Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
proven
Random Politics & Religion #08
|
Random Politics & Religion #08
Source? Bismarck.Magnuss said: » This is why I'm getting pissed off at people like Sarah Silverman and even Bernie himself. They're saying that we need to band together to take down Trump, but if that's the only reason to vote for Hillary, that's a gawdawful reason to vote for her. That's like saying that in order to lose weight, I need to take a lot of heroin. I mean sure it'll work, but my body would be ravaged for the rest of my life. Bernie supporters have been *** over during the primaries, they've had their voices snuffed out during every Democratic convention and ignored by the media. Hell, the party that they've been a part of has had emails leaked proving that the Democrats have been conspiring against Bernie and his supporters from day one. And now they should just band together and accept the party to stop the big bad Trump? And the way the DNC is trying to band them together is to shut them up and yell at them just because they're trying to be heard for once. It's complete and utter ***. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Ragnarok.Raenil said: » I'm not particularly for her, myself. But the Democratic party has integrated quite of few of Sander's stances into her platform. I'm pissed they *** Sander's over, but not so pissed I'm going to go against what Sander's stands for just to "*** the system". Trump's platform was already nearly "Nuke it from orbit" in my eyes. He now has an incredibly well known bigot for a running VP and some of the Republican party stances he's had integrated into his platform push it well beyond that point. As such, nothing is "proven". Yeah, unless you have proof, throwing around words like 'proven', especially in bold, is just going to make you look like a doofus.
Guilty until proven innocent.
Duh. Being called a doofus for thinking the sky is blue by people who think the sky is green is no skin off my back. I assure you.
[+]
Nice proof.
[+]
Anna, stop trying to be fair. You're a clinton fanboy. I could show you video evidence of her in the second floor of the dallas book depository aiming the gun and you'd insist that she had nothing to do with the kennedy assassination.
fonewear said: » It's because a 3rd party is the equivalent of voting for me for President. You know, plenty of people are fed up here. I already know which direction my state is going, if precedent means anything. We all have cameras on our phones. I'm curious as to how fed up. *** it! What I just heard was... fonewear said: »  WILDCARD, ***!!!
[+]
Asks for source.
>OMGCLINTONFANBOY Classy. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Anna, stop trying to be fair. You're a clinton fanboy. I could show you video evidence of her in the second floor of the dallas book depository aiming the gun and you'd insist that she had nothing to do with the kennedy assassination. How about you just start small and provide some evidence of anything you are saying. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Anna, stop trying to be fair. You're a clinton fanboy. I could show you video evidence of her in the second floor of the dallas book depository aiming the gun and you'd insist that she had nothing to do with the kennedy assassination. Ragnarok.Raenil said: » Asks for source. >OMGCLINTONFANBOY Classy. I gave you a direct quote of something she said that was intentionally and demonstrably false. The response borders between "nothing to see here" and "that doesn't convince me". Cognitive dissonance. Anna Ruthven said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Anna, stop trying to be fair. You're a clinton fanboy. I could show you video evidence of her in the second floor of the dallas book depository aiming the gun and you'd insist that she had nothing to do with the kennedy assassination. Did she in fact say that statement? Was it true or false? A quote, taken out of context, isn't a link to a trial or investigation.
AKA: Not a source. For what it's worth, I'm not saying she hasn't done shady ***.
But I am saying you need to provide a source proving she is, in fact, a convicted criminal for thew crime you're accusing her of if you're going to claim she is one.
[+]
You just accepted it as proof because of some sort of prejudice against Hillary, those of us who don't accept it as proof don't because it's just some disembodied quote that has been addressed and deemed irrelevant. You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you and you fail to deliver anything but prerehearsed talking points that prove nothing.
[+]
This isn't Boston Legal this is FFXIAH. The burden of proof is set so low that "No you" is the go to statement.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » How can you believe anything associated with Anna Ruthven said: » You just accepted it as proof because of some sort of prejudice against Hillary, those of us who don't accept it as proof don't because it's just some disembodied quote that has been addressed and deemed irrelevant. You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you and you fail to deliver anything but prerehearsed talking points that prove nothing. I accept it as proof because she said it and it wasn't true. It was a false statement (AKA a LIE). In what planet does someone get to spout false statements and not be a liar? Don't worry if any of you get in trouble you can always destroy the evidence Hillary set the precedent !
fonewear said: » This isn't Boston Legal this is FFXIAH. The burden of proof is set so low that "No you" is the go to statement.
[+]
This reminds me of arguing with a woman it's a losing proposition that goes no where...
The general masses won't have
Anna Ruthven said: » You just accepted it as proof because of some sort of prejudice against Hillary, those of us who don't accept it as proof don't because it's just some disembodied quote that has been addressed and deemed irrelevant. You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you and you fail to deliver anything but prerehearsed talking points that prove nothing. incoming wikileaks that contains the proof you seek. But I wonder even with any proof, if you'll believe it or deny its evidence.
[+]
fonewear said: » Don't worry if any of you get in trouble you can always destroy the evidence Hillary set the precedent ! Bahamut.Dannyl said: » incoming wikileaks that contains the proof you seek. But I wonder even with any proof, if you'll believe it or deny its evidence. Right now we will settle for any evidence. Although, I would prefer it would not be obtained through criminal behavior.
[+]
|
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.