Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/10/2018 in all areas

  1. If Earth were invaded by aliens ? from another Galaxy , I have 100% confidence that President Trump would be able to deal with them effectively , either by force or negotiations . Trump is literally that capable
    1 point
  2. Okay, so the poll that Trump cited had 62 percent of hispanics saying that they were better off under Trump, but the number was 42 percent for all respondents (and not just hispanics) compared to 30% who said that they were "about the same," and 26 percent who said that they were "worse off," so it's snickerty snickens tee hee hee time? Oh my god, how mathematically inept tee hee hee and embarrassing! An additional tee hee hee gotcha by the press is their pointing out that the poll question didn't actually ask about Obama by name, but only about a point of time during which he was president, so, therefore Trump's having said that Americans and especially hispanics are better off under his leadership than Obama's is a great big lie! The left has lost its damned mind. J
    1 point
  3. Carol, I did learn more. A whole lot more. I read Alinsky, Prairie Fire, and all kinds of things. Anyway, what I said was a quip. There's no change in policy on OL about controlling narratives, etc. I'll leave that to the fake news media. Sometimes I exercise flexibility regarding longstanding OL members. That's the long and short of it. I love you guys. Michael
    1 point
  4. Korben, I learned from the anti-Trumpers. I'm the info gatekeeper around here and I'm "controlling the narrative." ? Michael
    1 point
  5. Hmmm. So, this Kyle Kulinski kid apparently couldn't work our the logic of Trump's position. Billy, perhaps you can? Try thinking about it this way: Imagine that it's not Trump who is criticizing the polls as being slanted while also preening about how well he is doing in the polls. Is there potentially a logical explanation that comes to mind which would make this non-Trump person's position legitimate, reasonable, and not tee hee hee snicker snicker? Polling companies can be biased, and the sometimes use polls to try to influence people. They use push polls, and they often carefully craft their language in order to get closer to the result that they want to show, and encourage their friendly press to spin further. They play games. This isn't something new or secret, so don't act naive. You know better. But, anyway, polling companies also have reputations, so they generally have to stay within certain parameters with their activism. They can only lie so much, and lower their enemies' numbers only to a limited extent. With all of this in mind, can you imagine a scenario in which a person is critical of polls, but also accepts them as presenting some of the truth? In other words, if you were to force yourself to give a friendly interpretation, instead of the most hostile misinterpretation possible, do you think that it would be buffoonish and eminently embarrassing for someone to believe that polling companies are working their hardest to underreport his successes, but even with their biases and little games, they still have to stay within reality enough to give him the ratings that they have, and that those ratings are good, and when correcting for the posters' biases and little games are probably much higher? No? Guffaw snort tee hee hee? J
    1 point
  6. So, Barret is not the nominee. Not that it matters. The orchestrated leftist fear machine is running full throttle in high gear. ABC even had a pre-meltdown. Celebs are freaking out about the imminent dictatorship. Everything, every issue, is fear panic terror. Millions, maybe billions, perhaps even trillions, of women and minorities will die painful deaths because of Trump's choice. He's already worse than Hitler.
    1 point
  7. Jon, I put it in spoiler tags. It's not porn per se (intended to titillate), but image proof of an evil person, so this seems to me to be the best way around. btw - Anyone can use spoiler tags, which hide the content unless the reader opens it. Just put the following code around the content to be hidden. You do that right in the post and you don't have to go to source view. [spoiler]CONTENT TO BE HIDDEN[/spoiler] Michael
    1 point
  8. Jon, no porn: http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/topic/318-basic-objectivist-living-stuff/?do=findComment&comment=177953 Quote feature isn't working for me at the moment, in that post MSK says, "Kat and I own the forum. I basically run it--sort of like a traffic cop. I try to make sure things are moving along and that nobody hogs the forum with excessive preaching, trolling, spam and so forth. No explicit porn, either.. "
    1 point
  9. Call the gas company.
    1 point
  10. If the article now cites a fourth event, then that has since been added. Back then, it ended after three. It doesn’t matter when you or any other individuals understand the truth about Q. Your heroes are coming down. The worldwide trauma they have caused for centuries is ending. It’s better that you be blind to it, so just carry on.
    0 points