How will the media handle Bidens sexual assualt allegation? NYT tweet lets us know...just amazing

#1,026
#1,026
37L1 said:
Gee, maybe she's wrong about the year but not the incident? Seems like that's the leeway that was given to Dr. Ford.

You just can't jump up there fast enough to try and diminish these women's victimization can you?

It's hilarious.
Click to expand...
He wasnt there in 2007 either. How many years was she 14?
 
#1,027
#1,027
1972 Grad said:
I don't care if the woman is lying or not, but I'm thrilled that the Dems are having to take some of their own medicine. Bring more of them out of the woodwork to accuse him..
Click to expand...

Nobody cares. Trump normalized it sexual assault.
 
#1,031
#1,031
evillawyer said:
No, the argument was you that it was more likely that Kavanaugh assaulted Blasey Ford than that Jesus rose from the dead, yet you believe the more unlikely thing.
Click to expand...

Jesus had hundred of eye witness accounts on record that saw him after He rose.

Ford had no one and every witness she mentioned said they had no idea what she was taking about.

On the other hand, Peter believed to the point he not only died, he was crucified upside down by his choice due to not feeling he was worthy to die like Christ.

You need to pick up a history book. Oh, and stop lying about being a lawyer. Both would serve you well, mam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Vol1321, Rickyvol77, MOOOOONEY and 4 others
#1,034
#1,034
Hunerwadel said:
Who said I supported them? I didn't vote for Clinton and which Kennedy?
Click to expand...
"Which Kennedy?" question goes to show what a trash family they are from top to bottom and even more trash that the Democrats lionize all Kennedys and Bill Clinton.

Trump is nothing more than a guy behaving like all Democrats do, but they seemed to be outraged about it for some reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and NEO
#1,035
#1,035
Sin City Vol said:
Not this one
View attachment 276207
Click to expand...

Did Joe Biden sexually assault Tara Reade? Probably not.

Did the liberals take the believe all women and the #MeToo movement too far? Absolutely.

What we are witnessing with the backpedaling by the liberals on the believe all women stance since the allegations came out against one of their own is both funny and sad.

Vice President Mike Pence has been ridiculed by the liberal left due to the fact that he will not have dinner with a woman without his wife present. One poster on this board stated it was because he couldn’t control his sexual urges to assault women. Mike Pence is the smartest politician in America. He will never be accused of sexual assault because he refuses to put himself in situations where he is alone with a woman.

The whole believe all women and #MeToo movement has caused males in a supervisory position to rethink how they approach female subordinates. I try not to be alone with female employees especially when it comes to disciplinary situations.

Take off your blue shaded glasses and look at the difference of how this is playing out compared to the Kavanaugh situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1, tennvols77, Bigun and 1 other person
#1,036
#1,036
Bigun said:
According to the standards set by ypu liberals for Christine Blaslwy Ford, we are giving Tara Reid the survivors benefit of the doubt.

Own your own rules you set. The party of Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton....lol
Click to expand...
Well, the other allegation is from someone else that is lying. Last I heard Ms. Reade didnt file a complaint. She filed and intake form.....shes changed her story 4 times already.
 
#1,037
#1,037
titansvolsfaninga said:
Well, the other allegation is from someone else that is lying. Last I heard Ms. Reade didnt file a complaint. She filed and intake form.....shes changed her story 4 times already.
Click to expand...

Obviously she is lying. But we still must believe her and investigate the allegation. We cannot risk having a person who has done something like this occupying the highest office in the land.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bigun
#1,038
#1,038
titansvolsfaninga said:
Well, the other allegation is from someone else that is lying. Last I heard Ms. Reade didnt file a complaint. She filed and intake form.....shes changed her story 4 times already.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant according to the standard set by the Dem's less than 2 years ago. We must believe all women.
 
#1,039
#1,039
DC_Vol said:
Obviously she is lying. But we still must believe her and investigate the allegation. We cannot risk having a person who has done something like this occupying the highest office in the land.
Click to expand...
I mean... it is just a job interview after all so the bar is a lot lower. I’ve heard that somewhere before 🤔
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bigun
#1,040
#1,040
NEOCON said:
Jesus had hundred of eye witness accounts on record that saw him after He rose.

Ford had no one and every witness she mentioned said they had no idea what she was taking about.

On the other hand, Peter believed to the point he not only died, he was crucified upside down by his choice due to not feeling he was worthy to die like Christ.

You need to pick up a history book. Oh, and stop lying about being a lawyer. Both would serve you well, mam.
Click to expand...

Still one of my favorite takes on the hooey of miracles (religious or otherwise).

 
#1,043
#1,043
Bigun said:
Just to clarify, you think either Jesus never existed or if he did he was a liar and fraud?
Click to expand...

Did Jesus exist? Probably. Did he perform miracles (defined as a violation of a law of nature)? I have more reason to believe that the reports of those miracles are false than that they occurred. What's more likely--that a flesh and blood man literally walked on water or that something much more mundane happened (lie, inaccurate testimony, hallucination, etc). When it comes to miracles, it's always going to be more likely that something pedestrian has happened than that a miracle occured.

One of his best pieces of work. Read it if you haven't read it before.

Hume on Miracles
 
#1,044
#1,044
evillawyer said:
Did Jesus exist? Probably. Did he perform miracles (defined as a violation of a law of nature)? I have more reason to believe that the reports of those miracles are false than that they occurred. What's more likely--that a flesh and blood man literally walked on water or that something much more mundane happened (lie, inaccurate testimony, hallucination, etc). When it comes to miracles, it's always going to be more likely that something pedestrian has happened than that a miracle occured.

One of his best pieces of work. Read it if you haven't read it before.

Hume on Miracles
Click to expand...
That's fine, but if you believe Jesus is real, and don't believe he is the Son of God, the only way to salvation is through him and that he was able to perform miracles, then you have to believe he was a liar and fraud? Do you believe that?
 
#1,045
#1,045
Bigun said:
That's fine, but if you believe Jesus is real, and don't believe he is the Son of God, the only way to salvation is through him and that he was able to perform miracles, then you have to believe he was a liar and fraud? Do you believe that?
Click to expand...

Depends. There's a third option. Namely, the testimony was false. And that is all we have with Jesus. 100% testimony, nothing from the man himself. What's more likely: (1) that that testimony is false and miracles did not occur or (2) that that testimony is true and the man was violating laws of nature on a regular basis?

This was the whole basis of the tweet that started this discussion: how so many Republicans have no issue in believing second-hand testimony that honest-to-goodness miracles occured thousands of years ago, but have trouble believing a women who purports to relate what happened to her personally.
 
#1,046
#1,046
evillawyer said:
Depends. There's a third option. Namely, the testimony was false. And that is all we have with Jesus. 100% testimony, nothing from the man himself. What's more likely: (1) that that testimony is false and miracles did not occur or (2) that that testimony is true and the man was violating laws of nature on a regular basis?

This was the whole basis of the tweet that started this discussion: how so many Republicans have no issue in believing second-hand testimony that honest-to-goodness miracles occured thousands of years ago, but have trouble believing a women who purports to relate what happened to her personally.
Click to expand...

Do you know what the cool thing is ? We will all find out .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1
#1,049
#1,049
0nelilreb said:
“IF “ .. it’s so small and yet carries so much weight .
Click to expand...

It either is the end, and there's no you there to experience or find out anything, or it's not the end. If it's not the end, there is still no guarantee that conscious experience would continue. Maybe the "soul" continues to exist, but without consciousness, like a lifeless stone.
 
#1,050
#1,050
evillawyer said:
It either is the end, and there's no you there to experience or find out anything, or it's not the end. If it's not the end, there is still no guarantee that conscious experience would continue. Maybe the "soul" continues to exist, but without consciousness, like a lifeless stone.
Click to expand...

“IF”.. it’s the end we have no worries . “ IF” it’s not then we will too busy too worry about floaty souls and lifeless stone.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top