Not Prisoners of Mother England

[Kishkumen]

Supporting Trump is bad enough. No labels other than Trump necessary. It’s a crap brand. Always was.

[Whiskey]

Supporting Trump is bad enough. No labels other than Trump necessary. It’s a crap brand. Always was.

What brand is better?

Really, Kish. Use that giant tenured brain and tell us the better brand.

[Whiskey]

It makes sense that they probably disagreed with whatever Nazi, racist, fascist or dangerous things that were said.

It's redundant to call Republicans racist, just like it's redundant to call Republicans stupid. Racism and stupidity are the GOP brand (I'm being redundant myself - racism and stupidity are the same thing).

It's good when someone comes out defending the current GOP, because then you know you're dealing with someone who's slow and not really worth considering. You just politely dismiss their inevitable lunatic rantings.

Schmo. Do you read this crap before you post it? Any chance your rant could be considered a bit lunatic? Or nah?

In your opinion, who are the smartest and least lunatic posters on this board? I mean, you seem to be the resident judge in chief or bishop or whatever inspired white male that can judge like a idiot from your chair. So judge away. Judge away and tell us who is the best. Thank you.

[Gadianton]

This still doesn’t explain your need to say what I or Whiskey thinks - especially when you are so often wrong.

huh. I thought that's exactly what it explained. Let me summarize: When Markk or Ajax posts something, it represents what they think and it makes sense to simply respond to the words they write should I feel it's worth my time. When Whiskey posts something, it may have nothing to do with the Shakespearian mind behind the character Whiskey, and so while at times I explore the character directly, I want to know what the Shakespeare behind Whiskey thinks, just as those who read Shakespeare wish to understand what Shakespeare was thinking when creating Romeo -- what was the meaning of the character? What did Shakespeare intend to say about the world through his play? I probably am often wrong. but even intellectuals far better than I am are likely wrong about Shakespeare also. All we can do is try. Scholars will study Shakespeare indefinitely even if they fail. It's worth nothing, however, that Whiskey's declarations about the mind of his Shakespeare are not the final authority of the contents. We'd expect Whiskey to deny it, even if I were right about something.

[Whiskey]

This still doesn’t explain your need to say what I or Whiskey thinks - especially when you are so often wrong.

huh. I thought that's exactly what it explained. Let me summarize: When Markk or Ajax posts something, it represents what they think and it makes sense to simply respond to the words they write should I feel it's worth my time. When Whiskey posts something, it may have nothing to do with the Shakespearian mind behind the character Whiskey, and so while at times I explore the character directly, I want to know what the Shakespeare behind Whiskey thinks, just as those who read Shakespeare wish to understand what Shakespeare was thinking when creating Romeo -- what was the meaning of the character? What did Shakespeare intend to say about the world through his play? I probably am often wrong. but even intellectuals far better than I am are likely wrong about Shakespeare also. All we can do is try. Scholars will study Shakespeare indefinitely even if they fail. It's worth nothing, however, that Whiskey's declarations about the mind of his Shakespeare are not the final authority of the contents. We'd expect Whiskey to deny it, even if I were right about something.

Okay. I’ll stick to telling you when you are wrong then. And you just keep on figuring out The Bard of the Board. And then we will whiskey up Reno.

[Whiskey]

BREAKING: Analysts are calling this the biggest FRAUD in American history. MSNBC falsely aired a Video from 2017 claiming it was LIVE footage from yesterday's "No Kings" rally in Boston.

MSNBC purposely wanted to portray a massive turnout for "No Kings." Which was a LIE.

No way. No way. There is no way. America has way better frauds than that.

[Bret Ripley]

BREAKING: Analysts are calling this the biggest FRAUD in American history. MSNBC falsely aired a Video from 2017 claiming it was LIVE footage from yesterday's "No Kings" rally in Boston.

MSNBC purposely wanted to portray a massive turnout for "No Kings." Which was a LIE.

The above appears to be incorrect, as other networks simultaneously aired substantially similar live footage from Boston.

No way. No way. There is no way. America has way better frauds than that.

If the claim were true, it wouldn't even be the biggest fraud this week.

[Whiskey]

If the claim were true, it wouldn't even be the biggest fraud this week.

Agreed.

[Whiskey]

She is not a Senator, but you get the point.

I would join an anti-test or pro-test or whatever the hell it is for term limits in the senate and house. As for now, we don't bend the knee for a damn thing mostly.



Whoever organized these so-called protests must work for Trump. Swear to god.

[Whiskey]

I'll take this crap seriously when we have a No Kingsmen party. In the meantime, can we all just laugh at this silly stunt?