A Real American

[PoliticalChic]

Heads us, kiddies.

Our economic system DEMANDS both winners and losers.

Can't have one set without the other.

You are on the right track, techie...but far behind.
Your error is the word 'demand.'

Conservatives ACCEPT that there will be differences...

Conservatives believe in the principle of variety, while liberal perspectives result in a narrowing uniformity. Conservatives believe in choice of healthcare, education, religion, and various other areas. Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Equality will be of opportunity, not necessarily of result. The only uniformity will be before the law. Society will not be perfect. Consider the results of the rule of ideologues of the last century.


It is by DEMANDING equality of outcome that big government produces and enforces the 'loser' category.

 

[Montrovant]

Seems like Dawn got help when she needed it. Counselors acted on her behalf and asked the school custodian if she could stay with her.

She got help. There is nothing wrong with getting help when you need it. Whether you are Dawn or Michelle Obama.

Clearly you excelled at the game of "Twister.'

The Leftist view is stated by your icon, Biden, who specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.

I'm guessing that you understood that Dawn casts the lie to that view.
The help she got was the kind of charity that conservative philosopher Edmund Burke spoke of as 'the little platoons," the spontaneous social groupings that people create for themselves.


Would you care to guess how much Americans give in voluntary charity each year?
Sans government.

It would be nice if you actually based your rants on things people said, rather than your your imaginings.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Seems like Dawn got help when she needed it. Counselors acted on her behalf and asked the school custodian if she could stay with her.

She got help. There is nothing wrong with getting help when you need it. Whether you are Dawn or Michelle Obama.

Clearly you excelled at the game of "Twister.'

The Leftist view is stated by your icon, Biden, who specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.

I'm guessing that you understood that Dawn casts the lie to that view.
The help she got was the kind of charity that conservative philosopher Edmund Burke spoke of as 'the little platoons," the spontaneous social groupings that people create for themselves.


Would you care to guess how much Americans give in voluntary charity each year?
Sans government.

It would be nice if you actually based your rants on things people said, rather than your your imaginings.

1. rant/rant/
Verb:
Speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
Clearly this isn't one.

See, now you've learned a new word!
Now the day hasn't been a total loss for you.


2. Had you paid attention to the OP,you would have realized that the individual
was conflating ('twisting') government assistance to any help at all...

Note:

""Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that his wife, as well as the wife of President Barack Obama, would have had “no chance” in life had it not been for government help. According to vice presidential pool reports:

“I know, literally, Barack and I talk about it. Neither one of us would have had any shot,” Biden said. “The same with our wives. Both wives are smarter than both of us. Literally, these very accomplished women would not have any chance without some help."
Jill and Michelle ‘Would Not Have Any Chance’ Without Govt. | Washington Free Beacon


Surely the difference is not too nuanced for you, is it?

 

[Montrovant]

Clearly you excelled at the game of "Twister.'

The Leftist view is stated by your icon, Biden, who specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.

I'm guessing that you understood that Dawn casts the lie to that view.
The help she got was the kind of charity that conservative philosopher Edmund Burke spoke of as 'the little platoons," the spontaneous social groupings that people create for themselves.


Would you care to guess how much Americans give in voluntary charity each year?
Sans government.

It would be nice if you actually based your rants on things people said, rather than your your imaginings.

1. rant/rant/
Verb:
Speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
Clearly this isn't one.

See, now you've learned a new word!
Now the day hasn't been a total loss for you.


2. Had you paid attention to the OP,you would have realized that the individual
was conflating ('twisting') government assistance to any help at all...

Note:

""Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that his wife, as well as the wife of President Barack Obama, would have had “no chance” in life had it not been for government help. According to vice presidential pool reports:

“I know, literally, Barack and I talk about it. Neither one of us would have had any shot,” Biden said. “The same with our wives. Both wives are smarter than both of us. Literally, these very accomplished women would not have any chance without some help."
Jill and Michelle ‘Would Not Have Any Chance’ Without Govt. | Washington Free Beacon


Surely the difference is not too nuanced for you, is it?

Oh, I get this just fine, but perhaps it is too nuanced for you. Do you understand the difference between all and us? Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. It must take some mental gymnastics to turn 'I needed help' into 'everyone needs help'.

Oh, and I know full well what rant means, and that is exactly the word I intended to use.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It would be nice if you actually based your rants on things people said, rather than your your imaginings.

1. rant/rant/
Verb:
Speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
Clearly this isn't one.

See, now you've learned a new word!
Now the day hasn't been a total loss for you.


2. Had you paid attention to the OP,you would have realized that the individual
was conflating ('twisting') government assistance to any help at all...

Note:

""Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that his wife, as well as the wife of President Barack Obama, would have had “no chance” in life had it not been for government help. According to vice presidential pool reports:

“I know, literally, Barack and I talk about it. Neither one of us would have had any shot,” Biden said. “The same with our wives. Both wives are smarter than both of us. Literally, these very accomplished women would not have any chance without some help."
Jill and Michelle ‘Would Not Have Any Chance’ Without Govt. | Washington Free Beacon


Surely the difference is not too nuanced for you, is it?

Oh, I get this just fine, but perhaps it is too nuanced for you. Do you understand the difference between all and us? Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. It must take some mental gymnastics to turn 'I needed help' into 'everyone needs help'.

Oh, and I know full well what rant means, and that is exactly the word I intended to use.

I am tempted to say 'you can't be so simple-minded'...but, actually, it seems you folks on the Left can be just that.


You are actually denying that the essence of his statement is "even those who have reached the highest levels, status, and material wealthy are beholden to the magnanimity of the federal government to achieve success.'"

That is what he was saying.

Exactly that.


Any with a brain, and a sense of honesty will admit that his "admission" meant "If even wee need big government, then " everyone needs help".


I leave it to you to claim to be either oblivious, or dishonest.


"[Biden] hits new levels of desperation when he’s trying to convince people they’ll have no chance of survival if his bloated government sacred cow is ever made to stop churning out Julias on a 24/7 basis. Biden’s like a big-government version of Kathy Bates in Misery reminding the hobbled James Caan, “If I die, you die” — and it’s all packaged under the guise of compassion."
Michelle Malkin » Joe Biden: My wife and Michelle Obama wouldn’t have had a chance in life without government help


And you bought it like it was on sale.

I just checked the story on 8 or 10 websites....and almost every on reported the quote without comment, because they can't imagine there'd be folks dumb enough to claim "Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. "

Yet....here you are.

 

[Montrovant]

1. rant/rant/
Verb:
Speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
Clearly this isn't one.

See, now you've learned a new word!
Now the day hasn't been a total loss for you.


2. Had you paid attention to the OP,you would have realized that the individual
was conflating ('twisting') government assistance to any help at all...

Note:

""Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that his wife, as well as the wife of President Barack Obama, would have had “no chance” in life had it not been for government help. According to vice presidential pool reports:

“I know, literally, Barack and I talk about it. Neither one of us would have had any shot,” Biden said. “The same with our wives. Both wives are smarter than both of us. Literally, these very accomplished women would not have any chance without some help."
Jill and Michelle ‘Would Not Have Any Chance’ Without Govt. | Washington Free Beacon


Surely the difference is not too nuanced for you, is it?

Oh, I get this just fine, but perhaps it is too nuanced for you. Do you understand the difference between all and us? Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. It must take some mental gymnastics to turn 'I needed help' into 'everyone needs help'.

Oh, and I know full well what rant means, and that is exactly the word I intended to use.

I am tempted to say 'you can't be so simple-minded'...but, actually, it seems you folks on the Left can be just that.


You are actually denying that the essence of his statement is "even those who have reached the highest levels, status, and material wealthy are beholden to the magnanimity of the federal government to achieve success.'"

That is what he was saying.

Exactly that.


Any with a brain, and a sense of honesty will admit that his "admission" meant "If even wee need big government, then " everyone needs help".


I leave it to you to claim to be either oblivious, or dishonest.


"[Biden] hits new levels of desperation when he’s trying to convince people they’ll have no chance of survival if his bloated government sacred cow is ever made to stop churning out Julias on a 24/7 basis. Biden’s like a big-government version of Kathy Bates in Misery reminding the hobbled James Caan, “If I die, you die” — and it’s all packaged under the guise of compassion."
Michelle Malkin » Joe Biden: My wife and Michelle Obama wouldn’t have had a chance in life without government help


And you bought it like it was on sale.

I just checked the story on 8 or 10 websites....and almost every on reported the quote without comment, because they can't imagine there'd be folks dumb enough to claim "Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. "

Yet....here you are.

So....you don't think it's possible that because that's what you WANT Biden to mean that's what you are reading into it? You don't think it's possible that Biden is saying that SOME people can't make it without government assistance as he and Obama got, you are absolutely certain that his comments, which only spoke of 4 people, MUST mean that EVERY SINGLE PERSON needs the same assistance they received? Ok then.

I'll try to remember the next time I see you mention something that occurred to you, that you obviously must mean it occurred to everyone.

Biden may be an idiot, but this one statement, especially if taken without any context, does not mean what you claim just because you (or some websites you've looked at) want it to. Maybe it is what Biden meant; I'm certainly not going to claim I can follow the paths his brain takes his mouth in. But your ridiculous assertion that it is completely obvious that, in stating 4 people required government assistance, he is saying every single person needs the same, is just silly. It is certainly not true that Biden, "specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.".

 

[PoliticalChic]

Oh, I get this just fine, but perhaps it is too nuanced for you. Do you understand the difference between all and us? Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. It must take some mental gymnastics to turn 'I needed help' into 'everyone needs help'.

Oh, and I know full well what rant means, and that is exactly the word I intended to use.

I am tempted to say 'you can't be so simple-minded'...but, actually, it seems you folks on the Left can be just that.


You are actually denying that the essence of his statement is "even those who have reached the highest levels, status, and material wealthy are beholden to the magnanimity of the federal government to achieve success.'"

That is what he was saying.

Exactly that.


Any with a brain, and a sense of honesty will admit that his "admission" meant "If even wee need big government, then " everyone needs help".


I leave it to you to claim to be either oblivious, or dishonest.


"[Biden] hits new levels of desperation when he’s trying to convince people they’ll have no chance of survival if his bloated government sacred cow is ever made to stop churning out Julias on a 24/7 basis. Biden’s like a big-government version of Kathy Bates in Misery reminding the hobbled James Caan, “If I die, you die” — and it’s all packaged under the guise of compassion."
Michelle Malkin » Joe Biden: My wife and Michelle Obama wouldn’t have had a chance in life without government help


And you bought it like it was on sale.

I just checked the story on 8 or 10 websites....and almost every on reported the quote without comment, because they can't imagine there'd be folks dumb enough to claim "Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. "

Yet....here you are.

So....you don't think it's possible that because that's what you WANT Biden to mean that's what you are reading into it? You don't think it's possible that Biden is saying that SOME people can't make it without government assistance as he and Obama got, you are absolutely certain that his comments, which only spoke of 4 people, MUST mean that EVERY SINGLE PERSON needs the same assistance they received? Ok then.

I'll try to remember the next time I see you mention something that occurred to you, that you obviously must mean it occurred to everyone.

Biden may be an idiot, but this one statement, especially if taken without any context, does not mean what you claim just because you (or some websites you've looked at) want it to. Maybe it is what Biden meant; I'm certainly not going to claim I can follow the paths his brain takes his mouth in. But your ridiculous assertion that it is completely obvious that, in stating 4 people required government assistance, he is saying every single person needs the same, is just silly. It is certainly not true that Biden, "specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.".

"...he is saying every single person needs the same,..."

Of course that is what he is saying.

I can explain it to you....I just can't comprehend it for you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

People win the lottery all the time..you betcha!

Only a leftist twit would see the results of working your ass off and enduring and maintaining focus through adversity as "winning the lottery".

 

[Cecilie1200]

Oh, I get this just fine, but perhaps it is too nuanced for you. Do you understand the difference between all and us? Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. It must take some mental gymnastics to turn 'I needed help' into 'everyone needs help'.

Oh, and I know full well what rant means, and that is exactly the word I intended to use.

I am tempted to say 'you can't be so simple-minded'...but, actually, it seems you folks on the Left can be just that.


You are actually denying that the essence of his statement is "even those who have reached the highest levels, status, and material wealthy are beholden to the magnanimity of the federal government to achieve success.'"

That is what he was saying.

Exactly that.


Any with a brain, and a sense of honesty will admit that his "admission" meant "If even wee need big government, then " everyone needs help".


I leave it to you to claim to be either oblivious, or dishonest.


"[Biden] hits new levels of desperation when he’s trying to convince people they’ll have no chance of survival if his bloated government sacred cow is ever made to stop churning out Julias on a 24/7 basis. Biden’s like a big-government version of Kathy Bates in Misery reminding the hobbled James Caan, “If I die, you die” — and it’s all packaged under the guise of compassion."
Michelle Malkin » Joe Biden: My wife and Michelle Obama wouldn’t have had a chance in life without government help


And you bought it like it was on sale.

I just checked the story on 8 or 10 websites....and almost every on reported the quote without comment, because they can't imagine there'd be folks dumb enough to claim "Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. "

Yet....here you are.

So....you don't think it's possible that because that's what you WANT Biden to mean that's what you are reading into it? You don't think it's possible that Biden is saying that SOME people can't make it without government assistance as he and Obama got, you are absolutely certain that his comments, which only spoke of 4 people, MUST mean that EVERY SINGLE PERSON needs the same assistance they received? Ok then.

I'll try to remember the next time I see you mention something that occurred to you, that you obviously must mean it occurred to everyone.

Biden may be an idiot, but this one statement, especially if taken without any context, does not mean what you claim just because you (or some websites you've looked at) want it to. Maybe it is what Biden meant; I'm certainly not going to claim I can follow the paths his brain takes his mouth in. But your ridiculous assertion that it is completely obvious that, in stating 4 people required government assistance, he is saying every single person needs the same, is just silly. It is certainly not true that Biden, "specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.".

Reading comprehension does not allow for one to believe that the VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, talking about himself and THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES - and their wives - could just be saying that "some people" need help. Only a separate agenda would allow for that.

 

[Montrovant]

I am tempted to say 'you can't be so simple-minded'...but, actually, it seems you folks on the Left can be just that.


You are actually denying that the essence of his statement is "even those who have reached the highest levels, status, and material wealthy are beholden to the magnanimity of the federal government to achieve success.'"

That is what he was saying.

Exactly that.


Any with a brain, and a sense of honesty will admit that his "admission" meant "If even wee need big government, then " everyone needs help".


I leave it to you to claim to be either oblivious, or dishonest.


"[Biden] hits new levels of desperation when he’s trying to convince people they’ll have no chance of survival if his bloated government sacred cow is ever made to stop churning out Julias on a 24/7 basis. Biden’s like a big-government version of Kathy Bates in Misery reminding the hobbled James Caan, “If I die, you die” — and it’s all packaged under the guise of compassion."
Michelle Malkin » Joe Biden: My wife and Michelle Obama wouldn’t have had a chance in life without government help


And you bought it like it was on sale.

I just checked the story on 8 or 10 websites....and almost every on reported the quote without comment, because they can't imagine there'd be folks dumb enough to claim "Biden saying he and Obama, and their wives, not being able to make it without assistance does not mean everyone would need such help. "

Yet....here you are.

So....you don't think it's possible that because that's what you WANT Biden to mean that's what you are reading into it? You don't think it's possible that Biden is saying that SOME people can't make it without government assistance as he and Obama got, you are absolutely certain that his comments, which only spoke of 4 people, MUST mean that EVERY SINGLE PERSON needs the same assistance they received? Ok then.

I'll try to remember the next time I see you mention something that occurred to you, that you obviously must mean it occurred to everyone.

Biden may be an idiot, but this one statement, especially if taken without any context, does not mean what you claim just because you (or some websites you've looked at) want it to. Maybe it is what Biden meant; I'm certainly not going to claim I can follow the paths his brain takes his mouth in. But your ridiculous assertion that it is completely obvious that, in stating 4 people required government assistance, he is saying every single person needs the same, is just silly. It is certainly not true that Biden, "specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.".

Reading comprehension does not allow for one to believe that the VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, talking about himself and THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES - and their wives - could just be saying that "some people" need help. Only a separate agenda would allow for that.

Only a separate agenda allows for NOT reading into Biden's statement that his example of 4 people, President and Vice President though they are, means every single person? It takes an agenda not to assume a sample size of 4 must be indicative of the entirety of the population?

 

[PoliticalChic]

So....you don't think it's possible that because that's what you WANT Biden to mean that's what you are reading into it? You don't think it's possible that Biden is saying that SOME people can't make it without government assistance as he and Obama got, you are absolutely certain that his comments, which only spoke of 4 people, MUST mean that EVERY SINGLE PERSON needs the same assistance they received? Ok then.

I'll try to remember the next time I see you mention something that occurred to you, that you obviously must mean it occurred to everyone.

Biden may be an idiot, but this one statement, especially if taken without any context, does not mean what you claim just because you (or some websites you've looked at) want it to. Maybe it is what Biden meant; I'm certainly not going to claim I can follow the paths his brain takes his mouth in. But your ridiculous assertion that it is completely obvious that, in stating 4 people required government assistance, he is saying every single person needs the same, is just silly. It is certainly not true that Biden, "specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.".

Reading comprehension does not allow for one to believe that the VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, talking about himself and THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES - and their wives - could just be saying that "some people" need help. Only a separate agenda would allow for that.

Only a separate agenda allows for NOT reading into Biden's statement that his example of 4 people, President and Vice President though they are, means every single person? It takes an agenda not to assume a sample size of 4 must be indicative of the entirety of the population?

Are you serious?
You don't understand that he is simply propagandizing for his religion, big government Liberalism???


You went to a government school...didn't you?
That brain-washing is indelible.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So....you don't think it's possible that because that's what you WANT Biden to mean that's what you are reading into it? You don't think it's possible that Biden is saying that SOME people can't make it without government assistance as he and Obama got, you are absolutely certain that his comments, which only spoke of 4 people, MUST mean that EVERY SINGLE PERSON needs the same assistance they received? Ok then.

I'll try to remember the next time I see you mention something that occurred to you, that you obviously must mean it occurred to everyone.

Biden may be an idiot, but this one statement, especially if taken without any context, does not mean what you claim just because you (or some websites you've looked at) want it to. Maybe it is what Biden meant; I'm certainly not going to claim I can follow the paths his brain takes his mouth in. But your ridiculous assertion that it is completely obvious that, in stating 4 people required government assistance, he is saying every single person needs the same, is just silly. It is certainly not true that Biden, "specified that without the great and magnanimous paternalistic government, none of us would be able to succeed.".

Reading comprehension does not allow for one to believe that the VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, talking about himself and THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES - and their wives - could just be saying that "some people" need help. Only a separate agenda would allow for that.

Only a separate agenda allows for NOT reading into Biden's statement that his example of 4 people, President and Vice President though they are, means every single person? It takes an agenda not to assume a sample size of 4 must be indicative of the entirety of the population?

There's no "reading into" involved there. Just reading comprehension. The separate agenda is needed to read his meaning OUT of what he said, which is what you're doing.

"Oh, talking about how the President and Vice-President of the United States needed government help to get there? Oh, that doesn't mean anything . . . BECAUSE RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT, I DON'T WANT IT TO MEAN ANYTHING." Of course, when you move on to another conversation and wish to go back to advocating government micromanagement of everyone's lives, THEN it will mean exactly what the words say again.

Unfortunately for you, "words only mean things when I want them to" is only valid to leftists. To everyone else, it just looks like you're an illiterate jackwagon.

FYI, dipshit, the President, Vice-President, and their wives are not "a sample size of four". They are the four people arguably at the very top of American society and achievement. Saying, "WE needed government assistance to get here" is not saying, "See, some people need assistance and some don't." It is saying, "We are the best and brightest, so if we can't get where we are without the government, what chance do lesser people have?"

Stop the dishonesty. One does not use the top of the achievement scale as an example unless one is implying something about the entire rest of the scale. Period. End of discussion. Once again, your leaders fucked up, and you rank-and-file ass-suckers are left holding the bag and having to humiliate yourselves in order to justify their stupid behavior and your slavish devotion to them.

 

[Montrovant]

Reading comprehension does not allow for one to believe that the VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, talking about himself and THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES - and their wives - could just be saying that "some people" need help. Only a separate agenda would allow for that.

Only a separate agenda allows for NOT reading into Biden's statement that his example of 4 people, President and Vice President though they are, means every single person? It takes an agenda not to assume a sample size of 4 must be indicative of the entirety of the population?

There's no "reading into" involved there. Just reading comprehension. The separate agenda is needed to read his meaning OUT of what he said, which is what you're doing.

"Oh, talking about how the President and Vice-President of the United States needed government help to get there? Oh, that doesn't mean anything . . . BECAUSE RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT, I DON'T WANT IT TO MEAN ANYTHING." Of course, when you move on to another conversation and wish to go back to advocating government micromanagement of everyone's lives, THEN it will mean exactly what the words say again.

Unfortunately for you, "words only mean things when I want them to" is only valid to leftists. To everyone else, it just looks like you're an illiterate jackwagon.

FYI, dipshit, the President, Vice-President, and their wives are not "a sample size of four". They are the four people arguably at the very top of American society and achievement. Saying, "WE needed government assistance to get here" is not saying, "See, some people need assistance and some don't." It is saying, "We are the best and brightest, so if we can't get where we are without the government, what chance do lesser people have?"

Stop the dishonesty. One does not use the top of the achievement scale as an example unless one is implying something about the entire rest of the scale. Period. End of discussion. Once again, your leaders fucked up, and you rank-and-file ass-suckers are left holding the bag and having to humiliate yourselves in order to justify their stupid behavior and your slavish devotion to them.

First, they are your leaders as much as mine, dipshit. Second, I'm neither justifying their stupid behavior nor slavishly devoted to them. I neither voted for Obama nor do I support him or his administration particularly. Third, what you and PC don't seem to get is that Biden can push his big government agenda by saying that only some people need assistance, there's no reason it must be EVERY SINGLE PERSON as PC claimed and you seem to agree with. FFS, if it's just half the population, that's still a huge number of people who require government assistance and easily pushes a big government agenda.

The point of all this is that, even if Biden DID mean that EVERY SINGLE PERSON requires government assistance to achieve as he, his wife, and the Obama's did, it wasn't clearly and specifically said. At the absolute best it was implied.

Now, if you and PC think that you can understand all the implied or hinted at meanings of someone like Biden, who is known for shooting his mouth off and saying ridiculous, sometimes almost insane things, that's wonderful for you. I'm glad my mind does not work the same way his does, but if you both feel absolute certainty about his meaning without him actually SAYING what you think he means, more power to you. Just realize that your certainty is in no way objective reality. I looked at what the man said, at least the little that was shown. He was, I believe, talking about government help with tuition, although that's not entirely certain from the little I've seen in this thread and when I quickly searched for it. So his small quote, without context, does NOT specifically say what you and PC are alleging.

I can see where someone would get the impression you do. That's not the issue. It's the absolute fucking certainty he could have meant nothing else but that every person in the country must have government handouts to succeed. It's the idea that not reading that into his statement requires an agenda but reading that into it obviously does not.

If I were to say that Bill Gates needed a loan in order to start up Microsoft, am I saying every single person trying to start a business must require a loan? Or might I just be saying that some, or even many, people will require one? Does it have to mean EVERY damn person?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Only a separate agenda allows for NOT reading into Biden's statement that his example of 4 people, President and Vice President though they are, means every single person? It takes an agenda not to assume a sample size of 4 must be indicative of the entirety of the population?

There's no "reading into" involved there. Just reading comprehension. The separate agenda is needed to read his meaning OUT of what he said, which is what you're doing.

"Oh, talking about how the President and Vice-President of the United States needed government help to get there? Oh, that doesn't mean anything . . . BECAUSE RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT, I DON'T WANT IT TO MEAN ANYTHING." Of course, when you move on to another conversation and wish to go back to advocating government micromanagement of everyone's lives, THEN it will mean exactly what the words say again.

Unfortunately for you, "words only mean things when I want them to" is only valid to leftists. To everyone else, it just looks like you're an illiterate jackwagon.

FYI, dipshit, the President, Vice-President, and their wives are not "a sample size of four". They are the four people arguably at the very top of American society and achievement. Saying, "WE needed government assistance to get here" is not saying, "See, some people need assistance and some don't." It is saying, "We are the best and brightest, so if we can't get where we are without the government, what chance do lesser people have?"

Stop the dishonesty. One does not use the top of the achievement scale as an example unless one is implying something about the entire rest of the scale. Period. End of discussion. Once again, your leaders fucked up, and you rank-and-file ass-suckers are left holding the bag and having to humiliate yourselves in order to justify their stupid behavior and your slavish devotion to them.

First, they are your leaders as much as mine, dipshit. Second, I'm neither justifying their stupid behavior nor slavishly devoted to them. I neither voted for Obama nor do I support him or his administration particularly. Third, what you and PC don't seem to get is that Biden can push his big government agenda by saying that only some people need assistance, there's no reason it must be EVERY SINGLE PERSON as PC claimed and you seem to agree with. FFS, if it's just half the population, that's still a huge number of people who require government assistance and easily pushes a big government agenda.

The point of all this is that, even if Biden DID mean that EVERY SINGLE PERSON requires government assistance to achieve as he, his wife, and the Obama's did, it wasn't clearly and specifically said. At the absolute best it was implied.

Now, if you and PC think that you can understand all the implied or hinted at meanings of someone like Biden, who is known for shooting his mouth off and saying ridiculous, sometimes almost insane things, that's wonderful for you. I'm glad my mind does not work the same way his does, but if you both feel absolute certainty about his meaning without him actually SAYING what you think he means, more power to you. Just realize that your certainty is in no way objective reality. I looked at what the man said, at least the little that was shown. He was, I believe, talking about government help with tuition, although that's not entirely certain from the little I've seen in this thread and when I quickly searched for it. So his small quote, without context, does NOT specifically say what you and PC are alleging.

I can see where someone would get the impression you do. That's not the issue. It's the absolute fucking certainty he could have meant nothing else but that every person in the country must have government handouts to succeed. It's the idea that not reading that into his statement requires an agenda but reading that into it obviously does not.

If I were to say that Bill Gates needed a loan in order to start up Microsoft, am I saying every single person trying to start a business must require a loan? Or might I just be saying that some, or even many, people will require one? Does it have to mean EVERY damn person?

Calm down...if your pressure gets too high, you might need government help!
BTW...was that a rant?

This thread isn't going to convince you of the depth and breadth of progressivism, and you are free to have whatever view you choose...


"I can see where someone would get the impression you do."

How about we leave it at that.

 

[Montrovant]

Calm down...if your pressure gets too high, you might need government help!
BTW...was that a rant?

This thread isn't going to convince you of the depth and breadth of progressivism, and you are free to have whatever view you choose...


"I can see where someone would get the impression you do."

How about we leave it at that.

Fair enough!