So he was arguing against a point no one made. That's called a straw man! Glad we cleared this up.
It is weird, because, the person people are responding to said this.
First, there were mainstream people on the Left that were pushing anti-vax which is why Kennedy was brought up. He has a radio show that is on over 40 stations, written many articles that were posted on major sites.
2nd, he clearly pointed out that he was saying that the Left is not immune, not that the Left was equal.
You are wasting your time. Facts don’t fit the narrative.
So he was arguing against a point no one made. That's called a straw man! Glad we cleared this up.
Meanwhile, this topic was covered in another thread and the person arguing what you're arguing got owned.
This was my challenge:
Here is a challenge for you.
Name a major, mainstream left-wing politician, news outlet or political commentator who is anti-vaccine, a climate change denier, evolution denier, conspiracy theorist or pro-woo.
As for right-wing we have
Alex Jones (all of the above)
Trump (All of the above)
Brian Kilmeade (Fox and Friends anti-vax, climate change denier, general conspiracies)
Tucker Carlson (anti-vax climate change denier evolution denier)
Michelle Bachmann (Anti Vax climate change and evolution denier)
Rick Perry (anti-vax apologist)
Rand Paul (Anti-vax apologist and immune "overload" conspiracy pusher)
Mike Huckabee (anti-vax apologist disguised as "choice")
Sarah Palin (Evolution and climate change denier)
This is a short list that stopped growing only because I'm bored.
The point is this: The GOP has mainstreamed anti-science conspiratard thinking. The left wing has not.
The anti-vaxx movement is across party lines, it is not a liberal thing.
If you actually read the thread the crux of the argument was not that liberals are immune to conspiracy theories, it is that the right is particularly bad about them and they are mainstream in conservatism in way they are not mainstream in liberalism. This is undeniably true, so why it's even being argued is confusing.
Except it was. Again you simply cannot understand what is going on.
Weird right. So you were wrong about what he was arguing, and now clearly wrong about what question was asked.
The point is this: the GOP has mainstreamed anti-science conspiratard thinking. The left wing has not.
You're supposed left conspiracy theories aren't isolated to left. #bothsiderism ftl.Gay frog conspiracists from CT are the worst kind.
Nutters gonna nut indeed.
I have heard conservatives rant about Obama’s birth certificate, the left’s control of the media, the government coming for their precious guns and other such nonsense.
I’ve also heard people from the left rant about vaccines, embrace junk science “alternative” medicine, irrationally fear government helicopters and the deep/police state, the vast right wing conspiracy, 9/11 and the Jewish deep state.
And let’s not forget the don’t tread on me libertarians, who occupy their own plane of existence, or Hollywood, which promotes its own unique brand of social sciences and medicine among other things.
It's not confusing. It's just desperation on the part of realibrad to avoid acknowledging the truth.
No, his point was clearly articulated. He even said what the point was, which makes it all the more amusing that you can't understand it.
This is undeniably true and so I have no idea why you thought it was a good idea to try and say otherwise. I have no interest in continuing yet another discussion where you will endlessly try to rationalize yet another stupid argument you have made so by all means feel free to have the last word.
Do you think that Her and her group are not the place that people on the Left end up in terms of crazies?
It's not confusing. It's just desperation on the part of realibrad to avoid acknowledging the truth.
If she's good enough for Cornel West, she's good enough for me. And she is on point about US foreign policy.
Contrast that with mister Alex reptilian deep state Jones, and you'd be a complete eejit to equate Jill Stein with him. It should be easy enough to prove me wrong, if she really is bonkers; give me a video of Jill Stein going on an unhinged rant, shaking with anger and screaming nonsense at the camera.
Lol read my post again guy.
Amused said...
"The point is this: The GOP has mainstreamed anti-science conspiratard thinking. The left wing has not."
So Star gave an example of someone on the Left doing it. Keep up man.
wut?You're supposed left conspiracy theories aren't isolated to left. #bothsiderism ftl.
So, reading comprehension isn't a strong suit for you or Star, I take it?
Don't know the meaning of mainstream? No, Star failed completely to point out any mainstream "left" conspiracy theories.
Conspiracy theorist in Chief is giving a great speech at CPAC. He complains of "atrocities" committed by liberal media and Democrats. Anyone know what he's talking about??
ThisIt is weird, because, the person people are responding to said this.
First, there were mainstream people on the Left that were pushing anti-vax which is why Kennedy was brought up. He has a radio show that is on over 40 stations, written many articles that were posted on major sites.
2nd, he clearly pointed out that he was saying that the Left is not immune, not that the Left was equal.
Wait, so you think he is not trying to equate Jill Stein with Alex Jones, but, now you want examples of her acting like Alex Jones?
Starbuck said:Jill Stein and the Green Party is where all the liberal conspiracy nuts seem to land.
Jill Stein, the Green party candidate, is the bastion of liberal conspiracy theories? Mate you're nuts.
You also didn't give me the Alex Jones equivalent.
realibrad said:He did not equate Jill Stein to Alex Jones. He said that of the Left, the Green party is where crazies end up.
Do you think that Her and her group are not the place that people on the Left end up in terms of crazies?
This
So you’re changing and narrowing the criteria. It is not enough that someone delivers conspiracy based content, it is that they need to deliver it in the format and swagger of a fringe right wing radio personality.So from the top:
To which I said:
You then claimed that I said something I did not type:
I then stated that I made no equivalence to Jill Stein and Alex Jones, and then you made an equivalence between them:
So if crazy attracts crazy, Jill Stein will have some unhinged videos like Alex Jones.
So from the top:
To which I said:
You then claimed that I said something I did not type:
I then stated that I made no equivalence to Jill Stein and Alex Jones, and then you made an equivalence between them:
So if crazy attracts crazy, Jill Stein will have some unhinged videos like Alex Jones.
What you wrote made no sense as it is not a complete sentenceExactly as I stated. Read it.
*tap dances for the bothsides effect*, cons have conspiracy on lock down, sucks for you.Show me where I stated there was an equivalence, false or otherwise
So you’re changing and narrowing the criteria. It is not enough that someone delivers conspiracy based content, it is that they need to deliver it in the format and swagger of a fringe right wing radio personality.
In that case you are correct. You will not find any left wing commentators who deliver in the STYLE of Alex Jones.