the instances or if you'll just come back at me with more bullshit.
Also if what the guy did is very different...why then are you even comparing them? To what end? To try to show a double standard? Okay. Seems desperate. You feel the things are very different, but tried to use them to prove a double standard anyways?
Originally posted by Robtard
**Never mind that commentator Olberman asking a foreign power to release info is very different than Trump (the contender at the time) asking a foreign power to illegally hack his rival.
Yeah, that's the double standard alright. I just don't get why Surtur can't see it. Cognitive dissonance?
Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Yeah, that's the double standard alright. I just don't get why Surtur can't see it. Cognitive dissonance?
Lol so you indeed are just dumb then. The double standard is that the two situations aren't the same? But I never said they were the same. Rob brought up the Trump thing.
If the two situations are not the same how is having a different reaction to them a double standard? Explain that.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
...said the silly guy who's only defense for his weak pathetic line of argument is "i was just laughing".
Lol dude, I posted an article and was laughing. Rob came, tried and failed to imply a double standard. I said nope, just laughing.
The defense isn't weak if it's the truth.
Originally posted by Surtur
First this was that I had a "problem" with what he was doing, as in his specific acts. No, I was laughing at him. Now it's odd that I laughed? Yeah, nope.No, I don't see it as odd that I'm laughing at a hysterical liberal for being hysterical. This is part of a bigger picture of people like this going crazy over the Comey thing. Trump wasn't acting like a hysterical nut when he did what he did. So why would I have found it funny?
Now my question is if you'll be able to genuinely separate the differences between the instances or if you'll just come back at me with more bullshit.
Also if what the guy did is very different...why the are you even comparing them? To what end? To try to show a double standard? Okay. Seems desperate.
honestly don't recall you having a problem with Trump begging Russia to hack his rival Clinton. I'm also pretty sure you were happy as you were very anti-Clinton winning. Can you post a post that proves you were against Trump welcoming Russia to hack his rival?
Now you're seemingly contradicting yourself? Did you or did you not have a problem with Trump asking a foreign power to hack his rival? If no, why not? If yes, see above. Thanks in advance.
I don't see me asking a valid question as "bullshit".
Noting that what Olberman did is less insane is just that. You're getting defensive and I just asked a question
Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
He didn't really fail though Surt...
Okay, and you can prove this 100% if you answer my above question to you, and if you missed it I will go over it again:
Rob says the two are very different situations. You quote it, and say "that's the double standard alright".
Do you not see the issue? A double standard would be same situations, completely different reactions. Rob has said they are very different, you have concurred.
So the accusation is I reacted different to two situations you have said are very different and this is me having a double standard? Well shit, okay.
Originally posted by Surtur
Okay, and you can prove this 100% if you answer my above question to you, and if you missed it I will go over it again:Rob says the two are very different situations. You quote it, and say "that's the double standard alright".
Do you not see the issue? A double standard would be same situations, completely different reactions. Rob has said they are very different, you have concurred.
So the accusation is I reacted different to two situations you have said are very different and this is me having a double standard? Well shit, okay.
Let me explain using an example:
Scenario: Let's say Tom has a problem with person A) robbing a candy bar, but doesn't have a problem with person B) robbing the pensions of thousands of elderly people because that person is their friend.
See how both situations are indeed different as one is VERY much worse, but Tom is still using a double-standard in what he has a problem with.
Originally posted by Robtard
Let me explain using an example:Scenario: Let's say Tom has a problem with person A) robbing a candy bar but doesn't have a problem with person B) robbing the pensions of thousands of elderly people because that person is their friend.
See how both situations are indeed different as one is VERY much worse, but Tom is still using double
Come on Surt; you can't fail to understand that. Rob are you a high school teacher? If not, you should be.
Originally posted by Robtard
honestly don't recall you having a problem with Trump begging Russia to hack his rival Clinton. I'm also pretty sure you were happy as you were very anti-Clinton winning. Can you post a post that proves you were against Trump welcoming Russia to hack his rival?
Lol dude, can I post a post that proves I was against Trump doing that? No, I'm not going to go digging for posts nor did I ever say I posted and admonished Trump for it. If you're thinking of the situation I think you are, wasn't he jokingly asking? Wasn't it like a flippant comment? As opposed to a serious plea? If there is a legitimate serious plea from Trump I do not recall, can you post that?
Now you're seemingly contradicting yourself? Did you or did you not have a problem with Trump asking a foreign power to hack his rival? If no, why not? If yes, see above. Thanks in advance.
But where is the contradiction? You asked me if I felt odd laughing at this when I did not laugh at Trump. Trump, as I recall, made some flippant comment. He didn't go on a hysterical rant asking people hack Clinton. For someone who tries to get technical and talk about the "very different situations" I sure as hell hope you're referring to another incident. I do not recall Trump ever doing anything remotely on the same scale as some rant about hacking.
I also don't have a problem with what Trump or Keith did lol. Like I said, I was laughing at how hysterical he was getting. How is this hard to grasp?
Noting that what Olberman did is less insane is just that. You're getting defensive and I just asked a question
But you didn't phrase it that way. You said what he did was very different. So if it was very different, why are you comparing how I reacted to two different situations?
So your answer in Trump's defense is "he was not serious"? Okay, I laughed. But I'm pretty sure he was serious, watch the tape. Also, Russia actually doing it supports that Trump was serious.
If you didn't laugh at Trump's antics where were VERY much worse, but you laughed at Olbermans, that is indeed using a double-standard.
It's clear what I am saying, two other people understood my clear comments. But I've explained it using a scenario. See "Tom" above.
Originally posted by Robtard
Let me explain using an example:Scenario: Let's say Tom has a problem with person A) robbing a candy bar, but doesn't have a problem with person B) robbing the pensions of thousands of elderly people because that person is their friend.
See how both situations are indeed different as one is VERY much worse, but Tom is still using a double-standard in what he has a problem with.
I understand you now, but then let me use your example to have you see how I view this. A dude robs thousands from people, just a straight up by the book scam/robbery/whatever. I say nothing and do not laugh, etc.
Other dude steals a candy bar, but does so in an utterly hysterical fashion: I laugh my ass off.