• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

KISS in Iraq-For the Anthem kneelers

Conservative said:
there is a time and place for protest, the national anthem isn't that time or place. Only the leftwing radicals see it differently and always let words create reasons for protests
Click to expand...

LMAO accept for the what millions of other s that also dont see it that way, why post such blatant lies?
 
Conservative said:
there is a time and place for protest, the national anthem isn't that time or place. Only the leftwing radicals see it differently and always let words create reasons for protests
Click to expand...

That has been my point since this started over a year ago.

Look, I could not care less what somebody does on his own time. Stand for the flag, kneel for the flag, piss on the flag, burn the flag. Those are all legal expressions of the 1st Amendment, as validated by the SCOTUS many times over the decades. However, such actions would not protect anybody from the ramifications from fans.

This is where the idiots that scream "1st Amendment" show they have absolutely no clue what they are talking about. And they somehow think that their saying it actually means something.

Guess what children, the 1st Amendment only applies to the Government stopping you from taking an action. It gives very few protections for an employee who is saying or doing things while on "company time". In fact, such firings have been upheld a great many times over the years, more often than they have been overturned.

Work for a company and go to a protest against a company that makes mascara for dogs, go for it. As long as you are not in your work clothes have at it. Even as a member of the military I can do such things. Just so long as I am not in uniform, that then is a violation that I can be prosecuted for.

But if you go around work wearing a shirt saying that such and such a company is evil, your boss does have a right to tell you to remove it or be terminated. You can do all the political protesting you want, off the clock and away from work.

But here, for all those that do not believe me, tell me where in the 1st Amendment you have the right to do political grandstanding while on company time:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Click to expand...
 
Tanngrisnir said:
But, of course, I have and I've shown how you haven't backed up your own asinine claim.

I don't belong to any movement. Why be so dishonest and get so emotional when you can't back up your own claim?

You still haven't answered to question to any meaningful degree.

I find your intellectual cowardice regrettable, but I expected nothing less from you.
Click to expand...

Except no you haven't. All you've done is "refuted" a claim I never actually made.

Except your own words show that to be a lie, yet again. You once again show yourself to be unable to comprehend very simple English words.

I have already answered your question; you promptly resorted to dishonesty and lying about what I stated.

Frankly, its no wonder you haven't been able to prove anything.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Except no you haven't. All you've done is "refuted" a claim I never actually made.
Click to expand...

Except, of course, that I actually have. You made a claim. You offered one name and it wasn't in context of what I asked you.
Except your own words show that to be a lie, yet again. You once again show yourself to be unable to comprehend very simple English words.
Click to expand...

No, any rational adult reading what I posted sees that's not the case. Your dishonesty is really on full display today.
I have already answered your question; you promptly resorted to dishonesty and lying about what I stated.
Click to expand...

No, I specifically asked you "Who are these citizens 'prasing a brutal dictatorship'? Please name some names and how they're relevant to this issue." You haven't don't that.
Frankly, its no wonder you haven't been able to prove anything.
Click to expand...

I find your intellectual cowardice regrettable, but I expected nothing less from you.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Except, of course, that I actually have. You made a claim. You offered one name and it wasn't in context of what I asked you.

No, any rational adult reading what I posted sees that's not the case. Your dishonesty is really on full display today.

No, I specifically asked you "Who are these citizens 'prasing a brutal dictatorship'? Please name some names and how they're relevant to this issue." You haven't don't that.

I find your intellectual cowardice regrettable, but I expected nothing less from you.
Click to expand...

You being unable to comprehend why the leader of your movement supporting a brutal dictatorship yet trying to claim he is fighting injustice is still quite amusing, as is your fantasy that you have refuted anything at all.

Once again, since you seem fixated in your fantasy universe, I never said Kaepernick supported Saddam, but rather that he supports a brutal dictatorship which not only oppresses its own people but also actual Africans in Africa--- which is true. Any "rational adult" reading this will see you can't argue honestly so you have fixated on Saddam as a defense mechanism.

Except that I have done that. Repeatedly. But it seems dishonesty is your default setting and you can't help yourself.

You are clearly living in a fantasy world of your own creation.
 
Tigerace117 said:
You being unable to comprehend why the leader of your movement supporting a brutal dictatorship yet trying to claim he is fighting injustice is still quite amusing, as is your fantasy that you have refuted anything at all.
Click to expand...

The leader of 'my movement'? Yet again you offer only sniveling dishonesty. Typical of a Saddam-apologist and Marxist like yourself.
Once again, since you seem fixated in your fantasy universe, I never said Kaepernick supported Saddam, but rather that he supports a brutal dictatorship which not only oppresses its own people but also actual Africans in Africa--- which is true. Any "rational adult" reading this will see you can't argue honestly so you have fixated on Saddam as a defense mechanism.
Click to expand...

I specifically asked you this: "Who are these citizens 'prasing a brutal dictatorship'? Please name some names and how they're relevant to this issue." Any rational adult sees that you haven't answered that in any meaningful way yet. Why are you defending Saddam?
Except that I have done that. Repeatedly. But it seems dishonesty is your default setting and you can't help yourself.
Click to expand...

Except that to claim that is to lie.
You are clearly living in a fantasy world of your own creation.
Click to expand...

Sorry you can't answer such a simple question.
 
Tigerace117 said:
So the only thing stopping him from being a dictator is.......the same thing which has stopped every other president from being a dictator.
Click to expand...

Yeah sure. The systems of checks, balances, and safeguards is holding out still, although if they are strained to the limit and creaking dangerously under the weight of Trump. No other president in US history has been as overt, aggressive, and clear in their intentions. What other president in history ever publicly threatened to shut down media which has been critical of him? What other president in history ever offered to pay any legal fees for his supporters to physically beat protesters?
 
Last edited:
Tigerace117 said:
Yet that was the claim that was made, and the one that you are supporting by your claim that Trump wants to be a dictator.

There's plenty of evidence that Trump is playing to his base in the dumbest way possible; very little that he genuinely wants to be a dictator.
Click to expand...

So, in your opinion, will there ever be a time when we should take Trump seriously?
 
ataraxia said:
Yeah sure. The systems of checks, balances, and safeguards is holding out still, although if they are strained to the limit and creaking dangerously under the weight of Trump. No other president in US history has been as overt, aggressive, and clear in their intentions. What other president in history ever publicly threatened to shut down media which has been critical of him? What other president in history ever offered to pay any legal fees for his supporters to physically beat protesters?
Click to expand...

Except they really aren't "strained to the limit." You are giving the idea of Trump being a schemer far too much credit. Frankly, he simply isn't competent enough to become a dictator in the first place.

Except there's no real proof that those were genuine ideas as opposed to him playing to his base
 
lurchadams said:
So, in your opinion, will there ever be a time when we should take Trump seriously?
Click to expand...

Not about him "wanting to be a dictator" because I have seen no credible evidence that he actually does.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
The leader of 'my movement'? Yet again you offer only sniveling dishonesty. Typical of a Saddam-apologist and Marxist like yourself.

I specifically asked you this: "Who are these citizens 'prasing a brutal dictatorship'? Please name some names and how they're relevant to this issue." Any rational adult sees that you haven't answered that in any meaningful way yet. Why are you defending Saddam?

Except that to claim that is to lie.

Sorry you can't answer such a simple question.
Click to expand...

Aw, look at that, your favorite tactic--total and complete lying about the other poster in an attempt to distract from your inability to support your claims.

Why can't you comprehend basic English? I have repeatedly done so. Either you can't read, or you are simply totally dishonest.

Except you keep lying, so no one takes your claims seriously. You have shown yourself to be totally unable to handle facts and reality.

Sorry you can't bear to accept what has actually been said so you have to lie, both to yourself and to others.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Aw, look at that, your favorite tactic--total and complete lying about the other poster in an attempt to distract from your inability to support your claims.
Click to expand...

LOL! Can't take what you dish out, bud? I asked a question; you've failed to answer it. The one who made a claim here is you.
Why can't you comprehend basic English? I have repeatedly done so. Either you can't read, or you are simply totally dishonest.
Click to expand...

I can. Why are you so laughably, transparently dishonest? What's the point?
Except you keep lying, so no one takes your claims seriously. You have shown yourself to be totally unable to handle facts and reality.

Sorry you can't bear to accept what has actually been said so you have to lie, both to yourself and to others.
Click to expand...

Except of course, that I haven't lied, nor can you demonstrate that I have.

Sorry you can't answer such a simple question. This seems to be really, really difficult for you.

Your intellectual cowardice seems to be holding you back.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
LOL! Can't take what you dish out, bud? I asked a question; you've failed to answer it. The one who made a claim here is you.

I can. Why are you so laughably, transparently dishonest? What's the point?

Except of course, that I haven't lied, nor can you demonstrate that I have.

Sorry you can't answer such a simple question. This seems to be really, really difficult for you.

Your intellectual cowardice seems to be holding you back.
Click to expand...

LOL! Ive seen you totally lie about other posters in an attempt to distract from the fact you have no argument before. Unfortunately for you, thats not something that anyone is going to let you get away with.

I have repeatedly answered your question. Four times. Each time you merely ignored it and resumed your dishonest shrieking about how I "didn't answer your question." You don't have an argument; you are being dishonest because your knee-jerk reflex is to defend your movement, yet you can't disprove what people literally say.

Look at that, more dishonesty from you. You are fleeing from the subject because you can't defend your position.

Except I can and already have. Your shrieking is nothing more than you desperately trying to convince yourself that you haven't been exposed when in reality you abolsutely have.

Sorry you can't comprehend basic English, and prefer dishonesty to debate.

You can't seem to post a sentence without lying about something, can you? There's doctors to help you with your innate dishonesty, you know. All it does is expose you.
 
Tigerace117 said:
LOL! Ive seen you totally lie about other posters in an attempt to distract from the fact you have no argument before. Unfortunately for you, thats not something that anyone is going to let you get away with.
Click to expand...

Yawn. Again, you can't take what you dish out? And I asked a question; I didn't propose an argument. Even the basic terminology of discourse seem to confuse you.
I have repeatedly answered your question. Four times. Each time you merely ignored it and resumed your dishonest shrieking about how I "didn't answer your question." You don't have an argument; you are being dishonest because your knee-jerk reflex is to defend your movement, yet you can't disprove what people literally say.
Click to expand...

No, you haven't. To insist that you have is a lie.
Look at that, more dishonesty from you. You are fleeing from the subject because you can't defend your position.
Click to expand...

No, I'm still here, waiting for you to answer what I asked. You haven't, but you sure like to pretend that you have.
Except I can and already have. Your shrieking is nothing more than you desperately trying to convince yourself that you haven't been exposed when in reality you abolsutely have.

Sorry you can't comprehend basic English, and prefer dishonesty to debate.

You can't seem to post a sentence without lying about something, can you? There's doctors to help you with your innate dishonesty, you know. All it does is expose you.
Click to expand...

It's OK that you lack the ability to answer such a simple question. Nothing to be ashamed of. But your intellectual cowardice and dishonesty sure are.

Not that you'd know.

Tell you what: I'm done exposing your dishonesty, go ahead and have the last word. It's clear that you need it and you're compelled to take it.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Yawn. Again, you can't take what you dish out? And I asked a question; I didn't propose an argument. Even the basic terminology of discourse seem to confuse you.

No, you haven't. To insist that you have is a lie.

No, I'm still here, waiting for you to answer what I asked. You haven't, but you sure like to pretend that you have.

It's OK that you lack the ability to answer such a simple question. Nothing to be ashamed of. But your intellectual cowardice and dishonesty sure are.

Not that you'd know.
Click to expand...

Yawn. Except the only one "dishing out" rampant dishonesty is you. That's a clear sign of a weak debater, by the way--- you can't disprove what the other poster states so you have to lie about what I have said.

And I answered the question, and you ignored my response, lied, and then asked it again. You can't seem to handle reality very well buddy. Better crawl back into your bubble.

Yet more lying from you. What a surprise.....not.

It's okay that you lack, among others, both honesty and reading skills. I'm sure someday you'll learn how to debate with resorting to lies and nothing else. It must be hard, feeling that desperate need to defend Kaepernick and the rest of the idiots yet not having any ability to support your case.

Maybe some day you'll be able to overcome your pathological need to lie. But I doubt it.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Not about him "wanting to be a dictator" because I have seen no credible evidence that he actually does.
Click to expand...

That wasn't my question. Nice dodge. You are dismissed.
 
Floridafan said:
The only brutal dictatorship I have seen praised is in our current White House. Maybe you need to spend a bit less time trying to control a persons 1st amendment rights and worry more about what this administration is doing to our country.
Click to expand...

Calling The Trump presidency a brutal dictatorship shows that either you don’t understand what the words you type actually mean or that you are simply a partisan hack. Either way it’s good evidence that nothing you say should be taken seriously.
 
Floridafan said:
If this administration is left to go their own way, they will be no better than any of the people you have mentioned. We should be thankful to our press for continuing to cover this embarrassment to the America people and their constitution.
Click to expand...
So you have moved the goalposts from trump being a brutal dictator to he would be one if he could. Another claim you have any evidence for. But hey don’t let the facts that you are making yourself look like a joke stop you from your nonsense. It’s good entertainment
 
ataraxia said:
It's not for lack of trying. The only thing which has stopped him so far is that our legal system, including our Constitutional law and protection of free speech, is still sort of holding out. But Trump is straining it to its limits, though. I am sure he is not very happy about it. Not happy at all. Neither, obviously, are all our "conservative", "freedom-loving", "Constitution-loving" Conservatives.
Click to expand...

So let’s see some evidence of your claims. Prov that he wants to do as you claim. Prove that he has done anything to strain the constitution or the law. And just so you know he is not the first president that has EOs overturned for being unconstitutional.
So let’s see your evidence. And please be specific.
 
lurchadams said:
That wasn't my question. Nice dodge. You are dismissed.
Click to expand...

Actually it answers your question quite well. What subjects are we to take Trump seriously on? Not on any fantasy about him being a dictator or strongman.

You really aren't very good at countering others' posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom