You Want Unity? Seriously?

 

It’s like asking a person who has gone through four years of unjustified, ceaseless torture to join up with you in running the country. Let’s be unified?

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

First, let me say that I’m not a person who takes revenge, which I define as exacting punishment for a wrong in a resentful spirit. But I do feel motivated to avenge this corrupt election: I do want to inflict punishment as an act of retributive justice. At one time revenge and avenge meant the same thing, but I think the subtle difference is relevant in this situation.

Joe Biden is not justified in asking for unity. In the last four years, the Democrats and the media have scorned the President and the Presidency. They have lied, distorted, and planned ceaselessly, every single day, to destroy President Trump. Attacking the President, his family, his staff, and his supporters with such derision and hatefulness does not warrant any effort on the part of the Republicans to come anywhere close to trying to unify the government. In effect, the Democrats violated every code of integrity, decency, and truthfulness in their efforts. Political parties always have a certain amount of feuding that happens, but to begin attacking the President before he even took office is detestable. There needs to be accountability.

In addition to choosing to avenge the President’s treatment, I think we need to understand what Biden means by unity: don’t get in our way. He can’t possibly believe that the Republicans will support a far-Left agenda. Joining in his plans to destroy the country economically by trying to initiate climate change legislation, increase taxes, continue to abuse our education curricula, remove tariffs with the Chinese, pass onerous regulations against businesses—there is no way that can happen with our complicity. It not only would eliminate the economic growth that occurred during Trump’s time in office, but would take the country into an economic tailspin.

But Biden’s using the word “unity,” when other words might have been more appropriate is a “tell.” If he had said cooperation or negotiating in government, I might have had a different reaction. But Biden is addressing the entire country, more specifically Republicans. He’s talking to us, the citizens on the Right:

He wants us to make believe that the last four years never happened.

He wants us to be willing to put aside our differences and support their agenda.

He wants us to forget those who insulted, attacked, and harassed us, even making sure that people lost their jobs.

He wants us to make believe that there is no cancel culture, that it’s okay if the mainstream media continues to berate us, that we should be helpful and cooperative, just like the Republicans of old.

You destroyed any possibility of our working with you. You have no idea how deplorable we can be.

No matter who finally wins the election, you will lose.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 151 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Well, Trump and his attorneys are pursuing legal avenues. We will soon know how successful they are. If Trump’s legal team is successful to the extent that Trump serves a 2nd presidential term, than you can say that Heavy Water was wrong. If Biden becomes president in 2021, then you can say that Heavy Water was right. Or maybe you will see the election as illegitimate, sort of how many on the Left viewed Bush’s 2000 election and Trump’s 2016 election as illegiatimate. It’s up to you.

    Our difference is not about whether Trump’s legal challenges will succeed. I don’t know if they will or not. I’m not sure of the complete extent of the evidence of voter fraud. We’ll find out in court. You seem certain there isn’t any. I don’t know how you could possibly know that.

    If Trump’s challenges fail, and it is established that Biden won with legitimate votes, I’ll be satisfied. It will prove that the system still has integrity, which is far more important than any particular result. That’s much better than leaving it in a cloud of suspicion by Trump simply ignoring the indications of fraud. Elections are not only supposed to be fair, but to appear fair. This one doesn’t.

    Fighting the good fight is worth doing, even if you aren’t certain of winning.

    The problem I foresee is that judges will refuse to acknowledge any fraud unless they have a stack of ballots in front of them where the “voters” added to the ballot “this ballot is fraudulent.” Which is essentially impossible. In fact, “chain of custody” and other type rules should apply, and the mere fact that poll watchers were kept out or told to leave while counting actually continued, should be enough to disqualify those ballots. Or are we to believe that all the GOP observers were told to leave only because they wouldn’t stop popping their gum, or something?

    The other likely reason is that the judges don’t want to have BLM coming to their homes later, although that’s likely to happen regardless of the decisions they make.

    Maybe the mailed-out ballot issue could have been helped if, though the Dems wouldn’t have wanted this, if the outside envelope had two dozen lines to be signed with chain of custody, from leaving the printer to leaving the mail, to being picked up by the mail to being delivered to the election place, etc.

    That might be useful to show who had possession of it that signed, but it wouldn’t show who might have had possession that DIDN’T sign.

    And it also wouldn’t stop people from adding more ballots that were never in those envelopes to start with.

    • #91
  2. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Biden Pure Demagogue (View Comment):

    Please clap.

    Uhh.. have you heard of Hillary Clinton? Can’t you wait until we are sure the fraud wasn’t so widespread that it swung the election? If Trump does whole, “I didn’t really lose,” thing that Hillary did then he deserves to be dug into. 

    • #92
  3. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Biden Pure Demagogue (View Comment):

    Strangely, French’s tweet generates fear, paranoia and rage in me, but not at Trump.

    It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

    • #93
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Biden Pure Demagogue (View Comment):

    Strangely, French’s tweet generates fear, paranoia and rage in me, but not at Trump.

    It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

    Or as Dr Johnny Fever (WKRP) says, “When everybody is out to get you, paranoid is just good thinking!”

    • #94
  5. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Biden Pure Demagogue (View Comment):

    Strangely, French’s tweet generates fear, paranoia and rage in me, but not at Trump.

    It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

    Or as Dr Johnny Fever (WKRP) says, “When everybody is out to get you, paranoid is just good thinking!”

    That line is even better.

    • #95
  6. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Biden Pure Demagogue (View Comment):

    Strangely, French’s tweet generates fear, paranoia and rage in me, but not at Trump.

    It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

    Or as Dr Johnny Fever (WKRP) says, “When everybody is out to get you, paranoid is just good thinking!”

    That line is even better.

    I liked it.  :-)

    Sadly I couldn’t find a video clip of it.

    • #96
  7. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    J Climacus (View Comment):
    I think the moral equivalence you draw between Trump supporters and Biden supporters with respect to voting is, frankly, repellant. Republicans have consistently pushed for procedures that would limit vote fraud, for instance no mail in voting and using voter ID. Democrats always resist these efforts and deliberately put in place policies that invite vote fraud and generate chaos in the election aftermath. The chaos and questionable results are always in Democratic strongholds, and somehow always favor Democratic candidates.

    This is a central point, @jclimacus. We fight for the integrity of the process; they only work to damage and manipulate it.

    • #97
  8. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):
    I think the moral equivalence you draw between Trump supporters and Biden supporters with respect to voting is, frankly, repellant. Republicans have consistently pushed for procedures that would limit vote fraud, for instance no mail in voting and using voter ID. Democrats always resist these efforts and deliberately put in place policies that invite vote fraud and generate chaos in the election aftermath. The chaos and questionable results are always in Democratic strongholds, and somehow always favor Democratic candidates.

    This is a central point, @jclimacus. We fight for the integrity of the process; they only work to damage and manipulate it.

    I agree that Republicans support voter ID and other reforms that would improve our electoral process.

    But human nature is human nature.  I think people of all kinds of political ideologies are capable of participating in a scheme to stuff ballot boxes in order to advance a cause that they believe in.

    I believe that someone who is pro-abortion is willing to stuff ballot boxes in favor of pro-abortion candidates and I believe that someone who is pro-gun is willing to stuff ballot boxes in favor of pro-gun candidates.  

    In a few weeks it will be even more clear than it is now that Trump lost, Biden won, just as many candidates for US Senate and US House won while their Democrat opponents lost.  

    That’s the way elections work.  Sometimes you win them and sometimes you lose them.  

    By the way.  If the Democrats stuffed the ballot boxes in Pennsylvania, they did an incompetent job of it.

    The Republicans performed are trailing in the presidential race but in the Pennsylvania U.S. House races, the GOP candidates are currently getting 117,000 more votes than the Democrat candidates. 

    So, maybe the presidential race was viewed differently by the voters.  Maybe there were many potential GOP voters just couldn’t stomach Trump, but voted GOP in other races.  Maybe that explains the results in Pennsylvania. 

    In Pennsylvania Republicans won the Auditor General and Treasurer races even while losing the presidential race there.

    • #98
  9. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    • #99
  10. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    I was responding to J Climacus’ point about how conservatives support election reform while the Left opposes it.  I agree with that.  

    That was my point.  

    Also, I do think that the fact that Republicans did very well in the Pennsylvania election in non-presidential races provides a clue that Trump didn’t lose Pennsylvania due to voter fraud, but due to voter aversion to him among some ticket splitting voters.  

    • #100
  11. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    • #101
  12. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    • #102
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Especially the repetitious comments that have also been repeatedly debunked.  Such as, the Charlotteseville Lie.

    • #103
  14. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Especially the repetitious comments that have also been repeatedly debunked. Such as, the Charlotteseville Lie.

    You must be quoting someone else.

    • #104
  15. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Hi Susan,

    I don’t believe that I commented on this post.  If you see that I did, please let me know.  Therefore, my comments cannot be deemed to be repetitive as I have not commented until Comment #101.

    Gary  

    • #105
  16. OldPhil Coolidge
    OldPhil
    @OldPhil

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Hi Susan,

    I don’t believe that I commented on this post. If you see that I did, please let me know. Therefore, my comments cannot be deemed to be repetitive as I have not commented until Comment #101.

    Gary

    “Your comments” in the generic sense, I believe.

    • #106
  17. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Especially the repetitious comments that have also been repeatedly debunked. Such as, the Charlotteseville Lie.

    You must be quoting someone else.

    I was replying to/commenting on the reply to Gary, not you.

    • #107
  18. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Especially the repetitious comments that have also been repeatedly debunked. Such as, the Charlotteseville Lie.

    Please do not hijack Susan’s post.  If you would like to talk about what you call the Charlottesville Lie, and I call the Charlottesville Hoax Hoax (https://thebulwark.com/the-charlottesville-hoax-hoax/), please start your own post.  

    • #108
  19. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Hi Susan,

    I don’t believe that I commented on this post. If you see that I did, please let me know. Therefore, my comments cannot be deemed to be repetitive as I have not commented until Comment #101.

    Gary

    “Your comments” in the generic sense, I believe.

    Are you speaking for Susan?  

    • #109
  20. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Hi Susan,

    I don’t believe that I commented on this post. If you see that I did, please let me know. Therefore, my comments cannot be deemed to be repetitive as I have not commented until Comment #101.

    Gary

    “Your comments” in the generic sense, I believe.

    Are you speaking for Susan?

    I think OldPhil is a moderator and would like both of us to leave Ricochet.  Is that correct?

    • #110
  21. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Hi Susan,

    I don’t believe that I commented on this post. If you see that I did, please let me know. Therefore, my comments cannot be deemed to be repetitive as I have not commented until Comment #101.

    Gary

    “Your comments” in the generic sense, I believe.

    Are you speaking for Susan?

    I think OldPhil is a moderator and would like both of us to leave Ricochet. Is that correct?

    Well, I think that the Trumpist portion of Ricochet would like for me to leave Ricochet.  And the Co-Founders or Editors are free to ask me to leave at any time, and as this is their website, I would honor their requests.  

    Ricochet survived the SSM (Same Sex Marrige) wars.  And I think that it will survive the Trump wars. 

    What you and I have to do is to avoid being provoked into being intemperate and violating the CofC.  Increasingly, I am staying out of the Member Feed, as it has some of the crazier ideas.  “Have a revote!”, and “Have the legislatures select a rival sets of electors to the Electoral College!” to name a couple.  I am usually sticking to the Main Feed as this is what the public can see.  And I have repeatedly reviewed the CofC to insure that I stay squarely within its bounds.   

    • #111
  22. DrewInWisconsin, Man of Constant Sorrow Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Man of Constant Sorrow
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary: “Heavy Water” speaks for me!

    Susan: Your comments are tiresome.

    Gary: But I haven’t said anything.

    Literally LOL.

     

    • #112
  23. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Man of Consta… (View Comment):

    Gary: “Heavy Water” speaks for me!

    Susan: Your comments are tiresome.

    Gary: But I haven’t said anything.

    Literally LOL.

    A quick note Drew.  I am pleased to see that you have gone from being just a “member” to being part of the Cool Coolidge Level.  Good for you! 

    • #113
  24. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Hi Susan,

    I don’t believe that I commented on this post. If you see that I did, please let me know. Therefore, my comments cannot be deemed to be repetitive as I have not commented until Comment #101.

    Gary

    “Your comments” in the generic sense, I believe.

    Are you speaking for Susan?

    I think OldPhil is a moderator and would like both of us to leave Ricochet. Is that correct?

    Well, I think that the Trumpist portion of Ricochet would like for me to leave Ricochet. And the Co-Founders or Editors are free to ask me to leave at any time, and as this is their website, I would honor their requests.

    Ricochet survived the SSM (Same Sex Marrige) wars. And I think that it will survive the Trump wars.

    What you and I have to do is to avoid being provoked into being intemperate and violating the CofC. Increasingly, I am staying out of the Member Feed, as it has some of the crazier ideas. “Have a revote!”, and “Have the legislatures select a rival sets of electors to the Electoral College!” to name a couple. I am usually sticking to the Main Feed as this is what the public can see. And I have repeatedly reviewed the CofC to insure that I stay squarely within its bounds.

    Good job of not hijacking the thread there, Gary and HeavyWater.

    • #114
  25. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Hi Susan,

    I don’t believe that I commented on this post. If you see that I did, please let me know. Therefore, my comments cannot be deemed to be repetitive as I have not commented until Comment #101.

    Gary

    “Your comments” in the generic sense, I believe.

    Are you speaking for Susan?

    I think OldPhil is a moderator and would like both of us to leave Ricochet. Is that correct?

    Well, I think that the Trumpist portion of Ricochet would like for me to leave Ricochet. And the Co-Founders or Editors are free to ask me to leave at any time, and as this is their website, I would honor their requests.

    Ricochet survived the SSM (Same Sex Marrige) wars. And I think that it will survive the Trump wars.

    What you and I have to do is to avoid being provoked into being intemperate and violating the CofC. Increasingly, I am staying out of the Member Feed, as it has some of the crazier ideas. “Have a revote!”, and “Have the legislatures select a rival sets of electors to the Electoral College!” to name a couple. I am usually sticking to the Main Feed as this is what the public can see. And I have repeatedly reviewed the CofC to insure that I stay squarely within its bounds.

    Good job of not hijacking the thread there, Gary and HeavyWater.

    I think that Susan hijacked her own post when she tried to shut up HeavyWater back on Comment #99.  I was happy to stay out of this post until I say someone trying to shut up HeavyWater.  All I commented was that HeavyWater spoke for me too at Comment #101.  I am not responsible that folks lost their minds over me saying merely six words in Comment #101 of “HeavyWater is also speaking for me.”  Your quarrel is with them, not HeavyWater or me.

    • #115
  26. OldPhil Coolidge
    OldPhil
    @OldPhil

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Maybe you should find another OP to comment on, @heavywater. Your comments are repetitive and tiresome, plus I’m becoming weary at your persistence for poking at those who support Trump. Your hypotheticals are meaningless. And I frankly don’t care what will happen in two weeks. I’m dealing with what is going on now. You’ve made your point: you believe Trump will lose. We get it. Can you please move along?

    HeavyWater is also speaking for me.

    My comment applies to you, too. After a while your comments are repetitive and tiresome.

    Hi Susan,

    I don’t believe that I commented on this post. If you see that I did, please let me know. Therefore, my comments cannot be deemed to be repetitive as I have not commented until Comment #101.

    Gary

    “Your comments” in the generic sense, I believe.

    Are you speaking for Susan?

    Gary, if you post a comment, everyone sees it, believe it or not.

    I think OldPhil is a moderator and would like both of us to leave Ricochet. Is that correct?

    Har har. 

    • #116
  27. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Are you speaking for Susan?

    Yes, in general that’s true.

    • #117
  28. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    I think OldPhil is a moderator and would like both of us to leave Ricochet. Is that correct?

    All moderators have the label “Moderator” under their avatar. 

    • #118
  29. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    And I have repeatedly reviewed the CofC to insure that I stay squarely within its bounds.

    It’s unfortunate that you write in a way that you have to check the CoC. 

    • #119
  30. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that Susan hijacked her own post when she tried to shut up HeavyWater back on Comment #99.

    Now that is such an interesting accusation, @garyrobbins. I’ve never been accused of hijacking my own thread! 

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.