34
   

Are all Republicans Idiots?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2016 12:00 pm
@Baldimo,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
The GOP won the south based on racism.
giujohn
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2016 12:07 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
The GOP won the south based on racism.


Bullshit... Where's the proof?
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2016 12:10 pm
@cicerone imposter,
It might have gone for the GOP on Presidential races, but the south was controlled by the Dems until the 1990's. Look at each of the states and who was in control of the State houses and the Governorships. It was all Dems all the time until the mid 1990's.
Angelgz2
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2016 12:46 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You wanna talk about racism? Here' you go:
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-adv-asian-race-tutoring-20150222-story.html

Blacks and Hispanics are receiving favorable treatment to top colleges because they've been long criticized by liberals for "not taking enough black student." Well, a score is a score isn't it? If you can't score as high as I am, why should the school take you? School is giving favorable / unfavorable treatment based solely on race, so that's definitely a text book definition of racism.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2016 12:50 pm
@Baldimo,
That is true and I can tell you around here it was only because of unions, unions is democrats and people in coal mines belonged to unions so they registered democrat but voted however they wanted.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  4  
Reply Tue 6 Dec, 2016 04:29 pm
@giujohn,
Where's your proof it wasn't racially based? I won't wait for your response.
giujohn
 
  -4  
Reply Wed 7 Dec, 2016 07:56 am
@cicerone imposter,
Prove there isn't a massive underground movement of Aging Asians who are poised to take over the state of California secede from the Union and declare war on the United States because Donald Trump was elected president
tsarstepan
 
  6  
Reply Wed 7 Dec, 2016 08:10 am
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

Prove there isn't a massive underground movement of Aging Asians who are poised to take over the state of California secede from the Union and declare war on the United States because Donald Trump was elected president

Your apparent schizophrenia is dangerously flaring up. Please go to a Psychiatric Emergency Service immediately. That level of paranoia is really dangerous to your health and the wellbeing of anybody coming into contact with you.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Wed 7 Dec, 2016 09:01 am
@tsarstepan,
probably its the donut diet
giujohn
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 7 Dec, 2016 10:21 am
@tsarstepan,
I'm sorry I have it on good authority that this movement is real and that CI is The Mastermind!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Wed 7 Dec, 2016 03:13 pm
@farmerman,
Yea. He keeps eating the holes.
giujohn
 
  0  
Reply Wed 7 Dec, 2016 08:17 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Ok grape eater!
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2016 08:32 am
@Angelgz2,
Angelgz2 wrote:

There are two fundamental mistakes you have made:

1. You put stuff in my mouth that I NEVER SAID. For example:
I said "ignorant of the laws of economics." Which is not equal to being ignorant on all intellectual areas. Despite this, I will concede to you that this is a hasty generalization.

2. You are combining two different arguments into one. I concede that I should phrase it better: If people that make your daily essential needs, who is currently making $10 on average, gets an increase to $15, how much do you expect that they produce will increase?

Second argument: Production / Non-supervisory workers defined here:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AHETPI

which includes "engaged in fabricating, processing, assembling, inspecting, receiving, storing, handling, packing, warehousing, shipping, trucking, hauling, maintenance, repair, janitorial, guard services, product development, auxiliary production for plant's own use (for example, power plant), recordkeeping, and other services closely associated with the above production operations." per the above link.

So the categories includes both skilled and unskilled workers.

Unskilled Labor, defined here:

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unskilled-labor.asp

"Unskilled labor is a segment of the workforce associated with a limited skill set or minimal economic value for the work performed."

So the second argument can be constructed, using your template as such:

Fact: Unskilled labor adds minimal economic value for the work performed.
Fact: Production / non-supervisory worker includes many category that includes unskilled labor.
Fact: You will not be willing to pay for anything ABOVE it's inherent economic value (toilet paper is just an example, although I may concede to you that it's a bad example).
Therefore, if you "force" employers to pay for something above its economic value, e.g. a janitor's work, they will inevitably pass this burden, at least partially, to the consumers.

PS, my prejudice towards liberals are no more severe than yours. Your profane tone and hasty generalization towards republicans only exceeds all of which I have said. I never play the victim more than you liberals wants to make everyone feel like a victim. And no, I do not mind them attacking my argument. I only dislike liberals because they insult before they engage in a civil discussion. You have no yet disproved this by using terms such as "unsupported **** you pull out of your ass".




Go back and read your post on the subject. You asserted, if the workers who make toilet paper are paid $15 an hour, then we would have to pay more (I think you said $5 more) for a package of toilet paper. But workers who make the toilet paper (skilled production workers) already make more than $15 an hour. You equated skilled production workers with unskilled workers whom you declared to be easily replaceable. You pulled all of that **** out of your ass to justify poverty-level wages for production line workers. Backtrack all you want. I don't care. If you don't care about your own credibility, why should I waste any time reading what you post or responding to it? You place your own ignorance on display and then you declare that all liberals are ignorant hypocrites. I'm putting you on ignore because sweeping up after you would be a full-time job. If and when I notice a credible poster praising you about one of your posts for being well researched and thoughtful, I might take a look.
layman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2016 03:46 pm
@Debra Law,
Debra Law wrote:
If you don't care about your own credibility, why should I waste any time reading what you post or responding to it? You place your own ignorance on display... I'm putting you on ignore because sweeping up after you would be a full-time job. If and when I notice a credible poster praising you about one of your posts for being well researched and thoughtful, I might take a look.


Heh. The irony of it all, eh?
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2016 03:52 pm
@layman,
I have noticed a large uptick of the lefties on this site putting those they disagree with on ignore. I'm not really surprised by this as their "tolerance" levels only seem to swing in one direction.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2016 03:54 pm
@layman,
layman wrote:

Debra Law wrote:
If you don't care about your own credibility, why should I waste any time reading what you post or responding to it? You place your own ignorance on display... I'm putting you on ignore because sweeping up after you would be a full-time job. If and when I notice a credible poster praising you about one of your posts for being well researched and thoughtful, I might take a look.


Heh. The irony of it all, eh?


Your sins are your sins, not mine. Point your finger at yourself. Do you have anything of substance to offer?
layman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2016 03:56 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

I have noticed a large uptick of the lefties on this site putting those they disagree with on ignore. I'm not really surprised by this as their "tolerance" levels only seem to swing in one direction.


True dat, Baldy. Funny how they are constantly advocating tolerance all while practicing the utmost intolerance, aint it?

They have certainly taken the advice of Herbert Marcuse, the so-called "father of the new left," to heart. They bought his view of "repressive tolerance" hook, line, and sinker. He of course advocated that everyone be intolerant of, and suppress, any views that were not consistent with left-wing views.

Of course Marcuse had his doctrinal predecessors. The phrase "political correctness" came from the demands of the communist party in Russia in the 1920's. Like, whooda thunk, I ask ya?
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2016 03:57 pm
@Debra Law,
Debra Law wrote:

Your sins are your sins, not mine. Point your finger at yourself. Do you have anything of substance to offer?


Have some "integrity" and put me on ignore, cheese-eater.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2016 04:05 pm
There Debra. Youve been put in your place by the lying fact denying, ultra intelligent conservative posters showing that most republicans are idiots.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2016 04:10 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

I have noticed a large uptick of the lefties on this site putting those they disagree with on ignore. I'm not really surprised by this as their "tolerance" levels only seem to swing in one direction.


I have noticed that many people who identify themselves as Christian, or Republican, or Righties are intolerant of the rights of others. Then they use the Orwellian argument that other people are intolerant because other people don't tolerate their intolerance. In other words, they play the victim card when they themselves are the victimizers.

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/21/2022 at 03:04:04