- Feb 22, 2017
- 104,793
- 35,482
- 2,290
/——/ The prove them wrong. Calling them opinion is not how you refute them./----/ "Do you ever notice how none of your posts ever contain facts!"Do you ever notice how none of your posts ever contain facts!He is a disloyal PUNK who had no business being in the position he was,Trump is draining the deep state swamp and I love it! One less military leader who was disloyal and working AGAINST American interests for his OWN interests...No one attacked us snowflake,your candidate was just a SHIT candidate,who lied every time she opened her mouth,didn't give a shit about middle America and failed to listen to her TWO TERM former president husband!He gave Trump a chance to show he could be a leader, Trump failed over and over. Leaders don't accept responsibility only for success and then blame others for failures. Leaders don't stand next to the leader of another country that attacked us and take their side over his own people.
It's a sad state of affairs when we have citizens in our country, that one minute attack "kneelers" far saying they are disrespecting our military, and then the next minute call our military heroes partisan deep state pieces of trash the next. I'm not sure if some of Trump's supporters understand how stupid that looks. For a President that claims to be such a military supporter, he sure doesn't have many leaders from the military who support him back.
Odium's post contained plenty of facts, but you couldn't refute any of them.
Fact 1: He is a disloyal PUNK who had no business being in the position he was,
Fact 2: Trump is draining the deep state swamp and I love it!
Fact 3: One less military leader who was disloyal and working AGAINST American interests for his OWN interests...
Fact 4: No one attacked us snowflake,
Fact 5: your candidate was just a SHIT candidate,who lied every time she opened her mouth,didn't give a shit about middle America
Fact 6: and failed to listen to her TWO TERM former president husband!
You list 7 things as facts that have not a single bit of objective reality to them, making them nothing but opinions.
That is just it, they cannot be refuted as they are just opinions.
Just look at number 1.
Fact 1: He is a disloyal PUNK who had no business being in the position he was,
You consider him disloyal because he was not a yes man, he voiced his view. To me he is loyal for those very reasons. Yes men are the least loyal people alive.
What is punk and how is a punk determined objectively, as in devoid of emotion? It cannot be done as it has no real meaning and is a term of emotion.
"No business being in the position"...he had impeccable credentials for being in that position, he was eminently qualified for that position based upon his knowledge and experience. But your opinion is hat he was not, even though there is no factual basis for such an opinion, you still hold it.
The rest of your points are equally full of emotion and devoid of an actual fact.