I've had enough of arguing with Lefty t***ers for one night.

Posted by JossAmbrose 10 years, 12 months ago to The Gulch: General
41 comments | Share | Flag

There are some very uneducated & short sighted plankton posting pro left B**ullSh***it on an article about UKIP. I've had it out with a few of them & got nothing but progressive blank out in return. They almost hurt my feelings. I need to chill in the Gulch. Anyone fancy a chat?
SOURCE URL: http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/nigel-farage-hints-at-ukip-tory-deal-if-cameron-sacked-271093?_p=d740aa71-aef0-4e14-a340-afea51bf406e&_rp=18bbfbab-c5e6-451a-a5cc-41af8f4b1a0f


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by 10 years, 12 months ago
    I posted a comment on the linked article & ended up in an argument with an idiot. It goes as follows...

    Me:
    Judging by many of the comments & votes, I see the 'progressives' are out in force. Carry on, dig your own graves. Thirty years from now, the UK will be a Communist state. You'll have voted & lobbied & pressured all your liberties away.

    We do not own ourselves, Europe does - which is run by unelected Communist/Fascist bureaucrats. Totally undemocratic. If that's what you want, vote Labour - Tory - LibDem. If not, vote UKIP.

    A girl:
    what the fukc , communists , fascists .......where do you get that from ? there are no communist , or fascists in the eu parliament , that i know of , the odd one has been accused of being one , evidence please

    Me:
    Evidence.

    thefreedictionary dot com/fascism
    Fascism - "A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator..."

    dictionary.reference​ dot com
    Communism - "a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party."

    British money is being redistributed to countries whose governments have failed in their duty to ensure stability of their economies for the benefit of their people. Why should we fund our government's desire to throw good money after bad - against our will?

    We are accepting immigrants from such countries because of their governments' incompetences. I don't blame a single immigrant for wanting a chance to improve their quality of life. Their own governments have failed them. It is not our government's 'moral obligation' to look after these people. It IS the 'moral obligation' of their own governments to take responsibility for their actions - which they have no intention of doing. Of course nobody gets a say in aby of this, Europe decides where all our money goes.

    Twat:
    You're full of shhit Joss. Communism is the common ownership of the means of production by workers/consumers. I have to laugh when people like you try to be intellectual. You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

    Me:
    Michael, I suggest you read some history books.

    Twat:
    I suggest you read the communist manifesto, not the Daily Mail, if you want to describe communism. I'll say again, you are not well read and your attempt to give the impression you are is laughable. Oh and giving yourself the thumbs up is a bit pathetic. lmao!

    Me:
    Michael, here's one for you. Shakedown Socialism by Oleg Atbashian (a man who has first hand experience of life in Soviet Russia). It's a short book. Buy it, read it, then eat your words.

    Here's another. We The Living by Ayn Rand - another Russian with first hand experience of the horrible reality of Communism.

    A 70 year old customer of mine told me recently of her suffering in Communist Burma. Her family used to be wealthy property owners. Her family worked hard to raise the money to buy that property - of their own free will. The Burmese Communist Government stole all of their property against her & her family's free will. She escaped to England in 1965 & the Burmese government allowed her to keep £16 of her own money to do so. That is the most vile, greedy & oppressive political system I can think of in the known world. But you think that sounds fair don't you Michael?

    A girl:
    Joss ; didnt ask for a definition , or opinions re communism , or fascism , i remarked that i was not aware of any in the eu parliament
    thanks for the info , and references though ..........onwards and upwards

    Twat:
    Why do you think googling critics of russia adds voracity to your definition of communism. I simply pointed out that although you are claiming to be an intellectual with a grasp of facts, you in fact don't know what you're talking about. At least one of your ('sources', was a well known right wing crack pot (Ayn Rand).

    Me:
    Michael, I didn't Google them, I've read them.

    "well known right wing crack pot Ayn Rand" did you Google that Michael? Have you taken the time to form an opinion by studying any of her writings? I doubt it very much.

    So far you have done nothing to prove your own intellect. You have made several empty statements about how un-intellectual I am, without backing up your claims with any hard facts, whereas I have had an answer for every one of your jibes so far.

    You are the one who is full of shhiit Michael & that opinion will stand until you can quote chapter & verse to prove that you have a valid reason for supporting a political 'ideal' which has been proven time & again throughout history, to be a corrupt & oppressive failure.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by khalling 10 years, 12 months ago
      Plus 10. notice how they degenerate quickly to name calling. Rand called this "Argument From Intimidation." In this case, even though you cite references, they claim your references lack intellect.
      "There is a certain type of argument which, in fact, is not an argument, but a means of forestalling debate and extorting an opponent’s agreement with one’s undiscussed notions. It is a method of bypassing logic by means of psychological pressure . . . [It] consists of threatening to impeach an opponent’s character by means of his argument, thus impeaching the argument without debate. Example: “Only the immoral can fail to see that Candidate X’s argument is false.” . . . The falsehood of his argument is asserted arbitrarily and offered as proof of his immorality." AR, Virtue of Selfishness, Lexicon.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo