Especially if I can waterboard them.I see the way this works... You're one of those folks that subscribes to the guilty until proven innocent crowd.
Especially if I can waterboard them.I see the way this works... You're one of those folks that subscribes to the guilty until proven innocent crowd.
I never did, that little assumption was part of the game that you prefer to play in which you make a statement about something and then run along with it and pretend it;'s fact.
That strategy may work in you own little fantasy world, but no one else will typically buy that bull sh*t... If you ask me (and I know that you are asking), this is the reason that you get your panties all in a bunch every time that people don't support your unfounded commentary and 'factoids' - you want your position to be reality despite knowing it is fantasy and in turn, get all pissy when everyone doesn't fall in line.
roflmao
That strategy may work in you own little fantasy world, but no one else will typically buy that bull sh*t... If you ask me (and I know that you are asking), this is the reason that you get your panties all in a bunch every time that people don't support your unfounded commentary and 'factoids' - you want your position to be reality despite knowing it is fantasy and in turn, get all pissy when everyone doesn't fall in line.
Yep, ya find a handful of examples of misconduct of a bank and therefore every single financial institution and every person working for this sector is guilty due to the example.
You should have quoted this one as well...
Isn't that the concept you use when discussing, say, the OWS protestors, or Democrats, or anyone who disagrees with you?
Isn't that the concept you use when discussing, say, the OWS protestors, or Democrats, or anyone who disagrees with you?
It's more creative than having nothing to run along with at all.
roflmao
1.) Scroll up
2.) Read
Nope... I look at the common denominator in assessing a position. If you choose to open your eyes a wee bit, you'll observe what everyone else sees.
Try it some time, you'll find that you won't be branded as a complete fool.
.
If you chose to use your brain, you wouldn't be branded as a complete moron.
How ironic.. You went and did it again and posted without thinking.
Tell ya what, lemme give you a chance to redeem yourself. Perhaps you can post examples of smart and articulate OWS speakers and prove me wrong. In fact, I'll bet that you can find many more examples of the smart, articulate ones than there are examples of the criminals, brain-dead and idiots.
I wait with baited anticipation of your thought-provoking and insightful response.
To prove you wrong would be to show that you used a few examples and extrapolated. Which is what you do, you've proved it. Go back and read your own posts.
If you chose to use your brain, you wouldn't be branded as a complete moron.
So.. No examples then, eh?
Nothing, zip, zilch, nada.
Just as I thought
Still nothing, eh?.. That's gotta make you feel even more foolish.
I suppose that you're now learning that contrary to your earlier claim, there is no real body of legitimate speakers for OWS.
Think before you post TP.
Alright... Then can I assume that you were shooting your mouth off on a topic that you admittedly know nothing about and can show no examples to refute my commentary (of which you also have no knowledge)?
I suppose that your real purpose is then to act the part of a useless troll.
You are completely incoherent. You're claiming that I'm making some statement about OWS when, if you could read, you'd be able to see that my comment was about YOUR generalizing based on a few examples, which YOU accused someone else of doing. I didn't make any claims about OWS, I made claims about YOU and what you say.
You may think I'm useless, but I've kept you from running into the traffic for the last few minutes. That's my good deed of the day.
Fact is this TP, I stated that I observed numerous examples of the inability of this group to articulate any form of cohesive message that was common from group to group... You were asked to provide examples that would refute my generalizations and thereby prove your point.