You can start with answering this comment from five hours ago on this thread that you’ve ignored so far:
"
Conservatives have utterly betrayed that principle by supporting massive violations of rights such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid programs, central banking, government-run schools, welfare programs, the “war on drugs,” the progressive tax code, regulations on businesses, subsidies for infrastructure projects, and on and on. Such entitlements and regulatory controls are clear instances of socialist and fascist policies…
I’d suggest you spend a bit of time learning some history if this is the type of article you use to support that insane statement."
Or this from two day ago that you never responded to, just moved on to other posts.
"The names you listed are disgraced, in jail or dead but the big name conservatives don’t seem to suffer any consequences from their peers.
I’m also not claiming that any group of people have universal characteristics and I’m interested in hearing why you think they do."
What that you brought up something off topic and I decided to ignore it? If you don’t state something interesting or relevant, you can’t expect people to respond to you. Nobody owes you a response to irreverent statements.
The whole citation talking about conservatives. The topic was democrats and their strong association to fascism. It’s a well known tie. You didn’t dispute the book or the book review. You tried to talk about something else that was off topic and I ignored it.
If you want to go off topic, most people will ignore it.
Conservatives have utterly betrayed that principle by supporting massive violations of rights such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid programs, central banking, government-run schools, welfare programs, the “war on drugs,” the progressive tax code, regulations on businesses, subsidies for infrastructure projects, and on and on. Such entitlements and regulatory controls are clear instances of socialist and fascist policies…
You can start with answering this comment from five hours ago on this thread that you’ve ignored so far:
"
Or this from two day ago that you never responded to, just moved on to other posts.
"The names you listed are disgraced, in jail or dead but the big name conservatives don’t seem to suffer any consequences from their peers.
I’m also not claiming that any group of people have universal characteristics and I’m interested in hearing why you think they do."
I say what I need to say and move it. If the argument from the opposing person is senseless or weak, I move on.
I don’t know of conservatives that do as claimed. So how can I respond to something so generic? So I don’t.
And your comment has nothing to do with the topic. So I ignored it.
Maybe the issue is people ask off topic or silly things trying to “win” and that’s why I don’t respond. You didn’t catch my interest.
Thanks for proving my exact point.
What that you brought up something off topic and I decided to ignore it? If you don’t state something interesting or relevant, you can’t expect people to respond to you. Nobody owes you a response to irreverent statements.
Which comment was off-topic?
The whole citation talking about conservatives. The topic was democrats and their strong association to fascism. It’s a well known tie. You didn’t dispute the book or the book review. You tried to talk about something else that was off topic and I ignored it.
If you want to go off topic, most people will ignore it.
This citation I got from the article you posted was off topic?
And? What does that have to do with democrats being fascist ?
I’m not exactly sure, you are the one who shared it with me.
Was i reading the wrong part of the article that you sent to me?
Did I read it wrong?