Total posts: 5,890
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Well Biden was right about that by saying the quiet parts out loud. NATO and the USA are united in keeping Russia supplied with Oil to keep the war going.
He didn't say anything remotely like that. That is your steroid fueled confirmation bias at work.
The video I posted came from CNN. There's also a much more critical video calling out Biden's idiocy on MSNBC. The commentary after the clip from CNN talkers had much better points than you have in this thread, but I guess that makes them "far right" because they criticized Biden.It wouldn't surprise me at all that you would evolve to start calling CNN and MSNBC "far right"But you would have known that had you bothered to click the link rather than spout nonsense about "mah right wing"
First of, let me repeat: I don't give a shit about your videos. This is a debate site. If you're too lazy to type your own arguments then I have no interest in taking my time to watch them. Make an actual point and if your video supports your point then I might take interest in it.
If the commentators in your video had better points than me then go ahead and explain them. Can you do that, or did it just sound good to you at the time so you didn't bother to give it any more thought?
I never called nor implied anything close to CNN and/or MSNBC being far right. You have an amazing ability to make shit up and convince yourself it's true.
There seems no limit to the flat-earthing required to defend Biden these days.
I don't give a rats ass about Biden. I care about logic and reason. Provide some, and then maybe we can have a honest rational discussion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
These are not my points. They are Biden's points. If you don't want to address the points Biden made about minor incursions, then you have no reason to be upset about the consequences of Biden's actions that directly led to the invasion of Ukraine.
First if all, again, there were no points made. Stop posting videos and start typing actual words that you can be held to account for and then we have have any honest and productive discission.
Regarding Biden's "minor incursions" remark, it never ceases to amaze me how the political right will forever hold onto every dumb comment and misspeak coming coming from the left while completely ignoring the asinine, batshit crazy, and revealing things said by the last republican president without a peep.
It was stupid for Biden to use that phrase. Not because it revealed anything significant or consequential, but because people liked you would use it for years to feed into your made up BS about him.
If you actually listened to the conversation in context you would know that what Biden was talking about was not his position on what the US would do but whether NATO would be unified in it's response. Here's the full quote:
"Number two, we’re in a situation where Vladimir Putin is about to — we’ve had very frank discussions, Vladimir Putin and I. And the idea that NATO is not going to be united, I don’t buy. I’ve spoken to every major NATO leader. We’ve had the NATO-Russian summit. We’ve had other — the OSCE has met, et cetera.
And so, I think what you’re going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do, et cetera."
Clearly, he's talking about a situation where Putin does something far less drastic than what we're all envisioning leading to a situation where other countries might be on different pages about what to do. Pretending that this was somehow giving Putin permission to invade Ukraine is just stupid.
But why worry about facts when you can just cut out a soundbite to feed your prapaganda BS?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Why should we waste our money and suffer economically trying to “protect Ukraine.”
We're not defending Ukraine, we're defending democracy and sovereignty. Why is that so difficult?
Created:
-->
@oromagi
There's nothing easy about it....but Ukrainians are standing tall right now. What chance did the minutemen have against the redcoats? What chance did that student have against the line of tanks in Tiananmen Square? The Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto?
These are not the same thing. I admire the Ukrainians for their courage and resolve but it’s different when you are fighting back against an enemy force invading your home. That to most people is worth dying for regardless of the outcome. Standing up to a brutal dictator only to be swept away, never seen or heard from again while life goes on as normal for everyone else is a far less rewarding gamble.
Not saying that there isn’t truth to the notion, the people of Russia do certainly have it within their grasp to stop this monster but if it were that easy there wouldn’t be people like him in power anywhere.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
What is really funny is that the fervent followers of Biden also believe the "green energy investments" would have stopped Putin from achieving dominance in the region, when it objectively achieved the exact opposite. Gas prices are at a all time high along with demand.
Crazy how US investments in green energy caused a global spike in gas prices…
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's videos of Biden speaking. I don't blame you for ignoring Biden right now.
I’m not ignoring Biden, I’m ignoring your nonsense. This is a debate site, if you can’t be bothered to make a coherent point or at the very least explain what it is your videos are supposed to prove then Im not going to waste my time watching them. That’s common sense, unless it makes you feel good to tell yourself I’m running scared from your intimidating intellect, in which case go on and delude yourself if that’s what you need.
Do you actually have the courage to listen to Biden speeches without vomiting?
I have the courage to state clearly what I believe and defend it. I’m waiting for you to show the same.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
we democrats believe that the people are ultimately responsible for the behavior of their leaders.
Not when their leaders rule by brut force. It’s easy to claim the people should revolt but the world doesn’t operate like the Borg, any individual Russian who stands up to Putin ends up dead or missing. It’s easy to sit in the high horse when this is not the reality you face.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
The irony of this statement lol
Do you have anything of substance to contribute, or do you just get a kick out of pretending you did?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Is this a serious question? Really?1) none of this:or this:or this:
If you have an actual point please make it. Not watching YouTube videos to try and figure out what cockamamie idea you’re trying to convey.
2) A position of strength begins with this:A) Insist NATO take Putin more seriously than America does and insist NATO honors its obligations by backing it up with European military contributions.
Asking our NATO allies to uphold their military obligations is good, but Trump’s threats to back out of NATO or not uphold the US’s obligations weakened NATO, not strengthened it. The entire organization and everything it sets out to accomplish is based on trust - If one nation is attacked the rest of us will be there to defend it. Trump’s flagrant disregard for that obligation forces every NATO nation to think hard about whether they should be there for us, which could cause the entire alliance to collapse. This is one of the main reasons Putin wanted a moron like Trump in the Oval Office and was no doubt salivating anytime he would hear what Trump has to say about NATO.
B) Insist Germany AND America become less reliant on Russia for energy.
You mean like investing in alternative energy sources?
C) Kill hundreds of paramilitary Russians if they try to interfere in the Syria war to prove your resolve in a bloody and real way in a language Putin understands.
What does this have to do with Ukraine?
Created:
Posted in:
I would love to know if any of these people arguing “Russia invaded because Biden is weak” could explain what exactly is it that Biden is not doing which Trump would be doing to stop all this. Besides of course ranting with all caps on Twitter.
When Putin invaded Crimea Trump blamed Obama, not Putin. When Putin launched a cyber attack against the US, Trump took Putin’s denials over the unanimous conclusions of US intelligence. But Trump is the one Putin is afraid of. Ok bro.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Do you have any actual facts and logic to back that up, or is that just what you heard on Hannity?Only precedent. Putin already did it under the weak leadership of Obama/Biden.
So no facts, no logic. Just “dUh PuTIn dId iT uNDer oBamA AnD bIdeN sO iT MusT bE BecAuSE tHEyre WeaK”
Got it.
Here’s a crazy thought… the US is not the only other country in the world and the US President does not rule the world. There are plenty of other non-US countries out there so not everything that happens in the world is directly because of the US. I know American arrogance combined with your obsession of Biden is a difficult thing to combat, but just try.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
All of this is happening because of Biden’s weakness and incompetence in foreign policy.
Do you have any actual facts and logic to back that up, or is that just what you heard on Hannity?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
Which is the main point of the quote. And honestly, I think Trump in office over Biden would've resulted in a tougher America with a better chance of peace (albeit uneasy) between the two countries.
Please define “tougher America”.
When doing so, I would love to know how you account for the fact that Trump was literally everything Putin sought when he conducted an operation aimed at helping him get elected.
- an anti NATO President, check.
- an isolationist President, check.
- a President who feuded with all of our Democratic Allies while siding with every world autocrat, check
- a President who thought nuclear proliferation was a good thing, check.
- a President who would divide the US to the point where no President could ever reach 50% approval again, check.
Combine this with Trump’s public fawning over Putin for everything from his brilliance to his toughness, the way Trump’s face would literally light up when he saw Putin walk in the room, the way Trump took Putin’s side over that of his own US intelligence agencies in front of the entire world, the way Trump consistently went to bat to get Russia back in the G7 (they were booted out in the first place because of what they did to Ukraine), and then there was that whole thing about Trump taking a secret meeting that to this day no one in the United States knows what was said except the translator who was sworn to secrecy and who’s notes were confiscated by Trump.
When you argue that Trump was somehow tough on Russia, that Trump was the thing stopping Russia from taking these actions, please explain how you logically justify that. Inquiring minds would love to know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
From what I can tell, I don't think he's endorsing the invasion.
He’s doing what he always does, have it every way all at the same time.
On the one hand he’s gushing over how smart and savvy he thinks it is in clear admiration of the cleverness of Putin’s gaslighting. When someone executes on your specialty better than you, admiration is one typical response.
On the other hand he’s trying to play it tough as if Putin was so afraid of Trump that he never would have tried this if he were still in office, even though he’s gushing over it now as he has over Putin for the prior four years.
Trump doesn’t have political positions, he has emotional calculations of what’s best for him which he defines as whatever makes him look strong and like a winner. Why people think there is more to this man is beyond me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Russia argues that crimea has always been Russian especially since it gave it to Ukraine in 1954
I don’t think that’s how giving something away works.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Biden is the best thing to ever happen to Putin.
Pretty sure we won’t be seeing Biden take a one on one meeting with Putin with no Americans in the room except for a translator who’s notes Biden would confiscate and destroy after swearing the translator to complete and indefinite secrecy.
And then there was the whole thing about the US President loudly voicing his opposition to NATO, you know, the organization that was literally founded to combat Russian aggression against the rest of the world.
All of this and so much more, all done by a man Putin’s government conducted an entire operation to get elected, and then got elected. A man who to this day from the pulpit of a former US President serves as Putin’s mouthpiece for Russia.
But Biden is the best thing to ever happen to Putin. Ok bro.
TDS is definitely a real thing, it just doesn’t mean what you think it does.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
You missed the part where she called the police to attack her for exposing the truth.
Her literal request as stated to the officer was: “can you please ask Ms. Vaught to leave?”
That’s not an attack genius.
As DD pointed out, jailing your political opposition creates a risk of spawning even more tyranny to fight tyranny.
No one talked about jailing anyone. You are just making shit up.
“can we have a police officer please" is the catcall of tyranny. MLK and Ghandi agree.
The police being used as a weapon of tyranny has actual history which is what those like MLK reference, like back in the day when police departments were highly aligned with the KKK. You should study this stuff before you speak so you don’t sound so ignorant.
Created:
-->
@Incel-chud
That's the issue he mentioned. Why are you defending her hypocrisy?
Read what I wrote. Again. Then explain how you arrived at the conclusion that I was defending her hypocrisy.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's really sad when tyrants have a meltdown like this. Perhaps the leftists on this site can offer better strategies to crush political opposition?
It’s a video of a parent deciding to argue that the school board shouldn’t be enforcing mask mandates because she had a picture of one of the members not wearing a mask. That member took personal offense and asked her to leave, some of the other members spoke up in the parent’s defense so the officer walked away.
Only in your warped mind does this video qualify as being worthy of discussion about tyranny and crushing political opposition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
You reject religion, science supporting conservative positions, and more because they don't align with your cult of reason
I do reject religion, but my point has nothing to do with that. I was talking about what most religiously inclined individuals credit their own beliefs towards and how that feeds into my point. You disregarded all of that to push back against a point I never made.
The conservative positions you claim science backs have nothing whatsoever to do with science because they aren’t questions science could possibly answer. I already explained why. You disregarded all of that to push back against a point I never made.
And “cult of reason”??? That right there proves my point further. If you don’t accept reason as your foundation of acceptable thought then you are a right brained individual, aka you are an emotional thinker. The point I’ve been making about the right from the start, so I don’t know what point you think you’re making.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Webster's dictionary is not proof of anything. The words it adds and definitions it adds are based upon popularity and pop culture not science. Take the word gay for example: A totally made up definition accepted by pop culture.
Where do you think language comes from?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
"We’re not talking about man vs women. We’re talking about male vs female." Its the same god damn thing. No matter how much you say it isn't they are the same god damn thing always have been and always will be.
What part of:
in order to evaluate whether it’s a delusion, you have to use THEIR definitions, not yours.
Do you not understand?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Gender theory also has science because we need to distinguish scientifically how many sexes there are and the fundamental differences between them.
There is science in how to make brownies, that doesn’t make the question of whether I want a brownie for dessert a matter for science.
What is so complicated about this?
It is a pretty good argument. God is philosophically logical. The Christian religion is logical.
The claim I made is that even most religious people claim to believe based on faith, which is definitionally opposite from logic.
Can you at least respond to the claims I’m actually making?
Well if we go by that definition than Trumpet is not a figurehead.
A member of congress just a few days ago recorded a video of herself outside Trump tower to tell her voters how much she supports Trump. This in response to a primary challenge all because she distance herself from Trump after his supporters attacked the US Capitol.
Tell me more about how he’s not a figurehead according to my definition.
The fact is that the left is obsessed with idealist "plans" that are just not realistic.
Putting your ideas on paper to show how you actually plan to accomplish them is what separates politicians who are serious about governing from those who are just spouting nonsense to rally their base. The fact that you put the word plan in quotations proves my whole point.
It’s a college course. It has no obligation to change its name as a response to bad faith political activists trying to turn it into the next right wing bogeyman.Keep refusing my question. Keep saying that it is a college course. Keep saying that those opposed are simply bad evil nazteesz. Never think.Let's try this one more time. What does Critical Race Theory mean? Surely there's meaning behind words. Right?
My god dude, you can’t be serious.
“Critical race theory (CRT) is a cross-disciplinary intellectual and social movement of civil-rights scholars and activists who seek to examine the intersection of race and law in the United States and to challenge mainstream American liberal approaches to racial justice.”
Do you have a problem with Google?
Yes you can do all that. And we should do that! We should ban transgender nonsense. We should stop anti-white propaganda. We should not focus on race.
Because you know, free speech. N stuff.
Trump is a product of neoconservatism, not genuine right-wing politics.
He’s a product of everything I’ve been saying for the reasons I said it. None of which were addressed on any part of that last point I made.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Lets send all of these people to the homes of Bernie Sanders supporters, because they claim it's bad that there are orphans and homelessness and they want OTHER people to do something about it.They want everybody, including themselves to do something about it
What is so difficult to understand about this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Men have dicks and women have vaginas, pretending to be a woman when you have a dick and vice versa is delusional.
We’re not talking about man vs women. We’re talking about male vs female.
Do you know what the word delusional even means? Clearly by your commentary you don’t.
Delusional is when the ideas you believe are disconnected from reality.
In order to determine what someone believes in order to evaluate whether it’s a delusion, you have to use THEIR definitions, not yours.
If I told you the earth is flat, am I delusional? Well, that depends. Am I talking about the planet we all live on or am I referring to the nickname I gave to my ping pong table at home? You can take issue with the nickname of my ping pong table, but calling me delusional because you refuse to acknowledge what I’m actually saying is ridiculous.
This process is an exercise of logic. No one is claiming anything here to be a matter of biological fact. I already provided you with the dictionary definition of gender. The rest is logic 101, including recognition of the fact that your definition of gender is irrelevant to this discussion.
If your position is so rock solid why are such tactics used.? You tried to shame me by calling me a dick because your other arguments are based on pure emotion and no biological scientific bases.
I called you a dick because that is the purely logical conclusion of this exchange. Not as an assessment of your character (I don’t know you well enough to judge) but certainly in this context based on your commentary here. Let’s examine further;
Dick: “a mean, stupid, or annoying man”
So do your actions in this context qualify? Yes. Why?
What’s stupid is being unable to recognize the fact that in order to assess whether someone else is delusional you must first understand what they are saying by applying their definitions, not yours.
What’s mean is pretending that you do not understand what someone else is saying or purposefully misconstruing it in order to give yourself an excuse to not have to respect their wishes by identifying them how they would like to be identified.
Given your commentary it could only be one or the other. And given the word “or” in the definition, either of these will suffice.
This isn’t an appeal to your emotions, just a statement of fact. You can care about it or not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Being a man and thinking you are a woman is disconnected from reality. End of story.
They don’t think they are a woman. What is so difficult about that?
Changing the definition of a word is neither factual or scientific.
All words are made up, and definitions change over time.
Calling someone delusional because their statement doesn’t meat your definition when it’s already been pointed out to you that the definition they are using is not the same, just isn’t serious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
I didn’t prove anything you said, you don’t listen.
Your claim was that these people are delusional. To be delusional is to be disconnected from reality. But to support this claim you argued that gender and biological sex mean the same thing. Well, not only is that factually untrue if you actually picked up a dictionary, but more importantly… the people identifying as a different gender from their biological sex are not using the definition you are.
Using a different definition as you does not make them delusional. They understand full well what their biological sex is and how it compares to the gender for which they identify. What they are expressing is how they feel about it, which is a completely different thing. Calling them delusional for that is like calling someone delusional for liking a ham and cheese sandwich.
So once again, you’re right that you have no obligation to respect their feelings and instead have every right to be a complete dick.
What part of this is so difficult?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Yes, because it was never socially acceptable until recent years for people to identify by gender any differently than their biological sex. It’s not that people have changed, it’s that we’ve learned more about the struggle people go through. Caitlyn Jenner didn’t just wake up one day and say “I’ll give this a try”, she struggled with it her whole life but just couldn’t do anything about it till now because of people like you. Well thankfully that’s changing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Ya,they are the same thing, have been since the dawn of man.
They’ve always been the same to people who don’t know how to read.
I’m just going to leave this here so you can ignore it.
Gender: “either the male or female division of a species, especially as differentiated by social and cultural roles and behavior”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
It’s not a delusion. Why is this so difficult?
Do you understand the difference between biological sex and gender?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
We’re not talking about opinions, we’re talking about respecting someone’s wishes to be referred to by their self identified gender. But again, if that’s too much for you then that is your right… to be a dick.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I agree with your assessment, but add that the ability to predict what someone will say is not the same thing as understanding them (not sure if that’s the implication here but it’s what it sounds like). It’s like the abortion narrative where the right hates the idea of women having a choice on what to do with their bodies while the left just wants to kill babies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
inability to mentally model the opposition
I agree with everything you listed for both sides, but I don’t know what you mean by this one and am curious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Saw this clip and thought of our conversation. I didn’t devote much time responding to your point about Trump’s intent because that wasn’t really the point, but that argument doesn’t work either. Chris Hayes does a good job of explaining why here:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Society has no obligation to placate to your personal delusions.
Correct. It’s your right as an American to be a complete dick.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's ridiculous (and lazy) to reduce the general problem of resource shortages to "humanitarian issues." If that were the case, Ukraine could be judged to be oppressing Russia by not sharing it's bounty with Russia;
What is your purpose in this site? Because serious conversation is clearly not it.
I didn’t reduce anything, that’s ridiculous. I was describing the core issue at the southern border which is fueling everything going on there. And your comment on Ukraine does not follow. At all. This whole post reads like really bad satire.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
Then don’t accept it. Simple.
Created:
Posted in:
Yes abortion and gender theory are in line with Science, both disprove leftism.
The abortion debate is entirely about whether a woman’s right to her own body outweighs the rights of a fetus to life. There is nothing about this which science can possibly answer.
Gender theory is defined as: “an interdisciplinary academic field devoted to analysing gender identity and gendered representation”. Again, has nothing to do with science.
You could at least Google the terms before making such claims.
AGAIN, if you consider logos to be truth, then these Right-wing Christian positions would be logical,
Logos: “the divine wisdom manifest in the creation, government, and redemption of the world and often identified with the second person of the Trinity”
So in other words, if you believe in god then your belief in god is logical. Not a great argument.
Yes I am serious because he is basically a Marty for the left now. You don't have to be overtly political to be a figurehead for a political movement. He is treated like a idol now
When I talk about a figurehead I’m talking about someone the political movement appeals to, follows, and uses as a metric for whether one is right on a given issue. It’s a person you are not allowed to break with or you will be deemed an “other” by your own side. To put George Floyd in that category is absurd. You really need to drop this argument.
HE IS LITERALLY A DEITY IN AMERICA TODAY. YOU CAN NOT CRITICIZE HIM.
A deity and a martyr are two completely different things.
I will admit that the right is more fond of having a leader(not figure-head as you put it)because they accept hierarchy, in which there are leaders and there are followers.
Then why are we still talking about this?
There's plenty of examples out there like how Trump flamed his opponents for not having a plan for immigration.
I asked you for an example of a right wing politician paying a political price for not having an actual plan and your response is to talk about Trump going after his opponents.
Not only does this fail to address my question, but further emphasizes everything I’m talking about with regards to the need for a figurehead or leader if you prefer that term.
What does Critical Race Theory mean? It is obviously left vague to mask it's anti-white identity. And I am aware it is taught in schools and has a real definition, BUT THE NAME is kept vague.
It’s a college course. It has no obligation to change its name as a response to bad faith political activists trying to turn it into the next right wing bogeyman.
We elect government officials to pass policy regarding social issues. Which are more important to the average voter on both sides than economic positions. Logic is intertwined with social policy as well and to claim otherwise is absurd.
I suppose you’re right about that. You can for example legislate bigotry against transsexuals by passing bathroom bills to protect girls in bathrooms despite no actual problem being solved. And you can pass laws saying you’re not allowed to teach CRT in grade school classrooms despite no grade schools schools actually teaching it. And you can legislate white fragility into law by passing bills saying you’re not allowed to make anyone feel uncomfortable by talking about race.
The point wasn’t about what can or can’t be legislated, but about what the issues are. The idea of government is to protect the well being of its citizens. The question is, what does that mean and what does it look like?
For one side it means things like healthcare, infrastructure, minimum wage, etc. For the other side it means combating things like gender pronouns, cancel culture, and wokeness, which is especially ironic since this is the same side that says government should stay out of our business. If there’s one theme that seems to be coming from the right, it’s to own the libs.
You talk about the right not following Trump but rather Trump reflecting what the right is about. That only proves my point further. We have never had a more emotional less logically driven president in our history. The guy literally threatened nuclear war over Twitter, and no serious constitutional scholar would ever claim they believe he’s ever read the constitution. The guy was the most buffoonish clown we’ve ever seen when it came to talking about policy, but this is the guy the right fell in love with. You cannot tell me that showes anything other than the very thing I have been saying here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
You literally repeated the allegation in your opening sentence. Logic would dictate what what followed was your attempt to prove it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
Ok. Let me know when the evidence free crisis actors narrative becomes front center in the administration’s push for war with Russia, as opposed to, you know, the actual invasion of a democracy by a dictatorship.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
No it’s protect our sovereignty just like we’re protecting Ukraine’s. The left wants everyone to come cause poor people. They deserve a better life.
The comparison of the southern border and Ukraine are just idiotic.
The southern border is a crisis of people trying to escape the hell hole they live in, it’s a humanitarian issue. The crisis in Ukraine is about a dictator trying to use his military to take over another country.
You can’t be serious.
Gun rights is after seeing history show the first step to tyranny is taking guns away. We just saw it in Afghanistan too. Taking guns is ground in virtue signaling with “weapon of war and assault rifle”
There is no serious movement anywhere in America to “take your guns”. This is a right wing bogeyman created by the NRA to manipulate right wingers into buying more guns, and it works beautifully.
Wait, you wanna cut spending? Let’s get at it then. Also I’d argue everyone cares about taxes lol. A wise man once said there are only two things certain in this world. Death and taxes.
Of course, no one wants to pay taxes. But there is a problem… taxes are how we pay for everything the government funds. Like you know, the military budget Trump blew up after passing his tax cuts.
Earlier I described one of the key traits of a logical person as someone who is able to understand and accept truths even when it goes against their personal well being. This is one example where right wingers only care about how things impact themselves and don’t consider the big picture.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I could just as easily say that abortion, gender theory, and more are invalidated by science and I would be just as correct.
No, it would just show that you don’t know what any of these terms mean and especially that none of them have anything to do with science.
As for election fraud-you think that votes were added in at 4 AM after a pipe burst in Atlanta and counters prevented commissioners from coming are legitimate? Is this was logic is?
Again, you are defining logic as in leftism/atheism is right and right-wingers and dumb and stupid.
No, I’m defining logic as a process where a conclusion is drawn from a given set of premises. The fact that most religious people do not believe based on this process, and the fact that the political right is overwhelmingly tied in their politics to their religion is one of many indicators I listed that logic is not prioritized with regards to right wing politics.
Um are you serious? Do you see the left and their relationship with MLK? That is probably their biggest figurehead in USA at the moment and they direct schools to teach in a matter that worships this guy. How about George Floyd?
George Floyd of a symbol of police abuse in America. Painting him as a figurehead is just plain stupid. No one even knows what his politics were or if he had any particular political opinions. You can’t be serious.
MLK seems to be just as much of a figurehead on the right as he is on the left, every year republicans politicians pay homage to legacy and quote him on Twitter as much as democrats do.
The fact is that he is revered nationwide for the change he lead in American life and the fact that he sacrificed his life for it. He’s not the leader of the left. The only issues his words are used as ammunition in are issues that used to be settled which right wing politicians have suddenly changed their stance on. The voting rights act for example which passed the senate unanimously in 06 which not one single republican will vote for today. So no, this is not the left’s figurehead as much as it is a reminder of the rights extremism and hypocrisy.
And no, a figurehead in and of itself is not a “breach of logic”. The point is that people who care about logic focus on arguments, not deity like figures. If we believe in an idea we believe it’s right because it’s right, not because someone said it. MLK is a terrible comparison because all of society used to accept the core message he was known for advancing. Reagan was always a right wing figure. And Trump as a figurehead? That’s a whole different level of absurdity.
No you don't have to spell out your ideas. Elizabeth Warren got exposed for not having a plan but it happens on the right as well.
Name one right wing politician who would pay a political price for not having a specific plan to resolve an issue.
CRT is unknown because the left can't define it properly. What the fuck does "critical race theory" even mean in the first place? That's on the left for choosing such a weird policy name and masking it up as racial justice when in reality it's just anti-white propaganda.
My god dude.
CRT is an actual course taught in actual schools. Schools as in college. It has a real actual definition, you would know that if you ever googled it.
So no, it’s not a policy name, was not “chosen by the left” and being anti-CRT has nothing to do with actual policy.
Cultural issues>policy issues BTW
If there’s one thing you’ve said that has proven my point this is definitely it.
We elect government officials to pass policy, not to argue on Twitter about wokeness or cancel culture. This is the opposite of a logical position.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
It's called click bait.
Then stop blaming everyone else for being baited by it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
If it was a message to the kremlin and not a pretext for war delivered to the American people, why was this handled publicly instead of with a phone call?
If it were a pretext for war the administration would be asking congress to authorize it, just like they did with WMD’s.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
The title of your thread says “I just saw some reverse racism”. If you don’t want people getting caught up in the validity of your claims then you should keep them out of your title.
I think based on your story that you handled yourself mostly appropriately, but I don’t think you should have beaten the guy. A shove to the ground sounds like it would have sufficed.
I cannot think of any reason the women would have been arrested. And I see nothing that changes if everyone was white.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
Asked to provide proof, the government refuses and this is very reminiscent of the WMD DEBACLE.
No, it’s not.
The WMD debacle centered around the fact that the Bush administration *used the intelligence* it had as a pretense for war in Iraq. They didn’t just tell us about it as an FYI, they needed us to give them permission through our representatives to authorize this war.
The Biden administration is putting their conclusions out there as a message to the Kremlin that we know what they’re up to. The American people can take it or leave it, it makes no difference.
If Biden comes back and says we need to go to war with Russia *because of* this false flag and refuses to share the intelligence, then you can start to draw the comparisons.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Am I walking backwards, whilst facing forwards,Or am I walking forwards, whilst facing backwards.
Both.
And neither.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
Let’s just assume that after hours of working to concoct some story that makes sense we come up with nothing… now what? What can we conclude from this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
Since none of us were there and we have only one side of the story to work with, there’s nothing any of us can contribute aside from baseless speculation. But I will just say that all you’ve presented is an argument from ignorance. None of us know what the woman could have done to get herself arrested, that doesn’t mean she was arrested because she was white. I’m pretty sure if a black person did the same thing you would have no issue pointing this out, the difference being that black people see this type of thing happen to them all the time, so at least they have that angle.
Created: