Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

Cody montana

newhouse87 wrote: »

Yes that would make you homphobic.

Even though I’m gay?
How does that work?

newhouse87

newhouse87 wrote: »

Ah deflection as usual, didn't actually condemn psakis homophobic tweet, see the hyprcorisy as i predicted.

Didn't see anything homophobic about it, it referenced the fact that he's supposed to be closeted. He's referred to as such by gay people..

extra gravy

newhouse87 wrote: »

Ah deflection as usual, didn't actually condemn psakis homophobic tweet, see the hyprcorisy as i predicted.

Your faux outrage is tedious.

newhouse87

Cody montana wrote: »

Even though I’m gay?
How does that work?

Doesnt make a difference, its a homphobic slur, you should know better.

newhouse87

extra gravy wrote: »

Your faux outrage is tedious.

Your deflection and hypocrisy is predictable.

newhouse87

Deleted User wrote: »

Didn't see anything homophobic about it, it referenced the fact that he's supposed to be closeted. He's referred to as such by gay people..

Hate to break it to you but just because you see nothing wrong with it doesn't mean its ok.

newhouse87

newhouse87 wrote: »

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/white-house-press-secretary-jen-125522607.html?guccounter=1

Dont expect any condemnation from the many hypocrites on this thread just deflection as usual, trump is bad blah blah.

Are we reading the same article? You consider someone homophobic if they refer to someone else by the name believed to be given to that person by his escorts?

Does that tweet imply anything negative about homosexuals? Or imply anything about homosexuals at all? Do you know what the word homophobic means?

You can attack the tweet for making the assumption that he is a gay man, but it is no way homophobic

Cody montana

newhouse87 wrote: »

Doesnt make a difference, its a homphobic slur, you should know better.

It’s not.

His nickname is lady G, that’s what he’s known as.
That’s what his “clients” call him.

Your faux outrage is kind of cute though.

extra gravy

newhouse87 wrote: »

Doesnt make a difference, its a homphobic slur, you should know better.

Telling a gay person what homophobia is now, you're on a roll today

newhouse87

Deleted User wrote: »

Are we reading the same article? You consider someone homophobic if they refer to someone else by the name believed to be given to that person by his escorts?

Does that tweet imply anything negative about homosexuals? Or imply anything about homosexuals at all? Do you know what the word homophobic means?

You can attack the tweet for making the assumption that he is a gay man, but it is no way homophobic

These are all allegations, if trumps press sec had tweeted similar about a dem ye would be going mad, BTW where did i say Biden was a bad president, otherwise retract your last point on your post last page. I have always said i rather biden, hes obviously a nicer man, but as van jones on cnn said if you give trump any credit when he actually does good, democrats slate you like on here but i find it amusing tbh.

newhouse87

Cody montana wrote: »

It’s not.

His nickname is lady G, that’s what he’s known as.
That’s what his “clients” call him.

Your faux outrage is kind of cute though.

unproven allegations are ok so when it comes to republicans, again hypocrisy.

newhouse87

newhouse87 wrote: »

These are all allegations, if trumps press sec had tweeted similar about a dem ye would be going mad, BTW where did i say Biden was a bad president, otherwise retract your last point on your post last page. I have always said i rather biden, hes obviously a nicer man, but as van jones on cnn said if you give trump any credit when he actually does good, democrats slate you like on here but i find it amusing tbh.

Pretty credible allegations and she's just referring to the nickname the escorts have for him... Really struggling to generate a scandal.

Cody montana

newhouse87 wrote: »

unproven allegations are ok so when it comes to republicans, again hypocrisy.

So why was it homophobic if it’s unproven?

A hypocrite to me would be someone being gay, paying for gay escorts and not supporting gay rights.
Like.....

newhouse87

newhouse87 wrote: »

These are all allegations, if trumps press sec had tweeted similar about a dem ye would be going mad

If the current press secretary had made homophobic allegations about a a democrat, then yes we would be going mad.

If the current press secretary had instead referred to a democrat by a homosexual nickname when there is no evidence that that democrat is a homosexual, we would also attack it as we would see it as a republican mocking a democrat for no reason. But in no way would we consider it homophobic because it isn't homophobic.

If the current press secretary had instead referred to a democrat by a homosexual nickname when there is significant evidence that that democrat is a homosexual, we would say "meh" and move on. And again, in no way would we consider it homophobic because it isn't homophobic.

newhouse87 wrote: »

BTW where did i say Biden was a bad president

Yes, you believe that Biden makes a better president than Trump just like you believe Jeremy Clarkson would make a better F1 driver than Trump. Based on your post history though, you think he is a bad president relative to other people you believe should be in the White House is that not right?

newhouse87

newhouse87 wrote: »

anyway thats me done proving alot of the hypocrisy on here again, ill be back next week, stay tuned folks.

You've said that a homosexual person on here should know better about what homophobia is. Are you sure you'll be invited back?

WrenBoy

Deleted User wrote: »

You've said that a homosexual person on here should know better about what homophobia is. Are you sure you'll be invited back?

Luckily its an open online message board and no invites are needed.

WrenBoy

WrenBoy wrote: »

Luckily its an open online message board and no invites are needed.

I was referring to what a mod might or might not do when they read his posts.

ohnonotgmail

Cody montana wrote: »

So why was it homophobic if it’s unproven?

A hypocrite to me would be someone being gay, paying for gay escorts and not supporting gay rights.
Like.....

he goes beyond "not supporting gay rights". He actively campaigns against them.

newhouse87

Deleted User wrote: »

You've said that a homosexual person on here should know better about what homophobia is. Are you sure you'll be invited back?

invited back, haha, brilliant, just to reply on your other point i dont see any republicans at the moment who i would like as much as biden in the WH. Got to go now, work calls.

newhouse87

newhouse87 wrote: »

invited back, haha, brilliant, just to reply on your other point i dont see any republicans at the moment who i would like as much as biden in the WH. Got to go now, work calls.

That wasn't what I stated, but ok. You go do your work, hopefully you don't work at a call centre.

namloc1980

newhouse87 wrote: »

anyway thats me done proving alot of the hypocrisy on here again, ill be back next week, stay tuned folks.

Ah the hallmark of a Trumpist. Dump a few posts and then run away until next time. How predictable.

ExMachina1000

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

Much of them reversals of questionable eo's from the previous president...

ohnonotgmail

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

Imagine a president actually doing his job. If it was your guy he would be on 20 game of golf right now.

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

Oh look, it's that guy who completely made stuff up about Biden not having a Covid plan and disappeared when it was pointed out to him. Had you hoped that we had forgotten?

And which is it? Are you angry about Biden signing too many executive orders, or are you angry that Biden has not signed an executive order yet about Iran?

Cody montana

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

Great news.
Well done joe.

ExMachina1000

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Oh look, it's that guy who completely made stuff up about Biden not having a Covid plan and disappeared when it was pointed out to him. Had you hoped that we had forgotten?

And which is it? Are you angry about Biden signing too many executive orders, or are you angry that Biden has not signed an executive order yet about Iran?

It's just a count on his executive orders. That's it.

Its fairly obvious who is and who isn't angry on this thread.

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

It's just a count on his executive orders. That's it.

Exactly, you have contributed nothing to this thread. Again.

And, as I said before, you made a big deal about me not answering some of your questions in the past, but have again ignored all of my questions.

Professor Moriarty

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

TBF, Biden has a lot of sh1tty legislation to roll back. By comparison, the previous incumbent had very little.

ExMachina1000

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Exactly, you have contributed nothing to this thread. Again.

And, as I said before, you made a big deal about me not answering some of your questions in the past, but have again ignored all of my questions.

I answered your list of questions a couple of days ago. Do you think people are required to answer and respond to everything you write? When you dont get what you want or the answer you feel isnt adequate you turn to name calling and abuse.

Cop on please. This thread is in the toilet. Its Biden or bust here at the minute. No other view is permitted

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I answered your list of questions a couple of days ago. Do you think people are required to answer and respond to everything you write? When you dont get what you want or the answer you feel is adequate you turn to name calling and abuse.

Cop on please. This thread is in the toilet. Its Biden or bust here at the minute. No other view is permitted

In fairness, you try to generate a scandal out of everything on a daily basis.... The reality is, things are pretty boring at the moment.

ExMachina1000

[Deleted User] wrote: »

In fairness, you try to generate a scandal out of everything on a daily basis.... The reality is, things are pretty boring at the moment.

What's the attempted scandal in posting his days in office alongside the number of executive orders. No inflammatory statements were made. Just facts.

Replies included a Trump comparison and "your guy" and also the rudeness from the "answer my questions "poster

mcmoustache

joe40 wrote: »

There was nobody "mocked" in that exchange. This is getting ridiculous.

Cut him some slack. It's not easy scouring right-wing rags, Q/MAGA twitter, videos by vitamin salesmen and "DESTROYS"ers of libs and satirical websites to find something about Biden to be outraged about.

extra gravy

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

This thread is in the toilet.

And we all know whose fault that is. Maybe if you contributed something worthwhile to the discussion instead of pointlessly tallying executive orders and dumping links and then running away, the thread would improve.

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I answered your list of questions a couple of days ago. Do you think people are required to answer and respond to everything you write? When you dont get what you want or the answer you feel isnt adequate you turn to name calling and abuse.

Well, you yourself clearly don't believe any of that, otherwise why did keep asking me to answer your questions when I didn't?

I pointed out to you that you stated that no details were given about his covid plan. I asked you this not once, but twice, if that was true. You ignored both times. I have now asked you a third time and you have once again deflected from it.

Would you like to try a fourth time?

You have also stated that Biden signing all of these executive orders makes it seem like it's a dictatorship, but also believe that Biden should sign another executive order about Iran. Would you like to clarify how that makes any sense?

Timberrrrrrrr

WrenBoy wrote: »

Luckily its an open online message board and no invites are needed.

Timberrrrrrrr

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

Brilliant isn't it? Finally a president that gets shìt done instead of watching TV eight hours a day and then goes off golfing.

ExMachina1000

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well, you yourself clearly don't believe any of that, otherwise why did keep asking me to answer your questions when I didn't?

I pointed out to you that you stated that no details were given about his covid plan. I asked you this not once, but twice, if that was true. You ignored both times. I have now asked you a third time and you have once again deflected from it.

Would you like to try a fourth time?

You have also stated that Biden signing all of these executive orders makes it seem like it's a dictatorship, but also believe that Biden should signed another executive order yet about Iran. Would you like to clarify how that makes any sense?

How about I would prefer not to engage with you any more. You can continue to ask me endless questions if you wish but none will be answered.
I have no interest in endless argument with you. Thanks

Beasty

ExMachina1000 quit the trolling or I'll threadban you

Everyone else, please do not rise to the bait

eagle eye

ExMachina1000 wrote:

Continued running Executive order count:
Days as president: 20
Executive orders signed: 52

The man is showing impressive energy and a great work attitude. At his age it's amazing, deserves plaudits.

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

How about I would prefer not to engage with you any more. You can continue to ask me endless questions if you wish but none will be answered.
I have no interest in endless argument with you. Thanks

Exactly. You made up nonsense to attack Biden and when called out about it, you become a snowflake and deflected. You attack people for not answering questions, but then attack people when they ask you to answer questions. You attack Biden for signing too many orders, and then attack him for not signing enough orders.

Nothing but hypocrisy.

Edit: Sorry posted before seeing Beasty's post. Will get back to adult conversations with adults.

mcmoustache

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Cop on please. This thread is in the toilet. Its Biden or bust here at the minute. No other view is permitted

Nonsense.

Transparent low-effort ****-stirring and fake outrage isn't popular, especially when it comes from the types who had no issues with behaviours that were orders of magnitude worse by the previous administration.

namloc1980

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

Busy man in fairness.

Timberrrrrrrr

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Continued running Executive order count:

Days as president: 20

Executive orders signed: 52

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

It's just a count on his executive orders. That's it.

Its fairly obvious who is and who isn't angry on this thread.

What are the new EO's that have been signed? Are they good or bad in your opinion?

eagle eye

All this stuff about calling people names reminds me how old I am. When I was a child I, and most of my friends, had been given the old line by our parents that sticks and stones might break my bones but names will never hurt me.
We lived by that code and laughed at anybody calling us any name. These days people get upset so easy and are ready to jump and call you homophobic or racist at the first possible opportunity.
The other day I had a guy defending the cop that killed George Floyd as innocent until proven guilty and calling out Floyd's criminal record as proof that he pretty much deserved it. I didn't call him a racist over that, I called him a bellend. He didn't like it but he is one. He never said anything racist but I know if that conversation happened on here he'd be called a racist.

Timberrrrrrrr

eagle eye wrote: »

All this stuff about calling people names reminds me how old I am. When I was a child I, and most of my friends, had been given the old line by our parents that sticks and stones might break my bones but names will never hurt me.
We lived by that code and laughed at anybody calling us any name. These days people get upset so easy and are ready to jump and call you homophobic or racist at the first possible opportunity.
The other day I had a guy defending the cop that killed George Floyd as innocent until proven guilty and calling out Floyd's criminal record as proof that he pretty much deserved it. I didn't call him a racist over that, I called him a bellend. He didn't like it but he is one. He never said anything racist but I know if that conversation happened on here he'd be called a racist.

I worked security for a long long time, bars/pubs/clubs. I have been called every name under the sun (several times) to the point where I genuinely cannot be insulted by anything anyone says to me. I have even challenged my friends to come up with something new so we can both enjoy it.

Now if you say the wrong thing or even worse...someone interprets what you say wrongly it will get you into a world of shìt. The world has gone crazy with people being offended by the most innocuous things.

newhouse87

if Kayleigh mcenany had tweeted something about andrew gillum being bi sexual before his sleazy drug fueled encounter with a escort who died was reported , ye would be calling her all sorts about how she should leave him decide when he tells people but according to some of ye its ok for psaki to insinuate it about graham, again the hypocrisy and i know some not many of ye can see it.

weisses

Cody montana wrote: »

Even though I’m gay?
How does that work?

Let me help you out

newhouse87

newhouse87 wrote: »

if Kayleigh mcenany had tweeted something about andrew gillum being bi sexual before his sleazy drug fueled encounter with a escort who died was reported , ye would be calling her all sorts about how she should leave him decide when he tells people but according to some of ye its ok for psaki to insinuate it about graham, again the hypocrisy and i know some not many of ye can see it.

If I understand what you're saying through your awful use of grammar and punctuation, then no, we would not believe that Kayleigh was homophobic if she implied someone was bisexual before they came out as bisexual.

y0ssar1an22

Tell me how wrote: »

You should consider this in the context of that scene from Fr Ted where they discussed the concept of scaling.

Overheal wrote: »

Shoes work but putting a giant pair of shoes on the United States won’t make it run faster.

Such lazy false equivalencies between sovereign border security and property barricades. (must have missed the endangered migratory animals that traverse between Lafayette square and the rose garden?)

everlast75 wrote: »

My god, this is such a lazy, lazy "argument".

Munstersrebel wrote: »

Joe didn't get this wall build... The seditious one aka the Corrupter in chief aka the super spreader in chief.. aka Russia's top spy Donald Trump had it build in anticipation of the 6th of January

are you guys for real?

i asked do walls work and posted a picture of a wall in action.

has anyone actually addressed the argument. if its so easy, bat me away.

too much if that: