Hi all

We hopeless optimists such as ME believe that you are capable of doing better.

Fuck U and the horse you rode in on...WE object.

"U R A optimist.....I want to be one"

A recent movie.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
JPP is almost all chaff no wheat.


OH DAMO!!
Click to expand...
That cunt Phan filtered out the word ass. I happen to like them.

77783617007-donkeys-picabo.jpg


1753173992518.png
 
I guess if there's any doubt the OP is a sock it's gone now. With no further participation it must have been a new person who was scared off. A sock would have gotten busy right away.
 
ULTRA MAGA said:
I guess if there's any doubt the OP is a sock it's gone now. With no further participation it must have been a new person who was scared off. A sock would have gotten busy right away.
Click to expand...
Socks control JPP. She'll be back next time she gets banned from DP.
 
Scott said:
Walt seems to avoid insulting others. A
Click to expand...
No, he doesn't; his posts are insults to sane people everywhere. So are most of yours. You seem to be very young and naive, as opposed to old and criminally insane like your left wing buddies here, so it's still possible for you to grow. You will have to shed that indoctrination you received in school, though. And avoid the conspiritard crap; that's just for low IQ lazy idiots who can't think for themselves and they're frankly just weaklings who secretly hope there really is a Big Daddy out there ruling the world, because they're terrified of the fact that it's mostly chaos created by many competing interests and none of it is 'centrally organized and prearranged'. Avoid fake 'history' like the plague; trying to substitute it for real history is a very very bad thing to do, since it leads to fake 'solutions' as well. That's why all ideologues rely entirely on it to sell their idiot bullshit.


And here is what bothers me so much about modern "scholarship." At what point did history become ethics? Why should we subvert the elusive search for facts to moralist concerns? So what if they are on or off the hook? If you want to be a preacher, go preach. If you want to save the world, go into politics. If you want to invent a world free of evil, take prozac. It was said in Ecclesiastes and it still is true today,people suck. They did then, all of them. They do now, all of us.History is the history of self-interested, competing, aggressive,selfish, murderous humans. At what point did it become a morality play? -Dave WIlliams, George mason Univ.
 
EdwinA said:
Scott said:
I have to give you -some- points here. Like me, Walt seems to avoid insulting others.
Click to expand...
No, he doesn't; his posts are insults to sane people everywhere. So are most of yours.
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose a person could take any disagreement as an insult- I think we might even be able to agree the dictators tend to do that on a regular basis. I'm referring to crass insults, such as personal attacks and, to a lesser extent, insulting a person's ideas, with words that are clearly meant to insult, such as "idiotic", "stupid", etc. Using such terms against an ideological opponent doesn't help the discussion- generally, it either shuts down a discussion right away or it leads to one's ideological opponent engaging in the same, which tends to shut down any productive discussion as well.

The key to a productive discussion is to avoid such insults and instead focus on why we disagree with our ideological opponents as well as trying to understand why our ideological opponents disagree with us.
 
Tobytone said:
There's a lot here and definitely much disagreement. I'm not sure you listed any real examples of agreeing with the right, but if you think you do, that's your call. My point is, most of your party isn't up for debate anymore. If you actually agree with the right on something, you're out in the woods with no one to back you up. That's not a dig, just a sad truth.

Like I said, your positions scream Democrat, a party that's lost its grip on reality. I predict they'll keep pushing away supporters unless someone with common sense, broad appeal, and enough guts to call out the craziness of the new faces running the show steps up. They need to lay out a vision that's not straight-up communism, one that leads with ideas different from Republicans but still respects the Constitution and aligns with what most of their voters want.

Again, a healthy two-party system matters. Right now, the Democrats are so far gone and corrupt, if they got power, they'd rig the game to never lose again, turning us into another communist disaster like every other time it's been tried. If you think your party's still capable of real debate, you're being naive. Just keeping it real.

Not long ago, if you asked any Democrat if they loved this country, supported the Constitution, and backed free-market capitalism, you'd get a firm yes every time. That's what being part of a country means. You support it, love it enough to fight for it, and work to improve it, not tear it down, condemn it, or try to transform it instead of reform it.

Your mention of the Electoral College shows where you're at on understanding our system of government. It's either ignorance or worse. If you know what scrapping the Electoral College would do to our system and still want to change it, you're in the wrong country, try France. Good thing it's hard to change by design. Our founders knew people like you would come along, sore losers blaming the Electoral College for their losses, trying to convince folks to ditch it. Your idea isn't new. It's a tired argument born from ignorance or bad intentions.

It's great you think you can bridge the left and right but saying it doesn't make it true. Give me one example of something Trump has done that you agree with. No buts, ifs, or almost. He's done plenty most sane Americans can get behind. Let's start there, and please spare me the anecdotal stories, I know it's a favorite 'debate' technique of the left, but it's not productive, it's almost always a waste of time that deflects from the actual argument thinking that some real or made-up story about the exceptions or the expectational should drive the debate. Just to be clear, I or nobody I know is against immigration, it's illegal immigration we are against, something I'm really get sick of, morons or straight up liars conflate the two, usually intentionally, knowing they're very different.

And let's move away from your dream of turning our representative republic into a democracy, which would gut the core of our brilliant system. Bring it down to something smaller, like no men in women's sports. That's an 80/20 issue Democrats ignore their voters on, pushing this insanity. Can you say you agree with Republicans on this and think Democrats have lost their minds?

I suspect you can't, but if you do, you will further alienate yourself from your current mess of a party and will get no quarter here from your compadres, which is my whole point. Your party is brain dead and spiraling into disaster, at least in the short term.
Click to expand...

A Trumper accusing anyone of losing his/her "grip on reality" is like listening to Adolf Hitler accusing someone of antisemitism.

MAGA has left reality completely. It is in fantasyland...and has nothing going for it but projection...WHICH IT USES CONSTANTLY.
 
Ross Dolan said:
A Trumper accusing anyone of losing his/her "grip on reality" is like listening to Adolf Hitler accusing someone of antisemitism.

MAGA has left reality completely. It is in fantasyland...and has nothing going for it but projection...WHICH IT USES CONSTANTLY.
Click to expand...
Here comes the legendary two-time letter to the editor writer with some never before seen claims with a style only a two-time letter to the editor writer could possibly bring to this forum.

Can you say senile old dumbass liptard parrot? Take a nap, get a diaper change, have your pudding, and then give it another shot.
 
Tobytone said:
Here comes the legendary two-time letter to the editor writer with some never before seen claims with a style only a two-time letter to the editor writer could possibly bring to this forum.

Can you say senile old dumbass liptard parrot? Take a nap, get a diaper change, have your pudding, and then give it another shot.
Click to expand...
Grow the hell up, Child.
 
Scott said:
insulting a person's ideas, with words that are clearly meant to insult, such as "idiotic", "stupid", etc. Using such terms against an ideological opponent doesn't help the discussion- generally,
Click to expand...

It's really easy; just don't post idiotic and stupid crap, is all. Apparently that's impossible for many here, especially left wingers and conspiratorial, since stupidity and idiocy is their entire repertoire; just a fact, is all.
 
EdwinA said:
Scott said:
Well, I suppose a person could take any disagreement as an insult- I think we might even be able to agree the dictators tend to do that on a regular basis. I'm referring to crass insults, such as personal attacks and, to a lesser extent, insulting a person's ideas, with words that are clearly meant to insult, such as "idiotic", "stupid", etc. Using such terms against an ideological opponent doesn't help the discussion- generally, it either shuts down a discussion right away or it leads to one's ideological opponent engaging in the same, which tends to shut down any productive discussion as well.
Click to expand...
It's really easy; just don't post idiotic and stupid crap, is all.
Click to expand...

For starters, not everyone agrees on what "idiotic or stupid crap" is, but I believe there's also the far more important issue, which is what interjecting words of this nature does to a conversation.

I decided to look up the terms idiot and stupid. The term idiot came up as I imagined it would on Wikipedia's article of the term:
**
"Idiot" was formerly a technical term in legal and psychiatric contexts for some kinds of profound intellectual disability where the mental age is two years or less, and the person cannot guard themself against common physical dangers. The term was gradually replaced by "profound mental retardation", which has since been replaced by other terms. Along with terms like moron, imbecile, retard and cretin, its use to describe people with mental disabilities is considered archaic and offensive.
**

Wikipedia seems to be saying that the term nowadays is just used as a pejorative. That in turn, suggests that it's a productive conversation stopper.

Wikipedia's entry on stupid is more nuanced, but I think at its core, it follows the same pattern, that is, using the term against others or against their arguments tends to be a conversation stopper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top