Tlaib uses expletive while calling for impeachment

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Did I call it or what folks? I’ve stated before buddy. People on here have seen it. You made the accusation. Now you lack the spine to do either of these two things.

1). Just guess and hope you are right.

2). Maybe apologize for your presumptuous garbage.

The ball is in the court of the guy making the claim in just about form of conversation. Nice try though.

Nope. You’re wrong yet again. As is so often the case, you’ve got it backward here. Don’t act like a shyster by challenging me to guess who you voted for, if you cannot even state that you actually voted, Mr. Use of “I say what I mean” Time.

 

[Benjamin]

Bro. Curtis was kind of enough to remind me that Trump himself has violated while in office. (Calling football players SOB’s).

Oh yeah right, there is some value in that argument as well! ...That is, if you're not quite up to comprehending the critical thinking skills necessary to understand the fallacy of projecting the idea or thought that 2 wrongs makes a right, (which Basic Logic 101 teaches it leads to a logically false conclusion anyway you look at it my friend) and in fact only demonstrates your ignorance to get it through your skull that such arguments don't carry any value as far as basic logical truth is concerned.

Hence, the topic of thread is about:
Tlaib uses expletive while calling for impeachment

...and yet Use of Time has merely used All his Time to try desperately bring up any argument he can find or invent on Trump to make a comparison because he is obviously under the illusion "it" (2 wrongs makes a right) is a valid and valuable argument concerning the topic of the thread while he continues demonstrate his basic logic and critical thinking skills ignorance that is on display here by not recognizing one of the most simplest forms of logical fallacy to comprehend.

All one has to is look back at the thread to see your constant focus as if it of some kind of value.

...Use of Time, Bro Curtis wasn't kind to you by feeding you this information because in truth he was merely feeding your fallacious agenda to make an ignorant illogical argument so you could repeat your fallacy yet again.

Please get a clue of where your arguments lead and quit embarrassing yourself.

 

[Use of Time]

Nope. You’re wrong yet again. As is so often the case, you’ve got it backward here. Don’t act like a shyster by challenging me to guess who you voted for, if you cannot even state that you actually voted, Mr. Use of “I say what I mean” Time.

YOU made the accusation. You are required to support your own accusations with evidence. That’s how the world works. I didn’t challenge you. You made an assumption and I have (I believe we are at the 5th dodge now) asked you to back up your comment. You are unwilling (read: incapable) of backing it up. This is obvious to anyone who is a grownup.

 

[Use of Time]

Oh yeah right, there is some value in that argument as well! ...That is, if you're not quite up to comprehending the critical thinking skills necessary to understand the fallacy of projecting the idea or thought that 2 wrongs makes a right, (which Basic Logic 101 teaches it leads to a logically false conclusion anyway you look at it my friend) and in fact only demonstrates your ignorance to get it through your skull that such arguments don't carry any value as far as basic logical truth is concerned.

Hence, the topic of thread is about:
Tlaib uses expletive while calling for impeachment

...and yet Use of Time has merely used All his Time to try desperately bring up any argument he can find or invent on Trump to make a comparison because he is obviously under the illusion "it" (2 wrongs makes a right) is a valid and valuable argument concerning the topic of the thread while he continues demonstrate his basic logic and critical thinking skills ignorance that is on display here by not recognizing one of the most simplest forms of logical fallacy to comprehend.

All one has to is look back at the thread to see your constant focus as if it of some kind of value.

...Use of Time, Bro Curtis wasn't kind to you by feeding you this information because in truth he was merely feeding your fallacious agenda to make an ignorant illogical argument so you could repeat your fallacy yet again.

Please get a clue of where your arguments lead and quit embarrassing yourself.

You failed again. I didn’t bring up Trump and the NFL. Bro. Curtis did. Like I said in the thread you are not reading apparently, I didn’t even bat an eye at the “SOB’s” remark. You have fallaciously misrepresented my post to say two wrongs make a right when I have done nothing but label them as two wrongs. One thing is wrong. So is the other. People who are capable of having an original thought can understand this.

You can leave Curtis out of this. All he did was disclose the comment out of regard to an honest conversation. He didn’t have to do that and I respect that.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

YOU made the accusation. You are required to support your own accusations with evidence. That’s how the world works. I didn’t challenge you. You made an assumption and I have (I believe we are at the 5th dodge now) asked you to back up your comment. You are unwilling (read: incapable) of backing it up. This is obvious to anyone who is a grownup.

Since you are being so obstinate, maybe I should consider some sort of apology…after you state that you didn’t vote for president.

 

[Use of Time]

Since you are being so obstinate, maybe I should consider some sort of apology…after you state that you didn’t vote for president.

That’s a good start.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

...Use of Time, Bro Curtis wasn't kind to you by feeding you this information because in truth he was merely feeding your fallacious agenda to make an ignorant illogical argument so you could repeat your fallacy yet again.

I was doing all that, huh?

Please get a clue of where your arguments lead and quit embarrassing yourself.

Trump swore, as a president,with a microphone, knowing good and well his words would be repeated on every news station. He did this while suggesting the subjects of his vulgarity be removed from their jobs. He did it for applause, and for effect, to get his crowd riled up and yelling.

He also called some third-world countries ——holes. (I agree in spirit, not in deed). But that’s a different story. Still, public vulgarities abounded with him in his first six months.

If you’re going to deny this isn’t like that Muslim woman then you’re really not honestly debating.

 

[Benjamin]

If you’re going to deny this isn’t like that Muslim woman then you’re really not honestly debating.

I've denied no such thing so on that note your looking at strawman at best.

Once again, my claim is that whatever Trump has said has ABSOLUTELY no bearing towards justifying whatsoever on the actions of Tlaib and to think otherwise that bringing up the ole Trump did it too argument has any value WHATSOEVER toward lessening the actions of Tlaib as wrong. To think otherwise is to think 2 wrongs makes a right and is fallacious thinking, yet that is the constant argument being made in this thread.

If you didn't think that way you wouldn't resort to yet two more attempted examples like you did above but you guys don't seem to realize that you could bring up 100 examples that you'd like to make a comparison of Trump with Tlaib and it does NOT lessen Tlaib's faults in the least. It logically means NOTHING in regards to the criticism of Tlaib's actions, such an argument reminds me of if a kid got caught stealing candy from a store and the kid's reaction was, "well Billy stole a cookie from the cookie jar last week" ...WELL, SO WHAT!? ...2 WRONGS DO NOT MAKE RIGHT! ...only a child would think that argument carries any value!

This is beginner understanding of Basic Logic and Critical Thinking Skills taught in 101 level, but I guess if I can't get this point across...then perhaps it is you that is not honestly debating.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Oh, Lordy! She would have been excoriated no end.

Remember the Republican congressman who couldn't contain himself during Obama's SOTU address and blurted out "You lie".

He was crucified, even though Obama was lying.

His Statement:

"This evening, I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the president's remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill," the statement said. "While I disagree with the president's statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the president for this lack of civility."

Wilson also called the White House to apologize and spoke with Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who accepted the apology on the president's behalf, according to a senior administration official."

You'll hear no apology like this from a democrat. Ever.

Sure they'd apologize...

Dear President Gasbag,

I am sorry I blurted out during your State of the Disunion Screech last night. Even though is was full of hatred, vitriol, & racism, I should have never stooped to your level and spoke out loud what I said. Again, I apologize for stooping to your level. I will not let your hatred for illegal immigrants ruin my life ever again.

Yours truly,

Sen. Hipp O. Crit

 

[Use of Time]

I've denied no such thing so on that note your looking at strawman at best.

Once again, my claim is that whatever Trump has said has ABSOLUTELY no bearing towards justifying whatsoever on the actions of Tlaib and to think otherwise that bringing up the ole Trump did it too argument has any value WHATSOEVER toward lessening the actions of Tlaib as wrong. To think otherwise is to think 2 wrongs makes a right and is fallacious thinking, yet that is the constant argument being made in this thread.

If you didn't think that way you wouldn't resort to yet two more attempted examples like you did above but you guys don't seem to realize that you could bring up 100 examples that you'd like to make a comparison of Trump with Tlaib and it does NOT lessen Tlaib's faults in the least. It logically means NOTHING in regards to the criticism of Tlaib's actions, such an argument reminds me of if a kid got caught stealing candy from a store and the kid's reaction was, "well Billy stole a cookie from the cookie jar last week" ...WELL, SO WHAT!? ...2 WRONGS DO NOT MAKE RIGHT! ...only a child would think that argument carries any value!

This is beginner understanding of Basic Logic and Critical Thinking Skills taught in 101 level, but I guess if I can't get this point across...then perhaps it is you that is not honestly debating.

Except nobody is saying two wrongs make a right. Literally no one in here has done that. Both sides have been soundly condemned.

You know what this is really about? You want to be able to manufacture outrage over this incident without being called on your own hypocrisy. Like a shield. This was definitely on your mind because this was the argument you immediately tried to get ahead of when you yourself created the argument that you got roasted on. You keep falling back on this “two wrongs make a right” argument that no one has made because you lack the integrity to debate in good faith. You mentally are incapable of handling any criticism of Trump and you’re even willing to compromise your own integrity (like this thread) to defend him.

Bro. Curtis and I are about as far apart as it gets on Trump. But I don’t have to play these word games with him when we argue. He means what he says and says what he means. It would be nice if you do the grown up thing here and own it.

Do you still think your public vs private argument still holds water at this point. I’d say that bucket is leaking.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I've denied no such thing so on that note your looking at strawman at best.

Once again, my claim is that whatever Trump has said has ABSOLUTELY no bearing towards justifying whatsoever on the actions of Tlaib and to think otherwise that bringing up the ole Trump did it too argument has any value WHATSOEVER toward lessening the actions of Tlaib as wrong. To think otherwise is to think 2 wrongs makes a right and is fallacious thinking, yet that is the constant argument being made in this thread.

If you didn't think that way you wouldn't resort to yet two more attempted examples like you did above but you guys don't seem to realize that you could bring up 100 examples that you'd like to make a comparison of Trump with Tlaib and it does NOT lessen Tlaib's faults in the least. It logically means NOTHING in regards to the criticism of Tlaib's actions, such an argument reminds me of if a kid got caught stealing candy from a store and the kid's reaction was, "well Billy stole a cookie from the cookie jar last week" ...WELL, SO WHAT!? ...2 WRONGS DO NOT MAKE RIGHT! ...only a child would think that argument carries any value!

This is beginner understanding of Basic Logic and Critical Thinking Skills taught in 101 level, but I guess if I can't get this point across...then perhaps it is you that is not honestly debating.

Tlaib swears bad. Trump swears good.

 

[Benjamin]

Except nobody is saying two wrongs make a right. Literally no one in here has done that. Both sides have been soundly condemned. It would be nice if you do the grown up thing here and own it.

I'm being as grown up as I can after having to watch your childish argument be repeated again and again while you demonstrate you don't have a clue, or pretend so, that making the 2 Wrongs Makes a Right fallacy is exactly what you have done from the get go.

Let me ask ask you something, when Johnny got caught stealing candy from a store and his first reaction is, "well Billy stole a cookie from the cookie jar last week" what do you think this kid is trying to accomplish with that childish argument?

Let's see:

He was trying to get the focus off his own actions.

Maybe Johnny doesn't like Billy and for childish reasons wants to get him into trouble also and is being vengeful.

The child is probably hoping that changing the subject from his stealing to Billy's will help keep the heat off his actions.

The child hopes the his argument will lessen his punishment or the lecture he is about to receive.

SO, do you think the parent should take into consideration that Billy stole something while judging this situation? - Well, obviously you must think Johnny's approach is pretty clever because it has been your focus throughout this thread.

Yeah, the first thing out of Billy's mouth for his defense was that Billy did it too. - Sound familiar?

Yep, the first out of the Left's or Trump Hater's mouth is that Trump did it too.

TO ME, that is just a childish argument and has no value concerning the subject, - so it strikes as rather funny that you now want to talk about being grown up while you can't quite seem to get past your childish fallacy.

Do you still think your public vs private argument still holds water at this point. I’d say that bucket is leaking.

It was actually wrong of me to throw in that argument, even while engaging with yours because it only encourages things like helping the opponent continue in his fallacy. But thanks for demonstrating that the truth is you do recognize that I fallaciously joined in with the same fallacy as you, even if in response to your fallacy.[/QUOTE]

 

[InTheLight]

Let me ask ask you something, when Johnny got caught stealing candy from a store and his first reaction is, "well Billy stole a cookie from the cookie jar last week" what do you think this kid is trying to accomplish with that childish argument?


Yeah, the first thing out of Billy's mouth for his defense was that Billy did it too. - Sound familiar?

Yep, the first out of the Left's or Trump Hater's mouth is that Trump did it too.

Where, oh where was this argument when people (like me) were criticising Trump's words or actions in 2016 and the rebuttal was "but... but Hillary..."??!!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

[Benjamin]

I think Use of…err…Johnny needs to go to his room and think real hard what the subject is and why Trum…err…Billy having done something along the same lines doesn’t help his situation, nor should it have any bearing toward the consequences for his actions which he is due to receive.

 

[Benjamin]

Where, oh where was this argument when people (like me) were criticising Trump's words or actions in 2016 and the rebuttal was "but... but Hillary..."??!!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

I've never liked this argument tactic since learning of and understanding the fallaciousness of it, but at least in understanding it you know it carries no logical weight as a rebuttal and can have some satisfaction that your opponent is using childish arguments.

 

[Use of Time]

I'm being as grown up as I can after having to watch your childish argument be repeated again and again while you demonstrate you don't have a clue, or pretend so, that making the 2 Wrongs Makes a Right fallacy is exactly what you have done from the get go.

Let me ask ask you something, when Johnny got caught stealing candy from a store and his first reaction is, "well Billy stole a cookie from the cookie jar last week" what do you think this kid is trying to accomplish with that childish argument?

Let's see:

He was trying to get the focus off his own actions.

Maybe Johnny doesn't like Billy and for childish reasons wants to get him into trouble also and is being vengeful.

The child is probably hoping that changing the subject from his stealing to Billy's will help keep the heat off his actions.

The child hopes the his argument will lessen his punishment or the lecture he is about to receive.

SO, do you think the parent should take into consideration that Billy stole something while judging this situation? - Well, obviously you must think Johnny's approach is pretty clever because it has been your focus throughout this thread.

Yeah, the first thing out of Billy's mouth for his defense was that Billy did it too. - Sound familiar?

Yep, the first out of the Left's or Trump Hater's mouth is that Trump did it too.

TO ME, that is just a childish argument and has no value concerning the subject, - so it strikes as rather funny that you now want to talk about being grown up while you can't quite seem to get past your childish fallacy.




It was actually wrong of me to throw in that argument, even while engaging with yours because it only encourages things like helping the opponent continue in his fallacy. But thanks for demonstrating that the truth is you do recognize that I fallaciously joined in with the same fallacy as you, even if in response to your fallacy.

Let’s put and end to this. If it’s so obvious that the argument I’m making is that two wrongs make a right. It should be really...really easy for you to post where I ever said it was alright. I’ve said that there were two wrongs. You introduced the Left’s response into this thread and got really really squeamish when your public vs private argument got sunk like the Titanic. And I’m not even the one that sunk it. An avid Trump supporter did that out of pure honesty. You boxed yourself in all by yourself.

I can’t help but notice the public vs private argument from RT and 777 has been abandoned in this thread like the plague all of a sudden or that Benjamin has also ran away from that defense of his as fast as possible.

 

[carpro]

Where, oh where was this argument when people (like me) were criticising Trump's words or actions in 2016 and the rebuttal was "but... but Hillary..."??!!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

Useful at times for pointing out the hypocrisy of the poster.

It's kind of like the media giving democrats a pass on so many things they said about border security that they now criticize Trump for.

Pointing out what they said in the past points out their hypocrisy and the media's bias. A 2fer.

 

[Use of Time]

I think Use of…err…Johnny needs to go to his room and think real hard what the subject is and why Trum…err…Billy having done something along the same lines doesn’t help his situation, nor should it have any bearing toward the consequences for his actions which he is due to receive.

Except you introduced the public vs private argument yourself thus initiating going off topic. Don’t get mad now just because it wasn’t a good one.

 

[Benjamin]

Except you introduced the public vs private argument yourself thus initiating going off topic. Don’t get mad now just because it wasn’t a good one.

Yes, knowing immediately that your and Pelosi’s argument was a purely fallacious defense of Tlaib’s actions I should not have replied by addressing it thereby contributing and enabling you to ride your fallacy further, my bad, I will admit to my error of acknowledging your fallacy as a an actual argument.

 

[Benjamin]

Well now you are just a straight up liar. You are raging right now.

Use of Time exposed on Page 1:

Tlaib uses expletive while calling for impeachment

Tlaib uses expletive while calling for impeachment

Yet, on Page 2 alone Use of Time continues on his fallacy to bring Trump into it 4 Times:

Bragging about sexually assaulting women in private vs an f bomb dropped in public. Apples and oranges indeed. No need to defend Trump you say? Wow. Just wow. Not going to argue but again, your morality may vary.

How can it be consensual when he says he didn’t even ask and just did it. I’m consistently amazed at what Christians will trivialize in support of politics.

I disagree about apples and oranges. If the f bomb triggers you then a lot of people would faint at some of General Mattis’s pep talks. I think the super perverted talk is more creepy. But whatever, my opinion. She’s attention seeking but of course people will happily play along.

Dude go read the transcript. It’s a lot worse than what I presented here. I can’t even quote it because I would have to spend half an hour sanitizing it for posting. Spoiler alert, he drops an f bomb too.

His pattern of drawing to Trump continues throughout the thread...

Seems Use of Time has a problem with the truth...

Calm down Use of Time, no rage on my part here, just the facts...