Warning: file_get_contents(/home/www/settings/mirror_forum_db_enable_sql): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /var/www/html/content/Forum/functions.php on line 8
Location: At the dude ranch / above the sea Gender:
Posted:
Oct 7, 2026 - 1:13pm
Pretending trump is erudite, or even thoughtful, would be a stupid thing to do. I hope no one does that.
If his grades were good, heâd have crowed about them. Ergo, they sucked. His speech patterns are nonsensical, completely lacking in a respect for grammar (or even sentence completion), and irrational and tangential. His non-existent negotiating âskillsâ are just mobster boss tactics, and the USA hasnât improved one whit under his indelicate, vulgar participation in the government.
He doesnât have the mental capacity to tease meaning out of words delicately. Heâs dumb as a rock, and thereâs never been proof to the contrary, and heâs not getting smarter as he ages.. In fact, heâs getting demented, exactly like his old man.
3 days later, sure, parsing every word, it's possible to see what he probably thought he was saying. But if you're telling me you and everyone in that Nebraska audience understood him perfectly well the first time, please explain the cheering. Even if he wasn't literally telling Iran he'd trade LA and SD for, I don't know, Peace in the Middle East, the way it came out sure sounded like that. That it makes zero sense, even for him, is beside the point. In the moment, Nebraska heard him say "let them take LA and SD, it's a small price to pay" ...for something. and they cheered.
Let's look at this as if we were in an English class, shall we ?
The first sentence is ...
"With the war it's just artificial, it's a little bit high, it's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe."
it's is the subject of the sentence and refers to the price of gas, not nuking L A or San Diego.
and then this sentence ...
"That's, this is a very small price to pay, and it's gonna be over very soon."
this is the subject of this sentence and refers to paying a temporarily higher price for fuel is a very small price to pay in order to prevent the nuking of L A and San Diego from happening.
.
To take the statement in dispute as a call for the nuking of these cities or any cities for this matter, is completely and utterly batshit crazy, no matter how hard you want to believe otherwise
You all have lost your minds.
3 days later, sure, parsing every word, it's possible to see what he probably thought he was saying. But if you're telling me you and everyone in that Nebraska audience understood him perfectly well the first time, please explain the cheering. Even if he wasn't literally telling Iran he'd trade LA and SD for, I don't know, Peace in the Middle East, the way it came out sure sounded like that. That it makes zero sense, even for him, is beside the point. In the moment, Nebraska heard him say "let them take LA and SD, it's a small price to pay" ...for something. and they cheered.
Let's look at this as if we were in an English class, shall we ?
The first sentence is ...
"With the war it's just artificial, it's a little bit high, it's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe."
it's is the subject of the sentence and refers to the price of gas, not nuking L A or San Diego.
and then this sentence ...
"That's, this is a very small price to pay, and it's gonna be over very soon."
this is the subject of this sentence and refers to paying a temporarily higher price for fuel is a very small price to pay in order to prevent the nuking of L A and San Diego from happening.
.
To take the statement in dispute as a call for the nuking of these cities or any cities for this matter, is completely and utterly batshit crazy, no matter how hard you want to believe otherwise
You all have lost your minds.
Paging Mr. Rorschach....
Weren't you the guy who argued that Comey threatened the President with his "86" out of seashells... yet you don't see "let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego" as somehow threatening? You should look up "Take out".
I'm sure the crowds in Nebraska were cheering high gas prices in California cities. That's your argument? Talk about batshit crazy.
this is the subject of this sentence and refers to paying a temporarily higher price for fuel is a very small price to pay in order to prevent the nuking of L A and San Diego from happening.
It might have been what he meant, unfortunately it is not what he said.
Words matter.
Whatever way you look at it, it's a big fail.
First he says there is no real war, it's just artificial. Then he says there are real consequences (high oil price), which contradicts his first claim.
Then he uses the wrong figure of speech, saying "let them take..." instead of something like "they could... "
And finally, in a historical context, he was the one to trash the non-nuclear deal that was in place with Iran in the first place, thereby necessitating this stupid war, at which he has spectacularly failed.
Go back and listen to that again. He did not ask Iran to attack anything. He posed a hypothetical. It is your personal bias that interferes with you ability to understand anything about Trump.
Here is the transcript of what he said. “With the war it's just artificial, it's a little bit high, it's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take, let it, let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That's, this is a very small price to pay, and it's gonna be over very soon. It's essentially almost over with.”
Let's look at this as if we were in an English class, shall we ?
The first sentence is ...
"With the war it's just artificial, it's a little bit high, it's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe."
it's is the subject of the sentence and refers to the price of gas, not nuking L A or San Diego.
and then this sentence ...
"That's, this is a very small price to pay, and it's gonna be over very soon."
this is the subject of this sentence and refers to paying a temporarily higher price for fuel is a very small price to pay in order to prevent the nuking of L A and San Diego from happening. . To take the statement in dispute as a call for the nuking of these cities or any cities for this matter, is completely and utterly batshit crazy, no matter how hard you want to believe otherwise
âWith the war it's just artificial, it's a little bit high, it's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take, let it, let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That's, this is a very small price to pay, and it's gonna be over very soon. It's essentially almost over with.â
What's the hypothetical?
What's the truth about Trump? What makes you so proud that all of the partisan attackers here are missing?
Bullshit.
You can say this was just another joke, a misinterpretation... the fact of the matter that a president said, implied or even joked that an adversary we are at war with to bomb a US city is completely, 100% inexcusable.
And you should be ashamed for trying to legitimize this, if not this entire presidency.
ps, i dont blame you for being misled by google...but now that the facts are in...
Come on. It's not like he said US farmers should consider diversifying into growing things like Belgian endive, or said something that sounded like he was taking credit for inventing the world wide web, or anything like that.
Go back and listen to that again. He did not ask Iran to attack anything. He posed a hypothetical. It is your personal bias that interferes with you ability to understand anything about Trump.
Here is the transcript of what he said.
âWith the war it's just artificial, it's a little bit high, it's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take, let it, let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That's, this is a very small price to pay, and it's gonna be over very soon. It's essentially almost over with.â
What's the hypothetical?
kurtster wrote:
None of you are interested in any truth about Trump because you think that he is so terrible that the truth about anything Trump is irrelevant and unwanted.
What's the truth about Trump? What makes you so proud that all of the partisan attackers here are missing?
You posted because you thought you had a 'gotcha' on RD. You were wrong...again. Your guy has said something despicable, unpatriotic, treasonous... again. You won't disavow what was said... again. You now claim to be the victim... again. You will now disappear for a while... hopefully.
Just more proof of his willingness to split any hair - no matter how fine - in defence of his daddy.
Again, if dave had posted a link, none of this would be happening.
Go pick on dave, not me. He is the problem which you all continuously enable.
You posted because you thought you had a 'gotcha' on RD. You were wrong...again. Your guy has said something despicable, unpatriotic, treasonous... again. You won't disavow what was said... again. You now claim to be the victim... again. You will now disappear for a while... hopefully.
I feel like I've been gang raped, in an internet kinda way. Not that I care.
But that's how I feel about it. So sue me ...
Care to comment on the substance of the speech? I mean...you denied he ever said it, implying a disavowal. Does that disavowal imply disagreement?
You can retreat behind the fact that it's Trump saying words, most of which are just meaningless applause lines for a crowd stupid enough to clap when he says them, but he is technically president of the United States and people around the world are listening.
Go back and listen to that again. He did not ask Iran to attack anything. He posed a hypothetical. It is your personal bias that interferes with you ability to understand anything about Trump.
Later.
Bullshit.
You can say this was just another joke, a misinterpretation... the fact of the matter that a president said, implied or even joked that an adversary we are at war with to bomb a US city is completely, 100% inexcusable.
And you should be ashamed for trying to legitimize this, if not this entire presidency.
ps, i dont blame you for being misled by google...but now that the facts are in...
interestingly (in a tragic car crash kind of way), the link in kurtster's post still brings up pretty much what he posted. Many hours later, with much discussion and Google's AI is still out there saying this is fake/never happened, and advising you how to spot such 'fakes'. Weird times.
tell google ai it is wrong the fact that you can hear cheers after this comment...
Again, if dave had posted a link, none of this would be happening.
Go pick on dave, not me. He is the problem which you all continuously enable.
His copy/pasting of AI generated context into Google as a means to find support or as he suggested... making an effort to verify... is driven by bias. EDIT - if you look at the link... the "q=" is the copy/pasted text of the search. The "=chrome..." is the right click "search for" from the menu. If you tell Google to search for proof of something that just happened, it's likely not indexed enough to fight off the bias of "fabricated", "falsely", and "attributed to".
I get that, but here we are hours later and that is still the response. This did happen and google is out there saying it didn't if people ask it to say it didn't. Even on the standards of trump, which are despicably low even for people who might make the thanksgiving dinner list, this is an insane statement. He asked and adversary, that we are currently at war with, to attack an American city. This man is no patriot. This statement should be impeachable. His fucking lemmings will do al they can to ignore or cover for it. The fact that google is empowering them to do so is crazy. Once the reconning comes for all those in government who allowed this catastrophe to continue, I hope there is equal rage and consequences for the corporate elite who said "eh, why not, we'll make a buck" and got on the bandwagon. That bandwagon needs to go over the cliff fully staffed. I'm not holding my breath, but I will never forget. This also applies to the ~1/3 that voted for him the second time.
Not that any of you are going to believe me on this, but ...
I started the post in question on the new website. The post editor disappears in the middle of the composing of the post, making things like inserting a hyperlink when you are ready to do so.
I originally used google search to look up the meme posted and got the response that I posted. When I went to post the link to that response the post editor was completely gone so I could not do anything else, like italics, bold text, etc. So I had to search the response by pasting into google search and that is where the link I posted came form. But the response was what I got from a cold search o the meme through google lens or whatever they call the image search function these days.
How else am I to verify an unattributed meme ? But that is what Dave does and you all enable him by not challenging him about it. Even worse is that this meme that has generated another tempest in a teapot will disappear after 5 days anyway as they all do.
I know that none of you believe I try to verify what I post before posting, mostly because none of you believe anything I say to begin with and say so, yet I do it mostly for me to know that I am being as truthful as possible. None of you are interested in any truth about Trump because you think that he is so terrible that the truth about anything Trump is irrelevant and unwanted.
Even on the standards of trump, which are despicably low even for people who might make the thanksgiving dinner list, this is an insane statement. He asked and adversary, that we are currently at war with, to attack an American city. This man is no patriot. This statement should be impeachable.
Go back and listen to that again. He did not ask Iran to attack anything. He posed a hypothetical. It is your personal bias that interferes with you ability to understand anything about Trump.
I get that, but here we are hours later and that is still the response. This did happen and google is out there saying it didn't if people ask it to say it didn't.
Even on the standards of trump, which are despicably low even for people who might make the thanksgiving dinner list, this is an insane statement. He asked and adversary, that we are currently at war with, to attack an American city. This man is no patriot. This statement should be impeachable. His fucking lemmings will do al they can to ignore or cover for it. The fact that google is empowering them to do so is crazy. Once the reconning comes for all those in government who allowed this catastrophe to continue, I hope there is equal rage and consequences for the corporate elite who said "eh, why not, we'll make a buck" and got on the bandwagon. That bandwagon needs to go over the cliff fully staffed. I'm not holding my breath, but I will never forget. This also applies to the ~1/3 that voted for him the second time.
Agree 100%.
And why isnt this the top story for every news source?
I see it as a front page, but not top story, on LA Times, NY Times Wash Post...ignored on fox, ny post...
The lack of integrity, critical thinking coming from Maga is beyond mind boggling.
