lol this post is THE living and breathing documentation of what is wrong with the left.
lol. Ok researching a topic is what’s wrong with the left.
I posted a picture response - to your picture tweet, in which your tweet proclaims that if someone isn't for CRT - then they aren't for teaching about slavery.... Which is a load of shit - which is what the image clearly shows. It's a fallacy of an argument to make, showing the stupidity of your original tweet post.
You should note my pic only made a word play on CRT. It actually said wanting to keep confederate statues and not teach slavery was
hypocritical race theory. That’s not actually a real thing.
So you sure read a lot into a simple joke.
So what's the first thing you do? The first thing you do is google the name of the person that posted it - and you attempt to discredit them, and put them into buckets.
Ok let me go through my thought process.
First off I have never heard of Dr Wu. So I looked her up. PhD international studies and executive director of Californians for Equality. First blush sounded pretty liberal. I wouldn’t expect you to post liberal minority female tweets. Of course she was conservative
Second I look up people so I can be aware of their expertise and their potential biases. It’s a good habit to do with unknown sources not just those on the left - you should consider doing it.
You're already making this into some kind of battlefield where you are attempting to declare what side they are on by notating certain things that you feel are relevant to the argument
No battlefield. I simply stated my position and supporting facts that she’s conservative when it comes to race. Being anti-affirmative action is a conservative position after all.
Do you disagree?
- but they actually have absolutely nothing to do with the argument. You're a 5th grader that didn't learn one of the first rules of debate - attack the message, not the messenger.
Is calling someone conservative an attack? Is she not conservative?
You post these as if it's a discredit in anyway, but it really just shows how far you have shoved your head in the sand instead of thinking rationally.
If I had discredited the tweet because she was conservative I wouldn’t have bothered investigating the claims in the pic. That would have been wrong by the way.
I discredited the tweet because it specifically states things that are not true and then based it’s position on false things.
You literally proved you are what I said - a pawn. Incapable of individual thought.
You keep using that phrase. I do not think it means what you think it means
Incapable of not judging others before segregating them into buckets that you classify people as. Do you realize how disturbing that is?
I judge based on words and actions. In this case the action was tweeting a misleading image. Not a good look.
You then go on to read some wikipedia summarizations of books that you haven't read -
Of course. I needed to understand what those books were actually about to compare it to what the tweet alleged they were about. I wasn’t about to read to entire non-fiction books to respond to your post.
Also we won’t be pretending you did even a modicum of research on those books let alone read them.
and proclaim that the statements in the image MUST be false based on a couple paragraphs of summary.
Wikipedia is more trustworthy than a rando tweet. If you know for a fact the wiki synopsis is false please link to your source or tell us your interpretation of the books after reading them.
How in anyway did you think that was logical?
Comparing a trusted source to a new source is always a logical way to evaluate the new source.
If you don’t like it you can have the money back you payed for my post.
Not to mention, you carved out one paragraph of the image and honed in on that particular part for whatever strange reason instead of actually seeing the overall point that was made.
As I said, the point that tweet was based on relied on the description in the image. That description was false which means the point is as well. It’s basic logic.