Skip to Main Content
ext_90803 (
badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
) wrote
in
talkpolitics
2014-07-13 09:20 pm (UTC)
no subject
Works for individuals too.
I agree! Like I said in the comment you replied to: "some of which are apparently actually not ideologically consistent"
It's okay that you missed that.
Reductive, again.
What's reductive is assuming Bundy = right, but whatever works for you.
The OP didn't mention Bundy.
Reductive, yet again, since we're talking about a broad topic in which the type of language we'd see at the Bundy protests fits.
So you claim.....
Based on the evidence presented, yes.
Do you have anything to add to this at all at this point?
(
282 comments
)
Post a comment in response:
From:
Anonymous
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
OpenID
(will be screened if not validated)
Identity URL:
Log in?
Dreamwidth account
Account name
Password
Log in?
If you don't have an account you can
create one now
.
Subject
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
Formatting type
Casual HTML
Markdown
Raw HTML
Rich Text Editor
Message
Log in
Account name:
Password:
Remember me
Other options:
Forget your password?
Log in with OpenID?
Close
menu
Log in
Create
Create Account
Display Preferences
Explore
Interests
Directory Search
Site and Journal Search
Latest Things
Random Journal
Random Community
FAQ
Shop
Buy Dreamwidth Services
Gift a Random User
DW Merchandise
Interest
Region
Site and Account
FAQ
Email
no subject
I agree! Like I said in the comment you replied to: "some of which are apparently actually not ideologically consistent"
It's okay that you missed that.
Reductive, again.
What's reductive is assuming Bundy = right, but whatever works for you.
The OP didn't mention Bundy.
Reductive, yet again, since we're talking about a broad topic in which the type of language we'd see at the Bundy protests fits.
So you claim.....
Based on the evidence presented, yes.
Do you have anything to add to this at all at this point?