Bob Woodward's new book entitled "Fear: Trump in the White House"

[wesfau2]

Let me clarify a bit more...do you think the Op-ed NY Times piece is "gutless" because it's anonymous? Yes or no answer will suffice.

I do.  That worthless dreck was recklessly published.

If some staffer has legitimate concern about the fate of the nation, then marshal the evidence and call in the appropriate agency(ies).

[Kaos]

I do.  That worthless dreck was recklessly published.

If some staffer has legitimate concern about the fate of the nation, then marshal the evidence and call in the appropriate agency(ies).

Little difference between this and Bullet Bob's "anonymously" sourced nonsense in a book.  

[The Prowler]

It was someone that uses a word like "Lodestar". Mike Pence uses that word a lot. Got 'em...Pence did it.

[The Prowler]

I do.  That worthless dreck was recklessly published.

If some staffer has legitimate concern about the fate of the nation, then marshal the evidence and call in the appropriate agency(ies).

Gutless article because it was anonymous. Why don't they just come out and say who they are? They're scared...PAWWWWW!!!

[AUTiger1]

*your

Fuckstick, dumb caveman.

Spelling smack?  That's all you got in response? 

He called you a dumb caveman because of the substance you post.  You can't even respond to his points.



GH = 1
Prowler = 0

[AUTiger1]

I do.  That worthless dreck was recklessly published.

If some staffer has legitimate concern about the fate of the nation, then marshal the evidence and call in the appropriate agency(ies).

Agree.  

[The Prowler]

Spelling smack?  That's all you got in response? 

He called you a dumb caveman because of the substance you post.  You can't even respond to his points.



GH = 1
Prowler = 0

Calling someone a dumb caveman...yet, doesn't know the difference between your and you're.

SMH

GH = -1
Me = Googolplex 

[AUTiger1]

Calling someone a dumb caveman...yet, doesn't know the difference between your and you're.

SMH

GH = -1
Me = Googolplex

You know as well as I do that he knows the difference.  You honestly aren't intelligent enough or you are too lazy to respond to his points so you resort to spelling smack.  Weak sauce.  Get that shit out of here and debate.

[AUTiger1]

*your

Fuckstick, dumb caveman.

Calling someone a dumb caveman...yet, doesn't know the difference between your and you're.

SMH

GH = -1
Me = Googolplex

This is for Wes.  You claim that we are ruining the board and possibly this forum.   We used to debate logically, but when this drivel is spewed everyday you get what you got.  We get "do more research", "smh", "maybe you should read", and links. Never have I seen him respond point by point to a post.  

I don't think it is us that is ruining the board, it's the lack of a Chizad, Garman, Tarheel and others that has ruined the SGA. 

[War Eagle!!!]

Let me clarify a bit more...do you think the Op-ed NY Times piece is "gutless" because it's anonymous? Yes or no answer will suffice.

Is this a trick question?

[Kaos]

Is this a trick question?

Yes.  It is. 

[Snaggletiger]

Not just referring to the op-ed piece or Woodward's book, I think anonymous sources in general constitute poor journalism. When your source is "Someone close to...or with knowledge of the situation", then every word should be taken with a grain of salt.  We see it constantly in the sports realm.  Anytime there are problems, or a coaching search going on in an athletic department, you see daily pieces citing inside sources, but no names. Nothing concrete.  And if you think about it, 90% of the time, they're just flat out wrong.  And most times, we are left to go, "Well, this guy is right more often than not."

[CCTAU]

Not just referring to the op-ed piece or Woodward's book, I think anonymous sources in general constitute poor journalism. When your source is "Someone close to...or with knowledge of the situation", then every word should be taken with a grain of salt.  We see it constantly in the sports realm.  Anytime there are problems, or a coaching search going on in an athletic department, you see daily pieces citing inside sources, but no names. Nothing concrete.  And if you think about it, 90% of the time, they're just flat out wrong.  And most times, we are left to go, "Well, this guy is right more often than not."

This is true except when dealing with hopeful libtards. They hang on every sliver of negative news against Trump. It really is a syndrome. I love it when he crushes those hopes, but its to the point where we are going to break out into some sort of civil war soon. Unstable people on the left cannot keep up this emotional roller coaster ride!

[AUJarhead]

I do.  That worthless dreck was recklessly published.

If some staffer has legitimate concern about the fate of the nation, then marshal the evidence and call in the appropriate agency(ies).

Agreed.

And if it bothers them so much, they could always...  I dunno... quit?

[Snaggletiger]

Agreed.

And if it bothers them so much, they could always...  I dunno... quit?

Then who is going to save the world from Trump?  Duh!

[GH2001]

Spelling smack?  That's all you got in response? 

He called you a dumb caveman because of the substance you post.  You can't even respond to his points.



GH = 1
Prowler = 0

He likes to point out autocorrect from a phone as evidence that he is a supreme being. Nothing new for him. Makes him feel good. 

He won’t respond with anything valid.  He just copies and pastes talking points from his heroes. He doesn’t comprehend any of this therefore he simply throws mud and points out stupid things, rhetoric, etc. 

I respect wes for being able to hold an informed discussion even if I don’t agree with him on things. 

[GH2001]

Calling someone a dumb caveman...yet, doesn't know the difference between your and you're.

SMH

GH = -1
Me = Googolplex

And you don’t know the difference between on purpose and autocorrect. Idiot. And I believe you started the mudslinging with “dumb southerner”. 

Seriously. Say when. Respond to something with substance. We’re waiting. Or is it wateing?

[GH2001]

This is for Wes.  You claim that we are ruining the board and possibly this forum.  We used to debate logically, but when this drivel is spewed everyday you get what you got.  We get "do more research", "smh", "maybe you should read", and links. Never have I seen him respond point by point to a post. 

I don't think it is us that is ruining the board, it's the lack of a Chizad, Garman, Tarheel and others that has ruined the SGA.

 
Chad and GF both tried this earlier this year I believe. He can’t do it. It ended up being a test case to show everyone. 

[The Prowler]

And you don’t know the difference between on purpose and autocorrect. Idiot. And I believe you started the mudslinging with “dumb southerner”.

Seriously. Say when. Respond to something with substance. We’re waiting. Or is it wateing?

Auto correct doesn't hit Post for you. Prove to the World that you aren't a "mentally retarded, dumb southerner" and proofread next time...it's really not that hard.

I know I started the mudslinging. And?

[Token]

Auto correct doesn't hit Post for you. Prove to the World that you aren't a "mentally retarded, dumb southerner" and proofread next time...it's really not that hard.

I know I started the mudslinging. And?

Are you only in favor of proofreading when it comes to typos? Sentence structure doesn’t make the list?