Are you a Trump loyalist? However remote the possibility, try, even if for a moment, to consider these things:

[Billiejeens]

Oh horseshit! Joe BiDumbfuck would never work with Conservatives, and it was not Trump, but the Mulatto Menace that caused the divide when he got into office in 2009.

Absolutely .
Prior to him each side wanted what they thought would improve the country.
We simply disagreed on what that was.

Barack Huessein took America Hating subversives out of the fringe, gave them a platform and looked to mainstream them.

 

[GMCGeneral]

That's good you don't like Trump. I suggest you avoid thought-terminating clichés and any right wing tropes that are floating about, it will make you more 'independent'.

Just sayin'

But, what rights are you referring to and what abuses of power are you referring to? I see none being removed by anyone on the left.

Rumpole

That's because you ARE a dumbfuck far Left Communist yourself.

 

[GMCGeneral]

Absolutely .
Prior to him each side wanted what they thought would improve the country.
We simply disagreed on what that was.

Barack Huessein took America Hating subversives out of the fringe, gave them a platform and looked to mainstream them.

And anyone who DARED to disagree with him or the Democrat Party was branded a racist (go figure)

 

[Rumpole]

Dogmaphobe

View attachment 775240

Nothing says he is a uniter quite like conducting a dystopian spectacle where he calls anybody that did not vote for his Junta an enemy of the state.

So Trump's American Carnage speech did you just fine, but Biden's tame speech, by comparison, is a problem for you?

As someone who made a living in the arts, of which photography is one of my skills, your photo is merely a lighting/metering trick.

Give me a DSLR camera, and proper lights, I can make you look like the devil incarnate. But, I charge money for the service.

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Give me a DSLR camera, and proper lights, I can make you look like the devil incarnate.

Cheers,
Rumpole

Why would you need all that?

My friends accomplish that by just using the phones on their phones and don't even charge me for it.

 

[Rumpole]

I certainly appreciate your well thought out response. But there is a major problem if you think that there’s any justification for Black Lives Matter when there are poor white people starving on the streets of America I don’t know what to tell you.

Well, let me tell you. There are a few flaws of reasoning in your statement.

1. False dichotomy fallacy: The statement sets up a false either-or choice between supporting the Black Lives Matter movement and helping poor white people. In reality, both issues are important and can be addressed simultaneously.
2. Misrepresentation of the Black Lives Matter movement: The statement misrepresents the goals of the Black Lives Matter movement by suggesting that it seeks to divide people by race and portray white people as privileged. In reality, the movement aims to highlight and address systemic racism and police brutality against Black people, without diminishing the struggles of other marginalized groups. (and no democrat supports violence, to be clear).

This is a critical platform of Democrats a major platform is race division the idea that white people are privileged including homeless people and that blacks are discriminated against in America is not only an insult to America it is flat out false.

Your above argument is also flawed for two reasons:

1. Misrepresentation of Democratic platform: The statement misrepresents the platform of the Democratic Party by suggesting that it is focused on race division. In reality, the party supports policies that aim to address systemic inequalities, including those related to race, and promote unity and inclusivity.
2. Denial of systemic racism: The statement denies the existence of systemic racism and the impact it has on Black communities in America. This denial ignores the historical and ongoing discrimination faced by Black people in areas such as education, healthcare, housing, and the criminal justice system.

More stimulus money was pumped into our economy under Joe Biden. I’m not here for lying or propaganda I’m just here to have a conversation with you

No, they were roughly the same. Third stimulus check: comparing Trump and Biden’s stimulus packages

The idea that America is racist towards blacks is flat out false it makes men weak it is a disgusting viewpoint.

Now I would never make such an egregious blanket claim. But racism and systemic racism does exist.

There is racism in America from corporations and from universities, from the legacy media and major sports organizations all of them have racist hiring quotas.

Good, here you are agreeing on the concept of systemic racism. That didn't seem clear, above.

to claim America is racist that is something that the enemies of America want people to believe to destroy our country.

The problem is that America is an open society. We are famous for self reflection and publish our history honestly. That Putin (or enemies) can use historical documentation against us, might seem like a fault, but but to ban books and historical data or to whitewash our history just to please Putin and our enemies would be worse.

Why would the United States be the number one destination in the world according to statistics for refugees and immigrants if we are such a racist country.

The flawed reasoning in the question lies in assuming that the popularity of the United States as a destination for immigrants and refugees is evidence that the country cannot be racist. This is a false dichotomy, and it ignores the complex reasons why people choose to come to the United States.

So this idea that America is systemically racist is brutally offensive. George Floyd had a monstrous criminal history including holding a gun to a pregnant lady‘s stomach, you would think if you agree or believe in Black Lives Matter the 10,000 Black people are lynched each year that is not only false but they were something like 4200 lynchings in the history of the entire United States of America and 1200 of them were against white people and the vast majority of these lynchings were of actual criminals my friend.

The paragraph presented contains several flaws in reasoning:

1. Ad hominem fallacy: The paragraph attacks George Floyd's character and criminal history, rather than addressing the issue of systemic racism. This is an ad hominem fallacy, which attempts to discredit the argument by attacking the person making it.
2. False assertion: The paragraph makes a false assertion that there have only been around 4,200 lynchings in the history of the United States, and that the majority of these were of actual criminals. This is based on reported lynchings (NAACP reports about 4700) However, the number of lynchings in the United States is estimated to be much higher, and many of these lynchings were of innocent people who were targeted because of their race, but there is no real way to know as many were never reported or recorded.

But the most egregious and repugnant thing you wrote was 'the vast majority of these lynchings were of actual criminals'.

Lynchings are murder, period. Remember the adage, 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law'? Blacks were a highly oppressed race in the south, and claims of 'they were criminal' is just not reliable.

Therefore whether they were guilty or not is not a claim you can actually make.

Humbly tendered,
Rumpole

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Are you really that ignorant, Blaylock? Say it isn't so.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Well, let me tell you. There are a few flaws of reasoning in your statement.

1. False dichotomy fallacy: The statement sets up a false either-or choice between supporting the Black Lives Matter movement and helping poor white people. In reality, both issues are important and can be addressed simultaneously.
2. Misrepresentation of the Black Lives Matter movement: The statement misrepresents the goals of the Black Lives Matter movement by suggesting that it seeks to divide people by race and portray white people as privileged. In reality, the movement aims to highlight and address systemic racism and police brutality against Black people, without diminishing the struggles of other marginalized groups. (and no democrat supports violence, to be clear).

Your above argument is also flawed for two reasons:

1. Misrepresentation of Democratic platform: The statement misrepresents the platform of the Democratic Party by suggesting that it is focused on race division. In reality, the party supports policies that aim to address systemic inequalities, including those related to race, and promote unity and inclusivity.
2. Denial of systemic racism: The statement denies the existence of systemic racism and the impact it has on Black communities in America. This denial ignores the historical and ongoing discrimination faced by Black people in areas such as education, healthcare, housing, and the criminal justice system.

No, they were roughly the same. Third stimulus check: comparing Trump and Biden’s stimulus packages

Now I would never make such an egregious blanket claim. But racism and systemic racism does exist.


Good, here you are agreeing on the concept of systemic racism. That didn't seem clear, above.

The problem is that America is an open society. We are famous for self reflection and publish our history honestly. That Putin (or enemies) can use historical documentation against us, might seem like a fault, but but to ban books and historical data or to whitewash our history just to please Putin and our enemies would be worse.

The flawed reasoning in the question lies in assuming that the popularity of the United States as a destination for immigrants and refugees is evidence that the country cannot be racist. This is a false dichotomy, and it ignores the complex reasons why people choose to come to the United States.


The paragraph presented contains several flaws in reasoning:

1. Ad hominem fallacy: The paragraph attacks George Floyd's character and criminal history, rather than addressing the issue of systemic racism. This is an ad hominem fallacy, which attempts to discredit the argument by attacking the person making it.
2. False assertion: The paragraph makes a false assertion that there have only been around 4,200 lynchings in the history of the United States, and that the majority of these were of actual criminals. This is based on reported lynchings (NAACP reports about 4700) However, the number of lynchings in the United States is estimated to be much higher, and many of these lynchings were of innocent people who were targeted because of their race, but there is no real way to know as many were never reported or recorded.

But the most egregious and repugnant thing you wrote was 'the vast majority of these lynchings were of actual criminals'.

Lynchings are murder, period. Remember the adage, 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law'? Blacks were a highly oppressed race in the south, and claims of 'they were criminal' is just not reliable.

Therefore whether they were guilty or not is not a claim you can actually make.

Humbly tendered,
Rumpole

How can you be 72 and still treat politics as such a complete act of faith?

I'm just 4 years younger than you and can see quite clearly that the Democrat party is not NEARLY what it was 40 or 50 years ago.

50 years ago, they could actually say with some degree of sincerity that they were for the little guy. Today, the only little guy they actually represent is Jeff Besos.

 

[Billiejeens]

Escape to what? Leftist communist transgender ideology? Why would we do that? Escape to giving up our guns? Escape to the thought control of the mob? I thought you were serious until like your second thought where you started insulting half of the population LOL. Then I realized you were just really a crackpot spewing garbage.

Long winded, boring, left wing super-duper crack pot.
I think.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Escape to what? Leftist communist transgender ideology? Why would we do that? Escape to giving up our guns? Escape to the thought control of the mob? I thought you were serious until like your second thought where you started insulting half of the population LOL. Then I realized you were just really a crackpot spewing garbage.

Indeed,this shill from langley sure get paid the big bucks to embarrass himself with shit on his face everyday.

 

[Blisterfinger]

Dogmaphobe

View attachment 775240

Nothing says he is a uniter quite like conducting a dystopian spectacle where he calls anybody that did not vote for his Junta an enemy of the state.

Then there is the colorized version of that picture. Pure orwellian black comedy

CNN questioned after altering blood-red background of Biden’s speech

CNN was was busted altering the lighting for President Biden’s Thursday address, softening the blood-red hues to calmer shades of pink.

nypost.com

 

[Oddball]

That's good you don't like Trump. I suggest you avoid thought-terminating clichés and any right wing tropes that are floating about, it will make you more 'independent'.

Just sayin'

But, what rights are you referring to and what abuses of power are you referring to? I see none being removed by anyone on the left.

Rumpole

Says the moonbat who constantly invokes leftist thought-terminating cliches and leftist tropes.

Self-awareness is your friend, Corky.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Self-awareness is your friend, Corky.

"COULD BE" his friend ,"COULD BE".


It appears to me that each of them is expecting the other to make the first move.

 

[Billiejeens]

Says the moonbat who constantly invokes leftist thought-terminating cliches and leftist tropes.

Self-awareness is your friend, Corky.

They have no relationship.

 

[Rumpole]

Says the moonbat who constantly invokes leftist thought-terminating cliches and leftist tropes.

Oh, really. Care to name a few? I surely don't want to traffic in them. Help me out.

Self-awareness is your friend, Corky.

Well, Oddball, I'll be waiting for the benevolence of your beneficent wisdom

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[Oddball]

Oh, really. Care to name a few? I surely don't want to traffic in them. Help me out.

Your OP is rife with them.....Emotional incontinence isn't an argument.

Well, Oddball, I'll be waiting for the benevolence of your beneficent wisdom

Cheers,
Rumpole

Self-Awareness | SkillsYouNeed

Self-awareness is a key component of emotional intelligence (EI), encompassing emotional awareness, accurate self-assessment and self-confidence.

www.skillsyouneed.com

 

[Rumpole]

How can you be 72 and still treat politics as such a complete act of faith?

I'm just 4 years younger than you and can see quite clearly that the Democrat party is not NEARLY what it was 40 or 50 years ago.

50 years ago, they could actually say with some degree of sincerity that they were for the little guy. Today, the only little guy they actually represent is Jeff Besos.

Doesn't matter what they are. What matters is what I am, what you are, in the struggle to make our parties better.
I'm a dem in the same style and kind is Bill Maher is, a liberal/libertarian, very critical of the hard left, but more critical of the hard right (who are the veritable inmates running the asylum these days) but there are only two parties with any sizeable caucus that can get things done, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Pick one! Whatever their faults are, the DNC and I are about 88% in accord, and it's much much worse than that with the Republican Party. My views are much closer to that of the Green Party, whose membership I would pursue, but they have no caucus to speak of.

 

[Rumpole]

Your OP is rife with them.....Emotional incontinence isn't an argument.

Self-Awareness | SkillsYouNeed

Self-awareness is a key component of emotional intelligence (EI), encompassing emotional awareness, accurate self-assessment and self-confidence.

www.skillsyouneed.com

Oddball, I'm sorry I wasn't clear in my request, I meant for you to please list some of my 'thought terminating clichés'

FYI "Emotional incontinence" sounds nice, but they are weasel words, so it's not even a valid premise. Therefore, the actual
non argument are the weasel words YOU used, not what you assume they refer to.

I do require precision, if you are going to battle words on precision's terms. I engage with verbal cleverness, where it is amusing and it is clear that is the game we are playing, but you've just established precision is what is in play, here.

So, I'll be waiting for those (actual) thought-terminating clichés you've alluded to.

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[Rumpole]

[...meme deleted..]

Sorry, didn't get passed my meme filter.

Care to offer a valid rebuttal?

Probably not, but no harm in asking.

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[Rumpole]

Escape to what? Leftist communist transgender ideology?

Question has an assumed premise. You should clear the premise before asking such a question.
For example, "How does it feel to hate America"? Capiche?

Why would we do that? Escape to giving up our guns?

Question has an assumed premise. See above.

Escape to the thought control of the mob? I thought you were serious until like your second thought where you started insulting half of the population LOL.

Hard to avoid, but given the tone and tenor of this forum for most, it's par for the course.

Then I realized you were just really a crackpot spewing garbage.

Well, you've certainly proved my point, that For most on the right, there is no escape.