You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
[–]Splooge0 points
37 points
37 points
(+37|-0)
ago
They're more than happy to describe the nature of the proof though, with plenty of haughty condescension (like you're the stupid one for even asking):
"Proof? Proof?? Oh man, where do I begin?! There's so much!"
"Literally look at every time he opens his mouth!!"
"You want proof?? There's thousands of thousands of thousands of examples every day!" <-- They like to elongate responses by repeating certain portions to make it seem more substantial.
"I'm not gonna sit here and tell you what you could look up on your own." <-- That one's always delivered while standing for some reason.
"I know what you're trying to do, but it won't work, there's TONS of proof, look at what everyone says."
If, for whatever reason they're not being haughty or condescending enough, responding with "Okay, so it should be easy for you to throw out just one example then. Anything, off the top of your head" will instantly trigger maximum levels of kvetching.
[–]Splooge0 points
13 points
13 points
(+13|-0)
ago
Hitler and Goebbels described them perfectly.
The more I argued with them, the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid. If all this didn't help, they pretended not to understand, or, if challenged, they changed the subject in a hurry, quoted platitudes which, if you accepted them, they immediately related to entirely different matters, and then, if again attacked, gave ground and pretended not to know exactly what you were talking about. Whenever you tried to attack one of these apostles, your hand closed on a jelly-like slime which divided up and poured through your fingers, but in the next moment collected again. But if you really struck one of these fellows so telling a blow that, observed by the audience, he couldn't help but agree, and if you believed that this had taken you at least one step forward, your amazement was great the next day. The Jew had not the slightest recollection of the day before, he rattled off his same old nonsense as though nothing at all had happened, and, if indignantly challenged, affected amazement; he couldn't remember a thing, except that he had proved the correctness of his assertions the previous day.
[–]Intrixina0 points
7 points
7 points
(+7|-0)
ago
I've done precisely this - when you really press them for an example they will either sperg the fuck out, or they mention that time when he "supposedly" called Mexicans rapists - which was a direct misquote of what he had said. When you point out it was a direct misquote they resort to sperging the fuck out.
[+]Splooge0 points3 points3 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]Splooge0 points
3 points
3 points
(+3|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
They can claim anything they want till they're blue in the face, that's the beauty of the burden of proof.
Why, just the other day I was buying some ice cream when I saw Trump throw a brick through a nearby shop window (the owner was muslim). He then called me a nigger, flashed a gang sign and then fled on a skateboard while playing Moonman from a boombox held aloft on his shoulder.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Splooge 0 points 37 points 37 points (+37|-0) ago
They're more than happy to describe the nature of the proof though, with plenty of haughty condescension (like you're the stupid one for even asking):
If, for whatever reason they're not being haughty or condescending enough, responding with "Okay, so it should be easy for you to throw out just one example then. Anything, off the top of your head" will instantly trigger maximum levels of kvetching.
[–] Glipglup 0 points 17 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago
Sounds like you described a very Jewish way of arguing. My favorite part is the next day and they act like the day before never existed.
[–] Splooge 0 points 13 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago
Hitler and Goebbels described them perfectly.
[–] BlowjaySimpson 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
Until gradually.....
[–] Intrixina 0 points 7 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago
I've done precisely this - when you really press them for an example they will either sperg the fuck out, or they mention that time when he "supposedly" called Mexicans rapists - which was a direct misquote of what he had said. When you point out it was a direct misquote they resort to sperging the fuck out.
[–] Splooge 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
In that instance, note if they accuse you of nitpicking, because seconds later guess what they'll start doing?
[–] moarzor 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I've heard some point to the racial bias lawsuit. They claim he wasn't letting blacks rent at his apartments.
[–] Splooge 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
They can claim anything they want till they're blue in the face, that's the beauty of the burden of proof.
Why, just the other day I was buying some ice cream when I saw Trump throw a brick through a nearby shop window (the owner was muslim). He then called me a nigger, flashed a gang sign and then fled on a skateboard while playing Moonman from a boombox held aloft on his shoulder.