Blue states are totalitarian dictatorships!

So says the Cato institute in a survey of freedom by state.

New York and California are the most oppressive in the 48, followed by the usual suspects on the Left.

https://www.freedominthe50states.org/

Seems the Left just loves a good dicktatorship.

NO not at all! Seems the CATO Institute is a biased source- THAT'S ALL THERE IS TO THIS!

YOU produced a biased OPED to the forum that erroneously makes wild and ridiculous claims about BLUE STATES! IT's a fucking LIE! FAKE NEWS!

WHAT ELSE IS NEW AND BIASED? LOL!

Got anymore FAKE NEWS for us?
 
If Koch Industries is your go to source for political/societal analysis this survey is RIGHT up your alley. It is made by Cato Institute, a Koch creation.

OMG! Not the George Soros of Conservatives! But I do admire your attempt at a Thought ending cliche though.

aa472a029fd9102e8bd407ae14dcf41c.png


It's a form of logical fallacy where the user (you) puts forward a statement intended to dismiss the original argument out-of-hand without ever actually addressing it. In this case, thus: The Koch brothers were involved, therefore your argument is tainted and invalid because of that...
 
NO not at all! Seems the CATO Institute is a biased source- THAT'S ALL THERE IS TO THIS!

YOU produced a biased OPED to the forum that erroneously makes wild and ridiculous claims about BLUE STATES! IT's a fucking LIE! FAKE NEWS!

WHAT ELSE IS NEW AND BIASED? LOL!

Got anymore FAKE NEWS for us?

Then find where the bias is and point it out. Your saying there's bias and that this is "fake news" does not make it so.
 
Not when it's used as a title of a thread on a political chat forum in a matter-of-fact manner.
Not that I recall.

The Left has no sense of humor...

If I meant it as a factual statement I wouldn't have included the exclamation mark as that is an inappropriate form of punctuation to end a factual sentence with. It shows that the statement was made as hyperbole or exaggeration.
 
OMG! Not the George Soros of Conservatives! But I do admire your attempt at a Thought ending cliche though.

aa472a029fd9102e8bd407ae14dcf41c.png


It's a form of logical fallacy where the user (you) puts forward a statement intended to dismiss the original argument out-of-hand without ever actually addressing it. In this case, thus: The Koch brothers were involved, therefore your argument is tainted and invalid because of that...

Koch was more than involved. It runs the thing. It's as if someone offered A Daily Worker warning on the evils of capitalism. You evidently don't know what a logical fallacy is - when it comes to opinion the objectivity of the source is always relevant. If you would like an example of a true logical fallacy take a look at the constant Right wing references here to BLM when the subject is the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
 
Koch was more than involved. It runs the thing. It's as if someone offered A Daily Worker warning on the evils of capitalism. You evidently don't know what a logical fallacy is - when it comes to opinion the objectivity of the source is always relevant. If you would like an example of a true logical fallacy take a look at the constant Right wing references here to BLM when the subject is the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

Doesn't change a thing that I said. This is just more misdirection without substance. If the study is wrong, point out where. Dismissing it because of the source is a genetic fallacy as well. It is a thought terminating cliche because you invoked the Koch's into it. If a Daily Worker reported on the evils of capitalism I'd crush their argument, not dismiss it, as being from a kook source which is what you are doing.
 
If Koch Industries is your go to source for political/societal analysis this survey is RIGHT up your alley. It is made by Cato Institute, a Koch creation.

And they try to do economics without math


The Austrian school
 
Back
Top