volinbham
VN GURU
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 70,110
- Likes
- 63,523
How so?
So if I say gene therapy is the best treatment for cancer you'd be puzzled why I didn't say not having cancer is the best treatment for cancer?
The best defense is to prevent the cancer in the first place. Your original statement said defense, not treatment. Treatment presumes the cancer has already taken hold. Defense does not.
So if I said the best way for citizens to overthrow a fascist government is if said citizens are armed then are you happy?
Since we are critiquing analogies; given one cannot consciously prevent cancer I'd argue that your first statement is incorrect too.
I'm not blaming the media - I have friends who've bought into the meme. I just think it's dumb.
Trump is tweeting Nazi imagery? What the picture where a couple people have their hands up? You think they are doing the Nazi salute and/or Trump wants to secretly communicate to groups that would like that?
You are the people I'm talking about
I always encourage people to change their statements/positions based upon newly discovered evidence.
Untrue, one can consciously take steps to prevent cancer. Doesn't always work, but that doesn't mean preventive measures don't exist.
No. I'm talking about the tweet over the summer. But here's a greatest hits list of some of (in my eyes) the most racist things to come from the trump campaign:
November- Trump tweets out made up racial statistics claiming 81% of whites are killed by blacks
Trump's Pants on Fire tweet that blacks killed 81% of white homicide victims | PolitiFact
August-Trump staffer calls Al Sharpton's daughter a "N-!" On Facebook.
Trump campaign fires staffer over Facebook posts - CNNPolitics.com
July-Trump tweets US flag with Nazi soldiers on it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...diers-inside-the-u-s-flag-then-deletes-tweet/
So once again: it's not the media's fault. It's not the liberals. It's Donald trumps fault that he's constantly compared to these people.
I reworded a statement but did not change my position and there is no newly discovered evidence in this case.
I'm still not sure if you are just playing semantics police or didn't understand my point.
You can take steps to lower your risk but you can't prevent cancer; unless you have some scientific breakthough I'm unaware of.
Defense against cancer can also include treatment.
The reference to 1917 is that conditions there led to the rise of communist leaders. The argument made about Trump is that his rise is equivalent to 1930s Europe so I'm just saying why not apply similar analysis to Sanders?
WRT the bold - you directly say that Sanders is excluding one group - upper class. They are the problem to be fixed and the source of problems for the people.
Sanders is catering to angry poor and middle class people who think the rich have it too good and are making them/keep them from advancing.
The newly discovered evidence is the knowledge that the 2nd amendment is not the best defense since the best defense is to not elect the fascist government in the first place.
Lowering the risk against cancer is a preventive measure against cancer. No one said preventive measures are always perfect.
The newly discovered evidence is the knowledge that the 2nd amendment is not the best defense since the best defense is to not elect the fascist government in the first place.
Lowering the risk against cancer is a preventive measure against cancer. No one said preventive measures are always perfect.
No, you are the one making the connection to Nazism. The first two incidences are race related but have no connection to Nazism.
The flag one is a gaffe, a mistake. Unless you are suggesting he intentionally had Nazi soldiers in it. I bet you'd never know those were Nazi soldiers if someone didn't point it out to you.
No sane person would conclude Trump is like Hitler because of what you posted.
There's a difference between demanding the rich (of all colors and creeds) and powerful to pay more in taxes and not abuse the economic and political system, and attacking marginalized groups in America. At least to me, there is a difference.
I think a sane person would conclude at a minimum that he's very likely a racist.
Throw the Nazi tweet in with his racism, his white nationalism, and his ex's claims that he keeps a book of hitler's speeches by his bed:
And it doesn't take a genius to make the connection.
That's not evidence. It's a conclusion you've drawn based on semantic argument.
No one said the way our government is elected is perfect nor how those that come to power will wield that power. The 2A can be seen as both a preventative (makes things more difficult to come off the rails in the first place) and a treatment for meeting force with force in a worst case scenario.
How is it not? In both instances you have the government dictating what a person can do with their property. With anti-gentrification laws you are doing worse, you are slowing appreciation or in some cases forcing an owner to hold a depreciating asset.
I would not characterized what you posted as a Nazi tweet.
When Rubio mistakenly used a picture of a Canadian city in an ad was it a Canadian ad?
Is he racist? I don't know.
Is comparing him to Hitler a logical conclusion - no effin' way but it hasn't stopped you.