I knew they wanted to be slavers again. I called it from the beginning.
Informal Logic—A Pragmatic Approach:
The fault of blind dogmatism, of only seeing one side of the argument as a position worth investigating, is among the most severe impediments or handicaps in reasonable dialogue.
I knew they wanted to be slavers again. I called it from the beginning.
Especially the 5th circuit. That’s where Matthew Kacsmaryk punts the dumbest cases to Sam Alito and Clarence Thomas, who then shit all over the law.
Republicans: Election integrity is when my preference wins.
Not really because I’m not being serious. But at high levels of education that aren’t in business, it’s because education roots belief in the scientific method and scientific evidence. For the humanities, it teaches a more rigorous form of thinking based still based on evidence and logical thinking patterns.
The way modern conservatives think is very illogical. It feigns a sort of logic but it’s really easy to identify as anything but
When you see what humans can do, it really encourages a perspective that pushes against people that say humans can’t.
“It’s about time the masculine energy in this country is ascendant,” he proclaimed. “I’m not defending what this kid allegedly did. I am defending young men holding up old glory, getting out there in the streets, and saying, we’re not going to take this anymore.”
So, what the hell is he defending then? What exactly about the incident exudes “masculine energy”?
In fact, Grants Pass pushed to get the Supreme Court to hear the case, and several nominally liberal cities and states on the West Coast are backing its argument.
How do you explain the liberal cities and states on the West Coast, then?
I feel like “Republican” is its own derogatory category now.
“Don’t be a Republican, care about your neighbor” or “Don’t be a Republican, check the facts” feel like completely reasonable things to say because Republicans have basically stereotyped themselves.