Liberals don't believe they hold "opinions." They believe that they are just "right."

[Unkotare]

Actually I am confused. What 3rd plural personal pronoun would have been more appropriate to refer to a group of people than "them" ?

No personal pronoun would be appropriate because, as I have indicated several times now, I was making a generalization and not referring to specific individuals. Come on, you took English class, right?

So wait - there's no 3rd person plural pronoun that refers to a group of people? None? Wow.

Of course there is, but the third person plural pronoun would not fit the syntax in which you attempted to use it. Maybe you didn't take English class; I don't know.

 

[DontBeStupid]

No, I'm sorry, but it's not. You made a claim about an internal emotional response which you obviously cannot confirm. That is illogical, as your conclusion cannot be supported. You also based your claim on the predicate "when they don't," without either proving this causal relationship or providing any example of same. In fact, the liberals who have responded here have confirmed my initial claim and therefore cannot be held as proof of yours. Again, illogical.

If you require any further education on logic and discourse I'm going to have to start charging you money.

Ah, well, then if you're not angry, then you really don't care about this, and that makes my original observation correct.

You're a dick.

As expected, your argument has completely fallen apart and you are just lashing out.

Your statement is illogical. I'm obviously not lashing out. My argument is rock solid and I am merely making an observation based on your wording and behavior.

Would this be easier for you if I used smaller words?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No personal pronoun would be appropriate because, as I have indicated several times now, I was making a generalization and not referring to specific individuals. Come on, you took English class, right?

So wait - there's no 3rd person plural pronoun that refers to a group of people? None? Wow.

Of course there is, but the third person plural pronoun would not fit the syntax in which you attempted to use it. Maybe you didn't take English class; I don't know.

In the English class I took I was taught that "them" is a 3rd person plural pronoun. Is the term "liberals" not plural? Is it not 3rd person?

Was the English class you took designed for shifty retarded message board posters who don't mind how big of a moron they make themselves look by maintaining such idiocies as the claim that "them" is not an appropriate pronoun to refer to "liberals" ?

 

[Unkotare]

Ah, well, then if you're not angry, then you really don't care about this, and that makes my original observation correct.

You're a dick.

As expected, your argument has completely fallen apart and you are just lashing out.

Your statement is illogical. I'm obviously not lashing out. My argument is rock solid and I am merely making an observation based on your wording and behavior.

Would this be easier for you if I used smaller words?

"You're a dick" is not an argument or support for any of your claims. It is just an expression of anger (i.e. lashing out). And of course since the absence of anger in no way proves indifference, your claim was yet again illogical. Maybe you should quit while you're behind.

 

[Unkotare]

So wait - there's no 3rd person plural pronoun that refers to a group of people? None? Wow.

Of course there is, but the third person plural pronoun would not fit the syntax in which you attempted to use it. Maybe you didn't take English class; I don't know.

In the English class I took I was taught that "them" is a 3rd person plural pronoun.

It is, but you don't seem to have known how to use it appropriately in the context of the sentence in question. Did you leave class early or something?


Oh, and if you are hoping this diversion will distract from your failed argument you are going to be disappointed.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Of course there is, but the third person plural pronoun would not fit the syntax in which you attempted to use it. Maybe you didn't take English class; I don't know.

In the English class I took I was taught that "them" is a 3rd person plural pronoun.

It is, but you don't seem to have known how to use it appropriately in the context of the sentence in question. Did you leave class early or something?

Is "liberals" a 3rd person plural noun?

 

[CaféAuLait]

Yes, by definition.

Then why are Liberals so much less generous than conservatives with their own money?

Lie, much?

Except that there is no evidence of that actually being true.

Sure there is proof it's true:

NYT: Bleeding Heart Tightwads

This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.

Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.

Other research has reached similar conclusions. The “generosity index” from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html

 

[occupied]

As expected, your argument has completely fallen apart and you are just lashing out.

Your statement is illogical. I'm obviously not lashing out. My argument is rock solid and I am merely making an observation based on your wording and behavior.

Would this be easier for you if I used smaller words?

"You're a dick" is not an argument or support for any of your claims. It is just an expression of anger (i.e. lashing out). And of course since the absence of anger in no way proves indifference, your claim was yet again illogical. Maybe you should quit while you're behind.

Or maybe it is an accurate description of your posting style, something else that probably never occurred to you.

 

[SniperFire]

People such as yourself spend your days on websites demanding more free gubmint stuff

LOL

De Nile ain't just a river in Egypt.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Then why are Liberals so much less generous than conservatives with their own money?

Lie, much?

Except that there is no evidence of that actually being true.

Sure there is proof it's true:

NYT: Bleeding Heart Tightwads

This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.

Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.

Other research has reached similar conclusions. The “generosity index” from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html

Is there really only ONE study that shows this? everyone one of you nutbags makes this claim, it ALWAYS goes back to a single study but A CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK PRESIDENT named Arthur C Brooks. Do you not desire any credibility whatsoever?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

people such as yourself spend your days on websites demanding more free gubmint stuff,

link?

 

[Unkotare]

In the English class I took I was taught that "them" is a 3rd person plural pronoun.

It is, but you don't seem to have known how to use it appropriately in the context of the sentence in question. Did you leave class early or something?

Is "liberals" a 3rd person plural noun?

It sure is. Do you remember this? "The third person plural pronoun would not fit the syntax in which you attempted to use it." I'm sorry if you can't understand that. The way you were trying to use it, the appropriate phrasing would have been "Did you ask all liberals?" in order to indicate that you were referring to all members of a group and not a specific plural set within the group.

What is your native language?

 

[Unkotare]

Your statement is illogical. I'm obviously not lashing out. My argument is rock solid and I am merely making an observation based on your wording and behavior.

Would this be easier for you if I used smaller words?

"You're a dick" is not an argument or support for any of your claims. It is just an expression of anger (i.e. lashing out). And of course since the absence of anger in no way proves indifference, your claim was yet again illogical. Maybe you should quit while you're behind.

Or maybe it is an accurate description of your posting style, something else that probably never occurred to you.

Ah, more lashing out. We both know what that means.

 

[Plasmaball]

Did you read the article?

yes, and its fucking stupid.

Easier to dismiss than to consider. Very 'open minded'...

wow how sad you need to cherry pick in order to retort....Your OP is pathetic and easy to dismiss as rubbish.

 

[francoHFW]

It's like Romney gives so much to charity- which turns out to be the Mormon church. Those charities- and the blood banks- run out in hard times, and because of the Pub obsession with saving on taxes,the government doesn't have the programs to help. Pub POLICY is anti-poor and helpless- see also Booooosh policy doubling the cost of public college and health costs in 8 years.....not to mention them holding the victims of their greedy policies responsible for their plight. see sig pp1.

Worst party and voters anywhere....and BS propaganda and hate for humanity...gd assholes LOL

Then go to church and the blood bank. BORING selfish twits.

 

[SniperFire]

Is there really only ONE study that shows this?

This was an extremely exhaustive study, by the way.

You cannot refute the results.

Nor the fact that Liberals such as yourself spend your votes on candidates that promise you the most free gubmint stuff.

 

[Unkotare]

Skipped over another post by franco. I wonder what he had to say?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

It is, but you don't seem to have known how to use it appropriately in the context of the sentence in question. Did you leave class early or something?

Is "liberals" a 3rd person plural noun?

It sure is.

Great. Then "them" is an appropriate pronoun.

Do you remember this? "The third person plural pronoun would not fit the syntax in which you attempted to use it." I'm sorry if you can't understand that.

I understand it completely. Its just wrong, that's all.

The way you were trying to use it, the appropriate phrasing would have been "Did you ask all liberals?"

It should have been clear to all but them most mentally incapacitated that the pronoun "them" had the antecedent "liberals" when I used it. I'm very sorry you're a complete imbecile.

What is your native language?

Its not MORON so I guess that's why I can't understand you.

 

[occupied]

"You're a dick" is not an argument or support for any of your claims. It is just an expression of anger (i.e. lashing out). And of course since the absence of anger in no way proves indifference, your claim was yet again illogical. Maybe you should quit while you're behind.

Or maybe it is an accurate description of your posting style, something else that probably never occurred to you.

Ah, more lashing out. We both know what that means.

No it's that you pointedly refuse to explain a couple of things. How are conservatives different or better than liberals on the point of blind political faith and do you yourself think that you subject your beliefs to greater scrutiny than liberals?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Is there really only ONE study that shows this?

This was an extremely exhaustive study, by the way.

How would you know?

You cannot refute the results.

Nor the fact that Liberals such as yourself spend your votes on candidates that promise you the most free gubmint stuff.

I don't dispute the fact that conservative think tank President Arthur C Brooks got to define what counted as "charity" and then found that conservatives gave more often to the things he has defined as "charity" - no. I just don't see the value in the finding. Wow - conservatives like to give more to conservative causes than liberals do. Earth shattering! Hey lets publish a book about that and sell it to a bunch of sucker morons who think their shit don't stink!