Burn baby burn! Texas on fire. 🔥

[JaySecrets]

Tell me I’m wrong that you have been previously diagnosed with a mental illness and are currently off your meds.



Also:

Tell us your previous username or GTFO.

Number one for me to even engage that question allows you to set the terms of debate or discussion. That is insane. I'm not the one speaking on unhinged levels and spewing out vitriol. You are. That's a question on the level of asking someone, Have you stopped cheating on your wife yet. Questions to which there are no right answers are not questions. I am stupid enough to answer. Something is fundamentally wrong with you there.

Second, the reason why I'm not using or bringing up my previous screen name, is because there are people on here who I had personal relationship with who are now moved on to someone else after things didn't work out, and my putting that out there, because there are deep feelings involved, Will end up hurting them. I care too much about them to do that.

You don't dictate to a person how they are to function. That you have the arrogance to think you can says more about you than you even imagine.

In the end, your inability to engage in intelligent informed discourse has revealed yourself. The only people that think you have won by acting as you are now, are people who are blindly on the same side as you are. Neutral parties looking at this are going to see a different thing all together. Those were the people I'm talking to anyway.

 

[Lazaran]

 

[RobDownSouth]

Number one for me to even engage that question allows you to set the terms of debate or discussion.

Can we have a side discussion here about "terms of debate"?
This might avoid unpleasantries like yesterday's Trump Anti-Vaccine Mandate discussion.

• I made a thread about Trump's threats to withhold federal funding from schools that require students to be vaccinated.
• In order to pre-empt the inevitable "He NEVAR Said That!" response, I supplied a video of him doing so at a campaign rally, cued to the exact moment where he said that.
• Four minutes later, you replied "CONTEXT!" and demanded I watch the whole 75 minute stump speech for some elusive "context'.
• I asked you why *I* should be expected to do so when YOU had no time to have reviewed the speech you demanded I watch.
• You disingenuously claimed to have complete knowledge of Trump's worldview and beliefs, having watched enough of his rhetoric over the years to "know what he really meant".

This is the very definition of an unbalanced playing field. You claim to have some sort of special insight as to what Trump "really" thinks. Well, coincidentally, I do too!

Going forward, I want you to realize I will not concede a single point on anything related to Donald Trump based on your feelings, beliefs, of "special insight". You can attempt to continue doing this, of course, but you should in turn expect replies full of withering scorn and contempt, the volume of which is not unlike that made you tuck tail and vanish the last time you came to Literotica and mounted your soapbox and prattled about "This I Believe!"

As a side note, unsourced random blog posts you've found somewhere are the internet are not generally accepted as validation of your position.

And asking people to prove a claim you've made is juvenile. Ishmael (now doing business under his fourth alt "Chobham" still does this, but he has tertiary syphilis in his brain so we tend to cut him a little slack. You (and everyone else), not so much.

I hope you understand these "rules of debate". They are non-negoitable.

Have a nice day!