Nancy Pelosi is a badass MF and I want her to be Speaker

[DixonHur 11296]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Um, no, the Supreme Court cost Al Gore the election.

My point is the supreme court wouldn't have been in play.  But you already knew that.

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Your position seems to move all over the place.

Wrong.  I've been on the impeachment train for a long time.  It's not my fault it hasn't left the station yet.

It's just now I agree it's probably too late to to use it to get him out of office.  The key word in that sentence is "probably".  None of us know what would happen if all Trump's malfeasance lay bare for all the American public to see.  But, if not, that doesn't mean they shouldn't try.  The only sure way to fail is to fail to try.

Not sure why you're having such a hard time understanding that...I guess you live in a binary world that says impeachment is only effective if it removes the president.  I disagree.  I think there are a number of ways it would help the Dems...including the possibility that he gets convicted by the Senate.  But the Dems have always been a bunch of chicken shits.  

In '16 the Dems assumed Hillary was going to be president so they soft played the Russian interference, the dossier, and Merrick Garland's confirmation.  And that's not hindsight, I had the same opinion then...of course, I too thought Hillary would be president...but Trump is what you get when you assume. 

For the sake of the country, the Dems can't afford to make that mistake again.

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Also you only copied half of the clause from my comment. That doesn’t seem to be in good faith. 

Um, because that was the part of the sentence I was responding to.  What part of the rest of the sentence would have changed the point?

[deech 2272]

3 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

Some weird stuff going on here.

It seems that every time trump shits his pants in front of the world, folks come in here and blame Pelosi.  

There is a strange delusion that Pelosi is protecting trump.

There are some political realities:

A GOP controlled senate is not going to get a 2/3 vote to remove based on what is currently known about trump. To attempt to do so, would not be politically advantageous. Folks can disagree on that last point but then you have to consider timing and view it through the primary goal of all this - 2020 election.

Hoping that maybe today the senate would vote to remove or thinking there is a chance of that is not based on reality.

The potential exists that additional evidence is out there that would change the GOP’s minds. I think that potential is very very slim based on how far McConnell, Graham, and other folks have abandoned all norms and principles. Even so, let’s see what the subpoenas uncover - note this is about timing.

The only real chance of removing trump IMO and most realistic observers, absent a smoking gun or some new evidence, is the 2020 election.

Knowing that, how does impeachment, house investigations, the execution of subpoenas, the timing of the release of evidence, the timing of public testimonies, and the timing of a potential impeachment hearing, influence the probability that trump loses the 2020 election?

The bottom line is that trump is causing massive harm every day he sits in the White House. That sucks. That is shameful. However, elections have consequences. It is time to put on some big boy pants. Cowboy up. It is time to realize that there is one singular primary goal to all of this. That goal is keep trump out of the White House for a second term. Everything else is secondary to that single primary goal.

Politically calculated decision making is for cowards.  Take a fucking stand.  Don't sit in the corner and try to figure out what plays best politically before deciding that is the plan.   Trump should be impeached for a litany of reasons.  Any calculation that the same people who voted for Trump four years ago are going to wake up and change their mind next election is naive IMHO.

[GW Hayduke 1953]

6 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Wrong.  I've been on the impeachment train for a long time.  It's not my fault it hasn't left the station yet.

Your position is now that it is appropriate to consider politik. That is good. The question of impeachment isn’t duty. It is politik.

8 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

None of us know what would happen if all Trump's malfeasance lay bare for all the American public to see.  But, if not, that doesn't mean they shouldn't try.  The only sure way to fail is to fail to try.

Is anyone arguing that we should hide his malfeasance? What do you think my positions are? What are you arguing against?

9 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Not sure why you're having such a hard time understanding that...I guess you live in a binary world that says impeachment is only effective if it removes the president

Please read my comments in good faith. That isn’t my position.

12 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

including the possibility that he gets convicted by the Senate

Not happening unless there is a smoking gun or additional new evidence. I understand you feel the GOP might remove him now if we just let them vote on it so let’s just agree to disagree on that.

Please read my comments in good faith. You believe impeachment might lead to GOP removing. No one else thinks that but you do you. We differ there. Cool. You appear to think, although haven’t fully supported it, that impeachment in the house might help the 2020 election. If that is your position, we differ on that. Cool.

[DixonHur 11296]

22 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Please read my comments in good faith. You believe impeachment might lead to GOP removing. No one else thinks that but you do you.

Talk about bad faith.  I never said the Senate would remove him...I said there's no way to know for sure unless you try.  You and DD are defeatists and that's cool.  But it's also cowardly.

I'm sure you would have been cool paying extra taxes back in the late 18th century too because there's no way the colonists could possibly defeat the Brits.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

40 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

unless there is a smoking gun

Lmao, there are already several smoking guns.  Trump’s personal attorney is currently doing hard time for a felony criminal conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws that Trump directed in an effort to cheat in the election that made him president.   This isn’t conjecture.  This is on the books in court documents and Trump’s personal attorney testified publicly in congress under oath to this.  There are also incriminating audio tapes of Trump directing the conspiracy.

And the Mueller Report has at least a half dozen smoking guns.  

Edited August 22, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[GW Hayduke 1953]

45 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Talk about bad faith.  I never said the Senate would remove him...I said there's no way to know for sure unless you try.  You and DD are defeatists and that's cool.  But it's also cowardly.

I'm sure you would have been cool paying extra taxes back in the late 18th century too because there's no way the colonists could possibly defeat the Brits.

You believe there is no way to know for sure. That means you believe the senate MIGHT remove. Words have meaning. Maybe you aren’t acting in bad faith. Maybe you are accidentally not seeing words.

[GW Hayduke 1953]

33 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Lmao, there are already several smoking guns.  Trump’s personal attorney is currently doing hard time for a felony criminal conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws that Trump directed in an effort to cheat in the election that made him president.   This isn’t conjecture.  This is on the books in court documents and Trump’s personal attorney testified publicly in congress under oath to this.  There are also incriminating audio tapes of Trump directing the conspiracy.

And the Mueller Report has at least a half dozen smoking guns.  

Lmao. Read the whole sentence you pasted that from. How is your smoking guns relevant to the topic at hand? To the topic being discussed? How is it relevant to senate removal? Is your smoking gun getting GOP support for removal? That is the topic I was discussing. Don’t be a jack ass. Or, is your ploy to attempt to nitpick and take a couple words out of context because someone has a different position? 

[DixonHur 11296]

2 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

You believe there is no way to know for sure. That means you believe the senate MIGHT remove. Words have meaning. Maybe you aren’t acting in bad faith. Maybe you are accidentally not seeing words.

Well, I am dyslexic so there's that...

Anyway, my argument in a nut shell is that we are not clairvoyant so we don't know what would happen.  And that even if impeachment doesn't end in a conviction, it would further damage the GOP. 

IMO, the only bad option is doing nothing because it lends credence to Trump's claim of total exoneration.  We both know that's bullshit, but most people don't really pay as close attention as we do.  Most folks fall into the category of "If he did something wrong they would have impeached him already."  They need to be beat over the head again and again with details of Trump's illegal and unconstitutional actions.

Inaction is not a winning strategy.

 

  

[David Dennison 18851]

The whip count is 132 for.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

The whip count is 132 for.

This is the most obvious political strategy of all time.  

/sarcasm 

Edited August 23, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[David Dennison 18851]

42 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is the most obvious political strategy of all time.  

/sarcasm 

I know you are a big fan.

[Guest Lobo]

Any of y'all cohosting her fundraiser next month in Austin?  Or at least joining the free ranks of her welcoming committee?  Shit, the barrier of entry is only $100.  Can't believe nobody puts their money where their mouth is.  Even if you can't swing the donation minimum, the local Democrats in Austin are rallying the troops for a welcoming deal for her.  It's impossible none of you are involved with that.  It literally would take less time and money than your presence on this website.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

Some weird stuff going on here.
It seems that every time trump shits his pants in front of the world, folks come in here and blame Pelosi.  
There is a strange delusion that Pelosi is protecting trump.
There are some political realities:
A GOP controlled senate is not going to get a 2/3 vote to remove based on what is currently known about trump. To attempt to do so, would not be politically advantageous. Folks can disagree on that last point but then you have to consider timing and view it through the primary goal of all this - 2020 election.
Hoping that maybe today the senate would vote to remove or thinking there is a chance of that is not based on reality.
The potential exists that additional evidence is out there that would change the GOP’s minds. I think that potential is very very slim based on how far McConnell, Graham, and other folks have abandoned all norms and principles. Even so, let’s see what the subpoenas uncover - note this is about timing.
The only real chance of removing trump IMO and most realistic observers, absent a smoking gun or some new evidence, is the 2020 election.
Knowing that, how does impeachment, house investigations, the execution of subpoenas, the timing of the release of evidence, the timing of public testimonies, and the timing of a potential impeachment hearing, influence the probability that trump loses the 2020 election?
The bottom line is that trump is causing massive harm every day he sits in the White House. That sucks. That is shameful. However, elections have consequences. It is time to put on some big boy pants. Cowboy up. It is time to realize that there is one singular primary goal to all of this. That goal is keep trump out of the White House for a second term. Everything else is secondary to that single primary goal.

This is absolutely correct.

All the remaining carping is just people arguing to argue and taking their frustrations on the absolute shittiness of our current reality on Pelosi.

[DixonHur 11296]

10 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

 

This is absolutely correct.

All the remaining carping is just people arguing to argue and taking their frustrations on the absolute shittiness of our current reality on Pelosi.

 

Well, she is the only Dem in a position to do something to counter Trump and I'm not just talking about impeachment, but she's doing nothing, so I think it's fair to call her out about it.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

America kinda voted her to power to check Trump.  

Besides looking the other way on all the crimes, concentration camps, Trump’s domestic terrorism movement, and generally being a raving lunatic; Pelosi has done a bang up job of serving the American people in her position of leadership. 

Edited August 24, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[David Dennison 18851]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

America kinda voted her to power to check Trump.  

Besides looking the other way on all the crimes, concentration camps, Trump’s domestic terrorism movement, and generally being a raving lunatic; Pelosi has done a bang up job of serving the American people in her position of leadership. 

She can be removed from leadership at any time.

[David Dennison 18851]

26 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Well, she is the only Dem in a position to do something to counter Trump and I'm not just talking about impeachment, but she's doing nothing, so I think it's fair to call her out about it.  

She's not doing nothing. 

She's collecting votes.

[retread 2951]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

America kinda voted her to power to check Trump.  

Besides looking the other way on all the crimes, concentration camps, Trump’s domestic terrorism movement, and generally being a raving lunatic; Pelosi has done a bang up job of serving the American people in her position of leadership. 

Leadership would be the Speaker saying that we are going to hold an impeachment inquiry. Then, our caucus can state their positions by voting on articles if they are merited.

[David Dennison 18851]

2 minutes ago, retread said:

Leadership would be the Speaker saying that we are going to hold an impeachment inquiry. Then, our caucus can state their positions by voting on articles if they are merited.

That's what they are doing. If they had an actual vote on starting an inquiry right now, it would fail. 

[retread 2951]

It's so frustrating that everything has to skirt around the way things should actually work. We're not officially doing an inquiry, but essentially we're doing an inquiry. Just look at all the tough language in our court filings! 

Journalists have to pry language from Ds to insinuate that an inquiry has started, without actually voting on an inquiry.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, retread said:

It's so frustrating that everything has to skirt around the way things should actually work. We're not officially doing an inquiry, but essentially we're doing an inquiry. Just look at all the tough language in our court filings! 

Journalists have to pry language from Ds to insinuate that an inquiry has started, without actually voting on an inquiry.

That's what you have to do when the votes aren't there. If they put anything having to do with impeachment to a vote on the floor, it would fail. 

That is slowly changing.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Leadership is a foreign concept to some people. Gotta follow the polls and the votes and most importantly the money.  You know, politics!  This is exactly why we have Trump as president.  No one with a spine in leadership. 

[retread 2951]

The Ds think they're up by 2 TDs, so they run prevent D.

Edited August 24, 2019 by retread

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

1 hour ago, retread said:

The Ds think they're up by 2 TDs, so they run prevent D.

The Ds in game strategy is Mack Brown?

[pacman 7355]

Pelosi and Democrats are raking in political contributions during the Trump era. They have no desire to see it stop.

Pelosi shouldn't be anywhere near Democratic leadership.

[triplehorn 2664]

Alternatively, in less than 9 months, the House under her leadership has passed a boatload of meaningful legislation targeting several of the most pressing issues we all face.  Meanwhile this batch of inchoate traitors who call themselves republicans are AWOL.

[David Dennison 18851]

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Leadership is a foreign concept to some people. Gotta follow the polls and the votes and most importantly the money.  You know, politics!  This is exactly why we have Trump as president.  No one with a spine in leadership. 

She doesn't support impeaching Donald Trump. She has been very open about that. She's not going to whip votes for something she opposes. She's doing exactly what she told everyone she would do. If her caucus gets the votes needed to impeach, she'll let them. But she is not going to go out of her way to do something she disagrees with politically.

If the House Democrats don't agree with her on this, they can choose someone else to lead them.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

She’s a feckless coward and you’re cool with it.  It’s okay to admit it.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

Democrats need to stop worrying what Fox and Republicans are going to say. They are going to say the same shit, no matter what Dems do. Acting like perpetual cowards plays right into their hands. Stop worrying about it and fucking lead. Show Americans that the GOP has been dealing in bad faith and lies for decades. 

Do things because they are the right thing to do. Loudly defend that you are doing it because it is the right thing and you will not be held back by Republican lies and greed any longer.

This prevent defense shit is a failed strategy that has led to innumerable self-inflicted losses. The best way to make sure you win a game where you are up by 10 is to score 14 more and then keep scoring until the clock expires. 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

Pelosi has a big red button on her desk.  If she just pressed it, Trump would disappear and all of his policies would instantly be reversed.  I am so mad that she won't press that magical button.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I too am confused why she doesn’t just ask him to resign. 

[David Dennison 18851]

50 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

She’s a feckless coward and you’re cool with it.  It’s okay to admit it.

She disagrees with us on the politics. That's all.

[The People’s Elbow 707]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

She disagrees with us on the politics. That's all.

Speaking of feckless cowards...

[DixonHur 11296]

14 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Pelosi has a big red button on her desk.  If she just pressed it, Trump would disappear and all of his policies would instantly be reversed.  I am so mad that she won't press that magical button.

I'm not sure I've ever met anyone so risk averse as your posts seem to suggest you are.  

Literally no one has suggested that removing Trump through impeachment would be easy, or even probable, but not everything that should be done is going to be easy.

If not impeachment, how about at least call him out daily on his bullshit?  Hell, she been more vociferous toward her own caucus than she has toward Trump. 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

4 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

I'm not sure I've ever met anyone so risk averse as your posts seem to suggest you are.  

Literally no one has suggested that removing Trump through impeachment would be easy, or even probable, but not everything that should be done is going to be easy.

If not impeachment, how about at least call him out daily on his bullshit?  Hell, she been more vociferous toward her own caucus than she has toward Trump. 

Not only should she push the big red button, Pelosi should be more vociferous at Trump!!!  

[DixonHur 11296]

12 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Not only should she push the big red button, Pelosi should be more vociferous at Trump!!!  

Or she can continue down your proposed path of cowering in the corner because, gosh darn it, leading is hard.  

[GW Hayduke 1953]

3 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Or she can continue down your proposed path of cowering in the corner because, gosh darn it, leading is hard.  

Push the button, be vociferous, and lead hard!!!  Why doesn’t she just do it!

[suddenly shaggy 929]

33 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Pelosi has a big red button on her desk.  If she just pressed it, Trump would disappear and all of his policies would instantly be reversed.  I am so mad that she won't press that magical button.

Literally, not a single person on here is saying this, except you. You would know this if you'd ever bothered to participate in the CR before suddenly deciding last Wednesday that you have very strong ignorant opinions you want to hijack this thread with and then posting 21 consecutive posts, all on this thread, attempting to do that. The rest of us know full well that McConnell isn't removing Trump, even if Trump raped Elaine Chao on live TV while calling Mitch a Turtle Cuck Bitch. 

Notwithstanding that fact, we live in a world where perception matters and perception very much matters for the 2020 election. If the Dems don't impeach, perception will be that Trump has done nothing wrong, when the reality is that he has committed a minimum of dozens of impeachable offenses. Own the messaging that McConnell is a Turtle Cuck Bitch who wipes his ass with the Constitution. Expose everything Trump has done and make the GOP wear Trump like a millstone around their necks going into the election.  

[Underdog 28585]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Pelosi has a big red button on her desk.  If she just pressed it, Trump would disappear and all of his policies would instantly be reversed.  I am so mad that she won't press that magical button.

[GW Hayduke 1953]

4 minutes ago, suddenly shaggy said:

The rest of us know full well that McConnell isn't removing Trump

Actually, some folks here (dixondur and hugo) actually think that the GOP might do this. You may not have been paying attention. 

5 minutes ago, suddenly shaggy said:

Notwithstanding that fact, we live in a world where perception matters and perception very much matters for the 2020 election. If the Dems don't impeach, perception will be that Trump has done nothing wrong, when the reality is that he has committed a minimum of dozens of impeachable offenses. Own the messaging that McConnell is a Turtle Cuck Bitch who wipes his ass with the Constitution. Expose everything Trump has done and make the GOP wear Trump like a millstone around their necks going into the election.

You are talking about politik.  That was my entire point two days ago. You position is that impeachment now would decrease the chance of trump until 2024. Others, including the Dem leadership, have a different position.  Their position may be that impeachment after the subpoenas is best for 2020. I will give you credit, at least you are talking about the 2020 election - which is the only thing that matters. 

The problem is every time Trump shits himself folks will come in here and bleed their vaginas everywhere. She should be more vociferous and lead hard! 

[David Dennison 18851]

48 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Or she can continue down your proposed path of cowering in the corner because, gosh darn it, leading is hard.  

It's not cowardice when you think you are doing the right thing. She thinks she is right.

[DixonHur 11296]

54 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It's not cowardice when you think you are doing the right thing. She thinks she is right.

Sounds a lot like, it's not a lie if you believe it.

The fact is she's been in Congress for over 30 years, which makes her part of the problem, not the solution...she's Mitch McConnell in a dress.  She should follow the lead of the younger members of Congress who have a better read on the pulse of the new generation...in other words, anger.  

She's too worried about what the money people think, and how she can stay in power.  Period.  

[retread 2951]

The worst part is that there have probably been backroom discussions over martinis about which Ds will come out for impeachment. Some will do it to give cover for others. If so, fuck every one of them involved in that.

[DixonHur 11296]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Actually, some folks here (dixondur and hugo) actually think that the GOP might do this. You may not have been paying attention. 

Hugo and I understand that McConnell also refused to bring the 9/11 Victim's fund to a vote until he was publicly confronted and shamed into it by Jon Stewart.  It's a sad state of affairs when the most effective leaders aren't actually in a positions of political leadership.

Doing nothing is a huge gift to the GOP.  Would Mitch allow a vote if pressured?  I don't know, but I'd like to find out.  What I do know is that he sure as hell isn't going to if he doesn't feel the heat. 

Pelosi and her allies are running the same game they did with Merrick Garland's nomination, and the 2016 election. How'd that work out? 

[retread 2951]

There is a non-zero chance that the Senate would convict, albeit very low. There is also no caveat in the Constitution that says you can only impeach if certain of conviction.

Ds just love playing that prevent D.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

37 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Actually, some folks here (dixondur and hugo) actually think that the GOP might do this. You may not have been paying attention. 

You are talking about politik.  That was my entire point two days ago. You position is that impeachment now would decrease the chance of trump until 2024. Others, including the Dem leadership, have a different position.  Their position may be that impeachment after the subpoenas is best for 2020. I will give you credit, at least you are talking about the 2020 election - which is the only thing that matters. 

The problem is every time Trump shits himself folks will come in here and bleed their vaginas everywhere. She should be more vociferous and lead hard! 

False. Neither Dixon or Hugo actually expect a McConnell led Senate to remove Trump, none of us do. That argument has been rehashed here for years now. They think there is a chance. There's a chance for everything, even if it is an infinitesimally small chance. The GOP turned on Nixon and his support was about Trump's level when the hearings started and 27% when he was removed. Trump's crimes are astronomically worse than Nixon's. The GOP is filled with spineless cowards. If they finally realize Trump is going to drown them, they might jettison him. I will add though, that I personally think the chance is so small that it realistically approaches zero. 

 It's irrelevant however, Dems need to stop acting according to what they think the GOP and Fox will do or say, they are going to do it anyway. Just do the right thing and be very open about why. It's a shit leader who only follows where the rest of the herd goes first. 

You are also incorrect when you restated what you think my position is. Impeaching Trump and airing all of his dirty laundry on TV at once, rather than dribbled out in small bits that can be ignored, probably hits him hard in the next election. That notwithstanding, my position is that impeaching Trump and forcing the McConnell led Senate to own Trump's malfeasance by refusing to remove a crooked felon is both, the right thing to do, and will help the Democrats retake the Senate, which is the second most important part of the 2020 election. 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

29 minutes ago, suddenly shaggy said:

False. Neither Dixon or Hugo actually expect a McConnell led Senate to remove Trump, none of us do. That argument has been rehashed here for years now. They think there is a chance. There's a chance for everything, even if it is an infinitesimally small chance.

I know you are saying I am false. I suggest you read my comment again and note the use of the word "might."  I don't have a good meme handy for reading comprehension.

 

31 minutes ago, suddenly shaggy said:

You are also incorrect when you restated what you think my position is. Impeaching Trump and airing all of his dirty laundry on TV at once, rather than dribbled out in small bits that can be ignored, probably hits him hard in the next election. That notwithstanding, my position is that impeaching Trump and forcing the McConnell led Senate to own Trump's malfeasance by refusing to remove a crooked felon is both, the right thing to do, and will help the Democrats retake the Senate, which is the second most important part of the 2020 election. 

Again, you are talking about politik. That is good. The issue is not removal by the senate the issue is the 2020 election. 

[suddenly shaggy 929]

9 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I know you are saying I am false. I suggest you read my comment again and note the use of the word "might."  I don't have a good meme handy for reading comprehension.

 

Again, you are talking about politik. That is good. The issue is not removal by the senate the issue is the 2020 election. 

Yeah, I saw it and understood what it would mean if most people used it, but it seemed incongruous with how butt hurt you were acting about it. I was just trying to establish exactly what it is that you are so butt hurt about and giving you the courtesy of assuming you weren't catching the nuance of their positions.

Turns out you fully understand that both of them think there is almost no chance McConnell won't remove Trump, but you are choosing to act like a troll while being confrontational and butt hurt about the fact that each of them concedes there is a small chance that we don't know what will happen if all the facts come out and slap Americans in the face all at once. 

Good thing you decided to show up last Wednesday and appoint yourself the arbiter of what we should be talking about on this thread and what the issues for 2020 we should have been discussing are. I don't know what we've been doing all this time without you. 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

10 minutes ago, suddenly shaggy said:

Yeah, I saw it and understood what it would mean if most people used it, but it seemed incongruous with how butt hurt you were acting about it. I was just trying to establish exactly what it is that you are so butt hurt about and giving you the courtesy of assuming you weren't catching the nuance of their positions.

You saw it but chose to misread so you could build a strawman in an attempt to win an argument. That is some lame as shit. Strawmen are a sign of a weak position bro. 

[suddenly shaggy 929]

13 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

You saw it but chose to misread so you could build a strawman in an attempt to win an argument. That is some lame as shit. Strawmen are a sign of a weak position bro. 

False again. As I clearly said in my second sentence, I saw it, but gave you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't understanding the nuance of their positions. Shockingly, you aren't such an aggressive dick about the importance of reading comprehension when it applies to you.