wall didn’t put words into my mouth that directly contradicted the last thing that I said.

What you said was self contradictory… Wouldn’t surprise me if you actually attempted to literally talk to a wall, you both have rocks for brains.

Both sides can have overlap in things they do, but that doesn’t make blaming ‘both sides’ valid.

Your claim was based in cognitive dissonance… If the thing that they overlap on is deserving of blame then blaming both sides is valid.

How exactly are both sides not responsible for blame for voting to go to war in Afghanistan? How are they both not to blame for passing the Patriot act? They both agreed in complete consensus on both of those acts of Congress…well almost, two Republicans voted against the war in Afghanistan.

Go kick rocks.

Don’t bother, this dude is completely unable to understand anything that resembles a nuanced opinion.

Apparently the Democratic party is completely blameless for anything that’s ever happened, even when they vote in complete consensus with Republicans.

Cognitive dissonance is a bitch.

Both sides can have overlap in things they do, but that doesn’t make blaming ‘both sides’ valid.

Lol, if two people agree to do something stupid to an equal degree I can’t blame both people? Are you trying to be obtuse, or are you really this stupid?

am literally saying that ‘both sides’ is ALWAYS a false equivalence.

Then you are either misinformed or blatantly lying?

There are plenty of examples of both parties overwhelmingly agreeing on certain topics. An obvious one is the vote to go to war in Afghanistan, or the Patriot act…

Being ineffective at stopping something isn’t the same thing as enabling.

You’re claiming that conservatives and Democrats haven’t ever agreed upon anything that might be reasonably criticized…

Again, you’re just thinking in absolutes.

Lol, I’ve repeatedly said it’s not equivalent, and not a legitimate argument when utilized in generality. I’ve just noticed people like yourself are increasingly utilizing it to rebuff all criticism for the Democratic party.

Wanting to discuss nuance in an argument isn’t a blatant acceptance of an argument. You’re just trying to force a false dichotomy.

I guess we need to start a petition, and maybe some kind of sign up sheet for large ethical bullies?

The whole point of ‘both sides’ is both sides doing the same kinds of things.

Yes, and in some areas this is a legitimate argument. Both parties are slaves to donors and the capital class, and have rarely disagreed with things like how we handle things at a geopolitical scale.

One party failing to stop a coup because they try (and fail) to work within the legal system and making poor choices is the opposite of the side that is blatantly breaking the system.

Right, but that’s also ignoring the decades of thirdway politics that allowed the conservative party to position themselves to do a coup in the first place.

I’m not saying that both sides is a legitimate argument for every topic, but it also shouldn’t be off-handedly rejected in every scenario either.

Yeah, but half of the country has abused spouse syndrome with trump. While the nicest things most progressive people have to say about Biden is that he wasn’t Trump.

While conservatives are obviously worse than liberals in just about every way, I don’t think rejecting the “both sides” argument in such a general way is a legitimate argument either.

It takes two to tango, and the Democratic party obviously deserves some of the criticism for the current state we find ourselves in. Mainly in their passivity in response to the rise of fascism in the conservative party.

I wonder where the delineation from psychopathy and just being an asshole really exist? To my knowledge psychopathy isn’t a clinically diagnosable personality disorder, as it seems to require some aspect of privilege to perpetuate without completely isolating yourself.

With the amount of dweebs who instantly become “psychopaths” the moment they receive an iota of power over people, it really makes me wonder how many people lack genuine empathy. Are these people just utilizing false empathy as a way to fit in prior to their position of power, or is power really just that damaging to the psyche?

It’s just kinda horrifying how many nerds become rapist, naunces, or fascist the moment they think no one can bully them anymore. Does society need some kinds of system where we deputize some kind of ethical gymbro to give these dudes swirlies when they get out of hand?

Bergoglio brown?

I don’t know his actual ethnicity, but to a lot of European Catholics anyone from South America is brown at least by association. It was kinda a big deal that he was the first Pope from the southern hemisphere.

criticism against him is not an exclusive of US fundamentalists.

I didn’t claim it was?

But what about the shareholders? Defense requires taxation and freedom equals less taxes…right?

Yes…but no. American Catholic fundamentalism has little to do with the actual Catholic church. They’re basically a renegade sect of the church who believes the new Pope is woke because he’s brown.

They’ve steadily infiltrated the highest offices in the nation, but especially the judicial branch. They’re essentially high brow versions of southern evangelicals, with more cash and an ahistorical chip on their shoulder in regards to America’s relations to prejudice against traditional Catholics in the 19th and early 20th century.