jakee

Funny, 'expanded consciousness' is pretty much exactly what I'd have said would stop someone from joing the christian anything ssociation. Purely an anecdote, but the only person I ever met wearing a CSA patch on their jumpsuit also refused to believe that weight belts made people fall faster, because he'd once been told in high school that Galileo had proved heavy objects and light objects fell at the same rate. Wouldn't listen to explanations, wouldn't accept that he'd been taught a gross simplification of one aspect of the science, wouldn't even believe the evidence of his own eyes - just stuck to his blind dogma. 'Expanded consciousness' indeed... Do you want to have an ideagasm?

But does it? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

And those foundations are often disgustingly amoral. That's not an example, that's a hypothesis. A poorly stated one. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Whut? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Love it! Hillary Supporter: She's innocent - innocent I tell ya. It's all about intent! The Obama admin didn't prosecute. There's no proof - she's not guilty. She's innocent - innocent I tell ya! - But damn that Bush and all his war crimes! Poster: It's all about intent. The Obama admin didn't prosecute Bush. Besides, he's not even running for president. He hasn't been president for 7 years, ya know? Hillary Supporter: I was unaware of a statute of limitations on war crimes. No US government will ever attempt to prosecute any US elected official under international law. A) No matter how egregious the behaviour sheer self preservation would stop them. No-one wants to open that can of worms, including Barack 'drone strike' Obama. B) the US voted against the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court and never ratified their membership of it. Clinton, however, remains unindicted after ongoing hostile investigations by the FBI and various congressional bodies. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

How? Why? When? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Just as everything you have written started with the incorrect assumption that Douggs was in charge of an organised event involving the idiot. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

The first 3.5 years of Tribulations involves the rest of the world kinda not agreeing with the politics of the U.S. Government even if they still think the U.S. Is kinda cool and would like to visit anyway? Wow, to be honest I always thought Revelations was a bit more interesting than that. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

So... he's managed to lose over 80% of the public support that his predecessor had from retired military brass and it's the media's fault for not reporting this like it's a good thing? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Turtle, that's not liberal; that's anarchist. It's a mix of common sense post-colonial perception and libertarianism. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

So, you just believe your critical thinking skills exceed those of turnips? Seems a low bar to set for yourself, tbh. (That's not an 'I know you are...' btw, it's what you actually said.) Do you want to have an ideagasm?

While I would agree that education is probably the main factor behind luck with natural resources in terms of making a nation great, I would be amazed if the majority of Trump supporters (or of anyone who uses the phrase 'make America great again') share that opinion. So, was America greater when it was illegally and immorally destroying the democratic government of Iran to further its own selfish desires than when it is now engaging in reciprocal diplomacy and negotiations with Iran? Or kissing one? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

No, we don't. It reads like it was typed with one hand while the other was opening the evening's third bottle of wine. Quite aside from the mispellings, wrong words and grammatical chaos it is simply too vague and too confused to convey what it is that you actually meant. And lets face it, if we try and reply based on our best interpretation of what you meant and get it wrong, you'd be the first to piss and moan about words being put into your mouth. So if you want to contribute to the discussion then just explain what you meant. If you don't, then just stop. But again, all this deflecting that you're doing right now fools no-one. Again - which bit didn't you comprehend? I can educate you. It was a very short post. Lets just go with 'all of it'. Explain or restate all of it. (Cue next transparent redirect in 3,2,1....) Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Well, she didn't have an answer either, so it kinda looks like you are. Fuck you. If it wasn't for when America was great; you're little island wouldn't exist. I'm not a little island. (And yes we would. Hitler gave up on invasion plans when he got too deep into it with the Russians, way before you guys came along.) And, just like the sorority girl, you still don't have an answer. So what's the difference between America then and now? It can't be the strength of the military, you're even more disproportionately strong now than you were then (and massively stronger than before you entered the war. Current pro-military factions in the US would break down in tears at how weak and unprepared your armed forces were pre-Pearl Harbour). So was it the economy? The supposed family values? The much lower divide between CEO pay and worker pay? The willingness to rip up the constitution and incarcerate US citizens and legal aliens without due process? What? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Yeah, that's exactly what you see. You did dismiss the criticisms from DoJ report as corrupt, politically motivated falsehoods and if you're now claiming that you agreed with some of it this is brand new information. And if you're claiming that you posted here that you agreed with any part of the DoJ report that was critical of the Ferguson PD then unless you can link to it, I'm going to say you're simply not telling the truth. Because again, no, I did not see it. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Then you are simply wrong, again. But that is par for the course. We've all seen the posts where you dismiss the DoJ report as a politically motivated hatchet job by corrupt investigators. If you could link to the post or posts where you agree with any part of it that is critical of the Ferguson police department then please do. Otherwise, I simply don't believe you. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Well, she didn't have an answer either, so it kinda looks like you are. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I'm speaking specifically to the use of force of Officer Wilson. Yeah, that's exactly my point. Actually yeah, I have missed any post you've made where you have agreed with any criticism of the police in Ferguson. I've only seen the comments you made where you said the people who police the police are all corrupt liars. Which, as I pointed out before, is somewhat ironic. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

No, we don't. It reads like it was typed with one hand while the other was opening the evening's third bottle of wine. Quite aside from the mispellings, wrong words and grammatical chaos it is simply too vague and too confused to convey what it is that you actually meant. And lets face it, if we try and reply based on our best interpretation of what you meant and get it wrong, you'd be the first to piss and moan about words being put into your mouth. So if you want to contribute to the discussion then just explain what you meant. If you don't, then just stop. But again, all this deflecting that you're doing right now fools no-one. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Right, and 86 page DOJ report that you reject as a politically motivated hatchet job, so I'm not exactly sure how you think you can use it to support your argument on this while rejecting everything else it says? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Everyone knows that you know what he's asking. No-one is fooled by your efforts to dodge the question by being a dick about it. Answer the question or don't - but be aware that if you don't want to answer it you'd look a lot better if you simply refused or said nothing at all, rather than doing what you're doing right now. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Like a mercy killing, then? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Fictional TV shows arguably have a bigger impact on how people view things than the news does. Just like when Bush made policy decisions that were apparently influenced by having watched too much "24", The West Wing certainly propogated ideas that pop up a lot around here like the President being solely responsible for the strength of the currency, or the deficit, or the performance of the economy, or foreign relations, or a whole host of things that are actually jointly influenced by Executive and Legislative. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Remember when the power plant went into meltdown? He took personal control over the smallest details of the emergency operation right down to how long individual firefighters (or whoever they were) were inside the radiation zones despite not having any knowledge of or training regarding the operations of perfectly fucntional nuclear reactors, let alone ones that are in the process of exploding. That's far from the only example but it is the most obvious. Megalomaniac was the wrong word, but control freak micromanager he certainly was. Frankly, I blame the West Wing (at least in part) for the current cult of the President as leader and controller of every aspect of the nation's performance. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Bartlett (at least in the later series) was a control freak megalomaniac micromanager of the worst kind. He would have been a terrible president in the real world. Do you want to have an ideagasm?