Did Lauren Boebert work as a paid escort for Senator Ted Cruz?

[Oerdin]

I thought you'd people would've learned with the Stormy Daniels fiasco, the Russia collusion fiasco and so many others.

Oh well

They don't learn. That is why they are leftists and why they donate all their money to race grifters at BLM who just stole it all to enrich themselves and their families.

 

[Oerdin]

It is going to be enjoyable to watch these left wing nutjob liars get sued for defamation. They think they can say any lie they want but ever since Kyle started his lawsuits more and more people feel emboldened to sue. It will be enjoyable to watch.

O yoo hoo, Mr Oerdin, where has Kyle Filed all his slam dunk laws suits at?

For aidsman though he never reads anything.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Admin.]

It is going to be enjoyable to watch these left wing nutjob liars get sued for defamation. They think they can say any lie they want but ever since Kyle started his lawsuits more and more people feel emboldened to sue. It will be enjoyable to watch.

O yoo hoo, Mr Oerdin, where has Kyle Filed all his slam dunk laws suits at?

For aidsman though he never reads anything.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So where is the suit filed at again, for the 19th time? I intend to marry into the Royal Family, how do you like them apples?

 

[Admin.]

It is going to be enjoyable to watch these left wing nutjob liars get sued for defamation. They think they can say any lie they want but ever since Kyle started his lawsuits more and more people feel emboldened to sue. It will be enjoyable to watch.

O yoo hoo, Mr Oerdin, where has Kyle Filed all his slam dunk laws suits at?

For aidsman though he never reads anything.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So where is the suit filed at again, for the 19th time? I intend to marry into the Royal Family, how do you like them apples?

@Oerdin So is there a Suit, or only a 'threat' made of a possible suit? Time to shit or get off the pot friendo.

 

[Admin.]

It is going to be enjoyable to watch these left wing nutjob liars get sued for defamation. They think they can say any lie they want but ever since Kyle started his lawsuits more and more people feel emboldened to sue. It will be enjoyable to watch.

O yoo hoo, Mr Oerdin, where has Kyle Filed all his slam dunk laws suits at?

For aidsman though he never reads anything.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

@Oerdin Tomorrow morning, after my first cup of coffee, I INTEND to have a bowel movement, do you want wager on which intention happens first?

 

[Oerdin]

Dear idiot, I already posted the answer, you mongoloid. The article clearly says they are preparing to file. What is yr major alfncwhich prt u from reading simple English?

 

[Admin.]

It is going to be enjoyable to watch these left wing nutjob liars get sued for defamation. They think they can say any lie they want but ever since Kyle started his lawsuits more and more people feel emboldened to sue. It will be enjoyable to watch.

O yoo hoo, Mr Oerdin, where has Kyle Filed all his slam dunk laws suits at?

For aidsman though he never reads anything.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So where is the suit filed at again, for the 19th time? I intend to marry into the Royal Family, how do you like them apples?

@Oerdin So is there a Suit, or only a 'threat' made of a possible suit? Time to shit or get off the pot friendo.

@Oerdin Donald Trump Jr. INTENDS to run for POTUS in 24

 

[Oerdin]

Quote where I said it was already filed, you lying subhuman shit stain. You don't read what people write, you then lie and make false claims about what they said, then you cry that no one takes you seriously. Quote it, you lying Mongloid.

 

[Dove]

I support abortion & licensed sex work @Dove y.

However I see your point about cracking down on underage sex & human trafficking. It should only be totally voluntary & extortion should be punished to the maximum extent of the law.

We're you an escort at 1 time Dovey?

I don't care if you were. Just wondering.

Btw I don't really care if Lauren Boebert was or if she had an abortion either. She ought to just be open about it.

And if Ted Cruz used her for an evening of pleasure he should admit it too.

No I wasnt. But I was never in a bad enough situation.

I'd like you to consider what you mean by "choice" because a choice between sucking dick and having a place to sleep without getting beaten or raped isnt REALLY a choice, is it?

I'm gonna go ahead and make the assumption that most people who are pro "sex work" really have no idea what that world is truly like and you think it's like every other thing. It's not.

Legal sex work will leave women and girls to die. With no hope of intervention. Regulation is only as reliable as the regulators and it surprises me how much trust people are willing to put in strangers. It's illegal for a reason.....and it's not because people are prudes. It's because its unethical and markets that sell women shouldnt exist.

I wasnt a stripper off and on for 10 years because it was some aspiration. There isnt much support, bad policies make life unaffordable and men are exploitive.

And yet....this whole thing about celebrities or people in power of either party covering up about these scandals is denying who they really are.

They should all just admit it. Otherwise they're living a lie. You're honest about your past life so they should be too. I figger it's just part of the American way of life.

But I suppose the current social climate doesn't allow it.

Btw, isn't the % of American women who stripped or been in the sex industry at one time in their lives quite high? I heard something like 10%?

I’m not seeing the connection between legalized sex work and trafficking. It’s like comparing the illegal weed with the legal weed element… there is no comparison when the criminal element is replaced with white collar business investors. Heidi Fleiss was not charged and prosecuted for being the Hollywood Madame, she was on trial for tax evasion after claiming $60k in earnings while living in a Hollywood Hills mansion worth over 2 mil. It is legal in Nevada since 1971… but you pay heavily for the service so you aren’t exposed to public embarrassment and humiliation, arrested, assault and robbery, or STDs and all the other BS that comes along with prostitution.

I agree with legalization, but it is not going to stop trafficking or $5 blowjobs from a crackhead in a back alley on the wrong side of town. You aren’t going to get access to children through legalization. 80% of children trafficked are vulnerable and in the foster system. They have been lured/kidnapped into these situations and are beaten and drugged to keep them under control. This alone would justify why I’m pro-choice…. but I have other reasons too.

USA is busting apart socially at the seams with 330 million people. Can you imagine what it'll be like when it reaches 400 or 500 million?

But these pro life people want women to breed like the Duggars so it will be even more of a mess.

I'm so confused as to how this is not clearly understood.

Pro life people want it illegal to kill living human beings. No one is saying "go breed like the Duggars"

It's almost like you guys have been brainwashed to the believe the only choices people have is abortion or breeding. Like no one has any self control or ability to chose to not become pregnant.... and its fucking bizzare. It's like this critical information is tossed aside for an unrealistic and extremist opinion that unless we keep it legal to human human beings in utero....people will be "breeding" like the Duggars.

You really are not being reasonable and you are not understanding the pro life position. No one....absolutely no one....is saying to go and "breed". You are showing how convoluted abortion marketing truly is. People who support it are not thinking critically.

You've either forgotten that getting pregnant IS a choice. You can chose to avoid pregnancy. It's actually NOT difficult to just not get pregnant. And those who oppose abortion are not saying "der go breed"......they are saying "make your choices BEFORE another human life is in the balance".

Also if abortion were off the table, people would be much more serious about avoiding pregnancy.

You cant just ignore factors and points people make that complicate yours and claim pro lifers are saying something they are not. You need to address the actual claims and points made. Not make them up as you go because you feel like it helps your argument.

 

[Dove]

Dear idiot, I already posted the answer, you mongoloid. The article clearly says they are preparing to file. What is yr major alfncwhich prt u from reading simple English?

There have been some fake stories about Kyle winning millions or whatever. So since those were fake they think that means Kyle is never filing any defamation suits at all and everything that says otherwise is a lie. Because if the fake things that were passed around the internet.

The way they decide what's true and what isnt, and what's beings presented in a distorted manner is really odd. They kinda take a "choose your own adventure" approach and just agree with what suits their biases the best.

 

[Oerdin]

We are seeing Seamajor do that in real time in the Liz Cheney thread right now.

Seamajor: Here is an old article supporting the claims you say got debunked.

Me: Here is a new article explaining how that was all a lie and never true with evidence.

Seamajor: I only care about the old claim and refuse to acknowledge it was retracted by the author as untrue.

Just zombie like in clinging to nonsense because it comforts him.

 

[AnnaConda]

I don't like this woman. Too much rhetoric for me.

If you’re referring to ignorant, illiterate, unschooled, benighted, empty-headed, and ignoramus rhetoric you’re spot on.
Boebert is the definition of a moron.

 

[Blurt]

Don’t go around slandering morons, Annie, or they might intend to sue.

 

[Admin.]

Did Boobert buy a boob job?

 

[Murdy]

Did Boobert buy a boob job?

She had her fupa sucked out and redistributed XXL BBL stylo.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Forgive me if I don't define myself by the name of those I defend or defame,
But my opinion is free speech, regardless my name,
So I will empart to you & you to me,
The perfect summation of democracy,
Freedom of speech is not team sports,
It is a transcendance of sorts.

Listening is a glistening. A light beyond the tunnel.

 

[Admin.]

Forgive me if I don't define myself by the name of those I defend or defame,
But my opinion is free speech, regardless my name,
So I will empart to you & you to me,
The perfect summation of democracy,
Freedom of speech is not team sports,
It is a transcendance of sorts.

Listening is a glistening. A light beyond the tunnel.

 

[Blurt]

Forgive me if I don't define myself by the name of those I defend or defame,
But my opinion is free speech, regardless my name,
So I will empart to you & you to me,
The perfect summation of democracy,
Freedom of speech is not team sports,
It is a transcendance of sorts.

Listening is a glistening. A light beyond the tunnel.

With great freedom comes great responsibility..

I'd say the MAGA crowd has got the freedom part down pat.

They need to work on the responsibility part.

MAGA being MAGA, they view accountability as anathema to freedom.

It's unfortunate. To say the least.

Philosopher of language Ludwig Wittgenstein put it succinctly: " Words are deeds. "

Anyone arguing for unlimited freedom of speech is also arguing for unlimited freedom of action.

Unlimited freedom of action leads to chaos in any world where even just two people have a different view on what constitutes ideal actions and are willing to die on the hill of their respective idealism (or, worse, are willing to kill for it).

A House Divided Cannot Stand.

The U.S. is built upon a set of noble principles aiming to codify how individuals can best live (and thrive) as free agents who are also members of a cohesive whole--a nation. The U.S. is also still very much enamored with the mythos surrounding its own creation--escape from tyranny to some, lawless frontier to others. If you arm yourself with the Rule of Law as a foundational principle, you cannot also view the Rule of Law as an unfair limitation on your personal freedom.

The Constitution of the United States of America can be (and has been) amended, sure. But if even its general principles seem unpalatable to you (principles such as equal treatment under the law and the peaceful transfer of power, for instance), then you need to consider moving to Russia or to North Korea rather than try to undermine (or destroy) the principles laid out in the document.

Freedom of speech means that the GOVERNMENT (not Joe Plumber, who lives three houses over) will not try to curtail your ability (and desire and need) to express yourself. Joe Plumber, on the other hand, through his speech and actions, CAN try to end you if he is so inclined but, again, there are consequences to this under the Rule of Law.

Whenever someone incites hatred against, or calls for the assassination of, someone else, the law will come into play and limit that person's freedom of expression and action. We saw this play out, for instance, in New York City over the past couple of days.

MrNiceGuy likes to sing about freedom of speech.

I'd like to see him sing about accountability and personal responsibility in an equally clear and poetic voice.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

With great freedom comes great responsibility..

I'd say the MAGA crowd has got the freedom part down pat.

They need to work on the responsibility part.

MAGA being MAGA, they view accountability as anathema to freedom.

It's unfortunate. To say the least.

Philosopher of language Ludwig Wittgenstein put it succinctly: " Words are deeds. "

Anyone arguing for unlimited freedom of speech is also arguing for unlimited freedom of action.

Blurt, While I love & truly appreciate your heartfelt declaration, because we cannot have a discussion without open & honest discourse, I have a question.

If the thing that makes you human means thinking unique things & saying unique things then to deny you any part of that is to deny your humanity.

Conservatives will say cops should chase criminals and anything that happens after is a responsibility of the criminal whom initiated the problem. Liberals will say innocent people were hurt because cops chased a criminal.

I feel like you will say problems like January 6 happened because people believed Trump and I will say unto you that any one of those people had the benefit of their own unique human condition in a rational thinking brain, regardless of external conditions.

Are you human or are you an influenced bot?

 

[Admin.]

Blurt, While I love & truly appreciate your heartfelt declaration, because we cannot have a discussion without open & honest discourse, I have a question.

If the thing that makes you human means thinking unique things & saying unique things then to deny you any part of that is to deny your humanity.

Conservatives will say cops should chase criminals and anything that happens after is a responsibility of the criminal whom initiated the problem. Liberals will say innocent people were hurt because cops chased a criminal.

I feel like you will say problems like January 6 happened because people believed Trump and I will say unto you that any one of those people had the benefit of their own unique human condition in a rational thinking brain, regardless of external conditions.

Are you human or are you an influenced bot?

 

[Blurt]

Blurt, While I love & truly appreciate your heartfelt declaration, because we cannot have a discussion without open & honest discourse, I have a question.

If the thing that makes you human means thinking unique things & saying unique things then to deny you any part of that is to deny your humanity.

Are you human or are you an influenced bot?

MrNiceGuy,

I have zero issues with your first paragraph above. Indeed, open and honest discourse is the way to go in order to unearth any possible common ground on matters of some import.

However, you won’t be able to get me to assent to the ideas laid out in your second paragraph above without an additional few seconds of debate. “Thinking unique things” and “saying unique things” are not, in my view, what defines us as human beings. Dogs think unique things and cats (in their own unique language) say unique things. And it’s not merely a matter of being able to manipulate symbols (through language or art, say) for there’s ample evidence that other species also possess that ability.

I would venture to say there are a great many things that make me human, not just one. Thinkers and scribes of every ilk have long sought to discover what those things may be. No has come up with a definitive answer that would finally put an end to the search.

For me—and I stress: for ME—some of the things that make me human are at the very least related to my conscious (i.e., not merely instinctual) drive to self-actualize, by which I mean my will to secure for myself the conditions under which I can be given a chance to realize the full potential of my being as a free agent who is also a living, breathing, thinking, feeling creature… while living in a social environment that acknowledges that every other human is to be given the very same opportunity.

And this where I circle back to the notion of responsibility and accountability. Were I living alone, say on an otherwise deserted island, I would say and do whatever I damn well please. My thoughts, actions, and speech would present no obstacle to anyone else. But I don’t live alone on a deserted isle; I live in a society composed of millions—billions—of other souls also in search of their own inner paradise. The only way I can so live is by negotiating with those other souls what sacrifices each is willing to make so that every living, breathing, thinking, feeling human has a shot at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (or what I would call self-actualization). That I’m willing to make those sacrifices (rather than succumbing to urges and needs better left to nature red in tooth and claw) is not only what makes me human but it also enhances my humanity rather than diminishes it.

As to your final sentence above, I can only suppose that it originates from a mind that has not yet learned to think for itself. The comment sounds trite and rehearsed. It has no value, not even as a rhetorical question.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

MrNiceGuy,

I have zero issues with your first paragraph above. Indeed, open and honest discourse is the way to go in order to unearth any possible common ground on matters of some import.

However, you won’t be able to get me to assent to the ideas laid out in your second paragraph above without an additional few seconds of debate. “Thinking unique things” and “saying unique things” are not, in my view, what defines us as human beings. Dogs think unique things and cats (in their own unique language) say unique things. And it’s not merely a matter of being able to manipulate symbols (through language or art, say) for there’s ample evidence that other species also possess that ability.

I would venture to say there are a great many things that make me human, not just one. Thinkers and scribes of every ilk have long sought to discover what those things may be. No has come up with a definitive answer that would finally put an end to the search.

For me—and I stress: for ME—some of the things that make me human are at the very least related to my conscious (i.e., not merely instinctual) drive to self-actualize, by which I mean my will to secure for myself the conditions under which I can be given a chance to realize the full potential of my being as a free agent who is also a living, breathing, thinking, feeling creature… while living in a social environment that acknowledges that every other human is to be given the very same opportunity.

And this where I circle back to the notion of responsibility and accountability. Were I living alone, say on an otherwise deserted island, I would say and do whatever I damn well please. My thoughts, actions, and speech would present no obstacle to anyone else. But I don’t live alone on a deserted isle; I live in a society composed of millions—billions—of other souls also in search of their own inner paradise. The only way I can so live is by negotiating with those other souls what sacrifices each is willing to make so that every living, breathing, thinking, feeling human has a shot at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (or what I would call self-actualization). That I’m willing to make those sacrifices (rather than succumbing to urges and needs better left to nature red in tooth and claw) is not only what makes me human but it also enhances my humanity rather than diminishes it.

As to your final sentence above, I can only suppose that it originates from a mind that has not yet learned to think for itself. The comment sounds trite and rehearsed. It has no value, not even as a rhetorical question.

Trump was able to say what he wanted in regards to the election being stolen just as you can yell fire in a crowded theater. The system allows free speech and then punishes later if the speech incited others to hurt or be hurt.

I feel like you think the MAGA crowd alone is to blame for defending free speech but not with great responsibility while ignoring all sides are guilty of this. As when the left claims those on the right are racists and nazis or not referring to them by their preferred pronoun or giving them a living wage is an equivalent to violence against them.

This is where we part ways. If I ask you to call me "they" and you don't, then I say not only are you being violent against me by not acknowledging me wanting to be known as "they", but you are also putting in danger everyone of those like me who wishes to be "they", because everyone who hears you not acknowledging me as "they" are influenced bots instead of human beings with human being brains.

This is where the influenced bot line comes back. Because if that's all we are then maybe we should police speech? But I think we are better than that.

If you didn't call me "they" and someone beat my ass, do you think I should be able to hold you accountable for your free speech and opinion? Scarily enough, I think you do.

If doctors tell people to lose weight, like they always have done, and people start beating the asses of overweight people, should we blame the doctors? And when all of society is obese and dying out of heart attacks, should we all rejoice that at least we didn't body shame, even for our own health? Getting more scary in here.

The guy who said, "Words are deeds.", either did everything he ever said he would do or he's a liar like me saying I'm going out to work in the garage and then have some beers while typing this up, instead.

Words are not deeds. Words are words. Deeds are deeds. Human beings who can think can tell the difference. (Dogs & cats can't). Words can inspire or inflame but they are not a defence to do dumb shit. Ever.

So in your eyes if someone doesn't use preferred pronouns they are guilty of perpetrating violence while in my eyes they are just giving their opinions.

If I didn't use your preferred pronoun and someone who heard me beat your ass, you would blame me. If you didn't use my preferred pronoun and someone who heard you beat my ass, I would blame the ass beater.

Because ultimately, the deed of having our ass beaten is far worse then allowing someone the freedom to say they want our ass to be beaten.

Do you concur?

In a perfect world no one would talk about beating asses but as imperfect as we are, we allow people to talk about ass beating because we should rely on thinking brains to do the thinking! Hot take, I know.

After a day of dealing with customers, you may appreciate the difference of the words where you say you want to beat their asses vs the deed of of just going to the gym and punching a bag instead of their actual asses.

If you want to police your own speech moreso than others and judge the free speech of others moreso than yourself, that's wonderful, but the first amendment has no care for such things.

If the people who wrote the first amendment thought like the dude who said words are deeds, they might have scared themselves right away from the simplistic grandeur of allowing expression of opinion without deference to being offended.

 

[Lily]

Trump was able to say what he wanted in regards to the election being stolen just as you can yell fire in a crowded theater. The system allows free speech and then punishes later if the speech incited others to hurt or be hurt.

I feel like you think the MAGA crowd alone is to blame for defending free speech but not with great responsibility while ignoring all sides are guilty of this. As when the left claims those on the right are racists and nazis or not referring to them by their preferred pronoun or giving them a living wage is an equivalent to violence against them.

This is where we part ways. If I ask you to call me "they" and you don't, then I say not only are you being violent against me by not acknowledging me wanting to be known as "they", but you are also putting in danger everyone of those like me who wishes to be "they", because everyone who hears you not acknowledging me as "they" are influenced bots instead of human beings with human being brains.

This is where the influenced bot line comes back. Because if that's all we are then maybe we should police speech? But I think we are better than that.

If you didn't call me "they" and someone beat my ass, do you think I should be able to hold you accountable for your free speech and opinion? Scarily enough, I think you do.

If doctors tell people to lose weight, like they always have done, and people start beating the asses of overweight people, should we blame the doctors? And when all of society is obese and dying out of heart attacks, should we all rejoice that at least we didn't body shame, even for our own health? Getting more scary in here.

The guy who said, "Words are deeds.", either did everything he ever said he would do or he's a liar like me saying I'm going out to work in the garage and then have some beers while typing this up, instead.

Words are not deeds. Words are words. Deeds are deeds. Human beings who can think can tell the difference. (Dogs & cats can't). Words can inspire or inflame but they are not a defence to do dumb shit. Ever.

So in your eyes if someone doesn't use preferred pronouns they are guilty of perpetrating violence while in my eyes they are just giving their opinions.

If I didn't use your preferred pronoun and someone who heard me beat your ass, you would blame me. If you didn't use my preferred pronoun and someone who heard you beat my ass, I would blame the ass beater.

Because ultimately, the deed of having our ass beaten is far worse then allowing someone the freedom to say they want our ass to be beaten.

Do you concur?

In a perfect world no one would talk about beating asses but as imperfect as we are, we allow people to talk about ass beating because we should rely on thinking brains to do the thinking! Hot take, I know.

After a day of dealing with customers, you may appreciate the difference of the words where you say you want to beat their asses vs the deed of of just going to the gym and punching a bag instead of their actual asses.

If you want to police your own speech moreso than others and judge the free speech of others moreso than yourself, that's wonderful, but the first amendment has no care for such things.

If the people who wrote the first amendment thought like the dude who said words are deeds, they might have scared themselves right away from the simplistic grandeur of allowing expression of opinion without deference to being offended.

What a load of nonsensical non-sequitur horseshit.

 

[The Prowler]

Trump was able to say what he wanted in regards to the election being stolen just as you can yell fire in a crowded theater. The system allows free speech and then punishes later if the speech incited others to hurt or be hurt.

I feel like you think the MAGA crowd alone is to blame for defending free speech but not with great responsibility while ignoring all sides are guilty of this. As when the left claims those on the right are racists and nazis or not referring to them by their preferred pronoun or giving them a living wage is an equivalent to violence against them.

This is where we part ways. If I ask you to call me "they" and you don't, then I say not only are you being violent against me by not acknowledging me wanting to be known as "they", but you are also putting in danger everyone of those like me who wishes to be "they", because everyone who hears you not acknowledging me as "they" are influenced bots instead of human beings with human being brains.

This is where the influenced bot line comes back. Because if that's all we are then maybe we should police speech? But I think we are better than that.

If you didn't call me "they" and someone beat my ass, do you think I should be able to hold you accountable for your free speech and opinion? Scarily enough, I think you do.

If doctors tell people to lose weight, like they always have done, and people start beating the asses of overweight people, should we blame the doctors? And when all of society is obese and dying out of heart attacks, should we all rejoice that at least we didn't body shame, even for our own health? Getting more scary in here.

The guy who said, "Words are deeds.", either did everything he ever said he would do or he's a liar like me saying I'm going out to work in the garage and then have some beers while typing this up, instead.

Words are not deeds. Words are words. Deeds are deeds. Human beings who can think can tell the difference. (Dogs & cats can't). Words can inspire or inflame but they are not a defence to do dumb shit. Ever.

So in your eyes if someone doesn't use preferred pronouns they are guilty of perpetrating violence while in my eyes they are just giving their opinions.

If I didn't use your preferred pronoun and someone who heard me beat your ass, you would blame me. If you didn't use my preferred pronoun and someone who heard you beat my ass, I would blame the ass beater.

Because ultimately, the deed of having our ass beaten is far worse then allowing someone the freedom to say they want our ass to be beaten.

Do you concur?

In a perfect world no one would talk about beating asses but as imperfect as we are, we allow people to talk about ass beating because we should rely on thinking brains to do the thinking! Hot take, I know.

After a day of dealing with customers, you may appreciate the difference of the words where you say you want to beat their asses vs the deed of of just going to the gym and punching a bag instead of their actual asses.

If you want to police your own speech moreso than others and judge the free speech of others moreso than yourself, that's wonderful, but the first amendment has no care for such things.

If the people who wrote the first amendment thought like the dude who said words are deeds, they might have scared themselves right away from the simplistic grandeur of allowing expression of opinion without deference to being offended.

Whoosh!!!!

Duh.

Stay out of it, @Lily.

 

[Murdy]

Watching this dude trying to philosophize is mindnumpingly boring.

Whether or not it’s legal doesn’t defer from the fact that it’s a LIE.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Watching this dude trying to philosophize is mindnumpingly boring.

Whether or not it’s legal doesn’t defer from the fact that it’s a LIE.

You don't get it.

Trump isn't being charged because he said the election was stolen. He's being charged because he tried to seize voting machines.

And MAGA people on Jan 6 aren't being charged because they believed Trump when he said the election was stolen. They are being charged for breaking into congress.

Free speech & opinion is not problematic. Idiocy is.

You know the election being stolen is a lie. I know the election being stolen is a lie. But Trump still had the right to say it. Period. As free speech. As an opinion.

And those Proud Boys & Oath Keepers just like Antifa & BLM don't need a reason to do stupid shit but my lord, they will lay the blame on what happened or what someone said as a way to fuck free speech before admitting they are total fuck ups in the human being gene pool of life. Shame both sides can't come together & shed the idiots on the fringes.

THAT'S MY POINT.

 

[Seamajor]

For aidsman though he never reads anything.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Its just that some of us think Andy is a fucking moron. Understand?

 

[The Prowler]

Its

 

[Admin.]

O yoo hoo, Mr Oerdin, where has Kyle Filed all his slam dunk laws suits at?

@Oerdin So how many millions has Kyle won, so far?

 

[Admin.]

Trump was able to say what he wanted in regards to the election being stolen just as you can yell fire in a crowded theater. The system allows free speech and then punishes later if the speech incited others to hurt or be hurt.

I feel like you think the MAGA crowd alone is to blame for defending free speech but not with great responsibility while ignoring all sides are guilty of this. As when the left claims those on the right are racists and nazis or not referring to them by their preferred pronoun or giving them a living wage is an equivalent to violence against them.

This is where we part ways. If I ask you to call me "they" and you don't, then I say not only are you being violent against me by not acknowledging me wanting to be known as "they", but you are also putting in danger everyone of those like me who wishes to be "they", because everyone who hears you not acknowledging me as "they" are influenced bots instead of human beings with human being brains.

This is where the influenced bot line comes back. Because if that's all we are then maybe we should police speech? But I think we are better than that.

If you didn't call me "they" and someone beat my ass, do you think I should be able to hold you accountable for your free speech and opinion? Scarily enough, I think you do.

If doctors tell people to lose weight, like they always have done, and people start beating the asses of overweight people, should we blame the doctors? And when all of society is obese and dying out of heart attacks, should we all rejoice that at least we didn't body shame, even for our own health? Getting more scary in here.

The guy who said, "Words are deeds.", either did everything he ever said he would do or he's a liar like me saying I'm going out to work in the garage and then have some beers while typing this up, instead.

Words are not deeds. Words are words. Deeds are deeds. Human beings who can think can tell the difference. (Dogs & cats can't). Words can inspire or inflame but they are not a defence to do dumb shit. Ever.

So in your eyes if someone doesn't use preferred pronouns they are guilty of perpetrating violence while in my eyes they are just giving their opinions.

If I didn't use your preferred pronoun and someone who heard me beat your ass, you would blame me. If you didn't use my preferred pronoun and someone who heard you beat my ass, I would blame the ass beater.

Because ultimately, the deed of having our ass beaten is far worse then allowing someone the freedom to say they want our ass to be beaten.

Do you concur?

In a perfect world no one would talk about beating asses but as imperfect as we are, we allow people to talk about ass beating because we should rely on thinking brains to do the thinking! Hot take, I know.

After a day of dealing with customers, you may appreciate the difference of the words where you say you want to beat their asses vs the deed of of just going to the gym and punching a bag instead of their actual asses.

If you want to police your own speech moreso than others and judge the free speech of others moreso than yourself, that's wonderful, but the first amendment has no care for such things.

If the people who wrote the first amendment thought like the dude who said words are deeds, they might have scared themselves right away from the simplistic grandeur of allowing expression of opinion without deference to being offended.

I am always amazed at the lengths you are willing to go to be boring.




PS, have you been taking stultifying writing classes from Dove?