1st and 2nd doesnt exist because I said so (Page 3/7)
82-T/A [At Work] SEP 12, 11:49 AM

quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

^ Good stuff. ^

If toast is who he says he is, he has been exposed to all of that. He chooses to ignore it because the ideas that made America the greatest nation the world has ever known are contrary to his personal philosophy.

What he claims and what he demonstrates are two very different things. E.Furgal was the same way.




If Fred has even half the intelligence he states, then he DOES already know this stuff. But one of the things that I've found of people who are often slightly above average intelligence, but not highly intelligent, they'll often assume everyone is less intelligent than them. This causes them to do things that (in their mind) are sneaky / tricky, but unfortunately everyone else can see right through it.

Such as, intentionally spouting off things that they know are completely false, in hopes that the person they're talking to doesn't actually know any better and just accepts it. Why anyone would do this is beyond me. If you know you're completely wrong, but re-quote false statements ... what exactly does that gain? I have to assume it goes back to Fred's goal of feeling like he's winning an argument, for whatever benefit that is to him, even when he's actually totally wrong.
williegoat SEP 12, 12:23 PM
I don't doubt that he studied law, but so did Kamala Harris.

[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 09-12-2023).]

williegoat SEP 12, 01:04 PM
82-T/A [At Work] SEP 12, 01:12 PM

quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

I don't doubt that he studied law, but so did Kamala Harris.





Hahah... I thought about getting my JD too... from the exact same school that a few Democrat politicians got their degree from (it's actually local to me). It's the only law school that offers JDs online, which is a farce really... because half of what's required to being a good lawyer is being able to defend your position in front of an audience of jurors, judge, audience, etc... and not just passing the bar in your state. I was going to do it anyway, but then questioned what the point would be. I'm already well into my career, and I don't really plan to practice lawyer. For me to become a lawyer I would have to take a massive pay cut since public defenders and the like generally do not make much money. It's essentially civilian service at the state level. Law firms are a bloated area, and the only reason why I wanted to get into it is in case I decide to become a politician one day, and more broadly ... I wanted to better understand law in its totality. So I took two separate degrees, a full MLS and an MSc in Cyber and AI Law from a really well-known university just to make it count.

I've always thought law was fun, but I've enjoyed instead scratch that itch as an expert witness for the Government when the opportunity presents itself. Which honestly, is not as much fun as I thought because I end up usually feeling really bad knowing that my testimony is directly affecting someone negatively. It's hard for the defense to explain away stealing classified documents, or mountains of child p0rn though... so it's what it is.
ray b SEP 12, 04:54 PM
the god of gun requires fresh blood often

that is not a good or just god
olejoedad SEP 12, 05:16 PM

quote
Originally posted by ray b:

the god of gun requires fresh blood often

that is not a good or just god



Now you've got me confused.

You stated earlier that there is no God.
randye SEP 12, 06:02 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
If Fred has even half the intelligence he states, then he DOES already know this stuff. But one of the things that I've found of people who are often slightly above average intelligence, but not highly intelligent, they'll often assume everyone is less intelligent than them. This causes them to do things that (in their mind) are sneaky / tricky, but unfortunately everyone else can see right through it.

Such as, intentionally spouting off things that they know are completely false, in hopes that the person they're talking to doesn't actually know any better and just accepts it. Why anyone would do this is beyond me. If you know you're completely wrong, but re-quote false statements ... what exactly does that gain? I have to assume it goes back to Fred's goal of feeling like he's winning an argument, for whatever benefit that is to him, even when he's actually totally wrong.




"fraudtoast's" antics remind me of a quote:

"This jumbling up things is a sort of dust-throwing which is often indulged in by small men who argue for victory rather than for truth.
Frederick Douglass, March 26, 1860

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 09-12-2023).]

ray b SEP 12, 06:08 PM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:


Now you've got me confused.

You stated earlier that there is no God.



LOTS AND LOTS OF GODS

ONLY THE BIG 3 LIMIT GODS to one or 3in1 / 1in3

but understand all are made up by men zues thor ra odin ja thugee elohim feathered-serpent no matter

that does not limit or restrict the evil or the harm made up gods can do and have done

there are gods just no real GOD [S]

olejoedad SEP 12, 06:19 PM
You're in for a big surprise.
82-T/A [At Work] SEP 12, 06:42 PM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

You're in for a big surprise.




Sorry Joe, I couldn't help myself...