search results matching tag: straws

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (96)     Sift Talk (4)     Blogs (8)     Comments (894)   

New Rule: Make America Grind Again

eoe says...

Wow. I knew I was going to hate this, but man, Bill Maher's such an asshole. He's sitting there, with his now perpetually smug face, and trying to excuse his own toxic masculinity. I'm happy he can 0wn a bunch of straw men.

Also, it sounds like he wants to fuck Zelenskyy. Don't project your own insecurity, dude.

NOT GUILTY

newtboy says...

Lol. Is that what I said, or a ridiculous straw man you’re setting up to knock down?

Your fact free ilk are the decimation of a democracy that lasted over two centuries. Putting party above patriotism, principal, and phact (misspelled for alliterative purposes).

Yes, I watched some, and the trial isn’t the only source of info. I posted the video of him drinking and flashing white power signs. His own recorded actions are proof enough.
Here it is again…..



No bob, I’m talking about you, you are the one whining that the media isn’t unbiased and in the same breath posting insanely biased, partisan, fact free nonsense you call news….and god damn it it’s you’re - you are…not your - belonging to you….not yore - in ancient times . Learn English comrade. Patriots know their native tongue. What language DO you know, Bobski? Is it Russian or Mandarin?

bobknight33 said:

So My audience is larger than CNN, MSNBC etc. I know they have shit ratings but still bigger than me.

So you watched this trial ?
You saw what happened?
You know this kid is radicalized?
You know he is a trump nut case?

And you facts came from where? Your ass?

Edit:
"fact free hyper partisan nonsense and bemoan a lack of unbiased truth!? " Your talking about those no fact media outlets, not me

US sues to block TX abortion law

newtboy says...

Jane you ignorant slut…..MY tangent straw men!?! Lol!!! You mean like how many ultrasound techs I’ve known!? Or what my personal hands on experience is….as if one can only have an opinion on abortion or knowledge of the stages of development if they are ultrasound techs. Aaaaaahahahaha. That must be good meth.
Ok, here….again…. Illiterate Fool: you aren’t so blatantly hypocritical that you are both anti choice and anti mandatory vaccination, are you?

No one said it makes one a doctor besides you. Another paper tiger you set up for yourself. It’s not clever, you aren’t “winning”, you need your Ritalin.

My degree is general science, so I’m actually qualified to answer general science questions like this one. What’s your degree in again?

Bob, if you won’t or can’t read, there’s no point repeating myself again….Your question, replete with grammatical errors, was answered multiple times above. Reading comprehension is obviously not a strong suit for you.

In short, my hands on knowledge is decades of science education well beyond biology, necessarily including basic medical education (like topics like this), a continuing curiosity about how things work that keeps me up to date on most mainstream science including medical breakthroughs and quackery like your arguments, and ties to the Stanford medical community because my mother edited all their publications for decades, forwarding me the most interesting advancements they made, often before they were published.

Now, again I ask…what’s your personal experience on this topic? I’m absolutely certain it’s less, there’s no way an 8th grade dropout works in medicine. You have no experience and no education, no understanding, no knowledge at all, just what bubba dun told you down to da boars nest.

It’s what there is at 6 weeks. The whole thing is less than a newt in the egg, no limbs, 1/2 the size of a pea….the heart isn’t formed at all. Get someone to read for you, watch a film, this isn’t hard info to find if you remove your head from your anus. Look at real medical sites, not anti abortion propaganda sites, they lie, exaggerate, and obfuscate.

bobknight33 said:

What was you question of me? One gets tired of you tangent straw man arguments and can get lost in you incoherent gibberish.



Also reading some books and tagging along with you mom at the hospital does not make you a Doctor or any medical official.



Your medical degree is in what?
Bullshitology?



Yet you haven't responded to this simple question...

So AGAIN

Elitist Tool:
What actual hands on knowledge you you fucking have about this topic?


Or is this you response...
You saw a 6 week old cell clusters twitch ..


Was this a YouTube or your spent jizz left in the fridge as a "scientific" study?

US sues to block TX abortion law

bobknight33 says...

What was you question of me? One gets tired of you tangent straw man arguments and can get lost in you incoherent gibberish.



Also reading some books and tagging along with you mom at the hospital does not make you a Doctor or any medical official.



Your medical degree is in what?
Bullshitology?



Yet you haven't responded to this simple question...

So AGAIN

Elitist Tool:
What actual hands on knowledge you you fucking have about this topic?


Or is this you response...
You saw a 6 week old cell clusters twitch ..


Was this a YouTube or your spent jizz left in the fridge as a "scientific" study?

newtboy said:

An aside. One you can’t answer?

I had already responded to your last. Has wittle Bobby lost his uneducated dishonest voice? It would be more productive to debate science with Jethro Clampet.

You’re in rare form today, can’t keep track of your own arguments, of who hasn’t answered who, of what your standard is.



So I’ll ask again, without a hint of changing the subject but as a separate side question that only takes a yes or no from you, you aren’t so blatantly hypocritical that you are both anti choice and anti mandatory vaccination, are you?

..then you can get back to not responding to my last question…If you are implying I I should shut the fuck up because (you assume) I have no first hand experience seeing 6 week old cell clusters twitch, why are you talking about anything?

US sues to block TX abortion law

bobknight33 says...

Any Tech knows when there is a heart beat( except those in training or just out of school).
And they will tell you it occurs around 6 to 10 weeks. Fully developed or not a beat is a beat.

When finger develop they are stubs but still they are fingers.

Techs are not Drs but they relay 100% on what the tech say and write.

Not talking about Techs giving a treatment plan ( straw man argument).
Techs report and Dr give treatment options.
( hence high malpractice insurance costs).
Dr may edit and add to the report. IF they spot an error then can edit.



So you mom dragged yo to work and you somehow you became as knowledgeable at them.

My sister used to be a butcher and brought her daughter to work often. This does not make the daughter a butcher or even remotely knowledgeable of the subject.

You bringing up the many any many DR yo u met is irreverent to the argument.


So reading a book makes you more knowledgeable than the ones who see for themself day in day and day out.
( bet you supplement this with lots of YouTube's)

{{If I listen to lots and lots of music and read a few books This will make you smarter than an actual song writer? }} Good logic bud.



Elitist Tool:
What actual hands on knowledge do you fucking have about this topic?

newtboy said:

If people who see it daily call it a heart beat, then clearly reading a book is better, because you can't get a heart beat without a heart, and a valveless, chamberless tube isn't a heart.

Jebus. Double negative and heart best? Are you drunk?

I do think +-90% of them know, 10% believe they hear a heart beat because they can now detect a faint nerve signal, but no heart. That 10% are fooling themselves to avoid contradicting their beliefs with fact.

What bubble? Did I say they didn't? That doesn't make them doctors. Lab techs do the same...mri techs, even x-Ray techs in some places. Would you let a tech determine your treatment plan, or even diagnose you without a real doctor involved? They aren't even nurses, they know how to run the machine and spot certain results for further investigation/treatment. The doctors review and often edit the reports. If a report of a 6 week pregnancy talked about the heart, that tech would be let go for incompetence. There is no heart.

Dumb fuck, you asked me how many I've talked to. I answered. Now you act like I brought it up to say I know some, so I am one?! Are you on meth?

Mom worked at Texas Children's hospital and Methodist hospital in Houston, so yes, those specialists and many many many more, and being curious I asked them lots of questions.

Because my mom worked at a childrens hospital means I knew sonographers and ultrasound techs, there's a difference, which was your question. Jesus, you're like Ritalin kid from smoking aces....to yourself you're fighting this amazing fight with spinning kicks and flips so amazing it gets you hard, but to everyone else you're flailing wildly and are just annoying, not a dangerous opponent to be feared or respected.

US sues to block TX abortion law

newtboy says...

If people who see it daily call it a heart beat, then clearly reading a book is better, because you can't get a heart beat without a heart, and a valveless, chamberless tube that doesn't pump isn't a heart. If you look at a straw day in and day out and you start to see it as a heart, actually seeing it is worse. If you go to school and say you see the heart at 6 weeks, you fail.

Jebus. Double negative and heart best? Are you drunk?

I do think +-90% of them know, 10% believe they hear a heart beat because they can now detect a faint nerve signal, but no heart. That 10% are fooling themselves to avoid contradicting their beliefs with medical fact.

What bubble? Did I say they didn't? That doesn't make them doctors. Lab techs do the same...mri techs, even x-Ray techs in some places. Would you let a tech determine your treatment plan, or even diagnose you without a real doctor involved? They aren't even nurses, they know how to run the machine and spot certain results for further investigation/treatment. The doctors review and often edit the reports. If a report of a 6 week pregnancy talked about the heart, that tech would be let go for incompetence. There is no heart.

Dumb fuck, you asked me how many I've talked to. I answered, with an explanation of why I’ve met many. Now you act like I brought it up to say I know some, so I am one?! Are you on meth?

Mom worked at Texas Children's hospital and Methodist hospital in Houston, so yes, those specialists and many many many more, and being curious I asked them lots of questions.

Because my mom worked at a childrens hospital means I knew sonographers and ultrasound techs, there's a difference, which was your question. Jesus, you're like Ritalin kid from smoking aces....to yourself you're fighting this amazing fight with spinning kicks and flips so amazing it gets you hard, but to everyone else you're flailing wildly and are just annoying, not a dangerous opponent to be feared or respected.


bobknight33 said:

Reading a book and actually seeing the development day in and day out are NOT the same.

You don't think Ultrasound sonographers don't know what a heart best is?

Hate to burst you bubble. These techs scan , write up the report and tell the Dr. The techs also determine the age of development and also the estimate of due date. They also tell tell the Dr if you have a still born. The Dr then tells the patient.

The Dr reviews the report and look at the images if needed.

You mom worked at the hospital and you met a lot of doctors. That does not make you a DR nor you mom. Also were these
OB/GYN doctors
Rad Doctors
Oncology Doctors
Cardiac Doctors


Just because you mom work at a hospital doesn't mean much.

Try again tool boy.

TX law & tattoos

Anom212325 says...

Legally its not, you just have to look at the punishment to see that. legality aside, killing another innocent human being is murder. I'm just calling it for what it is and not hiding behind a legal term.

"TX can execute them. If the doctor and staff that performed the termination are known and enter TX they are murderers also. They can be killed by the state, too." When did I say that ? Your grasping at straws now. You know the legal consequences of those actions in Texas.

Definition
Murder: the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another

noseeem said:

Now it's not so easy.

Even TX recognizes women can terminate a pregnancy. They just decided to game the system to make it difficult to obtain in TX.

It's not murder.

But - in your mind - if mother and daughter drive to another state, one of them have the procedure, then returned, the daughter and mother, are now murderers. TX can execute them. If the doctor and staff that performed the termination are known and enter TX they are murderers also. They can be killed by the state, too.

Nope. Not that easy.

Because it is not murder.

Let this guy make that case: https://tinyurl.com/ma4sjz3v

Thanks for your honesty. And responding. So many just spout and run out.

Viral How Much Did Your Divorce Cost

scheherazade says...

"What on earth are you talking about?"
-newt

The rules for property and income when one or both parties decide they no longer want to be in the relationship.




"not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives"
-newt

Incorrect. If you are on birth certificate, you have the same rights and obligations.
The only pitfalls are that :
- Child support is calculated from the income of the parent with less custody (rather than from the true cost of raising a child).
- Women almost always get custody if the choice is between two parents (like when they live far apart and child can only be at one or the other).



"and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first"
-newt

Negative. Co-parenting does not conflate property.

Shared assets when not married are divided either by percentage of purchase price contribution, or by percentage stated in a contract.




"My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas"
-newt

"My brother won."
-newt

Won by your own definition. Hence I congratulate.




"You assume women take off time to raise the kids"
-newt

No assumptions. Although afaik they still do it more often.




"You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. "
-newt

Top result from a zero effort google of "men working hours vs women working hours"

https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041




"Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that"
-newt

I admit that women [as a group] under 35 out earn men under 35 because of preferential admittance (such as to higher education) and preferential hiring (such as to managerial positions).

I did not say that women earn more in the same position for the same hours worked. Young men are simply getting shut out of opportunities, so their incomes are lower. As by design.

It does however highlight how affirmative action is being poorly controlled.
The target statistic is based on overall population at all ages.
The adjustment is skewed to younger ages (school admission is typically for younger people).
So the system is trying to balance out incomes of older men by trimming up incomes of younger women, with no accounting for the effects on younger men or consequences of older men retiring.
The situation is doomed to overshoot with time.

A natural result is the popularity of people like Jordan Peterson, with messages like : "Young men, nobody will help you, stop waiting for someone to help you, stop lamenting your situation, you gotta pull yourself up by your boot straps. Start by cleaning your room, then go make something of yourself".






"Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk[etc]" -scheherazade "
-newt

Straw man argument.

You know I stated that those marriageability criteria exist specifically due to risk of consequences of divorce.

I never stated that I have personal issues with those attributes.
I have dated women on that list. I didn't /marry/ them.

My only criteria for a relationship that I am happy being in is :
- We are mutually attracted
- We like each other
- We are nice to each other
I don't care what your religion is, your politics, your family status, whatever. It's all just noise to me.





" And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are?"
-newt

Prenups can be negated by these simple words :

"I did not understand what I was signing"
or
"My lawyer was not present".

Poof. Prenup thrown out.




"their husbands are more likely to break their vows first"
-newt

A woman to cheat needs a willing man (easy)
A man to cheat needs a willing woman (hard)

Times have changed. Online dating made chatting someone up in person and make an impression uncommon, and even considered creepy/unusual. Now people are picked on their online profile based on looks/height/social-media-game.

Dating apps and sites publish their statistics. Nowadays, around 20% of men match with around 80% of women.
Most men aren't having sex. Most men can't find a match to cheat with if they wanted to.

The tall cute photogenic guys are cleaning up.
The 20% of men that match the bulk of women are going through women like a mill. They will smash whatever bored housewife crosses their path.

A 2 second google result :
https://usustatesman.com/economics-of-dating-2-the-brutal-reality-of-dating-apps/




"Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches"
-newt

Agreed.

Fortunately, I never say that about women.






" you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks"
-newt

False equivalence.

Cohabitation and Partnership are mutually independent.
Meaning both can exist at the same time.


-scheherazade

newtboy said:

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you believe the government dictates your vows? What "rules"? You just cannot grasp the concept of no fault divorce or prenuptial, can you?

I guess you never planned on kids or shared assets. If you do, not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives, and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first. Uncle Sam is in your relationship, married or not....without a marriage contract, he makes ALL the rules and you have no say.

My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas that in my state would have cost under $10K and you congratulate him? You are one strange person.

Again, your perception, not based in fact since the 60's. You assume women take off time to raise the kids and take care of parents and assume fathers don't take paternity leave or have obligations outside work. How 50's. You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. It certainly hasn't been my experience, I've seen women in the workplace working harder and longer for less pay, sacrificing just like their male counterparts if not more, putting off having families until it's too late while men can have kids long after normal retirement age, putting themselves in dangerous situations where those with power over them have opportunities to abuse that power and abuse those women in ways that rarely happen to men. These aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that, meaning soon women in most catagories will out earn men and have more to lose, you admit you're wrong in your position now, right? Of course not, I expect you will still start from a point that hasn't been correct since the era and sexual revolution, early 70's at latest.

No, many of the studies I've seen compared people in the same exact positions in the same industries, even same companies, and women consistently get paid less for the exact same job and hours, and women rarely work less today, and just as often out work their male counterparts knowing they are often token hires not valued by the bosses so have less job security. If I recall correctly, 80% of job losses due to Covid were women, and the men are getting rehired faster. I think you are thinking of some studies from the 80's that made those assumptions and accusations. Comparing apples to apples, women still get shortchanged and as often as not overworked.

Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk
Tends to have short relationships? Too much risk
Likes attention? Too much risk
Single mother (non-widow)? Too much risk
Any mental issues (depression, bipolar, narcissist, anxiety, etc)? Too much risk
Older (why you still single...)? Too much risk
Likes to party? Too much risk
Drinks? Too much risk"

And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are? Specify what you expect and agree, and you walk with exactly what you agreed to, no government rules or split involved. Geez. You speak as if you had never heard of them.

Most divorces may be initiated by the woman (if that's true, I expect it's just another assumption) because their husbands are more likely to break their vows first, but are not willing to pay to end the marriage, including penalties for breaking the marriage contract, and we're too dumb to get a prenuptial (or got one that spells out harsh penalties for cheating). Yes, I am assuming men cheat on their spouses more often than the reverse, because men are wired that way.

You are not more likely than not to face a divorce, because it's unlikely any woman meeting your criteria would give you a second thought, and you need to get married to get divorced.

I bet if you show your significant other this thread your 20 year relationship will be in big trouble, or at best enter a long dry dark spell. Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches that take more than they deserve or even could give back and destroy you whenever they think it serves them. It's probably a good thing you aren't married.

Laws and family court aren't as you describe. Maybe when you enter the 21st century you'll recognize that. The rules of your marriage can be whatever you agree to, including the specifics of the split if it ends.

It's a sad thing you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks.....almost always unless one or both of you are total douchebags.

DESPERATE Restaurant Owner BLOCKADES Inspector's Car

newtboy says...

You’ve said the same about people in their homes, even about George Floyd if I’m not mistaken, he wasn’t running, straw man.

I do see his issue as a problem. I don’t think it’s an excuse to break the law in multiple dangerous or malicious ways like he did. I think, like most other countries have, we should pay people their normal wages to stay home quarantined so we might stop being the worst at COVID response on the planet and avoid this kind of situation altogether.
You seem to think we should pretend the pandemic is a fraud and go back to life like it was pre 2020....problem solved. Your words say as much. Sorry, that’s not realistic. That “plan” kills millions at best and destroys the economy in the process.

Btw, we've been over this a dozen times, I’ve never taken a dime of government assistance, and my wife and I live on $30k a year. Just because i don't need government assistance doesn't mean I don't see the need for others, just like even though I'm "retired" I can still understand the need for a paycheck, but needing money is not an excuse to break the law or heroin dealers and bank robbers would be good guys who just need to make money.

Yes, the government doesn’t care, that’s why it just passed another COVID relief bill that again gives the vast majority of the money to corporations and state government, not citizens (likely with the same lack of protections that let Kushner and a few Trumps take millions from the first relief bill). For once, Trump at least publicly tried to do the right thing (credit where it’s due) by insisting on larger payments like Democrats wanted all along and Republicans killed the idea.

bobknight33 said:

Running from cops is 1 thing. A straw-man argument.


This guy represents a serious problem of the lock down.
He is desperate for himself and employees.

This story is 1 of thousands across America.
You don't care. You words say as much.

Maybe you are on government cheese.

But those who need to work, pay bills, or loose the job, house, car, This is a big big deal.

Government does not care for its people.

Government job= being paid and not caring about peoples blight.

DESPERATE Restaurant Owner BLOCKADES Inspector's Car

bobknight33 says...

Running from cops is 1 thing. A straw-man argument.


This guy represents a serious problem of the lock down.
He is desperate for himself and employees.

This story is 1 of thousands across America.
You don't care. You words say as much.

Maybe you are on government cheese.

But those who need to work, pay bills, or loose the job, house, car, This is a big big deal.

Government does not care for its people.

Government job= being paid and not caring about peoples blight.

newtboy said:

Etitiled douchebag.
This guy needs to be arrested for blocking traffic, impeding a government worker in their official duties, and have his truck impounded, not listened to and reasoned with for 10 minutes. In some jurisdictions this is considered kidnapping....blocking someone in.
I thought you said people should just obey the law and comply or expect to get beaten and shot....but not him. You support him. What’s different, @bobknight33 ? Hmmmm....

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

That's what you have to tell yourself to get through the day....but there was absolutely no evidence produced of that.

If the election was stolen, then Democrats also control the Senate because those republican senators didn't actually win their elections. Can't have it both ways....and you can't explain how or why only the presidential portion was effected by fraud but not the rest of the ballot. If it was stolen, it would have been across the board. So asinine, little Bobby. You're grasping at straws.

If democrats stole it, they have suddenly become the ultimate Ocean's 80 million, pulling off the most intricate heist without leaving a trace. If they are that competent, they should definitely be running the country....but thinking they are that competent means ignoring their entire history.

My election was stolen in 2016 when the "winner" had over 3 million fewer votes than the "loser". When the person with the most votes loses, that's a stolen election, not when the person with millions more votes wins. Duh. This isn't Russia.

Now get out there, destroy the GOP and boycott Georgia like Trump ordered.

bobknight33 said:

Stolen election.
Someday they will steal yours.

Flushing 240lbs of liquid mercury

Joe Biden admits he is involved in voter fraud.

newtboy says...

So desperate, little Bobby.
Just sad and desperate.
This is the best you got? Time to go home then....or into hiding, Putin doesn't like to lose, and he might blame you. Your trolling hasn't been up to snuff all year.

Pretty damn sad when all you can come up with is making fun of overcoming a speech impediment and pretending he didn't mean anti-voter-fraud organization....and I bet we would see he actually corrected it if the clip was 3 seconds longer.

Sorry sunshine. You reek of desperation as you grasp at straws and strawmen.

Gonna leave this here for you, sweetheart.
https://youtu.be/4MyLwAokINc

Doc Rivers

scheherazade says...

Assault weapon bans. Effectively making illegal the most common rifle in the country (ar15) - even though it's statistically tiny in terms of gun killings.
(~450 people killed per year with all forms of rifle. Only some of that is ar15. That's the ~same amount of people as what die yearly from falling out of bed.)

Suppressor bans. Illegalizing an item that has been statistically as good as nonexistent in firearm crimes.

Banning DIY non-commercial firearms. Illegalizing firearms that have been statistically as good as nonexistent in firearm crimes.

Banning Private Sales (aka gunshow loophole). Effectively banning transfers between family and friends. Even though nearly all illegal arms are acquired by straw purchase at conventional stores by girlfriends.
And commercial sellers at gun shows have to do background checks anyways - this is much ado about old geezers trading collectible wild west / ww2 / antique shit.

Nearly all people are killed by pistols. Nobody is calling for a pistol ban. It makes things like an AWB look like a disingenuous effort - because you can pass all sorts of non-pistol-banning gun control laws and there will be no effect on gun death stats. Meaning you can just make more and more stuff illegal forever so long as you save what really matters (pistols) for last.

Between city, county, state, federal, existing gun laws are fat like an encyclopedia. Most people, unless they are 'gun folk', don't even realize the ways you can go to jail. Put a vertical grip in a pistol and posted it to instagram? Enjoy your time with the ATF. 10 years and $100k, assuming you're lax enough to not hire a lawyer to knock it down a bit. Literally volumes of ways to go to jail for shit you wouldn't even imagine would matter.

Many things people complain about aren't even a thing. Like complaining about buying guns online (you can't, not without an FFL involved), or crazy people buying guns (they can't, unless they've yet to be caught doing crazy shit).

Too many laws as it is. Erase a bunch first.

-scheherazade

newtboy said:

What anti gun legislation do you mean? All I know of is closing a few loopholes that allow people legally banned from gun ownership to obtain them anyway without background checks. I disagree that that is anti gun legislation, and across the board background checks are something a vast majority think is proper.

There's plenty of misinformation on this topic floating about. Is there other actual legislation in the works, or just rumors of other legislation the left will enact....and only according to the right?

RNC 2020 & Kenosha: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

eoe says...

I can understand why you all still respond to @bobnight33. It's satisfying to smugly respond to him who, effectively, is a real live straw man. It makes you feel righteous (and frankly, it's pretty easy).

But really, Bob's been around for 11 years and has not conceded literally anything.

You're not changing his mind. Obviously. Why do you keep trying?

If anything, a new person who is (admittedly, astoundingly) undecided will see your vainglorious responses and dig their heels in to any existing conservative leanings.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon