By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
EricHiggin on 14 October 2018
Edit Thread
Final-Fan said:
EricHiggin said:

It's not my fault you focused on the title of the clip and the portion that I wasn't talking about, and not the point's I made about the portion within the short clip.

"Please don't ask me to watch videos whose titles are lies.  I didn't see any laugh directed at Clinton. 
"As for what McConnell said, just because the Republicans take their cues nowadays from extremist bloggers, radio talk show hosts, etc., doesn't mean the Democrats are following suit.  Let me know if someone in Congress proposes that, but until then McConnell—and you—are just stretching "a human being in the USA has this idea" to mean "the Democratic Party plans to do this".  I mean, shit, if they were going to pack the court there wouldn't even be a need to impeach Kavanaugh."

This is what you call "focused on the title"?  21 words about it, then 87 words about the other stuff. 

"TYT talking about it and FOX reporting it. They may do either or try both. McConnell smirks in the video which for him is about as close to a laugh as you get."

18 words about the title and 15 words about everything else.  Except even the 15 words were veering off topic, because when I said that you didn't dispute anything I had said you didn't even try to refute me about anything except the title. 

You've been exposed for what you are.  Why not just admit it? 

So you don't like the name of the title of the video, that I didn't make, that was as short and sweet as I could find, that I simply added as proof to help make my point, since the odds were high I would get asked for proof if I didn't?

A portion of a title of a 2:45 clip that also talks about something I didn't even mention at all in my initial post? You want me to say I'm a phony because I tried to answer you and point out how someone other than yourself may interpret that McConnell was laughing?

Well since this is clearly such a major problem for you, I'd be happy to ignore any and all of the following responses you make that veer off track, if even ever so slightly, since apparently it's up to me to decide what you should and shouldn't say when you respond to me, based on what I've already said prior.

Going to be some very short conversations by the the looks of it.



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.