Thanatos Sand

The only lady is you. I, the man, didn't protest at all.

I haven't seen one contributor who has said this, but you are free to actually back up your outlandish claim. You have yet to do so. So, the pattern s...

*.

No, they don't, they cause harm, which is substantially different from causing evil, defined as: "morally reprehensible." This denotes human activity,...

Michael still doesn't understand he can't attach the "metaphysics" that he supposes to the already-defined word skepticism. Language doesn't work that...

I've told you many times in previous posts why it's relevant. You just stick your head in the sand and repeat the same already answered questions. I n...

Man, your reading and reasoning skills have been really poor. I brought Hillary's crimes up as a relevant comparison (and it is), not as a source of e...

Mistake.

The fact that's the best you got shows the only absurd one who needs to save face is you. And I've shown you're in the wrong, so you really should acc...

They absolutely are relevant and I've shown how. Again, you just say they're not without showing how. — Thanatos Sand That's a terrible and inapt comp...

They absolutely are relevant and I've shown how. Again, you just say they're not without showing how they're not. Considering they are relevant, I'm n...

And I don't care if you care; I care, and I showed why Clinton's crimes are relevant. You did not prove your point, since I showed you why even the no...

Firstly, no educated person should use the banal term "whataboutism;" it's a vulgar platitude meant to preclude relevant mention of contradiction, jus...

Then the Clinton Foundation was definitely breaking the law,and definitely its ethical fibre, since they took money from foreign nationals as awful as...

Who said that and where?

And it certainly isn't determined by me. So, I'm wondering if you know what it is? A simple yes or no question. And feel free to make an argument and ...

Since you're the one who refuses to make an argument in this discussion, the one fearful to commit here is you.. And no, demanding someone answer a sp...

Look, if you want to have a conversation, then converse and make a point, and I will respond to that point. I'm not here to answer your list of questi...

I explained that very clearly in my post #572. Go read it again. That's your personal view. There is definitely value in them and I've shown some in p...

I'm not going to waste my time guessing what you think. So, go ahead and tell me what you think it is.

You're giving politicians too much credit. They purposefully and knowingly lie all the time. They lie about: 1. What favors they owe their major donor...

I would say there is the ethical level, which is telling the truth is when one tells what one believes to be true. So, even if Dave stole the cookie, ...

Ok, I agree with this. A more apt description would be a "Rare-Truth" world. Such is the "Rare-Truth" world we have always inhabited. Which is good, s...

Actually, this was intention to collude since no information was exchanged. In fact, the only info we know that harmed Clinton was the info that showe...

This is not trolling; it is called disagreeing with you, and you didn't show that conclusion you set out to demonstrate...and saying that is not "trol...

I have no idea what you are talking about since the only "rights" I know that are taught in school are the Bill of Rights, which are a key part of our...

It's cute how John thinks that talking about someone right below their post on a thread actually constitutes "ignoring them."...:)

First of all, there is no "old" progressive way, since Millennials are the most progressive generation we have, and they--to their credit--greatly emb...

Sorry, my not responding to you the way you wanted me to respond isn't trolling. Your calling it such shows a real arrogance in your expectations of o...

No, the ones who are both of those things are you and John, as proven by trolling statements like the one below: This is pure trolling on your part an...

You're right, it is the simple Truth you made a sophomoric retort. As to my education, I am well educated. So, you're sophomoric and hubristic, quite ...

Trust is not an indicator of Truth. The German people greatly trusted in the lies of their Nazi leaders about the Jews, and White Americans were buyin...

Sophomoric retort at best.

Thanks, man. I feel the same about your posts.

At least partly, it definitely does. You can't have a phrase like "Post-Truth" without reference to falsity. And what you refer to above has also alwa...

That's evidence-less support, and Harvard professors are often wrong. And the mid-20th century was full of lies from politicians and regular people. F...

As wii I.

Charming retort well-representing your intellect...:)

No, Non-Truth world; this has never not been the case. See my last post for clarification.

No, it's not, since to say we're in a Post-Truth world is to say we were once in a "Truth world," and I made very clear we never has a "Truth-world." ...

Except we're not in a "Post-Truth" world; were in the "same-lack-of-Truth-we've-always-had world.

Yes, but that's not what you said in your previous incoherent ramble, and "this" is not a "post-truth" world since it's not "post-truth."

At this point, you're just ranting and raving and not saying anything coherent, whatsoever.

And now, nobody will be skeptical of your being a fool as well, since I never said anything about your obligation to be a skeptic. I correctly showed ...

I never made the second statement, so now you're just pathetically lying, and those statements don't even contradict. So, you're living in your own no...

Of course it is. You refer to it in your first sentence:

No. What you call a post- truth world is what we've always had.

This is just wrong.

Except I never did that since I repeated my assertion that x--not a post-truth world, but a non-truth world--has never not been the case, which render...

That's fine since I made no performative contradictions, and you haven't shown I have, Creatchy