Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

You never seem to understand I'm not required to attend every argument you invite me to in your fever dreams

First of all it isn't an argument, its a simple discussion and a challenge I made to you, when I asked you to put forth any job that Fetterman had up until the age of 40 years old. 

And you can't answer.  The reason you never answer is because you cannot answer due to the fact that the answers you typically provide are fraught with absurdities and nonsense.

It is kind of like the last thread you jumped into whereby you had ZERO facts and ZERO evidence on your side, but yet that didn't stop You from positing the stats which you pulled right out of your backside, claiming that those individuals who are attacked by an assailant with a knife in 99.99% of the instances would either A) Be DEAD, or B) Get severely injured by the assailant.

Then Greg came along and indicated that he was attacked by a knife wielding assailant and managed to not only defend himself, but was able to put the assailant in the hospital.

So Greg just defied those odds that you provided (with Zero evidence I might add), and he miraculously survived!!  

So then, how do you explain that?  Is Greg just Superman?  Is he just the 1 person in 10,000 that YOU claimed MIGHT be able to defend himself?  And I'm not making up those odds, YOU claimed those odds, not me.

What are the odds of a person being here on this political forum of about 10 guys IN TOTAL who defied the odds you gave?

Would you like to answer that simple question, or is that simple question far too difficult for you to answer as well?  

You put out ridiculous statements at least 50% of the time you appear on this forum,

Then when challenged on your absurd remarks, you invariably say "I don't need to engage you".  

Well here's a thought for you to consider.  Since you can't defend or provide evidence for these absurd assertions you make, don't engage in a debate here when you're incapable intellectually to defend your nonsense.  

Just a thought.  

Interesting that the "knife fight" diversion is so extremely important to you.   

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Not a diversion.  You probably should have read my response to him.

I was simply pointing out the fact that he regularly pulls unsupportable stats right out of his ass, that he tries to use as evidence of the BS assertions that he comes up with.

It certainly wasn't extremely important to me, it was simply strong evidence to show that he just makes unsupportable claims.

Interesting that You feel the need almost always to jump into a discussion between 2 others to try and help out the losing leftist party in the discussion.  

Since you want to jump in here to help out your pal, why don't you provide the erudite answer that I'm certain is brewing in your head, to the question I asked?

I'll ask you the simple question that he avoided.  

What are the ODDS that on a political forum that is home to all of about 10 whole human beings that even 1 person would show up to provide a real life example of the 1 single guy in 10,000 who WAS able to fend off an attacker with a knife?

Are those odds HUGE that one of the guys would just happen to be here who IS that 1 in 10,000 Human being?

I assert that the chances of that occurring are miniscule.  

Therefore there are 2 possibilities in My estimation.

Either A) the odds he claimed are simply absurd and much less that the 1 in 10,000 that he provided with no evidence, or

B) Greg is a complete anomaly and is the Superman type.

Take your pick, but one is for certain, you won't answer that simple question above and provide your estimation of the odds.  

The message of James' post yesterday is that it is much safer for virtually everyone to flee a "full fledged" knife attack than to engage the knife, Stephen Segal style.  It is hard to argue with James's logic.  The odds James posted were obviously meant to mean, "virtually everyone" in the context of his post.  Everyone knows James' meaning, maybe even you.  Not surprisingly, you seized on James' turn of a phrase and tried to make his point into something it was not.  

You (I think) had boasted that you would lead the charge against a pack of knife wielding assailants right?  (I could be wrong, your original post was TL, and I still DNR).  James replied that you would end up dead, if your boast were true.  Again, I think James is right.  Also, I think Greg would agree.  Although he has had the misfortune of actually facing a knife attack, I suspect that he would counsel backing down rather than charging into the blade, "Rich" style.  Others have accused you of being deluded by your own machismo.  I agree with them too.

I may have jumped in here, it is a discussion forum after all, not a private message service, but James is not losing any aspect of this discussion.  James never loses discussions with you, in my opinion.  He is too smart and savvy.  You merely misrepresent what he actually said and declare victory.  Over and over and over again.  It is as if Hitler were alive in his bunker today, declaring loudly that Germany had won the war.  Everyone on earth would know he is wrong, but you could never convince him of that.  After a while, it is hardly worth trying...although it is fun sometimes. 

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Let me say that I wasn't putting forth any machismo.  I was simply making a statement about my confidence that I would jump in to try to disarm the assailant and take him down.  

Throughout my life I've trained in Martial arts and boxing.  In my family, My cousin was a professional heavyweight fighter.  My uncle was All-Army champion back in the '60s.  Self-defense runs in my family. I don't apologize for my confidence in being out front with that.  

I believe Greg, because he describes a knife encounter in a straightforward and humble manner.  ("I am no Stephan Segal..." )  He is credible.  So I believe him. 

You on the other hand are always full of hot air and trumped up bravado.  This is the modern definition of "machismo."  It is not credible that anyone who actually had truly elite defensive skills would boast: "I was simply making a statement about my confidence that I would jump in to try to disarm the assailant and take him down.  Throughout my life I've trained in Martial arts and boxing.  In my family, My cousin was a professional heavyweight fighter.  My uncle was All-Army champion back in the '60s.  Self-defense runs in my family. I don't apologize for my confidence in being out front with that."   No, that sort of boasting comes across as the bluster of a wanna-be.  

Context matters Rich - you have posted umpteen thousand boastful and incredible things on this forum over the years.  No one doubts your own sense of inflated self-worth.  Speaking only for myself, I doubt that you would actually "bring it" if faced with a knife wielding attacker.  I could be wrong of course¹.    
Interesting point here - I know myself and hopefully have projected to my friends here that I have a good deal of self awareness.  I think I would be terrible in a knife fight and I would flee if I had any chance.   "If I had any chance."  That is key.  Like Russ mentioned yesterday, if my wife or kids^2, 3 were threatened by a serious knife-wielding assailant or gunman, I know I would do what I could to protect them.  I am not under any delusion that at best this would probably result in me dead and hopefully them escaping.  Some things are worth it.  

Jim

1.  You are an unemployed cabinetmaker.  If you are such a stud, why did you skip a career in the military, policing, or personal defense?

2.  My kids are now adults and now probably better suited to defend themselves than I am.  I am talking about when they were little and vulnerable. 

3.  I know that you do not have a wife or kids, so it is probably hard for you to comprehend the lengths a parent/spouse would go to to protect his or her mate or offspring.  This is evolutionarily hard-wired and you can see this behavior in most higher vertebrates, even some of the smallest. 

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

Who are you? Pee Wee Herman?

Dang, Brian beat me to it!

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

You said:  "You are an unemployed cabinet maker"

Well, no I am employed and I'm going to be finishing a large vanity that I will be delivering to a customer in Denver for her new master bath. 

Going to be finishing when?   

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Most likely today!  Why do you ask?

Does my job threaten you as well? 

Are you posting here in between finish coats?  I am just trying to keep you on track.  

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

Well, maybe in Florida and Texas. Historically, the party who holds the WH loses 28 seats in the following midterms. Currently they are -6.

Inflation, low approval ratings for Biden, the economy, inflation, crime, immigration and illegal border crossings, inflation, abortion, and the American people didn't flinch. Except for that bozo in Georgia most Trump endorsed candidates lost. 

By all means, keep supporting Trump, it's working out pretty well, huh? He lost the WH, Senate, and House in 2020. Like I said in another thread, hopefully he'll have a presidental election rally somewhere else the day before the potential runoff in Georgia. He screwed them once to lose the Senate, no reason to think he won't do it again.

Maybe you all can finally put Trump out to pasture. He can then make a TV comeback as host, with Dr. Oz as his sidekick, in the return of The Biggest Loser on NBC. 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-blasted-across-media-spectrum-over-republicans-midterms-performance-biggest-loser-tonight

Even our local Trump whack-a-do, Rod's crush Lauren Boebert, is in jeopardy of losing.  No one saw that coming.  Good riddance if it comes to pass!

I never predicted a red tsunami, like some, but I thought the economy would provided stiffer headwinds for the Democrats. 

"Maybe you all can finally put Trump out to pasture. He can then make a TV comeback as host, with Dr. Oz as his sidekick, in the return of The Biggest Loser on NBC."

Amen brother.  Please let this come to pass.  Jim

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

He must be busy delivering that vanity. Must be tough for him to live in a blue state.

I love living in blue Colorado - even with my crazed neighbor in the Springs.  Still, I do miss the days when Colorado had competitive elections.  They called our key races about when the polls closed.  Not that long ago we were the center of attention.  I liked that....

Ah well.  Jim

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Trump is reportedly seething, yelling at everybody around him, according to an aide. I wonder if Richie is doing the same in his mom's basement?

I would think that Trump would be pleased about what he will perceive as R failing, without him on the ticket.  He obviously won't blame himself for so many R disappointments, even though his hand-picked candidates did fairly poorly.  (I think, this seems to be an unusually less "settled" election nationwide, in so many key races).

Originally Posted by Greg Shaffer

Kemp 1 Abrams 0 thanks for big favors!!

Walker 1 Warnock 0 Glad he won but wish we had had a better candidate, warnock had to go.....

I think you went to bed too early Greg - Warnock is up and how the heck can Walker beat him in a runoff?  I'm thinking that the 2% who voted Libertarian are likely to pick Warnock over Walker in the runnoff.

I asked myself last night, "why is Kemp doing better than Walker by this much?"

I answered myself:

1.  Kemp is competent and popular
2.  Kemp is the incumbent
3.  Abrahms has worn out her welcome and is an easier opponent
4.  Most importantly, the religious right, many of whom actually do hold life sacred, can't have been too pleased with Walker's love-babies and alleged abortions.

In such a climate, the only thing Walker has going for him in the runoff is Kemp's support (I presume).  Who do you think wins the runoff this time around?  Like two years ago, control of the Senate probably hangs on this runoff.

Jim