Non-man (formerly known as woman)

Quote: Mission146

Because they are Republicans, who tend to be Evangelical Christians, who are, statistically speaking, the dumbest people in this country. I should imagine there is a great deal of crossover between those two groups.

You bet.

The evangelicals claim "My imaginary friend can beat up your imaginary friend," and republicans claim "My candidate, with his imaginary claims can beat up your candidate."

Quote: missedhervee

You bet.

The evangelicals claim "My imaginary friend can beat up your imaginary friend," and republicans claim "My candidate, with his imaginary claims can beat up your candidate."

Are you saying Democrat leaders like Obama, Biden, Harris, (add name of 90+% of elected Democrats) don’t have an imaginary friend they pray to?

Quote: SOOPOO

Are you saying Democrat leaders like Obama, Biden, Harris, (add name of 90+% of elected Democrats) don’t have an imaginary friend they pray to?

There is a massive difference
They are firm believers in separation of Church and State
Its common sense
The right Kowtows to the religious crazies against gays and abortion and separation of Chruch and state
Thats why I predict any republican running for President will get creamed
The right refuses to read the room on abortion because of the religious fanatics they depend on for limited regional power
I'm an athiest
The crazy dumb stupid religious fanatics are all on the right

Quote: SOOPOO

Are you saying Democrat leaders like Obama, Biden, Harris, (add name of 90+% of elected Democrats) don’t have an imaginary friend they pray to?

No, that is not my point at all.

I am comparing evangelicals to Trump.

The church folk believe that an invisible (and what I call "imaginary") being controls all aspects of existence, whereas Trump proffers imaginary claims to prop up his political existence.

Whether other presidents are religious is irrelevant to the discussion.

Quote: Mission146

Anyone who is so stupid as to believe Michelle Obama is actually a man should simply grab a high-caliber handgun and blow their brains out of the back of their skull; their brains are doing so little for them anyway that they might survive it. They might end up like that headless carnival chicken.

Or the former president.

Quote: SOOPOO

Are you saying Democrat leaders like Obama, Biden, Harris, (add name of 90+% of elected Democrats) don’t have an imaginary friend they pray to?

I would not be surprised at all if Obama was actually an atheist.

I do believe Biden’s Catholic faith is sincere.

Quote: DoubleGold

Her credibility would be an issue.

That's all.

How would her credibility be an issue?

A. She is clearly a woman, and has been her whole life.

B. Her kids are clearly hers.

But, let's assume that both of your conspiracies are true. She was trans, and lived her life as a woman because that is her identity. And, she did not want to upset her children before they turned 18 by telling them they were adopted (a very normal thing btw, even for "normal" adopted families). How would either of these damage her credibility? Has she ever been asked and lied that she was a bio woman? Has she ever been asked and lied that her kids are adopted? I don't need to look it up, because only a psychotic reporter would even ask that.

Even if your unhinged conspiracy was 100% true (it is not), it would do nothing for her credibility. It could actually be argued that it helped her credibility by protecting her children (again this is not the case, this is a pure thought experiment).

Quote: Gandler

B. Her kids are clearly hers.

How could you possibly know that?

Quote: Gandler

How would her credibility be an issue?

A. She is clearly a woman, and has been her whole life.

B. Her kids are clearly hers.

But, let's assume that both of your conspiracies are true. She was trans, and lived her life as a woman because that is her identity. And, she did not want to upset her children before they turned 18 by telling them they were adopted (a very normal thing btw, even for "normal" adopted families). How would either of these damage her credibility? Has she ever been asked and lied that she was a bio woman? Has she ever been asked and lied that her kids are adopted? I don't need to look it up, because only a psychotic reporter would even ask that.

Even if your unhinged conspiracy was 100% true (it is not), it would do nothing for her credibility. It could actually be argued that it helped her credibility by protecting her children (again this is not the case, this is a pure thought experiment).

Anytime in the future that she would contradict a statement she made in regards to her sex or her children could prevent her from becoming President.

Lying would hurt her credibility.


No one here knows her sex or if those are her genetic children.

If someone does, I want an autograph.

Quote: DRich

How could you possibly know that?

Appearance, consistent story of her kids and relationships. Again, it could all be a ruse to cover an adoption of a kid who had a resemblance. But, this is unlikely. And, again even if it were true, this would not be a credibility issue.

I tend to take people at their word when they have been consistent for decades and many others validate their story. And, the only plausible circumstance for why she would lie (not the case) is an honorable one, so it is not an issue.

For example, my Director told me on the phone he was going to Subway for lunch today. I did not see him go there or ask to see his receipt. But, he eats there nearly every day, and there would be no reason to lie about such a thing, so I can say with confidence that he ate there. Can it all be a ruse to make me think he ate at Subway instead of somewhere else? In fact, could he have been carrying around empty subway bags for the last two years to make me think he eats there nearly everyday while really eating somewhere else? Could he have further briefed his secretary to make seemingly offhand comments to me on how much he likes Subway randomly over two years to make this story more believable? Maybe, but what would he have to gain about lying about such a thing?
Can I say with "scientific certainty" (to use your term) that he ate there? No.

But, I also can't say with "Scientific Certainty" that New Zealand exists (I have never been there, I don't have anyone close who has been there, I have never read a peer-reviewed paper about New Zealand, I have never even seen a travel catalogue or ticket offerings for New Zealand. For all I know they shot the Lord of the Rings in Middle Earth and made up the existence of a far-off country to hamper suspicion that they have access to Middle Earth).

We can go on and on with examples of what we actually know firsthand versus assume or deduce. For most of our lives we make deductions by linking pieces of information, and if there is no reason to doubt, we form a conclusion. We have very little firsthand knowledge of almost anything that "we know." And, if you really want to get pedantic even firsthand knowledge is questionable (what if you had a realistic dream, hallucination, intoxication, medical condition, saw a realistic trick that you were convinced was real in your head when it was not, etc..... Some people live their whole lives convinced of something that they saw that never occurred, and often get called a fraud, when in reality it happened in their mind so they were not being deceitful, sometimes you see this with various lie detection technology)


So yes I am convinced that her kids are hers. And, it is such an inconsequential fact to my life, that if it turns out she was lying for their protection, I would not care at all (again in some ways that is morally commendable, the Ned Stark esque lie to protect a child). The fact that this is the big Michelle Obama alleged scandal, shows how unscandalous her life is. Like seriously, she may be trans and may have adopted her kids? Where do you guys come up with this stuff.....