Parliament vs. Trump

[Pogo]

FIrst of all, ridiculing a reporter is always called for.

Mexicans, women, Presidents, candidates for President, and landowners are not "reporters".

The only 'reporter' involved was the visual.
So you're saying that ridiculing a congenital disability is "always called for".

Fascists.... SMH

What I said was very clear, why are you pretending to be dumb?

Reporters deserve nothing but contempt and ridicule.

Reporters are how we know things. So you're saying knowing things deserves nothing but contempt and ridicule.

Yeah I figured that was coming. It kinda naturally follows. Ignorance is Strength.

The rest? Shotgun Fallacy. You posted a bunch of crap, I picked what I felt like picking. If you don't like that, then focus.

I just did. The only "reporter" involved was the gyration in the gif image. Which has nothing to do with reporting, but with a congenital physical disorder. And that "deserves contempt and ridicule".

Says so much.

 

[Pogo]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

THERE we go. "Different rules apply". Finally he admits to a double standard.

As I said at the beginning -- Rump the Magnificent can denigrate whoever/whatever he wants but let somebody react to it..... ooooooh no, we can't have that.

Having it Both Ways: Priceless.

This is where I came in.

 

[Slade3200]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

 

[Correll]

FIrst of all, ridiculing a reporter is always called for.

Mexicans, women, Presidents, candidates for President, and landowners are not "reporters".

The only 'reporter' involved was the visual.
So you're saying that ridiculing a congenital disability is "always called for".

Fascists.... SMH

What I said was very clear, why are you pretending to be dumb?

Reporters deserve nothing but contempt and ridicule.

Reporters are how we know things. So you're saying knowing things deserves nothing but contempt and ridicule.

Yeah I figured that was coming. It kinda naturally follows. Ignorance is Strength.

The rest? Shotgun Fallacy. You posted a bunch of crap, I picked what I felt like picking. If you don't like that, then focus.

I just did. The only "reporter" involved was the gyration in the gif image. Which has nothing to do with reporting, but with a congenital physical disorder. And that "deserves contempt and ridicule".

Says so much.

Which is why their complete betrayal of their professional responsibility has been so hurtful to the nation and why they deserve such contempt now.

And the gif image was about ridiculing a reporter. Which is always a good idea.

DO you want to focus on one of your other Shotgun pellets?

 

[Pogo]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

Seems to me Correll's blatant double standard fits under that definition.

 

[Correll]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

THERE we go. "Different rules apply". Finally he admits to a double standard.

As I said at the beginning -- Rump the Magnificent can denigrate whoever/whatever he wants but let somebody react to it..... ooooooh no, we can't have that.

Having it Both Ways: Priceless.

This is where I came in.

They are two completely different situations, of course different rules apply, you moron.

"Politics stop at the water's edge." YOu ever hear that before, moron?

 

[Correll]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

My point stands. If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

That you don't understand the difference between a political campaign and international relations or why there might be different rules and expectations for the two, is you being a moron.

 

[Pogo]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

My point stands. If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

That you don't understand the difference between a political campaign and international relations or why there might be different rules and expectations for the two, is you being a moron.

Then I shudder to think what the same reasoning makes you with your hero-worship personality cult double standard.

 

[Slade3200]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

My point stands. If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

That you don't understand the difference between a political campaign and international relations or why there might be different rules and expectations for the two, is you being a moron.

If Trump wins then Congress needs to work with him as well... How is that different and how does that excuse the same childlike behavior that you are condemning from the Britts?

 

[Pogo]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

THERE we go. "Different rules apply". Finally he admits to a double standard.

As I said at the beginning -- Rump the Magnificent can denigrate whoever/whatever he wants but let somebody react to it..... ooooooh no, we can't have that.

Having it Both Ways: Priceless.

This is where I came in.

They are two completely different situations, of course different rules apply, you moron.

"Politics stop at the water's edge." YOu ever hear that before, moron?

I don't know any "morons" -- perhaps Donald Rump can point them out -- but no, I've never heard that. But diga me this:

If that's true, then what the fuck business is it of ours what Natalie Maines says to a concert audience in London?

Once again ---- can't have it both ways. It seems we're making this same point over and over.
Wonder why.

 

[Correll]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

My point stands. If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

That you don't understand the difference between a political campaign and international relations or why there might be different rules and expectations for the two, is you being a moron.

Then I shudder to think what the same reasoning makes you with your hero-worship personality cult double standard.

You are an asshole.

Trump is not my "hero", he is the candidate that most agrees with me on the issues, thus he has my support.

My point stands.

If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

 

[Correll]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

My point stands. If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

That you don't understand the difference between a political campaign and international relations or why there might be different rules and expectations for the two, is you being a moron.

If Trump wins then Congress needs to work with him as well... How is that different and how does that excuse the same childlike behavior that you are condemning from the Britts?

True to a lesser extent.

 

[Pogo]

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

My point stands. If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

That you don't understand the difference between a political campaign and international relations or why there might be different rules and expectations for the two, is you being a moron.

Then I shudder to think what the same reasoning makes you with your hero-worship personality cult double standard.

You are an asshole.

Trump is not my "hero", he is the candidate that most agrees with me on the issues, thus he has my support.

My point stands.

If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

Double standard.
Ergo --- hypocrisy.

 

[Esmeralda]

What do you all think of Parliaments view of Trump?

Actually, I don't give a rat's ass about anything Parliament says or does.

This is an indication of how foolish and misguided Trump supporters are regarding international relations: it is of great importance what our strongest and closest international ally thinks of a person who aspires to be the US president. It's hugely important.

 

[Correll]

Insulting the potentially future President of the United States, is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

THERE we go. "Different rules apply". Finally he admits to a double standard.

As I said at the beginning -- Rump the Magnificent can denigrate whoever/whatever he wants but let somebody react to it..... ooooooh no, we can't have that.

Having it Both Ways: Priceless.

This is where I came in.

They are two completely different situations, of course different rules apply, you moron.

"Politics stop at the water's edge." YOu ever hear that before, moron?

I don't know any "morons" -- perhaps Donald Rump can point them out -- but no, I've never heard that. But diga me this:

If that's true, then what the fuck business is it of ours what Natalie Maines says to a concert audience in London?

Once again ---- can't have it both ways. It seems we're making this same point over and over.
Wonder why.

The idea of a group, such as a nation, with loyalty supposedly between it's members, means that when one is insulting a fellow member of that group to an outsider, that person is showing disloyalty.

That is why it matters.

She was taking internal disagreements and using it to pander to people outside the group at the expense of the group as a whole.

 

[Correll]

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

I love it when idiots attack other peoples intelligence. Whatever helps you sleep at night smarty pants. Really think about the statement you just made and maybe you will see the hypocrisy.

"It's ok for insiders to act like irresponsible undiplomatic babies as long as they are campaigning because they only have to work with the president in government. Outside countries have much more responsibility to work together and get things done so they need to keep their opinions to themselves and play nice."

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

My point stands. If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

That you don't understand the difference between a political campaign and international relations or why there might be different rules and expectations for the two, is you being a moron.

Then I shudder to think what the same reasoning makes you with your hero-worship personality cult double standard.

You are an asshole.

Trump is not my "hero", he is the candidate that most agrees with me on the issues, thus he has my support.

My point stands.

If Trump is President, the British will have to deal with him though his term(s).

Insulting the possible leader of the most powerful nation in the world is irresponsible and undiplomatic.

Double standard.
Ergo --- hypocrisy.

Do you think a political campaign and international relations are the same thing?

 

[Pogo]

It amazes me how small minded some people are. I was expecting some "Fuck Britain we are Am'rica, suck my butt" comments, but not this many.... First of all the video has it's share of comedy value... Second, If you have zero interest in how an ally and major world government, views a presidential candidate of ours then you should really think about opening your eyes. Perception is part of the equation, stop drinking the Koolaid.

Their complaints are wrong.

They are being disrespectful to a man who has a good shot at being the Leader of the remaining superpower and the Free World.

It is very telling that you have no problem with their actions.

You say it's telling... Please explain

She is quick to call Americans on our actions, but gives a pass to those foreigners who are attacking Trump.

She is using different standards based on her partisan biases.

Thus, her complaint is invalid and she is a hypocrite.

Who the fuck is "she"?

 

[Esmeralda]

What do you all think of Parliaments view of Trump?

I think that any ban or denunciation of an elected US President by members of Parliament, especially the Prime Minister, is sufficient grounds for withdrawing all of our military from said nation and ending any favorable trade status that that nation might enjoy.

Who the fuck do these twits think they are sticking their nose into our affairs?

Fuck them all and let them rot for all I care.

I know one thing about Europe; We must NEVER AGAIN send our boys to bleed, get maimed or die for those useless fucktards over there.

I know that there are a lot of good people in the UK but they need to belly up and speak out.

Otherwise to hell with them.

What a joke. As if we don't 'stick our nose' in their affairs. They are our strongest, oldest and best ally in the world. You're ready to dump them because of the asshole Trump. You people are pathetically ignorant.

 

[Pogo]

With this logic are you saying that Rubio, Cruz, Bush, McConnell, Romney, and the majority of the Republican party are irresponsible and undiplomatic? After all Rubio did call him a pants wetter with a little ding dong, doesn't get much dirtier than that... What do you suggest their consequences be?

Different rules apply INSIDE a political campaign then in international relations.

I'm sorry that I didn't explain that to you. I thought you were smart enough to realize that painfully obvious fact.

I will adjust my view of your intelligence downward.

THERE we go. "Different rules apply". Finally he admits to a double standard.

As I said at the beginning -- Rump the Magnificent can denigrate whoever/whatever he wants but let somebody react to it..... ooooooh no, we can't have that.

Having it Both Ways: Priceless.

This is where I came in.

They are two completely different situations, of course different rules apply, you moron.

"Politics stop at the water's edge." YOu ever hear that before, moron?

I don't know any "morons" -- perhaps Donald Rump can point them out -- but no, I've never heard that. But diga me this:

If that's true, then what the fuck business is it of ours what Natalie Maines says to a concert audience in London?

Once again ---- can't have it both ways. It seems we're making this same point over and over.
Wonder why.

The idea of a group, such as a nation, with loyalty supposedly between it's members, means that when one is insulting a fellow member of that group to an outsider, that person is showing disloyalty.

That is why it matters.

She was taking internal disagreements and using it to pander to people outside the group at the expense of the group as a whole.

Again --- who the fuck is this "she"? What thread are you even in?

Where do you get "disloyalty" out of your personal rules for what the British Parliament is allowed to opine on? Where exactly do you derive that?

See, this is exactly what I mean by hero-worship personality cult. Your Dear Leader gets criticized, not only does he melt down ---- you do too. Your relationship with this man is entirely emotional.

 

[Correll]

What do you all think of Parliaments view of Trump?

Actually, I don't give a rat's ass about anything Parliament says or does.

This is an indication of how foolish and misguided Trump supporters are regarding international relations: it is of great importance what our strongest and closest international ally thinks of a person who aspires to be the US president. It's hugely important.

It amazes me how small minded some people are. I was expecting some "Fuck Britain we are Am'rica, suck my butt" comments, but not this many.... First of all the video has it's share of comedy value... Second, If you have zero interest in how an ally and major world government, views a presidential candidate of ours then you should really think about opening your eyes. Perception is part of the equation, stop drinking the Koolaid.

Their complaints are wrong.

They are being disrespectful to a man who has a good shot at being the Leader of the remaining superpower and the Free World.

It is very telling that you have no problem with their actions.

You say it's telling... Please explain

She is quick to call Americans on our actions, but gives a pass to those foreigners who are attacking Trump.

She is using different standards based on her partisan biases.

Thus, her complaint is invalid and she is a hypocrite.

Who the fuck is "she"?

It's part of my rebellion against the Patriarchal oppression of gender pronouns. Deal with it.