• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

And The Gaff's Live On

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Please enlighten me your ulterior responce to the title of the subject.
Nah, I understand your attempting to cover for this doofus.

I read the page you linked, it seems the title misrepresents the facts and your OP. Perhaps if you read it you will come to the same conclusion.

Dufus yes, "Poor Joe seems he isn't being kept informened by his staff." Total nonsense
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
No, I did not defend him the majority of the time because on this forum it would have been a waste of time.
But now the shoe is on the other foot and I will ding this administration ever chance I get; that is until the weather gets better, or when I'm engrossed in my Xbox. Then I have better things to do than antagonize those that think the current herd of Democrats are untouchable.
The upshot is that you shouldn't criticize Biden for anything.
Any criticism of Biden is invalid because because it would
be the false equivalency fallacy. Why?
I don't know. I tried, but couldn't figure it out. But that's what
they tell me. Trump's evil is so great that you're not allowed
to sully Biden or Harris. I think it might even be federal law
now to require changing the subject from Biden to Trump.
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
Poor Joe seems he isn't being kept informened by his staff.
Or is it he really doesn't know or remember.
Fact Check: Were there no COVID vaccines when Joe Biden became president?
From the link:

Biden responded: "By the end of July this year. When we came into office, there was only 50 million doses that were available.

"We have now...by the end of July, we will have over 600 million doses—enough to vaccinate every single American."

It is therefore unlikely that Biden was attempting to claim that Trump's administration did not have a coronavirus vaccine available by the time he took over. He said exactly the opposite two minutes prior.


Who knows what goes in that man's head but it's clear from the above he knows the situation (as in fully informed and in complete recall).
 

ecco

Veteran Member
It just amazes me that some people are so biased and so petty that they ignore tens of thousands of Trump lies but jump on any perceived "gaffs" of Biden.

In their minds, Trump could never have done anything wrong. I guess that's what defines a cult following.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
It just amazes me that some people are so biased and so petty that they ignore tens of thousands of Trump lies but jump on any perceived "gaffs" of Biden.

In their minds, Trump could never have done anything wrong. I guess that's what defines a cult following.
Just like the left!

Cept its a cult of partisanship rather than a personality. Obama was the closest though for a cult based on personality.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
from the post-Trump-stress-disorder crowd I would hazard to guess.
Well, I think it is fair to question why you chose not to hold previous administrations to the same standard. My guess is it is purely partisan against anything that isn't the GOP.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Well, I think it is fair to question why you chose not to hold previous administrations to the same standard. My guess is it is purely partisan against anything that isn't the GOP.
Does anyone call Dem & Pub administrations on
misdeeds equally? Nah....no one does (IMO).
If one can only criticize X if they equally criticize Y,
then no criticism of either is valid.
People will have biases. This doesn't make their
opinions invalid. And it's not a standard of judgement
that the accuser would want applied to oneself.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
Does anyone call Dem & Pub administrations on
misdeeds equally? Nah....no one does (IMO).
If one can only criticize X if they equally criticize Y,
then no criticism of either is valid.
People will have biases. This doesn't make their
opinions invalid. And it's not a standard of judgement
that the accuser would want applied to oneself.
Some level of consistency would be a nice bonus. Other times, like this one, it is glaring and pretty obvious. This doesn't discredit the point but it does discredit the person giving it.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Some level of consistency would be a nice bonus. Other times, like this one, it is glaring and pretty obvious. This doesn't discredit the point but it does discredit the person giving it.
Is it ever not glaring...people's tendency to
criticize one side more than the other?
Tis easier on us if we accept that all are
biased. Woe unto the one's who believe
they're above it all.
The real trick...something we can actually
do about it...is to ensure that our criticism
is objective & cromulent, our biases
notwithstanding.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
Is it ever not glaring...people's tendency to
criticize one side more than the other?
More than > never, which is what is happening here with esmith. It is possible I am missing something, but I cannot think of a single instance, in the entirety of the Trump administration, that Trump was held accountable or questioned by the OP. That is my point.

It really doesn't matter to me, but there shouldn't be any whining or underhanded comments when others hold your feet to the flames over it.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
More than > never, which is what is happening here with esmith. It is possible I am missing something, but I cannot think of a single instance, in the entirety of the Trump administration, that Trump was held accountable or questioned by the OP. That is my point.

It really doesn't matter to me, but there shouldn't be any whining or underhanded comments when others hold your feet to the flames over it.
So Esmith is biased.
I am. You are. So is everyone else who would dismiss
our opinions because of bias.

You cannot recall him criticizing anything about Trump.
Have you asked him if he did?
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
So Esmith is biased.
I am. You are. So is everyone else who would dismiss
our opinions because of bias.
If you are going to flip flop positions based on political party alone, is the discussion worth having? For me, that answer is clearly no. It happens in a majority of threads here, hence me spending less time here. I am not here to change his or your mind. Simply pointing out the reason his posts are not well received by others.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
If you are going to flip flop positions based on political party alone, is the discussion worth having?
I don't understand this "flip flop" accusation.
Could you explain?
For me, that answer is clearly no. It happens in a majority of threads here, hence me spending less time here. I am not here to change his or your mind. Simply pointing out the reason his posts are not well received by others.
His opinions are troubling to some posters on the other
side of the aisle. But I observe that this condition happens
in both directions.
It strikes me that too many people try to derail threads by
the opposition. Criticize Biden...they bring up Trump.
Criticize Trump...they bring up Biden. I believe this
phenomenon is called "whataboutism", which is used to
derail discussions.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
I don't understand this "flip flop" accusation.
Could you explain?
Sure, the idea that when one party is in power and conducts themselves in a certain way is acceptable because they are the party you support. But then condemning others for acting in a similar fashion. In one instance, it is acceptable or excusable. In others, it isn't. Discussions quickly become circular because it is impossible to identify a spot to draw the line because it is always moving.

His opinions are troubling to some posters on the other
side of the aisle. But I observe that this condition happens
in both directions.
It strikes me that too many people try to derail threads by
the opposition. Criticize Biden...they bring up Trump.
Criticize Trump...they bring up Biden. I believe this
phenomenon is called "whataboutism", which is used to
derail discussions.
In some cases, I agree. In others, it helps to have another example of similar conduct to try to find a place where both people agree. This is idealistic, but this discussion wouldn't have to happen if those of the various parties would hold their own accountable. In this specific example, a simple "I agree, Trump said things that I don't agree with either. But, for now, let's focus on Biden." Instead, we get none of that compromise so the position becomes a bit more aggressive. I am not innocent of this charge, it is something I am trying to work on.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Sure, the idea that when one party is in power and conducts themselves in a certain way is acceptable because they are the party you support. But then condemning others for acting in a similar fashion. In one instance, it is acceptable or excusable. In others, it isn't. Discussions quickly become circular because it is impossible to identify a spot to draw the line because it is always moving.
Yes, I see that too.
In some cases, I agree. In others, it helps to have another example of similar conduct to try to find a place where both people agree. This is idealistic, but this discussion wouldn't have to happen if those of the various parties would hold their own accountable. In this specific example, a simple "I agree, Trump said things that I don't agree with either. But, for now, let's focus on Biden." Instead, we get none of that compromise so the position becomes a bit more aggressive. I am not innocent of this charge, it is something I am trying to work on.
OK.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
No, I did not defend him the majority of the time because on this forum it would have been a waste of time.
But now the shoe is on the other foot and I will ding this administration ever chance I get; that is until the weather gets better, or when I'm engrossed in my Xbox. Then I have better things to do than antagonize those that think the current herd of Democrats are untouchable.
I was writing about your not dinging Trump not the reverse.
 

esmith

Veteran Member
I was writing about your not dinging Trump not the reverse.
I agreed with almost every decision he came to as far as the economy, national defense, and border security was concerned.
Therefore why would I post anything in opposition to those decisions.
However, I may not have agreed with his manner of expressing his opinion or other mannerisms.
Those actions had little or no consequences on my life.
But what difference did it make if I didn't make any of those view public knowledge?
When you read anything I say here about any member of this administration concerning expressing their opinion or mannerisms feel free to call me out.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Just like the left!

Cept its a cult of partisanship rather than a personality. Obama was the closest though for a cult based on personality.


So you need to ignore the difference between an occasional gaffe and 30,000 lies in order to keep believing.


Also, you apparently need a refresher on the meaning of the word cult.

cult
/kəlt/
Learn to pronounce

noun
a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.
"the cult of St. Olaf"
a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister.
"a network of Satan-worshiping cults"

a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing."a cult of personality surrounding the leaders"
A "cult of partisanship" is something you made up as another failed example of your need for whataboutism. It's comparable to six-year-olds screaming "Na na, you're a poopy pants"; "No, you are the poopy pants".
 
Top