To be fair, he is correct in one respect: The average US taxpayer pays a LOT in taxes in regards to the percentage of said taxes that go into social programs to actually help said taxpayer... it's why we also end up needing state, local, and municipal taxes (and then often have to tack on additional taxes for education, sales, etc) in order to maintain infrastructure et al... and then we still need to buy health insurance and STILL pay crazy premiums... By compare, while some places have a higher overall tax rate, they get a lot more out of it (such as universal health care).
The only other interpretation would have been as metaphor - Clinton as a metaphorical reptile, say - in which case the question would be not of fact but of argument (yours is garbage - your assertion of "therefore" confuses association with necessary implication) and legitimacy. I would have no objections to your employment of metaphor there, in itself, but of course my post (post 121, you were attempting to parody) does not employ metaphor. Still no sign of anything in that post of mine that you can point to as a falsehood. Or to be hardboiled about it: You obviously intended alignment with my post; In that sense, you made false claims of fact central to a bad argument. The false claims included: that some behavior of politicians was a consequence of their being "cold blooded" as reptiles are. The argument broke down on its steps from association to implication - Machiavellian behavior and coldbloodedness to the first implying the second, coldbloodedness and reptile nature to the first implying the second. Note that as lined up with my post, the false claims of fact are the reason your argument is crazy - if all your claims had been non-metaphorically, literally, true, as mine are, your argument would have made sense, as mine did. As mine did, in the post you disparaged and attempted to parody, while missing the central matter: I'm arguing from fact, verifiable aspects of physical and historical reality. That's exactly what 4chan and the rest of your wingnut sources are not doing, and the reason the bothsides claims you get from them are garbage. And that's one of the several places where your "pendulum" supposition seems unlikely - it requires two essentially equivalent directions of swing, with a center more or less in one place. Yet another disparagement without evidence. The Young Turks have many flaws and faults - but not that particular one, which is why you can't post examples.
No it was an example. Oh I could, I just don't care to. By the way what I did was an example of how your conclusion that you derive are insane regardless if the evidence you present is true or false (like Hillary beng a reptaile), worse you will invariable claim that your words must interpreted in what ever way allows you to move the goal post. Well they do.
Sure. You'd rather type out several much longer posts that don't work, because that's so much less trouble than quoting a claim from post 121, and settling the matter. You can't. There aren't any falsehoods in post 121. You can't do that arguing from metaphors - that's an example of something quite different from my post. And you can't do that making logical errors of implication that I did not make. Wingnuts and their damn videos. No, they don't. And nothing in that video shows they do. You need a lie, or a debunked conspiracy. Not a flaw, or a fault, or an objectionable viewpoint, or stupidity, or anything like that - you need lying, advocacy of debunked conspiracies. You need Alex Jones stuff, to be an Alex Jones type. Not an hour long video "argument" that the Young Turks are soft on Muslims and screwed up in some of their thinking (an assessment I share, btw, although that guy is not making a very good case in his bigoted idiocy, and I'm reluctant to be associated with him). And I seem to have called it, about where you are getting your vocabulary - right? Not from a British Muslim politician, but from the wingnut video pack.
So a vehement democrat and Hillary voter, moderate, is a wingnut to you? Have you ever considered that you are so far on the political spectrum that everyone looks like wingnuts to you? Considering how often you us the word it is practically pathological for you. Is that a double dare? So like how the police are racist? How there is this present day systemic racism and sexism horribly oppressing everyone but white males? How the conservatives are pure evil devoid of any morality? I find his dickishness hilarious, so sorry it is not to your taste. Again if Devon Tracey is a wingnut to you, you must be somewhere beyond the wing.
I'm pretty sure he would take offense to that, but I don't care. Also decency is dead, trumps president, thanks to you. None the less if a cowardly supremacist says 2+2=4, or the equivalent as in this case, is 2+2 not 4? See if someone makes an argument and present evidence (doing so in a humors manner is a plus, but optional) it is really the argument and evidence that matters, not who the someone is. TYT are constantly pushing specific agendas, many have pointed it out and their arguments and evidence is solid. Look at how TYT handled #BLMkiddnapings for example. Anyways Alex Jones is constantly pushing specific agendas on the right, TYT on the left, they both cherry pick facts, present very biased perspectives, push conspiracy theories and probably huff paint.
This and That Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Click for genderbending prettyboys. Kind of a non sequitur, don't'cha think? • • • Are you sure Tracey wouldn't be proud? One thing the internet diva is great at is getting other internet divas worked up into a froth↱ about his racism, misogyny, and even apparent rape apologism↱. And it's true some people find this admirable. There is always a question of why two plus two or its equivalent is relevant. Here's the thing: Nobody else is really so anxious to waste their time trying to figure out what some angryman diva on YouTube is trying to say when his advocate isn't capable of figuring it out. You're pretty much like all the other alt-right YouTube seeders. Nothing like low-effort trolling to boost your flagging self-esteem, is there? At the end of the day, all you're trying to do is normalize bigotry. You might well consider decency dead, but the question remains: Did you surrender the fight, or were you never in it?
You post the damn videos as your "argument", you get the appellation. What about it? Sounds like your take on the Young Turks' objectionable views and flawed understandings. Reminder: Yeah, he's funny - but he's bigoted, and it screws up his thinking at critical junctions. PJ O'Rourke held the patent on that for a while - read him on climate change, for an illustration of the problem. I'm pretty close to center left/right, a little bit (within stat error) left. Wingnut is as wingnut does - although Tracey does get points for employing "regressive left" in close agreement with its coiner (unlike you). Maybe he's just a grouch - I'm willing to cut orneriness considerable slack, as an American virtue of considerable utility. But the difference between TYT and Alex Jones is stark - a basic, fundamental difference in their dealings with physical reality, reason, and evidence.
Cop-out. Oh that right I need to satisfy your definition on what makes you lefty version of an Alex Jones follower! Oh he is bigoted, how so?, elaborate. You have not watched his other videos have you? Oh that right you can't stand to watch, how about he regressive left agenda: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And yet they are both pumping agenda conspiratorial bullshit to their respective audiences.
Oh no some blog somewhere does not like him, woopty-doo. Actually you're right he relishes people calling him racist, misogynist, etc, because he eventually gets people to apologize for calling him such. His strategy is to state statistical facts about race and when people scream racist he really lays into them. Truth of his argument is that to conclude that just because blacks commit more crimes it must be genetic, is a fallacy on your part not his, for he does not believe so. So again a democrat Hillary voter like Devon Tracy, his videos are alt-right? Also "Boost my self-esteem is flagging self-esteem", really? Is that your understanding of trolling? Oh I wanted decency to win from the beginning that is why I voted for Bernie in the primary, did you?
Not me - the Young Turks. I'm not involved - you posted TYT as a lefty equivalent of Alex Jones, I pointed to the basic difference, and now you need to find evidence of the equivalence you claimed or try to find a different Lefty Jones site. Transcript, provided by you, and I'll circle the bigotry I heard in skimming. His description of the Palestinians, for example. Or feminists. No, you still seem confused - once again, read slowly: "You need a lie, or a debunked conspiracy. Not a flaw, or a fault, or an objectionable viewpoint, or stupidity, or anything like that - you need lying, advocacy of debunked conspiracies". So: do you have any? Ok, I take it back - he was only using the term as its coiner used it in that one video. The rest of the time he is just like your other sources. So we have his wingnut bona fides, thank you. And there's where you've been getting your frame, your worldview, your vocabulary: secondhand wingnuttery originally organized and even composed from the rightwing think tanks and media operations, the propaganda efforts behind the Republican takeover. Because that's the only source for that kind of frame. It isn't common reality observed by anyone, because there is no such reality - as there is to explain common observations by the rest of the political world.
and who is the person judging this? What the fat brown buffalo himself? Let me get this straight, you don't like his opinions on palestinians and feminism, so he is a bigot... Pot calling the kettle black? Alright so what specific descriptions of Palestinians and feminist you have a problem with? But you have and will deny any example I have presented is a lie or debunked conspiracy, you have created a criteria that only you can determine satisfied and you would only do that if you want to acknowledge my point, which you don't, so you will never be satisfied. In short you reject reality and create one of your own. Yeah and? Again if the alt-right say 2+2=4 is it untrue? How is it so hard to accept that you and your ilk helped rally them? Yeah sure lefty alex jones, yes the elder of conservatism been orchestrating it all! Yeah except for everyone else on the left that can't stand you and your ilk anymore.
ok tried watching a few of devon tracey video just to here electric cause maybe i'm missing something nope i wasn't. funny how he was whinying about the young turks being the left wing version of alex jones and posting as evidence against them some probably far closer to that description. I could make it through that dudes videos. its the type of dick measuring claptrap that electric loves to do. this is electric, i think, trying to defend his own covert racism. cause i'm sorry anyone claiming systemic racism doesn't exist is just willfully trying to ignore reality. at this point dealing with him just makes me feel dirty.
It's not a matter of judgment unless you come up with something to be judged - some lying, or repetition of debunked conspiracy theories, on the part of the Young Turks. Still no idea who I or my "ilk" are, apparently. You even post somebody's video on Black Lives Matter, from someone who is 1) not on the Left as far as the video goes, and 2) in basic agreement with me and everything you've seen me post here relative to BLM, under the rubric of somebody on the left who can't stand me. Clueless much? Here's a video with three guys and one gal of my ilk talking about the election (not Friedman, or the Dem power guy): His "opinions" are skewed by bigotry, whether I like them or not (I've already mentioned my general agreement with him on some issues surrounding muslims). Post the transcript, and I'll circle the bigotry for you - so if you want to try arguing that vile shit is an unbigoted "opinion", you can do it with the words in front of you. Try me. You have yet to even attempt an example of a lie or debunked conspiracy repetition. It's because you can't find one. They got your number, for sure. Only one place to acquire a common set of errors and bs vocabulary. Common reality explains common agreement on facts and common accurate vocabulary describing them - no organizing propaganda operation necessary. Common agreement on gross and bizarre errors described in common bs terms, on the other hand, requires explanation.
I did. oh you claim your not a duck, but you quack. See there is that quacking! Oh boy bigoted words are what are important... where do I get a transcript? The systemic racism and sexism, I said this repeatedly now. You lost me at the gross bizarre errors part, see the video you posted above, you claim to agree with that, classical liberals agree with that, conservatives agree with that, alt-right agrees with that, perhaps you are the one with gross and bizarre errors.
Nope. No quacking. You keep trying to attribute quackpottery to me, and I keep pointing out that it all seems to be based on something you got off 4chan about "lefties" or "liberals". The latest was that BLM critic's video, which was essentially my pretty much uninformed and casual view of BLM repeated to you by a black woman instead of by me - and you present it as the view of someone on the left (not in that video) who can't stand "me" (although agreeing with my take on stuff). * "Bigoted words" have nothing to do with it, and they aren't important to me. That's an emphasis you got from someplace like 4chan, or rightwing talk radio. Post the transcript. That way you can reason from evidence. Or quit posting videos like some wingnut in terminal avoidance, and instead do your own reasoning from more easily handled evidence. No, you didn't. You posted a video by somebody else, that was at best - when it wasn't just silly - a disagreement with the views, flaws, and foolishness, of the Young Turks. It was missing the lies and conspiracies. You need lies and conspiracies, not flaws and foolishness. And all you have to do is name them or briefly synopsize them, as is perfectly easy to do with Alex Jones (9/11 was organized by the US government in cooperation with Israel, the Jews knew about it and stayed home from the Towers. Obama was born in Kenya and is a secret Muslim, etc etc etc). No hours of video to wade through, And your inability to distinguish foolishness from dishonesty, or analysis from conspiracy, is both cause and consequence of your vulnerability to Nameless media ops. and their framing. Like this: Apparently, you regard people who point to stuff they describe as products of systemic racism or sexism as either 1) repeating a known lie, or 2) repeating accusations of conspiracy, long debunked. There is only one likely source for such ridiculous bubblewrapping, and that is the US wingnut media operations - I listed a few outlets above. I don't know which you fell for. See * above, for one. Or just now: Honest, evidence based, and reasoned accusations of racism and sexism, right or wrong, are not lies; racism and sexism are not themselves conspiracies - especially not when "systemic". I claim to agree with what? (see the problem with videos?). In that video, people are disagreeing with each other as well as me. When you are talking about me and people of my ilk, that's something to remember. Sounds like Trump - or any Republican administration since Lincoln, possible exception Eisenhower.
