Chip_Rat

Oh I remember we had a big bag of rainbow cookies one time and they made you gay, and the only gay guy in school was eatting them but they were apparently really good so we figured out if you just ate an even number you'd end up back straight again.

Twas a simpler time.

Go ahead, please talk about the real and genuine problems here....,

It's a privilege to pee.

Alan Rickman, what a treasure.

I understand your argument now. I agree.

Did Trump's campaign have credible evidence she didn't? Was there any reason for them to suspect she was lying?

It's a waste of time to prove every little facet of someone existence, not matter how "easy" it would be.

Instead, let's ignore wild bullshit accusations of lying unless we are presented with some sort of evidence that backs it up, or come up against a strong reason to need to know (I can't even think of a decent reason in this example...)

If Harris is caught in a lie about something related (lied about her qualifications during a campaign speech or something) THEN maybe demanding she look up her records and print some proof would carry some weight.

As of now, I'm just tired of this double standard. They squaxk and squak and demand proof for every little thing, it's just to waste time and energy.

I don't believe that happened, can you provide a link of him saying it or a reputable source quoting him saying that?

Because I feel like I saw that episode and at no point did he admit to losing....

Even more straight forward and valid points.

I 'get' the "oh you are flying the wrong flag so you aren't the boss of me" desperate misinterpretations of semi-related laws. It's stupid, but it takes time to explain and honestly it takes a fair amount of trust in a system that usually is working against them (because they are deadbeat parents or idiots who don't want to pay taxes).

The driving thing is so straight forward you could explain it to a 6 year old.

Right - those visitors either have a passport and were granted permission to enter for a set period of time, or they too would be picked up and deported back to their country.

There's a lot of rabbit holes that I can see people with poor reasoning/logic getting stuck down, but this one seems pretty easy to explain....

So this was percolating in my brain for awhile, these dense people have a hard time understanding the law but it's very easy to explain even if they magically are a sovereign citizen which means they don't have to do all the regular things humans do in a society.

If you are driving on publicly funded roads that you didn't contribute to with taxes and did not licence your vehicle to drive on, you are just trespassing. Your options are: pay the fee/fine for trespassing, and then stay off the roads you don't own, or buy the "ticket" (pay your taxes and ensure your vehicle is licenced.).

What's the response to that? Like I know they think a lot of weird and crazy stuff, but I get why they don't understand some of it, bevause it is complicated and based on law and generations of social contracts. This isn't that. This is "you can't trespass, no matter how sovereign you are."

Oh I'll try!

I think he thinks by buying the car for $1000 it's his, contract fulfilled he paid for it noone can take it away.

Ignoring how titles work and how you wouldn't be able to get ownership transfered to you with the debt on the original vehicle purchase, he seems to think because he is in the clear (because he bought it legally for $1000) his friend won't still be on the hook for the full price of the contract.

So in his Iala land he would still be screwing his gullible friend over.

I think that's what he is saying...

But why would God be quoting my response to ProdigalFrog to me?