- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
12 Dec 16
Originally posted by PhrannyI have a new one, it's the Left wing extremist conspiracy theory!😛
If the Emollients Clause doesn't get Trump impeached, maybe we can send him to prison for treason. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2016/12/10/world/europe/10reuters-usa-election-cyber-russia.html?emc=eta1
And if you do not believe he has serious connections to Russia, read this: http://time.com/4433880/donald-trump-ties-to-russia/?xid=emailshare
Obama wait ...[text shortened]... would do great damage by undermining the public's faith in voting. Suzianne, I love your posts.
Originally posted by WajomaIf P, then Q.
So write your point as a formula if words are failing you.
It is after all "elementary".
P
Therefore, Q.
If X causes leftist butt-hurt, then X has done something right.
X causes leftist butt-hurt.
Therefore, X has done something right.
It's the same reasoning, whether X = Trump, X = Hitler, or X = cholera.
Therefore, if we reject the conclusion that, say, "Hitler has done something right," then it follows that at least one of the premises "Hitler causes leftist butt-hurt" or "If Hitler causes leftist butt-hurt, then Hitler has done something right" must be rejected. We can safely say that Hitler did, in fact, cause leftist butt-hurt. Hence we are led to discard the premise "If Hitler causes leftist butt-hurt, then Hitler has done something right" if it is not true that "Hitler has done something right."
Originally posted by checkbaiterGood God. I didn't think you were quite that stupid.
Reagan was the greatest President of my lifetime. I hope Trump does follow in his footsteps.
Reagan almost destroyed this country. He certainly laid the blueprint the banksters and the globalists still follow. Trickle-down is the world's worst bad joke.
13 Dec 16
Originally posted by checkbaiterSeriously, are you stupid?
Surely you mean a tool of the left. The narsisist Obaba is the one who shoved Obamacare down the throats of the people even though the majority was against it. They even had to bribe some politicians and threatened others to get it passed.
Who have you been listening to?
Fascism is extreme conservatism, in many cases following on the heels of desperate authoritarianism. And then you elect Trump, possibly the biggest narcissist (and authoritarian) this country has ever seen, but that's okay with you, and then you call Obama a narcissist. It would be funny if it weren't so stupid.
And I don't know what country you come from, but 25 million Americans are damn glad they finally have health insurance, even though those filthy rich corporations are now trying to hike rates through the roof to keep from honoring their obligations.
You act like McConnell and the other Republicans who always want to dismantle everything that is good in this country (social security, medicare) are doing the American people a big favor by taking away their health insurance and not replacing it with anything except nebulous promises.
Why do people like you, who I assume work hard for every nickel they make, always support the rich taking everything away from Americans and refusing to support the poor?
13 Dec 16
Originally posted by SuzianneFascism is only possible through a strong centralized government. In other words, they are collectivists.
Seriously, are you stupid?
Who have you been listening to?
Fascism is extreme conservatism, in many cases following on the heels of desperate authoritarianism. And then you elect Trump, possibly the biggest narcissist (and authoritarian) this country has ever seen, but that's okay with you, and then you call Obama a narcissist. It would be funny if ...[text shortened]... always support the rich taking everything away from Americans and refusing to support the poor?
There are many flavors of collectivism Suzy. There is Nazism, communism, socialism, fascism, which flavor do you prefer?
And yes, drawing the line between the flavors often gets blurry. Once the state has absolute control it does not much matter which flavor they choose to enjoy at a whim.
13 Dec 16
1 edit
Originally posted by PhrannyI haven't heard anyone mention this yet. It's the Emoluments Clause of the US Constitution.
If the Emollients Clause doesn't get Trump impeached, maybe we can send him to prison for treason. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2016/12/10/world/europe/10reuters-usa-election-cyber-russia.html?emc=eta1
And if you do not believe he has serious connections to Russia, read this: http://time.com/4433880/donald-trump-ties-to-russia/?xid=emailshare
Obama wait ...[text shortened]... would do great damage by undermining the public's faith in voting. Suzianne, I love your posts.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 8:
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
This is the heart of the controversy. Trump is already counting on the presidency inflating the value of his "brand". Perhaps even his kids can get in on the action. If this country had any, ummm, "testicular fortitude", that's exactly where Trump will end up. Prison.
Hillary's emails are so much fiddle-faddle compared to this. At least she didn't violate the Constitution.
13 Dec 16
Originally posted by whodeyI do not agree with your "collectivist" or "statist" nonsense. Labels meant to deceive.
Fascism is only possible through a strong centralized government. In other words, they are collectivists.
There are many flavors of collectivism Suzy. There is Nazism, communism, socialism, fascism, which flavor do you prefer?
And yes, drawing the line between the flavors often gets blurry. Once the state has absolute control it does not much matter which flavor they choose to enjoy at a whim.
I believe in a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Conservatives believe the government should serve the rich, an authoritarian plutocratic oligarchy. I do not.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
Originally posted by SuzianneGood God, I didn't think you were such a brainwashed looney tunes libtard. You are hopelessly irreconcilable.
Good God. I didn't think you were quite that stupid.
Reagan almost destroyed this country. He certainly laid the blueprint the banksters and the globalists have followed. Trickle-down is the world's worst bad joke.
13 Dec 16
Originally posted by SuzianneNo, it's all fine. While experiencing his latest episode of word vomit regurgitation, Donny has said that while his sons run his business, they will be making "no deals." Whatever that means.
I haven't heard anyone mention this yet. It's the Emoluments Clause of the US Constitution.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 8:
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of an ...[text shortened]... mails are so much fiddle-faddle compared to this. At least she didn't violate the Constitution.
13 Dec 16
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraAnd now my point has been made, not by me but by yourself, that being; You had no point, there is nothing there to aknowledge. You may as well have said cholera has an 'r' in it and Hitler has an 'r' in it, or the sky is blue and grass is green, the sky has a color and grass has a color. You were asked if you were trying to draw some parallel between Trump, Hitler and cholera and what it amounts to is different words used in similarly structured statements. You've made a public service announcment that you don't support hitler nor cholera, we're not sure why, neither were subjects under discussion. The reason it was necessary for me to make the 'not a Trump supporter' distinction is that anything less than anti-Trump bile is seen as Trump support, a recent example being when I de-bunked the "Trump called mexicans rapists" lie. It was taken as a sign of support for Trump. On this occasion I pre-empted the conclusion jumpers.
If P, then Q.
P
Therefore, Q.
If X causes leftist butt-hurt, then X has done something right.
X causes leftist butt-hurt.
Therefore, X has done something right.
It's the same reasoning, whether X = Trump, X = Hitler, or X = cholera.
Therefore, if we reject the conclusion that, say, "Hitler has done something right," then it follows that at ...[text shortened]... then Hitler has done something right" if it is not true that "Hitler has done something right."
So after digging an increasingly deep hole for yourself the last tactic was to pass off your snide obscure oneliner as giving some unsolicited tutoring on elements of elementary compositional logic. But from your last post one can only come to either of two conclusions, either you claim to have a grip on elementary logic but you don't possess the ability to elucidate what that understanding is (it is after all, elementary) or, you're bluffing.