Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[josh]

Why is it so hard for you to cite your source? Plagiarist.

I did.

Liar.

A.  The source was referenced
B.   Do you dispute the numbers I referred to?

The article provided its source for the numbers.

You did not provide a source for the text; you copied and pasted it without stating that it was taken from elsewhere. That is what makes it plagiarism,, Ward, but you knew that.

[Yankguy1]

No he doesn't. Red, the teacher, isn't bright and seems to think that if he agrees with what is written he can pass it off as his own. If I wanted to argue with Andy Puzder, the author of the Wall Street Journal essay, I'd write to him.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Why is it so hard for you to cite your source? Plagiarist.

I did.

Liar.

A.  The source was referenced
B.   Do you dispute the numbers I referred to?

The article provided its source for the numbers.

LOL   

You did not provide a source for the text; you copied and pasted it without stating that it was taken from elsewhere. That is what makes it plagiarism,, Ward, but you knew that.

ROFL

Now.
Answer Question B

[Yankguy1]

You didn't refer to the numbers. Andy Puzder did.

[REDSTATEWARD]

No he doesn't. Red, the teacher, isn't bright and seems to think that if he agrees with what is written he can pass it off as his own. If I wanted to argue with Andy Puzder, the author of the Wall Street Journal essay, I'd write to him.

Which, of course, would be futile since his source is the one I included.

[facilitatorn]

Everyone knows President Obama was a great economic steward for whom we will be forever thankful. It doesn’t change the fact that Deficit Don and Moscow Mitch’s one big accomplishment helped very few tax payers and created fewer jobs while exploding the debt.

[facilitatorn]

Individual 1 can tell his cell mate what a great steward of the economy he was during his single term in office.

[Yankguy1]

No he doesn't. Red, the teacher, isn't bright and seems to think that if he agrees with what is written he can pass it off as his own. If I wanted to argue with Andy Puzder, the author of the Wall Street Journal essay, I'd write to him.

Which, of course, would be futile since his source is the one I included.

Plagiarist.

[barton]

 If the Gen Xers and Millenials start looking back in a few decades and decide to blame us Boomers for the condition of the world, I hope someone reminds all those political geniuses that they decided they were too "busy" to vote

Just what is the condition of the world?

Have a sardine! 

For a non sea lion, the "in a few decades" might have been a contextual clue. 

[josh]

No he doesn't. Red, the teacher, isn't bright and seems to think that if he agrees with what is written he can pass it off as his own. If I wanted to argue with Andy Puzder, the author of the Wall Street Journal essay, I'd write to him.

Which, of course, would be futile since his source is the one I included.

Along with his words.

So, no, if one wanted to argue with the author, writing to him would not be futile, let alone for the reason you state here.

Arguing with you, OTOH, is always futile.

[facilitatorn]

http://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/18/kelly-rogers-conservative-pac-fraud-1501931

As Red kicks himself for missing out on the scam.

Conservatives all have sloppy heads.

[bambu.]

Another global school climate-change protest day this Friday...
'Climate emergency'.
The kids would be far better off staying in school and learning how to spell and write correctly.

Climate change [or whatever they're calling it]...conference in NYC soon...Australia banned from speaking at it.  LOL
Seems only true believers are allowed to speak.
"China will be increasing its carbon emissions by multiples times of what Australia's are." - No1 radio host.
"China and India will be seeking trillions from the 'climate fund'" ...No1 radio host.

"It's a transfer of wealth....
A transfer of wealth from so-called "wealthy countries" to those not so wealthy." -No1 radio host.
Well, hey...if American taxpayers want to give China and India et al billions and trillions for 'climate change', then that is their choice.

I guess these kids should have followed your advice...

https://nmaahc.si.edu/blog/childrens-crusade

If the children had been kept at home they would not have been injured.

[REDSTATEWARD]

 If the Gen Xers and Millenials start looking back in a few decades and decide to blame us Boomers for the condition of the world, I hope someone reminds all those political geniuses that they decided they were too "busy" to vote

Just what is the condition of the world?

Have a sardine! 

For a non sea lion, the "in a few decades" might have been a contextual clue.

LOL

[REDSTATEWARD]

No he doesn't. Red, the teacher, isn't bright and seems to think that if he agrees with what is written he can pass it off as his own. If I wanted to argue with Andy Puzder, the author of the Wall Street Journal essay, I'd write to him.

Which, of course, would be futile since his source is the one I included.

Along with his words.

So, no, if one wanted to argue with the author, writing to him would not be futile, let alone for the reason you state here.

Arguing with you, OTOH, is always futile.

For obvious reasons.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Colbert vs Warren

Col­bert: You keep be­ing asked in the de­bates: “How are you go­ing to pay for it? Are you go­ing to raise the mid­dle-class taxes?” How are you go­ing to pay for it? Are you go­ing to raise the mid-dle-class taxes?
Warren: So, here’s how we’re going to do this: Costs are going to go up for the wealthiest Americans, for big corporations.
Colbert: Taxes is what you mean by costs?
Warren: Yeah, and hard-working middle-class families are going to see their costs go down.
Colbert: But will their taxes go up?
Warren: But, here’s the thing—
Colbert: But, here’s the thing. I’ve listened to these answers a few times before and I just want to make a parallel suggestion for you about how you might defend the taxes that perhaps you’re not mentioning in your sentence... Isn’t Medicare-for-all like public school? There might be taxes for it, but you certainly save a lot of money on sending your kids to school and do you want to live in a world where kids aren’t educated? Do you want to live in a world where your fellow citizens are dying, even if it costs a little bit of money?
Warren: So, I accept your point and I believe in your point. Health care is a basic human right. We fight for basic human rights, and that’s Medicare-for-all. Everyone gets covered.


Suffice it to say the next 2 minutes was a filibuster from Warren without ever answering the question about tax hikes for people in the middle of the income scale.

As if anyone with a brain had not yet figured it out.