That’s a long way to say you didn’t actually read what you were replying to, let me help by refocusing you on the point that individual was making:
Name one thing the US Government has done in your lifetime that you support.
You’ll note that the things you listed are probably not in your life time. 1970 would put you at a minimum of 54 meaning a 32% chance. Not that I particular care about your age. Just refocusing you on the actual spirit and letter of the statement. And the fact that 1970 being your most recent example should be what concerns you even more.
You’ll also note I agreed with you that they were important. just not as important as ensuring the quality of life of the average american which has declined economically far too much in the last 6 decades.
You’re so adorable when you get snarky. I see you don’t want something during my lifetime, but rather something recent. If you were better at understanding your own thoughts, I bet you’d be better at communicating them.
its cute to watch you try to defend your choices as being even remotely relevant. maybe if you were better at reading comprehension you wouldn’t be in this mess.
Have you ever noticed that your phrasing impacts other people’s response to you? Let’s try this, since we’ve already tried snarky, and it isn’t really working all that well, so let’s try something else. Here, I’ll try first: I appreciate that you want to engage in meaningful conversation. And I’ll throw in another, just for fun: You are right that I named federal government agencies, not actions taken by the US government. Tho’ I do have to point out that these agencies do things, and have done things, yes even during my lifetime, and perhaps even yours. Even recently.
That’s a long way to say you didn’t actually read what you were replying to, let me help by refocusing you on the point that individual was making:
You’ll note that the things you listed are probably not in your life time. 1970 would put you at a minimum of 54 meaning a 32% chance. Not that I particular care about your age. Just refocusing you on the actual spirit and letter of the statement. And the fact that 1970 being your most recent example should be what concerns you even more.
You’ll also note I agreed with you that they were important. just not as important as ensuring the quality of life of the average american which has declined economically far too much in the last 6 decades.
You’re so adorable when you get snarky. I see you don’t want something during my lifetime, but rather something recent. If you were better at understanding your own thoughts, I bet you’d be better at communicating them.
its cute to watch you try to defend your choices as being even remotely relevant. maybe if you were better at reading comprehension you wouldn’t be in this mess.
Have you ever noticed that your phrasing impacts other people’s response to you? Let’s try this, since we’ve already tried snarky, and it isn’t really working all that well, so let’s try something else. Here, I’ll try first: I appreciate that you want to engage in meaningful conversation. And I’ll throw in another, just for fun: You are right that I named federal government agencies, not actions taken by the US government. Tho’ I do have to point out that these agencies do things, and have done things, yes even during my lifetime, and perhaps even yours. Even recently.