Once again, the rank hypocrisy of the Dems clearly exposed
12,597 Views |
79 Replies |
Last: 5 mo ago by bearister
Are you mentally ill? I lost the bet? Do I need to draw you a road map with pictures?blungld said:How was that a weasel clause? I made no prediction about who would win the election. I predicted that if he was in office he would not be impeached or incapacitated and be gone by May. This all started when you insisted that he had stage 3 dementia or whatever, or that Biden was a shell and there just to get elected and pass presidency to Kamala directly after election. This was your argument and the reason you made the bet. Your bet wasn't who would win the election. I clarified what you meant, but did not weasel.bearlyamazing said:
Now that your weasel clause exempting you if Biden lost is out of the way, if I lose, I'm a man of my word. I took a break for 4 months. I can certainly handle one more.
But I am glad that you will admit you lost the bet. Does that mean you were wrong?
This is the last time I'll repeat this. My bet included two caveats. I said I didn't think he'd win the election but if he did, he wouldn't be in office a year past the date I posted the original bet at the end of May. You tried to eliminate the first part and say the second part was the only valid part of the bet. If Trump won, you would've used that weasel clause to say the second part was invalidated. Now you're trying to say the second part doesn't count and I already lost the bet. Are you mental?
I'll lose the bet if he's still in office at the end of May 2021, being propped up and carted around like Weekend at Bernie's. If so, I won't post for a month, as I promised. However, I am confident if Biden's not in office, you'll weasel your way out of it with an excuse and continue your patronizing, know it all drivel right through June and beyond, as always.
Exposed.
The difference between a right wing conspiracy and the truth is about 20 months.
It's funny to watch you not be able to follow basic logic.bearlyamazing said:Are you mentally ill? I lost the bet? Do I need to draw you a road map with pictures?blungld said:How was that a weasel clause? I made no prediction about who would win the election. I predicted that if he was in office he would not be impeached or incapacitated and be gone by May. This all started when you insisted that he had stage 3 dementia or whatever, or that Biden was a shell and there just to get elected and pass presidency to Kamala directly after election. This was your argument and the reason you made the bet. Your bet wasn't who would win the election. I clarified what you meant, but did not weasel.bearlyamazing said:
Now that your weasel clause exempting you if Biden lost is out of the way, if I lose, I'm a man of my word. I took a break for 4 months. I can certainly handle one more.
But I am glad that you will admit you lost the bet. Does that mean you were wrong?
This is the last time I'll repeat this. My bet included two caveats. I said I didn't think he'd win the election but if he did, he wouldn't be in office a year past the date I posted the original bet at the end of May. You tried to eliminate the first part and say the second part was the only valid part of the bet. If Trump won, you would've used that weasel clause to say the second part was invalidated. Now you're trying to say the second part doesn't count and I already lost the bet. Are you mental?
I'll lose the bet if he's still in office at the end of May 2021, being propped up and carted around like Weekend at Bernie's. If so, I won't post for a month, as I promised. However, I am confident if Biden's not in office, you'll weasel your way out of it with an excuse and continue your patronizing, know it all drivel right through June and beyond, as always.
Here are the EXACT words you wrote, cut and paste from YOUR original post: "If Biden is elected and is still serving as president at this time next year, I'll go into self-exile for a month and won't post till July 2021. Anyone else willing to take that bet on the other side?"
So YOUR bet has a first clause: "if Biden is elected"
That means the bet itself is contingent on that happening. It is not me weaseling out, it is literally taking the bet as you wrote it. Nonetheless, I would have accepted the bet if you wrote it without that clause and simply said "Biden will not be president on May 29, 2021." But again, that is NOT what YOU wrote.
If I make a bet and say, if the Niners are in the Super Bowl, I bet they will win. I am making no claim that they will be in the Super Bowl and the bet is contingent on them being in the Super Bowl. I don't lose the bet if they do not make it to the Super Bowl. Get it?
And, I did not say that I had already won the bet. I was speaking rhetorically with the expectations that I will win the bet trying to see if YOU were going to weasel out or say that you wrote something different.
The overall point here isn't actually who won the bet, but rather if you can stick to your word, if you acknowledge logic and reality, and if you see that the REASONS you made this bet to begin with were absolutely crazy. You believed that Biden was suffering from stage three dementia and that he was a shell and incapable of physically/mentally acting as president and was being used by the Dems and would pass the office to Kamala right after the election. It is the "reasoning" and beliefs you expressed that were ridiculous and that have been disproven and what I want to call out for you to learn from how you think and the sources you trust. The winning of the bet by me is about exposing your conspiracy thinking, and not some stupid arbitrary date and condition you threw out there as a really dumb bet.
How many times do you need to be shown you are wrong before you look at yourself?
The Bear will not quilt, the Bear will not dye!
So I see that as is the norm from the right-wing Trumpers who post on these boards, when asked a direct question or to stand behind their words, they either ignore, run away, change the subject, or get angry.BearForce2 said:
Exposed.
I asked you who you were and shared who I was first. Are you just going to ignore the question and keep posting random videos and memes, or are you able to answer the question and stand behind your words and the persona you inhabit on the internet? Just going to be another chicken poster hiding behind a handle and trolling?
The Bear will not quilt, the Bear will not dye!
Don't worry about him. He's nobody. He's not important on this board. He is not important in the real world. He's a nothing. Just a sad little snowflake crybaby MAGAt.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
Hi, thanks for sharing but please note I didn't ask, I'm not that curious about other's personal identities here. It's interesting that you're trying to predict who I am based on my posts. People with similar backgrounds and similar immutable characteristics can think differently about the world so I don't know what age, race, or college degree have to do with anything. Let's not talk about caustic antagonism unless you want to address your own "team" first. In the meantime, no one is making the country a better place by being on this board.blungld said:I am so curious. Would you say that you have a lot of friends? What type of person are you off the internet? Mind giving a basic description of yourself? Between 50-60 white male living in Sacramento area, Christian, divorced, didn't go to Cal...that kind of thing? I am so curious what kind of person has come to think the way you do and inhabit the type of internet person that you do. Are you really the same in real life as you are here? Does this caustic antagonism make you happy or do you really believe you are making some important points, changing minds, and making the country a better place? Or is this all a trolling hobby?BearForce2 said:You know that just getting mad and incredulous doesn't mean you are correct or making good points, right?blungld said:You know that just getting mad and incredulous doesn't mean you are correct or making good points, right?bearlyamazing said:
You stooges are pathetic. But what aboutism at it's finest.
We're talking about an impeachment trial and how the Dems have completely corrupted the political process.
You were called out on a whole list of things you have said that have been factually wrong. A good starting point would be to acknowledge that you were wrong, and maybe start a new conversation where you consider that those who were right might have something to offer. Maybe have a little humility and self-reflection rather than reaching for the outrage and insults as cover.
I think you'd find we are all really reasonable and ready to talk with anyone who is also reasonable and ready to talk. But that starts with you being able to see reality and admit when you're wrong.
You were called out on a whole list of things you have said that have been factually wrong. A good starting point would be to acknowledge that you were wrong, and maybe start a new conversation where you consider that those who were right might have something to offer. Maybe have a little humility and self-reflection rather than reaching for the outrage and insults as cover.
I think you'd find we are all really reasonable and ready to talk with anyone who is also reasonable and ready to talk. But that starts with you being able to see reality and admit when you're wrong.
I'll go first. I am mid-50s, white, former Christian now more of a secular Humanist, married for 25 years, three children, live in CT, successful business owner and creative, raised Republican but have been Democrat since my twenties, and Cal English grad from the 80s. My internet persona is maybe a little more preachy and forthcoming, but I am basically the same person in real life, considered a good listener, great advice giver, a person others turn to for counsel and wisdom, funny, and fiercely loyal to friends.
So who are you?
The difference between a right wing conspiracy and the truth is about 20 months.
That's pretty funny.Unit2Sucks said:
LOL found the obviously fake graphic from Citizen Free Press that duped our intrepid friend bearlyamazing early in the pandemic.
My cousin in TX sent me a graphic in April showing that early 2021 pneumonia deaths were much lower than in prior years, and contended that this meant normal pneumonia deaths were being classified as Covid solely for economic or political reasons.
When I pointed out that his chart COULD NOT support his assertion, he didn't bother to reply.
Here are the problems with his assertion:
1) The decline in pneumonia deaths begins long before any Covid deaths were reported in the US.
2) The shortfall in expected pneumonia deaths FAR exceeded the # of Covid deaths up until that point in time. I read the chart, and looked up Covid deaths. Big difference.
The question remained, why the aberrant shortfall in pneumonia deaths? But the answer was not "covid".
I do not know the source of the graphic, but it made me wonder if some right-wing hack was putting it out there as Fake News simply to get a million forwards and retweets - the MAGA crowd doesn't fact check much, don't use rationality much.
The green line is the next most recent year - maybe more people are getting the flu shot!
I imagine the rest of the red line, and this next year's line for 2021 will be even below the green and red.
bearlyamazing said:
I'll lose the bet if he's still in office at the end of May 2021, being propped up and carted around like Weekend at Bernie's. If so, I won't post for a month, as I promised.
OKAY FOLKS - YOU HEARD IT HERE.
BA is stating that Biden won't be President on June 1st.
If Biden is President on June 1st, BA takes a self imposed vacation.
This "exposure" only highlights the point (which House Managers made) that they had to recreate the Tweets from text based (non original Twitter graphical format) Trump Twitter Archive databases because Jack Dorsey and Twitter decided to ban Trump forever from their private forum, just like BearInsider occasionally bans users for similar bad behavior. Did you miss that explanation?BearForce2 said:
Exposed.
But, are you saying that Trump gets off because of a checkmark of this user "Jennifer Lynn Lawrence @JenLawrence21". Man, Shoen clearly had nothing and was grasping at straws.
You are one of my favorites, blungld.blungld said:
I am so curious. Would you say that you have a lot of friends? What type of person are you off the internet? Mind giving a basic description of yourself? Between 50-60 white male living in Sacramento area, Christian, divorced, didn't go to Cal...that kind of thing? I am so curious what kind of person has come to think the way you do and inhabit the type of internet person that you do. Are you really the same in real life as you are here? Does this caustic antagonism make you happy or do you really believe you are making some important points, changing minds, and making the country a better place? Or is this all a trolling hobby?
I'll go first. I am mid-50s, white, former Christian now more of a secular Humanist, married for 25 years, three children, live in CT, successful business owner and creative, raised Republican but have been Democrat since my twenties, and Cal English grad from the 80s. My internet persona is maybe a little more preachy and forthcoming, but I am basically the same person in real life, considered a good listener, great advice giver, a person others turn to for counsel and wisdom, funny, and fiercely loyal to friends.
So who are you?
By the way, I'm the 50-60 white male living in the Sacramento area.
Also, did not go to Cal, raised Republican and also Democrat since my 30's, more or less (period of Indep).
Wife from RI and we share 3-4 sets of grandparents from the 1600's in central CT. 5 children.
I, too, am curious about what type of people get all MAGAy. I have classified them as follows:
1. Rich and don't care about anything much beyond their 401k investments and the taxes that they pay.
2. Extreme partisanship simply from a Personal Identity standpoint. So tied up in being Republican that they simply cannot root for "dem cowboys" or (pick your own sports team affiliations adopted as a youth - for me it's Cal, because we always tailgated there as a youth when life seemed pure and good).
3. Racist, Low thinking - what Hillary called "The Deplorables". They take the time to think it through, and come up with deplorable conclusions.
4. Uneducated, Low information. I give a pass to the uneducated and those who work/paint/sail and simply don't take in the news as a life choice. There is always going to be that % of the population who are poorly aware.
5. Any combination of the above is possible and often is the case.
I imagine that your counterpart here represents more than 1 of the above categories, but certainly not #4.
Keep up the good work!
blungld said:I am so curious. Would you say that you have a lot of friends? What type of person are you off the internet? Mind giving a basic description of yourself? Between 50-60 white male living in Sacramento area, Christian, divorced, didn't go to Cal...that kind of thing? I am so curious what kind of person has come to think the way you do and inhabit the type of internet person that you do. Are you really the same in real life as you are here? Does this caustic antagonism make you happy or do you really believe you are making some important points, changing minds, and making the country a better place? Or is this all a trolling hobby?BearForce2 said:You know that just getting mad and incredulous doesn't mean you are correct or making good points, right?blungld said:You know that just getting mad and incredulous doesn't mean you are correct or making good points, right?bearlyamazing said:
You stooges are pathetic. But what aboutism at it's finest.
We're talking about an impeachment trial and how the Dems have completely corrupted the political process.
You were called out on a whole list of things you have said that have been factually wrong. A good starting point would be to acknowledge that you were wrong, and maybe start a new conversation where you consider that those who were right might have something to offer. Maybe have a little humility and self-reflection rather than reaching for the outrage and insults as cover.
I think you'd find we are all really reasonable and ready to talk with anyone who is also reasonable and ready to talk. But that starts with you being able to see reality and admit when you're wrong.
You were called out on a whole list of things you have said that have been factually wrong. A good starting point would be to acknowledge that you were wrong, and maybe start a new conversation where you consider that those who were right might have something to offer. Maybe have a little humility and self-reflection rather than reaching for the outrage and insults as cover.
I think you'd find we are all really reasonable and ready to talk with anyone who is also reasonable and ready to talk. But that starts with you being able to see reality and admit when you're wrong.
I'll go first. I am mid-50s, white, former Christian now more of a secular Humanist, married for 25 years, three children, live in CT, successful business owner and creative, raised Republican but have been Democrat since my twenties, and Cal English grad from the 80s. My internet persona is maybe a little more preachy and forthcoming, but I am basically the same person in real life, considered a good listener, great advice giver, a person others turn to for counsel and wisdom, funny, and fiercely loyal to friends.
So who are you?
That was going to be a tough act to follow! At least honestly. You might've made it seem a little more approachable by including some flaws or weaknesses. I don't know... " ... Occasionally I have been known to pick my nose and then eat the boogers, while on important zoom calls ... "
What part of "I am going to hell - heathen" did you not read?Big C said:blungld said:
I am ... former Christian
That was going to be a tough act to follow! At least honestly. You might've made it seem a little more approachable by including some flaws or weaknesses. I don't know... " ... Occasionally I have been known to pick my nose and then eat the boogers, while on important zoom calls ... "
I don't know what "Pneunomia" is but that's not an accurate chart of Pneumonia deaths. This is exactly the sort of "data" that people like bearlyamazing and hanky love to quote without having any idea or caring whether it makes any sense. Here's Alex Berenson misleading his sheep in April of last year and one of the responses was this dumb chart.concordtom said:That's pretty funny.Unit2Sucks said:
LOL found the obviously fake graphic from Citizen Free Press that duped our intrepid friend bearlyamazing early in the pandemic.
My cousin in TX sent me a graphic in April showing that early 2021 pneumonia deaths were much lower than in prior years, and contended that this meant normal pneumonia deaths were being classified as Covid solely for economic or political reasons.
When I pointed out that his chart COULD NOT support his assertion, he didn't bother to reply.
Here are the problems with his assertion:
1) The decline in pneumonia deaths begins long before any Covid deaths were reported in the US.
2) The shortfall in expected pneumonia deaths FAR exceeded the # of Covid deaths up until that point in time. I read the chart, and looked up Covid deaths. Big difference.
The question remained, why the aberrant shortfall in pneumonia deaths? But the answer was not "covid".
I do not know the source of the graphic, but it made me wonder if some right-wing hack was putting it out there as Fake News simply to get a million forwards and retweets - the MAGA crowd doesn't fact check much, don't use rationality much.
The green line is the next most recent year - maybe more people are getting the flu shot!
I imagine the rest of the red line, and this next year's line for 2021 will be even below the green and red.
Here's a response showing why the chart was misleading:
Here's the most recent CDC chart showing % of deaths to pneumonia, flu and COVID, among other things. Denialists will only show you false or misleading data because they don't want to confront what is really going on. Or perhaps, there is money in it for the fakers like Alex Berenson that the anti-science crowd loves to listen to.
correction/add: because they don't understand facts, data.Unit2Sucks said:
Denialists will only show you false or misleading data because they don't want to confront what is really going on.
FYI to myself: PIC = Pneumonia and Influenza and Covid together
So the short answer is no you are not going to answer your question? Why not? Embarrassed by what you write? Like being anonymous? Afraid that if you describe yourself honestly it will show you to be a cliche or something you would not want to be judged by?BearForce2 said:
Hi, thanks for sharing but please note I didn't ask, I'm not that curious about other's personal identities here. It's interesting that you're trying to predict who I am based on my posts. People with similar backgrounds and similar immutable characteristics can think differently about the world so I don't know what age, race, or college degree have to do with anything. Let's not talk about caustic antagonism unless you want to address your own "team" first. In the meantime, no one is making the country a better place by being on this board.
You sure like to post big bold proclamations and like an internet tough guy, but then asked a personal question or held to any accounting, it's squeak squeak timid little mouse.
The Bear will not quilt, the Bear will not dye!
In a classic display of both beauty contest false humility and hamartia, I will add "I am just so giving, that sometimes there is nothing left for me."Big C said:blungld said:
I'll go first. I am mid-50s, white, former Christian now more of a secular Humanist, married for 25 years, three children, live in CT, successful business owner and creative, raised Republican but have been Democrat since my twenties, and Cal English grad from the 80s. My internet persona is maybe a little more preachy and forthcoming, but I am basically the same person in real life, considered a good listener, great advice giver, a person others turn to for counsel and wisdom, funny, and fiercely loyal to friends.
So who are you?
That was going to be a tough act to follow! At least honestly. You might've made it seem a little more approachable by including some flaws or weaknesses. I don't know... " ... Occasionally I have been known to pick my nose and then eat the boogers, while on important zoom calls ... "
He he. Weakness? How about this? I am too much an idealist and disappointed time and time again that most people are less principled and sort of okay with self-interest, greed, and out and out cheating. I naively believed the values I was told matter when I was a kid were true and enduring. I am no saint, but I have been burned several times in my life by sticking to my word or working to comprise when others did not. Much more an East Coast thing than a West Coast thing. My reward though, I guess, is being able to sleep at night (sometimes) and basically respecting myself.
Enough of the journal entries from me.
The Bear will not quilt, the Bear will not dye!
"You might've made it seem a little more approachable by including some flaws or weaknesses."
I did that in a job interview once:
Interviewer: "What would you say is your greatest weakness?"
bearister: "That I am too humble."
I did that in a job interview once:
Interviewer: "What would you say is your greatest weakness?"
bearister: "That I am too humble."
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
bearister said:
"You might've made it seem a little more approachable by including some flaws or weaknesses."
I did that in a job interview once:
Interviewer: "What would you say is your greatest weakness?"
bearister: "That I am too humble."
You didn't go with "perfectionist"
Unit2Sucks said:
He's not capable of having any credibility. He is shown a consistently warped understanding of current events and is unable to separate fact from fiction. I haven't watched either video he posted in this thread, but my assumption is that he's trying to compare something Maxine Waters did with something Donald Trump did. If Maxine waters incited a riot or insurrection to overthrow our government, she should be impeached and removed from office. She should face criminal charges. She hasn't done any of those things.
Likewise, I didn't read anything you just wrote but I assume you're wrong just because.
The difference between a right wing conspiracy and the truth is about 20 months.
BearForce2 said:Unit2Sucks said:
He's not capable of having any credibility. He is shown a consistently warped understanding of current events and is unable to separate fact from fiction. I haven't watched either video he posted in this thread, but my assumption is that he's trying to compare something Maxine Waters did with something Donald Trump did. If Maxine waters incited a riot or insurrection to overthrow our government, she should be impeached and removed from office. She should face criminal charges. She hasn't done any of those things.
Likewise, I didn't read anything you just wrote but I assume you're wrong just because.
Speaking of Maxine Waters....
The difference between a right wing conspiracy and the truth is about 20 months.
Certain customers are entitled to a refund. Just the institutional investors though, not Mom and Pop...BearForce2 said:BearForce2 said:Unit2Sucks said:
He's not capable of having any credibility. He is shown a consistently warped understanding of current events and is unable to separate fact from fiction. I haven't watched either video he posted in this thread, but my assumption is that he's trying to compare something Maxine Waters did with something Donald Trump did. If Maxine waters incited a riot or insurrection to overthrow our government, she should be impeached and removed from office. She should face criminal charges. She hasn't done any of those things.
Likewise, I didn't read anything you just wrote but I assume you're wrong just because.
Speaking of Maxine Waters....
But Trump's guilty of insurrection when he tells protestors to protest peacefully and patriotically?
Laughable.
Hey bearlyamazing - can you remind me again when armed Democrats stormed the capitol and tried to murder politicians at the behest of the democratic women that you hate so much? Oh that's right, it never happened.
What a pathetic argument. Even Moscow Mitch and Kevin McCarthy acknowledge the responsibility that Trump bears but maybe you just need to hear it from some of your fake news sources like Citizen Free Press or Epoch Times.
In other words, you can fool yourself and others like you but you won't fool us. We all saw what happened and know why it happened.
What a pathetic argument. Even Moscow Mitch and Kevin McCarthy acknowledge the responsibility that Trump bears but maybe you just need to hear it from some of your fake news sources like Citizen Free Press or Epoch Times.
In other words, you can fool yourself and others like you but you won't fool us. We all saw what happened and know why it happened.
Boy oh boy, BearFarce2 sure gets its rocks off when racism is mentioned.
Here's my RIGHT!
"Let go of me you thug. I'm not Asian!"
Here's my RIGHT!"Let go of me you thug. I'm not Asian!"
\The Hypocrats.
Unit2Sucks said:
Fair point, but the less smooth brained people were arguing the trial is unconstitutional because he was no longer in office and had been removed. Never mind the fact that some Republicans have been arguing they can still impeach Obama.
For God's sake, all you black mom's please raise your sons to be more like Clarence Thomas and nothing like Barack 👇Obama pic.twitter.com/SKtM7D928W
— Chicago1Ray 🇺🇸 (@Chicago1Ray) July 12, 2023
Don't let your kids grow up to be like Obama.
scratch a hypocrite and a liberal bleeds.148 Days Til No Joe said:BearForce2 said:
The Hypocrats.I say once again there is no group on the planet as hypocritical as liberals. https://t.co/CaQqNFy5vk
— Ajamu Baraka (@ajamubaraka) June 9, 2024
scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.
Liberal fascist?
I guess that makes you a genius moron.
I guess that makes you a genius moron.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
AunBear89 said:
Liberal fascist?
I guess that makes you a genius moron.
You strike me as a liberal fascist.
Featured Stories
See All
No. 20 Cal Stymies SMU
by Cal Athletics
No. 20 Cal Falls At Clemson
by Cal Athletics
Stojakovic Scores 30 in Loss at Clemson
by Cal Athletics
Novak Named Head Football Athletic Performance Coach
by Cal Athletics