Tecs the immigrant opposes immigrants' voting. Rotter Logick in all it's splendor. So, in your epistemology, immigrant == (illegal immigrant) == (legal immigrant)?
Why nut just say (A implies ¬A), and be done with it? I can fill in the rest of your argument for you.
6 comments:
Tecs the immigrant opposes immigrants' voting.
It's like selflessness.
Tecs the immigrant opposes immigrants' voting.
Rotter Logick in all it's splendor. So, in your epistemology, immigrant == (illegal immigrant) == (legal immigrant)?
Why nut just say (A implies ¬A), and be done with it? I can fill in the rest of your argument for you.
"Why nut"?
I was about to ask you the same question!
As always, Mr Rot cuts to the chase. Not. Or Nut. Whatevah.
Right-O, Herr Stramansky.
NuT.
Post a Comment