PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #21
scholar: a person who is highly educated or has an aptitude for study.Be specific.
Very kind of you.
Now, if you could only articulate a point vis-s-vis 1953.....
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
scholar: a person who is highly educated or has an aptitude for study.Be specific.
It's only 12 mos- surely a scholar can secure their own opinion(s)- if that scholar is intellectually honest.Now, if you could only articulate a point vis-s-vis 1953.....
Perhaps- but, for sure, you're intellectually dishonest and highly subjective with an objective which tarnishes your image-You're like a child refusing to say where you hid the remote.
address
1953
1953
Here is opportunity to prove me wrong 1953intellectually dishonest… intellectually dishonest…. intellectually dishonest.
Here is opportunity to prove me wrong 1953intellectually dishonest… intellectually dishonest…. intellectually dishonest.
BTW, parroting for the RNC, as you do, is not flattering, nor does it lend credibility- it tarnishes your image. Unless a political, partisan hack is the image you desire- personally, I think you're better than that- stop disappointing me.
No I'm not- you're highly subjective- that is highly partisan personified- and you still refuse to address 1953 = intellectually dishonest- I don't worship anyone or anything- there are a lot of things I despise though- intellectual dishonesty tops the list- partisan hacks is second- and you will continue to be disappointing while I continue to show your intellectual dishonesty- I don't despise yo though- you present me with opportunity to sow seeds of Truth, and Liberty, objectively, with objective analysis of myth and fallacy, presented by a partisan hack- your saving grace is, I'm 72, will turn 73 next month, so I won't be around as long as you- but, I have ensured, "I" will survive by helping raise 2 critical thinkers who learned from me- not partisan hacks, like you.While you are clearly wrong, as magnanimous as I am, I will continue to allow you to worship me from afar.
No I'm not- you're highly subjective- that is highly partisan personified- and you still refuse to address 1953 = intellectually dishonest- I don't worship anyone or anything- there are a lot of things I despise though- intellectual dishonesty tops the list- partisan hacks is second- and you will continue to be disappointing while I continue to show your intellectual dishonesty- I don't despise yo though- you present me with opportunity to sow seeds of Truth, and Liberty, objectively, with objective analysis of myth and fallacy, presented by a partisan hack- your saving grace is, I'm 72, will turn 73 next month, so I won't be around as long as you- but, I have ensured, "I" will survive by helping raise 2 critical thinkers who learned from me- not partisan hacks, like you.While you are clearly wrong, as magnanimous as I am, I will continue to allow you to worship me from afar.
I doubt it- I pick my words, specifically-I can help with your vocabulary, too.
The RNC appreciates your robust denial in the face of defeat- but, it changes nothing-Obviously you have chose the wrong term from your limited vocabulary.
My posts are never 'blind adherence.'
I doubt it- I pick my words, specifically-I can help with your vocabulary, too.
The RNC appreciates your robust denial in the face of defeat- but, it changes nothing-Obviously you have chose the wrong term from your limited vocabulary.
My posts are never 'blind adherence.'
It's adequate- anything of value to add? No? Imagine that- and so eloquent-Easy enough in such a small collection.