It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Donald Trump has just directly accused Obama of wiretapping Trump residence.

page: 383
158
<< 380  381  382    384  385  386 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: SBMcG

You think that was "polite" ... it was literally chock-full of hyper-partisan terminology.


It was polite in that it did not contain any personal attacks. Partisanship doesn't bother me that much as long as the give-and-take is equal in the level of vitriol.

Again, absent personal attacks ("stupid", "uneducated", "racist", etc...).


As you say.

Consider though that someone can make a statement that is "stupid" without being stupid (or racist or uneducated) themselves.

We here assembled (with a few exceptions) don't know each "other." We know the words we see.

That said, you really can't think that your general posting tendencies aren't offensive to some in the same way you now state that you're offended ... can you?


I am one of the few conservatives on this site who gives back as good as the leftists give.

The endless mockery of President Trump is fine as long as equal time is given to the factual and proven shortcomings of liberals like Obama and Bill Clinton's wife.

Do I go over the top at times?

Probably. But that is a calculation I make based upon how ridiculously blown out of all proportion the statement I'm replying to is.

I believe in vigorous debate, even disrespectful to the subjects at the time. But not personal attacks.




posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: SBMcG


Land Development doesn't require intelligence...It requires BS, Money and bulldozers...

I have bought and sold land to developers as a side gig. I know your type well.

At least I now understand your loyal affinity for Trump.



So you are "good" at scientific logic compiled off an internet forum.

Hope this award makes you number one in your own mind..




When they start attacking you personally -- as they certainly have done to me here, you must be over the target.

I would normally never "go there", but the leftists have become so abusive (yes, I know this is the Mud Pit) that it's actually a new low for ATS standards.


Don't be sensationalistic...both sides are spewing their respective rhetoric...you only think "youre side" is right just as much as anyone else....yea, youre the victim, gimme a break


In this case, I was attacked personally by two other members. That changes things from partisan bickering to a whole different thing, wouldn't you agree?


I think there has been so much partisanship present in this thread that I believe 2 things have happened:

1) Extreme views on either side of the aisle are blinded by party loyalty

2) Extreme views on either side have forgotten what they're fighting about and instead revert to half-truths and innuendo


Both 1 & 2 end up becoming personal attacks which likely should have been expected ... magnified even more so that someone with an engineering background and vast disciplines as you have brought out for us here today; one would imagine you of all people should recognize that it would happen. As such, continue leaving on the big boy pants and throw the huggies away.


My "big boy pants" would make yours look like a tutu.


You know nothing about me, I responded with respect...so who is attacking?



I've just come to the point where the one-sided personal attacks against conservatives are not going to go unanswered in like kind anymore.


And so now, as a result, you're going to do what precisely?


You don't know anything about me. Telling me to "put on my big boy pants" was NOT respectful.



I carefully worded that response because I knew you were going to instinctively make that error. I didn't tell you to PUT them on (which would intimate that you were acting childish), instead I suggested that you leave them on (which instead indicates that up to this point you were acting like an adult, and don't lower yourself into NOT acting like an adult).

I drew you into that intentionally to show you where and why I see whats happening in this thread.


Naw. You used a phrase you thought I would take personally (I didn't) and I simply ignored it by saying what I wanted to say.

The entire point I was trying to make is that there exists a double-standard between what can be said about liberals and what can be said about conservatives without triggering a personal attack.


You are just plain wrong. It was intentional. Go back and re-read my response, unless you are what you claim to be fighting against, you will see that.


I will grant you this -- I can see your point. I read it quickly and "continue leaving on the big boy pants" is not how I would have worded that phrase, but it does make more sense after reading it again.

So there it is. You win.


My intention wasn't to win, I assure you. You asked me my opinion, and I gave it...I just felt that an example of what I've seen happening in this thread was worth more than trying to explain it.

I actually find it commendable and re-assuring that you can lower your guard enough to admit that maybe you saw something that wasn't there. For my part, I apologize for the deception, but the result seems to have made it worthwhile.
edit on 23-3-2017 by alphabetaone because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: SBMcG

Well, perhaps that "cockroach" feels the same about you ... perhaps that's where the "we're all God's children*" part comes in?








*Editor's note: God is of course merely a cultural reference to the personification of universal natural forces.


I have never attacked the "cockroach" personally. Yet that individual feels empowered to persoanlly attack anyone they don't agree with. Most people reading this know exactly who I'm talking about and it ain't you.

You can't defend decorum on the one hand and make excuses for the cockroach on the other just because you happen to agree with their politics.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: SBMcG


Land Development doesn't require intelligence...It requires BS, Money and bulldozers...

I have bought and sold land to developers as a side gig. I know your type well.

At least I now understand your loyal affinity for Trump.



So you are "good" at scientific logic compiled off an internet forum.

Hope this award makes you number one in your own mind..




When they start attacking you personally -- as they certainly have done to me here, you must be over the target.

I would normally never "go there", but the leftists have become so abusive (yes, I know this is the Mud Pit) that it's actually a new low for ATS standards.


Don't be sensationalistic...both sides are spewing their respective rhetoric...you only think "youre side" is right just as much as anyone else....yea, youre the victim, gimme a break


In this case, I was attacked personally by two other members. That changes things from partisan bickering to a whole different thing, wouldn't you agree?


I think there has been so much partisanship present in this thread that I believe 2 things have happened:

1) Extreme views on either side of the aisle are blinded by party loyalty

2) Extreme views on either side have forgotten what they're fighting about and instead revert to half-truths and innuendo


Both 1 & 2 end up becoming personal attacks which likely should have been expected ... magnified even more so that someone with an engineering background and vast disciplines as you have brought out for us here today; one would imagine you of all people should recognize that it would happen. As such, continue leaving on the big boy pants and throw the huggies away.


My "big boy pants" would make yours look like a tutu.


You know nothing about me, I responded with respect...so who is attacking?



I've just come to the point where the one-sided personal attacks against conservatives are not going to go unanswered in like kind anymore.


And so now, as a result, you're going to do what precisely?


You don't know anything about me. Telling me to "put on my big boy pants" was NOT respectful.



I carefully worded that response because I knew you were going to instinctively make that error. I didn't tell you to PUT them on (which would intimate that you were acting childish), instead I suggested that you leave them on (which instead indicates that up to this point you were acting like an adult, and don't lower yourself into NOT acting like an adult).

I drew you into that intentionally to show you where and why I see whats happening in this thread.


Naw. You used a phrase you thought I would take personally (I didn't) and I simply ignored it by saying what I wanted to say.

The entire point I was trying to make is that there exists a double-standard between what can be said about liberals and what can be said about conservatives without triggering a personal attack.


You are just plain wrong. It was intentional. Go back and re-read my response, unless you are what you claim to be fighting against, you will see that.


I will grant you this -- I can see your point. I read it quickly and "continue leaving on the big boy pants" is not how I would have worded that phrase, but it does make more sense after reading it again.

So there it is. You win.


My intention wasn't to win, I assure you. You asked me my opinion, and I gave it...I just felt that an example of what I've seen happening in this thread was worth more than trying to explain it.

I actually find it commendable and re-assuring that you can lower your guard enough to admit that maybe you saw something that wasn't there. For my part, I apologize for the deception, but the result seems to have made it worthwhile.


You don't have to apologize for anything. I misunderstood a somewhat clumsily-worded phrase. No harm, no foul.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Was a GREAT movie.


Regretfully, the Guns-n-Roses tune, these days embracing that line from the Captain seems a bit more apropos given the current political climate


For your listening pleasure





posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: SBMcG

Actually, I can do whatever I like within the terms of T&C....

... you're missing my point for the most part.

Let me play jeopardy and phrase it as a question ... why do you feel like you're justified in referring to another ATS member (or really, another human being) as a "cockroach."

That might be a starting point in understanding why you seem to draw "attacks" rather than your political beliefs.

You think?



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Fox News reporter, James Rosen, who himself was spied on by the Obama Regime (along with members of his family) has dropped a bombshell development in the Trump wiretapping matter...


Republican congressional investigators expect a potential “smoking gun” establishing that the Obama administration spied on the Trump transition team, and possibly the president-elect himself, will be produced to the House Intelligence Committee this week, a source told Fox News.


Rosen has been rock-solid in the past. This report builds upon the information that was presented by Rep. Devin Nunes yesterday.


The intelligence is said to leave no doubt the Obama administration, in its closing days, was using the cover of legitimate surveillance on foreign targets to spy on President-elect Trump, according to sources.


Fox News



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: SBMcG

Actually, I can do whatever I like within the terms of T&C....

... you're missing my point for the most part.

Let me play jeopardy and phrase it as a question ... why do you feel like you're justified in referring to another ATS member (or really, another human being) as a "cockroach."

That might be a starting point in understanding why you seem to draw "attacks" rather than your political beliefs.

You think?


Thank you for proving my point.

The person I am referring to as "cockroach" has a long history of personal attacks. You don't seem to be bothered by that because you agree politically with that person.

This has been an interesting exercise in exposing bias.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:13 PM
link   
So ... I suppose the transcripts should have read something like ...

"SPEAKER ONE: So in regards to your Inauguration Parade XXXXXXX, would you prefer tanks or jets or both?

MASKED RESPONDENT: Whuddya mean? I want whatever we need to make the day as YUUUGE as possible."

Yes, these revelations will be ground-breaking.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: SBMcG

The only point you've proven is why you draw attacks ... it isn't your politics, it's your snide, supercilious tone.

Trust me, I'm an expert in that area.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: SBMcG

... it isn't your politics, it's your snide, supercilious tone.

Trust me, I'm an expert in that area.




posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
So ... I suppose the transcripts should have read something like ...

"SPEAKER ONE: So in regards to your Inauguration Parade XXXXXXX, would you prefer tanks or jets or both?

MASKED RESPONDENT: Whuddya mean? I want whatever we need to make the day as YUUUGE as possible."

Yes, these revelations will be ground-breaking.




The intelligence is said to leave no doubt the Obama administration, in its closing days, was using the cover of legitimate surveillance on foreign targets to spy on President-elect Trump, according to sources.


Who breaks the law just to listen to chatter about parades? Even Obama wasn't that lame.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Ah, a timely meme.

Another quality post, JinMI.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: SBMcG

The only point you've proven is why you draw attacks ... it isn't your politics, it's your snide, supercilious tone.

Trust me, I'm an expert in that area.


I made my point on the personal attacks. I will continue to avoid them as i always have, but I will also continue to in equal measure mock leftists for their flawed and failed ideology when appropriate.

For the rest of the evening, I will be following the truly stunning breaking developments indicating there was in fact a direct link between the Obama Regime and surveillance on Team Trump.
edit on 23-3-2017 by SBMcG because: Obama is going to SuperMax.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: SBMcG

"According to sources."

That's been established here by your colleagues as the tag-line of fake news.

Careful what you wish for.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: SBMcG

The only point you've proven is why you draw attacks ... it isn't your politics, it's your snide, supercilious tone.

Trust me, I'm an expert in that area.


i made my point on the personal attacks. I will continue to avoid them as i always have, but I will also continue to in equal measure mock leftists for their flawed and failed ideology when appropriate.

For the rest of the evening, I will be following the truly stunning breaking developments indicating there was in fact a direct link between the Obama Regime and surveillance on Team Trump.


Now, here's the punchline ...

You think that "mocking leftists" is not an attack.

I rephrase my previous comment, you're not a comedian, you're just a fairly clueless hypocrite.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: JinMI

Ah, a timely meme.

Another quality post, JinMI.


Trying to clean up my muddy act. Sometimes, I can't resist.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:23 PM
link   
If President Obama wanted to SPY on Trump and staff's activities, wouldn't have been better to turn up any significant "dirt", BEFORE the election?

Or, was Obama too slow to react...like Hillary and the DNC?

In fact, they're screwing themselves now for the 2018 mid-terms, by focusing on things they can't do anything about, instead of proactively grooming a person/platform for the next election.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


Trump’s Team Said It Didn’t Ask For Military Vehicles At Inauguration.

Emails Show It Did.

www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
If President Obama wanted to SPY on Trump and staff's activities, wouldn't have been better to turn up any significant "dirt", BEFORE the election?

Or, was Obama too slow to react...like Hillary and the DNC?

In fact, they're screwing themselves now for the 2018 mid-terms, by focusing on things they can't do anything about, instead of proactively grooming a person/platform for the next election.


Obama doesn't play checkers. For everything he is and represents, stupidity is not one of his characteristics.



new topics

top topics



 
158
<< 380  381  382    384  385  386 >>

log in

join