Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 151 through 200 (of 989 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Wedding Costs….In Law Chutzpah #1832031
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ctl
    I keep forgetting that you will respond to my choice of words over the substance of my post. So I’ll try again
    ”Bernie Sanders ” was shorthand for

    You consistently support ”higher taxes on those that have more ”
    Even though the people who are being taxed have no control in how that money is spent (if Bernie, as one of 100 is called ”can’t force you to do anything ” then my lone vote even in NYC is just one of 8-9 million, certainly fair to call it ”no say ”)
    So I’m not sure why your getting bent out of shape that someone is ASKING you to give money to a cause that you presumably support.
    Whether they need it or not is irrelevant.
    Your ire is directed at the asking.
    I’m not mixing politics in.
    I’m using your political statements to gauge your personal positions.
    I didn’t ask who your voting for nor do I care

    in reply to: Why was trump impeached??? #1832025
    klugeryid
    Participant

    C A
    I call that the Martha Stewart offense
    Congress had no business making a public investigation about a private ”affair” of his.
    You can’t back a guy into a corner where he needs to publicly embarrass himself or lie, and then wham now we got the crime we needed so we can impeach you.
    Similar to the obstruction charge here, (though the obstruction is even weaker it’s like saying or president we are investigating you. Please hand over anything we want, roll over and play dead, or we will call you obstructionist and slam you for that too.)
    If they asked him under oath what he ate for breakfast and he said yogurt and they have witnesses that he did not ,so you should impeach him too?
    If they had no business asking the question in the first place, in my opinion, they can’t use his answers.
    Why don’t they start every trial asking the accused, under oath, did you do this crime?
    Then every time someone is found guilty they can add jail time for lying under oath too!
    That is pure lunacy. If you think someone did something wrong it’s your business to find it out. Don’t ask the guy. And if you do, you have no right to expect the truth.
    So yes he lied. It’s not even an offense in my book.
    And I hate Clinton.I think he brought down the morals of this country.
    Whereas trump, if Hollywood would portray trumps moral level it would be a step up, and they probably would have a hard time selling those movies. So I don’t think his morals are impacting the country negatively.

    in reply to: shreds of decency #1832026
    klugeryid
    Participant

    As long as he has the power to pardon, he is not subverting justice by helping someone get off, provided what he does is not outright illegal

    in reply to: The top two dems are either a sodomite, or a communist #1832012
    klugeryid
    Participant

    G H
    That has got to be from the richest posts.
    I’m the same sort you call a liar yet you believe what he clearly has to say for political expediency!!!
    If you believe trump would vote for a gay man….

    in reply to: Wedding Costs….In Law Chutzpah #1831904
    klugeryid
    Participant

    CTL
    I personally think it’s way out of line.
    But you, as someone who sees nothing wrong with Bernie Sanders asking me to hand over more of my money to help some guy I never heard of, do something I don’t agree with, what could possibly be wrong with your grandchild ‘s future new grandfather asking you to kick in a bit of cash?

    In other words, if Bernie Sanders forced me to kick in cash to help John marry Jim that’s OK. But for the new grandfather to ask you to give cash to your own grandkid to help they do something that presumably you are shepping nachas from, you have an issue??

    in reply to: The top two dems are either a sodomite, or a communist #1831834
    klugeryid
    Participant

    C A
    Thanks I second your post

    in reply to: He who lives in glass houses shouldn’t throw roger stone #1831832
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Harav.
    You totally lost me
    חזל say one thing
    You mistranslated it on purpose because you know better? Is that what you are saying?
    Nice. I’ll keep חזל ‘ס version if you don’t mind.
    I can’t be positive but I just have this feeling that they were a drop smarter than even you.
    Hope I’m not being to חוצפא to say that

    in reply to: Why was trump impeached??? #1831828
    klugeryid
    Participant

    No. Nixon was impeached for cause. That’s why he stepped down.
    Clinton you are correct. It was just hate. Same like here. Both worthless impeachments. It’s just a badge that you got under the other parties skin.

    in reply to: He who lives in glass houses shouldn’t throw roger stone #1831679
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Harav

    klugeryid, change your name. איזהו חכם הרואה את הנולד a smart person looks in the past. We don’t want a dictator who controls the Justice Dept. Next, any person can be investigated by the president, if he does’t like him.

    What are you talking about?
    It means who sees the future.
    At least translate correctly before criticizing.
    He does not control it any more than any president before or after him. He has not seized power. He UTILIZED his power. And we see which way he enjoys utilizing it. To help his friends. Big issue there.
    Maybe say, next boy of his cronies can do any crime and get away with it. At least then the issue you bring up would make sense. Although in my post I already answered that he already has that power. It’s called PARDON

    in reply to: Why was trump impeached??? #1831678
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Catch yourself
    You are correct
    I totally misunderstood your post. Thought you were supporting impeachment.
    Sorry
    Being as your writing is as a damnation on the dems I agree 100%

    in reply to: Why was trump impeached??? #1831602
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Cute they impeached him for obstructing their impeachment investigation.
    The dens are a real know it all party
    They knew Biden would be the eventual nominee so they know trump pressured
    They knew he would obstruct so they started the impeachment before he actually obstructed
    Fortunately it seems they are fast becoming the know it All wrong party

    in reply to: He who lives in glass houses shouldn’t throw roger stone #1831600
    klugeryid
    Participant

    What’s the difference between trump pressuring the Dept of justice to go easy on his friend or Obama siccing the irs on someone?
    Simple
    In trumps case he is using his pull to help his friend who is in trouble for helping him. Not really a surprising move. Something all those now upset about here should be rooting for. It’s called הכרת הטוב. From the guy who has no morals or מידות.
    It threatens nobody, and really is nobodies business.
    Whereas using the Irs to harass your political enemies, is something that threatens the very bedrock of free society.
    Even someone who is perfectly clean can still undergo years of hell and fortunes of money to clear themselves, with no recourse to Seamus that lost time and money. It’s a real threat.
    It’s almost as if the president can Willi nilli lock someone up for years for disagreeing with him personally or politically.

    Additionally it’s the stupidest thing to get upset at trump for.
    He is fully in his rights to wait until they sentence stone to 1000 years in prison plus the death penalty. Harsh enough? With no meddling from trump?
    And the next day pardon stone and he walks out a free man.
    So what’s the issue if beforehand he let’s it be known that he thinks this is too harsh of a punishment?
    Fabricated indignation from trump haters

    in reply to: The top two dems are either a sodomite, or a communist #1831582
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Unfortunately it looks like mini Mike is coming out swinging. Trump like.
    I think trouble is coming

    in reply to: Why was trump impeached??? #1831466
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Catch yourself if You can.
    So you support impeachment for non impeachable offenses utilizing a lame pretext.
    I hear.
    That’s sorta called communism..
    Hope You voting Bernie

    in reply to: Why was trump impeached??? #1831326
    klugeryid
    Participant

    I don’t like scotch.
    Why don’t you tell me?
    You seem to be well versed.

    I’m confused that trump seemed to be prescient enough to know Biden would challenge him but not to know he would lose the primaries?

    in reply to: No more shopping bags! #1830626
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Sure
    Explore paper company websites to learn the dangers of plastic.
    That’s going to give you accurate information

    Last I checked, plastic is made from crude oil.
    After sorting
    You get gasoline and many other products
    One of these is plastic.
    As long as we are using gas, the plastic is being extracted.
    If you don’t use it as bags it will either be used in another way, or thrown straight out and the cost passed along to all other crude oil components.

    in reply to: Why do you support trump #1830526
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubiq
    On your last post
    Agreed

    in reply to: Why do you support trump #1830457
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubiq
    I think your playing word games here
    Like the question he you love fish why do you eat it
    They like trumps flaws using form a of the word like, and you want them to explain themselves utilizing form b me the same word

    in reply to: Michael Bloomberg #1830431
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Bloomberg is spending truckloads of cash
    Where is he up to?

    in reply to: Why do you support trump #1830427
    klugeryid
    Participant

    I believe the Level of deep support for trump by his supporters without almost any level of detraction due to his numerous and glaring personal shortcomings, comes from the fact that for far too long the average thinking person had had his thoughts squelched and even criminalized on the blues of p.c.
    We watch left wing politicians say things which never mind that they are not even in the same orbit as fact, they don’t even make sense!!!
    For example
    Two men can get married to each other
    Gender is fluid
    Women get paid less FOR EQUAL RESULTS
    Dysfunctional family life has no bearing on academic success
    (these are just examples)
    And on and on
    Plus the onerous laws and fees that we pay to support someone else’s pet projects
    For example
    ”going green ” (changing light bulbs from cheap incandescent which work to the ”just option de Jour ”
    Banning styrofoam, plastic bags, large Soda,
    Penalizing success with higher taxes while rewarding delinquency with programs for criminals
    Thought police, can’t say Islamic terror, inner city crime, just goes on and on.
    And then along came Trump.
    If opened his mouth
    Announced from the rooftops ”the emperor has no clothes!! ”
    Crime is actually the fault of the criminals
    Merciful policies for criminals need to take law abiding citizens lives into account too
    And on and on

    It’s like the pressure cooker has been opened. Normal people feel like there is actually someone in a position to do something who gets it .
    They have a voice.
    Someone who will stand up to the garbage that’s been thrown in their faces and wallets for so long.
    Do they care about his personal flaws?
    Do they even see them???
    When someone has been held hostage for years, does he notice if his savior has body odor????
    He is so happy to be let free he will hug the man without even noticing the odor. And his now powerless Captor will be standing on the side trying to dampen The enthusiasm by saying, why you hugging that guy? Don’t you realize how awful he smells?
    All that that would do is serve as a reminder as to who the bad guy really is and make the captive hug him tighter.

    That in my opinion is the secret to trumps deep support and why the dems current efforts will only hurt themselves (so I say let them keep going)
    And that also answers ubiqs question, I think. Which is why In my mind my op was correct.
    Sorry ubiq it wasn’t on purpose

    in reply to: Why do you support trump #1830345
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubiq
    It’s not hijacking, thanks for clarifying.
    I want to see what people say

    in reply to: shreds of decency #1830210
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubik I would like to take a walk with you through one of the toughest neighborhoods in America. You have a choice you can walk through the neighborhood with a nice. Timid aristocrat Or you can walk through the neighborhood with a real tough guy 6 for bulging biceps. Tattoos covered from top to bottom loves ripping people to shreds likes to get into Street side brawls lives for the day when he can Mash people’s faces into concrete Oh and did I mention that we know for sure there is a group of people waiting for you to walk through the neighborhood so they can relieve you of your wallet your dignity and anything else that you might be carrying with you. Do you choose to walk with the Aristocrat or did you choose to walk with the Rough Tumble lowlife kind of a guy and does that mean that you like the guy?

    in reply to: Hashkafah on watching the Super Bowl #1830141
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Syag I think you may have missed this

    Syag I asked there two questions
    Still haven’t received a response

    1) Syag
    No I’m totally serious. Isn’t that like the simplest form of judging favorably??
    That he holds like a differing legitimate opinion in halacha?

    What do you consider judging favorably?

    2) According to you is there anything wrong with the following statement.
    I know for sure today some yiden will speak lashon hara

    in reply to: shreds of decency #1830032
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubiq

    so are you nervous for 2024?

    Yes.
    But I’m not confident about 2020 either.
    But of course if I just adopt Sam Klein’s attitude, im not nervous at all

    in reply to: shreds of decency #1830034
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Not sure what was unclear about the rest of my post. I’ll try again in short

    Even if you found me someone with the ideas I wanted to see implemented in how to run this country, if he is personally a nice guy, the libs will guilt him into abandoning all of them.
    Only a mean uncouth guy like trump can get past the radical left. He doesn’t let their words stop him, their words embolden him.

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829931
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Jackk
    Honestly I don’t see the difference between getting the fbi irs cia or a foreign government to investigate someone.
    If it’s OK to sick the fbi on trump, who cares if it was Ukraine that trump asked to investigate Biden.
    Had he asked the FBI t o do so it would be OK?
    Sounds weird to me
    But someone here seemed to claim is the law so I guess that part is too bad

    in reply to: shreds of decency #1829928
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Read the rest of my posts
    Or in short
    Others may have the same position but only he has the ability to get the job done

    in reply to: shreds of decency #1829918
    klugeryid
    Participant

    That’s an attitude your going to be hard pressed to duplicate.
    But it’s the only thing that’s going to work against the radical left.
    And that’s the same reason they hate him and fear him.
    They would have no issue with pence as president.
    I know nothing about him but just from the way he carries himself(he looks like someone I’d have no issue staying over in my house when I’m not even home ,or inviting him to my events or whatever. He looks almost aristocratic . But guess what? When I need a slumber to clean my sewer, I don’t want an aristocrat to show up. I want to get the job done. So when the guy with the filthy overalls shows up, I move away but I am relieved that he came confident that now the job will get done.) they would walk all over him like a used carpet.

    in reply to: shreds of decency #1829915
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Is there no republican with his qualities?
    I haven’t a clue. Show me one without his faults and I’ll vote for that guy over him
    But to ask why vote for trump? Surely there is someone else better, is like a reverse straw man argument.
    Pence? I have no clue. But here is the clincher.
    Yes there are many who have enough of the ideas I consider proper, that I actually could pick someone else.
    But that would work if I was hiring someone to run a business unopposed.
    Here we have an opposition party that is bold, in your face, and has frightened and bullied most politicians to back off their own positions so as not to be seen as Un ”woke ”
    Think back. To the incessant drumbeat against bush 42 that he lied about weapons of mass destruction.
    For some bizarre reason he felt it beneath his dignity to come out forcefully and say.
    No. I didn’t lie. I listened to the intelligence community who were taken in by Saddam ‘s own games.
    We know now that we were misled but at the time we acted justly.
    His taking the ”high road” opened the door to a cowering in fear republican party.
    Till big potty mouth Donald Trump came along. Yes that awful brash couldn’t care less about being nice and proper, two year old insulting personality? That’s exactly what is needed in today’s political climate to get the proper positions to be implemented.
    And that, only Donald Trump has shown.
    And that my friend in my opinion is the secret behind his popularity and support.
    He has the ”guts ” to push through and get the job done and not be bowled over by new age insults like the left loves to invent.
    We need a wall !!!!
    But you are going to separate families with kids!!
    (never mind that Obama did that unmolested)
    Old republican ”oh my! They are accusing me of being heartless!! OK fine we won’t build the wall. ”

    Donald Trump ”really? Oh that’s so sad. But you know what if we don’t build the wall some o these guys gonna come in and kill babies. And that’s much badder even. So we gonna build the wall anyway. And if they don’t want to be separated from their families, they should stay home or come here legally. Oh And by the way. Just because you tried to call me a bad name in going to make the wall taller, longer than before, and I’m going to take the money to do it from one of your pet sensitivity training projects to pay for it ”

    in reply to: shreds of decency #1829908
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubiq
    Why is that so hard to understand?
    I could not care less actually about his personal life. For that matter I didn’t really understand The issue with Clinton and his personal life either.
    I’m not looking to marry the guys daughter. I want a safe prosperous country that just let’s me live my life to my choosing. We can legitimately argue who’s vision is better his or the dems but who cares how many girl friends the guy has or had. Or his personal views on women. Let’s say he feels personally they are chattel and should be treated that way. But for nothing more than political expedience he passes legislation consistently protecting and supporting their right to be treated equally to males.
    Well then I support him even though his personal position is repugnant.

    in reply to: Hashkafah on watching the Super Bowl #1829883
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Syag I asked there two questions
    Still haven’t received a response

    1) Syag
    No I’m totally serious. Isn’t that like the simplest form of judging favorably??
    That he holds like a differing legitimate opinion in halacha?

    What do you consider judging favorably?

    2) According to you is there anything wrong with the following statement.
    I know for sure today some yiden will speak lashon hara

    in reply to: Hashkafah on watching the Super Bowl #1829881
    klugeryid
    Participant

    So it is About דן לכף זכות?
    I think you are wrong on either count and I have sources for both so it makes no difference to me.
    So I don’t think it’s sensible to accuse of of changing it to something that works for me.

    It probably would have been helpful to the conversation, had you actually responded to my posts and maybe called me out when I switched the conversation instead of silently watching from the sidelines, but whatever works for you is good

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829793
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Jackk
    This quote is rich!!!

    If he knew of the exorbitant compensation his son was receiving from a company actually under investigation, the vice president should have recused himself. While ignoring a conflict of interest is not a crime, it is surely very wrong. With regards to Hunter Biden, taking excessive advantage of his father’s name is unsavory, but also not a crime.
    Let’s pause here to let this sink in
    I’m going to vote to impeach a president, (which is really also voting as to what the president has done, for that is really the debate in the impeachment trial) even though no official crime has been committed, because one does not need to have the crime listed on the books for it to be wrong.
    But I’m going to give the bidens a pass, even though In their case it has already been agreed by all and or proven that unsavory behavior has taken place , because there is no official law that they broke!!!
    How’s that for some before breakfast hypocrisy??!!

    Let’s continue with the quote

    Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the president’s counsel that a crime had been committed, the president’s insistence that they be investigated by the Ukrainians is hard to explain other than as a political pursuit.

    Um, care to repeat that?
    Sure!
    Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the president’s counsel that a crime had been committed, the president’s insistence that they be investigated
    Wait! Isn’t that usually what an investigation is for?
    To find evidence in a situation where something doesn’t seem correct?
    Silly me. I forgot that In the liberal utopia, the accuser is supposed to provide the investigator with the evidence. Ala communist Russia.
    So part of trumps crime (unwritten of course) is failure to fabricate evidence against his political enemies. A crime of omission if you will
    Glad to clear this all up

    And for this we have posters calling the dog mutt Romney an honorable upstanding role model.
    Wow.

    in reply to: Hashkafah on watching the Super Bowl #1829841
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Avram
    Did you read the piece I quoted from the Chafetz Chaim?
    If you substitute schmoozing between mincha and Mariv for watching the Superbowl it is indistinguishable from Josefs comment.
    So According to you syag would take exception to the Chafetz Chaim. Nice.
    And no. I didn’t get ”hung up ” on A colloquial reference. That was seemingly her issue. When it was shown that that didn’t apply, it was clarified to another issue which also was off base as shown by the Chafetz Chaim and gemorah that I brought.
    I think they very much directly apply to show that such action as Josef did is not m s r

    in reply to: Why does Biden get a pass Or ”the donkey in the room ” #1829833
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Coffee, to put my answer in (personal) context
    I started a thread here with the basic premise being Bloomberg is the only one in afraid really has a chance to beat trump.
    So you know where my Political hopes lie.

    As far as Bloomberg is concerned, they need to at least reexamine the rule. It’s not a chok.
    It’s purpose is to keep non serious contenders from crowding the stage.
    But since that rubric doesn’t apply to him, they need to reevaluate his participation and judge his allowance based on different metrics. It’s not so crazy. I think it’s totally logical

    Crazy Bernie. Much as they hate trump, they fear him. He will destroy their whole power apparatus if he gets in. They will stop at nothing to keep him out

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829828
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ben
    No offense taken
    I know zero about constitutional law.
    I do know however that there are two schools of thought in interpretation of it.
    Constructionist which I think means it is what it says. Go break your head. And evolving
    Which are you using?

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829794
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Syag can I try?

    1) it is
    2) 2part answer
    2a) they don’t really believe the first half, they are afraid of the second half, and they need to say something.
    2b) they honestly believe the average American is as dumb clueless and naive as can be. So they DO believe what they are saying.

    I know 2a and 2b are at odds with each other. It’s a choice.

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829796
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Jackk I’d like to pose a hypothetical question
    According to your understanding
    If the president finds out that a political opponent of his is a spy against the United States. Operating in some country that we have no network on the ground but one of our allies has an extensive network,
    Should the president
    1) ignore the situation since the accused is his political opponent
    2)ask the ally to use their network to find out what the real story is
    3) use our own guys at substantial risk to life and huge financial outlay, in order not to get ”foreign governments ” involved?

    I’d love an answer

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829774
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Jackk
    Thank you.
    So Romney says high crimes and misdemeanors, doesn’t have to actually be a crime or a misdemeanor because it would be impossible to list them all. So it’s up to the judgement of the senate.
    So take your average Joe cop. Hauls some kid in front of a judge for spinning on his head on top of a soda bottle balanced on a unicycle in the middle of an empty lot at 3 am
    Judge sentences him to ten years in the slammer because ”someone who engages in such offbeat behavior, In my opinion is a public menace that must be taken off the streets ”

    Kids lawyer says, your honor what crime exactly is my client being accused of?
    Judge responds, buddy, it’s impossible to have the law list every type of crime, that’s why there are judges.
    I vote to put him in the slammer.

    You think that would work???
    It says HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS we got thousands of those on the books
    True the constitution doesn’t need to list it. But some law code does.
    So according to you Romney was over the mitzvah of din which is one of the seven.
    Straight to hell with him.
    Even according to his lovers here.
    Upstanding skunk that he is

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829702
    klugeryid
    Participant

    reb e
    why should there be a difference?
    from before matan torah to after , i can hear since as you pointed out, basically the world could not exist w/o teshuvah
    but once we are separated, as long as we can do teshuvah maybe thats enough

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829677
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ben and Reb
    Thanks
    Don’t know how I missed נינוה
    The other ones are before מתן תורה so that may not be a great proof for today

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829654
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Chash your good
    Realize though if you grant that trump did nothing wrong (just for arguments sake, since you agree it’s a possibility)
    Then the script gets flipped.
    Trump was upholding the law by making sure us money is not going to corrupt rockets, and then the impeachment was really just an illegal witch hunt and Rooney vindictively voting to impeach is voting to break the law.
    So it’s not so clear cut.
    Don’t think omer muttar help by a goy the gemorah says when hashem say they weren’t keeping their seven he made them think it’s now permitted so he could later punish them.
    Sorta sounds like it don’t help them guys

    Do you have to check?
    No way!!! Your allowed to assume the worst about them with a clear conscience.
    I think he felt it would give him more credence to split his vote so I don’t think he has a migu

    All jokes aside ,I don’t think this was upstanding at all. It was payback. Everyone knows the whole proceeding was only undertaken to get trump. Even if he is guilty, if they liked him they would never have done this.
    Sort Of like what they are saying about trump, even if Biden was guilty, trump only investigated to hurt Biden.
    So voting for it specifically where he knew it would be meaningless anyway, was only to poke trump in the eye.
    Had he been a deciding vote to cause trump to lose office, that possibly would be guts.
    Here it was just petty.

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829652
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Benig
    We were just discussing this in yeshiva as a schmooze
    Nobody knew sources as to whether a goy can do teshuva.
    .
    Me I seem to remember that they can’t
    But I’d love some sources
    You seem pretty certain
    Mind sharing?

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829635
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Dbrim 👍👍👍

    in reply to: Hashkafah on watching the Super Bowl #1829609
    klugeryid
    Participant

    avram

    He wrote that about you.
    absolutely! i got emotional and lost clarity
    women in general are more emotional and therefore generally are not so clear. he bolstered my point using my comment as his example.
    thats what i meant to sure
    not sure what you thought i was tring to say

    “I’M NOT FOLLOWING YOUR CIRCULAR ISSUE AT ALL SO I HAVE NO COMMENT.”

    That’s never stopped you before.

    pure conjecture

    These are powerfully negative things to say, and it’s not a leap at all to posit that someone who actually espouses such things would be beyond redemption.POSSIPLY but that would be you positing that
    josef never even insinuated that
    dont interject your negativity into someone elses comment and then excoriate him on it

    in reply to: Hashkafah on watching the Super Bowl #1829610
    klugeryid
    Participant

    chas
    thanks i wouldnt have the strength to type all that

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829598
    klugeryid
    Participant

    ct you remind me of a yankel miller joke
    a man has too many children to fit in an suv so he buys himsef a schoolbus.
    hes driving on the palisades parkway and gets stopped.
    officer , whats the issue?
    your driving a schoolbus on a parkway,its not allowed!
    officer this is not a schoolbus its my car
    sir it says schoolbus right on the side!
    officer, and if it said airplane it would be able to fly??

    so he calls himself a saint
    so did the pope call many murderers who murdered countless jews
    as to stealing, he wasnt always wealthy. you really think in his life he never took anything that wasnt his?

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829599
    klugeryid
    Participant

    reb eliezer
    klugeryid, Why does Romney have to be better than the Torah which allows polygamy?
    he doesnt
    why does trump?
    a goy cant have hundreds of girlfriends ?

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829525
    klugeryid
    Participant

    Chash

    And lets say its just out of spite, so he clobbered his enemy good, out of spite. Thats what you do to your enemies.

    Ain’t that at worst what trump did to Biden?

    And how rich is it that Mr Mormon that last Bastion of Polygamy to hate trump cause he had multiple girlfriends

    in reply to: Mitt Romney is now persona non grata #1829527
    klugeryid
    Participant

    You so sure he keeps all seven?
    Never took home a pen or paper clip from his office without permission?
    נכרים חייבים על פחות משווה פרוטה
    ואזהרתן זו היא מיתתתן
    I’d wager he’s no saint

Viewing 50 posts - 151 through 200 (of 989 total)