War Room Lounge V20: Halloween Awareness: Dispatches Blast Yo Ass from a Pumpkin Patch

[Jack V Savage]

My prediction was that another accuser would be revealed within one week of Ford's testimony. My prediction was correct.

After the third accuser, you offered a bet with me that more would come out. I said I had no idea and couldn't take it. I would have won, though.

 

[waiguoren]

After the third accuser, you offered a bet with me that more would come out. I said I had no idea and couldn't take it. I would have won, though.

Could be misremembering the wording, but I think I would have won. As I recall, Harris's accuser was the fourth accuser, and the fifth (Rhode Island one) came shortly thereafter.

 

[salamander]

Catholicism preaches a different Gospel of works that the book of Galatians warns us about.

What does our Redeemer state in Matthew 23:37 in regards to people like you?

What prompted him to speak thus?

What is the foundatinal commandment that renders even the book of Galatians into mere garnish?

 

[Ripskater]

What does our Redeemer state in Matthew 23:37 in regards to people like you?

What prompted him to speak thus?

What is the foundatinal commandment that renders even the book of Galatians into mere garnish?

I don't have my study Bible with me at the moment.

It seems that it's talking about the Jews who were stoning followers of Jesus.

 

[salamander]

I don't have my study Bible with me at the moment.

It seems that it's talking about the Jews who were stoning followers of Jesus.

Wow.

Okay we're done here.

 

[Fawlty]

I'm not seeing how this is even a big issue. Let's assume the worst. The worst reasonable case from the facts is that she was told she was NA, believed it, and assumed it as part of her identity for a time without checking into her genealogy, including telling her colleagues and putting it in a directory. How is this possibly such a major problem? This is about as serious as somebody being a Plastic Paddy because his dad said he was Irish.

This is using petty identity grievances to attack a person because her politics are threatening. Nothing more.

 

[HereticBD]

I'm not seeing how this is even a big issue. Let's assume the worst. The worst reasonable case from the facts is that she was told she was NA, believed it, and assumed it as part of her identity for a time without checking into her genealogy, including telling her colleagues and putting it in a directory. How is this possibly such a major problem?

Politically its a problem. She belongs to the "holier than thou" Dems. Every time they fuck up like this, it just makes them look phony. Don't act like your reaction would be this apologetic if the shoe was on the other foot, and someone from the Reps were touting this lie for years. You'd be judging the fuck out of them, and denouncing their character.

 

[waiguoren]

I'm not seeing how this is even a big issue. Let's assume the worst. The worst reasonable case from the facts is that she was told she was NA, believed it, and assumed it as part of her identity for a time without checking into her genealogy, including telling her colleagues and putting it in a directory. How is this possibly such a major problem? This is about as serious as somebody being a Plastic Paddy because his dad said he was Irish.

This is using petty identity grievances to attack a person because her politics are threatening. Nothing more.

She claimed that her husband's family opposed their marriage on the grounds that they didn't like Cherokees. That seems like an obvious lie.

Also, was the cookbook entry plagiarized?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Politically its a problem. She belongs to the "holier than thou" Dems. Every time they fuck up like this, it just makes them look phony. Don't act like your reaction would be this apologetic if the shoe was on the other foot, and someone from the Reps were touting this lie for years. You'd be judging the fuck out of them, and denouncing their character.

I think this kind of irrational suspicion is what drives a lot of shitty behavior. "They would do it to us so we are morally justified in behaving badly."

 

[Jack V Savage]

Could be misremembering the wording, but I think I would have won. As I recall, Harris's accuser was the fourth accuser, and the fifth (Rhode Island one) came shortly thereafter.

I don't know what "Harris's accuser" is or the "Rhode Island one," which is actually points to one of the reasons I didn't like the bet (the other being that there are multiple reasons that he might have more accusers). Any random person who says something anywhere could be called an accuser. Couldn't find it anyway, as that thread was a beast.

She claimed that her husband's family opposed their marriage on the grounds that they didn't like Cherokees. That seems like an obvious lie.

Why?

 

[waiguoren]

"Harris's accuser"

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethb...-jane-doe-accusing-kavanaugh-of-rape-n2524576

the "Rhode Island one,"

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...-about-rhode-island-sexual-assault-allegation

Any random person who says something anywhere could be called an accuser.

Oh...the irony....too good....

Why?

You seriously think that her then-boyfriend's family took a look at Warren and said, "Nice girl, but we can't handle her obvious Cherokee ancestry"?

The only plausible scenario along those lines is, "Sorry, your girlfriend is delusional. She actually thinks she is a Cherokee Indian. Do not marry crazy."

 

[HereticBD]

I think this kind of irrational suspicion is what drives a lot of shitty behavior. "They would do it to us so we are morally justified in behaving badly."

But you absolutely would do it. You especially would be frothing at the mouth, and calling her immoral and evil. Nothing wrong with calling out your double standards.

Its a problem that Liberals have now, that was once a conservative issue. Claiming some kind of unrealistic moral high ground. Somewhere along the line, you guys became the obnoxious militant moral crusaders of the world.

 

[Fawlty]

She claimed that her husband's family opposed their marriage on the grounds that they didn't like Cherokees. That seems like an obvious lie.

Also, was the cookbook entry plagiarized?

I rest my case on the "importance" of this.

 

[Fawlty]

Politically its a problem. She belongs to the "holier than thou" Dems. Every time they fuck up like this, it just makes them look phony. Don't act like your reaction would be this apologetic if the shoe was on the other foot, and someone from the Reps were touting this lie for years. You'd be judging the fuck out of them, and denouncing their character.

Again, I rest my case. This is all petty, stupid griefer shit. And you're trying to project it onto me. Grow up.

 

[Rational Poster]

 

[waiguoren]

I rest my case on the "importance" of this.

Obvious lies, not important.

Hope you're holding your political enemies to that same standard.

 

[sickc0d3r]

The outrage would come from her still playing political football with it, after she got the results back. Ignorance is one thing. If she just didn't know, and then apologized after getting the results back, that would be one thing, but she's still using it as a feather in her cap, like she proved the Native status she's been touting all these years.

Don't take my word for it though. Take the Cherokee peoples' word for it, who have denounced her, called it insulting, and told her to shut the fuck up about it.

That's fair, and I agree she should apologize (especially as she is a public servant) if that listing offends real Cherokee's or other minorities.

But, I was just pointing out that you don't actually give a shit, c'mon I know this because you defend Trump 24/7 around here, and he tells more lies and insults more minorities in a single tweet than Warren has in her whole life.

I think one area where there is some confusion is that the basis for her claim about being NA was her belief that she had a very small amount of NA blood. So the fact that she only said she had a distant NA ancestor and wasn't a tribal citizen or anything like that isn't inconsistent with the listing.

I've maintained that she's been honest about the facts as she knew them, but the fact is the dna test doesn't support her labeling herself "Cherokee" or "Native American", regardless of her understanding. If she knew her lineage was that distant, those labels weren't appropriate at the time. If she assumed her relative was closer (which I think she did judging by her family stories), then the current information warrants a concession that she made an honest mistake, imo.

 

[Fawlty]

Obvious lies, not important.

Hope you're holding your political enemies to that same standard.

No, you don't hope that. You actually hope I won't, because it will give you something to whine about. But I promise I'll balance the scales of karma by taking it easy on the next person I see claiming to be Irish on St. Patrick's Day.

 

[Fawlty]

I'll make the new thread in a bit, gonna be mobile pwnt.

 

[Jack V Savage]

But you absolutely would do it. You especially would be frothing at the mouth, and calling her immoral and evil. Nothing wrong with calling out your double standards.

Its a problem that Liberals have now, that was once a conservative issue. Claiming some kind of unrealistic moral high ground. Somewhere along the line, you guys became the obnoxious militant moral crusaders of the world.

Yes, I understand that you irrationally believe that everyone else is as unprincipled as you are and that you use that belief to justify your own poor behavior. I already said that.