Those darned liberal snowflake universities and their attacks on free speech:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...010_story.html
Guys, look. You're becoming a laughing stock. Seriously. Get a grip.
Printable View
Those darned liberal snowflake universities and their attacks on free speech:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...010_story.html
Guys, look. You're becoming a laughing stock. Seriously. Get a grip.
Stupid ignorant snowflakes.
I use at least four of these words on a daily basis.
Twitter Link
The tweets in that thread are some of the most carefully phrased tweets I've ever seen. A virtuoso performance in non-denial denials.
One of those deplorable conservatives actually tried to pull the stunt of pushing "fake news".
When I asked him where exactly the practical difference between a "ban" and "say those words and you don't get funded" exactly lies he of course couldn't say.
He's also one of those guys who preaches "freedom of speech" but thinks that banishing protestors into "free speech zones" miles away from proceedings is a grand idea. :rolleyes:
It's just so sad and embarrassing. I almost feel sorry for conservatives.
I'm just surprised Milo isn't picketing the CDC in the name of free speech.
Problem with conservatives is that they have been shown to be more willing to latch onto discredited or bullshit information to reinforce their view of the world. Before they know it they're 10 feet down the rabbit hole wrapped up with the crazies. Without counting Lewk we've seen it on this board with voter fraud, climate change, gun control, trickle down, even constitutional protections against certain groups.
http://assets.csom.umn.edu/assets/71516.pdf
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/...56797617692108
Negative messages get more attention and spread faster than positive messages, and conservatives are more likely to believe negative messages. Their threshold for what they consider a possible threat is lower than from those identified as liberal.
A study behind a pay wall that doesn't give any indications as to its statistical significance or methodology, (beyond two online surveys of Americans) isn't really going to tilt the balance for me.
It also doesn't reference bullshit or discredited information. It references the type of message.
Just wait until I dig up the study which indicates that conservatives have a lower IQ.
The only reason someone can disagree with your world view is they are stupid, or easily manipulated, is that it? And you and I, we are somehow different. More worldly. This level of hubris and arrogance, while not really surprising, doesn't seem to be raising red flags for either of you.
Maybe you are more conservative than you thought.
Semi-auto mods? I'm guessing you are referring to bump fire stocks? I don't recall aggressively denying usefulness of anything, but I also don't think they pose a grave existential threat either. I'm more worried about getting into my car to go to work than getting shot by someone. That worry shrinks even further if I am supposed to worry about getting shot by someone using a bump fire stock.
But I could see how negative messaging appealing to your fears might make you worry about it.
Considering the only way I could even be remotely considered "conservative" would be by someone on this board, I'm not too concerned about it. I'm not taking umbrage because I consider myself conservative, I'm taking umbrage because I hate seeing people who should be able to think more critically fail to do so. Especially when they are trying to use critical thinking as a cudgel against those they disagree with politically.
The plot thickens:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...ds-yuval-levin
long history of annoying some Republicans[...]
terms that it might be wise to avoid so as not to raise red flags among Republicans in Congress[...]
how to avoid setting off congressional Republicans and so how to maximize the agency’s chances of getting its budget-request approved.
That sums up the entire story. The snowflakes don't like certain things being brought to their attention, so the words aren't banned as long as you don't like things like getting a paycheck.
Oh, then please defend the latest switch-around by Mr. "I don't know what's in the bill, and if that passage is true then it shouldn't be in the bill, but please wait, I have to vote for the bill!" Corker.
Because that's what we "disagree with politically" here.
Wimp.
Well, we were talking about the stupidity of conservatives. Only a moron can use "but we didn't know what's in the bill!" as a defense when it's their job to know about that stuff.