Your reticence is noted.What I admit is that any source I provide you will be discounted. Period.
Your reticence is noted.What I admit is that any source I provide you will be discounted. Period.
Your reticence is noted.
I think we both know that your countervailing sources are lightweight.There's no point in engaging when you know someone will never budge from their position no matter what you present them with. This is most posters on this site to some degree, but you more than any.
I think we both know that your countervailing sources are lightweight.
Forgive me, but:I appreciate you telling me what I know and don't know. It fits right in there with your overarching arrogance that your view is the right view always, and anyone disagreeing with your philosophy or way of thinking is low information, stupid, etc.
I'll leave it there.Your reticence is noted.
Forgive me, but:
I'll leave it there.
No. You will continue to think as you do. I only wish to point out the weakness in your thinking and the legitimacy of the sources that brought you there. This is what we do here at ET. You have every right to continue. Why you would choose to do so is another matter.One of us wants to tell the other how to think.
No. You will continue to think as you do. I only wish to point out the weakness in your thinking and the legitimacy of the sources that brought you there. This is what we do here at ET. You have every right to continue. Why you would choose to do so is another matter.
I'm only bringing the evidence to you. You will do with it what you will. Whereas I lead you to a well, you tend to lead readers of your posts to raw sewage. That is how I see it. You want exchange? This is it.Right, I get it. My style of thinking is weak. My point of view is incomplete, incorrect. Yours is what we need to all strive for.
It's very clear to us.
*Impeached one term presidentTrump is also a one-term President.