Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[bankshot1]

Anyone here want to rent some space in the troll's head.

as you can see I own it and have for some time.

I'm open to any reasonable price, as its obvious its wholly vacant.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Rudy trying to clean up his now infamous "Truth isn't truth" mess with the following twitter post:

"My statement was not meant as a pontification on moral theology but one referring to the situation where two people make precisely contradictory statements, the classic "he said,she said" puzzle. Sometimes further inquiry can reveal the truth other times it doesn't."

And like everything that comes out of the mouths of this group, its total bullshit.  If a witness has nothing to hide from the truth, they aren't told by their lawyer not to cooperate with an important inquiry because someone just might contradict their version of events.  If evidence backing you exists, that evidence will win out.  If no such evidence exists (as Giuliani says, a classic "he said, she said") then the "puzzle" remains so. 

No one gets charged with perjury based on contradicting testimony.  They get charged when that further inquiry reveals a lie.  If there was no threat of that happening, there would be no perjury.

Its like the N-word tapes.  Most of us (though not everyone on this forum, maybe) can say with confidence that no tape exists of us saying the N-word.  There is a reason for that.  But if you are someone who is capable of using that word in professional conversation, then there might be!  And you need other people to assure you that it doesn't exist.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Rudy trying to clean up his now infamous "Truth isn't truth" mess with the following twitter post:

"My statement was not meant as a pontification on moral theology but one referring to the situation where two people make precisely contradictory statements, the classic "he said,she said" puzzle. Sometimes further inquiry can reveal the truth other times it doesn't."

And like everything that comes out of the mouths of this group, its total bullshit.  If a witness has nothing to hide from the truth, they aren't told by their lawyer not to cooperate with an important inquiry because someone just might contradict their version of events.  If evidence backing you exists, that evidence will win out.  If no such evidence exists (as Giuliani says, a classic "he said, she said") then the "puzzle" remains so. 

No one gets charged with perjury based on contradicting testimony.  They get charged when that further inquiry reveals a lie.  If there was no threat of that happening, there would be no perjury.

Its like the N-word tapes.  Most of us (though not everyone on this forum, maybe) can say with confidence that no tape exists of us saying the N-word.  There is a reason for that.  But if you are someone who is capable of using that word in professional conversation, then there might be!  And you need other people to assure you that it doesn't exist.

 "No, it isn't truth. Truth isn't truth. . Donald Trump says, 'I didn't talk about Flynn with Comey.' Comey says, 'You did talk about it,' so tell me what the truth is."

We know Donald will say he didn't talk about Flynn with Comey.  He says that or something similar every single day on his twitter feed.

Fo some reason Donald is unwilling to say that in an environment in which he could be charged with perjury if that turns out to not be true.   If he never talked about it, he never talked about it.  But your client doesn't seem so sure about that, Rudy.

[barton]

And JOSH:  what are you good for, Global Moderator?  Can't you delete off-topic flame posts?

[/size]

Yes.

It's better when I see them early in their posting.

And I try to minimize the deletions.

[whiskeypriest]

The fact that the President of the United States could spend that much time providing that much quote on the situation without once even mentioning White Supremacists (let alone condemning them) is extraordinarily bad.  Its a horror show.  And sorry, the only way you can not see that is if you sympathize with those White Supremacists.

I think the Devil's cleverest trick (aside from the classic one of convincing everyone that he doesn't exist) is rebranding
White Supremacists as the "Alt Right."  Putting "Alt" in front of something makes it sound trendy and cool and a refreshing alternative to the usual ideological menu picks. 

Banks - I'll address this to you, as you the seem like the saner person in the dispute:  any chance you and Nutley could PM each other?  And JOSH:  what are you good for, Global Moderator?  Can't you delete off-topic flame posts?

I have made that point to banks before, over in the sports fora, to no avail. Buttley knows his mark.

[bankshot1]

The fact that the President of the United States could spend that much time providing that much quote on the situation without once even mentioning White Supremacists (let alone condemning them) is extraordinarily bad.  Its a horror show.  And sorry, the only way you can not see that is if you sympathize with those White Supremacists.

I think the Devil's cleverest trick (aside from the classic one of convincing everyone that he doesn't exist) is rebranding
White Supremacists as the "Alt Right."  Putting "Alt" in front of something makes it sound trendy and cool and a refreshing alternative to the usual ideological menu picks. 

Banks - I'll address this to you, as you the seem like the saner person in the dispute:  any chance you and Nutley could PM each other?  And JOSH:  what are you good for, Global Moderator?  Can't you delete off-topic flame posts?

Bart

I've little interest in the troll whatsoever, he is a cancer on this forum, so no I won't PM him. But at the same time, I don't use ignore, and I have and will challenge his indecency as I think there is value in exposing a cancer.

and Bart just in the past 12 hours or so he's attacked/trolled yank, knicks and myself in purposely offensive manners.

btw, I'll make you a great deal on the troll rental, I can give you 3 for the price of 1

the seldom used hamilton, the Utley and the pigday

and for a limited time only I'll throw in a hardly used les miz.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Anyone here want to rent some space in the troll's head.

as you can see I own it and have for some time.

I'm open to any reasonable price, as its obvious its wholly vacant.

The only thing you "own" is a small prick and an oversized ego, CSP.

[Hamilton Samuels]

The fact that the President of the United States could spend that much time providing that much quote on the situation without once even mentioning White Supremacists (let alone condemning them) is extraordinarily bad.  Its a horror show.  And sorry, the only way you can not see that is if you sympathize with those White Supremacists.

I think the Devil's cleverest trick (aside from the classic one of convincing everyone that he doesn't exist) is rebranding
White Supremacists as the "Alt Right."  Putting "Alt" in front of something makes it sound trendy and cool and a refreshing alternative to the usual ideological menu picks. 

Banks - I'll address this to you, as you the seem like the saner person in the dispute:  any chance you and Nutley could PM each other?  And JOSH:  what are you good for, Global Moderator?  Can't you delete off-topic flame posts?

Josh chose sides many years ago. It's a Boston thing. 

[barton]

Thank heavens for acronyms I can't decode.

Anywho....

ATM, as I peruse news, am trying to wrap my mind around the scenario where I am 17, and Asia Argento offers me alcohol and demands sex after a blowjob, and I frame this later as sexual assault on me.  (I think the old "there's no such thing as a bad blowjob" canard might be relevant)  I know there are layers to this story, but I'm damned if I can recall any 17 year old boys for whom this type of scenario is anything but the start of an enjoyable fantasy.  I guess this underscores the gap between fantasy, what we imagine our inner 17 year old wants, and reality.  Just because the horndogs I hung out with in my teens would be of the "I wouldn't say no to that," school, doesn't mean that some boy couldn't feel overwhelmed and powerless.  But it's still a reach for me - part of me has this atavistic thought:  "jeez, they don't make 17 year old boys like they used to." 

[Hamilton Samuels]

The fact that the President of the United States could spend that much time providing that much quote on the situation without once even mentioning White Supremacists (let alone condemning them) is extraordinarily bad.  Its a horror show.  And sorry, the only way you can not see that is if you sympathize with those White Supremacists.

I think the Devil's cleverest trick (aside from the classic one of convincing everyone that he doesn't exist) is rebranding
White Supremacists as the "Alt Right."  Putting "Alt" in front of something makes it sound trendy and cool and a refreshing alternative to the usual ideological menu picks. 

Banks - I'll address this to you, as you the seem like the saner person in the dispute:  any chance you and Nutley could PM each other?  And JOSH:  what are you good for, Global Moderator?  Can't you delete off-topic flame posts?

Bart

I've little interest in the troll whatsoever, he is a cancer on this forum, so no I won't PM him. But at the same time, I don't use ignore, and I have and will challenge his indecency as I think there is value in exposing a cancer.

and Bart just in the past 12 hours or so he's attacked/trolled yank, knicks and myself in purposely offensive manners.

btw, I'll make you a great deal on the troll rental, I can give you 3 for the price of 1

the seldom used hamilton, the Utley and the pigday

and for a limited time only I'll throw in a hardly used les miz.

He has "little interest". Hence, his obsession with my every post, no matter how benign.

HEH

And FTR, no one here was "attacked" but me, and that was for calling out Josh for his misuse of the term "Nazi", which yank wrongly defended, and the DC Professional Victim made worse.

The Bullshit that is slung here is primarily....

By you. But the infection of lying, distorting, and willful misinterpretations have spread to others, sadly, merely because they are frustrated with their own lives, and their stunning lack of political acumen.

AS is the invective. Or did you forget the numerous "go fuck yourself" posts that littered the fora. The "cancer" is all yours, the lies are all yours.

The labeling of others as deeply flawed used to be all yours, a skill you've practiced for decades, but now that "cancer" has moved on to those who used to have some capacity to entertain and tolerate a different point of view.

The fact is you can't ignore me, and never have, and never will, because I know what kind of sick pervert you really are, and you are horrified that your little secret has been exposed.

As are so many in whiskeypriest's chosen "Church".


Maybe you could try sticking to the real topics here, instead of always looking for an opening to continue to try to mischaracterize and distort others' clearly stated opinions, lying weasel that you are.

[Hamilton Samuels]

BE nice to see you actually initiate a real opinion, for once. One of your own, instead of attempting to piggyback on others merely to get their approval, no matter how small.

YOu truly are a pathetic one.

[bankshot1]

heh

I gave a real opinion and I backed it up.

troll- you're an indecent cancer so threatened by others you feel the need to throw any baseless ridiculous offensive fabrication smear to deflect from your clear demonstrated inferiority.

Now go fuck yourself

[LarryBnDC]

Like Trump, I support their right to assemble - with the same respect I give BLM.

Like Trump, you deny that Trump is a racist.

You also seem to deny that his efforts to control things are fascist.

If this was 1939 kid would be a member of the Bund.

And you'd be picking cotton, right?

STFU.

In 1939? In the New York metro area?


Oh, yeah. I forgot you know shit about historical eras. You’re the guy who swore the Civil War Battle of Memphis was of greater importance than the invasion of Normandy.

[Hamilton Samuels]

The Roman Catholic Church’s clergy sex abuse crisis has come roaring back to life as if it were the worst days of 2002, when the scandal tsunami out of Boston seemed to inundate the entire church.

The shock waves this time came from substantiated allegations that a well-known cardinal, Theodore McCarrick, a retired archbishop of Washington, had molested boys; he was forced to resign last month from the College of Cardinals. Then came the grand jury report out of Pennsylvania detailing 70 years of horrific abuse by some 300 priests, too much of it facilitated by bishops.

It has all landed on the desk of the current pope, and the scandals have the potential to undermine the Francis pontificate.

It shouldn’t. Indeed, if Pope Francis lives up to his own words and actions, this could be a chance for him to advance his vision of church reform and turn a long-running crisis into an opportunity for long-term renewal.


This eruption was inevitable. At a historic meeting in Dallas in June 2002, American bishops agreed to a comprehensive set of policies designed to protect children and punish offending priests. But with other observers, those of us in the media — the people regularly accused of trying to “bring down the church” — shook our heads as the bishops effectively exempted themselves from genuine oversight or discipline for failing in their jobs, the sin that truly scandalized the faithful.

Only Rome could investigate bishops, they said, and only the pope could punish them. That wasn’t likely. The Vatican under John Paul II was not very keen on the United States hierarchy’s new policy against priests, and the pontiff certainly didn’t want to throw his own bishops under the bus.


Now the scandal has even some of John Paul’s staunchest fans questioning the wisdom of his canonization in 2014, and it bedeviled Pope Benedict up to his stunning 2013 resignation.

In closed-door meetings on the eve of the conclave that elected him in March 2013, Pope Francis — then Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires — gave a brief, powerful address in which he said the church needed to open up or risk becoming “self-referential” and “sick” with “theological narcissism” that leads to the worst evil, the “spiritual worldliness” of an institution that is “living in itself, of itself, for itself.”

The church, he was saying, had to undergo a moment of kenosis, of self-emptying, like Christ on the cross, surrendering power and prestige and privilege in order to truly become what she is called to be.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/20/opinion/pope-francis-catholic-church-sex-abuse.html

And so, what's he going to do?

[Hamilton Samuels]

Like Trump, I support their right to assemble - with the same respect I give BLM.

Like Trump, you deny that Trump is a racist.

You also seem to deny that his efforts to control things are fascist.

If this was 1939 kid would be a member of the Bund.

And you'd be picking cotton, right?

STFU.

In 1939? In the New York metro area?


Oh, yeah. I forgot you know shit about historical eras. You’re the guy who swore the Civil War Battle of Memphis was of greater importance than the invasion of Normandy.

I knew you'd miss the sarcasm. Listen, dude, you're telling people to get fitted with brown shirts is fucked up, and that was the point, and you KNEW it was the point, so don't try to turn it into something else.

That's a poor move on your part.