tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 My gay friends certainly agree! WA domestic partnership, repeal of DADT. Real results: not a progressive thing, I realize. Forgot to mention judicial smack down of CA prop 8. Sorry. Quote
Kimmo Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 BTW, that would be the very same Ron Paul that started the Tea Party movement in 2007. source, please. Get off yer lazy ass and google it, ya fuckin baby. I did, and you are wrong. Ron Paul did NOT start the Tea Party movement. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 YouTube. So useful! [video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvGS12EoZUE Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 Playing makes you happier! Again...not a progressive thing. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 You can start a movement, but you can't necessarily control where it goes.... Quote
j_b Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 I do find it interesting that you make the charge that the spokane bombing attempt did not receive the same media attention as other similar events , yet refuse to provide examples of other similar events. why is this so? I find it interesting that you are trying to dilute my point into a morass of irrelevant semantics. why is this so? Quote
Kimmo Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 YouTube. So useful! [video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvGS12EoZUE ok, so play a little yankee doodle dandy at a political rally, and voile! instant tea party? Quote
j_b Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 Playing makes you happier! Again...not a progressive thing. it's the tvash anti-progressive drivel hour. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 I do find it interesting that you make the charge that the spokane bombing attempt did not receive the same media attention as other similar events , yet refuse to provide examples of other similar events. why is this so? I find it interesting that you are trying to dilute my point into a morass of irrelevant semantics. why is this so? Actually, his question was spot on and effectively highlights the fundamental ridiculousness of your premise. I wouldn't have answered it either! Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 Playing makes you happier! Again...not a progressive thing. it's the tvash anti-progressive drivel hour. Does this fuckwit drivel out of its ass or its mouth? Quote
prole Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 Playing makes you happier! Again...not a progressive thing. It's a hedonistic bullshit lifestyle thing while the crooks've been robbing us all blind kinda thing. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 YouTube. So useful! [video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvGS12EoZUE ok, so play a little yankee doodle dandy at a political rally, and voile! instant tea party? UM...yeah, pretty much. Gotta start somewhere. Quote
Kimmo Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 I find it interesting that you are trying to dilute my point into a morass of irrelevant semantics. why is this so? if you underpin an argument with a particular assertion, it seems to me that providing an example of that assertion is a reasonable MO, yes? i am a little bewildered by your response to what i think is a very reasonable request. and a little disappointed, since we share similar feelings about politics and culture.... is it because you cannot provide any examples? Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 Playing makes you happier! Again...not a progressive thing. It's a hedonistic bullshit lifestyle thing while the crooks've been robbing us all blind kinda thing. Hedonism? GUILTY! Quote
Kimmo Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 UM...yeah, pretty much. Gotta start somewhere. Ronald Reagan started the Tea Party. Quote
j_b Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 I find it interesting that you are trying to dilute my point into a morass of irrelevant semantics. why is this so? Actually, his question was spot on and effectively highlights the fundamental ridiculousness of your premise. I wouldn't have answered it either! you already lost this argument but you keep coming back for more: it is undisputed that the corporate media will go hog wild for weeks on end on any half-ass report of Arab terror but will mostly ignore domestic terror. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 So, so far, we've confirmed that a) The original blog excerpt is non-journalistic crap that included actual falsehoods, pretty much on par with Faux Nooz b) Progressives here don't know who their political leaders actually are, although it hardly matters, I suppose c) Progressives are willing to forgive former progressives for a changed opinion (without any real action) but not non-progressives for tangible, positive, historic moves towards social justice. d) Tvash is a hedonistic fuckwit. SakU! Quote
j_b Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 I find it interesting that you are trying to dilute my point into a morass of irrelevant semantics. why is this so? if you underpin an argument with a particular assertion, it seems to me that providing an example of that assertion is a reasonable MO, yes? i am a little bewildered by your response to what i think is a very reasonable request. and a little disappointed, since we share similar feelings about politics and culture.... is it because you cannot provide any examples? wtf? what about the Time square event of May 2010 by some brown dude and his smoking toyota? I said they were similar insofar they were attempts at terror. Quote
j_b Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 e) starting to drink in the morning will make tvash say the darnedest thing all day long. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) I find it interesting that you are trying to dilute my point into a morass of irrelevant semantics. why is this so? Actually, his question was spot on and effectively highlights the fundamental ridiculousness of your premise. I wouldn't have answered it either! you already lost this argument but you keep coming back for more: it is undisputed that the corporate media will go hog wild for weeks on end on any half-ass report of Arab terror but will mostly ignore domestic terror. Seems like somebody might have slipped a wee bit o coverage in there about the Gifford and McVeigh thangs. And the Michigan militias, and that Idaho shootout, and.... Edited January 25, 2011 by tvashtarkatena Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 e) starting to drink in the morning will make tvash say the darnedest thing all day long. Ad Hominus Diem! Quote
prole Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 b) Progressives here don't know who their political leaders actually are, although it hardly matters, I suppose Some stoned hot-tubbing bond-trading Papa Bear, apparently. Thanks a lot for not very much. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 b) Progressives here don't know who their political leaders actually are, although it hardly matters, I suppose Some stoned hot-tubbing bond-trading Papa Bear, apparently. Thanks a lot for not very much. Pics! Quote
Kimmo Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 wtf? what about the Time square event of May 2010 by some brown dude and his smoking toyota? I said they were similar insofar they were attempts at terror. thank you for responding. if you reduce your argument to only center on "terror" as the commonality between events, you then remove other possible relevant information, such as location of attack. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.