This story is unavailable.

Please, as I have asked before, point out what it is I said that is “angry voiced.”

I do not understand

I simply pointed out an inconsistency in your positions, it is intended as an aid to construct a valid and useful argument, and that is how such observations are generally accepted

It is not angry, simply attempting to understand your position, which as noted, is inconsistent, so constructive response is futile (though in most cases I’ve addressed both positions, and you seem to reject both without reason or note. This is the source of my confusion)

I suppose this may be your position, so you may simply say harsh and hateful things about our government and the dedicated people who work to provide the freedoms we enjoy, without actually taking a position to be logically addressed? This is a clever construction for an attack bot, I suspect it is used quite successfully

As the new president elect has noted, the job of president is far more complex than many understand, so also is the function of government. Many operations, when viewed in isolation seem wasteful or non-sensical, but contribute in some way to the over all function of state

Again, I appreciate the presentation of arguments that would not otherwise occur to me, to better perfect a more accurate world view, but I feel obligated as a result of your generosity, to advise you when your arguments lack validity, just as I would remove a string from the back of your uniform

Thanks again for your kind indulgence

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.