A Mere Hundred Years

[Anomalism]

I have noticed that NOT ONE TIME in this thread, have you even addressed the content of her post. You've done NOTHING BUT attack her.

I have tried and have been disappointed before. She isn't capable of defending ideas with her own thoughts.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What would you do in this 'conversation' other than ignore her and shotgun her with links and quotes to create the illusion that you actually think for yourself and have all the answers.

Last time I tried to have a debate she told me herself that she doesn't debate. She's just here to stand on her soapbox and call other people stupid. I think the truth for why she doesn't debate is she isn't actually capable of thinking for herself effectively.

That is because there is no debate with the left, here or anywhere. Provide them with information on why someone believes what they do and all you get is called names, told you are a wannabe killer/mass murderer and just so many kinds of evil.

After decades of that, why bother. Post the information is what she does.

Instruct based on that information.

I have noticed that NOT ONE TIME in this thread, have you even addressed the content of her post. You've done NOTHING BUT attack her.

And said attacks?
......aimed at me are as eggs attacking stones.

 

[Anomalism]

You believe that without a shred of proof simply because you think the world that does not adhere to your world view is somehow mass murders. Yet the evidence throughout history proves that it is the progressive/Liberal/LEFTIST that is the mass murderer.

I have talked to plenty of religious lunatics that dehumanize Muslims to the point that they actually think they're all evil.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Watch this:

Can you name three or four of the books that have informed your geopolitical worldview?

Nice attempt at a deflection. I assume you're leading up to another narcissistic attack on my intelligence.

Your intelligence?

Fact not in evidence.

 

[Anomalism]

Your intelligence?

Fact not in evidence.

I have your game all figured out and it's actually quite boring.

 

[Darkwind]

I have noticed that NOT ONE TIME in this thread, have you even addressed the content of her post. You've done NOTHING BUT attack her.

I have tried and have been disappointed before. She isn't capable of defending ideas with her own thoughts.

Are you?

However, I will acknowledge that you agree with Me. After being confronted, always, with people who won't acknowledge your argument, we simply stop trying.

This attitude from you is exactly how the conservatives in this world feel toward you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have noticed that NOT ONE TIME in this thread, have you even addressed the content of her post. You've done NOTHING BUT attack her.

I have tried and have been disappointed before. She isn't capable of defending ideas with her own thoughts.

Everything I post is of my thoughts....unless you claim the quotes and links are chosen at random.

Unlike Liberals...I state the source of material I provide.

Always.
Of course, I can do this due to my excellent education, and work ethic.



Now....compare that to the 'Liberal Plagiarism' of your ilk.

You dolts use the talking points you glean from Obama, the NYTimes, the DNC, MSNBC, Comedy Central,.... or CAIR.....and never give the source. It is a pretense that is is aimed at implying that you came up with the material on your own.....
...but we both know that you aren't capable of that: after all, you're a government school grad.

You Liberals are the Milli Vanilli of political discourse....lip-syncing Liberal outlets.

That's the truth.....isn't it.

 

[Darkwind]

You believe that without a shred of proof simply because you think the world that does not adhere to your world view is somehow mass murders. Yet the evidence throughout history proves that it is the progressive/Liberal/LEFTIST that is the mass murderer.

I have talked to plenty of religious lunatics that dehumanize Muslims to the point that they actually think they're all evil.

I've talked to literally thousands of non-religious and atheists who dehumanize religious adherents and think they are all evil. I'm thinking you're one of them.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your intelligence?

Fact not in evidence.

I have your game all figured out and it's actually quite boring.

I sense the white flag coming.

 

[Anomalism]

Are you?

I always use my own thoughts unless the debate demands otherwise.

 

[Anomalism]

I've talked to literally thousands of non-religious and atheists who dehumanize religious adherents and think they are all evil.

Your whataboutism doesn't make what I said any less true.

 

[Anomalism]

I sense the white flag coming.

There was never a competition because you don't actually debate.

 

[Darkwind]

I've talked to literally thousands of non-religious and atheists who dehumanize religious adherents and think they are all evil.

Your whataboutism doesn't make what I said any less true.

What you term "whatagboutism" actually has a term in the English language. It is called, "Hypocrisy". Its an actual word with an actual definition.

Look it up and impress us with your thinking ability.

 

[Darkwind]

Are you?

I always use my own thoughts unless the debate demands otherwise.

What about her OP is not her own thoughts? The only difference is she is providing some evidence as to what helped shape her thoughts.

you still have NOT addressed a single thing in her statement.

Forget about getting her to debate. Why not just take the information and then post WHY you disagree with it, regardless of whether or not she'll debate it?

 

[Anomalism]

What you term "whatagboutism" actually has a term in the English language. It is called, "Hypocrisy". Its an actual word with an actual definition.

Look it up and impress us with your thinking ability.

So you were a hypocrite when you pointed your finger at atheists that dehumanize religious people?

 

[Anomalism]

What about her OP is not her own thoughts? The only difference is she is providing some evidence as to what helped shape her thoughts.

you still have NOT addressed a single thing in her statement.

Forget about getting her to debate. Why not just take the information and then post WHY you disagree with it, regardless of whether or not she'll debate it?

A lot of what she posts is a perspective derived from a distorted view of history. There is not just one perspective to get from history. There are many opinions and perspectives that can't be proven wrong with data alone. With stuff like that the only way to gain ground is to break things down and have a debate with our own brains. She refuses to do that.

 

[Desperado]

A century after the establishment of Karl Marx's playground, and under the auspices of their protégés, the Democrats, the Soviet Union lives again.

View attachment 435073

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics established
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, formed this day in 1922 with its capital in Moscow, eventually incorporated 15 republics and constituted (in area) the largest country in the world until its dissolution in 1991.
Britannica.com


How about you take a look at the aims of the Communist Party, USA, and the aims of the modern Democrat Party.



Watch, and note the consubstantial basis of both the aims of the Communist Party and the Democrat Party:

......it is ...extraordinary.....the correspondence between the aims of the communist party and the aims of the Democrats.....

1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

2. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.

3. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

4. . Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.


5. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

6. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

7. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

8. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

9. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

10. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.


11. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

12. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

13. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce



Now....wouldn't an honest appraisal agree that all or almost all are clearly the aims and direction of Democrats/Liberals/Progressive leaders?

I got 'em from a website of declared communist goals...

The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals



You might take a look at this one, too.
10 planks of Communist manifesto
Communist Manifesto 10 Planks

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

The democrats are following the script step by step

 

[Darkwind]

What you term "whatagboutism" actually has a term in the English language. It is called, "Hypocrisy". Its an actual word with an actual definition.

Look it up and impress us with your thinking ability.

So you were a hypocrite when you pointed your finger at atheists that dehumanize religious people?

I was pointing out facts, facts that I am willing to defend. I can start that defense right her in this very thread with you and your willingness to believe she is willing to do harm, even murder, just for believing what she does. That by you, someone who presents the face of one who is anti-religion.

The actual hypocrisy is yours.

 

[Darkwind]

What about her OP is not her own thoughts? The only difference is she is providing some evidence as to what helped shape her thoughts.

you still have NOT addressed a single thing in her statement.

Forget about getting her to debate. Why not just take the information and then post WHY you disagree with it, regardless of whether or not she'll debate it?

A lot of what she posts is a perspective derived from a distorted view of history. There is not just one perspective to get from history. There are many opinions and perspectives that can't be proven wrong with data alone. With stuff like that the only way to gain ground is to break things down and have a debate with our own brains. She refuses to do that.

YOU ARE refusing to do that, right this very moment.

You speak of 'gaining ground' as if the purpose and goal is to convert her to your world view. You are correct in that the ere is not just one perspective to get from history. This does not make YOU perspective correct and hers wrong.

Are you going to say something directly to her OP, not her, about your thoughts on the content of that post or not?

 

[Anomalism]

I was pointing out facts, facts that I am willing to defend. I can start that defense right her in this very thread with you and your willingness to believe she is willing to do harm, even murder, just for believing what she does. That by you, someone who presents the face of one who is anti-religion.

The actual hypocrisy is yours.

I'm not an atheist. In fact I argue with atheists frequently.