 
     |
| "2000 Mules" (Page 16/22) |
|
ray b
|
MAY 18, 05:34 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by olejoedad:
I'm sure you believe everything you post here.
Posting historical facts in response to your claims has no effect on your beliefs, so I'm not going to waste my time.
|
|
time better spent cheerleading for randy's lies and BS here ?
I know history far better then most here
I do NOT believe things I learn about then and get to know how stuff went down
a large bit of school taught history is cover ups and smoke screens
not so much the who or where or when but very much on the whys and hows
those are the important bits they hide
our first government was weak just like the con's say they want
for sure it was not in any way too strong
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
MAY 18, 06:35 PM
|
|
"Dinesh D’Souza’s 2000 Mules Is a Hilarious Mockumentary"
Amanda Carpenter for The Bulwark; May 17, 2022.
https://www.thebulwark.com/...arious-mockumentary/
Read-o-Meter says "9 minutes."
This is a colorfully written column from Bulwark political columnist Amanda Carpenter; also a CNN contributor, author, and formerly, communications director for Ted Cruz and speechwriter for former U.S. Senator Jim DeMint.
It would be a valuable addition to anyone's "2000 Mules" library.
I've only scrolled through it quickly to get some idea about its relative significance within the genre of "2000 Mules" reviews and critiques.
The fifth paragraph from the top provides links to four other online critiques of "2000 Mules" from the Washington Post, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Denver Post and PolitiFact, respectively.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-18-2022).]
|
|
|
|
WonderBoy
|
MAY 18, 07:10 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by ray b:
I know history far better then most here
I do NOT believe things I learn about then and get to know how stuff went down
a large bit of school taught history is cover ups and smoke screens
not so much the who or where or when but very much on the whys and hows
those are the important bits they hide
our first government was weak just like the con's say they want
for sure it was not in any way too strong |
|
You only know the history THEY want you to know. And Google will put history they want you to know up front first. One has to DIG for the truth.
MiKhelob Ultra
I'm curious why those who were released from ICE custody with ankle monitors, were then changed to cell phones, but according to the nay sayers and flakcheckers, it works for them.
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
MAY 18, 07:29 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by ray b:
time better spent cheerleading for randy's lies and BS here ?
I know history far better then most here
I do NOT believe things I learn about then and get to know how stuff went down
a large bit of school taught history is cover ups and smoke screens
not so much the who or where or when but very much on the whys and hows
those are the important bits they hide
our first government was weak just like the con's say they want
for sure it was not in any way too strong |
|
I'm sure my Minor in US History is worthless then.
And I shouldn't believe the writings of the Founding Fathers.
We won't even talk about the Federalist Papers, they don't hold any truth either.
I wasted my education....😟[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 05-18-2022).]
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
MAY 18, 07:35 PM
|
|
Both threedog and sourboy also claimed to be unimpeachable history experts.
I learned long ago, if someone has to tell you how smart he is, he ain't.
|
|
|
|
Raydar
|
MAY 18, 08:12 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
...
Think about that for a second. What is the AJC trying to say? |
|
AJC would probably like us to believe that it's a done deal.
But I missed this, since I refuse to read AJC. Thanks for the update.
|
|
|
|
ray b
|
MAY 18, 09:12 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by olejoedad:
I'm sure my Minor in US History is worthless then.
And I shouldn't believe the writings of the Founding Fathers.
We won't even talk about the Federalist Papers, they don't hold any truth either.
I wasted my education....😟
|
|
well you mix eras very easily Federalist Papers are after George W and have nothing to do with the articles of CON-federation
while the articles of CON-federation are before George W was president and dead and gone by the time of the Federalist Papers
guess that was a minor not your main subject ------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?
|
|
|
|
ray b
|
MAY 18, 09:15 PM
|
|
|
I like jefferson both tom and the airplane ------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
MAY 18, 10:44 PM
|
|
You're correct.
The Articles of Confederation preceded the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
Fats
|
MAY 18, 11:56 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by ray b:
how
why
do you really understand what the article's were
they were a weak gov just what our con's say they want NOW
except to jail or kill people ban stuff and have a strong military
to do stuff like the abortion laws they want ie NO CHOICE
I think you and randy are the ones 180 out |
|
I don't think you understand what the word "Confederacy" means, and whenever you read it you jump right to "Ooooh, South Bad" since the Left has bastardized all words.
Perhaps more history and less woke would help here.
Not gonna lie, I laughed at the word of the day.
|
|
|
