·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- I really had no idea you didn't want to be groped.
I really had no idea you didn't want to be groped.Follow
And it's not a good transformation if it doesn't have nudity.
Good 'ol pokemon ****.
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
gbaji wrote:
If you're going to quote me, quote the whole damn sentence Joph.
Before the next time you post, learn how English works.
Quote:
The parts you left out completely change the meaning of the sentence."or any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out" is one item in a list.
gbaji wrote:
Meanwhile, Democrats can cheat on their taxes, cheat on their wives, get caught on camera smoking crack, get caught red-handed with bribery money in their freezers, make openly racist comments, or any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out, and rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects.
Yes. A list of things that you claim would get any Republican thrown out. A list that includes:
-- Cheating on taxes (HA! The irony here slays me)
-- Cheating on wives
-- Caught on camera smoking crack
-- Caught with bribe money in freezer
-- Making openly racist comments
See that bolded item? It shouldn't be there. Republicans who cheat on their wives do not get throw out of office. At all. Certainly not in recent history.
Look, you were wrong. There's no amount of false outrage you're going to muster that will make you look less wrong. Just admit that Republicans are fine with their political members fucking other women besides their wives and move on from it. Or, shit, don't admit to it because God forbid you take your sacred cow down off its pedestal for five seconds and just drop the topic instead of embarrassing yourself trying to explain how this or that infidelity doesn't really count.
Edited, Aug 15th 2013 4:58pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
someproteinguy wrote:
Good 'ol pokemon ****.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#131gbaji,
Posted: Aug 16 2013 at 4:55 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Incorrect. You are the one who is wrong here Joph. I mean, this one isn't even questionable. The phrase "rarely do they (Democrats) suffer much if any negative effects" is what the list refers to in that sentence.
lolgaxe wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Good 'ol pokemon ****.
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If you're going to quote me, quote the whole damn sentence Joph.
Before the next time you post, learn how English works.
Sigh... Coming from the guy who apparently can't parse a sentence, that's amusing as hell.
Quote:
Quote:
The parts you left out completely change the meaning of the sentence."or any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out" is one item in a list.
gbaji wrote:
Meanwhile, Democrats can cheat on their taxes, cheat on their wives, get caught on camera smoking crack, get caught red-handed with bribery money in their freezers, make openly racist comments, or any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out, and rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects.
Yes. A list of things that you claim would get any Republican thrown out. A list that includes:
-- Cheating on taxes (HA! The irony here slays me)
-- Cheating on wives
-- Caught on camera smoking crack
-- Caught with bribe money in freezer
-- Making openly racist comments
No. That is a list of things which "rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects" (referring to Democrats). Contained within that list is "any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out". Also contained within that list is "cheating on their wives".
Those are two separate elements within a list of things that Democrats rarely suffer much if any negative effects from.
If I say that cars, boats, planes, and trains are all vessels which can transport people and things from one place to another, only a complete idiot would say that I'm wrong because cars are not trains. Do you get that this is what you are doing here?
Quote:
See that bolded item? It shouldn't be there. Republicans who cheat on their wives do not get throw out of office.
Cheating on their wives is something which Democrats rarely suffer much if any negative effects from though. See how that works? It's not my fault that you don't understand English sentence structure.
Quote:
Look, you were wrong.
Incorrect. You are the one who is wrong here Joph. I mean, this one isn't even questionable. The phrase "rarely do they (Democrats) suffer much if any negative effects" is what the list refers to in that sentence.
Do you have any examples of Republicans who *were* thrown out for the things listed, or is that just conjecture on your part?
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
gbaji wrote:
Incorrect. You are the one who is wrong here Joph
I knew you couldn't do it. Ah, you.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Given gbaji's slide into logic oblivion (over the past two years in particular) I'm going with "Meth addiction".
No. I'm not kidding.
Edited, Aug 16th 2013 9:47pm by Bijou
No. I'm not kidding.
Edited, Aug 16th 2013 9:47pm by Bijou
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
Debalic wrote:
Do you have any examples of Republicans who *were* thrown out for the things listed, or is that just conjecture on your part?
I hope this was a joke?
Quote:
Given gbaji's slide into logic oblivion (over the past two years in particular) I'm going with "Meth addiction".
No. I'm not kidding.
No. I'm not kidding.
But you have to remember that he's pretty much just a talking head for the party, and the party itself is so at odds with itself right now that it shouldn't be surprising. Who does he support? The Tea Party idiots? The Evangelists? The Reformists? The oldschool, rich white guys?
The GOP isn't a cohesive party anymore. They managed to trudge along for a while on the back of social issues, but they've invested so much there, and lost so many voters because of them, that they're lost now. They HAVE to reform if they have any chance of surviving - every Republican leader has been fairly open about this. But the GOP is pushing harder than ever on those issues, particularly in battleground states where they were most problematic. North Carolina, for instance.
My favorite part, though, has to be how active they're being in blocking student aid legislation, while openly acknowledging the fact that they'll fail if they don't serious ramp up their recruitment with young voters.
Increasing their tuition, reducing their student aid, and ramping up their interest rates sounds like the perfect way to court young voters. Yup, yup.
Edited, Aug 17th 2013 12:01am by idiggory
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Incorrect. You are the one who is wrong here Joph
I knew you couldn't do it. Ah, you.
Ggaji performing Olympic level mental gymnastics. He gets a perfect score from the judges!!
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Jophiel and Debalic are both incorrect on stating that Gbaji's list of things which would get Republicans thrown out must necessarily include cheating on spouses. When gbaji says:
He is correct.
There's a problem though. While he is correct about what is included in the list and what that means, his statement has no value. It's logically meaningless. I know he's trying to imply that Democrats get away with more than Republicans, but he hasn't literally said that. You can swap "Democrats" and "Republicans" and receive a statement that is equally true and valid.
Meanwhile, Republicans can cheat on their taxes, cheat on their wives, get caught on camera smoking crack, get caught red-handed with bribery money in their freezers, make openly racist comments, or any of a number of things which would get any Democrat thrown out, and rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects.
Is equally true and also fairly meaningless.
Edited, Aug 17th 2013 1:11am by Allegory
Quote:
No. That is a list of things which "rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects" (referring to Democrats). Contained within that list is "any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out". Also contained within that list is "cheating on their wives".
He is correct.
There's a problem though. While he is correct about what is included in the list and what that means, his statement has no value. It's logically meaningless. I know he's trying to imply that Democrats get away with more than Republicans, but he hasn't literally said that. You can swap "Democrats" and "Republicans" and receive a statement that is equally true and valid.
Meanwhile, Republicans can cheat on their taxes, cheat on their wives, get caught on camera smoking crack, get caught red-handed with bribery money in their freezers, make openly racist comments, or any of a number of things which would get any Democrat thrown out, and rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects.
Is equally true and also fairly meaningless.
Edited, Aug 17th 2013 1:11am by Allegory
It was pretty obvious that Gbaji was making a list of things with dire consequences for Republicans that Democrats did not care about to project an air of moral superiority. If the consequence of that was for Gbaji to curl up and mutter "Semantics!" over and over... well, that sort of answers the question of what big differences there are.
However, Gbaji plainly said "any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out" so he is welcome to list some of THOSE things since the rest of the list "obviously" doesn't count. I invite him to list, oh say, maybe three things that get "any Republican thrown out" but Democrats enjoy with impunity. Naturally, for these to hold weight you would expect an example of a Democrat and Republican both engaged in the action and the Republican getting the boot.
Realistically, I don't expect Gbaji to actually do this and don't plan to pursue it. Because we all know this list doesn't exist. But when you're going to try and pretend that one side has the moral high ground, you should probably do better than "That list doesn't count!" and "There's a bunch of stuff that DOES count but I won't list any of it... but don't look at the stuff i listed since it doesn't count!"
However, Gbaji plainly said "any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out" so he is welcome to list some of THOSE things since the rest of the list "obviously" doesn't count. I invite him to list, oh say, maybe three things that get "any Republican thrown out" but Democrats enjoy with impunity. Naturally, for these to hold weight you would expect an example of a Democrat and Republican both engaged in the action and the Republican getting the boot.
Realistically, I don't expect Gbaji to actually do this and don't plan to pursue it. Because we all know this list doesn't exist. But when you're going to try and pretend that one side has the moral high ground, you should probably do better than "That list doesn't count!" and "There's a bunch of stuff that DOES count but I won't list any of it... but don't look at the stuff i listed since it doesn't count!"
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Allegory wrote:
Jophiel and Debalic are both incorrect on stating that Gbaji's list of things which would get Republicans thrown out must necessarily include cheating on spouses. When gbaji says:
He is correct.
There's a problem though. While he is correct about what is included in the list and what that means, his statement has no value. It's logically meaningless. I know he's trying to imply that Democrats get away with more than Republicans, but he hasn't literally said that. You can swap "Democrats" and "Republicans" and receive a statement that is equally true and valid.
Meanwhile, Republicans can cheat on their taxes, cheat on their wives, get caught on camera smoking crack, get caught red-handed with bribery money in their freezers, make openly racist comments, or any of a number of things which would get any Democrat thrown out, and rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects.
Is equally true and also fairly meaningless.
Quote:
No. That is a list of things which "rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects" (referring to Democrats). Contained within that list is "any of a number of things which would get any Republican thrown out". Also contained within that list is "cheating on their wives".
He is correct.
There's a problem though. While he is correct about what is included in the list and what that means, his statement has no value. It's logically meaningless. I know he's trying to imply that Democrats get away with more than Republicans, but he hasn't literally said that. You can swap "Democrats" and "Republicans" and receive a statement that is equally true and valid.
Meanwhile, Republicans can cheat on their taxes, cheat on their wives, get caught on camera smoking crack, get caught red-handed with bribery money in their freezers, make openly racist comments, or any of a number of things which would get any Democrat thrown out, and rarely do they suffer much if any negative effects.
Is equally true and also fairly meaningless.
I didn't necessarily include anything, I was just fishing for
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Jophiel wrote:
It was pretty obvious that Gbaji was making a list of things with dire consequences for Republicans that Democrats did not care about to project an air of moral superiority. If the consequence of that was for Gbaji to curl up and mutter "Semantics!" over and over... well, that sort of answers the question of what big differences there are.
I'm not going to waste time arguing over what was going through his head when he made the comment, but the interpretation he is presenting is a perfectly valid one as well being more literal.
Jophiel wrote:
I invite him to list, oh say, maybe three things that get "any Republican thrown out" but Democrats enjoy with impunity.
Support for the Affordable Care Act, support for pro-choice legislation, support for increased firearm restrictions. That's not what you wanted, but it is a correct answer to your question.
And also idiotic. Well done though.
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
Allegory wrote:
Support for the Affordable Care Act, support for pro-choice legislation, support for increased firearm restrictions. That's not what you wanted, but it is a correct answer to your question.
Not going to look into ACA but "Susan Collins" and "Chris Christie" are immediate counter-examples that spring to mind of the second two.
Edited, Aug 17th 2013 3:27pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
Allegory wrote:
Support for the Affordable Care Act, support for pro-choice legislation, support for increased firearm restrictions. That's not what you wanted, but it is a correct answer to your question.
Not going to look into ACA [...]
Jan Brewer.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/arizona-jan-brewer-medicaid-obamacare-92304.html
Thanks. From the same article:
Quote:
Ohio Gov. John Kasich drew scorn from conservatives this week when, in a USA Today op-ed, he suggested Ronald Reagan would have supported expansion
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
You're both right. I should have been more careful in my selection of criteria. I wanted to get at the idea that actions that would get any Republican thrown out of office would include not just morally reprehensible acts, but valid policy disagreements.
Perhaps, but we both knew that wasn't what Gbaji meant. So besides failing to make the point, it wasn't even a point worth making.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
OOOOH BURN!
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Arguing based on what you believe someone meant to say is pointless, and you were still wrong in that regard.
So I guess a failurous tit for tat all around.
So I guess a failurous tit for tat all around.
Allegory wrote:
Arguing based on what you believe someone meant to say is pointless, and you were still wrong in that regard.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Allegory wrote:
Arguing based on what you believe someone meant to say is pointless, and you were still wrong in that regard.
So I guess a failurous tit for tat all around.
So I guess a failurous tit for tat all around.
You're gonna bring tits into a groping discussion? Really?
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Recent Visitors: 223
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (223)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- I really had no idea you didn't want to be groped.
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC