democrats are a sorry lot

@averagejoe1 said
Lost their minds fighting in a war, some are suicidal . Where have you been? Not fighting, that's for sure.

How could you be so thick as to miss the point of that question and still be able to breathe.

@averagejoe1 said
How do you get that the Banker owns the cookies? As a matter of fact, the analogy, such as it is, says the immigrant is going the get the cookie of the worker.....So, it would seem the worker owns the cookie, not the banker.
You see now that the analogy is quite incomplete. Please ask him for more info,, he will likely not respond to me.

Should read :
The banker steals 19 of the cookies gives two to the GOP and eats the rest with their collusion, meanwhile the GOP also point their finger at the migrant in order to distract the workers attention from the theft

@kevcvs57 said
Should read :
The banker steals 19 of the cookies gives two to the GOP and eats the rest with their collusion, meanwhile the GOP also point their finger at the migrant in order to distract the workers attention from the theft

Yes, I must be thick, indeed. I still don’t get you, mainly because you suggest that the GOP is fraught with collusion. I will not write a long paragraph about the collusion that went on with Hillary, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. You are welcome.
Maybe you should start a new thread, about anything. I’m thinking about nominating you to replace Marauder, but you need to polish up on links !!

@suzianne said
"The banker takes 19..."

As I said, learn to read.

OK. TAKES the cookies. …..from where they rest (I assume on a plate) on the table? An action he takes after seeing the cookies? Yes, it would have to be after, because they would already be sitting there for him to reach and take them.
I think that you are leaving out a step, can you help me here.? Maybe Sonhouse can weigh in.

@averagejoe1 said
Yes, I must be thick, indeed. I still don’t get you, mainly because you suggest that the GOP is fraught with collusion. I will not write a long paragraph about the collusion that went on with Hillary, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. You are welcome.
Maybe you should start a new thread, about anything. I’m thinking about nominating you to replace Marauder, but you need to polish up on links !!

No one needs links to put you back in your idiots box son, your pathetic intellect and pathological lying requires a fly swatter not a rebuttal

@kevcvs57 said
No one needs links to put you back in your idiots box son, your pathetic intellect and pathological lying requires a fly swatter not a rebuttal

Oh yeah?! Prove it with facts!!!!!
Oops lost my head for a moment, I hope I don’t appear angry. There’s nothing worse.

@kevcvs57 said
No one needs links to put you back in your idiots box son, your pathetic intellect and pathological lying requires a fly swatter not a rebuttal

why you queer folk so angry all the time?

@mott-the-hoople said
why you queer folk so angry all the time?

How's that Durham investigation going?

@averagejoe1 said
Oh yeah?! Prove it with facts!!!!!
Oops lost my head for a moment, I hope I don’t appear angry. There’s nothing worse.

Why should we bother trotting out facts when you lot just ignore them?

@suzianne said
How's that Durham investigation going?

I guess the same way as did the putting Hunter in jail for a felony of falsifying a gun application, and also for throwing a gun in a dumpster near a children's school.
So these are facts, Suzianne, and you are ignoring the facts just as you say we do in your post just above.
Do you think hunter should face a sentence by violating two laws on the books....criminal code? Do you think he should get a pass? Tell us why he should not be tried on these two counts?
And we conceded the findings of the Durham report, it is what it is. He is smart, probably right. So, that is that.
Standing by. Marauder gone, you may have some shoes to fill.

@averagejoe1 said
You need to improve on analogies, I love analogies. You leave out if the immigrant is legal, you leave out from whence the cookies come (who owns them), and what the cookies represent. You say the immigrant has one cookie. Who has/owns/controls the other 19? ? Please complete your analogy.
All I gather, with all due respects, is that someone (a banker in this case, ...[text shortened]... a grade schooler) has told the worker that something he has may be taken away by an immigrant. ??

The immigrant could be a citizen and the analogy holds fine. The immigrant worker (a baker) made the cookies. The banker owns the cookies because the government says he does (he paid 3 cookies to the government under the table via lobbying to get that judgement).

Who "controls" the cookies? The government does for the benefit of the banker.

@mott-the-hoople said
why you queer folk so angry all the time?

They aren't. You only see their anger because you are an a**hole to them.

@averagejoe1 said
Lost their minds fighting in a war, some are suicidal . Where have you been? Not fighting, that's for sure.

They're losers, right?

@athousandyoung said
The immigrant could be a citizen and the analogy holds fine. The immigrant worker (a baker) made the cookies. The banker owns the cookies because the government says he does (he paid 3 cookies to the government under the table via lobbying to get that judgement).

Who "controls" the cookies? The government does for the benefit of the banker.

OK. something to chew on, thanks.
A legal immigrant, Hussein, is a baker and makes 20 cookies. Later,
Hussein is sitting at a table with Mr Moneypenny, a banker, who illegally acquired the cookies. He had paid graft to a govt person to get the plate-full from Hussein, and it was put upon the table.
Since the govt was paid to put the cookies into the name of the banker, the govt is not in the picture anymore, and is not at the table. The govt or its officer is not at the table.
So we have this question by the honorable ThousandYoung. ....
WHO controls the cookies? The govt is not at the table, and has received consideration for their part in the banker getting 17 cookies. Though illegally acquired, banker has possession until this matter goes to court. Hussein could blow it wide open, or just let the person with the cookies, Mr Moneypenny, control the cookies.
The government does not control the cookies. The govt is gone. The phrase 'for the benefit of the banker' makes no sense, as banker has already benefitted by receiving the cookies, before the govt stepped out of the picture.
This has been unfair, as I used to write ethical analogies for law school students. But it wold still be entertaining to get your response. Feel free to change the premise to arrive at a conclusion more in keeping with the point you are trying to make.

@averagejoe1 said
OK. something to chew on, thanks.
A legal immigrant, Hussein, is a baker and makes 20 cookies. Later,
Hussein is sitting at a table with Mr Moneypenny, a banker, who illegally acquired the cookies. He had paid graft to a govt person to get the plate-full from Hussein, and it was put upon the table.
Since the govt was paid to put the cookies into the name of the ba ...[text shortened]... change the premise to arrive at a conclusion more in keeping with the point you are trying to make.

Well clearly you weren't teaching math. 19-3=16

How is the government not part of the picture? If Mr Hussein picks up the cookies and walks away government men with guns will arrest him and return the cookies to the banker Mr Moneypenny.

If the police don't get involved the younger, stronger and tougher guy decides who gets how many cookies. Or the baker just keeps them all for himself.

WHO controls the cookies? The govt is not at the table

Well Mr Moneypenny is not at the bakery so I guess Mr. Hussein gets all the cookies and the banker gets nothing. Good luck to Mr Moneypenny in maintaining his lavish lifestyle in this anarchist society you are describing.