“ You guys’ obsession with Trump’s tweet is laughable.”
You guys? Minnesotans? People from Wyoming? People who are Thelemic? Independants? Those would apply to me, not sure where you are going with that part. You also ignored that his Twitter Habit now has consequences. Or as you later clarified you just don’t care about that reality.
“ You’re dissecting it like it’s the Zapruder film.”
You used it to prove your point, unfortunately when it was broken down it did not support your point.
“ Trump is — if nothing else — a blowhard. He speaks his mind and makes no apologies for it.”
True, however his Spokespeople make excuses for it. So do most of his supporters.
“ That is, as Pence said, refreshing (something else TP took out of context, BTW). I don’t think even his supporters take him seriously half the time. But I digress.”
So you feel it will be refreshing for the President of the United States to spout of without knowing what is going on, and to spout of lies, and that even his own supporters won’t believe him half the time. That’s a little odd, most people do not like being lied to, or not being able to trust what the President says. Seems you are an exception to that. it should also make Diplomacy and Foreign Relations interesting,
“ Are you kidding?”
Nope. you stated that you had already provided Victoria examples. You had not. You prove that when you follow with “ Hell, you don’t even have to read past the headlines to see my point” You were stating your point, you did not cite three previous examples as you claimed. Although since you find lies and ignorance “refreshing” this is not really surprising you are attempting to pivot from that. It is amusing to see you distort the point I made, in a post you are whining about distortions.
“ “Trump proposes stripping citizenship from political protesters” Really? He proposes nothing.”
True, he did not propose it, he clearly stated it. That is one of two of his suggested punishments. “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag — if they do, there must be consequences — perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!” If you suggested it, then it would be nothing more than your opinion. When the man who will be President in a few weeks suggest it, well will have a little more Authority and Power than you. He clearly stated “there must be consequences”. Then suggested two.
“ It’s pure distortion with the intent to scare the uneducated (the educated know the “proposal” is impossible).”
The educated do understand it is not possible, which is why it is a little disconcerting to see the President Elect state something like that. Of course, Rep Paul Ryan proudly touted that he is tutoring the President Elect on the Constitution and the Separation of Powers. Since obviously, even in your own words, the President Elect is not very educated.
“ If you need me to point out all the distortions on TP, then you’re not going to see them anyway. It’s like arguing whether the sky is blue.”
When someone from the other side of an argument says “you don’t understand what I’m saying” as you just did, what they really mean is “why can’t you just accept that I’m right?” This is the argument used when they cannot justify their position and point.
“ What you believe is, as you say, what you will perceive.”
Amusingly enough this does apply to most people, however, it does not apply to people who are Thelemic. Due to Philosophical/Religious Beliefs they have to accept facts and reality as it is, they cannot have a belief after it is proven to be false. Thus they perceive Life and Reality as it is without Partisan Filters. Perhaps you should try being original if you are going to attempt to insult me. You also should have countered my points rather than resorting to empty rhetoric and innuendo. Good Effort Kiddo, you get the participation ribbon!