It seems I spoke too soon about the asterisks. I did say they became his. But it's not just because. They actually did become his in January of 2009 when he took the oath of office. That is when he assumed responsibility for the actions of the United States of America. It is what he sought. It is what he was elected to do. If he is righteous and honorable, he would have stopped the actions of the NSA. He has not done so. I expect you to hold him to account. I did not vote for him so I have no say.
Or you can just use copper or silver wire, without having to wait for a machine that can print it. 3d printers are cool, but let's not put them on a pedestal.
They became his programs the moment he assumed office. He is the embodiment of the executive branch, and all of its power is vested in him. Congratulations, you seem to have weaned yourself off of asterisks.
That's how fascism actually works. The way free speech works is that you can say what you want, and other people get to say what they want. When you add the element of persecution, that when it changes from a liberal society to one that is totalitarian.
No, he's saying that he is someone who can think conceptually using logic and reasoning. As a result, he has no need to cast his opponents as evil bigots.
And if he had fired everyone that tweeted their lack of support for their CEO, would you be saying the same thing? No? Then really what you are saying is that only some freedom of speech should have consequences, namely those views that aren't aligned with yours.
Yep. Basically, you are saying that the only safe opinion is empty opinion. I'll pass on your politically repressed society. I'll chose a liberal society any day over that.
Not sure what happened. Thought the first one was lost, posted the second, and then there were two. Let me just delete the dupe...oh...this is slashdot.
I see more asterisks. Was your argument not capable of standing on its own merits? Do the words have different meaning when they have little stars next to them? Do the spiky balls somehow add emphasis to milquetoast language and give it extra punch? What does the GOP have to do with any of this?
I think the word you are looking for is ad hominem. It means arguing to the person in lieu of the argument. For several examples of ad hominem arguments, see your posts above. This is far more fun than actually posting logical descriptions of my arguments so you can ignore them, pretend they don't exist, and put asterisks around silly retorts.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems I spoke too soon about the asterisks. I did say they became his. But it's not just because. They actually did become his in January of 2009 when he took the oath of office. That is when he assumed responsibility for the actions of the United States of America. It is what he sought. It is what he was elected to do. If he is righteous and honorable, he would have stopped the actions of the NSA. He has not done so. I expect you to hold him to account. I did not vote for him so I have no say.
Or you can just use copper or silver wire, without having to wait for a machine that can print it. 3d printers are cool, but let's not put them on a pedestal.
They became his programs the moment he assumed office. He is the embodiment of the executive branch, and all of its power is vested in him. Congratulations, you seem to have weaned yourself off of asterisks.
You know what else? In 2011 Barack Obama signed the Patriot Act Extension into law. And most of the yahoos here still voted for him.
Have you always though this way? Or just in the last two years?
That's how fascism actually works. The way free speech works is that you can say what you want, and other people get to say what they want. When you add the element of persecution, that when it changes from a liberal society to one that is totalitarian.
Stop trying to destroy the narrative. Mormon's are amoral and they need to be persecuted.
That's a pretty good description of Jeff Flanagan's response. Agreed.
Why is Eich unfit to be CEO of Mozilla, but Barack Obama was fit to be President?
Most of the people involved in this discussion ignored the views of Barack Obama when they voted for him. His views were identical to Eich's.
No, he's saying that he is someone who can think conceptually using logic and reasoning. As a result, he has no need to cast his opponents as evil bigots.
And if he had fired everyone that tweeted their lack of support for their CEO, would you be saying the same thing? No? Then really what you are saying is that only some freedom of speech should have consequences, namely those views that aren't aligned with yours.
Yep. Basically, you are saying that the only safe opinion is empty opinion. I'll pass on your politically repressed society. I'll chose a liberal society any day over that.
And that is how the left represses people who don't share their views.
Yeah, actually they are.
You are right. But he is being persecuted.
Fascism isn't only perpetrated and instituted by governments.
Remember the 2007 NIE? They scratch someone's back, someone scratches their back.
The Left has become fascist in the name of tolerance. Tolerance will be imposed and all who stand in the way will put against the wall.
Not sure what happened. Thought the first one was lost, posted the second, and then there were two. Let me just delete the dupe...oh...this is slashdot.
Let's just ban cars. And sharp scissors. How many people died from choking last year? Surely there's something we can do to prevent those deaths.
Let's just ban cars. And scissors. How many people died from choking last year? Surely there's some way to prevent those.
I see more asterisks. Was your argument not capable of standing on its own merits? Do the words have different meaning when they have little stars next to them? Do the spiky balls somehow add emphasis to milquetoast language and give it extra punch? What does the GOP have to do with any of this?
I have made lots of coherent points, including this one. You just don't like them.
I think the word you are looking for is ad hominem. It means arguing to the person in lieu of the argument. For several examples of ad hominem arguments, see your posts above. This is far more fun than actually posting logical descriptions of my arguments so you can ignore them, pretend they don't exist, and put asterisks around silly retorts.