[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Guns - rgio - May 25, 2022 - 2:56pm
 
New Song Submissions system - VV - May 25, 2022 - 2:38pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - Isabeau - May 25, 2022 - 2:20pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - cptbuz - May 25, 2022 - 12:56pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 25, 2022 - 11:00am
 
Unquiet Minds - Mental Health Forum - black321 - May 25, 2022 - 10:16am
 
What is the meaning of this? - oldviolin - May 25, 2022 - 9:35am
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - May 25, 2022 - 9:33am
 
Counting with Pictures - Proclivities - May 25, 2022 - 9:19am
 
Trump - Red_Dragon - May 25, 2022 - 9:14am
 
Wordle - daily game - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 25, 2022 - 7:52am
 
Baseball, anyone? - Skydog - May 25, 2022 - 6:10am
 
New Music - Skydog - May 25, 2022 - 5:41am
 
Russia - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 25, 2022 - 12:23am
 
Post your favorite 'You Tube' Videos Here - Red_Dragon - May 24, 2022 - 8:37pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - GeneP59 - May 24, 2022 - 4:16pm
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - GeneP59 - May 24, 2022 - 4:05pm
 
Posting Images? - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 24, 2022 - 3:18pm
 
Ukraine - Lazy8 - May 24, 2022 - 1:24pm
 
MQA available on ifi Zen - nickt1 - May 24, 2022 - 1:01pm
 
The Obituary Page - ptooey - May 24, 2022 - 6:41am
 
A Little Psychedelic Jazz-Rock Never Hurts - whatshisname - May 24, 2022 - 5:32am
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - May 23, 2022 - 7:25pm
 
FLAC Streaming - miamizsun - May 23, 2022 - 6:16pm
 
The Dragons' Roost - GeneP59 - May 23, 2022 - 5:16pm
 
Things You Thought Today - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 23, 2022 - 4:26pm
 
John Cale - TheKing2 - May 23, 2022 - 2:08pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - Skydog - May 23, 2022 - 1:33pm
 
Today in History - Proclivities - May 23, 2022 - 9:41am
 
Favorite Quotes - nightdrive - May 23, 2022 - 7:58am
 
History of past donations? - Skydog - May 23, 2022 - 7:33am
 
That's good advice - miamizsun - May 23, 2022 - 5:22am
 
Questions. - haresfur - May 22, 2022 - 9:24pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - Red_Dragon - May 22, 2022 - 4:50pm
 
• • •  What's For Dinner ? • • •  - miamizsun - May 21, 2022 - 3:29pm
 
Reccomended System or Powered Speakers - miamizsun - May 21, 2022 - 2:29pm
 
Today, I learned... - Proclivities - May 21, 2022 - 7:02am
 
MQA Stream Coming to BLUOS - nickt1 - May 21, 2022 - 1:09am
 
Live Music - oldviolin - May 20, 2022 - 7:06pm
 
Neil Young - oldviolin - May 20, 2022 - 6:50pm
 
songs for drella - haresfur - May 20, 2022 - 5:47pm
 
Chicago 25 Or 6 To 4 - Steely_D - May 20, 2022 - 2:42pm
 
Derplahoma! - sunybuny - May 20, 2022 - 5:41am
 
songs that ROCK! - Red_Dragon - May 19, 2022 - 5:10pm
 
Online Radio Platforms - Steely_D - May 19, 2022 - 4:03pm
 
Brag about your stereo - miamizsun - May 19, 2022 - 3:16pm
 
All Dogs Go To Heaven - Dog Pix - islander - May 19, 2022 - 3:00pm
 
COVID-19 - Red_Dragon - May 19, 2022 - 1:50pm
 
Testing your Metal? - oldviolin - May 19, 2022 - 12:11pm
 
Help Finding A Song - nightdrive - May 19, 2022 - 10:19am
 
Lyrics - oldviolin - May 19, 2022 - 8:17am
 
What Makes You Sad? - Coaxial - May 18, 2022 - 6:42pm
 
NASA & other news from space - GeneP59 - May 18, 2022 - 4:37pm
 
Guided Meditation by Bill - thisbody - May 18, 2022 - 2:45pm
 
January 20th, 2005 ~ Boycott And Meditation Day - thisbody - May 18, 2022 - 2:34pm
 
Economix - thisbody - May 18, 2022 - 1:48pm
 
Japan - Red_Dragon - May 18, 2022 - 10:58am
 
Race in America - Red_Dragon - May 18, 2022 - 7:36am
 
North Korea - Red_Dragon - May 17, 2022 - 9:07pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 17, 2022 - 11:24am
 
"2000 Mules" movie purports to prove 2020 election was st... - rgio - May 17, 2022 - 7:02am
 
Buddy's Haven - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 6:31pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 6:18pm
 
Environment - Red_Dragon - May 16, 2022 - 4:42pm
 
RightWingNutZ - Red_Dragon - May 16, 2022 - 4:24pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 3:24pm
 
• • • Clownstock • • •  - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 10:17am
 
What the hell OV? - miamizsun - May 16, 2022 - 9:40am
 
Supreme Court Rulings - Red_Dragon - May 16, 2022 - 9:33am
 
Outstanding Covers - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 8:35am
 
Watching My Mind Slip Away... - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 6:05am
 
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - Alchemist - May 15, 2022 - 10:12pm
 
TuneIn difficulties - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 15, 2022 - 7:02pm
 
Terrorist Watch! - Steely_D - May 15, 2022 - 5:17pm
 
Climate Change - Red_Dragon - May 15, 2022 - 1:31pm
 
Index » Regional/Local » USA/Canada » Joe Biden Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 43, 44, 45 ... 51, 52, 53  Next
Post to this Topic
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: May 8, 2020 - 7:43pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:
I don't like him. I don't like him at all. But he isn't Trump. That's the equation for me; as horrible as it is.
 
Yeah, well it was anybody but a Clinton or a Bush for me last time around, so there ...

 {#Nyah}
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: May 8, 2020 - 6:08pm

I don't like him. I don't like him at all. But he isn't Trump. That's the equation for me; as horrible as it is.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 8, 2020 - 6:02pm

 haresfur wrote:
I suppose it would be politically incorrect to point out that, even if the accusations against Biden are taken at face value, it would show he believes no means no and stops. 
 
You can only get a no when you ask...

"Are you ok with me pinning you against the wall and sliding a hand up your dress?"
haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: May 8, 2020 - 5:35pm

I suppose it would be politically incorrect to point out that, even if the accusations against Biden are taken at face value, it would show he believes no means no and stops. 
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 8, 2020 - 1:09pm

You don't say...
Fox News has unsurprisingly become the go-to cable-news outlet for chatter about the sexual-assault allegations about former Vice President Joe Biden. But when it came to similar (and more voluminous) allegations against his opponent, President Donald Trump, the network was seemingly nowhere to be found.

Earlier this year, Tara Reade claimed that the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee forced her against a wall and put his hands up her skirt when she worked as a staffer in his Senate office in the early 1990s. The narrative became instant red meat for Fox News, which has made the allegations one of its top stories across its cable and digital platforms, largely aggregating or riffing on reporting done by mainstream outlets while lamenting a supposed lack of media coverage of the story.

According to a transcript search via media-monitoring service TVEyes, the Reade accusations have been mentioned at least 289 times on the network since late March, when Reade first detailed them in an interview with leftist podcast host Katie Halper.

kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: May 8, 2020 - 12:53pm



 KarmaKarma wrote:

RUH-ROH!


THIS 1996 COURT DOCUMENT BOLSTERS RAPE CLAIM AGAINST BIDEN


Normally I'd be compelled to remind people that everyone deserves due process. But Joe Biden just this week reminded people that he doesn't believe in due process. So seriously, screw Joe Biden's due process. I'm not the one who made the rules. I'm just a comedy writer who moonlights in political snark. Who was told I hate women when I said the Brett Kavanaugh allegations looked like a political stunt.

The only question now: Does the DNC drag Biden across the finish line? Or is he just made to feel comfortable until nature takes its course?



https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/tara-reade-joe-biden-1996



 

That court document, filed by Reade's then-estranged husband in 1996, mentions only sexual harassment and not sexual assault. It does not provide any detail that might corroborate Reade's claim of sexual assault.

From https://www.mercedsunstar.com/...




From that same article: 



Asked for comment Thursday, the national press secretary for Biden’s presidential campaign, T.J. Ducklo, said the campaign is not commenting on the latest development at this time.

However, the campaign did provide a comment from Ted Kaufman, who was Biden’s chief of staff at the time. â€œI have consistently said what is the truth here — that she never came to me,” Kaufman said. “I do not remember her, and had she come to me in any of these circumstances, I would remember her. But I do not, because she did not.”

R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 8, 2020 - 12:19pm

 sirdroseph wrote:
In regards to the second remark,  you are as naive as you are intelligent.
 
Don't let ignorance lead you to jump to conclusions about other people.
KarmaKarma

KarmaKarma Avatar



Posted: May 8, 2020 - 6:24am

RUH-ROH!


THIS 1996 COURT DOCUMENT BOLSTERS RAPE CLAIM AGAINST BIDEN


Normally I'd be compelled to remind people that everyone deserves due process. But Joe Biden just this week reminded people that he doesn't believe in due process. So seriously, screw Joe Biden's due process. I'm not the one who made the rules. I'm just a comedy writer who moonlights in political snark. Who was told I hate women when I said the Brett Kavanaugh allegations looked like a political stunt.

The only question now: Does the DNC drag Biden across the finish line? Or is he just made to feel comfortable until nature takes its course?



https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/tara-reade-joe-biden-1996



sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: May 8, 2020 - 6:21am

 rgio wrote:


 sirdroseph wrote:
If we were honest with ourselves this is true and sometimes the price is payed gladly with altruistic intentions for the greater good.   This is why I have no issue at all with someone who votes for Biden and supports the metoo movement in regards to prioritizing the voice and concerns of women victims of sexual assaults or harassment.   Just acknowledge that you are paying a price.   After all,  virtually all of us here have already chosen an alleged abuser of women in an election.  I did it twice myself.  Once in 1992 and again in 96.

In regards to the second remark,  you are as naive as you are intelligent.

So we all have 3 choices:  Trump, Biden, or neither.  Let's agree neither hands your choice to others.

If you support #metoo, who do you pick?
If you support the pro-life movement, who do you pick?
If you support current gun laws, who do you pick?
Lower taxation, lower regulation, the environment, immigration reform, and anything else that may be important to you, who do you pick?

Analyzing the limitations of your options is critical.  You don't have to surrender your principals to vote...you have to prioritize them.
 
Personally I am holding true to exercising my right to vote as a protest to the 2 party duopoly meaning anybody but a D or an R.  It has never been easier to maintain my tradition started back in aught 10.  In other words, I am in the neither camp.{#Mrgreen}   As long as your reasoning is intellectually honest then you have the credibility to proceed with your choices and makes it easier for those that hold different opinions to work with you and of course that goes both ways. {#Meditate}
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: May 8, 2020 - 5:33am



 sirdroseph wrote:
If we were honest with ourselves this is true and sometimes the price is payed gladly with altruistic intentions for the greater good.   This is why I have no issue at all with someone who votes for Biden and supports the metoo movement in regards to prioritizing the voice and concerns of women victims of sexual assaults or harassment.   Just acknowledge that you are paying a price.   After all,  virtually all of us here have already chosen an alleged abuser of women in an election.  I did it twice myself.  Once in 1992 and again in 96.

In regards to the second remark,  you are as naive as you are intelligent.

So we all have 3 choices:  Trump, Biden, or neither.  Let's agree neither hands your choice to others.

If you support #metoo, who do you pick?
If you support the pro-life movement, who do you pick?
If you support current gun laws, who do you pick?
Lower taxation, lower regulation, the environment, immigration reform, and anything else that may be important to you, who do you pick?

Analyzing the limitations of your options is critical.  You don't have to surrender your principals to vote...you have to prioritize them.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: May 8, 2020 - 2:41am



 R_P wrote:
 sirdroseph wrote:
 R_P wrote:
 sirdroseph wrote:
(...) but I agree with what Biden says above and have never wavered from this notion regardless of the political party of the accused. You should try it, there is no confusion.

Unless there's the threat of a socialist getting the Democratic nomination, in which case you'd feel compelled to vote (expediently) for the lesser evil alleged rapist (aka Trump)...
 
This is true, it would take something that dangerous, but that is about the only thing.
{#Yes}
 Though sadly it looks like the pandemic has pushed us into socialism anyway.  How ironic that we are destroying our grandchildren's hope by having them foot the tab for shutting the economy down and it is helping the environment which was the concern of our grandchildren as well.  Seems like either way, we are screwing our descendants.
{#Cry}
 
Just goes to show that almost everyone has a price (or a fear) that might make them put their principles on hold.


If you actually had socialism, workers would be prioritized (in any bailout scheme), not capital...
 

If we were honest with ourselves this is true and sometimes the price is payed gladly with altruistic intentions for the greater good.   This is why I have no issue at all with someone who votes for Biden and supports the metoo movement in regards to prioritizing the voice and concerns of women victims of sexual assaults or harassment.   Just acknowledge that you are paying a price.   After all,  virtually all of us here have already chosen an alleged abuser of women in an election.  I did it twice myself.  Once in 1992 and again in 96.


In regards to the second remark,  you are as naive as you are intelligent.
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: May 7, 2020 - 9:23pm



 R_P wrote:
Birds of a feather... Adorable.
 


R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 7, 2020 - 7:58pm

Birds of a feather... Adorable.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: May 7, 2020 - 7:43pm

 KarmaKarma wrote:


 R_P wrote:
 KarmaKarma wrote:
Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. Whataboutism is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

Also:  SQUIRREL!

Nobody has to refute or disprove "Joe's creepiness". They might actually agree to some extent. However, your tremendous hypocrisy still stands as well.
 
Only being blind to your own tremendous hypocrisy, permits you to say that, while offering a straight face.  

Obviously your personal mottto is  'Rules for thee, but not for me.'

And: SQUIRREL !

 
There ya go.  I've been beaten up for using whataboutism here for years, by R and many, many others.

I always forgot to counter it in a timely way to neutralize it.  Now I'm doing things a little differently now and it is fair game for using it.  They use it, call em out if they ask for it.  Doesn't mean that you can't use it, too.  Now it's, so what ?  Kinda like grammar police.

It's getting easier to do now because their over confidence is getting in their own way and their game is slipping as a result.
black321

black321 Avatar

Location: An earth without maps
Gender: Male


Posted: May 7, 2020 - 7:05pm



 kcar wrote:


 R_P wrote:
 KarmaKarma wrote:
Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. Whataboutism is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

Also:  SQUIRREL!

Nobody has to refute or disprove "Joe's creepiness". They might actually agree to some extent. However, your tremendous hypocrisy still stands as well.
 

Hypocrisy?!? Oh dear me, no. It's not hypocrisy when someone is paying you to shill. KK's just doing his/her job.
 
Wait...you can get paid for doing this?

kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: May 6, 2020 - 3:53pm



 R_P wrote:
 KarmaKarma wrote:
Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. Whataboutism is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

Also:  SQUIRREL!

Nobody has to refute or disprove "Joe's creepiness". They might actually agree to some extent. However, your tremendous hypocrisy still stands as well.
 

Hypocrisy?!? Oh dear me, no. It's not hypocrisy when someone is paying you to shill. KK's just doing his/her job.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 6, 2020 - 3:24pm

 KarmaKarma wrote:
 R_P wrote:
 KarmaKarma wrote:
Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. Whataboutism is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

Also:  SQUIRREL!

Nobody has to refute or disprove "Joe's creepiness". They might actually agree to some extent. However, your tremendous hypocrisy still stands as well.
 
Only being blind to your own tremendous hypocrisy, permits you to say that, while offering a straight face.  

Obviously your personal mottto is  'Rules for thee, but not for me.'

And: SQUIRREL !
 
You're projecting somewhat... Like Dear Leader usually does.

I assume that allegations of creepiness against Dear Leader don't concern you (nearly as much as they do for Biden).
KarmaKarma

KarmaKarma Avatar



Posted: May 6, 2020 - 3:21pm



 R_P wrote:
 KarmaKarma wrote:
Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. Whataboutism is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

Also:  SQUIRREL!

Nobody has to refute or disprove "Joe's creepiness". They might actually agree to some extent. However, your tremendous hypocrisy still stands as well.
 
Only being blind to your own tremendous hypocrisy, permits you to say that, while offering a straight face.  

Obviously your personal mottto is  'Rules for thee, but not for me.'

And: SQUIRREL !

R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 6, 2020 - 3:16pm

 KarmaKarma wrote:
Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. Whataboutism is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

Also:  SQUIRREL!

Nobody has to refute or disprove "Joe's creepiness". They might actually agree to some extent. However, your tremendous hypocrisy still stands as well.
KarmaKarma

KarmaKarma Avatar



Posted: May 6, 2020 - 3:06pm



 rgio wrote:


 KarmaKarma wrote:
Creepy AF
 
Yeah...it's pretty creepy...but it's amusing to see the supporters of a guy with 25+ assaults, start a character debate.   Creepy is saying...

"She's Got The Best Body"
"Is she a Piece Of Ass?" "Yeah."
"Perhaps I'd Be Dating Her"
"Kiss her?... As Often As I Can"
"She's Always Been Very Voluptuous"

and the all timer...

"If I Weren't, Ya Know, Her Father" 


Do I need to tell you who said those things about his little girl?



Whataboutism
, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. Whataboutism is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.


Also:  SQUIRREL!
 


Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 43, 44, 45 ... 51, 52, 53  Next