Philosophy Now Forum

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
WHAT? Not PC enough for you. LOL.

Oil and water.

Is that the best a girl can do?

That's all that needs 'doing' (for anyone with half a brain or more).

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Oil and water.

Is that the best a girl can do?

That's all that needs 'doing' (for anyone with half a brain or more).

Don't be so hard on yourself. I'm sure you have more than half. You just need to learn how to use it.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Is that the best a girl can do?

That's all that needs 'doing' (for anyone with half a brain or more).

Don't be so hard on yourself. I'm sure you have more than half. You just need to learn how to use it.

You should leave the 'funnies' to Harbal. He does them much better.

artisticsolution wrote:The major "motive" in Obama's presidency was always based on helping the majority of people. The major "motive" of the Republican party is "money".

That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Walker wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:The major "motive" in Obama's presidency was always based on helping the majority of people. The major "motive" of the Republican party is "money".

That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Because you think that is absurd is why you are so out-of-touch with reality.
It's no wonder no one here knows what the hell you are blathering on about when you are so fucking naive.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:The major "motive" in Obama's presidency was always based on helping the majority of people. The major "motive" of the Republican party is "money".

That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Because you think that is absurd is why you are so out-of-touch with reality.
It's no wonder no one here knows what the hell you are blathering on about when you are so fucking naive.

I’m not convinced of the premise,

and,

You’re a lousy persuader for that premise. Thus by your actions, and by objective principles found in definitions, not a philosopher.

Come to think of it, you’re not all that funny either.

(However, what I just wrote is not only true, it truly does deserve a chuckle that extends beyond the tribal signs and shouts.)



That's pretty plain. Do the world a favor and wise up, which does require thought now and then.

Walker wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote: That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Because you think that is absurd is why you are so out-of-touch with reality.
It's no wonder no one here knows what the hell you are blathering on about when you are so fucking naive.

I’m not convinced of the premise,

Well duh!!
That's rather taken for granted by the premise - that you would be incapable of it.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Well duh!!
That's rather taken for granted by the premise - that you would be incapable of it.

Straighten up. You sound like a sloppy drunk.

The premise lacks factual support, plain and simple.
Folks may as well speculate about unicorns.

You can’t provide any factual support, plain and simple.

Once the premise was called hope but that horse is out of the barn.


Premise is a generous word inserted for the purpose of intellectual decorum amongst a vocabulary that communicates about as much intelligence as a barnyard grunt, and is designed to distract. Must you be reminded yet again? Four legs bad, two legs good.

I’ll leave you to play in your chuckles for awhile, burn off some of that silly energy and get real.

In a free world that does not rely on the club of totalitarianism, one who persuades for their supper would starve with this tactic:

Customer: Why should I buy that?
Persuader: Because you’re stupid if you don’t.

Walker wrote:In a free world that does not rely on the club of totalitarianism, one who persuades for their supper would starve with this tactic:

Customer: Why should I buy that?
Persuader: Because you’re stupid if you don’t.

Huh...and that how I thought capitalism worked...go figure.

Walker wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:The major "motive" in Obama's presidency was always based on helping the majority of people. The major "motive" of the Republican party is "money".

That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Well then, please answer me this: What do you think the prime motive of Obamacare was?

artisticsolution wrote:

Walker wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:The major "motive" in Obama's presidency was always based on helping the majority of people. The major "motive" of the Republican party is "money".

That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Well then, please answer me this: What do you think the prime motive of Obamacare was?

It had a significant impact on creating fundamental change in the United States, by lacing a thread of causality throughout the society that connects into a web of chaos. This was witnessed in real time, as one absurdity upon the next was foisted upon the public. Absurdity founded on absurdity, and then custom tailored to fit. What ended as the evolving Obamacare was far from what was passed as legislation in fact and reasoning, and the legal contortions to prop it up were absurd. Everyone remembers when the ashen-faced, swing-vote Roberts cast the unanticipated vote that led to much gossip and speculation of how they got to him.

Walker wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:

Walker wrote: That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Well then, please answer me this: What do you think the prime motive of Obamacare was?

It had a significant impact on creating fundamental change in the United States, by lacing a thread of causality throughout the society that connects into a web of chaos. This was witnessed in real time, as one absurdity upon the next was foisted upon the public. Absurdity founded on absurdity, and then custom tailored to fit. What ended as the evolving Obamacare was far from what was passed as legislation in fact and reasoning, and the legal contortions to prop it up were absurd. Everyone remembers when the ashen-faced, swing-vote Roberts cast the unanticipated vote that led to much gossip and speculation of how they got to him.

I didn't ask you about the impact. I asked you about the motive . Are you able to discern the difference?

artisticsolution wrote:

Walker wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:The major "motive" in Obama's presidency was always based on helping the majority of people. The major "motive" of the Republican party is "money".

That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Well then, please answer me this: What do you think the prime motive of Obamacare was?

To make everyone dependent on the Government (Liberals) for everything.

thedoc wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:

Walker wrote: That’s absurd, and the rest follows from that.

Well then, please answer me this: What do you think the prime motive of Obamacare was?

To make everyone dependent on the Government (Liberals) for everything.

Aren't you being a tad dramatic? How does having access to purchase ones own health insurance, "make one dependant on government"? You are a silly little thing.