PBS Gets Citizen Question Wrong

[AntonToo]

No. You haven’t explained. You have simply made an empty claim.

While it’s true that the two forms of government are similar in some ways, there are obvious difference and they are significant.

Again. You don’t get it. You have only sources to academic shit. But a scholar saying that we are a democracy doesn’t mean that we are actually a democracy. Indeed, if you understood this topic, you’d be able to finally comprehend that the “scholar” is wrong. His academic work (or hers) is mistaken.

This is why definitions actually matter.

I didn’t claim it was. You claim that citing an academic tome is valid sourcing.

No. It is not. It is merely an appeal to alleged “authority.” What tube steaks, like you, fail to grasp is that the academic can be wrong, too.

No. You remain wrong.

Since you have conceded that you are unable (as well as unwilling) to distinguish between a Constitutional republic and a Constitutional democracy, there is no real point in trying to discuss this matter with a retard like you any further.

Bottom line: the form of government of the United States of American is a “Constitutional republic.”

It is absolutely NOT a “democracy” of any kind.

So bottom line:

1. You can't provide serious sourcing for what you say.

2. You conceed that college taught academic work agrees with me, disagrees with you.

Correct?

 

[BackAgain]

So buttom line:

1. You can't provide serious sourcing for what you say.

You can’t. And haven’t. Just academic opinions.

2. Academics agree with me, disagree with you.

Correct?

Some academics disagree with you. So what?

 

[AntonToo]

You can’t. And haven’t. Just academic opinions.

Some academics disagree with you. So what?

What academics disagree with me? Source them.

I've showed you college taught academic work that agrees with me, disagrees with you.

So what is so crazy about you showing your source?

 

[Mac-7]

Our country is a representative democracy.

We are a republic

 

[Foxfyre]

Take a Citizenship Quiz | CONSTITUTION USA with Peter Sagal | PBS

One of the questions was: What type of government is America (something like that) and the 4 possible answers were:

1. Monarchy
2. Progressive Fascism
3. Democracy, or
4. Republican

The correct answer is that we are a Republican form of government, but the Progressive Fascists at PBS say that we are a "democracy"

Just because somebody is on television doesn't mean they are educated.

 

[otto105]

You can’t. And haven’t. Just academic opinions.

Some academics disagree with you. So what?

Blotto is zero point zero.

 

[Foxfyre]

Our country is a representative democracy.

Sorry but that merits at best a D minus and if it was any of my teachers it would get an F

What Type of Government Does the United States Have?

The United States government is composed of the legislative, the executive, and the judicial.

www.worldatlas.com

 

[otto105]

Sorry but that merits at best a D minus and if it was any of my teachers it would get an F

What Type of Government Does the United States Have?

The United States government is composed of the legislative, the executive, and the judicial.

www.worldatlas.com

Hilarious

Does a republic allow a party in implement project 2025 from themselves.

 

[Foxfyre]

Hilarious

Does a republic allow a party in implement project 2025 from themselves.

Considering that it takes some deciphering to even make sense of your question, I will say that our republic is based on a Constitution that allows any private citizens to draw up any kind of plan or document they wish to draw up. If they wish for the federal government to implement the proposals in that document they can petition their representatives to introduce it to the House or Senate, debate it, vote on it. If it is a good plan or policy or proposal, a good government will pass it and it becomes law.

Or if it is something the President has authority to do on his own they can petition him to consider it.

Otherwise it is just a document reflecting the thoughts, opinions, hopes, dreams proposals of a group of American citizens.

 

[otto105]

Considering that it takes some deciphering to even make sense of your question, I will say that our republic is based on a Constitution that allows any private citizens to draw up any kind of plan or document they wish to draw up. If they wish for the federal government to implement the proposals in that document they can petition their representatives to introduce it to the House or Senate, debate it, vote on it. If it is a good plan or policy or proposal, a good government will pass it and it becomes law.

Or if it is something the President has authority to do on his own they can petition him to consider it.

Otherwise it is just a document reflecting the thoughts, opinions, hopes, dreams proposals of a group of American citizens.

Hilarious

Project 2025 was written for him. Over 160 people who worked in his first term helped write the thing. Vance wrote the forward.

They will use the courts to implement portions of the authoritarian power grab.

 

[Foxfyre]

Hilarious

Project 2025 was written for him. Over 160 people who worked in his first term helped write the thing. Vance wrote the forward.

They will use the courts to implement portions of the authoritarian power grab.

Show me ANY credible evidence or shut up about it already. Those spreading stupid dishonest inflammatory propaganda really REALLY make themselves look like useful idiots for the deep state.

 

[otto105]

Show me ANY credible evidence or shut up about it already. Those spreading stupid dishonest inflammatory propaganda really REALLY make themselves look like useful idiots for the deep state.

Project 2025 mainly led by ex-Trump officials, leaked videos reveal | Project 2025 | The Guardian

 

[otto105]

Former Project 2025 director downplays Trump ties, but says he hopes he’d implement the plan | CNN Politics

 

[Foxfyre]

Project 2025 mainly led by ex-Trump officials, leaked videos reveal | Project 2025 | The Guardian

That's the leftwing MSM interpretation of what Project 2025 is. Smart people have actually read the document and know better.

And ethical people don't spread malicious gossip about Project 2025 or anything else.

 

[otto105]

That's the leftwing MSM interpretation of what Project 2025 is. Smart people have actually read the document and know better.

And ethical people don't spread malicious gossip about Project 2025 or anything else.

Hilarious

The document was written for him. A lot of ex-humper people worked on it.

Nobody that wants America to remain a Democracy wants that shit.

 

[Foxfyre]

Hilarious

The document was written for him. A lot of ex-humper people worked on it.

Nobody that wants America to remain a Democracy wants that shit.

An ethical person would show evidence for a claim like that. Since you can't show any evidence. . .

 

[BackAgain]

What academics disagree with me? Source them.

Application denied. Do your own homework.

But mostly, tell me why your question even matters. Would the fact that some academics deny the positions of your preferred academics make a damn bit of difference?

I've showed you college taught academic work that agrees with me, disagrees with you.

So what? The opinions expressed by your preferred academics are still wrong.

So what is so crazy about you showing your source?

It’s irrelevant.

I’m sad for you, ya dolt. You just don’t get it.

 

[otto105]

An ethical person would show evidence for a claim like that. Since you can't show any evidence. . .

Just did.

You disagree with the facts presented. When Harris wins, will you still be advocating for her to implement project 2025 for herself.

 

[Foxfyre]

Just did.

You disagree with the facts presented. When Harris wins, will you still be advocating for her to implement project 2025 for herself.

Have a lovely evening otto. Maybe you will understand the difference between what you have evidence for and what you want to believe one of these days and understand that there is a difference between those two thing.

 

[AntonToo]

Application denied. Do your own homework.

But mostly, tell me why your question even matters. Would the fact that some academics deny the positions of your preferred academics make a damn bit of difference?

So what? The opinions expressed by your preferred academics are still wrong.

It’s irrelevant.

I’m sad for you, ya dolt. You just don’t get it.

So no, you can't source or reasonably support anything you say.

When you say "other academics disagree with you" you actually have no idea and can't name any. You just wish it was so and then you just say it.


You do know you are a total clown, right?