Cancel 2016.11
Darla
"Passive manipulation" is mansplaining. How about diplomacy, cooperation and compromise?
Great post Christie, thanks.
"Passive manipulation" is mansplaining. How about diplomacy, cooperation and compromise?
this is how I know you only give lip service in support of the constitution.Again.... IF we could go back in time, and IF we had captured a terrorist in a foreign country, and IF we knew they had information regarding some kind of upcoming terror attack... would it not be worth waterboarding, if it prevented the tragedy in Boston? A simple yes or no will do.
When it comes to preventing terrorist attacks which kill and injure many people, I am very much an 'ends justifies means' kind of guy, I am sorry if that offends you. I don't consider waterboarding "torture" because it is "interrogation" and I don't believe it should ever be used by local law enforcement on US soil and US citizens, or as a form of punishment for any crime.
"Passive manipulation" is mansplaining. How about diplomacy, cooperation and compromise?
Yes, but this is separate from that. I mean that we all know this is was a man. We know nothing else, but we know this. And it will turn out that we were right. It's a man.
There is a high probability it is a man, but there is no guarantee. People like Kathy Boudin, Judith Bissell, and Jane Alpert exist. Women kill, some even use bombs, like the aforementioned Judith and Jane.
The reality is, yes, it is very likely to have been a man but assuming that we "know" this is just as foolish as hoping "he's" white.
Those are all forms of passive manipulation.
I really don't know what to make of a lot of what you post.
One thing has zero to do with the other, and no, it's not.
It wasn't a comparison of things that are the "same" or "have something to do with each other"... It was a simple analogy of something foolish somebody "hoped" and something some claim to "know". Both are foolish and about this particular attack, those are the only connections.
My point was, no... we don't "know" that it was a man, you have simply judged what we "know" based on a quirk of language where we use a generic "he" when we don't know an identity.
Way back, President Obama's good friend, Professor Bill Ayers's fellow Weatherman girlfriend blew herself up making a bomb, so women can be dastardly at times.There is a high probability it is a man, but there is no guarantee. People like Kathy Boudin, Judith Bissell, and Jane Alpert exist. Women kill, some even use bombs, like the aforementioned Judith and Jane.
The reality is, yes, it is very likely to have been a man but assuming that we "know" this is just as foolish as hoping "he's" white.
Cooperation and compromise are not manipulative.
That depends on the intent.
Way back, President Obama's good friend, Professor Bill Ayers's fellow Weatherman girlfriend blew herself up making a bomb, so women can be dastardly at times.
Well it turns out that it was Chechen terrorist. WTF? What did we ever do to Chechnya?
Well it turns out that it was Chechen terrorist. WTF? What did we ever do to Chechnya?
I stand corrected. They are Chechyn immigrants. Still a lot to learn about how and why they did what they did.Not Chechen terrorists. They lived in the Boston area for years. The younger brother went to high school here.
Also, too, apparently they have him surrounded. Watching on TV.