What a ridiculously narcissistic misogynistic viewpoint.

I feel so sorry for your wife, who I imagine you must jab at constantly for making you such a constant and complete loser. She must feel so loved and appreciated, knowing how you feel, that she's nothing but a leech on your life, only taking never giving....in fact giving you nothing while taking from you...everything.- Leonidas

My marriage is nearing 23 years. It was a definite win win for me, and my wife seems to feel the same. We've both carried the other in hard times, and as importantly enjoyed the good times together as a team.

The fact that you've only attracted women with nothing to lose and nothing to offer says a lot more about you than it does about women.

Correct.

I am more worried about murder than property damage.

Do you wish to represent the opposing viewpoint?

I understand, it would be almost impossible. I just don't want to remove that chance. I respect your viewpoint though.

We aren't going to agree on this.

Like I said, I can't find all the videos because people are taking them down as fast as they go up, but it wasn't just some random person who fired, it was someone in the crowd that came after him for defending the store. These were not peaceful protesters, they were violent and had already attacked him before he fired, first with pepper spray and then charging and throwing an unidentified object at him that many thought was a molotov cocktail until it was later found to be something else.

If you think I am being deluded, so be it. But I did the best I could to show you as much evidence that I could find that he isn't just a gun vigilante that opened fire for no reason. You can't seem to move from your viewpoint that he is. Sorry.

His "the other side of the argument" comment leads me to believe this movement is to mock the concept that opposing viewpoints are different but credible. Somehow I have a feeling he only applies this to viewpoints that oppose liberal positions.

Once again, you ignore fact to spread dishonest propaganda.

This sure looks more like idiot right wing man took his daughter into an Antifa crowd to start a fight he wanted recorded.....again....and repeatedly abandoned his daughter in the process of trying to start fights for the camera.
Who waded into the opposing crowd with their "I hate you" messages? Who is dressed for battle? Who has a metal weapon? Who tried to hit multiple others with that weapon first?

Why don't we see the instigation, only the response? That's obvious to those with a brain....because right wing moron intentionally started a physical fight with a crowd with his child present.

What happens if you wear an AOC shirt at a Patriot Prayer rally? Or an "i hate Trump and the right" shirt? Far worse than this every time.


Republicans now happily include the KKK, Bob. Democrats abandoned racism in the 60's when the Republicans turned to it for survival.
They gladly courted the American racists to get Trump "elected", and for 3 years now have furthered the racist agenda....and you love it...you continuously call it winning.
Democrats denounce Antifa, Republicans say the KKK are good people, patriotic Americans, and gladly welcome in the Republican party, even as representatives.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

You know every word of this, but disingenuously spread totally dishonest and divisive propaganda like you get paid in rubles.
So dishonest and dumb, Bob. You don't convince a single person to adopt your dishonest viewpoint with this lame propaganda.

I'm all for immigration. Can someone please explain to me why flaunting the rules of the state regarding who can and cannot enter and stay in the country is a positive thing? I understand that the proper process to promote my "more is better" viewpoint on immigration - petitioning my representatives, organizing politically, running for office, etc. - is slow, difficult, maybe broken. But isn't this democracy? Aren't we giving up on a representative democracy when we promote not just the tolerance of, but defense and support of, illegal actions? Isn't the right way, even if it's the hard way, changing the laws?

The vertical axis of the graph at 0:45 is fake news.

No mention of import tariffs and border walls - easily the dumbest Trump presidential ideas from an economic viewpoint.
The tax cut for the rich is in the same league, but I dont think he promised that, he snuck it in under the radar mostly.

Most of the other "failures" are just nonsense claims or the POTUS has no power over them, it was just stupid to make such claims. Or maybe it was clever in an evil way.

Regarding population control I lay a lot of hope on self driving cars - if they become intelligent enough to actually drive in traffic they might realize at that point that if they kill 9/10ths of the population the traffic will become much more bearable and easier to navigate.

The new lower standard....which was exponentially higher than the standard set by either the previous or subsequent president?
Do you not know how lowering standards works? To set a new low, you have to be worse than others.

8 years and Obama never had to hire a lawyer, not one indictment with the republicans frothing at the mouth daily over....well, obviously nothing, for all 8 years.
Trump, at 1.8 years in had 89 indictments and already 24 convictions (more now, 36 guilty pleas for Republican Mueller's investigation alone) with Republicans in FULL CONTROL (and he still couldn't get wall funding, Muslim bans, or kill the ACA, and barely even got his deficit exploding tax cut for millionaires).
Bush had 16 indictments, all convictions, and until Trump was considered our dumbest, most incompetent president...not anymore.

Every time you spout this kind of asinine brain dead stupidity, I will be here to save you with some fact. Claiming Obama set a new low standard means you have absolutely no grasp on reality, as it's simply embarrassingly wrong and easy to debunk factually. By every standard imaginable (morally, ethically, in civility, rationality, directionality, ability, honesty, FIDELITY, respect, etc.) he was and remains not just head and shoulders above Trump, he's miles above Trump and well above W.

It's very sad your baseless irrational hatred taints your viewpoint so thoroughly you would think that nonsense would fly....but since you just proudly flew a Q flag there, it's clear you're too far gone for fact or history to matter a whit.
Q=batshit crazy conspiracy nuts akin to flat earthers and breathairians, 100% worthy of shunning before they pull out a gun in your pizza place looking for child sex slaves, illuminati, and lizard people.
Just when I think you can't sink lower, you surprise me every time.

Btw, thanks to numerous states making releasing your tax returns mandatory to be on the ballot, Trump's 2020 chances are quickly becoming slim to none....hard to win if you aren't on the ballot, harder to win when it's shown you're a complete fraud and tax cheat.

I was thinking it must only work in one direction, but you have a point, it seems to work best from only one single point. I wonder if it could be designed to work from any viewpoint. Somebody get Watson working on it....he might have to design holographic tile printing first.
Still a *quality idea.

Oh yeah... the crows.
Well, not SPOT on, but I certainly agree with him about the olden-tyme authors. Don't be such an asshole that you can't even read an outmoded viewpoint without exploding. And if you are, don't guarantee your kids are too, by banning the books.

Sorry to hear that. As I have mentioned before (in a couple of different posts), I also grew up in a household that was deeply troubled and violent. My grandfather was a wonderful man when sober, unfortunately he was more often than not inebriated.

I experienced multiple styles of punishment, depending on the situation. If my grandfather was drunk, he was like as not to hit me. I still have a physical reminder of that method, in that he broke my nose once. I too learned to be elsewhere when he was drunk and to fear that version of my grandfather.

In times when he was sober, or when my grandmother was able (she suffered from MS), I received spankings. I learned that if I did not do certain things, I would not get spankings. So I stopped doing those things.

Same in school, I used to be a little shithead, very sarcastic and mean. I quickly learned that if I did things against other kids, I would get a paddling. The paddling didn't actually hurt that much, but the knowledge that other kids knew I was getting swats was very effective in making me stop acting out.

Later, as I became close to 18, both the school and my grandparents moved to a more hands off style. The school because, even in Texas, people were trying to get schools to stop using corporal punishment. My grandparents because they were older, sicker, and I was larger. My grandfather basically told me that I was close enough to being a man that I was going to make my own mistakes and he wasn't going to bail me out from them. I still got punished after the fact, but it wasn't physical.

Maybe I am an outlier, but that period was probably when I was the most wild. I got in trouble with the law, made terrible decisions, and probably would have done some serious time but for the guiding principles of my eventual wife when we started dating. I feel that if my grandparents and the school had been more strict during that time, I might have not had as many close calls as I did.

In any case, I would say that both of our experiences with earlier punishment would be taking it to the abuse level. I feel that corporal punishment, justly applied, is still better than not doing it. Fortunately we all can have our own opinion on the topic, so I can understand your viewpoint as well.

As far as the screwdriver, I wouldn't use it because it is completely ineffective. However, if I did not have a lug wrench and had a tool that could apply the proper force (say a crescent wrench or lockjaw pliers) I would use that tool.

Yeah, the bad thing about the entire situation is it seems the facts vary wildly depending on who you go with. I guess just like any statistic analysis with such a charged subject, people probably alter the methodology of getting the information to support their viewpoint. I found super low stats and higher ones, so I tried to go with the ones that seemed to have the least reason to alter the stats. Maybe they are wrong, I can't say.

Same for Dr. Ford, I can only go off my personal take on it. She seemed credible until I read the letter from her Ex, but maybe he lied or was a plant by the Republicans. I certainly can't go by her polygraph since I agree with everyone so far that they are pretty much junk science as you said. I'm torn, but like I mentioned, I am still leaning towards her account being false. I might be totally wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.

The worst thing is that no one here really won except Kavanaugh. The Republicans are going to take a hit in years of coming elections, the Democrats are stuck with a conservative majority court, Dr. Ford is going to be praised or vilified depending on individual opinion, and we as a nation look like we are ready to basically go to war with one another over our political split. We look dumber than ever to the rest of the world and I don't see a quick resolution in sight.

It isn't as rare as you think. There are numerous accounts of false accusations that don't make it as far as court or they do and the accused choose to take a plea versus chancing half their life.

Brent E. Turvey, a criminologist, wrote a 2017 book that dispels this notion. His research, and that of two co-authors, cited statistical studies and police crime reports. One academic study showed that as many as 40 percent of sexual assault charges are false. Mr. Turvey wrote that the FBI in the 1990s pegged the falsity rate at 8 percent for rape or attempted rape complaints.

“There is no shortage of politicians, victims’ advocates and news articles claiming that the nationwide false report for rape and sexual assault is almost nonexistent, presenting a figure of around 2 percent,” writes Mr. Turvey, who directs the Forensic Criminology Institute. “This figure is not only inaccurate, but also it has no basis in reality. Reporting it publicly as a valid frequency rate with any empirical basis is either scientifically negligent or fraudulent.”

A recent study supports this assessment. The Pentagon issues an annual report on sexual assaults in the military. Nearly one-quarter of all cases last year were thrown out for lack of evidence, according to a report released in May.

As far as the rape every 98 seconds, I am unsure where you found that number. There were 95,730 rapes under the revised FBI definitions (which include more categories that previously were not considered rape, like child molestion, under the legacy definitions) in the last year I could find which was 2016. These are the combined rapes of men, women, and children for that year. That means the actual rape of a 'person' is occurring somewhere around every 5-6 minutes. Now if you are going by a different statistic, like the CDC ones that include such a wide definition of what constitutes 'rape' that it isn't funny, you might get the result you quoted. I wouldn't go by those stats, even TIME magazine had to call out the CDC for overstating the numbers.

As far as Trump goes, he is a complete idiot dickhead. He shouldn't have insulted anyone, least of all Dr. Ford. I will point out one thing though, and this is subjective in that your viewpoint will differ from mine, Dr. Ford is an alleged rape survivor. She has made the claim and took a polygraph test, but other than that she can only claim that in her recollection she was at a party where Brett Kavanaugh was also at supposedly. She also claimed to be heavily intoxicated. If you want to believe her Ex, she has lied in her testimony. (https://heavy.com/news/2018/10/christine-ford-boyfriend-ex-letter-blasey/) Heavy leans left, so this isn't a bobknight cherry picking of information.

Now, why would she come forth and deal with all the negatives of making the claim? I guess that is the kicker, normally you would expect a person to really be telling the truth if they are going to be put through hell. I would put forward though that this was one of the most hotly contested confirmations for SCOTUS ever. Even more so than for Bork, and I remember that one clearly. In my opinion, far more than for Thomas. If you were adamantly opposed to a person sitting on the Supreme Court, had went to school with that person, and were willing to fall on your sword for your beliefs, you might do it.

In any case, that is just supposition on my part.

I like being at this place also, even though I am out numbered 5000:1 That's Ok. It my choice. I like @Newboy the best. He to is unswayable.


Does a vote come with obligatory reason?


I do not think it is a great song. Catchy yes, great no.

I do not need to by into the Men are pigs, bastards, slime, evil.

Men are men. We like beer, We like women. Some men go to far but most don't.

Some women go to far also. Most don't. Where is this catchy song?

So No I do not by into this political crap just because it's the in thing to do. This scale is tipping too far.


Society is full of opposites. Opinions and viewpoints is part of this.

If the girl was ugly would this even be posted or listen to, or given the time of day? Fair question. Would @RFlagg even watched it or hence post it? Maybe Maybe not but having a pretty woman playing a catchy song sure helps get looks and votes. Apparently it got your up and my down and so far 91 views on the sift.

In you honor I gave it an upvote.