Um….what?!

Read what you wrote here, Bob….and then try to say you aren’t a dumb shit without grinning.

Testy? Shirley, you jest! You’ve seen me testy, that ain’t it.
Tired of your ridiculous double standards and deflection from actual crimes against America (that you completely ignore) with unprovable nonsense about a family member who isn’t part of the administration. If everything Hunter is accused of were proven 100% true, it would still be 100% irrelevant and minor crimes compared to the Trump syndicate.
Also tired of illiterate asshats who shower us with stupid right wing propaganda they clearly don’t even watch themselves….as if anyone here wants that, believes a word of it, or can’t see through the tissue thin lies they contain. Only you buddy, only you. (And your sock puppet brigade)

LMFAHS!! Real communists wouldn’t PAY for propaganda…real communists wouldn’t want to be paid! I don’t think you know what communism is.
I wish someone would pay me for my $.02, but I don’t really think I could make a profit on that transaction.

Try again Bobski….this time get your handler to at least check for lucidity since they clearly won’t check your spelling or grammar.

For a 9 month employment, getting the start year and end year wrong by one year each, and not mentioning the true start date was late December, that's a pretty big lie to start with.

I've heard nothing of this alleged Larry King call....link? No recording, or any details that don't match her first iteration of this constantly morphing story? ...don't bother mentioning it or it just sounds like desperation.

Um....1) Ford had written contemporaneous notes about her attack.
2) Ford's FIRST HAND WITNESSES, not people she told a story years later, were mostly NOT HEARD, AND WEREN'T GOOD ENOUGH.

Yes, the double standard is quite conspicuous....but it's the Right's blatant double standard.

One likely attack with a credible professional accuser, multiple first hand witnesses unheard and contemporary evidence is ignored and denied even a full hearing, and one changing accusation of a totally unbelievable public attack in the halls of congress made by a non credible accuser with no witnesses, no evidence, and who never brought up her attack before even though her attacker has had constant elections for high office including VP twice...even when she was part of a group making other public accusations against the same man, her accusations are to be believed?!

You really have some nerve implying the double standard comes from the Left here. Such bullshit.

MAYBE she exaggerates?!? There's no MAYBE about it. Everything about her claims scream political lie from a proven liar. I can't fathom why anyone ever listened to her unbelievable story except out of desperation, needing so badly to have a Biden abuse story to counter Trump's decades long history of real abuses, both on tape and bragged about in multiple interviews like forcing his way into dressing rooms at his beauty pageants to ogle underage girls as they dress, trying hard to Fuck his friend's wives while he's married, forcibly finger banging any woman he finds attractive, all the way to multiple rape cases in court now.

I meant the start and stop year are each off by 1.

Circumstantially it looks like maybe her mom called Larry King Live to ask for guidance way back in 1993 (the content of the exchange matches, as does the date, but no names were given). Could be unrelated.
Supposedly neighbors were told. Again, who knows.

If zero corroboration was good enough for Ford (Named first hand witnesses said they remember nothing of the sort), then maybe it's only fair to give Reade the same benefit of the doubt?
The double standard is quite conspicuous.

Personally, I wouldn't condemn anyone without physical measurable evidence on which to decide. Talk is cheap.

Maybe she does exaggerate. She wouldn't be the first.

-scheherazade

Yes, including Republicans like Comey at the FBI who said it's improper to discuss ongoing investigations like the Trump/Russia investigation publicly, but it's fine to go after Clinton days before the election, even though there was zero crime there and zero new evidence found to imply there might have been.

The double standards are impossibly divergent.

It's that whole double standard of, "no it's okay because she's gay!"

Honestly though, I could care less, have fun.

Clearly there's a double standard.

He had been drinking.
She initiated the contact.
She pulled him along and took him home for sex.
So she raped him.
Where are the angry anti rapists chanting "lock her up, lock her up, lock her up."

It's disgusting the ridiculous double standards we put on issues like this in the name of equality. Outrage at the story that he took a drunk girl home for sex, totally dismissive when it turns out that she actually did what he was accused of.

Shit, if a tweet is enough to have Rosanne fired from her show, his tweets should be enough to have him fired.

Double standards much?

Wow. Little to no evidence of smoked marijuana having any connection to lung or other cancers.

I must admit I'm surprised. To me it seems like burning something and inhaling the smoke is "obviously" a bad idea with regards to health.

Since the link between tobacco cigarettes and cancer is well established and agreed on by doctors, it makes one wonder what the difference is. Is it entirely the additives that cigarette manufacturers put into cigarettes? If so, why the hell wouldn't there be massive pressure to mass produce additive-free cigarettes at least as an option for smokers?

Also, I guess one (potential) downside of legalization is that the same sort of corporations that knowingly put cancer-causing shit into cigarettes might expand into marijuana territory, potentially trying to put crap into your pot that dispensaries and dealers never have.

Still, overall this is clearly good news for pot fans out there, and will put further pressure on the double standard between legal-but-far-more-dangerous alcohol and tobacco as compared to illegal-but-relatively-innocuous pot. Congratulations! Light one up in celebration (as if you needed a reason).

How do they take our money? Half the people who work for Walmart qualify for food stamps, even though they make so much money they could easily pay living wages, give benefits and still make a profit. This happens at big companies all across the country. That's how they take our money. But you, as a Christian, don't give a crap about those employees, they just better get another job and work 80 hours a week, so they don't have to get food stamps, just so the rich people running these companies and the shareholders can continue to reap in the huge amounts of money. Who cares Jesus commanded you to help the poor, and that the rich were going to hell, in modern Christian culture it is the rich who are blessed, and the poor who need to be vilified.

I'd wager most of us are working, probably 40 hours or more. Used to be that one person in the family working 40 hours a week was enough. Now that isn't enough in most cases. That money moved to the top. We have one of the largest and fastest growing wealth and income gaps in the world, and in history. Real world income isn't staying with inflation, but that 1% that modern Christians love so much, is staying so far ahead of the curve.

And as to, "they like making $8 an hour" bull fucking shit. While I'm making well more than that, I know that isn't true. They got the best job they can get. It's not that people aren't applying for the jobs that are out there, the employers aren't hiring the people applying. Perhaps that person making $8 an hour doesn't have a college degree, and can't afford to go to college. I have a worthless bachelor's degree in "programming and applications" which basically means I know how to use Word, which I knew before I had it (I could have taught even the programming classes for all the further we got into the programming). That degree cost me near $25k, and who knows how much it'll cost by the time I'm done paying it off with all the interest on it. Back on point, those people can apply to a ton of jobs, but unless they are qualified they won't get it, and even among those they do qualify for, there are a ton of applicants for each job out there. Nobody is working Walmart, McDonald's, Lowes or whatever because it's their dream job. It's the job they can get.

Why should you make a living off 40 hours a week, but they should have to work 80? Why the double standard? Why say let the rich owners and shareholders take that income that used to go to the workers and just say f the employees, so long as I make a living at 40, those people better just work longer. This is why I HATE Christianity because every person who thinks that is a Christian. Every person who thinks that LGBTQIA+ people shouldn't have equal rights under the law is a Christian. Every person who was shouting "let him die" at the Republican debate in '08 in regards to a guy without insurance, was a pro-life Christian. Every person who cheered at the idea of carpet bombing at the 16' debates were pro-life Christians. It's why, in the unlikely event it is real, I'd rather burn in hell than be around those people for all eternity. I've never met a good right-wing Christian. Never. They are all evil vile people who are full of greed and have zero of the love of Christ. Their witness is a shining example of how evil and vile Christianity is.

I'm surprised that fat tub of lard Trump, who dictated his son's letter, who dictated his Doctor's letter, can swing a golf club as often as he does... a guy who bitched and moaned about how often Obama golfed, and who's own golfing and vacation time has far outdone Obama's golfing and vacation time.

We got a President, flagrantly breaking the emoluments clause, and nobody seems to give a rats ass (save a few on the further end of the left, certainly the mainstream media, which Fox and the right accuse of being far left, doesn't care, nor do even moderate Democrats).

I know you don't believe he, or Fox and the like are the ones doing the lies and deceit... and nobody will ever convince you otherwise. I know, because I too once was a far-right Christian, who only trusted Fox, and thought the science of climate change was a joke, as was evolution and the big bang (though I was an old earth creationist, I could never get into the 6,000-10,000-year-old argument)... then I learned to actually vet my news and information. I have no doubt that most of my anger at the right is the fact I was so easily deceived for over 30, nearly 40 years of my life. Hopefully, in the highly unlikely event that others on the right learn that they are the ones who've been lied to, that they are the ones more guilty of spreading falsehoods, deceit, greed, and setting a horribly bad witness for their faith that does far more harm than good, they don't get as angry as I did and leave the faith all together and then hate all of what they once were a part of.

Can't think of anything to say to my previous post Bob? Can you explain why you support a party that raises taxes for the poor to give to the rich? Did Jesus teach you that? He would be disgusted by people like you.

And can you explain why you support a president who is a debaucherous lecher? Will you yell "Boss TRUMP!" when he grabs your loved ones by the pussy? And why are you full of double standards and make excuses to support a pedophile?

It's because you are a hypocrite and you have no morals Bob.

I get the theory, but that's just not how real life works. Telling people 'I may do "X, but you may not because you aren't the right race' is never an acceptable argument, won't get you much cooperation, nor does it show the proper disdain for that mindset that has been so disastrously used against minorities historically.

Edit: Also, this makes a HUGE mistake of thinking all black people agree, like they're all alike. That couldn't be farther from the truth, they are not unified on this issue, they, like everyone else, are diverse in their thinking.


If people insist on fairness and equality, they'll get far more support and far less opposition from fair minded people. Change the meaning of the word like we did with "fag" (now meaning Harley Davidson riders), sure, but not just for one group. Insisting on a double standard means they don't have a problem with double standards that work in their favor. That loses them the support of people who believe in equality and hate double standards with passion.

When Maher used it and Ice Cube came on to tell him how wrong he was I did sort of feel like its divisive power was perpetuated by the double standard it seemed to represent - black people can use it, white people can't. Honestly I thought it was all a bit hysterical (not hilarious), not that I doubted the authenticity of people taking offence, just that there was an obsession over the word rather then Maher's intent that only furthered the divide between black and white.

Now I think I missed the point. Naively I believed the end goal was to sterilize the word through usage, that the fact a word can cause offence is a sort of aberration. Recently I was made to understand that the word is venomous for good reason. It should be offensive because it represents not just a terrible history of slavery, but also of the continued oppression, both overt and insidious, that blacks experience.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and often I think that is how us whites use it. Mostly our intentions are good, we want to be part of that group... but we never will be because we will never experience that word the way a black man or woman will. I don't think I was a racist (well, so far as any of us are free from bias) when I used it before but I think it was ignorant and wrong of me. To only care for your own intent and ignore a word's symbolism is lazy and self interested.

I'd like a future where the word truly does lose contemporary meaning, but I don't think we get there by ignoring what it still represents to others.

$0.02

Where did these white people get that idea about "nigga" being a term of endearment?
Black people.
This is what you get for fostering a double standard. Telling a black child to hit white children if they use a word, but not hit a black child if they do....who's the racist?
When the black child says nigga, expel them, then maybe you'll get somewhere.

This dude probably thinks he's fighting against racism by being pretty damn racist. All he said was "white"..."black"....."black"...."white"...."white". I get his anger, but you cannot fight injustice by suggesting injustice, you cannot fight racism by dividing people by race for separate treatment.

Rule of thumb, if those you find to be disgusting sub humans would be wrong to use your words with black and white reversed, you're being a racist.
If you become what you despise in your fight, you lost.
Those who fight monsters must be ever vigilant against becoming one.

The point
Your head

And I don't believe for a moment that you really are missing the point.

The victim in the video made a tweet that sounds racist, but was meant in a sarcastic manner to be making fun of the stupid things racists say.

Your own comment you've made before is the same thing, saying profiting of racism is AOK, in a sarcastic way to be making fun of the stupid things racists do:
Once you learn to profit from racism then BS like this doesn't bother you. In fact you begin to appreciate all the hard free labor that keeps the dividends flowing

You weren't really advocating for enjoying the free labor and profits of racism, you were making fun of it. The victim you are so quick to run a bus over and see ruined made the same joke as you did, but you still fail to see any irony or double standard in this.

And 1 sentence to refute your off-topic rant. Apparently newtboy and I differ from you in believing the historic racism and prejudices were BAD and should be ended rather than recycled against a new range of victims.