- Joined
- Oct 30, 2004
- Messages
- 95,963
- Reaction score
- 35,164
Sure Jack. Then why mention nukes at all in a response? What was the point? The guy who made the "it would be civil war" comment knows full well that the US has a nuclear arsenal at it's disposal.
The mention of nukes was to illustrate the superior firepower of America against traitors. And then he follows that by saying that discussion is better. As I said, what an evil monster! Wants to talk instead of starting a war! How dare he?
Do you actually follow Swalwell on Twitter? Might want to check both of his accounts just to see how truly NOT interested in the discussion he is . . . he wants to dictate what we'll do.
Regardless . . . are we through with this yet? Seems like we keep repeating the same crap over and over.
I don't follow Swalwell. You posted a tweet and then misrepresented what it said.
I mean, I think we were through the second the quote was posted. But, as I said (and this is the more significant point), right-wing political culture in America today strongly discourages rational pursuit of truth. That's the point I made in the other thread. Some of us think that there exists objective truth that is separate from tribal desires, that that truth can be known to some extent, that logic and evidence are the paths to true knowledge, and that discussion can be a useful part of the process of processing evidence and checking logic. But on the right, discussion is just used as a means to enforce conformity through social pressure (attacking non-believers in tribal truth can discourage others and agreeing with each other strengthens the community).