Which Vaccine?

[HaShev]

Trumpster Q-tards believe in all kinds of stupid conspiracy theories.

I'm not an anti vaxer but I believe everyone has a right to transparency and all the info to decide and weigh their risks.
Actually, with how you approach and respond to this non partisan subject, I would have to say your comments are just as bad as the over zealous propagandists against vaccines and non scientific in your refutation and not logical in your response.
Not to soon after you posted your rant this happened that made your comments look ignorant to the full scope of the subject.
Colorado vaccination site closes early after reactions to Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

Colorado vaccination site closes early after reactions to Johnson & Johnson vaccine

A mass vaccination site in Colorado closed early Wednesday after a "limited number" of people began having adverse reactions to the Johnson and Johnson COVID-19 vaccine, resulting in hundreds of people who waited in line for hours being sent home without receiving a shot.

www.foxbusiness.com

Wahington post also reporting this but for some reason censorship news /fake news is slow to the draw, I guess they are waiting to find a benefit or spin to this.

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

 

[MisterBeale]

No where in there does LA state that he is sure that Michelle is a man.

Ok, so you want to nitpick at minor differences. Fine with me.

I didn't claim that he said he was sure that she is a man, now did I? Perhaps your reading comprehension isn't all that great.

All he stated is that he does now take those rumors seriously.

And that he is "...leaning towards it that she really IS a man..."

If you want to argue that leaning towards and believing in are different, then you're really nitpicking over a minor detail of semantics.

As in. . . that MAY BE in the realm of possibility.

Leaning towards isn't the same as saying that something MAY BE in the realm of possibility. Do you seriously not understand the difference?

If you're going to make an argument of semantics, it might help if you have basic reading comprehension skills.

Go ahead, , . make excuses for being a bully and slandering folks character.
To sit there and talk 'bout nitpicking, when you call out folks spelling? Stahp. Just quit already.

What you are now engaging in is a campaign of prevaricating and equivocating. No one on this forum takes that seriously.

Pogo does that gas-lighting shit all the time when he has been called out and proven wrong. . . and no one takes him seriously either.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Trumpster Q-tards believe in all kinds of stupid conspiracy theories.

I'm not an anti vaxer but I believe everyone has a right to transparency and all the info to decide and weigh their risks.

I didn’t say otherwise.

They have the right to do what they want. I have the right to point out that they’re inclined to believe in all kinds of conspiracy theories.

 

[MisterBeale]

Trumpster Q-tards believe in all kinds of stupid conspiracy theories.

I'm not an anti vaxer but I believe everyone has a right to transparency and all the info to decide and weigh their risks.

I didn’t say otherwise.

They have the right to do what they want. I have the right to point out that they’re inclined to believe in all kinds of conspiracy theories.

Bully.

 

[XponentialChaos]

No where in there does LA state that he is sure that Michelle is a man.

Ok, so you want to nitpick at minor differences. Fine with me.

I didn't claim that he said he was sure that she is a man, now did I? Perhaps your reading comprehension isn't all that great.

All he stated is that he does now take those rumors seriously.

And that he is "...leaning towards it that she really IS a man..."

If you want to argue that leaning towards and believing in are different, then you're really nitpicking over a minor detail of semantics.

As in. . . that MAY BE in the realm of possibility.

Leaning towards isn't the same as saying that something MAY BE in the realm of possibility. Do you seriously not understand the difference?

If you're going to make an argument of semantics, it might help if you have basic reading comprehension skills.

Go ahead, , . make excuses for being a bully and slandering folks character.
To sit there and talk 'bout nitpicking, when you call out folks spelling? Stahp. Just quit already.

What you are now engaging in is a campaign of prevaricating and equivocating. No one on this forum takes that seriously.

Pogo does that gas-lighting shit all the time when he has been called out and proven wrong. . . and no one takes him seriously either.

You’re just whining now.

 

[MisterBeale]

No where in there does LA state that he is sure that Michelle is a man.

Ok, so you want to nitpick at minor differences. Fine with me.

I didn't claim that he said he was sure that she is a man, now did I? Perhaps your reading comprehension isn't all that great.

All he stated is that he does now take those rumors seriously.

And that he is "...leaning towards it that she really IS a man..."

If you want to argue that leaning towards and believing in are different, then you're really nitpicking over a minor detail of semantics.

As in. . . that MAY BE in the realm of possibility.

Leaning towards isn't the same as saying that something MAY BE in the realm of possibility. Do you seriously not understand the difference?

If you're going to make an argument of semantics, it might help if you have basic reading comprehension skills.

Go ahead, , . make excuses for being a bully and slandering folks character.
To sit there and talk 'bout nitpicking, when you call out folks spelling? Stahp. Just quit already.

What you are now engaging in is a campaign of prevaricating and equivocating. No one on this forum takes that seriously.

Pogo does that gas-lighting shit all the time when he has been called out and proven wrong. . . and no one takes him seriously either.

You’re just whining now.

 

[HaShev]

Wow you are far more gone than I ever thought imaginable believing the evil,corrupt FBI with their long history of corruption,that explains it all why you swallow everything hook line and sinker without question you trusting the government over whistleblowers.

as always when losing a debate,you change the subject.

You believe Michelle Obama is a man and you think you're in any position to call someone else far gone. I think your tinfoil hat might be cutting off the circulation to your very limited brain.

She might not be a man but it's odd that you never see Wayne Brady and Michelle Obama at the same party at the exact same time. *L*

 

[XponentialChaos]

Calling me a bully is where on that chart?

 

[HaShev]

Trumpster Q-tards believe in all kinds of stupid conspiracy theories.

I'm not an anti vaxer but I believe everyone has a right to transparency and all the info to decide and weigh their risks.

I didn’t say otherwise.

They have the right to do what they want. I have the right to point out that they’re inclined to believe in all kinds of conspiracy theories.

But in all seriousness when you do it in a blanket way you miss some of the valuable truths mixed in with propaganda and ignore data you might need yourself.

 

[dblack]

Trumpster Q-tards believe in all kinds of stupid conspiracy theories.

I'm not an anti vaxer but I believe everyone has a right to transparency and all the info to decide and weigh their risks.

I didn’t say otherwise.

They have the right to do what they want. I have the right to point out that they’re inclined to believe in all kinds of conspiracy theories.

But in all seriousness when you do it in a blanket way you miss some of the valuable truths mixed in with propaganda and ignore data you might need yourself.

That's exactly what makes them so dangerous. They actually cover up legitimate concerns with bizarre (and easily dismissable) paranoia.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Trumpster Q-tards believe in all kinds of stupid conspiracy theories.

I'm not an anti vaxer but I believe everyone has a right to transparency and all the info to decide and weigh their risks.

I didn’t say otherwise.

They have the right to do what they want. I have the right to point out that they’re inclined to believe in all kinds of conspiracy theories.

But in all seriousness when you do it in a blanket way you miss some of the valuable truths mixed in with propaganda and ignore data you might need yourself.

That's why I go with the input from our medical experts and not some random idiot with a 5th-grade education who is inclined to believe in all kinds of ridiculous nonsense.

 

[MisterBeale]

Calling me a bully is where on that chart?

inclined to believe in all kinds of conspiracy theories

Trying to elevate the conversation with you has thus far? Failed miserably. Every time I try to do so, you fail to reply.

"Attacks the characteristics or authority of the writer without addressing the substance of the argument"

It is obvious at this point, logic and reason do not appeal to you, only grade school tactics. . . Am I wrong?

SO. . .

. . . AND I wasn't wrong, was I? That got your attention. But that is what your government compulsory education programmed you to respond to.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Trying to elevate the conversation with you has thus far? Failed miserably. Every time I try to do so, you fail to reply.

Persistent whining isn’t what I would consider an elevated conversation.

Calling me a bully is where on the chart? I noticed that you failed to reply to that. I wonder why that is.

 

[HaShev]

Trumpster Q-tards believe in all kinds of stupid conspiracy theories.

I'm not an anti vaxer but I believe everyone has a right to transparency and all the info to decide and weigh their risks.

I didn’t say otherwise.

They have the right to do what they want. I have the right to point out that they’re inclined to believe in all kinds of conspiracy theories.

But in all seriousness when you do it in a blanket way you miss some of the valuable truths mixed in with propaganda and ignore data you might need yourself.

That's exactly what makes them so dangerous. They actually cover up legitimate concerns with bizarre (and easily dismissable) paranoia.

My early Spygate posts (predating Greg Jarretts book), was "report forced by the leftist" into the conspiracy section while Russia Russia Russia nonsense was kept in the Politics section even after being disproved. I was proven right all along, the AG even backed it in commentary, but it was never moved back into the proper section and Russia hoax nonsense was allowed to continue even though, by then it deserved the Loon bin section.
When someone can't refute with logic the reply will always be an ad hominem attack on the poster with the same tactical wording: conspiracy, Rusian bot, crazy, drugs, racist, and so on.....just so predictable you can write a whole chapter about it*... ;-)
*Chapter 1 "Keepers of the Unpopular Truth"

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Per my MD if you had the virus and still have the antibodies the impact of the vaccine will be heavier than if you never had the virus. Fun times. When it is my turn, I'll just punch myself in the face and grin and bear it. Sucks that I had to deal with the virus and now have to deal with the vaccine because the medical experts don't know how long antibodies last.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Trying to elevate the conversation with you has thus far? Failed miserably. Every time I try to do so, you fail to reply.

Persistent whining isn’t what I would consider an elevated conversation.

Calling me a bully is where on the chart? I noticed that you failed to reply to that. I wonder why that is.

Jeeezuz are you ever not a total dink?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Jeeezuz are you ever not a total dink?

Trumpsters are easily agitated.

 

[MisterBeale]

Trying to elevate the conversation with you has thus far? Failed miserably. Every time I try to do so, you fail to reply.

Persistent whining isn’t what I would consider an elevated conversation.

Calling me a bully is where on the chart? I noticed that you failed to reply to that. I wonder why that is.

I am not sure further conversation with you would be productive.

You are either;

A) Far intellectually inferior to me, or

B) Continuing with your gas-lighting, and prevaricating. I made the assumption you would know where it is on the chart, and likewise, thought you would know where on the chart your argument that elicited that response was. I am sorry if I made an ass out of you and me... . . OTH, I believe you do know both instances and enjoy low argumentation. I am done with it.

and

C) "Persistent Whining?" derogatory characterization of replies? Seriously?

 

[MisterBeale]

Jeeezuz are you ever not a total dink?

Trumpsters are easily agitated.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I am not sure further conversation with you would be productive.

Bye then. You're welcome to take your whining elsewhere.