We need a Reality Czar!

[Sonicfire1981]

Originally Posted by u crank

Think again.

You're still dodging the key point, I wonder why this is. This commentary is so meaningless, you could have done without. I repeat: please give me a bit more to go on; in facts.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/28/polit...ack/index.html

she blames him for inciting the riots of which she could easily been one of (if not "the") key victim. the *bad, bad* media talks about murder allegations. that is incorrect: "You [..] had me murdered" -> incitement to murder, which I find acurate. courts should decide on that. Wonder why Mr. Cruz did not file anything yet.

Possibly but now after the fact when we know what actually happened why is she still telling this fabulous tale? An intellegent person would review the facts and make those facts part of her story. She is not doing that. She is playing the victim card to the hilt.

She was talking about her feelings. Is it sexist to point out that she's a women and that's not uncommon, as well as perfectly covered by the first ammendment?

Apparently not.

Without the quotes it got lost how you contradicted yourself. I took the liberty to put it back in.

The logic here is difficult to understand. To excuse dishonesty in one person because someone else is crazy does not do anything to dispell the accusation of dishonesty.

You could at least try. I even painted you a pretty word picture; deal with the immediate threat to democracy first, do it without distraction ("whataboutX") and deal with the parking tickets once the crisis is averted.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Sonicfire1981

You're still dodging the key point, I wonder why this is. This commentary is so meaningless, you could have done without. I repeat: please give me a bit more to go on; in facts.

Sorry but I thought that it what you were looking for in regards to "I am not aware of the argument Ms. Cortez makes, but I think she's smarter than to just throw allegations around." She made the allegation right? You read that part didn't you. So what exactly are you looking for?

she blames him for inciting the riots of which she could easily been one of (if not "the") key victim. the *bad, bad* media talks about murder allegations. that is incorrect: "You [..] had me murdered" -> incitement to murder, which I find acurate. courts should decide on that. Wonder why Mr. Cruz did not file anything yet.

Sounds like you are saying that it is Mr. Cruz's fault that AOC said that he tried to have her killed. I understand beyond a doubt that AOC has accused Sen. Cruz of 'trying to have me killed.'

She was talking about her feelings.

I'm touched.

You could at least try. I even painted you a pretty word picture; deal with the immediate threat to democracy first, do it without distraction ("whataboutX") and deal with the parking tickets once the crisis is averted.

I believe I made a pretty good attempt. You have disregarded it. 'The immediate threat to democracy first' is a good tactic though. Because you think the sky is falling is not an excuse to overlook something as important as a Congresswoman's honesty or her slanderous accusations.

[Sonicfire1981]

Sounds like you are saying that it is Mr. Cruz's fault that AOC said that he tried to have her killed. I understand beyond a doubt that AOC has accused Sen. Cruz of 'trying to have me killed.'

Yes. yes indeed. this will be interesting for the courts no doubt.

.

I'm touched.

You should be. you should get in touch with your feminine side.
No, wait, that was b_stank. got you mixed up because your names rhyme.
But it's a healthy thing for you to try, too.

I believe I made a pretty good attempt.

I believe you can do better than this

You have disregarded it. 'The immediate threat to democracy first' is a good tactic though.

Rightfully so. but thank you.

Because you think the sky is falling is not an excuse to overlook something as important as a Congresswoman's honesty or her slanderous accusations.

When your toddler reaches into the cookie-jar and someone tries to shoot your toddler - your not going after the toddler first.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Sonicfire1981

I believe you can do better than this

That is all you are getting.

When your toddler reaches into the cookie-jar and someone tries to shoot your toddler - your not going after the toddler first.

Now you're repeating yourself.

[vienna]

I've always viewed reality as an alternative lifestyle...




<O>

[vienna]

<O>

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Glass houses, my friend.

Yes.. also should be old enough to not get triggered

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by vienna

I've always viewed reality as an alternative lifestyle...




<O>