Total posts: 5,890
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
It wouldn’t be so frustrating if you had enough evidence to meet the burden of proof you give yourself when you make a claim, such as “a god exists”.
You’re confusing atheists with atheism. Atheism has no worldview because that’s not what it is. It’s the rejection of theistic claims. Any attempt to add a worldview into that is wrong because there is nothing about any worldview you add that is necessarily a part of atheism. This is like the question “what do all women want?”. The very act of answering this question with a desire you believe to be common amongst all women is itself demonstrative of the fact that you don’t understand the scope of the question.
If there is one thing most atheists accept as a foundation of their worldview it’s skepticism. So if you’d like to have a conversation with atheists about what they believe while sticking to this subject, spend some time discussing epistemology. Things what kind of evidence is needed to support various claims, where is the line between accepting a proposition vs not accepting vs denying it as false, and where the default position lies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
As we can see from the above, two party politics is divisive. .....You've got your inveterate right and you've got your inveterate left......
This is exactly what makes this so irritating. This isn’t two sides playing the same game. What the democrats are doing doesn’t even compare to the republicans and their base.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
On December 17, 2020, gas was also around 2 dollars a gallon.
That’s what happens when the economy is essentially shut down to the point where no one is traveling, completely tanking oil demand.
Not sure what this has to do with the conversation.
Created:
Posted in:
Elon Musk recently claimed he would switch from previously voting democrat and vote republican this election claiming the democrats have become the party of divisiveness.
The GOP has no party platform, no policy ideas to actually help Americans and spends all of its energy attacking the left as opposed to providing any serious governing solutions. Their leading candidate for 2024 is still lying daily claiming the democrats stole the 2020 election. Their slogan which was even uttered on the house floor is a euphemism for fuck Joe Biden. The narrative among much of the party base is that democrats are the party of pedophiles, and all the party does is blame Biden for everything, even a baby formula shortage. But this is the party Musk will turn to…
Does anyone agree with him?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
If all 30 of those women have decided that they do not wish for their body to be used to carry the pregnancy to terms, I’d rather perform 30 1st trimester abortions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
you seem to have no concept of jurisdiction
A state within your country, who’s state constitution begins by declaring its constitution is subservient to the country’s constitution, would fall within that country’s jurisdiction.
This conversation has gone completely off track. It began with you defending the notion that the civil war was about states rights before it was about slavery, but you also point out how limited the federal government’s authority was supposed to be at its conception which is clearly not where it stayed. That alone proves the point; If states rights were such an issue the civil war would have been fought a hundred times over by now but it hasn’t. It never mattered until and since the north said you can’t own black people anymore.
Created:
Posted in:
There was definitely massive fraud in the 2020 election, but not in my race, I won fair and square
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
and this is fundamentally distinct from the question of self-identification
Hitler was the good guy in his own book.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
attacking states for breaking away from the union would be like russia attacking former soviet-union states for breaking awayor the european union attacking member-states who wish to withdraw from their union
What would you accept as a justified response of New York City decided to succeed from New York State?
Now imagine if the reason they succeeded was because they wanted to imprison the Asian population and rape all the women, and the state said no.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
When I say "attacked" I mean physical attack, or threats of physical attack, or malicious deception.
First off I have no idea how malicious deception has anything to do with a physical attack, but more importantly, none of these concepts have anything to do with the principal you espoused.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
And the civil war was about states rights (to allow slavery for example)the two are not mutually exclusive
The civil war was about states rights in the same way that Playboy Magazine is about art.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
They may not have the same degree of education a large portion on the left do, but they are still important to the livelihood of the nation.
Of course they are, that’s why this is so concerning. I never suggested these people weren’t important, I’m saying that the combination of ignorance plus being easily manipulable is being taken advantage of full stop by politicians who care nothing about the country but rather their own political careers. As a leftist it is infuriating because I know the political message these people are selling is pure nonsense, and now we have the proof that the vast majority of them understand it as well, even though truth is we knew that already.
The GOP in many ways reminds me of that twilight zone episode with the child who had the power to kill anyone who disobeyed him. So you see the adults pretending to be all for everything he wants meanwhile they’re all looking at each other knowing it’s insane. The politicians are following the children.
You see it as GOP vs Democrats. I see it as Establishment vs everyone else.
“Establishment” is a meaningless term. What matters is not whether the current political climate is established, but rather whether what is established is good. And within our current political norms and expectations you are always going to find some good things and some bad. “Establishment” is just a vapid catch all phrase to mean “I’m against bad”. Well so is everyone, so you haven’t argued a thing, yet this works amazingly well on the political right which goes back to my point about being easily manipulable.
Moreover, it’s been about 6 years since the Trump takeover of the GOP, so Trump is the quintessential establishment republican today. This is even playing out right now ironically in the PA Senate race where the fringe far right candidate is surging to the top in the polls to the point where even Trump is saying she’s too extreme to win in the general. Turns out the “outsider obsession” is now coming back to bite them.
But to the point, we can label it however we want, I’m talking about the political left vs the political right. If you think Trump should still be president after Jan 6th but Biden shouldn’t because of Afghanistan… you live in a different world. Not just from the left but also from most of the right.
TDS does persist in right-wing elites. Best example is Liz Cheney. In Congress she voted practically 100% with Trump. But the moment an opportunity came to uplift her profile, she did. Something her own constituents don’t agree with her on.
This statement is self defeating. Her political career is in the hands of her constituents, and by all accounts it appears likely over because of her position and advocacy against Trump. How is this “lifting her profile”?
loyalty. That’s my strongest trait that I personally value in an individual. If I’m doing something wrong, I want you to call me out on it. Not in public, but in private. Tell me your concerns. I don’t want unconditional loyalty. But people like Brian Kemp, who Trump carried to the Governor’s office are ungrateful. Privately talk behind Trump’s back. It loses my complete respect.
Politics is supposed to be the means by which society discusses, debates, and ultimately resolves its issues. Loyalty has absolutely no place in that. The only people a politician should feel a sense of loyalty towards it’s their constituents.
Trumps demand for personal loyalty is one of his most grotesque character traits as a politician.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
One nice thing about Trump was that he was open to all sorts of Covid treatments like remdesvir and others if it could save lives. Once Biden got in, there was a significant censorship of any talk outside of vacc$ines, cause of course...big Pharma.
Everyone is open to different COVID treatments, what any rational person is against are treatments that are ineffective and potentially harmful. That’s why we have clinical trials/studies and rely on data. All Trump did was jump to support every drug that any lunatic doctor on Fox News propagated, that’s what the current administration stopped.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
I have tried to have a good faithed conversation with you before, but it hasn’t worked out. Neither of our minds are gonna be changed
Why do either of our minds have to change? What’s wrong with a deeper understanding of alternative points of view? If your position is right wouldn’t the attempt only further demonstrate it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Thanks for that, but it’s not quite what I was asking.
Let me put it this way; we all have a working model of how we think the world operates. I see the Republican Party mainly as the party of the stupid people. That’s not to say everyone who votes republican is stupid, that’s just a generalization of the base at large. The recent recordings coming to light only further add to why I see the world this way because what they show is that even the people at the very top of republican politics agree with me when it comes to the previous administration, so it turns out that so called TDS extends to them as well.
This is exactly what we would see if my view is accurate, those who know better selling BS to those who don’t because they are easy to manipulate.
What I’m asking here is, what is your view of this? It’s easy to just write it off with no further thought by saying you don’t care what they think, but something here has to be true. Is it some kind of conspiracy by the left to put people in power that agree with them even if they pretend not to? Does TDS really persist even amongst the right wing political elites? How would you explain that? Is the Trump base and only this relatively small group the ones who get it and the rest of the country just idiots? Some other explanation?
How does your “model” account for this?
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
Trump destroyed ISIS. #PromisesMadePromisesKept
He actually didn’t, but even if he did, it still has nothing to do with everything I just said which you not surprisingly ignored.
Everything looks fine to me.
Well dUh I know that, it was in fact my point. If it’s Trump it’s fine, if it’s Biden it’s a catastrophe to carry all the way to the next election.
But like you said and are demonstrating here; reason, logic, consistency… these are all meaningless. You’re just fighting the battle so your team wins. Serious good faith conversion be dammed.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
I think you meant to say "democracy" because ISIS is still around. FOX News just stopped reporting on them.
No, Trump said he defeated ISIS so it is so. If they pop back up (on Fox News) it’s because Biden bad.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
exposing jaw dropping hypocrisyThere won't be any more rules for thee and not for me status quo hypocrisy once the current FBI is dismantled.
I was talking about your jaw dropping hypocrisy, I don’t know how the FBI came into this conversation.
Actually I do, it’s just another right wing bogeyman used to distract from the conversation.
The thing I don’t understand is why you bother, you don’t have to chime in to the thread, you could just not say anything, so why pretend you’re engaging when you’re clearly not?
Don’t bother answering, not interested in another deflection. Thanks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I was talking about Trump’s inflating and deflating assets, much of which is undeniable public information. But you know that already, you just pretended to not get the message so you can avoid exposing your jaw dropping hypocrisy which shows just how little you actually care about the issue you are now pretending to care about.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I wouldn't have to say anything if the Felons were arrested as the law requires.
The law also says it’s a crime to inflate or undervalue your assets, as well as to try and coerce election officials, but I somehow missed your thread ranting about how there have been no consequences there.
You don’t really care about this.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
So you’re just ignoring everything I say to focus on whether McCarthy will have a job, which is completely irrelevant to this thread. Got it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
No, it’s not, because this isn’t about McCarthy. It was about what the McCarthy tapes and Meadows messages show; that nearly every prominent Republican out there including those selling their message agrees with the left on how dangerous the previous administration was. So my question was, how do people like you make sense out of this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Influencing an appointed Judge of the court on case rulings destroys the very foundations of law. How would you like it if your life was on the line in a court case and a mob protested outside the Judge's home in order to have you executed despite the legal arguments of your case?
Most people, including staunch left wingers disagree with the crowds that gathered outside the houses of the justices. Even the Young Turks, “home of progressives” talked about how unbecoming it is to do what they did. This isn’t a left vs right issue, this is an extremist vs non extremist issue, so to even bring it up in this conversation is a bit disingenuous.
But while you have plenty to say about how bad this was, you seem to have almost nothing to say any Jan 6th rioters, which is what makes this so ridiculous.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
In all seriousness, this is the stupidest post I’ve ever read on this site.
Trump is well known for being the internet’s biggest bully, a childish man who spent half his time in office tweeting insults at everyone he didn’t like from politicians to world leaders to celebrities. But you have a problem with Joe Biden being insulting.
Trump used the pardon power to get all of his closest friends and associates off the hook for crimes they committed on his own behalf, but you have a problem with your fantasy of Biden aiding criminals.
You don’t seem to take issue with rioters beating their way past Capitol police as they literally invaded the US Capitol during the certification of a US election forcing the United States Congress to have to evacuate the building. But you take issue with people peacefully protesting outside the houses of Supreme Court justices (not one violent incident occurred).
You talk about rules for me and not for thee? You are the poster child of it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
GP this week:"Heavens to Betsy! They're calling us extremists! How unfair!"
The same people who support Trump over Biden are always the same people complaining that Biden is not a unifier. The double standards are beyond words.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
This was clearly Biden's "Basket of deplorables" moment.
But we’re the snowflakes. Ok bro…
Created:
Posted in:
Over the past few weeks we’ve seen an onslaught of tapes and messages released publicly detailing what went on behind the scenes with both House Republicans and President Trump’s allies in the aftermath of January 6th. So what is the take away from all this?
Personally, nothing. Anyone paying attention knew all this already, it’s just jarring to actually hear and read it and recognize that this is real life. But to any rational person who hasn’t been paying attention the take away is obvious; the GOP at large doesn’t give a rats ass about truth or reality, they know how batshit crazy all of this is but they also know they have to go along with it if they want to remain in power. Also that right wing news is Republican Party propaganda full stop.
My question is to those who continue to defend Trump, argue that January 6th wasn’t a big deal, or pretend that left wing news is worse… how do you make sense of all this? How do you deal with the fact that all of the people leading the party you defend don’t even believe the ideas they are selling you? How do you continue to believe everyone else is suffering from TDS and you’re the normal one when the people on top of your own party agree with people like me but pretend not to just because they want your vote?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Most people don’t want to ban abortion entirely but also don’t think it should be legal up to the moment of birth. What do you think the limit should be and why?
I say it should be legal up until the point of viability. My position is based on the woman’s right to her own body, so if the fetus can survive outside of it then that no longer applies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Conservallectual
DDO really shouldn’t be compared to DART unless you’re comparing DART to the old DDO. I enjoyed that sight but once the bots got to it and they were either unwilling or unable to do anything about it everyone abandoned ship so it hasn’t been the same ever since. Now it’s just a shadow of what it used to be.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
BTW, the hypocrisy of the right wing’s fascination with the Afghanistan withdrawal never ceases to amaze me. When Trump pulled US forces out of Syria completely abandoning the Kurds and leaving milirary equipment behind for it to fall into the hands of ISIL fighters, no one on the political right gave a rats ass, but here we are a year later and the right still talks about Afghanistan as if that pull out was the worst thing we ever saw. It wasn’t. If Syria happened under Biden you would swear this alone was reason enough for all of us to recognize how incompetent and dangerous he is which is why he needs to go. But it was Trump, so no one cares.
You don’t really care about this.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
Maybe the inflation, horrible Afghanistan withdrawal, same number of deaths for COVID (with a vaccine), completely open border, etc.
Presidents are not gods. They don’t control humanity, they control one branch of the federal government of one country. So in order to evaluate the performance of a president you need to have the bandwidth to think beyond “inflation high, Biden president, therefore Biden bad”. The world is not that simple even if you are.
Take COVID for example. Biden took office during the midst of the holiday spike in deaths which was the worst peak we ever saw. Deaths from COVID lag, so the spread of the virus took place while Trump was still in office even if the actual deaths occurred under Biden. Does any of this factor into your numbers? No, of course it doesn’t.
But the reality is that it shouldn’t, because that’s not how any rational person evaluates a president. We look at what they actually did. Trump was COVID’s best friend, he couldn’t have done more to spread the virus if he tried. From holding supper spreader events before there were any vaccines, to telling everyone to just open everything up, to attacking anyone who took the virus seriously, to politicizing masks. To argue that there is some equivalence between Biden’s handling vs Trump’s on the basis of death counts is absurd.
It’s also self contradictory. To evaluate a president’s handling of COVID based on death counts is to concede that government policy impacts its spread, yet these are all the same people claiming that masks and lockdowns don’t work. Either we can control its spread or we can’t. Pick one.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Honestly I do find it weird that you hold Biden in a higher regard than his own party has.
If you pay attention to the context of my points about Biden I don’t hold him in high regard at all, I just find it baffling how anyone with an IQ above room temperature can think he’s worse than Trump and find no explanation for that other than pure hypocrisy, which is the thing I’m actually attacking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
To be clear there isn't exactly a "right to free speech", there is a right to not be attacked for speech.
This conversion is not about physical retaliation, so “attacked” in this sense is just an overhyped word being used to mean “criticized”.
Therefore your statement is that in principal we have a right to not be criticized for our speech. But the right to criticize someone else is literally what free speech means, so this statement is self refuting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It doesn’t say that a state government can’t dissolve special jurisdictions or that the governor can’t be peeved at a company and look for ways to persuade them of the error of their ways.
The amendment speaks solely to governmental action that abridges free speech
An example of governmental action that abridges free speech would be for a government to pass a law revoking benefits a company was previously receiving as retaliation for that company’s criticisms of their actions.
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The majority isn't always wrong, often it is right; but as a deductive argument it is fallacy because sometimes the oddball is Galileo.
We’re not talking about deductive arguments, we’re talking about inference and induction. In the absence of subject matter knowledge we turn to those who have it because that gives us our best chance to achieve the desired result. This is what I’ve been saying and nothing I’ve said remotely suggests that one must be right because they listened to the experts.
and despite what your preferred list of fallacies might tell you
You are not the only one thinking for yourself here. Get over yourself.
I am saying that all appeals to authority are fallacies because the only irrefutable difference between an authority and a false authority is sound/strong argument on the subject itself
I’ll remember this the next time I get legal advice from a competent attorney.
The issue is that if the subject matter is complicated enough (which follows from the fact that we would consult with the experts in the first place) then you need expertise in order to understand the arguments themselves. So you are partly correct, we don’t publish scientific findings because Scientist X said so and he’s a trusted authority. He became a trusted authority by making the case which the rest of the scientific community was able to verify.
And notice the last sentence… the scientific community… there is a reason we use peer review and not public polling.
Also I’m curious… do you think the justice system has it completely wrong to use expert witness testimony?
An expert in a debate will have the best arguments and if he does not he is not the most expert after-all.
That’s not true. Experts have expertise in their fields, they don’t necessarily have strong rhetorical skills and certainly do not always have the ability to deal with ignorant people making absurd arguments. Debate is itself a skill and that’s not what they were recognized for excelling in.
Anyone can make an argument that sounds good to the lamen, just listen to flat earthers.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
You are right, FDR for example was far more aggressive in exercising his democratically bestowed authority. In fact, no president is like any other.
Is this even supposed to be a serious thought? I mean why bother?
Maybe you should edit the wiki page on Authoritarians to include Trump's name since you seem to be the only one with this idea.
Along with every expert out there on authoritarianism.
I don’t need to edit the page cause I actually read it.
No, the current president thinks we can all fly in magical electric cars while families can't eat. That's sooo much better in a presidential leader.
And here’s the difference between us, my example came out of Trump’s own mouth while you just make shit up because it goes with the caricature in your news bubble.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Google authoritarianism.I did
Then learn how to read. No former president in recent memory compares to the last one. He’s in a league of his own.
And BTW I’ll take the current president’s memes over the last one any day. At least the current one doesn’t think clean coal when they take it out and scrub it with a brush.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Google authoritarianism.
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
anyone who permanently surrenders the responsibility of discerning truth to others is worse than an idiot. Idiots are often confident in their own foolishness, which makes them wrong but not always easy to manipulate.The problem with "experts", much like religions, is there is so many (if you define them as people who will tell you what to think with confidence); and if you won't think for yourself you can't differentiate between them.
Trusting experts is not the disregard of reason and logic, it is the result of using it. There is a reason human civilization has thrived. There is a reason we put a man on the moon and satellites in space. No one person figured out everything needed to accomplish this. We did it because we understand that the world is an extemely complicated place, and those who have focused their lives in particular feilds of expertise are by far the best voices to discern what is real from what is fiction. This is basic common sense.
The irony here is that you think you are somehow different - like you're thinking for yourself while the rest of us mindless bots just follow others. The simple fact is that the overwhelming majority of information you consider knowledge you, just like the rest of us, learned from someone else. How do you know George Washington was a real person? Were you there? No, you were told he was. How do you know Antarctica exists? Have you ever been there? No, you were told it exists, and shown images you were told was Antarctica.
The only difference between us is in who we decide to trust with the information we consider to be factual and more importantly, how we go about determining who to trust. That's where the "I don't trust experts" idea goes off the rails. There is nothing wrong with skepticism, but that is something entirely different.
If you do not immediately see this explain the means to differentiate between an appeal to people and appeal to authority.
I don't know what "appeal to people means". There are appeals to authority, and then there is the appeal to authority fallacy, which I already explained is when you appeal to someone who is not an authority. The difference between these two is the process by which we tell who is an authority.
The first is about credentials, including experience and proven results. If someone has a track record of accomplishing the desired result, they are likely to continue getting said results. That's basic inference.
The second is about access. If I go to a doctor and he tells me my blood pressure levels are not safe, they're probably not safe. I trust him as the authority in this situation because he's the only doctor I have access to in that moment so I am reasonable to take his conclusion as accurate. But if I go to 10 doctors and 9 of them tell me my blood pressure is high while 1 says it’s low, to assume it’s low I’m ignoring the bulk of experts in favor of the assessment I want to hear. That’s not rational.
And yes, there will always be some doctor or some scientist out there who will tell you what you want to hear, that’s why we look to the bulk of expertise in order to determine what the authority is there. To do otherwise is claim humanity itself is not only incapable of understanding a particular field, but also that we are not smart enough to know we don’t understand it. That takes quite an argument to justify.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
What they care about is irrelevant.Really? So you don't think the Democrat party cares about helping people over their mad lust for power anymore?
What they care about is irrelevant.
Pretty sure I just finished explaining this.
The idea that we are better off turning to people who know what they're doing than trusting or own tuitions is your idea of an echo chamber.No, it's the ideas of lazy individuals who support authoritarianism over individual responsibility.
I'm pretty sure the last time you had a toothache you went to the dentist. Arguing that it's somehow a bad thing to take the position that those who know what they're doing should be listened to would be incredibly stupid if you actually believed it, the problem is that you don't. You know full well that this is the only reasonable way to approach the world and it's why human civilization has thrived. It's only when it comes to politics that you suddenly think differently.
But we're the ones suffering from TDS.
And BTW, Google authoritarianism. Learn what it actually means, then take note of how one of the last two presidents meets all of those check boxes perfectly. Also take note of how it's not the president you complain about as you complain about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
What's your definition of a racist? Is it anyone that is right wing on BLM?
Add I said in my first post, I think of it in terms of the attitude one has towards other groups. The point of my post however, is that it's far more complicated then a simple definition.
Created:
-->
@Conservallectual
my method is supposed to be anti-empiricism/scientismAn example of my razor in work: how do we prove god exists?first we will examine it with the scientific method - nope, this is a metaphysical claimsecondly we examine logic - kalam cosmological argument, yep we proved it.
That's not how logic and reason works.
To attack/support a claim you need to address the claim on its own plain. "The earth is round" is a factual claim deduced from observations within reality. So to attack/disprove it you need to use observations within reality.
"Murder is wrong" is a philosophical claim, so to address it you need to establish your underlying philosophy and why it should be accepted.
"God exists" is a claim about empirical reality, so you need to use empirical reality to prove it. It cannot be proven solely with abstract logic.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
It is. Both parties don't care about you. They care about power.
What they care about is irrelevant. What matters is what they do. And what democrats have actually done is not remotely similar to your delusions of GOP control.
Thanks for the demonization.
You can take it as demonization or recognize the absurdity of the position. Not surprising you chose the former.
Lol! You are the kind of person who would pick a court appointed attorney on credentials alone over one with no credentials and a perfect court record. There are many who live in a dream world of their own mental superiority.
The usual unserious and frankly stupid response I've come to expect...
All of this is common sense.To people in an echo chamber, it is
Right. The idea that we are better off turning to people who know what they're doing than trusting or own tuitions is your idea of an echo chamber.
It's sad that there are really people out there like this. No wonder America elected a man who thought it would be a good idea to nuke a hurricane as president.
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
"experts" I dismiss as I dismiss all appeals to authority.
I mean no offense by saying this, but this is why Trump supporters are widely considered to be idiots.
If you need an attorney, you hire someone who passed the bar exam. If you need surgery, you go to someone with a doctorate. Appeal to authority is only a fallacy when you either cherry pick or appeal to someone who is not an authority, as in someone who does not have expertise.
All of this is common sense. It'll never cease to amaze me how people are willing to abandon that in order to hold onto their own political ideology.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
I don't know why you are covering for a woman calling a legally elected president "illegitimate". That is incredibly damaging to the democracy you purportedly love so much. I don't see how free speech is even in question. Yes, what she said is free speech. It is also the free speech of any Republican who says that Democrats removed votes and replaced them with fake votes.
Do you... seriously... not know the difference between:
"candidate X shouldn't have won the election"
vs.
"candidate X didn't win the election"?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
The crazy thing is, you actually believe this is the equivalent of what democrats have done.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
No one is black and no one is white.
And the civil war was about states rights
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I pretty much agree with everything you said. The other thing about cancelling student loan debt, what happens then? Do we continue giving out student loans and expecting the next generation to pay them off after giving this one a free pass? And do we not think giving a pass or even talking about it is driving many in debt to hold off on paying them back hoping they won't have to?
The whole system makes no sense, but this is the result of years of terrible policy. As left wing as I am I do often find it remarkable how little thought seems to be given to the unintended consequences of many noble efforts. How did no one realize that opening the door to large swathes of the population to go to college would not send college costs skyrocketing?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
"Dont sensor Disney" is a cartoonishly ignorant way to characterize what we've been talking about. I suggest you read and respond to the actual points made if you'd like to have a serious conversation.
Created: