trump might stand a chance with this texas law suit

Author: n8nrgmi

Posts

Total: 186
#151
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
Please stop being stupid. I did not say I believed it. I said I did not know if it was true, and I had no reason as yet to believe or deny it.
of course you have reason not to believe it. It is an internet rumor with no evidence. Never believe internet rumors with no evidence. 

And the CJ just talking to another SCOTUS member is hardly like Trump killing and eating a baby. 
I made it extra ridiculous to highlight how stupid this is. it is some a random rumor on the internet that you have no reason to believe is true. you choose to believe it because you want to. 

I do. And millions of others do too. It was possible for cases concerning the election to reach the supreme court. Some have.
like what exactly? What kind of case could possibly make a difference that could be heart by the supreme court?

Are you trying to be stupid? You asked me " who cares?" I said I care, and you conclude I'm "bent out of shape"? 
I said who cares about something extremely stupid (ie a human being having an opinion) and you said you do. So yeah, that is extremely stupid. Of course he has an opinion. if he didn't, he wouldn't be human. So basically, you are saying if he is human, you are going to be upset...

I heard this. I don't know if its true or not. I have no reason to believe it and I currently have no reason to doubt it. So I seek information.
that is what research is for. You are just spreading rumors on the internet. which is exactly how you heard about this in the 1st place. 

 But in your partisan mind, I'm already killing and eating babies! I'm here asking if there is any evidence, and you are rabid. 
all i'm doing is pointing out your actions so you can take a look at what you are doing. You are spreading rumors on the internet that, as far as you know, have no basis in fact. 

I have only asked a question. If you think questions should not be asked until a story is validated, then you ARE a fascist.
so if i start asking people if they have evidence about how trump eats babies, that is totally ok right? I can start spreading rumors like that as long as i frame it as a question?
#152
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
Please stop being stupid. I did not say I believed it. I said I did not know if it was true, and I had no reason as yet to believe or deny it.
of course you have reason not to believe it. It is an internet rumor with no evidence. Never believe internet rumors with no evidence. 
I did not believe it, and said so. Stop being an idiot.

And the CJ just talking to another SCOTUS member is hardly like Trump killing and eating a baby. 
I made it extra ridiculous to highlight how stupid this is.
No, you simply exposed your partisanship. Your TDS.

it is some a random rumor on the internet that you have no reason to believe is true. you choose to believe it because you want to. 
You cannot see that I said I did not believe it because TDS makes you stupid.

I do. And millions of others do too. It was possible for cases concerning the election to reach the supreme court. Some have.
like what exactly? What kind of case could possibly make a difference that could be heart by the supreme court?
Please don't try now to dishonestly move the goalposts. You asked me who cares what the chief justice thinks, I told you I do, and millions of others. This is true. There was nothing about the merits of Trumps case, or of overturning this election. That is all in your paranoid TDS affliction.

Are you trying to be stupid? You asked me " who cares?" I said I care, and you conclude I'm "bent out of shape"? 
I said who cares about something extremely stupid (ie a human being having an opinion) and you said you do. So yeah, that is extremely stupid.
Then I think you're an idiot. I do care about the opinions of the chief justice. In fact, I think you're a hypocrite AND an idiot. You cared about the opinions of most recent SCOTUS appointee. Take your sickness elsewhere.

Of course he has an opinion. if he didn't, he wouldn't be human. So basically, you are saying if he is human, you are going to be upset...
I am not upset. I never was. I did not say I was. I said I cared about his opinions. You, rabid with TDS, thought I believed the story (though I said I did not) thought I was advancing it as truth (though I said I was not) thought I was "bent out of shape" (why, only TDS can explain) and now think I was "upset" because the opinion of the chief justice interests me.

Its like you are communicating from a parallel universe.

I heard this. I don't know if its true or not. I have no reason to believe it and I currently have no reason to doubt it. So I seek information.
that is what research is for. You are just spreading rumors on the internet. which is exactly how you heard about this in the 1st place.
Asking here IS research idiot. And again, if you think I can't ask questions, you can take your fascism and jump off a bridge. Do you have any proof for half of the ridiculous things you say about Trump?

 But in your partisan mind, I'm already killing and eating babies! I'm here asking if there is any evidence, and you are rabid. 
all i'm doing is pointing out your actions so you can take a look at what you are doing.
No. You are assigning me beliefs and actions. I said I did NOT believe the story. You insisted I did. You called me "upset" for reasons only in your mind. You seem not to be able to tell the difference between your opinion and reality.

You are spreading rumors on the internet that, as far as you know, have no basis in fact. 
That is your fascist opinion. You want me not to ask. I say, f you. My country has freedom of speech. I did not come in saying it was true, or that I believed it. You are the one constantly feeding us your biased and dopey opinions on Trump as of they are true. If I had said I heard that Trump had killed and eaten a baby, you'd be the first one up to say it was probably true.

I have only asked a question. If you think questions should not be asked until a story is validated, then you ARE a fascist.
so if i start asking people if they have evidence about how trump eats babies, that is totally ok right?
Please stop being stupid. Really. Any question you ask is OK with me. I actually place free speech above PC liberal dogma. I was not asking for evidence, I was asking if anyone had heard of the rumor. Stop being paranoid and imbecilic.

I can start spreading rumors like that as long as i frame it as a question?
Now you're assigning me intent. Did you think Kavenaugh was guilty? On what evidence? Get away from me you befuddled partisan hack. The police state you wish us to live in will be met by logic and resistance. 
#153
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
Please stop being stupid. I did not say I believed it. I said I did not know if it was true, and I had no reason as yet to believe or deny it.
and yet you insist on spreading this conspiracy theory on the internet. That is the problem. You heard a thing that has no basis in reality as far as you know and you are proceeding to spread it. Shit like that is why so many people think there was fraud in the election, even though no one can find any evidence. 

I made it extra ridiculous to highlight how stupid this is.
No, you simply exposed your partisanship. Your TDS.
lol, i showed how foolish you were being, so that somehow has something to do with me hating trump? this has nothing to do with trump. this is about you spreading rumors on the internet. 

Now you're assigning me intent. Did you think Kavenaugh was guilty? On what evidence? Get away from me you befuddled partisan hack. The police state you wish us to live in will be met by logic and resistance
lol, i didn't realize that expecting people to stick to reality was a "police state". Clearly people spreading baseless conspiracy theories online is the only way to be free. This is just pathetic. 
#154
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
-->
@ethang5
Has anyone heard about the recorded phone call between the chief justice and another member of SCOTUS about how to keep Trump from winning the election?
Based on 1 minute of googling, someone probably made it up.

#155
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
lol
#156
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@n8nrgmi
many justices was with trump
Topic's author
#157
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
it's very rare to see someone as brainwashed as u r 
#158
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@n8nrgmi
it's very rare to see someone as brainwashed as u r 
it's oddly impressive though. He can read the words that show that no supreme court justice agreed with texas' case, and still convince himself of the exact opposite. I think even George Orwell would be impressed by his level of doublethink. He can hold two completely contrary ideas in his head and "know" they are both true. 

#159
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@n8nrgmi
lol can I be brainwashed when all institutions and even the conservaticenstablihsment are against my ideas
#160
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
lol can I be brainwashed when all institutions and even the conservaticenstablihsment are against my ideas
so basically, you are saying that everyone thinks your ideas are crazy and stupid except for con men and crazy conspiracy theorists... Yes, that absolutely means you're brainwashed. Or just nuts. 

#161
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
Please stop being stupid. I did not say I believed it. I said I did not know if it was true, and I had no reason as yet to believe or deny it.

and yet you insist on spreading this conspiracy theory on the internet.
You call it a conspiracy theory. But you aren't anyone's standard. I remember you said no one had said Hunter Biden had committed any crime, yet he was under federal investigation. You are a liberal, and you not only think your opinion is fact, you think others should follow it.

That is the problem.
No, that's what you believe, and its your problem.

You heard a thing that has no basis in reality as far as you know and you are proceeding to spread it.
Sorry Adolph, I live in a country that honors free speech. When you close your trap to the insults, innuendos, and lies about Trump, I'll take you more seriously.

Shit like that is why so many people think there was  fraud in the election, even though no one can find any evidence. 
Like no one could find any crime Hunter Biden had done? Being obtuse to the evidence doesn't make it disappear. It's the 20th of December and Biden is still not confirmed, maybe the issue is your eyesight and not the visibility of the evidence.

I made it extra ridiculous to highlight how stupid this is.
No, you simply exposed your partisanship. Your TDS.

lol, i showed how foolish you were being, so that somehow has something to do with me hating trump?
You only thought I was being foolish snowflake, but you opinion is not fact. You brought up Trump. Your TDS was showing.

...this has nothing to do with trump. this is about you spreading rumors on the internet. 
Nope. This has to do with a deranged partisan hack trying to stifle free speech. Just like your leftist mobs on uni campuses who try to boycott speakers, and twitter and Facebook trying to silence and suppress posters, and the MSM pretending whole stories don't exist. You are cut from the same cloth and I reject and dismiss you as fascist liberal who only honors our constitution when it is advantageous to you.

Now you're assigning me intent. Did you think Kavenaugh was guilty? On what evidence? Get away from me you befuddled partisan hack. The police state you wish us to live in will be met by logic and resistance.

lol, i didn't realize that expecting people to stick to reality was a "police state".
When did you start sticking to reality? You were ready to convict and condemn Kavenaugh on baseless nonsense. Was that reality? You stink of hypocrisy.

Clearly people spreading baseless conspiracy theories online is the only way to be free. This is just pathetic. 
You are pathetic. You spent the last 2 years spreading baseless conspiracy theories online about Trump, but all of a sudden, you have integrity? Should I post some of the "facts" you've regularly posted?

I have no respect for your fake hypocritical "judgement". I can ask questions. Your only problem is that you viewed my question as being negative for Democrats. I don't answer to partisan hacks suffering from TDS. Go find someone who would be intimidated by your SJW-hood. It isn't me.
#162
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Death23
Thanks for the link D23, but was that supposed to be journalism? It was more like a hit piece. No wonder it said at the end of the article,

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.

Your source, the Abrams Media Network was founded by Dan Abrams. He is also the Chief Legal Affairs Anchor for ABC News, served as the General Manager of MSNBC  and most recently was the co-anchor of “Nightline” on ABC News.

I wish you had found a more object source. Here is an example of what I mean,

Though the author concedes there were many more posts which were receptive to what the rumour alleges, he sought out and printed only the negative reaction to Wood’s tweets!

Rather than telling us what the story is, the author's intent seems to be to attack Lin Wood. He fails to even mention where the story about the Supreme Court Staffer originates.

Here is the same story done without the over the top bias of the MSM and with a focus on the story instead of attacking a person.

I wonder if HB calls either of these 2 articles "spreading rumors"?

#163
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
Please stop being stupid. I did not say I believed it. I said I did not know if it was true, and I had no reason as yet to believe or deny it.
you keep saying that, but that isn't true. it is an internet rumor with no evidence. That is a very good reason not to believe it. 

You call it a conspiracy theory. But you aren't anyone's standard. I remember you said no one had said Hunter Biden had committed any crime, yet he was under federal investigation. 
ok. and that investigation has yet to say that he has committed a crime. So i am correct. No one has said hunter has committed a crime. 

You heard a thing that has no basis in reality as far as you know and you are proceeding to spread it.
Sorry Adolph, I live in a country that honors free speech.
lol you are spreading baseless rumors, not fighting for rights. Calm yourself. 

Shit like that is why so many people think there was  fraud in the election, even though no one can find any evidence. 
Like no one could find any crime Hunter Biden had done? Being obtuse to the evidence doesn't make it disappear. 
there has been over 50 lawsuits now as well as investigations by multiple law enforcement agencies and virtually all cases were thrown out or withdrawn because there was no evidence. I am not making it disappear, it doesn't exist. Or if it does, no one has found it. 

 It's the 20th of December and Biden is still not confirmed, maybe the issue is your eyesight and not the visibility of the evidence.
what? yes he has. The states have all certified their results and the electoral college has confirmed Joe Biden. what fantasy world do you live in that those things didn't happen?

You are pathetic. You spent the last 2 years spreading baseless conspiracy theories online about Trump, but all of a sudden, you have integrity?
what conspiracies did i spread exactly? I'm pretty sure most of the stuff I have said about trump has been confirmed. I said he had contacts to russia he lied about, confirmed. I said he was corrupt and trying to use his office to personally profit, confirmed. I said he tried to get a foreign leader to spread misinformation about joe biden, confirmed. So what are these "conspiracy theories" I spread?

And even if I had (which I did not), you think that excuses you spreading bullshit on the internet?
#164
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
Please stop being stupid. I did not say I believed it. I said I did not know if it was true, and I had no reason as yet to believe or deny it.
you keep saying that, but that isn't true.
How is it not true? I tell you I don't believe it and you use your magic 8-ball to find the truth?

it is an internet rumor with no evidence. That is a very good reason not to believe it. 
Which is why I said I didn't believe it genius.

You call it a conspiracy theory. But you aren't anyone's standard. I remember you said no one had said Hunter Biden had committed any crime, yet he was under federal investigation. 
ok. and that investigation has yet to say that he has committed a crime. So i am correct. No one has said hunter has committed a crime. 
If no one had said that, he would not be under investigation. The fact is, you don't know everything, and your bias is not fact. You were wrong.

You heard a thing that has no basis in reality as far as you know and you are proceeding to spread it.
Sorry Adolph, I live in a country that honors free speech.
lol you are spreading baseless rumors, not fighting for rights. Calm yourself. 
You call it baseless. We don't know that yet, so we suspend belief till we get information. You wish to stifle my right to ask questions. I am resisting your fascism.

Shit like that is why so many people think there was  fraud in the election, even though no one can find any evidence. 
Like no one could find any crime Hunter Biden had done? Being obtuse to the evidence doesn't make it disappear. 

there has been over 50 lawsuits...
Running away from the Hunter Biden case now?

now as well as investigations by multiple law enforcement agencies and virtually all cases were thrown out or withdrawn because there was no evidence. I am not making it disappear, it doesn't exist. Or if it does, no one has found it. 
Sort of like how the Supreme Court found Africans to be only 1/16th a man?

It's the 20th of December and Biden is still not confirmed, maybe the issue is your eyesight and not the visibility of the evidence.
what? yes he has. The states have all certified their results and the electoral college has confirmed Joe Biden. what fantasy world do you live in that those things didn't happen?
What happens on Jan 12th?

You are pathetic. You spent the last 2 years spreading baseless conspiracy theories online about Trump, but all of a sudden, you have integrity?

what conspiracies did i spread exactly? I'm pretty sure most of the stuff I have said about trump has been confirmed.
Of course you do. Why do you think its called derangement?

I said he had contacts to russia he lied about, confirmed. I said he was corrupt and trying to use his office to personally profit, confirmed. I said he tried to get a foreign leader to spread misinformation about joe biden, confirmed. So what are these "conspiracy theories" I spread?
You just listed them shemp. The Mueller report found no collusion with Russia. The Senate quashed the bogus impeachment, and Biden is now listed in a criminal indictment in Ukraine.

And even if I had (which I did not), you think that excuses you spreading bullshit on the internet?
No, but it sure makes you not able to ooze up to me talking about spreading rumors and sticking to reality. Your hypocrisy stinks to high heaven.

I notice you stay away from Kavenaugh. Are you ashamed of your hypocrisy in that case?

Is the story in Death23's link spreading a conspiracy theory? Why not?

Facts do not care about your feelings Karen.
#165
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@ethang5
Sort of like how the Supreme Court found Africans to be only 1/16th a man?
This is not true.
#166
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
-->
@ethang5
Your source referred to the phone call thing as "a completely unsubstantiated, bogus story". I think that's harsher than I would have put it lol. I mean, I at least remain open to the possibility that it could be true (even though I think it's unlikely to be true).
#167
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
Please stop being stupid. I did not say I believed it. I said I did not know if it was true, and I had no reason as yet to believe or deny it. How is it not true? I tell you I don't believe it and you use your magic 8-ball to find the truth?
I already explained this. It is an internet rumor with no evidence. This is a very good reason to not believe it. If it is a rumor on the internet and doesn't have any evidence, as rule, don't believe it. 

it is an internet rumor with no evidence. That is a very good reason not to believe it. 
Which is why I said I didn't believe it genius.
Then why are you continuing to spread something that is very likely not true?

What happens on Jan 12th?
not totally sure what you are referring to. Biden has already been legally confirmed as the winner. 

The Mueller report found no collusion with Russia.
no. it found they colluded with lots of russians. Just nothing criminal. 

You just listed them shemp. The Mueller report found no collusion with Russia. 
that is a lie. 

The Senate quashed the bogus impeachment
they blocked it based on partisan grounds. How does that matter?

Biden is now listed in a criminal indictment in
lol no. but trump is. You remember when michael cohen went to jail and trump was listed as a co-conspirator they couldn't charge? That protection ends in january. 

I notice you stay away from Kavenaugh. Are you ashamed of your hypocrisy in that case?
I didn't spread conspiracies' about kavenaugh. I didn't answer it because it didn't make sense.

Facts do not care about your feelings Karen.
true. and you have no facts whatsoever. your point is all feeling, no fact.... karen.
#168
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Death23
Your source referred to the phone call thing as "a completely unsubstantiated, bogus story". I think that's harsher than I would have put it lol.
The harshness doesn't bother me if the journalist is objective.

I mean, I at least remain open to the possibility that it could be true (even though I think it's unlikely to be true).
I am, but HB has a serious problem with being natural until information justifies belief or dismissal. In his due process free liberal world, anything remotely beneficial to democrats is a conspiracy theory that should not be spoken about.

Roberts is not the only jurist to have said improper and disparaging things about Trump, so this story is not as difficult to believe as the MSM will paint it. I would like to see the chief Justice deny the charge that he is the "John Roberts" on the Epstein pedo-jet.
#169
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@FLRW
...included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time [of America's founding] considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them.

... They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order ... and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.

— Dred Scott, 60 U.S. at 404–05
— Dred Scott, 60 U.S. at 407.
#170
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
Please stop being stupid. I did not say I believed it. I said I did not know if it was true, and I had no reason as yet to believe or deny it. How is it not true? I tell you I don't believe it and you use your magic 8-ball to find the truth?

I already explained this.
As have I. Why are you repeating stupidity?

It is an internet rumor with no evidence.
I noted that.

This is a very good reason to not believe it.
No one has said they believe it.

If it is a rumor on the internet and doesn't have any evidence, as rule, don't believe it. 
Go and repeat that to someone who has not repeatedly told he does not believe it. That is what I mean by, "stop being stupid".

it is an internet rumor with no evidence. That is a very good reason not to believe it. 
Which is why I said I didn't believe it genius.

Then why are you continuing to spread something that is very likely not true?
Spreading rumors is your deranged take. And also I have free speech, even when the fascist in you doesn't like it.

What happens on Jan 12th?
not totally sure what you are referring to. Biden has already been legally confirmed as the winner. 
You and Biden were calling him " president-elect" and "winner" long before  the states certified their results, so your mention of certification here is deceitful.

The Mueller report found no collusion with Russia.
no. it found they colluded with lots of russians. Just nothing criminal. 
Collusion would be criminal for a president Cletus. And you charged a criminal act.

You just listed them shemp. The Mueller report found no collusion with Russia. 
that is a lie. 
The collusion found was in the democratic party and the fake Steele dossier.

The Senate quashed the bogus impeachment
they blocked it based on partisan grounds. How does that matter?
They quashed a partisan impeachment because there was no evidence of any criminality.

Biden is now listed in a criminal indictment in [Ukraine] (edited later)
lol no. but trump is. You remember when michael cohen went to jail and trump was listed as a co-conspirator they couldn't charge? That protection ends in january. 
Untrue. Biden is listed right now.

I notice you stay away from Kavenaugh. Are you ashamed of your hypocrisy in that case?
I didn't spread conspiracies' about kavenaugh. I didn't answer it because it didn't make sense.
Did you think he was guilty?

Facts do not care about your feelings Karen.
true.
Then stop whining crocodile tears about conspiracy theories and repeating things I've told you are not true. I don't care about your feelings either.

I will treat your fake president-elect just as respectfully as you treated my President these last 4 years. Deal with it.
#171
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
you are just going to continue to spew nonsense fueled by your emotions. There is no point in continuing this with you. 

Bottom line, you are spreading conspiracy theories on the internet for which no evidence exists. you then cry about it when i point out that is what you are doing and then try to change the subject. 
#172
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@ethang5
Often misinterpreted to mean that African Americans as individuals are considered three-fifths of a person or that they are three-fifths of a citizen of the U.S., the three-fifths clause (Article I, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution of 1787) in fact declared that for purposes of representation in Congress, enslaved blacks in a state would be counted as three-fifths of the number of white inhabitants of that state.
The three-fifths clause was part of a series of compromises enacted by the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The most notable other clauses prohibited slavery in the Northwest Territories and ended U.S. participation in the international slave trade in 1807. These compromises reflected Virginia Constitutional Convention delegate (and future U.S. President) James Madison’s observation that “…the States were divided into different interests not by their…size…but principally from their having or not having slaves.”
#173
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
You dodged every question I asked you hypocrite.

There is no point in continuing this with you.
Lol! I told you several times to take your fascism and go jump off a bridge. You mistook me for some Dweeb terrified of PC violations. I'm not that guy.

Go peddle your SJW shlock somewhere else.
#174
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@FLRW
Did I say anything about the three-fifths clause?

From Wikipedia...
In the slave societies of the Americas, a quadroon or quarteron was a person with one quarter African and three quarters European ancestry (or in Australia, one quarter aboriginal ancestry).

Similar classifications were octoroon for one-eighth black (Latin root octo-, means "eight") and hexadecaroon for one-sixteenth black.

America's answer to the question 'Who is black?" has long been that a black is any person with any known African black ancestry. This definition reflects the long experience with slavery and later with Jim Crow segregation. In the South it became known as the "one-drop rule,'' meaning that a single drop of "black blood" makes a person a black. It is also known as the "one black ancestor rule," some courts have called it the "traceable amount rule," and anthropologists call it the "hypo-descent rule," meaning that racially mixed persons are assigned the status of the subordinate group.

This definition emerged from the American South to become the nation's definition, generally accepted by whites and blacks. Blacks had no other choice. As we shall see, this American cultural definition of blacks is taken for granted as readily by judges, affirmative action officers, and black protesters as it is by Ku Klux Klansmen.

It should now be apparent that the definition of a black person as one with any trace at all of black African ancestry is inextricably woven into the history of the United States. It incorporates beliefs once used to justify slavery and later used to buttress the castelike Jim Crow system of segregation.

Developed in the South, the definition of "Negro" (now black) spread and became the nation's social and legal definition. Because blacks are defined according to the one-drop rule, they are a socially constructed category in which there is wide variation in racial traits and therefore not a race group in the scientific sense. However, because that category has a definite status position in the society it has become a self-conscious social group with an ethnic identity.

The one-drop rule has long been taken for granted throughout the United States by whites and blacks alike, and the federal courts have taken "judicial notice" of it as being a matter of common knowledge. State courts have generally upheld the one-drop rule, but some have limited the definition to one thirty-second or one-sixteenth or one-eighth black ancestry, or made other limited exceptions for persons with both Indian and black ancestry.

The judge in the Dredd Scott case referenced this "rule" from legal publications and past court judgements.
#175
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
You dodged every question I asked you hypocrite.
your questions were mostly off topic and dumb. I answered the ones that were in any way relevant to this conversation. 

Lol! I told you several times to take your fascism and go jump off a bridge. You mistook me for some Dweeb terrified of PC violations. I'm not that guy.
I asked you why you were spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories on the internet. You responded by calling any attempt to validate information as fascism. 

#176
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
You're one of those dweebs who make long goodbyes aren't you?

You dodged every question I asked you hypocrite.
your questions were mostly off topic and dumb. I answered the ones that were in any way relevant to this conversation. 
Your silly liberal belief that you decide what's relevant and what questions should be asked will suffer with me. You couldn't answer my questions because you thought not responding would hide your hypocrisy. It didn't.

Lol! I told you several times to take your fascism and go jump off a bridge. You mistook me for some Dweeb terrified of PC violations. I'm not that guy.

I asked you why you were spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories on the internet. You responded by calling any attempt to validate information as fascism. 
You assumed I was spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories on the internet. You assumed this because you are a partisan hack suffering from TDS. When I asked you if the link offered by Death23 was also spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories on the internet, you ran away.

I was the one attempting to validate information. You just wanted me to hush. That, my SJW friend, is fascism. I never allow leftest goons to intimidate me or shut me down.

Have you now found a point continuing this with me? You run nothing. No one has to do, believe, or abide by the dumb stuff you say. Your opinions about conspiracy theories are just that, your opinions.

When you lose the hypocrisy and hubris, I'll give you more respect. Till then, you know what you can do with your cancel culture. Hint: The sun doesn't shine there.
#177
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
You're one of those dweebs who make long goodbyes aren't you?
no, you just keep replying and lying so I respond to point out your lies. Stop responding with lies and we can end this. 

You dodged every question I asked you hypocrite.
nope, just the ones that were unrelated since it is counter productive letting you side track a conversation. 

Your silly liberal belief that you decide what's relevant and what questions should be asked will suffer with me.
we were discussing a specific topic. you brought up stuff that wasn't related to that topic. That has nothing to do with "liberal beliefs", just basic logic. 

Lol! I told you several times to take your fascism and go jump off a bridge. You mistook me for some Dweeb terrified of PC violations. I'm not that guy.
no, your are the guy who spreads misinformation and baseless rumors on the internet. When you get called out on it you cry about fascism and how anyone who asks you to back up your bullshit with actual facts is a fascist. 

You assumed I was spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories on the internet. 
you have admitted that you were spreading shit that you have absolutely no supporting evidence for. I'm not assuming anything. you have admitted to it. 

I was the one attempting to validate information. You just wanted me to hush.
validating information is done with research. not by spreading rumors on a forum. I understand that you are unfamiliar with the concept of actually researching things before you spread them, but it is something you should work on. 
#178
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
You're one of those dweebs who make long goodbyes aren't you?
no, you just keep replying and lying so I respond to point out your lies. Stop responding with lies and we can end this. 
I don't want to end anything. You first posted to me. I've been trained for people like you. You can't frustrate me, or scare me, or wear me down. I will entertain your stupidity for as long as you want.

You dodged every question I asked you hypocrite.
nope, just the ones that were unrelated since it is counter productive letting you side track a conversation. 
Sure you did. I asked you if the link by death23 alleging the same thing I did was also a conspiracy theory. You ran like a thief.

Your silly liberal belief that you decide what's relevant and what questions should be asked will suffer with me.
we were discussing a specific topic. you brought up stuff that wasn't related to that topic. That has nothing to do with "liberal beliefs", just basic logic. 
I decide for me what's relevant. I label my actions. Not you. You have no authority with me. Stop confusing fascism for logic.

Lol! I told you several times to take your fascism and go jump off a bridge. You mistook me for some Dweeb terrified of PC violations. I'm not that guy.
no, your are the guy who spreads misinformation and baseless rumors on the internet.
And you're the SJW that's gonna correct that? 

When you get called out on it you cry about fascism and how anyone who asks you to back up your bullshit with actual facts is a fascist. 
You didn't ask me to back up anything moron. You told me not to ask questions. That is fascist. Plus, I was not advancing a theory stupid, I was asking if it was true. Why would you need to ask me to back up something I had said I did not believe? I've asked you to stop being stupid. Perhaps you aren't being stupid deliberately.

You assumed I was spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories on the internet. 
you have admitted that you were spreading shit that you have absolutely no supporting evidence for. I'm not assuming anything. you have admitted to it. 
No sir. You're just you suffering from TDS and think you can intimidate me. You can't. What I admitted was that you are an idiot. I did admit that.

I was the one attempting to validate information. You just wanted me to hush.

validating information is done with research. not by spreading rumors on a forum.
Validating information is done with questions. I am not obligated to follow your wants snowflake, and your opinion is not fact. No matter your butthurt, I will not do what you want.

I understand that you are unfamiliar with the concept of actually researching things before you spread them, but it is something you should work on. 
I may later, right now I'm working on you loser. Your silly little liberal policeman act will fail with me. You have zero integrity and zero authority. If you search, you might find you have a life somewhere. Go to it.
#179
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ethang5
I've been trained for people like you.
lol i wasn't aware that just lying and refusing to provide evidence for things required "training"

You dodged every question I asked you hypocrite.
more lies. I responded to the relevant ones. 

Your silly liberal belief that you decide what's relevant and what questions should be asked will suffer with me.
lol, your silly completely lacking beliefs have no idea what is relevant. 

no, your are the guy who spreads misinformation and baseless rumors on the internet.
And you're the SJW that's gonna correct that? 
I can't prevent you spreading misinformation. I can however point out that is what you are doing. 

You didn't ask me to back up anything moron. You told me not to ask questions. That is fascist.
I asked if you had any evidence to back up the conspiracy theory you were spreading. You said you don't. see, I asked you if you could back it up. You couldn't. Now you are screaming and crying that you need to be allowed to spread lies without having it called out. 

I was the one attempting to validate information. You just wanted me to hush.
you validate information with research, not on a forum. Go do research and find out if you are right. If you are, come back and share it and we can talk about it. Until then you are just shamelessly spreading information which is very likely false. 
#180
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
I've been trained for people like you.
lol i wasn't aware that just lying and refusing to provide evidence for things required "training"
Do you often provide evidence for things you say you don't believe? D'oh!

You dodged every question I asked you hypocrite.
more lies. I responded to the relevant ones. 
The gentle readers can see your dodge.

Your silly liberal belief that you decide what's relevant and what questions should be asked will suffer with me.
lol, your silly completely lacking beliefs have no idea what is relevant. 
It will bug you to high heaven then that I will decide what is relevant and all you'll be able to do is yap at my heels.

no, your are the guy who spreads misinformation and baseless rumors on the internet.
And you're the SJW that's gonna correct that? 
I can't prevent you spreading misinformation. I can however point out that is what you are doing. 
Lol. You are inching towards the truth that you don't run anything. You keep "pointing out" Karen, and I will keep burning you. Deal?

You didn't ask me to back up anything moron. You told me not to ask questions. That is fascist.
I asked if you had any evidence to back up the conspiracy theory you were spreading.
And I told you it was idiotic to ask someone to provide evidence of something they have said they didn't believe. That took a while to get past your TDS.

You said you don't. see, I asked you if you could back it up. You couldn't.
Of course Jedthro. Why would you ask me to "back up" something I've told you I don't believe? You're still struggling with that one aren't you? Your IQ really isn't high enough for you to be this militant HB.

Now you are screaming and crying that you need to be allowed to spread lies without having it called out. 
You've "called it out". Is your SJW Jones satisfied? You are exactly like those fascists uni BLM liberals stifling free speech but thinking they are "calling out" someone. It may take you a while, but you will see that stupidity is not s good tool.

I was the one attempting to validate information. You just wanted me to hush.
you validate information with research, not on a forum.
Stop deleting my replies if you are going to repost your comments. You validate research with questions. And SJW's get no respect.

Go do research and find out if you are right. If you are, come back and share it and we can talk about it. Until then you are just shamelessly spreading information which is very likely false. 
No. I will do what I like, and reject your opinions as non-binding and worth less than a hill of beans. As I told you, when you get rid of the hypocrisy and hubris, you might get some respect. Till then, you will get treated like the fascist Karen you are.

I'm not a Jew. Your jackboots don't scare me.