T 2.0

espola said:
"Trans men" (cis women who have been altered to have some degree of function and appearance as human males) and "non-binary people" (those who do not fit in either of the two slots that t imagines are the limits of biology)? Some of them have functioning wombs, some do not. Given the current state of conception medicine, it is not even necessary to have a vagina to conceive and/or give birth.

I can see that deep thought is hard for you. However, it is still possible to have pleasant conversations with you, such as what I experience when flea-combing the best one of the three kittens (don't tell the others!). The second best has fur like a mink, and the third runs away from the comb.
Click to expand...
Cis women? Just stop. You've never used that term in your life. YOU know what a woman is... even if you're insane political party doesn't.

You asked for 3 examples and I gave them to you.
 
watfly said:
When its opinion, the messenger matters. What he posts is just political, philosophical, bitter ramblings. There is no there, there, in his posts. He assumes facts not in evidence. I don't recall anything in the constitution that the government's responsibility is to protect citizens from predatory capitalism (which he doesn't define and I suspect he has a very liberal definition). This is just some theoretical socialist bullshit. No examples, no evidence. It's not like this guy is Neil deGrasse Tyson, he's just some social media hack that photographs birds. (end of my rambling)
Click to expand...
They want so badly to have their leftist Joe Rogan. Just like Trump’s “bad polling” and Newscum’s “rise”, they’ll just keep repeating it. It’s probably the best strategy they have. Heaven forbid they actually consider they support crap policies and the messenger won’t matter.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
First off he expects some degree of intelligence and intellectual integrity from his readers. Second, what did he get wrong? We all see the dismal reality of what Trump is doing. The fact you can’t and won’t is on you. Like a poet, a comedian or a song writer that nails the essence of an issue it’s the art not the artist. But yeah, I don’t expect a maga to understand.
Click to expand...
Again what a bunch of pseudo intellectual babble that liberals are suckers for. This guy is just pandering to the lowest common denominator lefty mentality aka "orange man bad".

I already told you what he got wrong. There are no constitutional protections against capitalism, so the basis for his argument is based on a flawed premise. He also uses capitalism in the perjorative which is a non-starter for good faith debate.

If you want to talk about the goverment getting Intel stock, then I'm against that.
 
espola said:
JW is a messenger whose messages often inspire deep thought.
Click to expand...
And they wonder why their losing? You know who else tries to inspire deep thought, Jack Handy.

espola said:
"Trans men" (cis women who have been altered to have some degree of function and appearance as human males) and "non-binary people" (those who do not fit in either of the two slots that t imagines are the limits of biology)? Some of them have functioning wombs, some do not. Given the current state of conception medicine, it is not even necessary to have a vagina to conceive and/or give birth.
Click to expand...
Have you thought about just micro-dosing?
 
Slobodan said:
Dismal reality. Hmm... which part? Any specifics or just butthurt?
Click to expand...
Dismal for him is finding out that to control the border you don't need new laws. And that all the Dems have lied for decades about it. Dismal for him is finding out policing actually reduces crime...and the people that benefit the most are the poor and middle class. Dismal for him is finding out tariffs didn't cause a recession. Dismal for him is finding out the level or corruption the Dems did vs T as far as Russia and more. Dismal for him is how people are fleeing the D party including increasing amounts of minorities. Etc etc
 
watfly said:
Again what a bunch of pseudo intellectual babble that liberals are suckers for. This guy is just pandering to the lowest common denominator lefty mentality aka "orange man bad".

I already told you what he got wrong. There are no constitutional protections against capitalism, so the basis for his argument is based on a flawed premise. He also uses capitalism in the perjorative which is a non-starter for good faith debate.

If you want to talk about the goverment getting Intel stock, then I'm against that.
Click to expand...
A bit of an oxymoron post there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top