Biden vs Trump 2020 - vote now and discuss!
Comments
-
-
I'm sitting this one out
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
I'm sitting this one out
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
I'm sitting this one out
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the "The T-1000 in the helicopter chasing after John, Sarah and Uncle Bob in the SWAT truck"-chase.Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
I'm sitting this one out
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
No more than you expressing adulation for Aaaaaaaaaahnold the Impregnator.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
Biden
sorry, but at this time in history, in america we do not have time for your purity test. we either vote biden, or trump wins again. i do not see what is so difficult to comprehend. you can't vote here, so do not shame the rest of us for trying to improve our country.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?Post edited by Kat on"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
Biden
Exactly. Well said.gimmesometruth27 said:
sorry, but at this time in history, in america we do not have time for your purity test. we either vote biden, or trump wins again. i do not see what is so difficult to comprehend. you can't vote here, so do not shame the rest of us for trying to improve our country.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?I LOVE MUSIC.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com0 -
I'm sitting this one out
When did I ever put up a purity test?gimmesometruth27 said:
sorry, but at this time in history, in america we do not have time for your purity test. we either vote biden, or trump wins again. i do not see what is so difficult to comprehend. you can't vote here, so do not shame the rest of us for trying to improve our country.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
I'm sitting this one out
Again, are you deflecting?Halifax2TheMax said:
No more than you expressing adulation for Aaaaaaaaaahnold the Impregnator.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?
My question stands:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
Biden
that is all you are doing. questioning us about voting for biden due to allegations against him. you are trying to impose some purity test on a potential leader of a country that you do not live in. you are trying to call us hypocrites. you can opine all you want, but our priority is to get trump out of office. period.Spiritual_Chaos said:
When did I ever put up a purity test?gimmesometruth27 said:
sorry, but at this time in history, in america we do not have time for your purity test. we either vote biden, or trump wins again. i do not see what is so difficult to comprehend. you can't vote here, so do not shame the rest of us for trying to improve our country.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Kat and @Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
BidenClosed for review.Falling down,...not staying down0
-
I'm sitting this one out
By calling it a purity test, are you saying you'd still vote for Biden if it turns out to be true?gimmesometruth27 said:
sorry, but at this time in history, in america we do not have time for your purity test. we either vote biden, or trump wins again. i do not see what is so difficult to comprehend. you can't vote here, so do not shame the rest of us for trying to improve our country.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?Post edited by Kat on0 -
BidenAt worst we would survive a Biden presidency. At best, we would suffer untold horrors under a second Trump term. The decision on who to vote for is easy.
Post edited by brianlux on"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
BidenHave the Democrats officially cancelled their convention due to COVID?___________________________________________
"...I changed by not changing at all..."0 -
Biden
yeeeeeup.gimmesometruth27 said:
sorry, but at this time in history, in america we do not have time for your purity test. we either vote biden, or trump wins again. i do not see what is so difficult to comprehend. you can't vote here, so do not shame the rest of us for trying to improve our country.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. When have I opposed anything against Julian Assange?Halifax2TheMax said:
Only if you promise to stop posting gifs and referencing that slime ball Aaaaaaahnold?Spiritual_Chaos said:
I don't see how anything has changed?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because you did for Julian Asstrange who was "credibly" accused of rape. What has changed in the past year for you?Spiritual_Chaos said:
You are still not making sense.Halifax2TheMax said:
Point out anyone saying he (Biden) has been found guilty in court? Was that really too difficult for you to understand?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Not seeing the point you are trying to make.Halifax2TheMax said:
What’s changed? From the Julian Assange thread:Spiritual_Chaos said:mrussel1 said:
1. "out of respect for the senator" means she respects the senator. It's the same statement. In English, there isn't a different, it's just a sentence construct.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Her mother said "out of respect for" and not "because she respects him".mrussel1 said:
I said yesterday that this was the strongest corroboration, but it's still not evidence. Second, I don't understand how she respects him if he raped her. I asked you that twice and you haven't helped me square thatSpiritual_Chaos said:
@Halifax2TheMax - you still stand by these posts?
@mrussel1 you still stand by Biden in this and that her accusations could just be about touching her neck?
Or am I wrong?
And I don't feel the need to go some "The T-800 before they turn on the switch that makes him being able to learn human behavior" level and question why and how a sexual assault victim did not behave in the way, you or I find "logical".
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why? A naked Arnold, before entering the bar and getting clothes, boots and a motorcycle would not understand that.
But an Arnold switch to learn how humans work, I reckon would.
Should be noted again that YOU M. Ruseel yourself has said that at this time in history being a woman and being called "nothing but an oral sex machine" or whatever Bloomberg had said to women around him during the late 80s/early 90s -- but was anything out of the ordinary. That is how men were joking, or whatever you defended him with.
Now delve into that culture a bit more, and put yourself in a woman's shoes being in that world. Just look at Anita Hill. Then look at Biden during the Anita Hill hearings. Then back at Anita Hill again.
Seems there is.
Not to go inside Taras head and trying to figure out what happened between her telling her mom and mom talking and perheps condensing things about it on the phone with Larry King -- but out of respect for, I could imagine could be about destroying his life, destroying his job as a senator, causing problems for him and his family etc.
And also, you did not respond:
My friends teenage sister got sexually assaulted at a party, and decided not to file charges because it would stir things up among their group of friends and she felt she would be responsible for causing a lot of problems for everyone involved -- even with her being a victim. Now tell me - why?
Why should I point out anyone saying Biden has been found guilty in court?
Neither has been found guilty in court to my knowledge.
What is your point?
Please make sense. Or I will have to mute you (1 out of the limit of 5). This takes time. Cut to the chase.
Because a year ago, you were opposed to trying Julian Asstrange on social media for the very credible allegation of rape. Now that its Sleepy Woke Joe, you're trying to hang him without any semblance of due process. I'm asking you why one and not the other?
And you still haven't answered my question about whether I could walk into a police station in Stockholm or anywhere else in Sweden and make an allegation of sexual assault, 8, 12 or 27 years after the alleged incident.
2. I don't know the statute of limitation on sexual assault in Sweden.
My question to you is - how much shame should a person feel for carrying water on internet forum for and "if the glove don't fit acquit-defending a person who's by all probable accounts is a "slime ball" and sexual assaulter instead of just admitting it is highly probable but seeing reasons to vote for the slime ball sexual assaulter anyway?Post edited by Kat onwww.myspace.com0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 278 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help