oh you claim your not a duck, but you quack.
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). *
See there is that quacking! Oh boy bigoted words are what are important... where do I get a transcript?
"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.
electric said:
"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."
I did.
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:
"Try me. You have yet to even attempt an example of a lie or debunked conspiracy repetition."
The systemic racism and sexism, I said this repeatedly now.
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.
You lost me at the gross bizarre errors part,
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".
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.
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.
"Arrogance"
"Exceptionalism".
"Interventionism"
(working on the next 2 vowels)(more later)
Sounds like Trump - or any Republican administration since Lincoln, possible exception Eisenhower.