XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican
On 2024-02-02, AlleyCat <
katt@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 00:32:27 -0000 (UTC), pothead says...
On 2024-02-01, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-02-01 15:23, AlleyCat wrote:
Biden's immigration policies at work.
Can you elucidate (now run along and look that up)...
...and single policy difference between Biden's policies and Trump's?
<https://www.speaker.gov/64-times-the-biden-administration-intentionally-undermined-border-security/
Alan's a fucking loon. He also employs bullshit liberal semantics games. We ALL
know what's "on the books" as far as border POLICIES are, and we KNOW there are
few "differences".
But THE difference isn't IN the policies... it's IN the way the that Biden and
the Democrat's ENFORCE, or better yet, do NOT enforce the policies.
Trump's administration did.
Alan's such a fucking pedantic little child. He's incapable of refuting ANYTHING that is the topic, having to go off on tangents NOT related to the subject.
CIP:
Mann is blaming his lawyers for using his exaggerated resumé for grant funding.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/c/8Ir2vnK6oXo/m/IVW8T7LGAAAJ
This article is about Michael Mann's climate trial, and since ski bunny can't refute any of it, he has to bring up Trump. That's just idiotic. I can see him
bringing Tim Ball or anyone else in that particular trial up, but Trump?
I guess it's, those who are "off" mentally", are off-topic whores.
2) "Which is why you snipped everything else I said."
When Cuntnadian can't refute, he HAS to bring it up that I snip. I snip for brevity (look it up, ski bunny kook), and SINCE he has no refutation, he tries
to make THAT an issue. Narcissistic nerds like that, need to have a psychiatrist look at them.
3) "No source."
Another trick liberals employ, when they have no refutation. It's ALL too easy
to look this shit up himself, but HE thinks, by asking for a source, that nulls
and voids the article.
No loon, it does not. You're either too stupid to refute, or it CAN'T be refuted.
4) Bullshit liberal semantics.
Liberals can ONLY employ this tactic when they KNOW they can't argue the point
or refute it at all. If someone says someone "said" something in an article, they will scream and holler like little children, pointing it out that you can't SAY something in print... you WRITE it.
THAT'S the childishness of the modern liberal.
When pointing out Physicists telling us their points of view on climate, undoubtedly one of these childish liberal will pipe in with and whining, "Bu bu
but heee's not a climate scientisssst!"
Then, the MOST childish one of the bunch will go a step further.
"He has no 'particular' qualifications for understanding climate."
Notice the bullshit word semantics. "Particular".
Wittle pussy-boys play these bullshit liberal semantics games.
I've noticed that.
Example when I mention that BLM was burning down cities, the libtards
Jumped on it asking so what City was burned down.
Obviously no city was completely burned down, but that doesn't stop the libtards from pulling the
semantic card.
--
pothead
Tommy Chong For President 2024.
Crazy Joe Biden Is A Demented Imbecile.
Impeach Joe Biden 2022.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)