Report: Sessions Out as Attorney General

[Spartanmack]

You mean like how O'Reilly, Hannity, and nearly all the rest of the FOX news crew treated Obama?

Guess which one didn't cry like a baby and just dealt with it.

which one of those was a white house correspondent who regularly confronted, heckled, harangued and disrespected the President to his face?

none of them is the answer.

 

[turok]

saying your idea is stupid isnt an ad hominem attack.

I read what you posted before editing it, but nice try.

 

[tinselwolverine]

You mean like how O'Reilly, Hannity, and nearly all the rest of the FOX news crew treated Obama?

Guess which one didn't cry like a baby and just dealt with it.

I haven’t paid much attention to the Acosta event and it seems to me to be much to do about nothing.

I saw O’Reilly on a recorded interview with President Obama during the Super Bowl halftime and it seemed to me that O’Reilly treated Obama with the respect and decorum the office is owed.

I don’t believe Hannity has ever had a personal interaction with Obama, either well in office or well not in office.

I don’t know anything about any direct interaction with Obama that anyone else at Fox News has ever had, but I don’t recall hearing that any one from Fox News was disrespectful toward a president Obama in a direct encounter.

Edit: I’m pretty sure that by now you have all figured out that I generally voice recognition text and I don’t bother offering to go back and fix Siri is misunderstanding that are obvious to translate.

 

[Spartanmack]

I read what you posted before editing it, but nice try.

oh, so you saw my spelling errors. good for you.

 

[turok]

oh, so you saw my spelling errors. good for you.

Liar

Should have quoted your reply, will do so from now on.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I guess major Garrett and some dude Ed Henry were the primary Fox News White House correspondents during the Obama administration. I don’t recall hearing of any conflict or acrimony regarding either of their tenure as the chief White house correspondent.

 

[Spartanmack]

Liar

Should have quoted your reply, will do so from now on.

LOL. Look at the time stamps. I edited that post for spelling errors at 8:28 this morning. You made your comment about ad hominem ten minutes later at 8:38 and I didn't reply to you until this afternoon. I guess I was a mind reader, knew you were gonna call me out for ad hominem so I edited it out - or maybe I have one of those precogs from Minority Report in my basement that tells me what you're gonna post before you post it. Seems like you're the liar here. Seriously, I don't care enough about your opinion to lie about what I said to you. If I engage in ad hominem, it's only in response to ad hominem. And if you don't agree or believe me, I really don't care.

 

[Thumb]

which one of those was a white house correspondent who regularly confronted, heckled, harangued and disrespected the President to his face?

none of them is the answer.

So it's okay as long as it's not to his face?

And while not defending Acosta at all, those things you say he regularly did, were they always in the context of a question? And if not would you care to provide some examples?

 

[turok]

LOL. Look at the time stamps. I edited that post for spelling errors at 8:28 this morning. You made your comment about ad hominem ten minutes later at 8:38 and I didn't reply to you until this afternoon. I guess I was a mind reader, knew you were gonna call me out for ad hominem so I edited it out - or maybe I have one of those precogs from Minority Report in my basement that tells me what you're gonna post before you post it. Seems like you're the liar here. Seriously, I don't care enough about your opinion to lie about what I said to you. If I engage in ad hominem, it's only in response to ad hominem. And if you don't agree or believe me, I really don't care.

The later timestamp is meaningless, since it was early in the am, no one else had posted in between my reply and yours, and I had not refreshed the page before posting.

 

[Spartanmack]

So it's okay as long as it's not to his face?

And while not defending Acosta at all, those things you say he regularly did, were they always in the context of a question? And if not would you care to provide some examples?

yeah, it's ok to be critical of the president, which to my knowledge is mostly what those others you mentioned do - I don't watch any of them, so I don't really know. It's not OK for a White House correspondent to be disruptive, rude and disrespectful of the office. But nice try at the whataboutism.

I think they were mostly in the form of a question but I'm not sure - but they weren't always during Q&A sessions. There was the time Trump was hosting a bunch of kids at the White House not taking questions and Acosta starts shouting about DACA kids, then he heckled Trump at the Peace Summit w/ Kim - those are just off the top of my head. The guy is just an ass, plain and simple.

 

[Spartanmack]

The later timestamp is meaningless, since it was early in the am, no one else had posted in between my reply and yours, and I had not refreshed the page before posting.

it means everything - it means I didn't edit it after you posted. Why would I edit the ad hominem if you hadn't posted about it?

You're clearly wrong, I know you can't admit it so just let it go.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Oh for the Love - hey - an emoge popped up-of God.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J7kugXfzdkM

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GT0TBWg3C3k

There have been a whole lot of stupid dumb arguments on this board, but this one is definitely in the final running for the stupidest dumbest of all.

 

[turok]

There have been a whole lot of stupid dumb arguments on this board, but this one is definitely in the final running for the stupidest dumbest of all.

So you're not only a mod, but the final arbiter on what is and isn't the stupidest arguments are on this board?

Fancy that.

Some poster here believes that making the last reply somehow wins all arguments, and won't stop until then.

 

[tinselwolverine]

So you're not only a mod, but the final arbiter on what is and isn't the stupidest arguments are on this board?

Fancy that.

Nope.

Everyone is entitled to carry on with their own foolishness, at least as far as I understand things to be.

But I am at least allowed to voice my own two dang cents like everybody else, aren’t I?

Fancy that.

Also, “arguments” requires the plural form of the verb “to be.”

You used the singular.

EDIT: Actually you used both.

 

[sggatecl]

It's only fitting that a discussion about Sessions devolved into this, really.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Some poster here believes that making the last reply somehow wins all arguments, and won't stop until then.

I didn?t include this in my post above but I realize I find it pertinent.

My post you responded to didn?t specifically address anyone-It didn?t specifically address you or anybody else regarding what I thought were people engaging in a stupid argument - I thought everybody Who was engaging In the argument was engaging In a stupid argument.

Nobody else replied but you.

And what was your reply? Your reply is what I just quoted - ?Some posters here believe that making the last reply somehow wins all arguments, and won?t stop until then.?

 

[turok]

Nope.

Everyone is entitled to carry on with their own foolishness, at least as far as I understand things to be.

But I am at least allowed to voice my own two dang cents like everybody else, aren?t I?

Fancy that.

Also, ?arguments? requires the plural form of the verb ?to be.?
/
You used the singular.

EDIT: Actually you used both.

So what? You redundantly used "stupid dumb" and "stupidest dumbest" in the same sentence

When I read grammatical errors in these threads, I tend to refrain from calling them out b/c it seems too petty of a thing to do, as well as avoid calling anyone else's comments stupid or dumb.

 

[turok]

I didn?t include this in my post above but I realize I find it pertinent.

My post you responded to didn?t specifically address anyone-It didn?t specifically address you or anybody else regarding what I thought were people engaging in a stupid argument - I thought everybody Who was engaging In the argument was engaging In a stupid argument.

Nobody else replied but you.

And what was your reply? Your reply is what I just quoted - ?Some posters here believe that making the last reply somehow wins all arguments, and won?t stop until then.?

I actually was referring to one poster in particular, since it was singular not plural. And it was your two videos that I didn't include in my quote is what prompted my reply. I rarely include images or videos in quotes b/c I find it annoying to see them being repeated multiple times in threads.

 

[Spartanmack]

So you're not only a mod, but the final arbiter on what is and isn't the stupidest arguments are on this board?

Fancy that.

Some poster here believes that making the last reply somehow wins all arguments, and won't stop until then.

no, he's right. this is a stupid argument.

by the way, were you looking in the mirror when made this post?

 

[Gulo Blue]

I haven?t paid much attention to the Acosta event and it seems to me to be much to do about nothing.

The incident and the press pass isn't that big a deal and I could even chalk up the White House tweeting a doctored video as a mistake (though they should acknowledge their mistake), since the doctoring was likely done by someone else. All that is small potatoes relative to a typical week of political news. Spartanmack's posts about there being experts on both sides is a bit of a thing for me though. Might change how I interact with him going forward a little.