Speaking of conspiracy theories...

[kazoolaw]

Explains much.

Whenever you post a clip of Joe appearing cognitively impaired to the point of being unfit for office, I'll respond.

No point in doing that when you can't tell what's abnormal.

Worse is having to have someone else tell you it’s abnormal. @tehrbs doesn’t need someone like you apparently.

I agree: it's worse having to explain to TSherbs what abnormal is. C'mon man, it's like trying to mobilize trunalimunumaprzure.

[Chuck Naill]

You’re just trying to be cute and it isn’t working .

[kazoolaw]

You’re just trying to be cute and it isn’t working .

C'mon man, you know that's no so.

[Chuck Naill]

Change your name to “c’mon man…”

Seriously, you cannot respond to your own threads. You wrangle and hyperbolize (is that a word?).

You wanted fo chastise Biden’s interpretation and then pulled out the evangelism. That means there was no reason to whine unless you don’t think he’s included in “all”. Stop trying to be cute . Is truly isn’t working and your not making your point.

[kazoolaw]

Change your name to “c’mon man…”

Seriously, you cannot respond to your own threads. You wrangle and hyperbolize (is that a word?).

You wanted fo chastise Biden’s interpretation and then pulled out the evangelism. That means there was no reason to whine unless you don’t think he’s included in “all”. Stop trying to be cute . Is truly isn’t working and your not making your point.

Chuck,
"C'mon man" is your man's line.
The fact you don't see the point doesn't mean there isn't one.
"You...then pulled out the evangelism."
Oops.
Chuck, did you notice you're in the wrong thread again: no evangelism here.
Have a nice night.

[Chuck Naill]

Change your name to “c’mon man…”

Seriously, you cannot respond to your own threads. You wrangle and hyperbolize (is that a word?).

You wanted fo chastise Biden’s interpretation and then pulled out the evangelism. That means there was no reason to whine unless you don’t think he’s included in “all”. Stop trying to be cute . Is truly isn’t working and your not making your point.

Chuck,
"C'mon man" is your man's line.
The fact you don't see the point doesn't mean there isn't one.
"You...then pulled out the evangelism."
Oops.
Chuck, did you notice you're in the wrong thread again: no evangelism here.
Have a nice night.

My bad, you introduced Evangelicalism in a different thread.

[kazoolaw]

My bad, you introduced Evangelicalism in a different thread.

Remind me, did you use the E word or did I?

[Chuck Naill]

My bad, you introduced Evangelicalism in a different thread.

Remind me, did you use the E word or did I?

You said something about “all have sinned…” . Did I misread?

[kazoolaw]

My bad, you introduced Evangelicalism in a different thread.

Remind me, did you use the E word or did I?

You said something about “all have sinned…” . Did I misread?

As you've quoted 1 Tim, I guess we've both introduced Evangelicalism Brother Chuck.

[Chuck Naill]

My bad, you introduced Evangelicalism in a different thread.

Remind me, did you use the E word or did I?

You said something about “all have sinned…” . Did I misread?

As you've quoted 1 Tim, I guess we've both introduced Evangelicalism Brother Chuck.

No, it was you and certainly not me. You have a vivid imagination.

[kazoolaw]

I may have a vivid imagination, but I can't imagine you forgetting Post 27 in the topic Biden and the Bible.. I think that's you quoting 1 Timothy 5:2.
Be well, and good night.

[dneal]

Another futile attempt to get back on topic, but a friend posted this elsewhere. The second post (the latter portion in particular, since some will be triggered at the sight of the name of the orange one) has some insight. For those who base everything on politics, this person is a lifelong Democrat. A Mondale and Dukakis voter.

Do those who have concluded that Joe Biden is incapable of communicating coherently without prompters actually believe that he is making critically important decisions without prompters? He says and does what the prompters direct him to say and do. They have directed him, with his cooperation, into a situation where most of the country is now ready for him to leave office, and the prompters are ready to replace him.

Love him or hate him, Donald Trump was not controlled by "prompters". Republican Party "prompters" could not control him, and did not want him in office. In fact, they were nearly as anxious to get rid of him, and stay rid of him, as the Democrats. The Dem prompters got fully behind Biden's candidacy because they could control him, and he wanted it more than anything else in the world in order to enhance his legacy. Do you think he would have been willing to follow their direction if they promised to get behind him? So, they literally did everything they could to get him into office. Once there, he was subject to their manipulation and control, due to vulnerability that resulted from his involvement in shady dealings in Ukraine, China, etc., as well as his rapidly deteriorating mental functions. In my opinion, their plan (all along) was to use him as their presidential puppet for as long as the arrangement worked, then simply allow him to blunder his way to impeachment, or to removal from office via the 25th Amendment. In any case, next in line is Kamala. Do you remember that she was blown off the Dem candidate stage by a hugely more competent Tulsi Gabbard? That basically ended her bid for the Dem nomination... yet, they chose her for his running mate! Why would that be? Think maybe she expressed a willingness to take direction from the prompters, as long as they make her President? It's a win-win... Kamala gets to be the first female president, and the prompters get another puppet to control. No? Okay, change my mind.

[Chuck Naill]

Being “uncontrollable” is not a positive trait with presidential power.

People will support authoritarian leaders until they don’t. When it’s too late.

It’s sad and humorous how the same people screaming for freedom will support the very people who would control that freedom.

Praise God for people who can see the danger of absolute power and work to never allow it to occur on their watch.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

[Chuck Naill]

EOC you are a genius

[TSherbs]

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[dneal]

EOC you are a genius

Nope. Just a meme plagiarized by lefties, because the left can’t meme.

Let’s see what Snopes has to say, since you guys like that. Hmmm, the politicians are different than EoC’s. I guess it doesn’t matter since Snopes authoritatively declares this “FALSE”. But you know I don’t trust Snopes…

So let’s find another. Oooh, here’s a good one from USA Today! Oh, it just references Snopes; but they are stunning and brave enough to also independently render their verdict that this is “FALSE”. Hmmm. What about “checkyourfact.com”? More Democrats and more “FALSE”.

But now that it has been stolen by lefties, and the names simply changed; is it still false? I thought you believed this sort of disinformation should be shut down? Anyway, I didn’t spend a lot of time looking, because it’s just satire; which Reuters is apparently able to identify. I wonder why they didn’t fact check the original too? I wonder if they know the original listed Democrats? Do liberals only understand satire when they’re not the subject?

[Chuck Naill]

We and They by Rudyard Kipling

Father, Mother, and Me,
Sister and Auntie say
All the people like us are We,
And every one else is They.
And They live over the sea,
While We live over the way,
But would you believe it?
They look upon We
As only a sort of They!

We eat port and beef
With cow-horn-handled knives,
They who gobble Their rice off a loaf,
Are horrified out of Their lives;
While They who live up a tree,
And feast on grubs and clay,
(Isn’t it scandalous?) look upon We
As a simply disgusting They!

We shoot birds with a gun.
They stick lions with spears.
Their full-dress is un-.
We dress up to Our ears.
They like Their friends for tea,
We like Our friends to stay;
And, after all that,
They look upon We
As an utterly ignorant They!

We eat kitcheny food.
We have doors that latch.
They drink milk or blood,
Under an open thatch.
We have doctors to fee.
They have Wizards to pay.
And (impudent heathen!)
They look upon We
As a quite impossible They!

All good people agree,
And all good people say,
All nice people, like Us, are We
And every one else is They:
But if you cross over the sea,
Instead of over the way,
You may end by (think of it!)
Looking on We
As only a sort of They!

[Empty_of_Clouds]

EOC you are a genius

Nope. Just a meme plagiarized by lefties, because the left can’t meme.

Let’s see what Snopes has to say, since you guys like that. Hmmm, the politicians are different than EoC’s. I guess it doesn’t matter since Snopes authoritatively declares this “FALSE”. But you know I don’t trust Snopes…

So let’s find another. Oooh, here’s a good one from USA Today! Oh, it just references Snopes; but they are stunning and brave enough to also independently render their verdict that this is “FALSE”. Hmmm. What about “checkyourfact.com”? More Democrats and more “FALSE”.

But now that it has been stolen by lefties, and the names simply changed; is it still false? I thought you believed this sort of disinformation should be shut down? Anyway, I didn’t spend a lot of time looking, because it’s just satire; which Reuters is apparently able to identify. I wonder why they didn’t fact check the original too? I wonder if they know the original listed Democrats? Do liberals only understand satire when they’re not the subject?

Ooh, triggered AND a sense of humour failure. Well done!

[dneal]

EOC you are a genius

Nope. Just a meme plagiarized by lefties, because the left can’t meme.

Let’s see what Snopes has to say, since you guys like that. Hmmm, the politicians are different than EoC’s. I guess it doesn’t matter since Snopes authoritatively declares this “FALSE”. But you know I don’t trust Snopes…

So let’s find another. Oooh, here’s a good one from USA Today! Oh, it just references Snopes; but they are stunning and brave enough to also independently render their verdict that this is “FALSE”. Hmmm. What about “checkyourfact.com”? More Democrats and more “FALSE”.

But now that it has been stolen by lefties, and the names simply changed; is it still false? I thought you believed this sort of disinformation should be shut down? Anyway, I didn’t spend a lot of time looking, because it’s just satire; which Reuters is apparently able to identify. I wonder why they didn’t fact check the original too? I wonder if they know the original listed Democrats? Do liberals only understand satire when they’re not the subject?

Ooh, triggered AND a sense of humour failure. Well done!

Still the plagiarist, I see.

p.s.: I just explained to Chuck the problem of trying to adopt my tactics; and now you come along and try the same?

You had an enormous opportunity with those three paragraphs, and you pissed it away due to (like Chuck) the absence of sufficient intelligence and wit. Jeezus you guys are amateurs.

This is why I don’t like having these types of conversations. None of you pose a challenge. You’re internet hyenas, squelching real discussion with petty partisanship and pathetic efforts to “win” something (and I think that ‘something’ is maintaining your self-contradictory worldview). It’s much more fun to discuss things civilly and objectively.