On 10/19/2024 at 2:49 PM, earlinclaifornia said:

His team says he is exahusted Looks like a heart problem to me

Come on you tools admit an 82 year old running this country WTF

 

Much better than the fool you have in the job now.

On 10/19/2024 at 2:50 PM, bubblegum said:

Yeah like his answer about child care, talked half an hour about tariffs. Wake up from your dreamworld.

 

Sliding further and further

 

 

Good work, Kamala.

 

 

On 10/19/2024 at 3:40 PM, bubblegum said:

You answer comments like Trump, deflect to something that has absolutely nothing at all to do with matters at hand. 

 

Pot calls through the trees.

On 10/19/2024 at 1:01 PM, earlinclaifornia said:

Honestly? It is more of relying my integerity, honesty and the truth

Three strikes and you are out

5 hours ago, John Drake said:

 

What is revealing about the 32 days incident is what it reveals about her understanding of what she had just said. When the teleprompter went out, she was stuck on the last two words she had just read off the screen. If you had asked her what she had just said prior to getting stuck, she couldn't have told you. It's the worst sort of vacuous brain jerk. This used to be said about local evening news anchors. They, too, couldn't remember the stories they had just read on air. Just (and they) are just a face, with somebody else behind them operating them like automatons. Elon's new robots have more individual awareness.

 

Much more attractive too.

35 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

It's criticism and doesn't need explaining more than she didn't answer a single question directly.

If you can’t provide proof for your claim that Harris didn’t answer any questions, then you’re not criticizing—you’re lying.

She addressed immigration, healthcare, and gun control directly.

Exaggerating or ignoring facts to push your narrative doesn’t make it true; it just shows you’re not engaging honestly.
 

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

If you can’t provide proof for your claim that Harris didn’t answer any questions, then you’re not criticizing—you’re lying.

She addressed immigration, healthcare, and gun control directly.

Exaggerating or ignoring facts to push your narrative doesn’t make it true; it just shows you’re not engaging honestly.
 

When asked how many illegals came into the county during the Biden Administration what was her direct answer again? 

 

What is her stance on gun control again? 

 

What is her plan for healthcare again? 

 

You're funny.

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

When asked how many illegals came into the county during the Biden Administration what was her direct answer again? 

 

What is her stance on gun control again? 

 

What is her plan for healthcare again? 

 

You're funny.

Wow, thanks! I really appreciate it when someone makes a compliment—it's like a rare gem in a sea of questions!

But seriously, maybe do your own research and watch the interview.

Do you really need me to spoon-feed you the answers? It’s all there if you’re genuinely interested in what she said!

3 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Wow, thanks! I really appreciate it when someone makes a compliment—it's like a rare gem in a sea of questions!

But seriously, maybe do your own research and watch the interview.

Do you really need me to spoon-feed you the answers? It’s all there if you’re genuinely interested in what she said!

That's what I thought

17 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

That's what I thought

Your thoughts aren’t always correct, especially considering your past mix-up between the US ‘Capital’ in DC and the ‘Capitol’ building.

A bit more accuracy could really strengthen your arguments!

12 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Much more attractive too.

 Taking about a person melting down! Your just off your rocker!

8 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Your thoughts aren’t always correct, especially considering your past mix-up between the US ‘Capital’ in DC and the ‘Capitol’ building.

A bit more accuracy could really strengthen your arguments!

No, my thoughts are not always correct, but they are mine, and they were correct this time. 

 

Incidentally, the Capital in DC, is the Capital Building. The capital of the United States is not in DC, it is DC.

 

I had forgotten about you going on and on that that Jan 6 was an "armed insurrection" because someone has a gun in their car parked somewhere in DC. That was hilarious. 

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

No, my thoughts are not always correct, but they are mine, and they were correct this time. 

 

Incidentally, the Capital in DC, is the Capital Building. The capital of the United States is not in DC, it is DC.

 

I had forgotten about you going on and on that that Jan 6 was an "armed insurrection" because someone has a gun in their car parked somewhere in DC. That was hilarious. 

Ah, I see we're still having trouble distinguishing 'Capital' from 'Capitol.'

Allow me to clarify (again): Capitol refers to the building where Congress meets, while Capital refers to the city itself. DC is indeed the capital city, but the building in question is the Capitol—no 'a' in sight.

 

Now, your thoughts are yours, really? Interesting, because they just so happen to align perfectly with the same narratives pushed by right-wing disinformation media.

You know, the ones that faced billion-dollar lawsuits for lying about… what again? Oh, that’s right—the facts.
 

As for the January 6th incident, labeling it an "armed insurrection" isn’t just based on one car with a weapon; it's backed by multiple arrests and charges involving weapons and assaults.

But, when building arguments on shaky foundations, accuracy tends to be a casualty.
 

Care to give it another shot? Maybe this time with a dictionary.

 

Edited October 21, 20241 yr by LosLobo

6 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Ah, I see we're still having trouble distinguishing 'Capital' from 'Capitol.'

Allow me to clarify (again): Capitol refers to the building where Congress meets, while Capital refers to the city itself. DC is indeed the capital city, but the building in question is the Capitol—no 'a' in sight.

Apologies, a typo on my part; "in DC" should have been just "DC."

You see, I’m not averse to admitting when I’m wrong and moving on—unlike some who prefer to continue with an obvious charade.
 

Now, your thoughts are yours, really? Interesting, because they just so happen to align perfectly with the same narratives pushed by right-wing disinformation media.

You know, the ones that faced billion-dollar lawsuits for lying about… what again? Oh, that’s right—the facts.
 

As for the January 6th incident, labeling it an "armed insurrection" isn’t just based on one car with a weapon; it's backed by multiple arrests and charges involving weapons and assaults.

But, when building arguments on shaky foundations, accuracy tends to be a casualty.
 

Care to give it another shot? Maybe this time with a dictionary.

 

I never knew that, thanks!