Free Republic 2nd Qtr 2022 Fundraising Target: $82,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $43,003
Woo hoo!! And we're now over 52%!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Posts by Enchante

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 5:50:58 PM PDT · 2,000 of 2,068
    Enchante to edzo4

    Yeah, we already know you are illiterate and incompetent. Everything is beyond your feeble grasp.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 5:49:50 PM PDT · 1,999 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster

    You continue to lie. Or are you really illiterate?

    (1) no sufficient reason(s) to accept that Q is what is claimed.

    (2) that does not mean we know ***what Q really is***

    Those two statements are perfectly compatible.

    The fact that you cannot seem to grasp that (or wilfully ignore it) means that you are either incompetent or lying.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 5:32:13 PM PDT · 1,994 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster

    YOU LIE. My words are reasonably clear if (always) imperfect.

    I say there is not sufficient reason(s) to believe Q is what he is claimed to be.

    That does NOT imply that I know “What Q really truly is” — only that I (claim to know pretty well) what Q is NOT.

    You really need a course in basic logic and reasoning.

    Hmmmm you trolls really do feel threatened by me, even though I am just one-offing very casual thoughts and impressions. If I ever decide to go into some serious debunking of this crap you will truly never recover. ha ha...

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 5:17:14 PM PDT · 1,990 of 2,068
    Enchante to Fantasywriter

    yes, one version is “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”.... there is also, “don’t assume malice when it may be incompetence” or something like that.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 5:04:46 PM PDT · 1,985 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster

    rofl, you have torn the latter statement out of context, as I just explained to you. You are consumed with your stupid gung fu crap or whatever it is that Q trolls like to do.

    I am actually thinking, hard as that is for you to accept.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 5:02:08 PM PDT · 1,984 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster

    I have an informal, slowly developing method.... method to this madness, yes. Nothing scientific, nothing too rigorous, just impressionistic.

    I look at stuff and think about whether it makes enough sense to pursue it further. That is what we ALL have to do with everything on the internet and in life most of all. There is such a vast amount of “stuff” out there and no one can spend time on every bit of you.

    So, yeah, we all have to pick and choose, and I am sharing a little bit of how I “pick and choose” while enjoying (some of) the responses to it. That is called a discussion.

    You guys don’t really like discussion, you seem to prefer either mocking, ridiculing, or trying to bludgeon people into submission. I like to discuss.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 4:58:54 PM PDT · 1,981 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster

    I have looked at LOTS of alleged “evidence” and many many times found it wanting.

    No, I do not have to live full time amidst Q-world (or Scientology, numerology, astrology, spirit cooking, etc.) to make a reasonable, provisional judgment about whether something is worth pursuing a lot further.

    EVERY group, EVERY view ever propounded can say “you have to devote months/years to our studies before you can have any opinion at all about whether this could be worthwhile.” “you have to look at ALL our claimed evidence before you can have any judgment at all.” etc.

    I am viewing a ***certain amount*** of what has often been put forward as important Q-evidence and/or understandings. Then I am simply asking whether I think it is worth pursuing a lot further. I am not trying to have opinions about particle physics or something that is already recognized as deserving many years of close study in order to form any good judgments.

    The Q stuff is not meeting my minimal threshold for “deserves a great deal more investigation.” I’m sorry that I have higher standards than you guys, ha haaa. Sorry.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 4:51:35 PM PDT · 1,977 of 2,068
    Enchante to corlorde


    I am calm, Q re-assures us all that “We are in control” or something along those lines.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 4:49:41 PM PDT · 1,974 of 2,068

    It is perfectly possible and REASONABLE to say “here are some reasons I don’t take Q to be what is claimed” and then to FOLLOW that with,

    “I don’t know with any certainty WHAT Q really is, I do know what he is not.”

    That is the form of my arguments, in informal prose, though some trolls seem to wilfully willingly eagerly try to misunderstand me at every turn.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 4:46:22 PM PDT · 1,973 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster; Fantasywriter

    You ripped my words out of context, as you often do. The CONCLUSION of my train of thought in that post was that between options such as (not an exhaustive list) (1) Silly LARP , (2) adolescent MAGA LARP, (3) serious ADULT MAGA LARP, (4) AI program, (5) Deep State psyops etc. etc. I don’t try to take a definite position on THOSE kinds of issues.

    That does not mean I didn’t just indicate reasons I don’t take “Q” to be what he pretends to be.

    It should not be necessary to spell this kind of thing out in every comment, but you don’t argue in good faith.

    We need Fantasy Writer’s fine synopsis of “Q alternatives” — I will have to look that up again.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 4:39:51 PM PDT · 1,970 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster

    B.s. you have reading comprehension difficulties.

    I argue about the things I DO think I have some basis to think, and then I also note places where I do not think there is sufficient evidence to decide something.

    THAT is a how a more careful, thoughtful mind would approach these matters.

    It is NOT a game to just try to always take a strong stance and bludgeon or ridicule others into submission.

    I give examples of actually THINKING about this stuff and not just swallowing/regurgitating.

    I am sad that you cannot grasp my method.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 4:37:20 PM PDT · 1,968 of 2,068

    One more reason that the 20/80 or 40/60 percentage talk is simply silly is that it takes no account of the magnitude of crimes or the significance/standing of perps.

    I.e., it makes zero sense to weigh revelations of minor crimes or low level figures in the same scales with treason, child trafficking etc. or compare prosecuting some obscure lower bureaucrat with prosecuting a Podesta or (dare we hope) Hillary, Obama, etc.

    You can’t just take a percentage of deeds/crimes or perps/DeepStaters and say “this is the percentage we have decided to expose and prosecute.” Silliness.

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 4:31:09 PM PDT · 1,965 of 2,068
    Enchante to Fantasywriter; corlorde; caww; Reily; Basket_of_Deplorables; Electric Graffiti; eyedigress

    I loved a Q-drop back in Dec., something like “The World Cannot Handle the Truth” — yeah whatever dark conpiracies are to be revealed, only the brave Q-bots are REALLY capable of “handling the truth.” WOW.

    Then there was also the total bs about whether 20% or 40% of all bad stuff/actors would be exposed..... Q said “we listened” (to the clamor of anons? loyal Q-followers??) and decided to up it from 20% to 40%.

    20 or 40% of WHAT? counting perps, charges, crimes, prosecutions etc.? Whatever the 20/80 or 40/60 percentages were supposed to represent, it was just SILLY TALK.... i.e., if there were this grand secret movement of “White Hats” at the top level of the US govt, they would not, could not be deciding in Dec. 2017, “let’s see, shall we reveal 20% of all the bad stuff? no, 40%??? ok, done.” That’s just a nonsensical to think or talk about revealing/prosecuting criminal/treasonous actions.

    NO ONE, not POTUS Trump or AG Sessions or anyone else, could reasonably sit in a room and decide “well, let’s reveal 20% of the bad stuff to the public” or “let’s reveal 40% of the bad stuff to the public now.”

    This is simply total adolescent B.S.

    It is not the way any senior official(s) could go about judging how to pursue prosecutions of savage crimes, subversion, treason, etc. You would go after what you can get at and think you should go after... but you would not imagine you could ever have such tight control over the “flow” of exposures, revelations, prosecutions, etc. 20% today, 40% next week.... ok, maybe now the public can handle 60% ????

    This is just adolescent crap. One reason I don’t tend to think “Q” is either AI or a “Deep State psyops” campaign (though I continue to affirm that I just don’t follow it all closely enough to reach any firm conclusion).

    THen ofc there is all the recent b.s. with Corsi. What a s##tshow!!

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 4:15:07 PM PDT · 1,962 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster

    aha, haven’t you noticed, on FR everything must be beaten to death.....especially “taking flak over target” and other stale trite metaphors, memes, etc. Porn site viruses is just another one. Try to enjoy. :^)

  • California flower town wrestles with odor amid shift to marijuana

    05/10/2018 3:22:17 PM PDT · 27 of 61
    Enchante to 2ndDivisionVet
  • Hillary Clinton tells Julia Gillard the 2016 US election was 'a perfect storm'

    05/10/2018 2:45:25 PM PDT · 41 of 74
    Enchante to rovenstinez

    We can’t seem to get away from John McVain, either, and he lost in 2008!

  • Hillary Clinton tells Julia Gillard the 2016 US election was 'a perfect storm'

    05/10/2018 2:44:35 PM PDT · 40 of 74
    Enchante to GnuThere

    Yeah, but in India she said she was chugging INDIAN chardonnay!

  • Hillary Clinton tells Julia Gillard the 2016 US election was 'a perfect storm'

    05/10/2018 2:41:53 PM PDT · 39 of 74
    Enchante to Oldeconomybuyer
    ""There were times when I was tempted to just pull the covers back over my head," Mrs Clinton told a packed Melbourne Exhibition Centre on Thursday night."

    NOPE, we do not want her taking any "3 am calls" for our country, ever again.

    p.s. What is she, 12?? An alleged "world leader" on her global speaking tour actually said this?????? I am nauseous.
  • A Cornell Student Gave A Speech In Her Underwear To Protest…Something

    05/10/2018 2:23:05 PM PDT · 55 of 89
    Enchante to SeekAndFind

    Cornell U. couldn’t afford Stormy Daniels??

  • Who is #Qanon? (really interesting 19:30 video)

    05/10/2018 2:05:12 PM PDT · 1,946 of 2,068
    Enchante to bagster; little jeremiah; caww; Fantasywriter

    So many Q followers with “computer issues” — I am concerned that Q Headquarters does not provide proper training in avoiding those nasty porn sites with all the viruses.