Bill Maher: at it again and on target!

[Taichiliberal]

Yeah, I know.....a LOT of people hate him, even the people who like him don't agree with half his rants. But damned if he isn't on target a lot. As the old adage goes, if you're pissing off everyone, you must be doing something right.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Yeah, I know.....a LOT of people hate him, even the people who like him don't agree with half his rants. But damned if he isn't on target a lot. As the old adage goes, if you're pissing off everyone, you must be doing something right.

He's wrong about who is the threat.

Which party wants to pack the supreme court?
Which party wants to register 16 and 17-year-olds to vote even if they can't actually vote?
Which part of the political spectrum formed independent "states" like the CHOP and CHAZ?
Which party is upset that the alphabet soup of agencies can't just rule by fiat made by unelected bureaucrats?
Which party wants to declare the opposition "insurrectionists" without so much as a hearing or trial and force them off the ballot?
Which party wants to let non-citizens, even ones here illegally, vote?

 

[BidenPresident]

He's wrong about who is the threat.

Which party wants to pack the supreme court?
Which party wants to register 16 and 17-year-olds to vote even if they can't actually vote?
Which part of the political spectrum formed independent "states" like the CHOP and CHAZ?
Which party is upset that the alphabet soup of agencies can't just rule by fiat made by unelected bureaucrats?
Which party wants to declare the opposition "insurrectionists" without so much as a hearing or trial and force them off the ballot?
Which party wants to let non-citizens, even ones here illegally, vote?

Which party supports the violent overthrow of the government? Republicans.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Which party supports the violent overthrow of the government? Republicans.

Neither, or both. Your choice.

 

[BidenPresident]

Neither, or both. Your choice.

Fact: Republicans.

 

[Taichiliberal]

He's wrong about who is the threat.

Which party wants to pack the supreme court?
Which party wants to register 16 and 17-year-olds to vote even if they can't actually vote?
Which part of the political spectrum formed independent "states" like the CHOP and CHAZ?
Which party is upset that the alphabet soup of agencies can't just rule by fiat made by unelected bureaucrats?
Which party wants to declare the opposition "insurrectionists" without so much as a hearing or trial and force them off the ballot?
Which party wants to let non-citizens, even ones here illegally, vote?

Parroting right wing talking points seems to be your forte. Let me (once again) deconstruct them one at a time:

1. Both....but in recent history, the GOP head McConnell stated in no uncertain terms that he wasn't going to let Obama in his last term appoint SCOTUS judges. Yet, what did Turtle and company do during the reign of the Orange Oaf? Can you say "hypocrisy" boys & girls?

2. Proof please? I haven't heard of this...might have missed it.

4. Once again, you need to detox from Fox Noise and the like. Reality check: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ondemned-violence-linked-protests/3317862001/

https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/6/16/21292723/chaz-seattle-police-free-neighborhood

5. WTF are you babbling about? Remember, it was the Shrub who dismantled what Slick Willy put together by meetings that kept us safe from terrorist attacks ...then we had 9-11. That's when a panicky Congress okayed crap like DHS and scripted the Patriot Act. Only complete assholes gobble up this pseudo fascist nonsense and then bleat "states rights only". Contradictions, but folk like you just don't get it.

6. What makes you think you can lie your ass off and no one sees that? Try watching the current Jan. 6th hearings....the videos of Trump, the interviews and the actual riot that day that have not before been seen are by no means supporting ANY BS you and the rest of the MAGA minions are bleating. When the Shrub TWICE finagled his way into the White House, people were pissed but there was NO storming the Capitol and beating up cops while screaming for the VP's head. Hell, even Nixon who didn't like losing, accepted reality and there was no problem. Not so with the current GOP. Deal with it.

7. You seriously need to get your head out of Sean Hannity's ass. Reality check for your education: https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/13/poli...-noncitizens-democrats-bill-s1-hr1/index.html

GROW THE FUCK UP AND STOP WASTING TIME AND SPACE WITH THIS MAGA BULLHORN, WILL YA PLEASE?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Parroting right wing talking points seems to be your forte. Let me (once again) deconstruct them one at a time:

1. Both....but in recent history, the GOP head McConnell stated in no uncertain terms that he wasn't going to let Obama in his last term appoint SCOTUS judges. Yet, what did Turtle and company do during the reign of the Orange Oaf? Can you say "hypocrisy" boys & girls?

Tu quoque fallacy.

2. Proof please? I haven't heard of this...might have missed it.

Majority of House Democrats vote in favor of lowering voting age to 16
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-democrats-hr-1-lower-voting-age-16

"16-year-old voter age"

This is wrong. The bill says that states must accept an individual’s application to register to vote if the individual is at least 16 years old. However, it also states that nothing in that provision "may be construed to require a state to permit an individual who is under 18 years of age at the time of an election for federal office to vote in the election."

This process is known as "preregistration" and is already allowed in some states for individuals who are 16 or 17. Some states also permit 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections, if they will turn 18 before the general election.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/feb/03/fact-checking-misleading-attacks-hr-1-democrats-vo/

I picked that second one because it tries to argue that it's okay to register 16 and 17-year-olds to vote even if they legally can't...

4. Once again, you need to detox from Fox Noise and the like. Reality check: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ondemned-violence-linked-protests/3317862001/
https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/6/16/21292723/chaz-seattle-police-free-neighborhood

Seems just a few weeks later Vox was trying to excuse the rapes and murders there...

The violent end of the Capitol Hill Organized Protest, explained
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/7/2/21310109/chop-chaz-cleared-violence-explained

5. WTF are you babbling about? Remember, it was the Shrub who dismantled what Slick Willy put together by meetings that kept us safe from terrorist attacks ...then we had 9-11. That's when a panicky Congress okayed crap like DHS and scripted the Patriot Act. Only complete assholes gobble up this pseudo fascist nonsense and then bleat "states rights only". Contradictions, but folk like you just don't get it.

Supreme Court limits EPA authority to set climate standards for power plants
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/30/-su...ty-on-climate-standards-for-power-plants.html

https://www.universityofcalifornia....st-epa-heres-what-ucla-legal-experts-have-say

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1103595898/supreme-court-epa-climate-change

Supreme Court blocks Biden's Covid requirements for businesses, upholds health care workers mandate
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...covid-requirements-workplaces-allows-n1287435

6. What makes you think you can lie your ass off and no one sees that? Try watching the current Jan. 6th hearings....the videos of Trump, the interviews and the actual riot that day that have not before been seen are by no means supporting ANY BS you and the rest of the MAGA minions are bleating. When the Shrub TWICE finagled his way into the White House, people were pissed but there was NO storming the Capitol and beating up cops while screaming for the VP's head. Hell, even Nixon who didn't like losing, accepted reality and there was no problem. Not so with the current GOP. Deal with it.

7. You seriously need to get your head out of Sean Hannity's ass. Reality check for your education: https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/13/poli...-noncitizens-democrats-bill-s1-hr1/index.html

Democrats are using the 14th Amendment to threaten Republican candidates
https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ndment_to_threaten_republican_candidates.html

Democrats Continue Efforts to Wipe Republicans Off the Ballots
https://www.independentsentinel.com/democrats-continue-efforts-to-wipe-republicans-off-the-ballots/

To preserve our democracy, we must bar insurrectionists from the ballot
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...ights-curtail-january-6/9024921002/?gnt-cfr=1

GROW THE FUCK UP AND STOP WASTING TIME AND SPACE WITH THIS MAGA BULLHORN, WILL YA PLEASE?

Have fun going hair on fire explaining that response.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Tu quoque fallacy.



Majority of House Democrats vote in favor of lowering voting age to 16
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-democrats-hr-1-lower-voting-age-16

"16-year-old voter age"

This is wrong. The bill says that states must accept an individual’s application to register to vote if the individual is at least 16 years old. However, it also states that nothing in that provision "may be construed to require a state to permit an individual who is under 18 years of age at the time of an election for federal office to vote in the election."

This process is known as "preregistration" and is already allowed in some states for individuals who are 16 or 17. Some states also permit 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections, if they will turn 18 before the general election.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/feb/03/fact-checking-misleading-attacks-hr-1-democrats-vo/

I picked that second one because it tries to argue that it's okay to register 16 and 17-year-olds to vote even if they legally can't...



Seems just a few weeks later Vox was trying to excuse the rapes and murders there...

The violent end of the Capitol Hill Organized Protest, explained
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/7/2/21310109/chop-chaz-cleared-violence-explained



Supreme Court limits EPA authority to set climate standards for power plants
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/30/-su...ty-on-climate-standards-for-power-plants.html

https://www.universityofcalifornia....st-epa-heres-what-ucla-legal-experts-have-say

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1103595898/supreme-court-epa-climate-change

Supreme Court blocks Biden's Covid requirements for businesses, upholds health care workers mandate
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...covid-requirements-workplaces-allows-n1287435

Democrats are using the 14th Amendment to threaten Republican candidates
https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ndment_to_threaten_republican_candidates.html

Democrats Continue Efforts to Wipe Republicans Off the Ballots
https://www.independentsentinel.com/democrats-continue-efforts-to-wipe-republicans-off-the-ballots/

To preserve our democracy, we must bar insurrectionists from the ballot
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...ights-curtail-january-6/9024921002/?gnt-cfr=1



Have fun going hair on fire explaining that response.

1. You just parroted the stupidity that ITN squawks when faced with a fact/reality that obliterates his usual propaganda BS or MAGA beliefs. Sad, T.A., sad.

2. Okay, so the Dems make a proposal that (a) I don't agree with on any level for a myriad of reasons to long to list here (b) that has been analyzed to diminish the hype you and the right wing put forth. Pretty stupid of you to present a fact check and then try to dilute it with your supposition and conjecture.

3. That's my link, you nitwit. There's no attempted "excuse" in that article. WTF do you think you can lie in face of contrary facts. Since you have a penchant for not reading thoroughly, show me the passages that support what you say. If you can't, then you're a piss poor MAGA liar.

4. The EPA was created under the NIXON administration, genius. For your education: https://www.epa.gov/history#:~:text=Celebrating 50 years of the,1970, by President Richard Nixon.

And the Biden example you gave is hardly validation for the sweeping, all encompassing statement you made. As with the EPA, you clearly don't know what you're on about beyond MAGA talking points.

6. See #1.

7. As the reader can see, you were proven flat out wrong on your originally claim, so you then switch to another subject ...blather from right wing wonk sites that essentially spew the usual MAGA mush.

Newsflash for ya, toodles ... when both parties agree to the results of an election, when those results are contested NUMEROUS times and court and found to be valid....any attempt to change those results by force is called an insurrection. For a member of Congress to support such an effort borderlines treason. There is legal precedent for this. Again, for your education: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...elled-1861-supporting-confederacy/4107713001/

Now run-a-long and tell the guy in the mirror what a victory you just scored. The rest of us (sans the local MAGA morons and alt right rummies) will just shake our heads at your insipid, ignorant stubbornness.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

1. You just parroted the stupidity that ITN squawks when faced with a fact/reality that obliterates his usual propaganda BS or MAGA beliefs. Sad, T.A., sad.

2. Okay, so the Dems make a proposal that (a) I don't agree with on any level for a myriad of reasons to long to list here (b) that has been analyzed to diminish the hype you and the right wing put forth. Pretty stupid of you to present a fact check and then try to dilute it with your supposition and conjecture.

3. That's my link, you nitwit. There's no attempted "excuse" in that article. WTF do you think you can lie in face of contrary facts. Since you have a penchant for not reading thoroughly, show me the passages that support what you say. If you can't, then you're a piss poor MAGA liar.

4. The EPA was created under the NIXON administration, genius. For your education: https://www.epa.gov/history#:~:text=Celebrating 50 years of the,1970, by President Richard Nixon.

And the Biden example you gave is hardly validation for the sweeping, all encompassing statement you made. As with the EPA, you clearly don't know what you're on about beyond MAGA talking points.

6. See #1.

7. As the reader can see, you were proven flat out wrong on your originally claim, so you then switch to another subject ...blather from right wing wonk sites that essentially spew the usual MAGA mush.

Newsflash for ya, toodles ... when both parties agree to the results of an election, when those results are contested NUMEROUS times and court and found to be valid....any attempt to change those results by force is called an insurrection. For a member of Congress to support such an effort borderlines treason. There is legal precedent for this. Again, for your education: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...elled-1861-supporting-confederacy/4107713001/

Now run-a-long and tell the guy in the mirror what a victory you just scored. The rest of us (sans the local MAGA morons and alt right rummies) will just shake our heads at your insipid, ignorant stubbornness.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
1. You just parroted the stupidity that ITN squawks when faced with a fact/reality that obliterates his usual propaganda BS or MAGA beliefs. Sad, T.A., sad.

2. Okay, so the Dems make a proposal that (a) I don't agree with on any level for a myriad of reasons to long to list here (b) that has been analyzed to diminish the hype you and the right wing put forth. Pretty stupid of you to present a fact check and then try to dilute it with your supposition and conjecture.

3. That's my link, you nitwit. There's no attempted "excuse" in that article. WTF do you think you can lie in face of contrary facts. Since you have a penchant for not reading thoroughly, show me the passages that support what you say. If you can't, then you're a piss poor MAGA liar.

4. The EPA was created under the NIXON administration, genius. For your education: https://www.epa.gov/history#:~:text=...ichard Nixon.

And the Biden example you gave is hardly validation for the sweeping, all encompassing statement you made. As with the EPA, you clearly don't know what you're on about beyond MAGA talking points.

6. See #1.

7. As the reader can see, you were proven flat out wrong on your originally claim, so you then switch to another subject ...blather from right wing wonk sites that essentially spew the usual MAGA mush.

Newsflash for ya, toodles ... when both parties agree to the results of an election, when those results are contested NUMEROUS times and court and found to be valid....any attempt to change those results by force is called an insurrection. For a member of Congress to support such an effort borderlines treason. There is legal precedent for this. Again, for your education: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...cy/4107713001/

Now run-a-long and tell the guy in the mirror what a victory you just scored. The rest of us (sans the local MAGA morons and alt right rummies) will just shake our heads at your insipid, ignorant stubbornness.

And there you have it, dear readers. Like all the other MAGA minions, alt right rummies, right wing wonks and basic trolls, T.A. Gardener just devolves into childish memes and neologist babbling when facts with facts and logic he can't BS past.

You're pathetic, T.A. Don't ever rag on the likes of ITN and his ilk, because like them, you don't have the intellectual honesty or courage just to concede a point or admit error on any level. Carry on.

 

[Geeko Sportivo]

He's wrong about who is the threat.

Which party wants to pack the supreme court?
Which party wants to register 16 and 17-year-olds to vote even if they can't actually vote?
Which part of the political spectrum formed independent "states" like the CHOP and CHAZ?
Which party is upset that the alphabet soup of agencies can't just rule by fiat made by unelected bureaucrats?
Which party wants to declare the opposition "insurrectionists" without so much as a hearing or trial and force them off the ballot?
Which party wants to let non-citizens, even ones here illegally, vote?

All I heard was BLA! BLA! BLA!

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
He's wrong about who is the threat.

Which party wants to pack the supreme court?
Which party wants to register 16 and 17-year-olds to vote even if they can't actually vote?
Which part of the political spectrum formed independent "states" like the CHOP and CHAZ?
Which party is upset that the alphabet soup of agencies can't just rule by fiat made by unelected bureaucrats?
Which party wants to declare the opposition "insurrectionists" without so much as a hearing or trial and force them off the ballot?
Which party wants to let non-citizens, even ones here illegally, vote?

All I heard was BLA! BLA! BLA!

I took his blather apart piece by piece....look at his childish response. Sad.