|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 8:54:06 GMT -8
I created a s**tstorm? Come on. You made it one. I can bring up the good and bad in my eyes, all I want. You can rebut, but you'll be the one making it a s**tstorm. I actually said it was no big deal and isn't going to make a bit of difference. You're being a little dramatic here. I didn't even bring it up...and then you made multiple posts about it. So, yeah, that's a shitstorm....when you washed away Vance's comments and tried to rationalize/qualify them. If anyone is being dramatic, it's you for bringing up a non-issue and trying to say no politician has ever been self-deprecating before. If it wasn't a big deal, you made it that way with comments like you wouldn't want Walz in charge of the country....which is insanely dramatic. theconversation.com/politicians-dont-seem-to-laugh-at-themselves-as-much-anymore-122103Bringing something up doesn't cause a s**tstorm. It's responses that follow and in the manner that they are presented can cause it. I don't mind the back and forth, but I'm not going nuts about it. I just said that those two responses didn't come across too well in my eyes. I also said it isn't that big a deal and won't make any difference. That's my opinion, just as JD Vance calling Trump the next Hitler, or something like that, and now he's his VP running mate, is my opinion. Moving on. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 9:07:16 GMT -8
I didn't even bring it up...and then you made multiple posts about it. So, yeah, that's a shitstorm....when you washed away Vance's comments and tried to rationalize/qualify them. If anyone is being dramatic, it's you for bringing up a non-issue and trying to say no politician has ever been self-deprecating before. If it wasn't a big deal, you made it that way with comments like you wouldn't want Walz in charge of the country....which is insanely dramatic. theconversation.com/politicians-dont-seem-to-laugh-at-themselves-as-much-anymore-122103Bringing something up doesn't cause a s**tstorm. It's responses that follow and in the manner that they are presented can cause it. I don't mind the back and forth, but I'm not going nuts about it. I just said that those two responses didn't come across too well in my eyes. I also said it isn't that big a deal and won't make any difference. That's my opinion, just as JD Vance calling Trump the next Hitler, or something like that, and now he's his VP running mate, is my opinion. Moving on. You equating those two things like they are somehow on the same level is the pinnacle. It's not an opinion, it happened. I'd expect nothing less, though. Strange stuff. And rape is still just "inconvenient" I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 9:14:49 GMT -8
Bringing something up doesn't cause a s**tstorm. It's responses that follow and in the manner that they are presented can cause it. I don't mind the back and forth, but I'm not going nuts about it. I just said that those two responses didn't come across too well in my eyes. I also said it isn't that big a deal and won't make any difference. That's my opinion, just as JD Vance calling Trump the next Hitler, or something like that, and now he's his VP running mate, is my opinion. Moving on. You equating those two things like they are somehow on the same level is the pinnacle. It's not an opinion, it happened. I'd expect nothing less, though. Strange stuff. And rape is still just "inconvenient" I guess. You never answered my question from before. Did Vance say that some people think having a child can be an inconvenience so they have an abortion? Or, did he say the words that rape is an inconvenience? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 9:49:28 GMT -8
You equating those two things like they are somehow on the same level is the pinnacle. It's not an opinion, it happened. I'd expect nothing less, though. Strange stuff. And rape is still just "inconvenient" I guess. You never answered my question from before. Did Vance say that some people think having a child can be an inconvenience so they have an abortion? Or, did he say the words that rape is an inconvenience? The answer is obvious, or I wouldn't be bringing it up at all. I don't give people an automatic pass. You can find the quote online for yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 11:31:43 GMT -8
You never answered my question from before. Did Vance say that some people think having a child can be an inconvenience so they have an abortion? Or, did he say the words that rape is an inconvenience? The answer is obvious, or I wouldn't be bringing it up at all. I don't give people an automatic pass. You can find the quote online for yourself. I saw the quotes. I just wanted to clarify your take on it. It's exactly what I read before, and what I thought. He was saying that babies can become inconvenient for some, not that rape is inconvenient. He's talking about a baby, not the act of rape. I get that some will want to twist it and make him look as bad as possible, because that's what some people do, unfortunately, in many instances in life. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 11:40:23 GMT -8
The answer is obvious, or I wouldn't be bringing it up at all. I don't give people an automatic pass. You can find the quote online for yourself. I saw the quotes. I just wanted to clarify your take on it. It's exactly what I read before, and what I thought. He was saying that babies can become inconvenient for some, not that rape is inconvenient. He's talking about a baby, not the act of rape. I get that some will want to twist it and make him look as bad as possible, because that's what some people do, unfortunately, in many instances in life. That's why I didn't post it, I knew you'd take the lazy way out and try to spin it in a way that doesn't confront the reality of what he said. He clearly states the CIRCUMSTANCES of the child's birth, i.e. rape and incest are inconvenient. He then flipped his stance the next year in 2022 in a debate with Tim Ryan, saying there are "always exceptions." Yeah, I'll take the knucklehead 100 times. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 11:51:29 GMT -8
I saw the quotes. I just wanted to clarify your take on it. It's exactly what I read before, and what I thought. He was saying that babies can become inconvenient for some, not that rape is inconvenient. He's talking about a baby, not the act of rape. I get that some will want to twist it and make him look as bad as possible, because that's what some people do, unfortunately, in many instances in life. That's why I didn't post it, I knew you'd take the lazy way out and try to spin it in a way that doesn't confront the reality of what he said. He clearly states the CIRCUMSTANCES of the child's birth, i.e. rape and incest are inconvenient. He then flipped his stance the next year in 2022 in a debate with Tim Ryan, saying there are "always exceptions." Yeah, I'll take the knucklehead 100 times. Me twisting? You're doing the full on Chubby Checker Twist/dance with this one. He's absolutely talking about the child's BIRTH being an inconvenience, not the act of rape. Sheesh. AGAIN, I get that you'll want to twist/interpret it to your hate, but you're way out of line here. I THINK you're better than that. You actually believe that he's saying that the act of rape is inconvenient? If you do, then you've got it worse than I ever thought you had it. Sheesh, AGAIN. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 12:10:14 GMT -8
That's why I didn't post it, I knew you'd take the lazy way out and try to spin it in a way that doesn't confront the reality of what he said. He clearly states the CIRCUMSTANCES of the child's birth, i.e. rape and incest are inconvenient. He then flipped his stance the next year in 2022 in a debate with Tim Ryan, saying there are "always exceptions." Yeah, I'll take the knucklehead 100 times. Me twisting? You're doing the full on Chubby Checker Twist/dance with this one. He's absolutely talking about the child's BIRTH being an inconvenience, not the act of rape. Sheesh. AGAIN, I get that you'll want to twist/interpret it to your hate, but you're way out of line here. I THINK you're better than that. You actually believe that he's saying that the act of rape is inconvenient? If you do, then you've got it worse than I ever thought you had it. Sheesh, AGAIN. Because that's exactly what it says. Spare me the faux outrage. There's no backpedaling on this one. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 12:36:13 GMT -8
Me twisting? You're doing the full on Chubby Checker Twist/dance with this one. He's absolutely talking about the child's BIRTH being an inconvenience, not the act of rape. Sheesh. AGAIN, I get that you'll want to twist/interpret it to your hate, but you're way out of line here. I THINK you're better than that. You actually believe that he's saying that the act of rape is inconvenient? If you do, then you've got it worse than I ever thought you had it. Sheesh, AGAIN. Because that's exactly what it says. Spare me the faux outrage. There's no backpedaling on this one. Talk about faux outrage. Spare me the, this is how I want to interpret it, attitude. He's talking about how AFTER birth, the baby can be perceived as an inconvenience to some. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 12:49:25 GMT -8
Because that's exactly what it says. Spare me the faux outrage. There's no backpedaling on this one. Talk about faux outrage. Spare me the, this is how I want to interpret it, attitude. He's talking about how AFTER birth, the baby can be perceived as an inconvenience to some. I've seen some ridiculous things, but this is high on the list. Are you that desperate that you can't admit Vance is referring to the circumstances of the birth? He literally uses those exact words. Here's the ENTIRE exchange. It mentions nothing other than the "right to live." "Circumstances of the birth are inconvenient...." |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 3, 2024 12:54:41 GMT -8
Because that's exactly what it says. Spare me the faux outrage. There's no backpedaling on this one. Talk about faux outrage. Spare me the, this is how I want to interpret it, attitude. He's talking about how AFTER birth, the baby can be perceived as an inconvenience to some. The, "Circumstances of the birth are inconvenient," well, the circumstances in this hypothetical would be the rape, so, rather cold and uncaring about those circumstances J.D. Vance is. But then that's just who he is - cold, unfeeling, uncaring, unempathetic. His attitude towards women who don't have children is vile and misogynistic. He is not a good person. He is not a wise person. He does not belong in a position of power. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 13:23:18 GMT -8
Talk about faux outrage. Spare me the, this is how I want to interpret it, attitude. He's talking about how AFTER birth, the baby can be perceived as an inconvenience to some. I've seen some ridiculous things, but this is high on the list. Are you that desperate that you can't admit Vance is referring to the circumstances of the birth? He literally uses those exact words. Here's the ENTIRE exchange. It mentions nothing other than the "right to live." "Circumstances of the birth are inconvenient...." Talk about desperation, and ridiculously, reaching for things. Do you know what birth means? It means the emergence of a baby. Not the act of getting pregnant. I hope that helps. If he would have said, rape itself being inconvenient in the way of getting pregnant, ok, but he's talking about what happens AFTER BIRTH. Basically past tense from pregnant. The circumstances of what life will be like AFTER birth can look inconvenient to some. Not the circumstances of how she got pregnant. What a reach. Sheesh. I read the WHOLE article which I can post, and not just your snippets if you'd like, including Vance saying how ridiculous it was at TRYING to spin it. If the majority of people/media thought that he actually said, and felt, "Oh, rape is just an inconvenient act" "No bigee" then there's zero chance that he could ever live that down with the Media the way it is. It would have been a HUGE issue when it first came out. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 13:25:27 GMT -8
Talk about faux outrage. Spare me the, this is how I want to interpret it, attitude. He's talking about how AFTER birth, the baby can be perceived as an inconvenience to some. The, "Circumstances of the birth are inconvenient," well, the circumstances in this hypothetical would be the rape, so, rather cold and uncaring about those circumstances J.D. Vance is. But then that's just who he is - cold, unfeeling, uncaring, unempathetic. His attitude towards women who don't have children is vile and misogynistic. He is not a good person. He is not a wise person. He does not belong in a position of power. No, the circumstances awaiting the person after the child is born. Not the circumstances of the pregnancy. Birth means emergence of a baby. The baby is already born, not how she became pregnant. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 13:38:30 GMT -8
The, "Circumstances of the birth are inconvenient," well, the circumstances in this hypothetical would be the rape, so, rather cold and uncaring about those circumstances J.D. Vance is. But then that's just who he is - cold, unfeeling, uncaring, unempathetic. His attitude towards women who don't have children is vile and misogynistic. He is not a good person. He is not a wise person. He does not belong in a position of power. No, the circumstances awaiting the person after the child is born. Not the circumstances of the pregnancy. Birth means emergence of a baby. The baby is already born, not how she became pregnant. You're insulting intelligent people grasping to this. The circumstances of a baby being born come from the circumstances of how the woman got pregnant. Vance has been consistent with this....and then backtracked when confronted in his 2022 debate. Quit simping for losers. We know what he said. It's consistent with his desire for a national abortion ban. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 14:08:09 GMT -8
No, the circumstances awaiting the person after the child is born. Not the circumstances of the pregnancy. Birth means emergence of a baby. The baby is already born, not how she became pregnant. You're insulting intelligent people grasping to this. The circumstances of a baby being born come from the circumstances of how the woman got pregnant. Vance has been consistent with this....and then backtracked when confronted in his 2022 debate. Quit simping for losers. We know what he said. It's consistent with his desire for a national abortion ban. Grasping would be you. Big time. That's for sure. I get that you're going to want to try and make it be about the act of how she got pregnant, but it actually comes across as very desperate, unfortunately. "The circumstances of BIRTH can be inconvenient to some." Not "The circumstances of the act of how one got pregnant is an inconvenience." The circumstances of birth can be quite challenging to women for a variety of reasons. Again, you actually thinking that he meant the rape is an inconvenience for women just shows how bad you got it. I'm over this. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 14:17:02 GMT -8
You're insulting intelligent people grasping to this. The circumstances of a baby being born come from the circumstances of how the woman got pregnant. Vance has been consistent with this....and then backtracked when confronted in his 2022 debate. Quit simping for losers. We know what he said. It's consistent with his desire for a national abortion ban. Grasping would be you. Big time. That's for sure. I get that you're going to want to try and make it be about the act of how she got pregnant, but it actually comes across as very desperate, unfortunately. "The circumstances of BIRTH can be inconvenient to some." Not "The circumstances of the act of how one got pregnant is an inconvenience." The circumstances of birth can be quite challenging to women for a variety of reasons. Again, you actually thinking that he meant the rape is an inconvenience for women just shows how bad you got it. I'm over this. You should be, because you're wrong. Nothing he says is post-birth. Nothing. You said you read the entire article (Doubtful...) but you apparently can't comprehend circumstances of BIRTH...not AFTER the BIRTH. Once more, with feeling. ..."The circumstances of that child's birth are somehow inconvenient or a problem to the society." This isn't difficult. The question posed to him "Was should a woman be forced to carry a child to term if the child was a product of rape or incest?" It has nothing to do with the child being raised, or anything but the circumstances behind how the child was born. You have a daughter, you said. Think very hard about how you'd want to approach that. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 14:24:37 GMT -8
Grasping would be you. Big time. That's for sure. I get that you're going to want to try and make it be about the act of how she got pregnant, but it actually comes across as very desperate, unfortunately. "The circumstances of BIRTH can be inconvenient to some." Not "The circumstances of the act of how one got pregnant is an inconvenience." The circumstances of birth can be quite challenging to women for a variety of reasons. Again, you actually thinking that he meant the rape is an inconvenience for women just shows how bad you got it. I'm over this. You should be, because you're wrong. Nothing he says is post-birth. Nothing. You said you read the entire article (Doubtful...) but you apparently can't comprehend circumstances of BIRTH...not AFTER the BIRTH. Once more, with feeling. ..."The circumstances of that child's birth are somehow inconvenient or a problem to the society." This isn't difficult. The question posed to him "Was should a woman be forced to carry a child to term if the child was a product of rape or incest?" It has nothing to do with the child being raised, or anything but the circumstances behind how the child was born. You have a daughter, you said. Think very hard about how you'd want to approach that. No, it's not because I'm wrong, it's because I'm right. No use having dialogue with someone that is so far in the wrong, he can't see the truth. No, Vance is talking about what a woman may feel towards the baby AFTER BIRTH in response to the question of whether or not a mother should be forced to carry the baby to term. It's not all that difficult. You're going to see it how YOU want to see it, unfortunately. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 14:49:03 GMT -8
You should be, because you're wrong. Nothing he says is post-birth. Nothing. You said you read the entire article (Doubtful...) but you apparently can't comprehend circumstances of BIRTH...not AFTER the BIRTH. Once more, with feeling. ..."The circumstances of that child's birth are somehow inconvenient or a problem to the society." This isn't difficult. The question posed to him "Was should a woman be forced to carry a child to term if the child was a product of rape or incest?" It has nothing to do with the child being raised, or anything but the circumstances behind how the child was born. You have a daughter, you said. Think very hard about how you'd want to approach that. No, it's not because I'm wrong, it's because I'm right. No use having dialogue with someone that is so far in the wrong, he can't see the truth. No, Vance is talking about what a woman may feel towards the baby AFTER BIRTH in response to the question of whether or not a mother should be forced to carry the baby to term. It's not all that difficult. You're going to see it how YOU want to see it, unfortunately. Me, along with anyone else with a modicum of intelligence, yes. Intellectually dishonest. Funny, Erik and I can read and figured it out instantly. I guess I can't be surprised when you called Vanced "polished" - Bad look, man. Bad look. You're right, it's not that difficult, yet you managed to sideways your way out, somehow. Confounding. There's literally no way to come to a different conclusion if you read the paragraph. But here we are... |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 3, 2024 14:56:36 GMT -8
No, it's not because I'm wrong, it's because I'm right. No use having dialogue with someone that is so far in the wrong, he can't see the truth. No, Vance is talking about what a woman may feel towards the baby AFTER BIRTH in response to the question of whether or not a mother should be forced to carry the baby to term. It's not all that difficult. You're going to see it how YOU want to see it, unfortunately. Me, along with anyone else with a modicum of intelligence, yes. Intellectually dishonest. Funny, Erik and I can read and figured it out instantly. I guess I can't be surprised when you called Vanced "polished" - Bad look, man. Bad look. You're right, it's not that difficult, yet you managed to sideways your way out, somehow. Confounding. There's literally no way to come to a different conclusion if you read the paragraph. But here we are... That's absolutely hilarious!!! Shocking, you and Erik agree on this topic. Yeah, ok, that goes real far in justifying it, but here we are. Lol. There's only one way a one track, closed minded, biased person like yourself is going to see this. We get it. It's no revelation. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 3, 2024 15:16:13 GMT -8
Me, along with anyone else with a modicum of intelligence, yes. Intellectually dishonest. Funny, Erik and I can read and figured it out instantly. I guess I can't be surprised when you called Vanced "polished" - Bad look, man. Bad look. You're right, it's not that difficult, yet you managed to sideways your way out, somehow. Confounding. There's literally no way to come to a different conclusion if you read the paragraph. But here we are... That's absolutely hilarious!!! Shocking, you and Erik agree on this topic. Yeah, ok, that goes real far in justifying it, but here we are. Lol. There's only one way a one track, closed minded, biased person like yourself is going to see this. We get it. It's no revelation. "We?" Who's we? You're the only one arguing against a basic point where the exact words are used...seems like a you, not a we. A simple search of social media will clue you in to a metric ton of angry women. |
|
