BigBear wrote:
For several years I have been searching for a way to communicate with you. You have made it a priority for you to make it clear to me what you want and how you want it while my words seem to vaporize as soon as I say them.
I struggled to find a way for you to hear me. And each time I am told that I don’t communicate properly to you and it is my problem to figure out or I am free to leave. Any time I say something that you disapprove of, you come at me like a banshee and pound on my chest like a war drum.
Your version of communication is yelling into a bullhorn loud enough for your voice to cut through the billowing smoke and ash rising from the remnants of what is left of the bridge of communication that you set afire so the words of reason cannot reach you.
My rights amounted to making your values to be my values, and your causes to be my causes, and to resist would put me under penalty of law as a racist.
I thank God and the Patriot Founders of this country for their insight and long range thinking that gave us a tool called the Electoral College to help in keeping out or getting rid of tyrants who wish to force their views and values on us and transform our country into something it was never intended to be.
I am hereby proclaiming that the communication problem is being put back on you where it belongs. It is for you to either figure out how to communicate with me properly or you may choose to leave.
For several years I have been searching for a way ... (
show quote)
I'm sorry.
Just about anyone on this site, IMHO, would agree that everything you just said about liberals could be said about conservatives.
Conservatives say that they are right and the Liberals are wrong, lying, whatever nasty name they can think of.
Liberals say that they are right and the Conservatives are wrong, lying, whatever nasty name they can think of.
There is a group, in each camp, who's only way to discuss is to name call and belittle the other side and has NO interest in listening to another's point of view.
They operate under the "If you're not with me you're against me" mantra.
It is a very sad commentary on the current state of our country.
Keenan
Loc: Central Coast California
BigBear wrote:
I studied Constitutional Law. So don't try preaching to me about how you think it is supposed to work.
If that is really true, then why do you consistently act completely clueless regarding your understanding of the Constitution?
Or perhaps when you say you "studied Constitutional Law", what you mean is that you read a few right wing fringe screeds on the subject, and listen to some right wing pundits rant about the Constitution.
BigBear wrote:
There was nothing about his speech that was divisive. If you believe that it was, you didn't listen to it and are regurgitating liberal garbage.
Sorry Smokey but I heard the speech and it was directed to the population that voted for him. No healing, no uniting, just Trumpisms.
Give him time and he'll prove I'm right on this one.
Keenan wrote:
If that is really true, then why do you consistently act completely clueless regarding your understanding of the Constitution?
Or perhaps when you say you "studied Constitutional Law", what you mean is that you read a few right wing fringe screeds on the subject, and listen to some right wing pundits rant about the Constitution.
What part am I so clueless about ??
BigBear wrote:
I studied Constitutional Law. So don't try preaching to me about how you think it is supposed to work.
so did I .... in college and law school
Frank T wrote:
Sorry Smokey but I heard the speech and it was directed to the population that voted for him. No healing, no uniting, just Trumpisms.
Give him time and he'll prove I'm right on this one.
If you are talking about making government run the way it is supposed to and not be used support the liberal dependents that have made a living at the expense of others, then yes I agree it wasn't a speech for their cause.
BigBear wrote:
What part am I so clueless about ??
you do not understand the original purpose of the Electoral College ...... refer back to my first post ...
DEBJENROB wrote:
you do not understand the original purpose of the Electoral College ...... refer back to my first post ...
I got what you said. I don't know where you got the idea that Conservatives are considered a mob.
The EC worked exactly the way it was supposed to whereby the states get equal representation, and the vote is not decided by 1 or 2 states based on popular vote.
Keenan
Loc: Central Coast California
BigBear wrote:
I got what you said. I don't know where you got the idea that Conservatives are considered a mob.
The EC worked exactly the way it was supposed to whereby the states get equal representation, and the vote is not decided by 1 or 2 states based on popular vote.
LOL
See, this is a perfect example of how oblivious you are to your own hypocrisy regarding the Constitution and the ideas of the founding fathers.
You like to constantly proclaim that, "We are not a democracy, we are a republic!", and point out that majority rule = 'tyranny of the majority'
But then in the very next breath, you make an exception for YOUR favored group - "Conservatives". Majority rule by Conservatives is somehow NOT mob rule. You make an exception. You're ok with tyranny of the majority, just so long as YOU and YOUR GROUP is part of that majority mob rule.
green
Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20
Keenan wrote:
Any examples you can provide of libs making up stories?
we are in a post-truth era. And isn't that the point of fake stories? You can find proof of anything, but how do you know the proof itself isn't faked? You can look at multiple sources, but partisan stories spread like wildfire on the internet? Asking for proof from media anymore simply makes one appear outmoded, unrealistic or old-fashioned.
Keenan wrote:
LOL
See, this is a perfect example of how oblivious you are to your own hypocrisy regarding the Constitution and the ideas of the founding fathers.
You like to constantly proclaim that, "We are not a democracy, we are a republic!", and point out that majority rule = 'tyranny of the majority'
But then in the very next breath, you make an exception for YOUR favored group - "Conservatives". Majority rule by Conservatives is somehow NOT mob rule. You make an exception. You're ok with tyranny of the majority, just so long as YOU and YOUR GROUP is part of that majority mob rule.
LOL br br See, this is a perfect example of how o... (
show quote)
You are injecting your own comments into what I have said.
green wrote:
we are in a post-truth era. And isn't that the point of fake stories? You can find proof of anything, but how do you know the proof itself isn't faked? You can look at multiple sources, but partisan stories spread like wildfire on the internet? Asking for proof from media anymore simply makes one appear outmoded, unrealistic or old-fashioned.
Your description sounds pretty accurate to me! Keenan seriously believes that there are absolutely no "fake news" stories coming from liberal sources. Some people live in a bubble.
Keenan
Loc: Central Coast California
BigBear wrote:
You are injecting your own comments into what I have said.
It sounds to me like you objected to the idea that your group could ever be defined as mob rule: "I don't know where you got the idea that Conservatives are considered a mob."
This was in response to someone pointing out to you that the original purpose of the Electoral College was to prevent mob rule - Hamilton and Madison referred to the electorate (you) as the mob. They wanted to prevent the mob of popular voters from choosing an unqualified demagogue for president.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.