Two! Four! Six! Eight! JaySecrets Prevaricates!

[Rightguide]

I'm not. He's the one who brought up rap artists to ascribe their behavior to anything I support. I told him that I don't.

He can't even admit that Trump advocated for abhorrent behavior.

Like what?

 

[TastySuckToy]

Like what?

Free and fair elections is probably high on their list.

 

[JaySecrets]

I'm not. He's the one who brought up rap artists to ascribe their behavior to anything I support. I told him that I don't.

He can't even admit that Trump advocated for abhorrent behavior.

And you miss the point. You vocally attack Trump for language that you remain silent about on other celebrities and on so-called artists, at least until your hypocrisy is pointed out. Then it's, Well, yeah, that's bad too... BUT TRUMP!!!....

Trump, as a celebrity Playboy talked like... a celebrity Playboy. More than a decade before he ran for office. With a group of guys being equally foul mouthed. Should we talk about the Kennedys...? Your side needs to get a grip.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

What question?

The original question I asked.

 

[ll74]

And you miss the point. You vocally attack Trump for language that you remain silent about on other celebrities and on so-called artists, at least until your hypocrisy is pointed out. Then it's, Well, yeah, that's bad too... BUT TRUMP!!!....

I don't attack Trump. He said what he said. You voted for him. I've never said I condone or support rap lyrics. You brought it up. I condemn all language that advocates for sexual violence. And I don't need to boycott something I haven't subscribed to.

Trump, as a celebrity Playboy talked like... a celebrity Playboy. More than a decade before he ran for office. With a group of guys being equally foul mouthed. Should we talk about the Kennedys...? Your side needs to get a grip.

I don't give a shit why he is foul mouthed.

 

[ll74]

I have specifically said Trump's words were abhorrent. They were not advocating what you claim they were, nor are they WHAT you keep saying they were. But they were abhorrent. And had he been running for office then, or even close to it, they would be a relevant attack on the President Donald Trump. But because they are not from anywhere near that time, and because that is THE quote that keeps coming up because you don't have much else on that front, you are the one deflecting.

And if I bought the albums of the artists that say abhorrent things, you might have a leg to stand on in comparison. I've never done so.

And you never even touched your own two most recent presidents, minus Obama, and their actual legit sexual assaults on women.

The Biden accusations are truly unsubstantiated. As for Clinton, I didn't vote for his second term because of it.

 

[Rightguide]

I don't attack Trump. He said what he said. You voted for him. I've never said I condone or support rap lyrics. You brought it up. I condemn all language that advocates for sexual violence. And I don't need to boycott something I haven't subscribed to.

But you foolishly voted for a nationally renown liar, plagiarist, racist, and pervert.

 

[TastySuckToy]

The original question I asked.

I answered it.

 

[JaySecrets]

And if I bought the albums of the artists that say abhorrent things, you might have a leg to stand on in comparison. I've never done so.


The Biden accusations are truly unsubstantiated. As for Clinton, I didn't vote for his second term because of it.

Biden's accusations were heavily substantiated. She gave witness long before, while Biden was still a senator and she was an aide. She was told to shut up because Biden was a rising star. She informed several People around her of the assaults at the time they occured. She tried to bring in to the Democrat controlled media, avoiding conservative media because she didn't want the story to become about the party when the issue was one man. The story was buried. It's a sick saga of the media, the DNC, and the Dems in government conspiring to hush a victim of assault because her assault was done by a popular rising star in the Democrat party.

 

[JaySecrets]

You know I actually have a lot of respect for conservatives who are never Trump. The conservatives like that, including my brother, have consistently called for an end of that kind of language regardless of where it came from. They have openly take an issue with the hip hop and rap industry. They have openly taken issue with the rock industry and the country industry where they have had that kind of language. They have taken issue with the television industry and the media as they have endorsed and pushed that kind of language and talk and content. So when Trump came along they opposed him for the same reasons. And while I took some issue with the idea that voting for a third party was taking a stronger stance than simply voting for the person who was the best choice given the options, I respected their opinion. Your side has never taken such a stance. Your side has in fact endorsed the culture that has produced this kind of mentality and music and things that have become so apparent and sexualizing when it comes to women. So when you object to Trump, when you attack him on those grounds, you prove yourself to be hypocrites. That's my point.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I answered it.

You didn’t. You answered your own straw man question. I’ll keep waiting.

 

[TastySuckToy]

You didn’t. You answered your own straw man question. I’ll keep waiting.

I answered your court question, more than once.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I answered your court question, more than once.

Still haven’t.

 

[jaF0]

I haven't seen this much desperate bullshit from one poster on the PB in awhile.

The amount of effort is pretty remarkable, in a freakshow kind of way.

We'll see more of this as Trump falls further out of favor, and his flock tries in vain to re-invent themselves.

The secretions are really mucking up the boards.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Still haven’t.

Then either resubmit the question or point to the question you're referring to. I've answered every question you posed, while you on the other hand have answered none of mine.

 

[Pauljiggs]

I am forever at a loss to watch people argue with left wing wackos displaying TDS.
They will never give up the lies they rely on to bash all things right.
They will never acknowledge that their heroes have no better morals.
They will always misquote, remove context, and ignore moral equivalence.
Arguing with them is like arguing with a 9 year old.
A waste of time.
Making points they simply will refuse to acknowledge.
And call you names when they have no where left to go.
And anybody claiming the moral high ground while supporting a liar that was thrown out of an election for lying. For refusing to admit abortion is killing a living human being. Claiming men can become women and women can become men. Has no high ground to stand upon.
Simple claim “I support a liar, I know abortion is killing a human and I don’t care, I know they are not men or women, but I can pretend if I want too.”
Then you have some high ground to stand on.

 

[JaySecrets]

Still haven’t.

He did. You don't like his answer. He didn't dignify the way you framed the question. It's like asking a man, "Have you stopped cheating on your wife yet?" "I have never cheated on my wife." "That wasn't the question. Have you stopped cheating on your wife yet?" If he says yes, he was cheating, if he says no, he is. It's an ill-framed gotcha question, and he is wise to answer with the facts instead of allowing you a contrived framework.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Then either resubmit the question or point to the question you're referring to. I've answered every question you posed, while you on the other hand have answered none of mine.

Haven’t answered any of the questions. I’ll keep waiting.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

He did. You don't like his answer. He didn't dignify the way you framed the question. It's like asking a man, "Have you stopped cheating on your wife yet?" "I have never cheated on my wife." "That wasn't the question. Have you stopped cheating on your wife yet?" If he says yes, he was cheating, if he says no, he is. It's an ill-framed gotcha question, and he is wise to answer with the facts instead of allowing you a contrived framework.

It would only be like that if a court determined that the man beat his wife. Good try. Neither you or him will ever answer the question.

 

[JaySecrets]

I am forever at a loss to watch people argue with left wing wackos displaying TDS.
They will never give up the lies they rely on to bash all things right.
They will never acknowledge that their heroes have no better morals.
They will always misquote, remove context, and ignore moral equivalence.
Arguing with them is like arguing with a 9 year old.
A waste of time.
Making points they simply will refuse to acknowledge.
And call you names when they have no where left to go.
And anybody claiming the moral high ground while supporting a liar that was thrown out of an election for lying. For refusing to admit abortion is killing a living human being. Claiming men can become women and women can become men. Has no high ground to stand upon.
Simple claim “I support a liar, I know abortion is killing a human and I don’t care, I know they are not men or women, but I can pretend if I want too.”
Then you have some high ground to stand on.

I agree, but when they are pushed to the "F*** you, Trumptard" point, assuming you can keep your cool, they expose themselves for who and what they are to people watching. They ultimately do more to help people leave liberalism than anyone else. And it's times when they are pushed to exposure that they do the most damage to themselves, all while thinking they are winning. And that's why I occasionally do this.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Haven’t answered any of the questions. I’ll keep waiting.

So you concede the argument then. Good.

 

[JaySecrets]

It would only be like that if a court determined that the man beat his wife. Good try. Neither you or him will ever answer the question.

Rephrase then... It'd be like an innocent man found guilty of battery when he never touched her, found guilty because the DA was herself a battered woman and the Judge just dealt with a guy beating his daughter, so now is allowing every judicial rule to be thrown out because he and she both have decided he is going to be found guilty. Then the question. Still an ill-framed gotcha. Still you trying to control the narrative by how you frame the question. Still a wise and legit answer. You may not agree with it, but he answered honestly. Move on.

 

[ll74]

You know I actually have a lot of respect for conservatives who are never Trump. The conservatives like that, including my brother, have consistently called for an end of that kind of language regardless of where it came from. They have openly take an issue with the hip hop and rap industry. They have openly taken issue with the rock industry and the country industry where they have had that kind of language. They have taken issue with the television industry and the media as they have endorsed and pushed that kind of language and talk and content. So when Trump came along they opposed him for the same reasons. And while I took some issue with the idea that voting for a third party was taking a stronger stance than simply voting for the person who was the best choice given the options, I respected their opinion. Your side has never taken such a stance. Your side has in fact endorsed the culture that has produced this kind of mentality and music and things that have become so apparent and sexualizing when it comes to women. So when you object to Trump, when you attack him on those grounds, you prove yourself to be hypocrites. That's my point.

California health

I agree, but when they are pushed to the "F*** you, Trumptard" point, assuming you can keep your cool, they expose themselves for who and what they are to people watching. They ultimately do more to help people leave liberalism than anyone else. And it's times when they are pushed to exposure that they do the most damage to themselves, all while thinking they are winning. And that's why I occasionally do this.

I have consistently told you directly that I support your right to lobby for your preferred abortion policy.

You have called me names and redefined words and refused to do the same.

You have no high ground here.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Rephrase then... It'd be like an innocent man found guilty of battery when he never touched her, found guilty because the DA was herself a battered woman and the Judge just dealt with a guy beating his daughter, so now is allowing every judicial rule to be thrown out because he and she both have decided he is going to be found guilty. Then the question. Still an ill-framed gotcha. Still you trying to control the narrative by how you frame the question. Still a wise and legit answer. You may not agree with it, but he answered honestly. Move on.

No need to rephrase. Did Trump have her consent to assault her?

 

[Pauljiggs]

Well I disagree with you.
Neither you or them are doing yourselves any favors.
I was told as child never argue with an idiot. People watching can’t tell who the idiot is.