Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 378 of 960 (802694)
03-19-2017 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 346 by New Cat's Eye
03-17-2017 9:25 AM


Re: The racism is all coming from the Left
New Cat's Eye writes:
quote:
It's like if we were coworkers and every time we had a minor disagreement about something you ran to the boss to get them to implement a decision so you could force me to comply with your way.
That's how adults behave.
If there's a conflict, we seek to have it resolved, yes? After all, we shouldn't resort to violence, right? We need to have some sort of way to adjudicate which one of us shall prevail.
And if we as a society don't like the way that decision came down, we can petition the government to change the way such conflicts are resolved.
Of course, this leads to the question: Was Trump also "totalitarian" in his rescinding of the guidance that Title IX applies to trans people? After all, it was because of those guidelines that Grimm's case was likely to prevail...at which time the bigots "ran to the boss to get them to implement a decision so they could force us to comply with their way."
Shouldn't you be upset that Trump rescinded the guidelines?
quote:
It's that approach of running to and using an authority to force your dissenters into compliance rather than working with them and coming to an agreement that I find distasteful.
Libertarian claptrap, as usual.
So you don't like democracy. Because you've just described how democracy works: We as a society make a decision. If you don't like that decision, you are free to try and persuade others so that we can use that authority to change our minds.
Exactly how do you think you can resolve a conflict without at some point "forcing a dissenter into compliance"?
We can't both eat the cookie. Someone's going to have to be "forced" to give it up and let the other eat it.
Who makes that decision when neither is willing to relent? What do we do when we see that our guidelines for making that decision violate other principles that we hold dear?
Or do you not have any responsibilities under the social contract you purposefully and willfully signed when you agreed to citizenship?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 346 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-17-2017 9:25 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(3)
Message 957 of 960 (815242)
07-17-2017 8:06 PM
Reply to: Message 927 by Taq
07-13-2017 5:29 PM


Re: ItRe: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
TAQ writes:
quote:
"HILLARY DID IT TOO!!!!!"
Except, to be perfectly clear, she didn't.
The latest claim is that somehow the Clinton campaign was "colluding with the Ukraine." Except they weren't. The entire story is based on a low-level DNC consultant who is Ukrainian-American going to the Ukrainian embassy to discuss the actions of Paul Manafort, a lobbyist with ties to the Russian invasion of the Ukraine.
Let us unpack this:
1) The Democratic National Committee is not the Clinton campaign.
2) A consultant to the DNC is not an employee of the DNC.
3) The Ukraine is an ally.
4) The Ukraine was invaded by an enemy of the US.
5) A member of the Trump campaign was involved with the invasion of the Ukraine.
So not only is this naught but an attempt to distract from the actions of the son of the candidate having a meeting with a Russian hacker in order to receive stolen information, it's all based upon a lie.
Which, of course, is what we've come to expect from Faith. As she has already pointed out, she's blaming Clinton for somehow setting Trump, Jr. and Kushner up.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 927 by Taq, posted 07-13-2017 5:29 PM Taq has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024