Comments on: Modern Liberalism Explained (VIDEO)

By: Evan Sayet

Evan Sayet — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 04:42:55 +0000

The gentleman calls me “hate-filled” because, by definition, anyone who isn’t indiscriminate must have come to his position through “hate.” That is, just as I said in my talk, rational though is considered a “hate crime” by the left.

Thank you MsUnderestimated, for your service.

Evan

By: Evan Sayet

Evan Sayet — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 02:42:55 +0000

The gentleman calls me “hate-filled” because, by definition, anyone who isn't indiscriminate must have come to his position through “hate.” That is, just as I said in my talk, rational though is considered a “hate crime” by the left.

Thank you MsUnderestimated, for your service.

Evan

By: HEMSG

HEMSG — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:17:36 +0000

He stated that liberals view anyone with a notion of right and wrong as having descriminated against something no matter how vile it is, to come to that conclusion. In your first post you called Mr. Sayet a “hate filled nut”. He said nothing racist or hate filled in his speech, all he did was put forth rational arguments in a civilized manner and you automaticlly call him “hate filled” because of his views on morality.

By: HEMSG

HEMSG — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 05:17:36 +0000

By: orion

orion — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 22:59:00 +0000

Really, how so? This man is nothing more than a moron.

By: orion

orion — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 20:59:00 +0000

Really, how so? This man is nothing more than a moron.

By: HEMSG

HEMSG — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 10:56:05 +0000

Orion, you just proved Mr. Sayet’s point.

By: HEMSG

HEMSG — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:56:05 +0000

Orion, you just proved Mr. Sayet's point.

By: MsUnderestimated

MsUnderestimated — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 02:07:02 +0000

What, Jay… you missed his name?

Evan Sayet

Check your testosterone and repost again. Your comment is a non-answer and offers no real contests for evidence.

Refute it if you can.

By: Jay

Jay — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 00:55:36 +0000

This guy — whose name you haven’t posted — has offered neither fact nor evidence. His “narrative” hinges on anecdote and hyperbole. I presume you call it a narrative because even you recognize that it’s not an argument.

Does any man who considers Supertramp indicative of liberal social policy warrant debate?