Nobody is this stupid. He's a troll. He's deliberately reframing the argument to exclude any point you make, & not responding to your words at all. I'd block him. He's a flaming misogynist; he's no better than the misogynists trying to dominate women in the restrooms, pretending sympathy with women (laughably) while barely concealing his hatred. If every woman who has dealt with his nonsense blocked him, he'd have no-one to harass.
I highly recommend this book! Reading it has sharpened my ability to spot manipulations in argument as they're happening. MJMurphy has done us all a great service by consolidating their argumentative tricks into categories that enable our recognition and help us deliver reality based responses in real time. She strategically walks the reader through real arguments and highlights where gaslighters employ underhanded control tactics. Don't let gaslighters have the last word— MJMurphy's book is the best practical assist I have seen.
I doubt that they are legitimately being re-elected. Dems are fighting too hard to prevent election security, willing to sound like blooming idiots ("I lost my birth certificate and now I can't vote" etc.) to prevent voter ID. Nobody does all that unless they're trying to protect their ability to cheat.
@w_terrence All these people who post that they "may" leave the USA— OMG— just go. Why the interminable announcements? You don't need to notify us— just GO.
He didn't say a word about the fact that when he's "getting into his swimsuit" he is also exposing himself. And any woman who wants to put her own swimsuit on in the changing room, is now forced to strip naked in front of a man; forced nudity of women in mixed sex spaces.
Ditto for the showers. He just wants to shower off— yeah, with his penis on display, while women who need to shower have their breasts and privates exposed. This is the choice women face: forced nudity in front of a man/men OR stop showering after a work out. These showers were intended for women but are now the purview of men.
In the time it took Pelosi to spout insult after insult, she could have just answered the question. Clearly this hit a nerve. Trump had the Guard standing by, and the Chief of Capitol Police is on record calling Pelosi SIX times begging to her release the guard that Trump ordered.
Clearly these women know nothing about Maga, have likely never had a conversation with anyone aligned with Maga.
I realize that democrats believe feelings matter enormously, but those who align with Maga do not value emotionally based decisions and do not operate out of emotion. Additionally, we object to dem's fear-mongering because it lacks any intellectual substance.
Also, insulting people, name-calling, and making broad, evidence-free assertions, are not an argument.
I see Nicola Sturgeon is once again complaining that I posted a picture of myself wearing a T-shirt with her name on it and the legend 'Destroyer of Women's Rights.' Apparently this didn't 'elevate the debate.'
Is there a clinical term for an individual who has extreme thinness of skin when it comes to their own perceived hurts, coupled with a rhino-hide when it comes to the fear and suffering of others?
I'm thinking in particular of the two women Isla Bryson raped, who had to watch their First Minister squirm and smirk on TV as she tried to avoid admitting he was a man; of the five survivors of male violence who were ready to give evidence to Sturgeon's committee on gender self-ID, but were told to put their concerns in writing while seventeen trans-identified people appeared in person; of the mother of a young girl with a learning disability who campaigned against self-ID because she wanted her daughter to be guaranteed same sex intimate care, should she need it (the mother was presumably one of those female opponents Sturgeon calls 'shrill' and 'hysterical' in her memoir); of the ten-year-old girl sexually assaulted in a public bathroom by a 6'5" paedophile who served his jail sentence in a women's prison because he called himself 'Katie'; of Sandie Peggie, forced to discuss her own menstrual history in public to justify not wanting to undress in view of a 6ft straight cross-dresser in the nurses' changing room; of Marion Millar, dragged into court because she tweeted a picture of suffragette ribbons; of the Scottish rape crisis centres reliant on government funding who were pressured to admit trans-identified males into their services if they wanted funding to continue.
When Sturgeon refers to an 'elevated debate', she means a discussion that takes place within a tiny, smug bubble from which regular women suffering real life consequences of her policies are firmly excluded. These faceless ants are loftily dismissed as bigots, or, to be more precise: 'transphobic, misogynistic, homophobic, maybe racist as well.'
Nicola, you hated the T-shirt picture because you couldn't ignore it, as you'd ignored so many other women trying to make you understand their concerns. Appeals to your empathy, your intelligence and your compassion all failed. Apparently the only way to get through to you is through your vanity.
He was compensated far beyond his worth; 5-7 million annually. Beyond that, his new bosses made every effort to get him on board. Pelley refused every overture.
If I acted like that in my job I'd have been out the door immediately— no meetings to discuss how I can get on board. Pelley acted like a man who wanted to be fired. What a spoiled, privileged little brat.
GROK on Media Bias in Broader network TV news (ABC, CBS, NBC evening newscasts):
~ 92% of coverage on President Trump is negative.
~ 8% of coverage on President Trump is positive.
The conservative Media Research Center (MRC) analyzed Trump's second term's first ~100 days (Jan–Apr 2025) and found 92% negative coverage (1,692 of 1,841 evaluative statements) vs. ~8% positive across 899 stories. This included CBS content but not 60 Minutes specifically (which is a separate Sunday newsmagazine). For comparison, they rated Biden's first 100 days as far more balanced/positive.
Q: If she really thought her remarks were fine, why didn't she submit them for pre-approval like the rest of her speech?
A: Because she knew they would not get approval.
Sneaky way to prioritize herself on a day meant for every graduate and their family members as well. Hiraz made it all about her own priorities.
So these democrats who outright lie are wasting our time— we PAY them to get things done, but all she wants to do is to obstruct progress.
Do they not realize how EASY it is for us to debunk their lies? So, what does she accomplish with her ridiculous lies? She does not argue in good faith. And when the people in your party who cannot be trusted add up more and more, eventually your party will cease to exist.
In fact, if the Save Act goes through Dems will actually have to start listening to their constituents, & coming up with solutions, because the fix won't be in. Either they'll have to start doing real work or they will lose all power.
But for now, Rosen is yet another lazy, no-good liar whose name we can add to the tally of lying democrats whose words are meaningless.