CdnFox

Well that's all pretty much untrue. But it's a popular trope on the left. In fact - if you look through the winning campaigns of pretty much all the presidents they all do the same thing, and only trump really did the 'lets make america great AGAIN" routine. They either come up with a cutsie name and slogan for themselves (i like ike) or they come up wiht a slogan saying it's time for positive change Like Kennedy's for example - "it's time to make america great" . Sound familiar? So no - tehy don't pretend we have to go back to anything, they ALL simply acknowledge that things need to change and capitalize on that. And they all do the same thing. Change! We need change! We can make america great! We can do things differently this time! Yes we can! Carter - a leader for change! regan - Let's Make America Great Again (kennedy already stole lets make america great) Also regan the next time - its a new morning for america Bush - we need a 'kinder gentler nation" Clinton - for people ,for a change! Barrack - Change we can believe in. And of course Biden - "opur best days lie ahead" (Change again) It's always the same republican or democrat. If it's their first term - the message is that the country is going in the wrong direction and they'll make a change for the better. And it's telling that kennedy used 'make america great' the first time. If it's their second one it's basically "sorry - we'll get it right this time". But as we all know - the alt left like you DO love their fairy tales.

Ohhh i think we know you don't give a flying fig about individuality ohhh - so your argument isn't that the jews are the nazis - the jews just prefer to ELECT nazis! Well that's MUCH better Nice backtrack but that's not what you said. You didn't say they fled the nazi gov't but nazi germany Busted!!! Man you really don't like the jews - these kinds of comments just keep coming up. But real nice - comparing jews to the nazis is a class act thing to do. So you admit you were calling the jews nazis and are now adding 'fascist scum" to your description of them. Well. At least you're somewhat honest about how you feel. Points for that i guess. And yes - you are living proof that anyone can be fascist scum. That's for sure.

I don't remember any books as a kid that explained people could have a mommy and a daddy. Or the like. Why introduce sexuality at all to children? And as you know some of the 'banned books' (which aren't banned at all) are far worse. And the fact that it's being read during drag story hour highlights the fact that you're not just reading a book, you're pursuing an agenda. SO it's not just the book as you tried to pretend, it's that it's used to introduce children to complex issues beyond just two people getting married. Very dishonest. I can see why parents would be inherently distrustful of it and your motives. You downplay it as just being a book - but the truth is that it's part of a much larger agenda and 'drag story hour'. Meanwhile, your kind demanded the cancelling of "to think i saw it on mullberry st", Claiming any such images were just WAAAAAAY to formative for young children. So clearly you think even simple images are powerful for children and that we can't trust children to sort out the meaning of them accurately. Personally i'd be tempted to say leave both books alone and let parents talk to kids about them but you force the end of publication of one as a necessity and then question why the other should be excluded from schools only, but parents can buy it anywhere and show it to their kids. Well your use of 'triggered the right' shows you know it's a genuine issue and you feel the need to try to dismiss it. In fact, it was a concern for a number of parents. I heard about it . Strangely, despite being on the right, i wasn't triggered and nobody i know was. Parents had an issue with it. Guess what ... (some of them vote democrat!!! GASP!) I see your hypocrisy if that helps. You defend and deflect the same or worse actions on the left, yet condemn it here. I get why parents might not want to deal with complex sexual issues with kids. Whether you like it or not for many issues of gay or lesbian sex or marriage is a complex issue. Further - it's very clear that those promoting it are doing so based on an agenda. Nobody puts in the heterosexual kiss to promote heterosexuality - but the gay kiss is often put in for no better reason than to 'promote' the idea of homosexuality. That makes people concerned. And if you can't see that you're being grossly dishonest. So there's quesitons about motive. Why are they trying to 'teach' kids like that? What's next? Where does that stop? First it's a book - then the book is read by a trans or similar person, then ... what? All they know is that if they say 'you know - i have concerns about exposing children to this..." You'll attack immediately calling them right wing nazi's and how DAAAAARRE They and their concerns are completely invalid and they should shut up. Which ain't going to win anyone over to your side that's for sure. You come across as dishonest as hell. Can you understand why nobody trusts your motives?

DId i mention we all know when you post pictures because you can't make an argument you feel you lost the discussion? Thanks for conceding the point

You're comparing the current situation of the palestinians to that aren't you? That would make the jews the nazi's here.

I honestly wonder if he'd have any better luck with it.

So the Jews are nazis. Awkward.

I say we take off and nuke 'em from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

You literally say ALL conservatives are sub humans and constantly claim ALL conservatives believe this or that, you've made it pretty clear you don't think people are individuals.

If you thought i was referring to you when i said 'little miss propaganda" - you were mistaken LOLOLOL

We know, we know - you've been very clear. "Nazi= not me or people i agree with" - AA You've said as much a thousand times.

It's even more simple when you use the dictionary definition. and yet - despite being that simple, you still can't figure it out. Well - i' m sure we can find SOMETHING that's simple enough even for YOU to discuss if we try hard. How high can you count?

Well that would be an example of that 'intersectionality' i mentioned. And it's pretty hilarious. I think the first one where i heard that term was two people discussing that if you don't date trans people you're a sexist and a nazi. And the one said 'People need to get woke' or the like. that's when it was still a 'good' term for the left But i've heard it applied to other things - like AOC's climate plan change where she was going to ban airplanes and trains, and every home had to be upgraded to a high standard of insulation - like EVERY SINGLE HOME IN THE US - within 10 years, and there was a bunch of other nonsense. People called it her 'woke climate plan'.

This is what i think of when you've realized you've lost a discussion point and compensate with pictures And in fact I proved that it was not taxes that made up pubilc money - and you didn't even reazlie hadrian's wall was in england Sorry kid - but everyone knows when you resort to stoopid pictures and you start lying about what was said that you're running home with your tail between your legs.

Nope - total lie. Sorry. Remember - if you have to lie to make your point then you probably don't have a very good point. It's still entirely sexual and nothing at all like having women come from nasa. Many feel, with good reason, that introducing sexual issues to children too early causes a lot of problems. And there's a reasonable body of work to support that. And i'm not just talking about lgb stuff - i'm taking about hetero or any kind of sexual sensitive discussions. Thats why traditionally adults tell kids babies come from 'mommy's tummy'. Now - perhaps YOU feel that you should expose YOUR children to sexually explicit issues early. And if that's your decision as a parent then you can certainly make arrangements for that. BUt a lot of people feel it's child abuse, and using public resources to promote that is very concerning for them. So - it's a vaild issue to address. Why do we need to be teaching kids that young about sexual issues?

Well anyone who disagrees with the left is nazi. And anything the conservatives disagree with is woke apperently according to little miss propaganda over there, and many conservatives here seem to disagree with r10 from time to time, So does that make him a woke nazi? Can we call him a waxy? or a noke?

Well - sure - there's the 'soft left' or 'llberal left' as we say here who are basically just left of center who also think the seriously left or radical left are bonkers. And fair enough.

Yes, i was aware of that. Now YOU'RE dumb show me an example of right wingers claiming the left is pro slavery or dog burning. The voices in your head are not your friends. Actually that did happen, as you know. But i doubt anyone here is suggesting the left wants to bring back slavery. The left on the other hand has said such things about the right https://www.huffpost.com/entry/okay-gop-presidential-fie_b_8014798 OK, GOP Presidential Field, Who's for Bringing Back Slavery? So the left literally does what you cry the right will do, but doesn't. Sorry - still right. They're not banning books because they're 'woke'. They're banning books because of sexual content that is inappropriate for children FROM SCHOOL LIBRARIES where children can access them. So they're not actually banning any books. The books will be published and available, Just not in schools. They also don't allow mein kampf. Some things are inappropriate for young people at school. Remember what i taught you about if you have to lie to make a point, it's probably not a good point? On the other hand the left DEMANDED that some dr seuss books be cancelled - so again accusing the right of doing what the left is doing the left tried to make the term popular, but now is pissed off because now people recognize those same left wing ideas it ALWAYS stood for are dumb. And they're sick of it. That's why - get woke go broke. People are done with that kind of stupid and while the left was proud of 'woke', now they're trying to pretend it has nothing to do with them. Sorry - woke is being correctly used, people just don't like you.

But i posted the DICTIONARY definition. And that's what i use. See - over your head. Good for them - as i said it includes intersectionality. BUt that's Not ALL it includes. Sorry man. Some time when we have a topic that's more your speed lets try again

But there is a difference. A person has no reason in most cases to believe they know the answers to many of those things you mention. But - if they meet someone who presents as a 'woman' or a 'man' when they see them, there is a pretty reasonable expectation that the person BELIEVES he or she KNOWS the other person's bio sex. So - if you allow them to CONTINUE believing something that you know is untrue and highly relevant to why they asked you on a date, then it's not just a lie by omission, it's just a regular lie, and fraud as well. You are allowing them to proceed knowing they have a false belief that is highly relevant to their decisions because it suits your agenda. It would be extremely dishonest. If a friend came to me and said he was out on a date with a girl and on the second date she reviled that i would say "Dump her right now - you can never trust another thing she says". If you know someone is asking you out on a date for romantic reasons, and it's likely they have resaon to believe your bio sex is different than what it is, then you need to be up front with that right away. Otherwise, you're just dishonest.

The sad and bizarre thing is it was the left who only a few short decades ago were the ones championing free speech on campuses in the US. Now they're actively campaigning against it.

Man... it's really looking like this concept may be over your head. I don't understand, it seems pretty simple to me but you really are struggling with it. I'm sorry - we may have to wait for a conversation that's more your speed, where you can get your head around the basics. I can't explain it more simply than i did and you still can't figure it out, i'm not sure what i can do to help you.

Nope. Not a recognized source for definitions. The dictionary definition i gave is factual. Sorry big guy - you're wrong. Oh - and yeah i absolutely get to define it any way i like if i'm using the word. Words evolve constantly. But more importantly - websters gets to define it. It's kind of their thing swing and a miss The left started it, the left used it frequently to refer to any of their ideas, the rest of the world realized those ideas are largely bad thinking not based in fact and now 'woke' is a pejorative term because left wing thinking has become so poor it's insulting to be said to be thinking that way. Sucks to be you

Well - there's a SLIGHT difference between ideology and ideas, but i suppose that's not ENTIRELY wrong. Lets say yes with caveates. No, that would be dumb. Conservatives are strongly against slavery. Being pro slavery would not be 'woke'. Conservatives are against burning dogs for fun. That would not mean burning dogs was woke. There are even some ideas that both the left and the right agree on more or less, so they span political lines and couldn't be said to be left wing. Left wing ideology is specifically that ideology which is accepted by the left exclusively by the left. just as right wing ideology is ideology accepted by the right and not accepted by the left. This is pretty straight forward. No as noted, and it's generally better to let people address your first example of being retarded before proceeding to another example. -Said no one ever. I doubt that i would be considered to represent an ideology that is exclusive to and accepted by the left LOL Now smarten up and try harder. That was even worse than your last attempt. You can do better than that,

Nope. Sorry - tonnes of examples out there of the left wing using it differently than that - that's just a little revisionist history on your part. Of course it ALSO meant that - that would be an example of left wing ideology. Certainly the intersectional culure wars the left started would encompass that. But it wasn't relegated to that. Nope. They use it to refer to left wing ideology or far left ideology which does include the culture wars, sure. But includes ohter things as well. Such as AOC's suggesting that we ban airplanes. etc. In fact - here's AOC and newsweek agreeing on that very fact from back in 2021 https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-why-democrats-woke-problem-election-1646842 Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has fired back at political commentators who suggest Democrats face a "woke problem," following last week's poor election results. Webster's Dictionary defines "woke" as: "Aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)." However the term has also been used as an insult. Which is how everyone has been using it since day one. Aware of the issues and 'facts'. Especially about social justice issues - but not exclusive, and especaily about racial issues, but not exclusive. Sorry, You were wrong. Since day one 'woke has referred to issues that the left and far left subscribe to and that definitely includes intersectionality, but not JUST intersectionality.