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.
The fact that you think you determine what reasonable or not is amusing.Too bad you dont determine whats reasonable or not. Since I made the thread I determine that. Did you not read the rules of this forum or was that too much of a strain on your brain?I know I didnt read them. I didnt give him permission to change my OP so basically anything he posted was off topic and had nothing to do with my thread.He's presented a list of "honest" liberals that agree with him. He's provided a few talking points that he trots out at every opportunity. His belief that PC is destroying the country is well known and often parroted. That doesn't take any level of intelligence.
He presented an accurate and concise definition of Political Correctness and you libs are too dim to realize that your actions on this thread completely prove his claim.
HIs list of libs that have spoken out against PC, you never clicked on any of them did you?
Your desire to limit the discussion of Political Correctness to definitions of political correctness that you agreed with is not a reasonable request in an OP.
Expanding it to include, the ACTUAL REALITY OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS was completely the right thing to do, and your desire to avoid the truth shows you to be dishonest and intellectually cowardly.
The fact that it is not reasonable to insist on a false definition in a debate is a self evident truth.
One that you do not admit because modern liberalism is extremely dishonest.
The fact that you think you determine what reasonable or not is amusing.Too bad you dont determine whats reasonable or not. Since I made the thread I determine that. Did you not read the rules of this forum or was that too much of a strain on your brain?I know I didnt read them. I didnt give him permission to change my OP so basically anything he posted was off topic and had nothing to do with my thread.He presented an accurate and concise definition of Political Correctness and you libs are too dim to realize that your actions on this thread completely prove his claim.
HIs list of libs that have spoken out against PC, you never clicked on any of them did you?
Your desire to limit the discussion of Political Correctness to definitions of political correctness that you agreed with is not a reasonable request in an OP.
Expanding it to include, the ACTUAL REALITY OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS was completely the right thing to do, and your desire to avoid the truth shows you to be dishonest and intellectually cowardly.
The fact that it is not reasonable to insist on a false definition in a debate is a self evident truth.
One that you do not admit because modern liberalism is extremely dishonest.
I didnt admit his definition because it had nothing to do with my question. If you dont like that find another thread to whine on about it. If you cant answer the simple question in my OP without trying to change it to your liking then thats a "you" problem.
Here is Mac's excellent definition of Political Correctness which you libs have been so desperate to avoid.
"Political Correctness: Strategic Hypersensitivity deployed specifically to keep your target on the defensive and control the conversation."
The fact that you think you determine what reasonable or not is amusing.Too bad you dont determine whats reasonable or not. Since I made the thread I determine that. Did you not read the rules of this forum or was that too much of a strain on your brain?I know I didnt read them. I didnt give him permission to change my OP so basically anything he posted was off topic and had nothing to do with my thread.He presented an accurate and concise definition of Political Correctness and you libs are too dim to realize that your actions on this thread completely prove his claim.
HIs list of libs that have spoken out against PC, you never clicked on any of them did you?
Your desire to limit the discussion of Political Correctness to definitions of political correctness that you agreed with is not a reasonable request in an OP.
Expanding it to include, the ACTUAL REALITY OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS was completely the right thing to do, and your desire to avoid the truth shows you to be dishonest and intellectually cowardly.
The fact that it is not reasonable to insist on a false definition in a debate is a self evident truth.
One that you do not admit because modern liberalism is extremely dishonest.
I didnt admit his definition because it had nothing to do with my question. If you dont like that find another thread to whine on about it. If you cant answer the simple question in my OP without trying to change it to your liking then thats a "you" problem.
Because its my thread. Of course I decide whats offensive to me or not. You do the same for yourself.The fact that you think you determine what reasonable or not is amusing.Too bad you dont determine whats reasonable or not. Since I made the thread I determine that. Did you not read the rules of this forum or was that too much of a strain on your brain?I know I didnt read them. I didnt give him permission to change my OP so basically anything he posted was off topic and had nothing to do with my thread.
Your desire to limit the discussion of Political Correctness to definitions of political correctness that you agreed with is not a reasonable request in an OP.
Expanding it to include, the ACTUAL REALITY OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS was completely the right thing to do, and your desire to avoid the truth shows you to be dishonest and intellectually cowardly.
The fact that it is not reasonable to insist on a false definition in a debate is a self evident truth.
One that you do not admit because modern liberalism is extremely dishonest.
I didnt admit his definition because it had nothing to do with my question. If you dont like that find another thread to whine on about it. If you cant answer the simple question in my OP without trying to change it to your liking then thats a "you" problem.
Why not ?----you decide what is offensive and what is not.
Here is Mac's excellent definition of Political Correctness which you libs have been so desperate to avoid.
"Political Correctness: Strategic Hypersensitivity deployed specifically to keep your target on the defensive and control the conversation."
you guys are the ones avoiding...
doesn't get any more lame than what mac is doing... btw are you his puppy dog?
the funniest part is that definition describes whackjob mac to a T.
"Strategic Hypersensitivity deployed specifically to keep your target on the defensive and control the conversation."
Because its my thread. Of course I decide whats offensive to me or not. You do the same for yourself.The fact that you think you determine what reasonable or not is amusing.Too bad you dont determine whats reasonable or not. Since I made the thread I determine that. Did you not read the rules of this forum or was that too much of a strain on your brain?Your desire to limit the discussion of Political Correctness to definitions of political correctness that you agreed with is not a reasonable request in an OP.
Expanding it to include, the ACTUAL REALITY OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS was completely the right thing to do, and your desire to avoid the truth shows you to be dishonest and intellectually cowardly.
The fact that it is not reasonable to insist on a false definition in a debate is a self evident truth.
One that you do not admit because modern liberalism is extremely dishonest.
I didnt admit his definition because it had nothing to do with my question. If you dont like that find another thread to whine on about it. If you cant answer the simple question in my OP without trying to change it to your liking then thats a "you" problem.
Why not ?----you decide what is offensive and what is not.
i've barely ever talked to the guy and one day last month he pronounced he was putting me on ignore.
why? because he's feigning offense, acting hypersensitive, acting as if others are obsessed with him, and trying to put his adversaries, the ones HE is obsessed with, on the defensive in a LAME attempt to control the conversation.
that's whackjob mac for ya...
"Strategic Hypersensitivity deployed specifically to keep your target on the defensive and control the conversation."
Its my thread so I set the question and the definition of the terms. If you want to call that being right be my guest. Whatever is necessary for you to answer the question would work for me.Because its my thread. Of course I decide whats offensive to me or not. You do the same for yourself.The fact that you think you determine what reasonable or not is amusing.Too bad you dont determine whats reasonable or not. Since I made the thread I determine that. Did you not read the rules of this forum or was that too much of a strain on your brain?
The fact that it is not reasonable to insist on a false definition in a debate is a self evident truth.
One that you do not admit because modern liberalism is extremely dishonest.
I didnt admit his definition because it had nothing to do with my question. If you dont like that find another thread to whine on about it. If you cant answer the simple question in my OP without trying to change it to your liking then thats a "you" problem.
Why not ?----you decide what is offensive and what is not.
It's my thread so I'm right ?? LMAO
Pages and pages of deflections and not one person has given a reason that stands. Dilloduck got close but his reason failed on the bizarre and false logic that he could read minds.
You and Mac arent even discussing the topic.Pages and pages of deflections and not one person has given a reason that stands. Dilloduck got close but his reason failed on the bizarre and false logic that he could read minds.
Mac and me covered it better than anyone I have ever seen.
Your constant attempts to switch the topic to what bad people we are demonstrated perfectly what we described.
Your dishonesty in refusing to admit that you were owned is irrelevant.
Nothing in your post addressed my point.
admit that you were owned
They'll never give an inch, never, no matter how much we shove in their face.Pages and pages of deflections and not one person has given a reason that stands. Dilloduck got close but his reason failed on the bizarre and false logic that he could read minds.
Mac and me covered it better than anyone I have ever seen.
Your constant attempts to switch the topic to what bad people we are demonstrated perfectly what we described.
Your dishonesty in refusing to admit that you were owned is irrelevant.
i've barely ever talked to the guy and one day last month he pronounced he was putting me on ignore.
why? because he's feigning offense, acting hypersensitive, acting as if others are obsessed with him, and trying to put his adversaries, the ones HE is obsessed with, on the defensive in a LAME attempt to control the conversation.
that's whackjob mac for ya...
"Strategic Hypersensitivity deployed specifically to keep your target on the defensive and control the conversation."
Putting someone on ignore is not PC.
To really exhibit PC you need to constantly be replying to their posts.
They will just continue to flail away without addressing the topic. It frightens them for some reason.
i've barely ever talked to the guy and one day last month he pronounced he was putting me on ignore.
why? because he's feigning offense, acting hypersensitive, acting as if others are obsessed with him, and trying to put his adversaries, the ones HE is obsessed with, on the defensive in a LAME attempt to control the conversation.
that's whackjob mac for ya...
"Strategic Hypersensitivity deployed specifically to keep your target on the defensive and control the conversation."
Putting someone on ignore is not PC.
To really exhibit PC you need to constantly be replying to their posts.
^ again we see your lack of comprehension combined with your lack of honesty...
Valerie said:i've barely ever talked to the guy and one day last month he pronounced he was putting me on ignore.
why? because he's feigning offense, acting hypersensitive, acting as if others are obsessed with him, and trying to put his adversaries, the ones HE is obsessed with, on the defensive in a LAME attempt to control the conversation.
"Strategic Hypersensitivity deployed specifically to keep your target on the defensive and control the conversation."
^ that's whackjob mac for ya...
They will just continue to flail away without addressing the topic. It frightens them for some reason.
