I don't agree with Trumps decision to pardon the rioters. I don't agree with Trumps anti-environmental policies. I think Donald Trump is a controlling power hungry narcissistic imbecile.
Source?
They don't square at all. When they do it it's patriotic, everyone else is either "BLM" or "Antifa"
You sounded reasonable for 3 sentences, then in one sentence you shot your entire reputation to shit.
wizer needs to squeeze the base when he posts...that way he doesn't shoot too quickly.
Either both are acceptable or neither is. If you want to pick cherries, we'll find you an orchard and put you to work.
Both what are acceptable? Try making sense now and then, would you?
Well, let's have a real deep think -- you may need to rest and recover from the strain of that afterward.
LotusBud said:
The Question said:
I thought American voters best options were either elect Harris with a Republican Congress or else Trump with a Democratic Congress @wizer
Both WHAT are acceptable? Good god, man. Instead of being a droning pedant, try to answer the actual question.
Neat math tricks Einstein what if it was only one recidivist , and he still held you captive in his basement playing Pulp Fiction on your ass, would you still be so sanguine?Anyone who understands Criminology will know, that release has dis-orientating effects and therefor re-offending happens.
if you have 3 out of 1000 that is a 0.3% re-offending rate.
Now do illegal immigrants, blacks and Hispanics.
Pretty sure they are about 20% or more.
At about 1/100th the rate suggests they are well disciplined law abiding citizens.
OP is an idiot.
Crayons it is.
Not fair plagiarizing Mitch McConnell’s sound bites
I already pointed out his math was specious. Just an ignorant comment all around.
Nothing you said in this post is remotely accurate. You don't get to make those kind of comparisons and hold them up as "facts"
Nope. IMO, only facts are acceptable, on both sides. Is that simple enough for you to follow, or are you too fucking myopic to get the POINT of my thread.
It's not a comparison; it's a principle. Broad generalizations of groups is either okay or it isn't, regardless of the group being generalized.
You can make a broad generalization of one group. It doesn't set a predicate as a result for all groups.
I think you misspelled 'context'. Broadly generalizing groups, in principle, is either right or wrong. Whether it's right or wrong is based on the principle, not on which group is being generalized.
Let me see if I can clarify my position by referring to one of the effects of broad generalization: Racial bigotry.
Racial Bigotry, what’s that got to do with the price of eggs in America?
I have no idea what you meant there, but systemic institutionalized racism has been endemic in our government and society for many moons. It plays out in different ways against different groups but it's still institutionalized racism.
How come we don’t have white history month?
Not saying it doesn't. I'm saying it's wrong. As in ethically wrong, not 'factually incorrect'.
we dont have Black History Month any more either.
