Discussion:
It is a fiction to say that "states" elect the president
(too old to reply)
Rudy Canoza
2020-11-28 21:12:46 UTC
Permalink
They do not. People do.

It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal government. They
did not.
Just Wondering
2020-11-28 21:45:56 UTC
Permalink
They do not.  People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government.  They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
Rudy Canoza
2020-11-28 22:18:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Just Wondering
They do not.  People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal government.
They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map — don't "do"
anything.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2020-11-28 22:54:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Just Wondering
They do not.  People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal government.
They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't.
Nothing is funnier that watching Rudy flip and flop on the dock like a
landed fish, wielding his desperate semantics.

JW has kicked his ass again.
vallor
2020-11-29 01:01:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Just Wondering
They do not.  People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal government.
They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map — don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.

When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial usage for
"state's government" doing something.
--
-v
Sn!pe
2020-11-29 01:12:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map — don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is
colloquial usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
--
^Ï^


My pet rock Gordon just wondered.
vallor
2020-11-29 01:58:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map — don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial usage
for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
--
-v
The Right And The Powerful
2020-11-29 02:04:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map —
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial usage
for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
vallor
2020-11-29 02:29:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map —
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial
usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
The Right And The Powerful
2020-11-29 02:37:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial
usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor creature
even try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It was a futile
game but play it he must out of his lonliness where the red stripe of
anger fluttered.
vallor
2020-11-29 02:58:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated
representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial
usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor creature even
try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It was a futile game
but play it he must out of his lonliness where the red stripe of anger
fluttered.
this one doesn't think he can be any less angry than now, except through
chemical means, or so he's heard from a friend of a friend
--
-v
The Right And The Powerful
2020-11-29 04:14:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated
representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial
usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor creature even
try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It was a futile game
but play it he must out of his lonliness where the red stripe of anger
fluttered.
this one doesn't think he can be any less angry than now, except through
chemical means, or so he's heard from a friend of a friend
Don't talk about yourself like that. It's so unbecoming.
vallor
2020-11-29 04:19:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated
representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial
usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor creature
even try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It was a futile
game but play it he must out of his lonliness where the red stripe of
anger fluttered.
this one doesn't think he can be any less angry than now, except through
chemical means, or so he's heard from a friend of a friend
Don't talk about yourself like that. It's so unbecoming.
way to push your agenda
The Right And The Powerful
2020-11-29 04:34:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated
representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial
usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor creature
even try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It was a futile
game but play it he must out of his lonliness where the red stripe of
anger fluttered.
this one doesn't think he can be any less angry than now, except through
chemical means, or so he's heard from a friend of a friend
Don't talk about yourself like that. It's so unbecoming.
way to push your agenda
You and Biden have an agenda and a narrative to push.
vallor
2020-11-29 20:34:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the
federal government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated
representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is
colloquial usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor creature
even try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It was a
futile game but play it he must out of his lonliness where the red
stripe of anger fluttered.
this one doesn't think he can be any less angry than now, except
through chemical means, or so he's heard from a friend of a friend
Don't talk about yourself like that. It's so unbecoming.
way to push your agenda
You and Biden have an agenda and a narrative to push.
who am i to biden? sheesh

when this one says "can't be any less angry", he means he's completely
chill

if you're hung up on "lonliness" and "red stripes of anger", you could
use a new chill strategy for confronting the world with more slack.

jest sayin' -- doesn't mean much to this one, but he enjoys talking to
you for the most part, so if following a principle of maximum
correspondence, this could be a good plan.

what do you think?
--
-v
The Right And The Powerful
2020-11-29 21:27:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the
federal government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated
representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is
colloquial usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor creature
even try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It was a
futile game but play it he must out of his lonliness where the red
stripe of anger fluttered.
this one doesn't think he can be any less angry than now, except
through chemical means, or so he's heard from a friend of a friend
Don't talk about yourself like that. It's so unbecoming.
way to push your agenda
You and Biden have an agenda and a narrative to push.
who am i to biden? sheesh
when this one says "can't be any less angry", he means he's completely
chill
if you're hung up on "lonliness" and "red stripes of anger", you could
use a new chill strategy for confronting the world with more slack.
jest sayin' -- doesn't mean much to this one, but he enjoys talking to
you for the most part, so if following a principle of maximum
correspondence, this could be a good plan.
what do you think?
You're talking about yourself to yourself. Give it a rest man.
vallor
2020-11-29 22:21:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the
federal government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated
representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is
colloquial usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern
semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor
creature even try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It
was a futile game but play it he must out of his lonliness where
the red stripe of anger fluttered.
this one doesn't think he can be any less angry than now, except
through chemical means, or so he's heard from a friend of a friend
Don't talk about yourself like that. It's so unbecoming.
way to push your agenda
You and Biden have an agenda and a narrative to push.
who am i to biden? sheesh
when this one says "can't be any less angry", he means he's completely
chill
if you're hung up on "lonliness" and "red stripes of anger", you could
use a new chill strategy for confronting the world with more slack.
jest sayin' -- doesn't mean much to this one, but he enjoys talking to
you for the most part, so if following a principle of maximum
correspondence, this could be a good plan.
what do you think?
You're talking about yourself to yourself. Give it a rest man.
no, i'm talking about you talking about me talking about you. you can
_claim_ that i'm talking about you talking about me talking about you but
"pretending" to really be talking about me; however, such a claim would
be bogus and without evidence

Also, you smell.
--
-v
The Right And The Powerful
2020-11-30 03:35:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by The Right And The Powerful
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the
federal government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated
representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States ? arbitrarily drawn lines on a
map ?
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is
colloquial usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern
semi-logical debate!
Your posts are pregnant with nonsensical bullshit babies.
no they aren't. don't be ridiculous.
Yes they are, he thought to himself. Why would this valor
creature even try the pretense of intelligence on his betters? It
was a futile game but play it he must out of his lonliness where
the red stripe of anger fluttered.
this one doesn't think he can be any less angry than now, except
through chemical means, or so he's heard from a friend of a friend
Don't talk about yourself like that. It's so unbecoming.
way to push your agenda
You and Biden have an agenda and a narrative to push.
who am i to biden? sheesh
when this one says "can't be any less angry", he means he's completely
chill
if you're hung up on "lonliness" and "red stripes of anger", you could
use a new chill strategy for confronting the world with more slack.
jest sayin' -- doesn't mean much to this one, but he enjoys talking to
you for the most part, so if following a principle of maximum
correspondence, this could be a good plan.
what do you think?
You're talking about yourself to yourself. Give it a rest man.
no, i'm talking about you talking about me talking about you. you can
_claim_ that i'm talking about you talking about me talking about you but
"pretending" to really be talking about me; however, such a claim would
be bogus and without evidence
Also, you smell.
What a nice guy. Uh-huh.

Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛
2020-11-29 02:31:34 UTC
Permalink
On 29 Nov 2020 01:58:20 GMT, LO AND BEHOLD; vallor <***@cultnix.org>
determined that the following was of great importance and subsequently
decided to freely share it with us in
<***@mid.individual.net>:

On Sun, 29 Nov 2020 01:12:58 +0000, Sn!pe wrote:

vallor <***@cultnix.org> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2020 14:18:09 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:
On 11/28/2020 1:45 PM, F. Mark Hansen <***@comcast.net>, sleazy
rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun nut, lied:
On 11/28/2020 2:12 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
They do not. People do. It is also a fiction to say that "states"
created the federal government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map —
don't "do" anything.
Equivocation. When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is
colloquial usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?

Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical
debate!

he wouldn't have been confused if you told him it's the same state as the one in the state of the union address.

"4 out of 5 pet rocks" won't comment on this poast...
--
[THIS POAST HAS PASSED TRIMCHECK® VALIDATION]

THIS SPACE FOR RENT


"It will always be with you. Why do you think I hate those bastards as much as I do? I've been watching a lecture series on the history of the muzzies... many hour's worth, in fact, and the muzzies have been that way for thousands of years. It's in their culture. Every few hundred years, they try to invade Europe or some other region nearby, and have to be beaten back. They just need to be eliminated to whatever extent that's possible. You can't kill ideas completely, but you can set them back a few generations when necessary.

One important distinction between islam and christianity, is both religions have historically used their "beliefs" as a means to control the ignorant Unwashed Masses, only Western civilization became educated enough to take that power away from the clergy. The muzzies like their citizens to remain dumb, brainwashed, and obedient. That's why the radical ones are nearly all from The Land That Time Forgot. They're still stuck back in the fourteenth century, and suffer from the delusional notion that they're going to drag the rest of the world back there with them. As I see it, there's only one solution to that problem, and it's the same one we use to rid ourselves of rats, cockroaches, and other vermin." - Checkmate said this psycho lunatic shit in <***@news.altopia.com>

-

"What you see happening in Europe now... defiant muzzies openly proclaiming that they have no desire to "assimilate" or co-exist with Europeans, and stating that their objective is to turn all of Europe into a muzzie dominated region under sharia law, is the harbinger of what they have planned for the US. To what extent they'll be successful with that here can be debated, but should not be underestimated. I wish I could share your optimism in that regard, but I don't.

Terror attacks are only one page out of the muzzie play book. They serve more as a distraction. The real goal is occupation, and that's already well underway. They've got that frog pretty well boiled in Europe now, and they're getting bolder by the day. The longer the Europeans wait to do something about it, the harder it's going to be TO do anything about it. It may already be too late IMO. This is going to get real messy in a hurry." - Checkmate crying about some bullshit about muslims in europe that's he's convinced himself is true.

-

"Bitches don't get to use the Pussy Card when they initiate an
assault." - Cuckmate the Wonder Klown in <***@news.alt.net>

-

"Thanks to muzzies and their apologist-enablers like puppy whistle, this seems to be the new norm in the world. It's spreading like a cancer, and it's time we admit we're at war with pure evil. We need to put an end to this muzzie plague, or life on Earth is going to become pure hell everywhere. We need to get these people out of every civilized country, and there's only one way to do it. IOW, we have to become like them, with an emphasis on expediency over cruelty." - Herr Fuhrer Checkmate (of alt.checkmate)

-

"Pussy Willow has just proven that Trump's crackdown on previously unenforced immigration policies is working. We'll deal with the domestic terrorists as needed, but we don't need to be letting the muzzie terrorists get a foothold in our country too. One need only look at what they're doing in Europe right now to know we're doing the right thing by keeping them out, which is our right and our duty. - Checkmate (#1 pussy willow fan)

-

"You just made puppy whistle's sig line longer." - Janithor

-

STOP! (janithor time.):

i hope his sails weren't torn asunder with words on a screen, or
somesuch, but also i hope that his pain is not as bad as the murderguy
who got hit with a skateboard. - anynonymous

-

"If I have a complaint about the (Southern Poverty) Law Center's description (of the alt-right movement), it is the phrase "heavy use of social media," which implies the alt-right is a real-world movement which uses a lot of social media. This is backwards: it is an online movement which occasionally appears in the real world. Where it gets punched." - Jason Rhode

-

"I think we should destroy every last fucking mosque in America." - "Checkmate, DoW #1" <***@The.Edge> proves for us that white males are violent in Message-ID: <***@news.altopia.com>

-

"I wasn't even aware that I HAD a religion. I'm pretty-much against all of The Big Three, but the muzzies are at the top of the list." - Checkmate

-

"Such "places of worship" are terrorist breeding grounds, as has been proven on many occasions. Please refrain from morphing out of my
killfile." - Checkmate on his belief that all Mosques are where terrorists are.

-

"Is Pussy Willow saying you're a bigger nazi puke than me? You didn't even suggest that maybe we ought to burn down all the mosques. This just isn't fair!" - Checkmate admits to suggesting burning down mosques.

-

"The world IS shit, and getting closer to hitting the fan every day. We'll be at war before the end of this decade, and nearly everybody
already knows it." - Checkmate teh war hawk, in 2017

-

Golden Killfile, June 2005
KOTM, November 2006
Bob Allisat Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, September 2007
Tony Sidaway Memorial "Drama Queen" Award, November 2006
Busted Urinal Award, April 2007
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet, September 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, September 2006
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, April 2008
Tinfoil Sombrero, February 2007
AUK Mascot, September 2007
Putting the Awards Out of Order to Screw With the OCD Fuckheads, March 2016
Wader of Doom
2020-11-29 09:41:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map — don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial usage
for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
How rude! In that case I won't ask my supplementary question.
--
Darth Wader, WoD #1 No Club

I can't help it 'bout the shape I'm in,
I can't sing, I ain't pretty and my legs are thin.
Don't ask me what I think of you,
I might not give the answer that you want me to.
vallor
2020-11-29 20:44:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wader of Doom
Post by vallor
Post by Sn!pe
Post by vallor
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't. States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map —
don't "do"
anything.
Equivocation.
When one refers to a "state" doing something, that is colloquial
usage for "state's government" doing something.
Is it trite to state that stating a truism is trite?
Quiet, you! This here's bickerin' tactics for modern semi-logical debate!
How rude! In that case I won't ask my supplementary question.
Oh, don't let this one's course language of USENET semi-logical debate
get in the way of things -- what's the question, said the curious one?
--
-v
Just Wondering
2020-11-29 01:35:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal
government. They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't.  States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map — don't
"do" anything.
"State" has more than one definition. In this context, the word is
used to refer to a political entity, not a geographical one. Your
problem is either (a) you're trolling, or (b) you're functionally
illiterate. Either way, it's nobody's problem but your own.
Rudy Canoza
2020-11-29 02:19:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Rudy Canoza
It is also a fiction to say that "states" created the federal government.
They did not.
State governments acting through their designated representatives did.
But "states" didn't.  States — arbitrarily drawn lines on a map — don't "do"
anything.
"State" has more than one definition.  In this context, the word is
used to refer to a political entity, not a geographical one.
When it comes to electing the president, it is a fiction that the state is a
political entity. It does not have a "voice."
Klaus Schadenfreude
2020-11-28 21:49:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
They do not. People do.
Rudy is REALLY desperate now.

LOL
Loading...