WWTBAM Bored

I really believe I'd run in there, even if I didn't have a weapon

Donald Trump telling a group of governors what he would have done had he been at Parkland.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/26/politics ... index.html

Too bad he didn't say that in front of a group of Senators. I would have loved to see John McCain or Tammy Duckworth's reaction.

Why do you project your own cowardice onto those you disagree with. It seems counter-intuitive.

BackInTex wrote:Why do you project your own cowardice onto those you disagree with. It seems counter-intuitive.

I won't be drawn into games of "defend your manhood." Those who need to do so are the exact sorts who like to surround themselves with AR-15's and imagine that shooting a bunch of rounds off on the firing range or in the woods makes them real men.

And, if I had a nickel for every time Donald Trump has displayed real courage in his entire life, I wouldn't even have a nickel.

silverscreenselect wrote: And, if I had a nickel for every time Donald Trump has displayed real courage in his entire life, I wouldn't even have a nickel.

LOL. You don't know 0.1% of his life, but you act like you know it all. I'd wager you'd have at least a dime.

silverscreenselect wrote: I won't be drawn into games of "defend your manhood." Those who need to do so are the exact sorts who like to surround themselves with AR-15's and imagine that shooting a bunch of rounds off on the firing range or in the woods makes them real men.

Then why don't you shut up about mocking those you think aren't, or don't, or won't. Put up or shut up, as they say.

BackInTex wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote: I won't be drawn into games of "defend your manhood." Those who need to do so are the exact sorts who like to surround themselves with AR-15's and imagine that shooting a bunch of rounds off on the firing range or in the woods makes them real men.

Then why don't you shut up about mocking those you think aren't, or don't, or won't. Put up or shut up, as they say.

The President thanks you for having his back.

How would he have run with his bone spurs?

Donald Trump if there were an active shooter.

BackInTex wrote:Why do you project your own cowardice onto those you disagree with. It seems counter-intuitive.

I'm pretty sure that as usual when his lips are moving, Donny BoneSpurs was lying about this. --Bob

Try googling the November 20, 1991 Daily News article that belies your claim.

"Mugger's Trumped: Donald stops attack"

tlynn78 wrote:Try googling the November 20, 1991 Daily News article that belies your claim.

"Mugger's Trumped: Donald stops attack"

Snopes calls the incident "Unproven." --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:Try googling the November 20, 1991 Daily News article that belies your claim.

"Mugger's Trumped: Donald stops attack"

Snopes calls the incident "Unproven." --Bob

tlynn78 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:Try googling the November 20, 1991 Daily News article that belies your claim.

"Mugger's Trumped: Donald stops attack"

Snopes calls the incident "Unproven." --Bob

Snopes explains its reasoning. Do you perhaps have information about the incident that Snopes lacks? --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Snopes calls the incident "Unproven." --Bob

Snopes explains its reasoning. Do you perhaps have information about the incident that Snopes lacks? --Bob

Come on, a contemporary article in a mainstream newspaper is usually considered strong evidence. And while it doesn't prove Trump would act heroically in a crisis (no way to be sure until it happens, and it never will), it should put a stop to jokes about cowardice. Trump has plenty of other qualities that we can joke about.

jarnon wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:

Snopes explains its reasoning. Do you perhaps have information about the incident that Snopes lacks? --Bob

Come on, a contemporary article in a mainstream newspaper is usually considered strong evidence. And while it doesn't prove Trump would act heroically in a crisis (no way to be sure until it happens, and it never will), it should put a stop to jokes about cowardice. Trump has plenty of other qualities that we can joke about.

But look at what the article actually says. It says that Donny claims to have done this (and we know, of course, that Donny is a liar) and that two neutral witnesses had diametrically opposed accounts -- once supporting Donny and one stating that the guy was already gone before Donny's car had stopped. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

jarnon wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Snopes explains its reasoning. Do you perhaps have information about the incident that Snopes lacks? --Bob

Come on, a contemporary article in a mainstream newspaper is usually considered strong evidence. And while it doesn't prove Trump would act heroically in a crisis (no way to be sure until it happens, and it never will), it should put a stop to jokes about cowardice. Trump has plenty of other qualities that we can joke about.

But look at what the article actually says. It says that Donny claims to have done this (and we know, of course, that Donny is a liar) and that two neutral witnesses had diametrically opposed accounts -- once supporting Donny and one stating that the guy was already gone before Donny's car had stopped. --Bob

But he didn't just drive away like a coward.

jarnon wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

jarnon wrote:Come on, a contemporary article in a mainstream newspaper is usually considered strong evidence. And while it doesn't prove Trump would act heroically in a crisis (no way to be sure until it happens, and it never will), it should put a stop to jokes about cowardice. Trump has plenty of other qualities that we can joke about.

But look at what the article actually says. It says that Donny claims to have done this (and we know, of course, that Donny is a liar) and that two neutral witnesses had diametrically opposed accounts -- once supporting Donny and one stating that the guy was already gone before Donny's car had stopped. --Bob

But he didn't just drive by like a coward.

He saw an incident and was curious enough about it to stop to find out what was going on. If the second neutral is correct about the guy already being gone by then, it was evident that there was no cause for fear. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

jarnon wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Snopes explains its reasoning. Do you perhaps have information about the incident that Snopes lacks? --Bob

Come on, a contemporary article in a mainstream newspaper is usually considered strong evidence. And while it doesn't prove Trump would act heroically in a crisis (no way to be sure until it happens, and it never will), it should put a stop to jokes about cowardice. Trump has plenty of other qualities that we can joke about.

But look at what the article actually says. It says that Donny claims to have done this (and we know, of course, that Donny is a liar) and that two neutral witnesses had diametrically opposed accounts -- once supporting Donny and one stating that the guy was already gone before Donny's car had stopped. --Bob

The named witness said Trump just joined the crowd when the mugger ran away. The unnamed witness said he behaved like a hero.

Marla Maples was there. I wonder if anyone has asked her about the incident recently.

What is increasingly clear is that Trump hate from the left has reached a level that renders a lot of people incapable of using critical thinking skills. It's sad, really, when people let Trump hate take up so much of their brain matter there is little room for anything else.

tlynn78 wrote:What is increasingly clear is that Trump hate from the left has reached a level that renders a lot of people incapable of using critical thinking skills. It's sad, really, when people let Trump hate take up so much of their brain matter there is little room for anything else.

Please elaborate on your reasoning. Please explain why it's inappropriate to consider the claim "unproven." Demonstrate your own critical thinking skills. Because otherwise this is little more than name-calling on your part. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: He saw an incident and was curious enough about it to stop to find out what was going on.

A substantial number of people would stop and watch if they saw a building on fire. Very few of them would run inside to rescue someone.

Bob78164 wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:What is increasingly clear is that Trump hate from the left has reached a level that renders a lot of people incapable of using critical thinking skills. It's sad, really, when people let Trump hate take up so much of their brain matter there is little room for anything else.

Please elaborate on your reasoning. Please explain why it's inappropriate to consider the claim "unproven." Demonstrate your own critical thinking skills. Because otherwise this is little more than name-calling on your part. --Bob

Please explain why you think I have to answer to you. You are not, thank God, a college instructor, certainly not mine. Demonstrate where I "name-called." And, thanks for proving my point.

tlynn78 wrote:Demonstrate where I "name-called."

The emojis in response to my pointing out Snopes's evaluation of Donny's claim. And describing me (by implication) as lacking critical thinking skills.

You're an elected official. It's true that you don't answer to me because I don't live in your state, much less your county. But I would really hope that you'd hold yourself to a sufficiently high standard to engage in actual analysis.

A few posts above, jarnon and I engaged in a fact-based discussion which clarified his views for me, and I hope clarified mine for him. You, on the other hand, resort to name-calling instead of actually defending the merits of your position. It's true that I certainly can't make you engage in a fact-based discussion. But you can continue to expect me to call you out when you refuse to do so. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:Demonstrate where I "name-called."

The emojis in response to my pointing out Snopes's evaluation of Donny's claim. And describing me (by implication) as lacking critical thinking skills.

You're an elected official. It's true that you don't answer to me because I don't live in your state, much less your county. But I would really hope that you'd hold yourself to a sufficiently high standard to engage in actual analysis.

A few posts above, jarnon and I engaged in a fact-based discussion which clarified his views for me, and I hope clarified mine for him. You, on the other hand, resort to name-calling instead of actually defending the merits of your position. It's true that I certainly can't make you engage in a fact-based discussion. But you can continue to expect me to call you out when you refuse to do so. --Bob

If you immediately assume I'm speaking of you, personally, then that's on you. My observation, as is often the case, didn't evolve solely from the Bored, but from experiences across social media, as well as irl. The 'laughing' emoji in response to Snopes being a reliable source is self-explanatory, and still isn't 'name-calling.' Frankly, for you, of anyone on the Bored, to attempt to "call me out" on name-calling is ludicrous in the extreme. By the way, I'm fully aware I'm an elected official. I can't imagine why you feel the need to repeat that fact.

tlynn78 wrote:The 'laughing' emoji in response to Snopes being a reliable source is self-explanatory, and still isn't 'name-calling.'

And yet you still haven't explained what's wrong with Snopes's analysis, even though the Web site laid out in detail the basis for its conclusion. --Bob