Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
there you go with you 1,2,3 a,b,c bull shit ... then telling what liberals believe as if you really know ... I for one research everything that is said by republicans a democrats if it doesn't jive then I don't support it like the TPP don't support it now didn't support it before ... so when you learn, which we all know you can't learn, because you need to justify your Ignorance in defining who DEMS/LIBERALS are ... nobody any more takes you serious ... especially when you try to define what a liberals progressives is, do or areWhen Liberals/Progressives hear the words ‘ studies show,’ or ‘experts say,’ they cease to ‘question authority.’ Hence the appellation…'Lock-Step Liberals'
But there is a dark side....a darker side...that leads from that reputation.....it bodes the end of Western Civilization.
1. " All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences" MercatorNet: All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences
Real advances are stymied by the strangle hold that Progressives have on academia.
2." If you thought that the progressive bias in social sciences was considered a problem only by tradition-minded folk, you might be surprised to hear the views of celebrity skeptic, Michael Shermer in Scientific American earlier this year:
A 2015 study by psychologist José Duarte, then at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, entitled “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science,” found that 58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science? It begins with what subjects are studied and the descriptive language employed.
Duarte et al. find similar distortive language across the social sciences, where, for instance, certain words are used to suggest pernicious motives when confronting contradictory evidence—“deny,” “legitimize,” “rationalize,” “justify,” “defend,” “trivialize”—with conservatives as examples, as if liberals are always objective and rational." Ibid.
3. If our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat voters where bright enough, they would have caught on to the scam long go....
...as conservative/traditional observers have.
4. But hold on! Some Liberals not only caught on....but have the honesty to declaim it!
" As Jesse Singal puts it at New York magazine, discussing a liberal critique, Alice Dreger’s Galileo’s Middle Finger,
If activists—any activists, regardless of their political orientation or the rightness of their cause—get to decide by fiat what is and isn’t an acceptable interpretation of the world, then science is pointless, and we should just throw the whole damn thing out." Ibid.
Just as I said.....Liberals/Progressives presage the end of our civilization.
Saying Liberals do not read is not a lie? You are as stupid as Political Spice.Ann COulter won't be shouted down by you lefties.
She speaks Truth to Power, and that is why you hate her.
And you still haven't given ONE example of her lying.
Have you looked and not been able to find one?
I asked you for an example of Ann Coulter lying.
Instead you misrepresent the OP, falsely claim it is a lie, and of course it was not said by Ann Coulter.
You failed completely.
You are a moron.
Would you like to try again, or would you like to implement standard lefty avoidance tactics?
oh puleeze. if her lips are moving, she's lying.
there are entire books written about her insanity and dishonesty. feel free to take the time to read occasionally. if that is too difficult, i'm sure you can get it in audio form.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000MAH678/?tag=ff0d01-20
Then it shouldn't be very hard for you to post an example.
Give me a good one.
Don't play the bullshit Shotgun Logical Fallacy or Argument from VErbosity logical fallacy.
Pick one that you think is a strong example for discussion purposes, or admit that you just say shit, it don't mean nothing.
oh dear... i linked a book. now learn to use the google.
i'm not here to do your homework. i gave you a book to read. now read and learn
can you believe how stupid she is ??? I for one can1. "....58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science?.....
I think I see the problem, conservatives don't believe in science
Somehow you seem to believe that science is linked to political convictions, weird. Gallileo was an evil liberal who dared to question the conservative teachings of the holy church, I guess if you were around at the time, you would be one of those calling for his execution.
"....conservatives don't believe in science...."
Gads....this is sooooooo simple....almost as simple as you are.
Let's see what Liberals believe is "science."
Is Obama a Liberal.....and titular head of the LGBT Movement?
Did Obama select John Holdren as his SCIENCE ADVISER?????
3. Just one more factor one should consider before placing one’s faith in these ‘environmental scientists’…..remember their big project in the first half of the 20th century? For Progressives, it was eugenics; let’s just kill off the unworthy. See a pattern here?
- John Holdren- did I mention picked him to be ‘Science Czar’?- he claims 1 billion people dying due to global warming by 2020. Did the President’s Nominee for Science Advisor Say He Thinks A Billion People Are Gonna Die?
- Need further indicia of the mental outlook of this President Obama pick? “John P. Holdren’s advocacy for a global planetary regime to enforce forced abortion, government `seizure of children born out of wedlock, and mandatory bodily implants designed to prevent pregnancy, Obama’s top advisor also called for,”Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods.” Holdren notes that the proposal to forcibly mass sterilize the public against their will “seems to horrify people” and yet it doesn’t seem to bother him too much. Ehrlich, Ehrlich, and Holdren, “Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,” http://www.as.wvu.edu/biology/bio463/EHLRICH1.PDF
4. What the take-away? Environmentalists view mankind as a virus, a disease that must be eradicated. In 2011, PaulEhrlich’s wife wrote a piece in the LATimes, comparing humanity to cancer: “Perpetual growth is the creed of a cancer cell, not a sustainable human society.” http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/21/opinion/la-oe-harte-population-2011072
Gee….I’ll bet these folks would be in favor of a President who favored infanticide. And that’s just what we have.
That....and morons like you.
Like you did to me earlier.PC, it's not like you even demonstrate an understanding of the subjects you post. You copy and pasting some rightwing rag doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.When Liberals/Progressives hear the words ‘ studies show,’ or ‘experts say,’ they cease to ‘question authority.’ Hence the appellation…'Lock-Step Liberals'
But there is a dark side....a darker side...that leads from that reputation.....it bodes the end of Western Civilization.
1. " All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences" MercatorNet: All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences
Real advances are stymied by the strangle hold that Progressives have on academia.
2." If you thought that the progressive bias in social sciences was considered a problem only by tradition-minded folk, you might be surprised to hear the views of celebrity skeptic, Michael Shermer in Scientific American earlier this year:
A 2015 study by psychologist José Duarte, then at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, entitled “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science,” found that 58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science? It begins with what subjects are studied and the descriptive language employed.
Duarte et al. find similar distortive language across the social sciences, where, for instance, certain words are used to suggest pernicious motives when confronting contradictory evidence—“deny,” “legitimize,” “rationalize,” “justify,” “defend,” “trivialize”—with conservatives as examples, as if liberals are always objective and rational." Ibid.
3. If our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat voters where bright enough, they would have caught on to the scam long go....
...as conservative/traditional observers have.
4. But hold on! Some Liberals not only caught on....but have the honesty to declaim it!
" As Jesse Singal puts it at New York magazine, discussing a liberal critique, Alice Dreger’s Galileo’s Middle Finger,
If activists—any activists, regardless of their political orientation or the rightness of their cause—get to decide by fiat what is and isn’t an acceptable interpretation of the world, then science is pointless, and we should just throw the whole damn thing out." Ibid.
Just as I said.....Liberals/Progressives presage the end of our civilization.
"....doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.'
Sooooo....this is your explanation for your abject ignorance????
Wasn't necessary.
Friendly advice: try to avoid using that "us" thing....
...it reveals your fear of standing up on your own two paws.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
no this was proof on how stupid you are ... facts??? you don't know the meaning of facts ... you go to some right wing rag see something that will satisfy your need to try and demean liberals, then you post it and you fail at it big time ... republicans if they only kept there mouths shut the world would be better off ...can you believe how stupid she is ??? I for one can1. "....58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science?.....
I think I see the problem, conservatives don't believe in science
Somehow you seem to believe that science is linked to political convictions, weird. Gallileo was an evil liberal who dared to question the conservative teachings of the holy church, I guess if you were around at the time, you would be one of those calling for his execution.
"....conservatives don't believe in science...."
Gads....this is sooooooo simple....almost as simple as you are.
Let's see what Liberals believe is "science."
Is Obama a Liberal.....and titular head of the LGBT Movement?
Did Obama select John Holdren as his SCIENCE ADVISER?????
3. Just one more factor one should consider before placing one’s faith in these ‘environmental scientists’…..remember their big project in the first half of the 20th century? For Progressives, it was eugenics; let’s just kill off the unworthy. See a pattern here?
- John Holdren- did I mention picked him to be ‘Science Czar’?- he claims 1 billion people dying due to global warming by 2020. Did the President’s Nominee for Science Advisor Say He Thinks A Billion People Are Gonna Die?
- Need further indicia of the mental outlook of this President Obama pick? “John P. Holdren’s advocacy for a global planetary regime to enforce forced abortion, government `seizure of children born out of wedlock, and mandatory bodily implants designed to prevent pregnancy, Obama’s top advisor also called for,”Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods.” Holdren notes that the proposal to forcibly mass sterilize the public against their will “seems to horrify people” and yet it doesn’t seem to bother him too much. Ehrlich, Ehrlich, and Holdren, “Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,” http://www.as.wvu.edu/biology/bio463/EHLRICH1.PDF
4. What the take-away? Environmentalists view mankind as a virus, a disease that must be eradicated. In 2011, PaulEhrlich’s wife wrote a piece in the LATimes, comparing humanity to cancer: “Perpetual growth is the creed of a cancer cell, not a sustainable human society.” http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/21/opinion/la-oe-harte-population-2011072
Gee….I’ll bet these folks would be in favor of a President who favored infanticide. And that’s just what we have.
That....and morons like you.
Was this your attempt to rebut the facts I provided?
It certainly reveals your level of ability.
no this was proof on how stupid you are ... facts??? you don't know the meaning of facts ... you go to some right wing rag see something that will satisfy your need to try and demean liberals, then you post it and you fail at it big time ... republicans if they only kept there mouths shut the world would be better off ...can you believe how stupid she is ??? I for one can1. "....58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science?.....
I think I see the problem, conservatives don't believe in science
Somehow you seem to believe that science is linked to political convictions, weird. Gallileo was an evil liberal who dared to question the conservative teachings of the holy church, I guess if you were around at the time, you would be one of those calling for his execution.
"....conservatives don't believe in science...."
Gads....this is sooooooo simple....almost as simple as you are.
Let's see what Liberals believe is "science."
Is Obama a Liberal.....and titular head of the LGBT Movement?
Did Obama select John Holdren as his SCIENCE ADVISER?????
3. Just one more factor one should consider before placing one’s faith in these ‘environmental scientists’…..remember their big project in the first half of the 20th century? For Progressives, it was eugenics; let’s just kill off the unworthy. See a pattern here?
- John Holdren- did I mention picked him to be ‘Science Czar’?- he claims 1 billion people dying due to global warming by 2020. Did the President’s Nominee for Science Advisor Say He Thinks A Billion People Are Gonna Die?
- Need further indicia of the mental outlook of this President Obama pick? “John P. Holdren’s advocacy for a global planetary regime to enforce forced abortion, government `seizure of children born out of wedlock, and mandatory bodily implants designed to prevent pregnancy, Obama’s top advisor also called for,”Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods.” Holdren notes that the proposal to forcibly mass sterilize the public against their will “seems to horrify people” and yet it doesn’t seem to bother him too much. Ehrlich, Ehrlich, and Holdren, “Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,” http://www.as.wvu.edu/biology/bio463/EHLRICH1.PDF
4. What the take-away? Environmentalists view mankind as a virus, a disease that must be eradicated. In 2011, PaulEhrlich’s wife wrote a piece in the LATimes, comparing humanity to cancer: “Perpetual growth is the creed of a cancer cell, not a sustainable human society.” http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/21/opinion/la-oe-harte-population-2011072
Gee….I’ll bet these folks would be in favor of a President who favored infanticide. And that’s just what we have.
That....and morons like you.
Was this your attempt to rebut the facts I provided?
It certainly reveals your level of ability.
Like you did to me earlier.PC, it's not like you even demonstrate an understanding of the subjects you post. You copy and pasting some rightwing rag doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.When Liberals/Progressives hear the words ‘ studies show,’ or ‘experts say,’ they cease to ‘question authority.’ Hence the appellation…'Lock-Step Liberals'
But there is a dark side....a darker side...that leads from that reputation.....it bodes the end of Western Civilization.
1. " All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences" MercatorNet: All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences
Real advances are stymied by the strangle hold that Progressives have on academia.
2." If you thought that the progressive bias in social sciences was considered a problem only by tradition-minded folk, you might be surprised to hear the views of celebrity skeptic, Michael Shermer in Scientific American earlier this year:
A 2015 study by psychologist José Duarte, then at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, entitled “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science,” found that 58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science? It begins with what subjects are studied and the descriptive language employed.
Duarte et al. find similar distortive language across the social sciences, where, for instance, certain words are used to suggest pernicious motives when confronting contradictory evidence—“deny,” “legitimize,” “rationalize,” “justify,” “defend,” “trivialize”—with conservatives as examples, as if liberals are always objective and rational." Ibid.
3. If our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat voters where bright enough, they would have caught on to the scam long go....
...as conservative/traditional observers have.
4. But hold on! Some Liberals not only caught on....but have the honesty to declaim it!
" As Jesse Singal puts it at New York magazine, discussing a liberal critique, Alice Dreger’s Galileo’s Middle Finger,
If activists—any activists, regardless of their political orientation or the rightness of their cause—get to decide by fiat what is and isn’t an acceptable interpretation of the world, then science is pointless, and we should just throw the whole damn thing out." Ibid.
Just as I said.....Liberals/Progressives presage the end of our civilization.
"....doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.'
Sooooo....this is your explanation for your abject ignorance????
Wasn't necessary.
Friendly advice: try to avoid using that "us" thing....
...it reveals your fear of standing up on your own two paws.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
Shall I continue to wait for you to provide the list of Coulter's books that you have read, that led you to your critique of her works???
Or shall we stipulate that you have over-used the Liberal stratagem of following orders provided by your masters?
With very little effort you have become our greatest source of greenhouse gases.
Like you did to me earlier.PC, it's not like you even demonstrate an understanding of the subjects you post. You copy and pasting some rightwing rag doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.When Liberals/Progressives hear the words ‘ studies show,’ or ‘experts say,’ they cease to ‘question authority.’ Hence the appellation…'Lock-Step Liberals'
But there is a dark side....a darker side...that leads from that reputation.....it bodes the end of Western Civilization.
1. " All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences" MercatorNet: All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences
Real advances are stymied by the strangle hold that Progressives have on academia.
2." If you thought that the progressive bias in social sciences was considered a problem only by tradition-minded folk, you might be surprised to hear the views of celebrity skeptic, Michael Shermer in Scientific American earlier this year:
A 2015 study by psychologist José Duarte, then at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, entitled “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science,” found that 58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science? It begins with what subjects are studied and the descriptive language employed.
Duarte et al. find similar distortive language across the social sciences, where, for instance, certain words are used to suggest pernicious motives when confronting contradictory evidence—“deny,” “legitimize,” “rationalize,” “justify,” “defend,” “trivialize”—with conservatives as examples, as if liberals are always objective and rational." Ibid.
3. If our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat voters where bright enough, they would have caught on to the scam long go....
...as conservative/traditional observers have.
4. But hold on! Some Liberals not only caught on....but have the honesty to declaim it!
" As Jesse Singal puts it at New York magazine, discussing a liberal critique, Alice Dreger’s Galileo’s Middle Finger,
If activists—any activists, regardless of their political orientation or the rightness of their cause—get to decide by fiat what is and isn’t an acceptable interpretation of the world, then science is pointless, and we should just throw the whole damn thing out." Ibid.
Just as I said.....Liberals/Progressives presage the end of our civilization.
"....doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.'
Sooooo....this is your explanation for your abject ignorance????
Wasn't necessary.
Friendly advice: try to avoid using that "us" thing....
...it reveals your fear of standing up on your own two paws.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
Artists have studios.Like you did to me earlier.PC, it's not like you even demonstrate an understanding of the subjects you post. You copy and pasting some rightwing rag doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.When Liberals/Progressives hear the words ‘ studies show,’ or ‘experts say,’ they cease to ‘question authority.’ Hence the appellation…'Lock-Step Liberals'
But there is a dark side....a darker side...that leads from that reputation.....it bodes the end of Western Civilization.
1. " All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences" MercatorNet: All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences
Real advances are stymied by the strangle hold that Progressives have on academia.
2." If you thought that the progressive bias in social sciences was considered a problem only by tradition-minded folk, you might be surprised to hear the views of celebrity skeptic, Michael Shermer in Scientific American earlier this year:
A 2015 study by psychologist José Duarte, then at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, entitled “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science,” found that 58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science? It begins with what subjects are studied and the descriptive language employed.
Duarte et al. find similar distortive language across the social sciences, where, for instance, certain words are used to suggest pernicious motives when confronting contradictory evidence—“deny,” “legitimize,” “rationalize,” “justify,” “defend,” “trivialize”—with conservatives as examples, as if liberals are always objective and rational." Ibid.
3. If our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat voters where bright enough, they would have caught on to the scam long go....
...as conservative/traditional observers have.
4. But hold on! Some Liberals not only caught on....but have the honesty to declaim it!
" As Jesse Singal puts it at New York magazine, discussing a liberal critique, Alice Dreger’s Galileo’s Middle Finger,
If activists—any activists, regardless of their political orientation or the rightness of their cause—get to decide by fiat what is and isn’t an acceptable interpretation of the world, then science is pointless, and we should just throw the whole damn thing out." Ibid.
Just as I said.....Liberals/Progressives presage the end of our civilization.
"....doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.'
Sooooo....this is your explanation for your abject ignorance????
Wasn't necessary.
Friendly advice: try to avoid using that "us" thing....
...it reveals your fear of standing up on your own two paws.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
Is this the poster in your office?
View attachment 89079
I have an exciting life, and you are boring. Do not sit around waiting for me in your boring existence.Like you did to me earlier.PC, it's not like you even demonstrate an understanding of the subjects you post. You copy and pasting some rightwing rag doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.When Liberals/Progressives hear the words ‘ studies show,’ or ‘experts say,’ they cease to ‘question authority.’ Hence the appellation…'Lock-Step Liberals'
But there is a dark side....a darker side...that leads from that reputation.....it bodes the end of Western Civilization.
1. " All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences" MercatorNet: All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences
Real advances are stymied by the strangle hold that Progressives have on academia.
2." If you thought that the progressive bias in social sciences was considered a problem only by tradition-minded folk, you might be surprised to hear the views of celebrity skeptic, Michael Shermer in Scientific American earlier this year:
A 2015 study by psychologist José Duarte, then at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, entitled “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science,” found that 58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science? It begins with what subjects are studied and the descriptive language employed.
Duarte et al. find similar distortive language across the social sciences, where, for instance, certain words are used to suggest pernicious motives when confronting contradictory evidence—“deny,” “legitimize,” “rationalize,” “justify,” “defend,” “trivialize”—with conservatives as examples, as if liberals are always objective and rational." Ibid.
3. If our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat voters where bright enough, they would have caught on to the scam long go....
...as conservative/traditional observers have.
4. But hold on! Some Liberals not only caught on....but have the honesty to declaim it!
" As Jesse Singal puts it at New York magazine, discussing a liberal critique, Alice Dreger’s Galileo’s Middle Finger,
If activists—any activists, regardless of their political orientation or the rightness of their cause—get to decide by fiat what is and isn’t an acceptable interpretation of the world, then science is pointless, and we should just throw the whole damn thing out." Ibid.
Just as I said.....Liberals/Progressives presage the end of our civilization.
"....doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.'
Sooooo....this is your explanation for your abject ignorance????
Wasn't necessary.
Friendly advice: try to avoid using that "us" thing....
...it reveals your fear of standing up on your own two paws.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
Shall I continue to wait for you to provide the list of Coulter's books that you have read, that led you to your critique of her works???
Or shall we stipulate that you have over-used the Liberal stratagem of following orders provided by your masters?
With very little effort you have become our greatest source of greenhouse gases.
Gee....that was like five hours ago......
...still no response from our pal NoCerebrealNeurons
He must be a Liberal
Artists have studios.Like you did to me earlier.PC, it's not like you even demonstrate an understanding of the subjects you post. You copy and pasting some rightwing rag doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.When Liberals/Progressives hear the words ‘ studies show,’ or ‘experts say,’ they cease to ‘question authority.’ Hence the appellation…'Lock-Step Liberals'
But there is a dark side....a darker side...that leads from that reputation.....it bodes the end of Western Civilization.
1. " All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences" MercatorNet: All sides agree: progressive politics is strangling social sciences
Real advances are stymied by the strangle hold that Progressives have on academia.
2." If you thought that the progressive bias in social sciences was considered a problem only by tradition-minded folk, you might be surprised to hear the views of celebrity skeptic, Michael Shermer in Scientific American earlier this year:
A 2015 study by psychologist José Duarte, then at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, entitled “Political Diversity Will Improve Social Psychological Science,” found that 58 to 66 percent of social scientists are liberal and only 5 to 8 percent conservative and that there are eight Democrats for every Republican.
How does this political asymmetry corrupt social science? It begins with what subjects are studied and the descriptive language employed.
Duarte et al. find similar distortive language across the social sciences, where, for instance, certain words are used to suggest pernicious motives when confronting contradictory evidence—“deny,” “legitimize,” “rationalize,” “justify,” “defend,” “trivialize”—with conservatives as examples, as if liberals are always objective and rational." Ibid.
3. If our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat voters where bright enough, they would have caught on to the scam long go....
...as conservative/traditional observers have.
4. But hold on! Some Liberals not only caught on....but have the honesty to declaim it!
" As Jesse Singal puts it at New York magazine, discussing a liberal critique, Alice Dreger’s Galileo’s Middle Finger,
If activists—any activists, regardless of their political orientation or the rightness of their cause—get to decide by fiat what is and isn’t an acceptable interpretation of the world, then science is pointless, and we should just throw the whole damn thing out." Ibid.
Just as I said.....Liberals/Progressives presage the end of our civilization.
"....doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.'
Sooooo....this is your explanation for your abject ignorance????
Wasn't necessary.
Friendly advice: try to avoid using that "us" thing....
...it reveals your fear of standing up on your own two paws.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
Is this the poster in your office?
View attachment 89079
I have an exciting life, and you are boring. Do not sit around waiting for me in your boring existence.Like you did to me earlier.PC, it's not like you even demonstrate an understanding of the subjects you post. You copy and pasting some rightwing rag doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.
"....doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.'
Sooooo....this is your explanation for your abject ignorance????
Wasn't necessary.
Friendly advice: try to avoid using that "us" thing....
...it reveals your fear of standing up on your own two paws.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
Shall I continue to wait for you to provide the list of Coulter's books that you have read, that led you to your critique of her works???
Or shall we stipulate that you have over-used the Liberal stratagem of following orders provided by your masters?
With very little effort you have become our greatest source of greenhouse gases.
Gee....that was like five hours ago......
...still no response from our pal NoCerebrealNeurons
He must be a Liberal
I find the opposite to be true. Liberals that I know are readers, where conservatives are couch potato television watchers. Do you have any figures on book sales and what is read?
how cute. the cut and paste queen comes up with fake "studies".
I have an exciting life, and you are boring. Do not sit around waiting for me in your boring existence.Like you did to me earlier."....doesn't make us feel any different about you or the subject matter.'
Sooooo....this is your explanation for your abject ignorance????
Wasn't necessary.
Friendly advice: try to avoid using that "us" thing....
...it reveals your fear of standing up on your own two paws.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
Shall I continue to wait for you to provide the list of Coulter's books that you have read, that led you to your critique of her works???
Or shall we stipulate that you have over-used the Liberal stratagem of following orders provided by your masters?
With very little effort you have become our greatest source of greenhouse gases.
Gee....that was like five hours ago......
...still no response from our pal NoCerebrealNeurons
He must be a Liberal
Wasn't it fun, yesterday, the way I made you eat your words?
You went on and on about how terrible, Coulter is...what a liar, and wrong, wrong wrong.
Your train of thought derailed....and there were no survivors.
And all I had to do as challenge you to list the scholarly, well documented best sellers Queen Ann has produced .....and......
....silence from you.
You've read none!!!!
None!!!!
Liberals are like that...as I proved....don't read books, but have strong opinions about them.
Wadda dunce.
You must have been busy digesting the words I rammed back down your throat, huh?
Maybe I should have warned you: You can go blind from my pure awesomeness!
how cute. the cut and paste queen comes up with fake "studies".
Fake studies should be purely the domain of you Communists...
I have an exciting life, and you are boring. Do not sit around waiting for me in your boring existence.Like you did to me earlier.
I teach you something and you repeat it. Very good, you are able to learn.
Shall I continue to wait for you to provide the list of Coulter's books that you have read, that led you to your critique of her works???
Or shall we stipulate that you have over-used the Liberal stratagem of following orders provided by your masters?
With very little effort you have become our greatest source of greenhouse gases.
Gee....that was like five hours ago......
...still no response from our pal NoCerebrealNeurons
He must be a Liberal
Wasn't it fun, yesterday, the way I made you eat your words?
You went on and on about how terrible, Coulter is...what a liar, and wrong, wrong wrong.
Your train of thought derailed....and there were no survivors.
And all I had to do as challenge you to list the scholarly, well documented best sellers Queen Ann has produced .....and......
....silence from you.
You've read none!!!!
None!!!!
Liberals are like that...as I proved....don't read books, but have strong opinions about them.
Wadda dunce.
You must have been busy digesting the words I rammed back down your throat, huh?
Maybe I should have warned you: You can go blind from my pure awesomeness!
Yes, but Rachel Madcow and the DailyShow told nonukes that he HATES Ann Coulter - so he does....
Oft times I think the Communists here are programmed by pheromones. Soros secretes orders at the hate sites, and drones like nonukes pick them up to be followed precisely.
Saying Liberals do not read is not a lie? You are as stupid as Political Spice.
I think I see the problem, conservatives don't believe in science
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Somehow you seem to believe that science is linked to political convictions, weird. Gallileo was an evil liberal who dared to question the conservative teachings of the holy church, I guess if you were around at the time, you would be one of those calling for his execution.
[
Have you noticed that government school doesn't teach actual facts, merely way to attack facts....
e.g., Jillian's "fake" without every trying to actually disqualify said studies.
As though her (Liberal) conclusion is good enough.
An excellent indictment of the school system....run entirely by Liberals.
