Sorry, But It’s Entirely the Right’s Fault

[cwolff]

Great article (http://billmoyers.com/story/sorry-entirely-rights-fault/) hits the nail squarely on the head. It's time for the false equivalency fallacy to die.


Many commentators are suggesting that both right and left are equally to blame for all the polarization between them. They’re wrong. The reason for all the bitterness between left and right is entirely the right’s fault. Right-wingers who suggest otherwise are self-deluded — and usually projecting.


This unenlightened, know-it-all mindset, completely impervious to conflicting facts and theories, is just not the stuff of rationality, progress and constitutional democracy. It is, rather, the stuff of superstition, cults and fascism. Fortunately, the brainwashed right constitute a minority — only 35 to 40 percent — of the American population. This is why Republicans have to cheat to win local, state and national elections. Because they can’t be honest about their self-serving, oligarchical motives, they have to resort instead to the most ruthless, unscrupulous, anti-democratic tactics: voter suppression (including voter purges), unconstitutional gerrymandering and dissemination of fake news.

[Eodus]

https://media4.giphy.com/media/3oKIPrkyVAGYerjIsM/giphy.gif

[drauz]

Great article (http://billmoyers.com/story/sorry-entirely-rights-fault/) hits the nail squarely on the head. It's time for the false equivalency fallacy to die.

A two paragraph article?

[cwolff]

Click the word article for the link.

[Tgo01]

The reason for all the bitterness between left and right is entirely the right’s fault. Right-wingers who suggest otherwise are self-deluded — and usually projecting.

I swear time4fun wrote this article.

"No, it's not the left's fault for why a man targeted and shot Republicans while they were practicing for a charity baseball event, it's the fault of Republicans. If you suggest otherwise you're self-deluded and projecting. Trust me. I am very smart."

[tyrant-201]

When challenged, they don’t act like good thinkers would — by listening carefully and then responding with careful, effective, fact-based arguments. Instead, they interrupt and shout down their opponents, belittle them with some pejorative term (“feminazi,” “libtard,” “snowflake,” “elitist”)

Sounds like a lot of our friends here.

Let's be fair though, the identity politics of the Left are stupid and without reason as well. Allying with the cause of SJW's instead of paying attention to the cause of ordinary Americans was probably one of the worst moves the Left made for itself. A small segment of the left makes the rest of us look like loons. Case in point: Time4Fun.

[Tgo01]

I actually got into an argument about this name calling with one of my slower cousins the other day. There is simply no comparison between being called a "snowflake" and being labeled a racist.

Being referred to by a made up term such as "libtard" or "snowflake" (never mind the fact I've seen "cuckservative" and the like thrown around as well) is mostly benign. I mean who gives a shit?

Being labeled a racist and sexist can have real world consequences depending on how far people want to take it. It's mostly benign on anonymous sites like Reddit and shit, not so much on open platforms such as Facebook and the real world.

[tyrant-201]

I actually got into an argument about this name calling with one of my slower cousins the other day. There is simply no comparison between being called a "snowflake" and being labeled a racist.

Being referred to by a made up term such as "libtard" or "snowflake" (never mind the fact I've seen "cuckservative" and the like thrown around as well) is mostly benign. I mean who gives a shit?

Being labeled a racist and sexist can have real world consequences depending on how far people want to take it. It's mostly benign on anonymous sites like Reddit and shit, not so much on open platforms such as Facebook and the real world.

Right,

The point is it adds nothing to any sort of discussion. Unfortunately in overusing harsh pejoratives like "Racist" and "Rapist" it cheapens the identifying term as well.

That said, I'm not and have never been under the impression that most people here are interested in legitimate discussion and negotiating their own points of view.

[Tgo01]

That said, I'm not and have never been under the impression that most people here are interested in arguing and negotiating points of view.

I am. I'm just gonna call someone stupid if they say something overly stupid. I can only handle so much stupid while keeping my cool.

Like a little bit of stupid but they are still making points? Okay, sure.

A lot of stupid while making no real points and just regurgitating what they heard on Rachel Maddow last night? No. My brain cannot handle that much stupid without lashing out. It's simply impossible. I've gone to Obamacare doctors to have it checked out and everything. And unfortunately I've seen a lot of stupid around here since November 8th.

[SHAFT]

Sounds like a lot of our friends here.

Let's be fair though, the identity politics of the Left are stupid and without reason as well. Allying with the cause of SJW's instead of paying attention to the cause of ordinary Americans was probably one of the worst moves the Left made for itself. A small segment of the left makes the rest of us look like loons. Case in point: Time4Fun.

It's exactly spot on.

[drauz]

It's exactly spot on.

Its biased and only shows one side of the problems. They wave their hand in your face while saying that the problems on the left aren't really problems.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/dWhHUkuWnGxFK/200.webp#14-grid1

[tyrant-201]

I am. I'm just gonna call someone stupid if they say something overly stupid. I can only handle so much stupid while keeping my cool.

Like a little bit of stupid but they are still making points? Okay, sure.

A lot of stupid while making no real points and just regurgitating what they heard on Rachel Maddow last night? No. My brain cannot handle that much stupid without lashing out. It's simply impossible. I've gone to Obamacare doctors to have it checked out and everything. And unfortunately I've seen a lot of stupid around here since November 8th.

:lolwave:

[Fortybox]

I am. I'm just gonna call someone stupid if they say something overly stupid. I can only handle so much stupid while keeping my cool.

Like a little bit of stupid but they are still making points? Okay, sure.

A lot of stupid while making no real points and just regurgitating what they heard on Rachel Maddow last night? No. My brain cannot handle that much stupid without lashing out. It's simply impossible. I've gone to Obamacare doctors to have it checked out and everything. And unfortunately I've seen a lot of stupid around here since November 8th.

LOL Tgo keeping his cool. Hahahahahahahaha that was a good laugh:

https://media4.giphy.com/media/12o59FPKmT4flu/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

LOL Tgo keeping his cool. Hahahahahahahaha that was a good laugh:

https://media4.giphy.com/media/12o59FPKmT4flu/giphy.gif

Rapist.

[tyrant-201]

Rapist.

*Child rapist*

[Latrinsorm]

Sounds like a lot of our friends here.

Let's be fair though, the identity politics of the Left are stupid and without reason as well. Allying with the cause of SJW's instead of paying attention to the cause of ordinary Americans was probably one of the worst moves the Left made for itself. A small segment of the left makes the rest of us look like loons. Case in point: Time4Fun.Worked well enough in the 1960s, the 1920s, the 1860s...
I actually got into an argument about this name calling with one of my slower cousins the other day. There is simply no comparison between being called a "snowflake" and being labeled a racist.

Being referred to by a made up term such as "libtard" or "snowflake" (never mind the fact I've seen "cuckservative" and the like thrown around as well) is mostly benign. I mean who gives a shit?

Being labeled a racist and sexist can have real world consequences depending on how far people want to take it. It's mostly benign on anonymous sites like Reddit and shit, not so much on open platforms such as Facebook and the real world.You just called someone a child rapist. That just happened.

[Fortybox]

Rapist.

"Since people insist on being pieces of shit, no Dreavenings are being held until July 15th. Be sure to tell Tgo 'Fuck You' for ruining it for everyone."

TRIGGERRRRREEEEDDDDD!
https://media0.giphy.com/media/EPsdF1SvWrzHy/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

You just called someone a child rapist. That just happened.

I did say I have a threshold for stupid and I can't be held responsible when people cross that threshold. I literally just said that. Why you parroting back my own words?

[Fortybox]

I did say I have a threshold for stupid and I can't be held responsible when people cross that threshold. I literally just said that. Why you parroting back my own words?

What you just said is stupid.

[Tgo01]

What you just said is stupid.

Child rapist.

[Fortybox]

Child rapist.

https://media4.giphy.com/media/E7pgTuBMTfDd6/giphy.gif

[Parkbandit]

Great article (http://billmoyers.com/story/sorry-entirely-rights-fault/) hits the nail squarely on the head. It's time for the false equivalency fallacy to die.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDM6R6IW0AEspDs.jpg:small

[Back]

I think it is pretty obvious just from our little sandbox.

[Fortybox]

I think it is pretty obvious just from our little sandbox.

https://media4.giphy.com/media/aQGqcObSxfixy/giphy.gif

[kutter]

There are 2 big problems with that article. It stole 20 minutes of my life I can never get back and now I am dumber for having read it.

[Shaps]

Anyone that puts "complainer" in their Twitter description box should be outright ignored. Yes.. I actually checked the guys twitter.

The fact he's a vegetarian makes it doubly so.

The fact he claims to be a Packers fan, just makes it sad :( .

[Parkbandit]

Anyone that puts "complainer" in their Twitter description box should be outright ignored. Yes.. I actually checked the guys twitter.

The fact he's a vegetarian makes it doubly so.

The fact he claims to be a Packers fan, just makes it sad :( .

Maybe he wasn't talking about the NFL team....

[Methais]

I legit thought the 2nd paragraph was talking about the left until it said republicans.


This unenlightened, know-it-all mindset, completely impervious to conflicting facts and theories, is just not the stuff of rationality, progress and constitutional democracy. It is, rather, the stuff of superstition, cults and fascism. Fortunately, the brainwashed right constitute a minority — only 35 to 40 percent — of the American population. This is why Republicans have to cheat to win local, state and national elections. Because they can’t be honest about their self-serving, oligarchical motives, they have to resort instead to the most ruthless, unscrupulous, anti-democratic tactics: voter suppression (including voter purges), unconstitutional gerrymandering and dissemination of fake news

[Savageheart]

Everyone reads into their bias not in spite of. The whole article (which seems more like a ranty blog) could have been written at NRO with very few changes.

edit obligatory

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFTLKWw542g

[Tisket]

Everyone reads into their bias not in spite of. The whole article (which seems more like a ranty blog) could have been written at NRO with very few changes.

Editorial pieces are not (nor are they intended as) news articles.

[Savageheart]

Editorial pieces are not (nor are they intended as) news articles.

No shit, what's that got to do with price of chocolate biscuits?

[Gelston]

Editorial pieces are not (nor are they intended as) news articles.

Your face isn't a new article.

[Tisket]

No shit, what's that got to do with price of chocolate biscuits?

I was agreeing with you, dumbshit.

[Savageheart]

Your face isn't agreeable!

[Tisket]

Your face isn't a new article.

My witty rejoinder bank is empty at the moment :(

[Savageheart]

I rely on you for snappy comebacks though... :cry:

[Astray]

This article is dumb. You're dumb. I'm going to go find some more dudes to set on fire.

[tyrant-201]

Titsket for PC overlor...lady 2017!

[Parkbandit]

Everyone reads into their bias not in spite of. The whole article (which seems more like a ranty blog) could have been written at NRO with very few changes.



Editorial pieces are not (nor are they intended as) news articles.


No shit, what's that got to do with price of chocolate biscuits?

Her point was that it was an editorial.. an opinion of someone.. much like a blog... and not an actual news article.

[Savageheart]

So cute how you White Knight each others sentences.
I desperately want to find a dude in a Klan outfit on a horse for this.
Sadly, I cannot find one that is both whimsical and just the right amount of offensive.

Also yes on second pass it became clear that it was a positive statement, not that I really found it negative just less related. One statement did not need the other and vice versa blah blah

Am I still typing?

[Back]

There is a reason it's called WHITE knight.

[hello]

World's smallest deer: The Pudu

http://www.pickfreeall.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/103.jpg

Honestly, I have no idea how such a critter survives in the wild. Nature should just stick them in vending machines, 25 cents.

[Parkbandit]

So cute how you White Knight each others sentences.

I do translations on the side. I'm well versed in speaking to those (like you) with learning disabilities.


I desperately want to find a dude in a Klan outfit on a horse for this.

Sorry, I had no idea you were black. I just knew you to be a fucking retard.

Don't blame the color of your skin for being mentally disabled. That's a crutch.


Sadly, I cannot find one that is both whimsical and just the right amount of offensive.

Poor thing.


Also yes on second pass it became clear that it was a positive statement, not that I really found it negative just less related. One statement did not need the other and vice versa blah blah

Normal intelligence wouldn't take 2 passes to read it.. but hey, it's better than your usual getting someone to read it for you.

PROGRESS!!!


Am I still typing?

And still making no sense.

[Parkbandit]

There is a reason it's called WHITE knight.

Speaking of retards...

Why don't you explain it to all of us?

Let's get this Drunk Tuesday off to a fantastic start!

[Parkbandit]

I desperately want to find a dude in a Klan outfit on a horse for this.


"desperately"?

Here, let me help the disabled....

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=picture+of+klan+on+white+horse

Now, click the word "Images"

Or have an adult help you.

[Back]

Speaking of retards...

Why don't you explain it to all of us?

Let's get this Drunk Tuesday off to a fantastic start!

Just a passing comment for levity's sake. So serious. And when am I ever NOT drunk? Hard to tell. I know.

[Savageheart]

Dude you need to step back and get some perspective, it's not mean it's just sad, like the ending of Old Yeller sad.

I enjoy you wiping your ass with your hand and throwing shit at the crowd as much as the next asshole but this has just nothing good going for it.


Sorry, I had no idea you were black. I just knew you to be a fucking retard.
Don't blame the color of your skin for being mentally disabled. That's a crutch.


Who broke you Bubbles?

[Savageheart]

"desperately"?

Here, let me help the disabled....

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=picture+of+klan+on+white+horse

Now, click the word "Images"

Or have an adult help you.

Use the rest of the quote like a big boy Bubbles.


I cannot find one that is both whimsical and just the right amount of offensive.

It's a subjective call Bubsy

[Parkbandit]

Dude you need to step back and get some perspective, it's not mean it's just sad, like the ending of Old Yeller sad.

I enjoy you wiping your ass with your hand and throwing shit at the crowd as much as the next asshole but this has just nothing good going for it.

Who broke you Bubbles?

You have some serious issues.

I've never, ever thought about another man wiping their ass with their hand and "enjoying it".

So.. mentally disabled and into some very freaky fetishes.

Your parents must be so proud.

[Parkbandit]

Just a passing comment for levity's sake. So serious. And when am I ever NOT drunk? Hard to tell. I know.

I just wanted you to explain how "White Knighting" came about.

And you are correct.. very hard to tell.

[Savageheart]

They honestly are, it's pretty great. We have a very good relationship, thanks!

[Parkbandit]

They honestly are, it's pretty great. We have a very good relationship, thanks!

You confuse "proud" and "pity".

But hey! They both start with the letter "P"! It's a start!

[Savageheart]

You have some serious issues.

Oh man, quote of the year.

[Parkbandit]

Oh man, quote of the year.

Thank you. I'm sure I'll have even better ones.. I still have 6 months.

[Savageheart]

You confuse "proud" and "pity".

But hey! They both start with the letter "P"! It's a start!

Oh Bubs, I wish you knew the joy of having a loving and supportive household growing up and as a man. Two words, life affirming. Really we are swimming in hallmark cards and long distance commercials over here.

Hey the world needs what ever it is you are too.... probably?

[Tisket]

So cute how you White Knight each others sentences.
I desperately want to find a dude in a Klan outfit on a horse for this.
Sadly, I cannot find one that is both whimsical and just the right amount of offensive.

Also yes on second pass it became clear that it was a positive statement, not that I really found it negative just less related. One statement did not need the other and vice versa blah blah

Am I still typing?

He isn't white knighting my sentence as much as he is pointing out how you were the only person confused by it.

At this point, even if I didn't like PB or agree with him, I'd still defend him just to annoy the likes of you, Backlash, and WB.

[Savageheart]

Dawww, thanks for the thought

[Parkbandit]

Oh Bubs, I wish you knew the joy of having a loving and supportive household growing up and as a man. Two words, life affirming. Really we are swimming in hallmark cards and long distance commercials over here.

Hey the world needs what ever it is you are too.... probably?

Dude.. I'm not interested in other guys... especially one who enjoys thinking about another man wiping his ass with his hand.

There are PLENTY of guys here though that probably are. You should try them.

I like women. And intelligence.

You are/have neither.

[Godsanvil]

8675

[Savageheart]

Okay okay fine, you're a 52ish year old man (at least according to your bio, who knows) hurling epithets at strangers on the internet with a lighter trigger than Annie Oakley - you care more (positively or negatively) about dudes you've never met than anyone I know.

Let's peel back the onion on tonight's episode. The heaviest hitter you brought with you was you're stupid and girls don't like you, to a stranger you've never met. Where did you get these powers of prognostication, did you tell my wife?

Your feigned ignorance to any sort of metaphor not withstanding, you ever take a step back, a deep breath and realize you're actually not a child? This isn't a playground and you don't own the swing-set Bubbles.

Again you are an old(er) gentleman, wantonly abusing the English language like a child, offending people you do not know - for reasons only you can explain.

Add to that a touch of over compensation slash exaggeration, and the misunderstanding of a sentence on the internet has become the rubric of intelligence tests since the dawn of the ages.

FYI paranoia, irritability and a tenuous grasp of reality are early onset signs of dementia.

[Back]

He isn't white knighting my sentence as much as he is pointing out how you were the only person confused by it.

At this point, even if I didn't like PB or agree with him, I'd still defend him just to annoy the likes of you, Backlash, and WB.

I didn't think you cared. So what makes you enjoy being an annoying asshole?

[Tisket]

I didn't think you cared. So what makes you enjoy being an annoying asshole?

Why do you enjoy being a clueless idiot?

[drauz]

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2013/03/blurry.gif

[Back]

Why do you enjoy being a clueless idiot?

Just asking since you admitted it yourself. I really do wonder why people like to make other people angry on purpose. My phrasing was a bit harsh though. I don't think of you as an asshole.

[Shaps]

WTF is "white knighting" anyways? I've been confused for the past 3 pages...

[Tgo01]

WTF is "white knighting" anyways? I've been confused for the past 3 pages...

It usually refers to a man defending chicks online in an overt attempt to get some sex from said chick, or at the very least some topless pics.

But since we're progressive here on the PC white knighting can refer to men defending women, women defending men, or even men defending men.

[drauz]

WTF is "white knighting" anyways? I've been confused for the past 3 pages...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=white%20knighting

[Shaps]

Thanks guys.

[Parkbandit]

It usually refers to a man defending chicks online in an overt attempt to get some sex from said chick, or at the very least some topless pics.

But since we're progressive here on the PC white knighting can refer to men defending women, women defending men, or even men defending men.

So what you are saying is that Tisket owes me some tit pics.

/agree

[Tisket x2]

lol

[Tisket x2]

It usually refers to a man defending chicks online in an overt attempt to get some sex from said chick, or at the very least some topless pics.

But since we're progressive here on the PC white knighting can refer to men defending women, women defending men, or even men defending men.

No, when the term is bandied about it's usually by someone who wants to attack a poster while avoiding responding to anything that poster has actually said. It's a weak defensive move usually performed by those with poor debate skills. Or a losing position in an argument.

[Savageheart]

Oh look PB is back I got my weekly red rep. Shine on you crazy diamond.


Sorry.. I still don't do dudes. I told you, there are many here that would probably be more of your fetish type. Also, fuck off

It's ok old boy, keep yelling at strangers on the internet with all the profanity and vigor that belies your advancing age. I'm glad you got your account back!

That old chestnut of 'you're gay and I'm not' is getting a lot of mileage for you these days?

Why didn't you quote in the thread? As happy as I am for you to be using full sentences, I missed all the ............................... .... .

[Savageheart]

No, when the term is bandied about it's usually by someone who wants to attack a poster while avoiding responding to anything that poster has actually said. It's a weak defensive move usually performed by those with poor debate skills. Or a losing position in an argument.

It was a throwback to the earlier thread, and a cute comment nothing near requiring constant rehashing? Personally I was tickled by the tisket white night image PB made.

This wasn't some capital offense, why there always has to be so much rancor with every single thread.

There was no debate, the exchange of vitriol devoid of any intent but malice is not debate, it is just the debasement of the forum.

[Parkbandit]

Oh look PB is back I got my weekly red rep. Shine on you crazy diamond.

Weekly? Like in the past 3-4 weeks? You poor victim you!

To be fair, I never heard of you like more than a month ago.




It's ok old boy, keep yelling at strangers on the internet with all the profanity and vigor that belies your advancing age. I'm glad you got your account back!

That old chestnut of 'you're gay and I'm not' is getting a lot of mileage for you these days?

Not sure. You just stated that you were excited about another man wiping his ass with his own hand.. not me.

Whatever floats your boat... just don't try tying it to my dock.


Why didn't you quote in the thread? As happy as I am for you to be using full sentences, I missed all the ............................... .... .

SPOILER: Your next "weekly" thread won't let you down then.

[Savageheart]

Yes yes, that wasn't a metaphor either it was it?

You believe in you're heart of hearts this was some sort of ham-handed overture to you?


I'm not surprised my name is new to you, I assume this was some sort of backhanded insult, maybe not? I've not really been active in the community for the last decade or so and mostly just in the merchants forum.

You shitpost in every thread you engage it, some of it has always been a fun sort of Mutt and Jeff back and forth. Lately it's just gone immediately to 11 though.

What are you getting out of the obscene and vulgar baiting, is it pure sadism or is there some sort of benign even lofty design you're aiming toward.

If you are winning all of the time, why are you so angry? If political discourse is your pleasure why are you constantly undermining it by maligning any who might have a different view with personal and juvenile insult.

Is it sadism? Is it some sort of forum based xenophobia? These are not insults, I'm genuinely intrigued as you have in the past made extremely potent points (bulleted, numbered or otherwise) about various topics.

Lately not so much.

[Parkbandit]

I looked back.. clearly you are upset over all the "weekly red reps" you've received from me over the course of your time here.

First rep you received from me: 4/4/17 For a stupid response to a post.

2nd rep you received from me was positive a month later: You actually showed the tiniest glimmer of intelligence that I wanted to coax along in hopes there was more.

After that, I realized that tiny glimmer was just that.. a miracle that could never be reproduced or cultivated.

A grand total of 6 negative reps and 1 positive rep.

Not exactly what we're looking for to achieve victim status.

But hey, you keep trying!

[Savageheart]

Just so I'm understanding where you're going, the followup to "you are gay, I am not, girls don't like you and I dont like you" is "look at you, you are a victim, you must be a victim because you point out my behavior"

I'm amused by the antic, and I return your attentions in kind. As well I look forward to these followup posts where you highlight you're own obsessions so delightfully.

The gravest injury you do, is to yourself. It's beautiful and sad and used to be comical but I think I'm done with you PB - I think I might be feeding some legitimate derangement on your part and I don't want that on my soul.

Have fun man. I'll continue to add to the forum but there's no delight or gain in interacting with you.

[Parkbandit]

Just so I'm understanding where you're going, the followup to "you are gay, I am not, girls don't like you and I dont like you" is "look at you, you are a victim, you must be a victim because you point out my behavior"

So add "I can't follow a thread at all" to your lists of failures.


I'm amused by the antic, and I return your attentions in kind. As well I look forward to these followup posts where you highlight you're own obsessions so delightfully.

WTF? Delightfully? Really?

You might want to tone it down a bit.


The gravest injury you do, is to yourself. It's beautiful and sad and used to be comical but I think I'm done with you PB - I think I might be feeding some legitimate derangement on your part and I don't want that on my soul.

Sure you are "done".. people like you aren't ever "done".


Have fun man. I'll continue to add to the forum but there's no delight or gain in interacting with you.

Continue to add?

Please do! Turn over a new leaf!

I'm looking forward to this 180 degree change from you.

Good luck!

[RichardCranium]

You shitpost in every thread you engage it, some of it has always been a fun sort of Mutt and Jeff back and forth.

Showing your age here.

[tyrant-201]

Just so I'm understanding where you're going, the followup to "you are gay, I am not, girls don't like you and I dont like you" is "look at you, you are a victim, you must be a victim because you point out my behavior"

I'm amused by the antic, and I return your attentions in kind. As well I look forward to these followup posts where you highlight you're own obsessions so delightfully.

The gravest injury you do, is to yourself. It's beautiful and sad and used to be comical but I think I'm done with you PB - I think I might be feeding some legitimate derangement on your part and I don't want that on my soul.

Have fun man. I'll continue to add to the forum but there's no delight or gain in interacting with you.

It's more fun to just point and laugh.

[Parkbandit]

It's more fun to just point and laugh.

http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Jake-Gyllenhall-Point-and-Laugh-Nightcrawler.gif

Damn.. you are right!

First time for everything I suppose...

[Savageheart]

Showing your age here. The mutt and Jeff reference?

[RichardCranium]

The mutt and Jeff reference?

Indubitably. I've never heard anyone reference from my generation; only my parents'.

[Savageheart]

Eh I'm 36 it's technically before my time but I still grew up with the reruns

[Latrinsorm]

8675Sorry, but he didn't.

[tyrant-201]

Sorry, but he didn't.

Link plz

[drauz]

Link plz

I'm sure it means banning muslims in particular, it just happens to be a muslim majority nation.

[Latrinsorm]

Link plzHow am I supposed to link to something that didn't happen? To view content from the negaverse you'd need at least three denimite mem-shards and you're out here running a 486 with a 5.25" floppy drive.

[Savageheart]

Sorry, but he didn't.

It's a mixed bag at best. He did much of the same.

http://www.snopes.com/jimmy-carter-banned-iranian-immigrants/

[Latrinsorm]

It's a mixed bag at best. He did much of the same.

http://www.snopes.com/jimmy-carter-banned-iranian-immigrants/Do me a favor, do a ctrl-f for "Muslim" "FBI" and "students" in that link. Let me know what you find.

[Parkbandit]

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33233%20

"Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly." -Jimmy Carter on April 7, 1980

He didn't "ban" anyone.. he just made it almost impossible for anyone from Iran from getting into the US

[~Rocktar~]

Do me a favor, do a ctrl-f for "Muslim" "FBI" and "students" in that link. Let me know what you find.

Do all of us a favor and try and make a rational argument. While he didn't use the word ban, it's effect is still the same. There is no practical difference between a ban and making something principally impossible. It's the same as the difference between someone who cannot read and someone who does not read. They are equivalent in practice. The Liberal/Socialist position on this is morally reprehensible, ethically bankrupt and structurally irresponsible. To use their argument, if it saves just one American life, isn't it worth it?

[Savageheart]

Do me a favor, do a ctrl-f for "Muslim" "FBI" and "students" in that link. Let me know what you find.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, just that its mixed.

He has a very narrowly defined scope of all Iranian citizens for a very clear and concise response.

It was not multinational or decidedly vague.

[drauz]

You're not banned from entering but we will arrest and deport you if you try. But you aren't banned...

[Latrinsorm]

Do all of us a favor and try and make a rational argument. While he didn't use the word ban, it's effect is still the same.I'm gonna stop you here. I didn't say anything about anyone using the word ban. I said "Muslims" "students" and "FBI". Let's start with "Muslims". President Carter never tried to ban Muslims from entering the United States. President Trump did, was immediately stopped from doing so by the Ninth Circuit, and didn't even bother appealing the ruling. Why? Because it's an express violation of the First Amendment. It has nothing to do with morals, ethics, or whatever you mean by structures. The Constitution says what the Constitutions says, period. Whether the second executive order constituted an implicit Constitutional violation will probably never be determined. These are the breaks.

President Carter also never deported Muslim students, following FBI investigation or otherwise. Neither has President Trump, of course, and this is the point I keep trying to make to you jamokes: the jpegs your puppetmasters use to manipulate you are just sloppy. They're literally making it up as they go because they know you'll just go "yeah! darn libruls!" At this point it's not a question of intelligence, or reasoning, or education... don't you have any pride? Doesn't it make you mad that they have such a demonstrably low opinion of you?

[~Rocktar~]

I'm gonna stop you here. I didn't say anything about anyone using the word ban. I said "Muslims" "students" and "FBI". Let's start with "Muslims". President Carter never tried to ban Muslims from entering the United States. President Trump did, was immediately stopped from doing so by the Ninth Circuit, and didn't even bother appealing the ruling. Why? Because it's an express violation of the First Amendment. It has nothing to do with morals, ethics, or whatever you mean by structures. The Constitution says what the Constitutions says, period. Whether the second executive order constituted an implicit Constitutional violation will probably never be determined. These are the breaks.

President Carter also never deported Muslim students, following FBI investigation or otherwise. Neither has President Trump, of course, and this is the point I keep trying to make to you jamokes: the jpegs your puppetmasters use to manipulate you are just sloppy. They're literally making it up as they go because they know you'll just go "yeah! darn libruls!" At this point it's not a question of intelligence, or reasoning, or education... don't you have any pride? Doesn't it make you mad that they have such a demonstrably low opinion of you?

OK, so go read the text of the ban and fo a search for Muslim. Don't bother, here is the link https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/06/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states and you won't find it.

What makes me mad is that useful idiots such as yourself and morally bankrupt moron Liberal/Socialists who argue that it's unfair to ban people from known terrorist nations. Further you go on to argue that it's morally imperative to let every Tom, Dick and Hakeem who wants to come here and not assimilate into the country over protecting our citizens. It is not only morally corrupt, it's ethically derelict and absolutely reprehensible. It's like you want to take a random stranger released from prison early and force them into the home of a family with little children and then tell them that they have to feed, cloth and support the person no matter what they may have done and regardless of what they do, they have to keep them. I bet you have locks on your doors but you don't want to allow locks on the country.

[Latrinsorm]

OK, so go read the text of the ban and fo a search for Muslim. Don't bother, here is the link https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/06/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states and you won't find it.This is a link to the wrong order. The relevant section of the correct order (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states) is 5b, of which there is no corresponding version in any order of President Carter.
What makes me mad is that useful idiots such as yourself and morally bankrupt moron Liberal/Socialists who argue that it's unfair to ban people from known terrorist nations.I'm gonna stop you here. I didn't say unfair, and I didn't say people from "known terrorist nations". I said it was unconstitutional to ban Muslims, which is a demonstrated fact - the courts ruled it, the President accepted it.

What should really worry you is that when I raise the possibility (well, certainty) that the people feeding you slogans are making it up as they go, your response is... more slogans those same people have been feeding you. Yikes! Not great, Bob.

[~Rocktar~]

This is a link to the wrong order. The relevant section of the correct order (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states) is 5b, of which there is no corresponding version in any order of President Carter.I'm gonna stop you here. I didn't say unfair, and I didn't say people from "known terrorist nations". I said it was unconstitutional to ban Muslims, which is a demonstrated fact - the courts ruled it, the President accepted it.

What should really worry you is that when I raise the possibility (well, certainty) that the people feeding you slogans are making it up as they go, your response is... more slogans those same people have been feeding you. Yikes! Not great, Bob.

My name is not Bob, but thanks for playing. What you really should be worrying about is how the courts can stretch to find that a ban of travel from something like 13% +/- of the world's Muslim population is somehow a ban on Muslims. More important, you should be worried about how easily you have been duped into believing that simple fact. This is the kind of thinking that people use to rationalize all homosexuals/blacks/whites/whatever are evil. So, put down the kool-aid and stop supporting a ruthless, destructive and failed ideology.

[Tgo01]

Democrat president bans citizens from a predominately Muslim country: No problem here, he didn't ban "Muslims", he just banned citizens from one country.

Republican president bans citizens from 7 (6?) predominately Muslim countries: RACIST! ISLAMOPHOBE! XENOPHOBE! HE'S BANNING ALL MUSLIMS!!

[Tgo01]

Democrat president bans citizens from a predominately Muslim country: No problem here, he didn't ban "Muslims", he just banned citizens from one country.

Republican president bans citizens from 7 (6?) predominately Muslim countries: RACIST! ISLAMOPHOBE! XENOPHOBE! HE'S BANNING ALL MUSLIMS!!

Also I can never keep this bullshit straight; do Democrats take credit for Carter or is he considered a Republican? I always forget how this works since the "parties switched" at some point in the not too far past.

[Godsanvil]

Sorry, but he didn't.

President Carter had opted to impose sanctions on Iran, which included a cessation of diplomatic relations, a prohibition on trade, assessment of previously-frozen Iranian Government assets, the cancellation of Iranian-U.S. visas, and a moratorium on new visas (with exceptions for humanitarian and otherwise compelling situations) in response to Iranian terrorists’ having invaded the U.S. Embassy in Tehran five months earlier and taken 50 American citizens hostage

You can try and play word games with it but yeah its exactly what he did. Also he was right and not acting like a moron just trying to side with a group of people that stand for every he doesn't. Just to win some points in an on going moronic argument.

[tyrant-201]

Way to go Latrin, now you got the cucks all riled up.

[Tgo01]

Way to go Latrin, now you got the cucks all riled up.

Shut up, rapist.

[Tgo01]

President Carter had opted to impose sanctions on Iran, which included a cessation of diplomatic relations, a prohibition on trade, assessment of previously-frozen Iranian Government assets, the cancellation of Iranian-U.S. visas, and a moratorium on new visas (with exceptions for humanitarian and otherwise compelling situations) in response to Iranian terrorists’ having invaded the U.S. Embassy in Tehran five months earlier and taken 50 American citizens hostage

You can try and play word games with it but yeah its exactly what he did. Also he was right and not acting like a moron just trying to side with a group of people that stand for every he doesn't. Just to win some points in an on going moronic argument.

I'm honestly really curious, was anyone old enough to remember much about when this was all happening? What was the general mood in America? Was it like "FUCK IRAN FOR KIDNAPPING OUR CITIZENS!" Or was it mostly "Meh."

I can only imagine if something similar happened today you would have Democrat on college campuses and elsewhere saying something about how the whities had it coming to them because it's payback for white privilege.

[Savageheart]

At the time I believe the reaction to Carter was that his actions were not severe enough at least to many.

The Dixiecrat flop was a reaction to the Civil Rights act of 64, I think.

[Godsanvil]

I'm honestly really curious, was anyone old enough to remember much about when this was all happening? What was the general mood in America? Was it like "FUCK IRAN FOR KIDNAPPING OUR CITIZENS!" Or was it mostly "Meh."

I can only imagine if something similar happened today you would have Democrat on college campuses and elsewhere saying something about how the whities had it coming to them because it's payback for white privilege.

Yeah i am. People wanted to nuke the place to glass. Democrats where not total candy asses then. It wasn't a look at me and how outraged i am about everything pageant. But it was something you talked about a few minutes then went on with your life. Social media is turning America into a shit hole.

[Neveragain]

I'm honestly really curious, was anyone old enough to remember much about when this was all happening? What was the general mood in America? Was it like "FUCK IRAN FOR KIDNAPPING OUR CITIZENS!" Or was it mostly "Meh."

I can only imagine if something similar happened today you would have Democrat on college campuses and elsewhere saying something about how the whities had it coming to them because it's payback for white privilege.

I was about 8 years old in the midst of it and yes there was a national outrage over the kidnappings. Things were very tense because we were also in the middle of a very hot cold war with the USSR, I can only imagine the paranoia we would have experienced if we had the instant communication we have today.

Two of my best friends growing up at that time were forced to move back from Kuwait because of the kidnappings. Their grandfather was a Kuwait native that had ties with the Shaw of Iran who's ousting basically lead to the kidnappings. A couple years later the twins (my friends) had to be taken out of school because their family were receiving threats from the new Iranian regime...rambling.

[Godsanvil]

At the time I believe the reaction to Carter was that his actions were not severe enough at least to many.

The Dixiecrat flop was a reaction to the Civil Rights act of 64, I think.
Yup

My Grandfather and father voted for Carter because he was farmer. Then hated him the whole time he was in office.

[Gelston]

I'm honestly really curious, was anyone old enough to remember much about when this was all happening? What was the general mood in America? Was it like "FUCK IRAN FOR KIDNAPPING OUR CITIZENS!" Or was it mostly "Meh."

I can only imagine if something similar happened today you would have Democrat on college campuses and elsewhere saying something about how the whities had it coming to them because it's payback for white privilege.

There was even a military attempt to rescue them. One met with disaster when a bunch of sand caused helicopter accidents and was canceled. The Lessons Learned did, however, help us out years later for Desert Storm.

Carter was the one who ultimately got them out, he was in negations with Iran up until right before he had to hand over Presidential power. The hostages were loaded onto plans, but the Iranians hated Carter, so they didn't formally release them until just after Reagan took over.

[Neveragain]

I think Carter mostly gets a bad rap because things sucked financially for the country at the time, we were also still dealing with a hangover from Vietnam. To be honest the late 70's sucked as far as the mood of the Nation goes, Star wars, the 1980 Olympic US hockey gold medal, Reagan and the Atari completely changed the direction of this country.

[cwolff]

I'm honestly really curious, was anyone old enough to remember much about when this was all happening? What was the general mood in America? Was it like "FUCK IRAN FOR KIDNAPPING OUR CITIZENS!" Or was it mostly "Meh."

I can only imagine if something similar happened today you would have Democrat on college campuses and elsewhere saying something about how the whities had it coming to them because it's payback for white privilege.

It was totally FUCK IRAN! If that level of patriotic hatred hit the streets today we'd shit out pants. Local news anchors were burning the Iranian flag on live T.V. and the Beach Boys hit "Babara Ann", got turned into "Bomb Iran" and hit the charts and it was all good. I don't think that could happen today.

[Taernath]

It was totally FUCK IRAN! If that level of patriotic hatred hit the streets today we'd shit out pants. Local news anchors were burning the Iranian flag on live T.V. and the Beach Boys hit "Babara Ann", got turned into "Bomb Iran" and hit the charts and it was all good. I don't think that could happen today.

The videos of fratbros celebrating bin Laden getting killed were pretty surreal.

[cwolff]

The videos of fratbros celebrating bin Laden getting killed were pretty surreal.

Yes that's true. I celebrated that inside a bit too. LOL Fuck OBL. That same feeling was nationwide and persistent over a few years. On a positive note, we did have an Iranian kid move into his grandparents house down the street. He was somehow a refugee from Iran. I guess his Dad was a Shah guy over there. Anyway, the good news is that he wasn't trashed for being Iranian. Mostly I don't think kids my age understood about all that and this dude was just a new kid, kind of weird that he lived with his grandparents, but they had a pool so it was OK.

[Back]

Yeah. Obama, a real president, got him. Too bad it wasn't alive.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah. Obama, a real president, got him. Too bad it wasn't alive.

DRUNK FRIDAY IS HAPPENING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gelston]

I wasn't aware Obama was a member of DevGru

[Methais]

The videos of fratbros celebrating bin Laden getting killed were pretty surreal.


https://youtu.be/XASdaXejcMQ


Yeah. Obama, a real president, got him. Too bad it wasn't alive.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Deg7VrpHbM

[Latrinsorm]

My name is not Bob, but thanks for playing.It's a thing. "Not great, Bob!" Nothing? Oh well.
What you really should be worrying about is how the courts can stretch to find that a ban of travel from something like 13% +/- of the world's Muslim population is somehow a ban on Muslims. More important, you should be worried about how easily you have been duped into believing that simple fact. This is the kind of thinking that people use to rationalize all homosexuals/blacks/whites/whatever are evil. So, put down the kool-aid and stop supporting a ruthless, destructive and failed ideology.The Constitution doesn't say "Congress shall make no law respecting literally every member of a religion." It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." It doesn't matter what % of Muslims you're banning, if you're banning Muslims on the basis of their religion you are unconstitutional. You do not pass GO. You do not collect $200. Nobody said anything about evil. Unconstitutional, do you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth?
President Carter had opted to impose sanctions on Iran, which included a cessation of diplomatic relations, a prohibition on trade, assessment of previously-frozen Iranian Government assets, the cancellation of Iranian-U.S. visas, and a moratorium on new visas (with exceptions for humanitarian and otherwise compelling situations) in response to Iranian terrorists’ having invaded the U.S. Embassy in Tehran five months earlier and taken 50 American citizens hostage You can try and play word games with it but yeah its exactly what he did. Also he was right and not acting like a moron just trying to side with a group of people that stand for every he doesn't. Just to win some points in an on going moronic argument.It's not "word games" to point out that President Carter never banned Shi'ite Muslims, or deported students, or directed the FBI to investigate them. Talking about siding with a group of people that don't stand with you, do you really think the people who made your precious jpeg believe what you do? Why would they assign controversial actions to President Trump that he hasn't taken? All they care about is your clicks, so they make something up knowing you'll be so outraged by it that you'll link it to every one you know. They look at you and they see a cash register, punch the buttons and money comes out.

[Latrinsorm]

Democrat president bans citizens from a predominately Muslim country: No problem here, he didn't ban "Muslims", he just banned citizens from one country. Republican president bans citizens from 7 (6?) predominately Muslim countries: RACIST! ISLAMOPHOBE! XENOPHOBE! HE'S BANNING ALL MUSLIMS!!The problem was never which countries the order banned immigration from. As I said way back in November 2016:
The First Amendment does not have a problem with limiting or even outright banning people from a certain country. You want to close the door on all Syrian refugees, the First Amendment doesn't care. I personally would find it abhorrent and pathetic, but it wouldn't be unconstitutional.

Even if you were to make a list of such countries and mysteriously left out countries like Ireland and Israel, leaving only Muslim majority countries, you probably still would be able to skate by. You'd just have to make sure you did nothing to grease the skids for Syriac Christians (e.g.), then you'd definitely get in trouble.And what a crazy coincidence! The first executive order, which openly greased the skids for Syriac Christians, definitively got in trouble! And when those clauses were removed, the second executive order was able to (mostly) skate by!

I wonder if I'll ever get tired of being right all the time.

[Godsanvil]

It's a thing. "Not great, Bob!" Nothing? Oh well.The Constitution doesn't say "Congress shall make no law respecting literally every member of a religion." It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." It doesn't matter what % of Muslims you're banning, if you're banning Muslims on the basis of their religion you are unconstitutional. You do not pass GO. You do not collect $200. Nobody said anything about evil. Unconstitutional, do you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth?It's not "word games" to point out that President Carter never banned Shi'ite Muslims, or deported students, or directed the FBI to investigate them. Talking about siding with a group of people that don't stand with you, do you really think the people who made your precious jpeg believe what you do? Why would they assign controversial actions to President Trump that he hasn't taken? All they care about is your clicks, so they make something up knowing you'll be so outraged by it that you'll link it to every one you know. They look at you and they see a cash register, punch the buttons and money comes out.

First i am not OUTRAGED. Don't assume to decide how i feel about something. Your whole response is exactly what i mean by playing word games...."do you really think the people who made your precious jpeg believe what you do?" Word games...Who cares what they think its not the point or even close to it. That is word games. Its what people like you do when you are wrong and have no valid argument.

And i am sorry but,
"It doesn't matter what % of Muslims you're banning, if you're banning Muslims on the basis of their religion you are unconstitutional. You do not pass GO. You do not collect $200. Nobody said anything about evil. Unconstitutional, do you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth?"
Wrong again..How would a person who doesn't even live in our country be protected by our constitution. Also its a Travel ban not a Muslim ban. Yes i understand the words coming out of your mouth they sound like. "I have zero reading comprehension skills" And that is why the Travel ban is on.

[Tgo01]

I wonder if I'll ever get tired of being right all the time.

How can you get tired of something you have yet to experience?

http://i.imgur.com/xgz9nkR.gif

Where in the constitution does it state the US can't have preference over a certain group of people when considering which refugees to admit?

Shit, the supreme court said it was okay to round up AMERICAN CITIZENS based on their race and throw them in internment camps, and you're telling me non-US citizens who don't even live in the US have more rights?

[Latrinsorm]

How can you get tired of something you have yet to experience? Where in the constitution does it state the US can't have preference over a certain group of people when considering which refugees to admit?The First Amendment.
Shit, the supreme court said it was okay to round up AMERICAN CITIZENS based on their race and throw them in internment camps, and you're telling me non-US citizens who don't even live in the US have more rights?I bolded the relevant section for you. What boggles my mind is that what I said would happen months before it happened has in fact happened, word for word, and you're still arguing with me. Check the receipts, Terry. Check and mate.
First i am not OUTRAGED. Don't assume to decide how i feel about something. Your whole response is exactly what i mean by playing word games...."do you really think the people who made your precious jpeg believe what you do?" Word games...Who cares what they think its not the point or even close to it. That is word games. Its what people like you do when you are wrong and have no valid argument.Let's be clear. I have made the factual claims that President Carter never banned Shi'ite or any other immigration on the basis of religion, that neither President Carter nor President Trump directed the FBI to investigate residents based on their religion, and that neither President Carter nor President Trump deported students on the basis of any nationality or religion.

These are all true, and have never been disputed by anyone, because they are true.

Now, you have accused me of "acting like a moron just trying to side with a group of people that stand for every he doesn't." so the point of who made your jpeg and what they think is absolutely at point. Nobody could accidentally misremember President Carter deporting Muslim students. That is a lie, and one that is completely unnecessary because as stated above, President Trump has never deported Muslim students either! There is no possible way the lie can defend President Trump, because he has not taken the actions that would require such a defense. Thus it's a lie whose sole purpose is to inflame you, and you gobbled the bait whole, like a moron, trying to side with a group of people whose sole interest in our partisan divide is the money they can make off it. Forget about nebulously standing with a group, you have put money directly in the pockets of this group by spreading their clickbait.

And you still believe I'm your enemy here. Astonishing.

[Tgo01]

The First Amendment.

Where in the constitution does it state any part of the constitution pertains to non-US citizens not living in the US?


I bolded the relevant section for you.

So...it's okay to literally round up American citizens and place them in internment camps based on their race...but it's not okay to place a preference for refugees based on their religion?

For a second there I thought you had given up your trolling ways. My mistake :(

[Latrinsorm]

Where in the constitution does it state any part of the constitution pertains to non-US citizens not living in the US?The part where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion", not "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion unless doing so only affects non-US citizens". This isn't a debate, Terry. I told you exactly how it was going to happen in November, and then it happened exactly that way. This is settled law. You lost. Get over it.
So...it's okay to literally round up American citizens and place them in internment camps based on their race...but it's not okay to place a preference for refugees based on their religion? For a second there I thought you had given up your trolling ways. My mistake :(You people are laboring under this mistaken assumption that the Constitution is equal to okay, or good, or nice, or right. None of these have anything to do with it. The Constitution says what the Constitution says, period. It has grown progressively less abhorrent as SJWs through the years forced their opinions on other people, like "slavery is illegal", "racial disenfranchisement is illegal", and so on, but it has never and will never be a document of the good, only a document of the law.

[Tgo01]

The part where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

Congress showing preference to one group of refugees is not establishing a religion. This is a stretch even by Latrinsorm standards.

If there were a country out there where the government were literally sending tanks to everyone's homes in search of "THE GAYS!" and was demolishing homes where they found gays and running over the gays themselves, don't you think maybe the US should should have the power to make those people a priority over, say, political refugees in another country who are being arrested for staging protests against the government? No? We should be bound by our constitution to treat these two groups of people equally?


You people are laboring under this mistaken assumption that the Constitution is equal to okay, or good, or nice, or right. None of these have anything to do with it. The Constitution says what the Constitution says, period.

Fine.

So according to the constitution...it's okay to literally round up American citizens and place them in internment camps based on their race...but it's not okay to place a preference for refugees based on their religion? For a second there I thought you had given up your trolling ways. My mistake :(

Do you realize how odd your argument sounds that the constitution applies to non-US citizens that aren't living in the US? Can the president's war policies be considered "unconstitutional" since for the past dozen years or so since the only people we have been killing have been Muslim?

We gotta diversify this shit up! Before we can kill anymore Muslims we have to kill some Europeans for a while.

[Gelston]

The Constitution doesn't apply to non-US citizens that are not currently in the US. If it did, Gitmo would have been shut down a long time ago.

[Latrinsorm]

Congress showing preference to one group of refugees is not establishing a religion. This is a stretch even by Latrinsorm standards.The Constitution doesn't say "establishing a religion" though, so the only person stretching things here is you.
Do you realize how odd your argument sounds that the constitution applies to non-US citizens that aren't living in the US?Again, not making an argument. Stating facts.
Can the president's war policies be considered "unconstitutional" since for the past dozen years or so since the only people we have been killing have been Muslim? We gotta diversify this shit up! Before we can kill anymore Muslims we have to kill some Europeans for a while.We did not declare war on Muslims on the basis of their being Muslims. This is also why the second version of the executive order survived, because while it disproportionately affected Muslims it did not explicitly target them on the basis of their religion.
The Constitution doesn't apply to non-US citizens that are not currently in the US. If it did, Gitmo would have been shut down a long time ago.This part of the First Amendment doesn't apply to any citizen in any location. It applies to establishments of religion. Islam is an establishment of religion. Therefore an executive order explicitly discriminating against Islam is unconstitutional.

.

Bottom line, I told you all how it was going to happen. It happened exactly like I said it would.

You lost.

Get over it.

[Gelston]

You're an idiot.

[Tgo01]

The Constitution doesn't say "establishing a religion" though, so the only person stretching things here is you.

However you wish to misrepresent this, it's still not what would be happening if Congress showed preference over one group of refugees over another.


We did not declare war on Muslims on the basis of their being Muslims.

And if we say we are going to accept more Christians from this region because they are being more persecuted than Muslims then we are not showing preferential treatment based on religion, but rather severity of said persecution.

However you wish to spin the narrative that it's okay for us to bomb exclusively Muslim targets can go ahead and be applied to your inane arguments about this refugee nonsense.

[Latrinsorm]

You're an idiot.
However you wish to misrepresent this, it's still not what would be happening if Congress showed preference over one group of refugees over another. And if we say we are going to accept more Christians from this region because they are being more persecuted than Muslims then we are not showing preferential treatment based on religion, but rather severity of said persecution. However you wish to spin the narrative that it's okay for us to bomb exclusively Muslim targets can go ahead and be applied to your inane arguments about this refugee nonsense.Look guys, I know it's hard for you to admit I was right. I'll post it again for you, from November 2016:
The First Amendment does not have a problem with limiting or even outright banning people from a certain country. You want to close the door on all Syrian refugees, the First Amendment doesn't care. I personally would find it abhorrent and pathetic, but it wouldn't be unconstitutional.

Even if you were to make a list of such countries and mysteriously left out countries like Ireland and Israel, leaving only Muslim majority countries, you probably still would be able to skate by. You'd just have to make sure you did nothing to grease the skids for Syriac Christians (e.g.), then you'd definitely get in trouble.This is exactly what happened.

President Trump issued an order that banned immigration from a list of countries that all happened to be Muslim majority, but greased the skids for Christians. That order was immediately struck down for that specific reason (https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf): "The First Amendment prohibits any “law respecting an establishment of religion.” U.S. Const. amend. I. A law that “officially prefer[s] [one religious denomination] over another,” violates that clause Larson v. Valente, 456 U.S. 228, 244 (1982)."

President Trump issued another order that banned immigration from a list of countries that all happened to be Muslim majority and did not grease the skids for Christians. That order survived Supreme Court scrutiny.

I told you it would happen.
It happened.
And you're still arguing with me.
Methais, it looks like we were both wrong.
My gal name should have been Cassandra.

[Gelston]

You're an idiot.

[Latrinsorm]

You're an idiot.lol you lost. Stop being mad and get over it.

[Wrathbringer]

lol you lost. Stop being mad and get over it.

:lol:

[time4fun]

lol you lost. Stop being mad and get over it.

They don't really do that. They regroup with the other kids on the playground and agree among themselves that all new information can be disregarded and they really are totally correct.

[Gelston]

Now we have Tweedledee and Tweedledum.

[Parkbandit]

You're an idiot.

Stop feeding the troll.

[hello]

Eh, judging as a third party I would call this a win for Latrin + time4 lib tag team duo.

[time4fun]

Eh, judging as a third party I would call this a win for Latrin + time4 lib tag team duo.

All Latrin. I wasn't really involved.

[Tgo01]

All Latrin. I wasn't really involved.

lol

time4fun is congratulating a well known troll (Latrinsorm) and thanking another well known troll (hello) for this "victory."

This is a great day indeed.

The only thing that could make this more perfect is if ClydeR comes along and declares that as a Republican he thinks Trump is the worst president ever and then time4fun saying "See?!"

[tyrant-201]

lol

time4fun is congratulating a well known troll (Latrinsorm) and thanking another well known troll (hello) for this "victory."

This is a great day indeed.

The only thing that could make this more perfect is if ClydeR comes along and declares that as a Republican he thinks Trump is the worst president ever and then time4fun saying "See?!"

As a Republican I think he's the best president we've ever had. We're well on our way to Making America Great Again! Down with the immigrants and libtards! Bring slavery back!

[Tgo01]

As a Republican I think he's the best president we've ever had. We're well on our way to Making America Great Again! Down with the immigrants and libtards! Bring slavery back!

See?!

[Wrathbringer]

As a Republican I think he's the best president we've ever had. We're well on our way to Making America Great Again! Down with the immigrants and libtards! Bring slavery back!

Now you're getting it!

[Shaps]

As a Republican I think he's the best president we've ever had. We're well on our way to Making America Great Again! Down with the immigrants and libtards! Bring slavery back!

You do realize slavery was a Democratic thing right? It was the Republican's that ended it. Sheesh.. give credit where credit is due.

I get why Democrats are so self-loathing and touchy feely though. Guilt over the oppression of minorities for generations. It leaves an indelible mark.

As for best President ever? No where close, but he's better than what we could have had.. and sadly that's not saying much right now. He still needs to STFU on Twitter, as he actually is doing some decent work.. just no one knows about it because he keeps doing things and giving his opponents stupid talking points.

[cwolff]

You do realize slavery was a Democratic thing right? It was the Republican's that ended it. Sheesh.. give credit where credit is due.

I get why Democrats are so self-loathing and touchy feely though. Guilt over the oppression of minorities for generations. It leaves an indelible mark.

Unfortunately you still don't realize how fucking stupid this is to say. Honestly, I can't tell if you're just joking and I'm taking the bait or if you're serious. My gut feeling is that you're serious and you think you're making a valid argument here and that's sad.

[Shaps]

Unfortunately you still don't realize how fucking stupid this is to say. Honestly, I can't tell if you're just joking and I'm taking the bait or if you're serious. My gut feeling is that you're serious and you think you're making a valid argument here and that's sad.

First part is fact.. sorry if you think facts are stupid.

The second part is just a bit of prodding to get you all worked up ;) .

edit: It's funny seeing your guilt flare up and you lash out. Does that validate the second part? Or are you just joking and I'm taking the bait?

[Gelston]

This just in, cwolff says historical facts are stupid!

[Shaps]

This just in, cwolff says historical facts are stupid!

Think he knows the history of the KKK? He'd be real proud of them Democrats then...

[cwolff]

First part is fact.. sorry if you think facts are stupid.

The second part is just a bit of prodding to get you all worked up ;) .

edit: It's funny seeing your guilt flare up though and lash out. Does that validate the second part? Or are you just joking and I'm taking the bait?

HAHAHA, Well you did get me pissed for sure.

What I don't like about this democrat and slavery argument is that all that changed when the dems decided to support civil rights. Then all those racists went over to the Republican party. So yes, the democrats were racist until they changed their platform. The racists didn't change, they just changed party and are Republicans.

[Gelston]

What I don't like about this democrat and slavery argument

It isn't an argument, it is fact.

[tyrant-201]

You do realize slavery was a Democratic thing right? It was the Republican's that ended it. Sheesh.. give credit where credit is due.

I get why Democrats are so self-loathing and touchy feely though. Guilt over the oppression of minorities for generations. It leaves an indelible mark.

As for best President ever? No where close, but he's better than what we could have had.. and sadly that's not saying much right now. He still needs to STFU on Twitter, as he actually is doing some decent work.. just no one knows about it because he keeps doing things and giving his opponents stupid talking points.

Slavery was totally a Democrat thing. Democrats are self-loathing because they don't have a soul! They should feel guilt over the oppression of minorities, they're the ones holding them down!

Best. President. Ever. Who else would be smart enough to use the office to benefit his own business? No one even comes close. I'm personally glad he's making America safe and great again! North Korea better watch their backs, we have nukes.

[Shaps]

HAHAHA, Well you did get me pissed for sure.

What I don't like about this democrat and slavery argument is that all that changed when the dems decided to support civil rights. Then all those racists went over to the Republican party. So yes, the democrats were racist until they changed their platform. The racists didn't change, they just changed party and are Republicans.

Seriously? You're argument is actually.. "all the racists just decided to switch parties"?

I don't even know what to say to this.. I'll let someone else handle it because I'm going to start drinking heavily... because these are the types of comments that just make you drink.

And don't get to worked up.. it's a holiday :) .

[cwolff]

No they didn't all switch of course but when you lose on facts you begin to parse wording.

There's no doubt that the democratic platform embracing civil rights swung southern democrats into the republican.

I think that the reason you all keep trying to use this "democrats supported slavery in the 1860's" thing is more a symptom of your tribalness than anything. As long as you can say something that supports your in group you'll say it, wether it's an accurate representation of anything or not. Liberals don't have the same tribal loyalty so it ends up being more a call out to your peeps than any kind of rational argument.

[Parkbandit]

HAHAHA, Well you did get me pissed for sure.

What I don't like about this democrat and slavery argument is that all that changed when the dems decided to support civil rights. Then all those racists went over to the Republican party. So yes, the democrats were racist until they changed their platform. The racists didn't change, they just changed party and are Republicans.

LOL.

Please take a history course. NOT a revisionist one.. a real one.

[Parkbandit]

No they didn't all switch of course but when you lose on facts you begin to parse wording.

There's no doubt that the democratic platform embracing civil rights swung southern democrats into the republican.

I think that the reason you all keep trying to use this "democrats supported slavery in the 1860's" thing is more a symptom of your tribalness than anything. As long as you can say something that supports your in group you'll say it, wether it's an accurate representation of anything or not. Liberals don't have the same tribal loyalty so it ends up being more a call out to your peeps than any kind of rational argument.

You are challenging time4fun for the belt now.. aren't you?

You still need to beat Backlash to become the #2 contender.

One more really stupid post should to it.

I KNOW! Tell us about how the KKK was started by the Republicans! How Senator Byrd wasn't a racist or a Democrat.. he was just pretending!

Bonus if you can be convincing that Lincoln was really a Democrat when he gave the Emancipation Proclamation.

COME ON MAN! YOU GOT THIS! YOU ARE SO CLOSE TO THE TITLE SHOT!

[Tgo01]

What I don't like about this democrat and slavery argument is that all that changed when the dems decided to support civil rights.

How do people think this argument makes sense?

More Republicans than Democrats supported civil rights. In what way does it begin to make sense that the racists said "Hey, our party likes them negros now! Let's move to the other party who likes them negros even more! That makes sense!"

[Gelston]

I like that he is accusing people of "tribalism" when he created a thread blaming all troubles on the right.

[cwolff]

You don't have to take my word on it.


By Mike Allen
Thursday, July 14, 2005

It was called "the southern strategy," started under Richard M. Nixon in 1968, and described Republican efforts to use race as a wedge issue -- on matters such as desegregation and busing -- to appeal to white southern voters.
Ken Mehlman, the Republican National Committee chairman, this morning will tell the NAACP national convention in Milwaukee that it was "wrong."

[tyrant-201]

Circle jerk in full force today! PB, Gelston, Tg0, who's beating off who?!

[Tgo01]

Circle jerk in full force today! PB, Gelston, Tg0, who's beating off who?!

Who's beating off whoM, you cretin.

[Tgo01]

You don't have to take my word on it.

That's great. Please name for me which Dixiecrats switched to the Republican party and which house seats switched from Democrat to Republican and when.

[tyrant-201]

Who's beating off whoM, you cretin.

English is not my first language. I'm from the Philippines and my brother needs healthcare. I make six figures and have a degree in Men's Studies.

[hello]

English is not my first language. I'm from the Philippines and my brother needs healthcare. I make six figures and have a degree in Men's Studies.

So, you majored in making your dick happy?

[Parkbandit]

Circle jerk in full force today! PB, Gelston, Tg0, who's beating off who?!

Sounds like you might be a homophobe.

Now, just blame Gelston on this and you will have come full circle jerk again.

[tyrant-201]

Sounds like you might be a homophobe.

Now, just blame Gelston on this and you will have come full circle jerk again.

"Shut your whore mouth!" - Gelston

[Latrinsorm]

Just wanted to say real quick for the record, everyone's favorite jpeg made five factual claims each about Presidents Carter and Trump. Seven of those claims were absolute lies. Rather than say "huh, I wonder why I posted a jpeg that was 70%
lies" certain people were more interested in (vainly) arguing with me about whether President Trump's executive orders were or were not Constitutional, which as I 100% accurately predicted was a matter of settled law. Makes you wonder.
How do people think this argument makes sense? More Republicans than Democrats supported civil rights. In what way does it begin to make sense that the racists said "Hey, our party likes them negros now! Let's move to the other party who likes them negros even more! That makes sense!"In the way that President Nixon intentionally and explicitly campaigned on being against civil rights. As a rising tide lifts all boats, a tide of filth sullies them.
That's great. Please name for me which Dixiecrats switched to the Republican party and which house seats switched from Democrat to Republican and when.http://lmgtfy.com/?q=which+Dixiecrats+switched+to+the+Republican+par ty+and+which+house+seats+switched+from+Democrat+to +Republican+and+when

Or, if you're even lazier, here's the first result (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats).

Your opposition to the idea that realignment occurred never grows less bizarre.

[Gelston]

You're an idiot.

[Gelston]

"Shut your whore mouth!" - Gelston

Just an FYI, I've never said that combination of words in my life.

[Tgo01]

Or, if you're even lazier, here's the first result (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats).

You didn't answer my questions but pretended you did. This is why you're a troll.

[Latrinsorm]

You didn't answer my questions but pretended you did. This is why you're a troll.You've touted your ability to read between the lines. My advice to you is to learn how to read what's on them.

[Neveragain]

As a rising tide lifts all boats, a tide of filth sullies them.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8T095mFdW8

[Parkbandit]

You didn't answer my questions but pretended you did. This is why you're a troll.

But you continue to feed him.

You're being played.

[Tgo01]

But you continue to feed him.

You're being played.

I can't help it, I enjoy seeing time4fun embarrass herself by claiming what a master debater the PC trolls are.

[Parkbandit]

I can't help it, I enjoy seeing time4fun embarrass herself by claiming what a master debater the PC trolls are.

She is "de"lusional.

[time4fun]

You've touted your ability to read between the lines. My advice to you is to learn how to read what's on them.

Reading comprehension is a weak spot for Tgo.

[Tgo01]

Reading comprehension is a weak spot for Tgo.

There she goes again thinking the PC trolls are the best debaters we have.

You can't buy this entertainment.

[Ashlander]

There she goes again thinking the PC trolls are the best debaters we have.

You can't buy this entertainment.

Hey now, (s)he has six degrees in debating so (s)he knows what (s)he's talking about.

[Tenlaar]

There she goes again thinking the PC trolls are the best debaters we have.

It's not hard to be better when most of you guys "debate" using arguments primarily made up of personal insults and hyperbole.

[time4fun]

Hey now, (s)he has six degrees in debating so (s)he knows what (s)he's talking about.

If you want to make someone feel bad about going to grad school, you should mention the debt, not the degrees. Thinking that having grad degrees is an insult just makes you look sad.

[Ashlander]

If you want to make someone feel bad about going to grad school, you should mention the debt, not the degrees. Thinking that having grad degrees is an insult just makes you look sad.

Don't you make more than all of us combined? Why are you worried about debt?

[Wrathbringer]

If you want to make someone feel bad about going to grad school, you should mention the debt, not the degrees. Thinking that having grad degrees is an insult just makes you look sad.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMNry4PE93Y

[Parkbandit]

If you want to make someone feel bad about going to grad school, you should mention the debt, not the degrees. Thinking that having grad degrees is an insult just makes you look sad.

It's not the story that you went to grad school that we're making fun of.. it's the way your stories are just so convenient.. as if you are making them up.

"You don't know the first thing about logic" = "Oh Yea?? I TAUGHT LOGIC!"

"You are an ignorant little bitch" = "I have 3 PhDs!"

"You sound like a racist" = "I'm in a mixed racial family!"

"You don't know the first thing about illegal immigration" = "My brother is an illegal immigrant!"

[Parkbandit]

Don't you make more than all of us combined? Why are you worried about debt?

How can someone making THAT much money even have debt!?

[Wrathbringer]

It's not the story that you went to grad school that we're making fun of.. it's the way your stories are just so convenient.. as if you are making them up.

"You don't know the first thing about logic" = "Oh Yea?? I TAUGHT LOGIC!"

"You are an ignorant little bitch" = "I have 3 PhDs!"

"You sound like a racist" = "I'm in a mixed racial family!"

"You don't know the first thing about illegal immigration" = "My brother is an illegal immigrant!"

You don't know about poverty = I grew up poor!

You don't understand terrorism = I was in NY on 911 and evacuated a building and got in a car!

[time4fun]

It's not the story that you went to grad school that we're making fun of.. it's the way your stories are just so convenient.. as if you are making them up.

"You don't know the first thing about logic" = "Oh Yea?? I TAUGHT LOGIC!"

"You are an ignorant little bitch" = "I have 3 PhDs!"

"You sound like a racist" = "I'm in a mixed racial family!"

"You don't know the first thing about illegal immigration" = "My brother is an illegal immigrant!"

You're oddly threatened by my life.

It makes me wonder what yours must look like. And if it looks like I think it does, I am genuinely sorry.

[Parkbandit]

You're oddly threatened by my life.

For someone with multiple PhDs and have given very important speeches in English.. it's amazing how you could be completely off base like this.

Confusion about "threatened" and "entertained by your INTERNET life" should be a pretty easily picked up theme.

Protip: There is nothing about you, your life, your Internet life or anything else that you have/can make up that I find the least bit "threatening".

Like at all.


It makes me wonder what yours must look like. And if it looks like I think it does, I am genuinely sorry.

At least with all your political predictions, you were only 87% wrong. You should stick with that.

[Tgo01]

It's not hard to be better when most of you guys "debate" using arguments primarily made up of personal insults and hyperbole.

How is asking someone to back up their argument a "personal insult"?

Oh right! I forget! Facts are racist!

[Tenlaar]

Oh right! I forget! Facts are racist!

See what I mean?

[Tgo01]

See what I mean?

"You pointed out my political party's penchant for calling everything racist! You're hurling a personal insult!"

This is sad, Tenlaar, even for you.

[Tenlaar]

"You pointed out my political party's penchant for calling everything racist! You're hurling a personal insult!"

This is sad, Tenlaar, even for you.

It wasn't the personal insults that your statement was an example of.

[Methais]

They don't really do that. They regroup with the other kids on the playground and agree among themselves that all new information can be disregarded and they really are totally correct.

Your lack of self awareness is astounding.

in b4 "something something posting without substance"


There she goes again thinking the PC trolls are the best debaters we have.

You can't buy this entertainment.

See sig.

[Gelston]

Just when I figure time4fun couldn't be any more retarded, it speaks again.

[cwolff]

Yup, it's all the right's fault but the Republicans are waking up and realizing they lost their party to madness. I am hopeful the responsible adults regain control of the GOP.


We are not, after all, divided because Americans pulled back from the center and retreated into extremism.
No, we are divided because one party did. And it wasn’t the Democrats.
Our political thinking being as fixedly bipolar as it is, many people will read the foregoing as an endorsement of the Democratic Party. It emphatically is not.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/leonard-pitts-jr/article159712234.html#storylink=cpy

[Wrathbringer]

Just when I figure time4fun couldn't be any more retarded, it speaks again.

ugh, I know. I'm sick of it. It needs to go away.

[Parkbandit]

Yup, it's all the right's fault but the Republicans are waking up and realizing they lost their party to madness. I am hopeful the responsible adults regain control of the GOP.

It's like you want to race time4fun to see who can post the dumbest post in this thread.

You're winning.. which is amazing.

[Gelston]

It's like you want to race time4fun to see who can post the dumbest post in this thread.

You're winning.. which is amazing.

He already won dumbest post when he created this thread and then accused everyone else of tribalism.

[Tisket]

He already won dumbest post when he created this thread and then accused everyone else of tribalism.

^^^

The bitterness displayed in his posts makes me smile.

[time4fun]

Yup, it's all the right's fault but the Republicans are waking up and realizing they lost their party to madness. I am hopeful the responsible adults regain control of the GOP.

That'd be great, but I think what's really happened is that the "responsible adults" left the party and started identifying as independent.

The reality, however, is that "independents" rarely vote as independents. Independents in the US tend to vote consistently for one party or another, and the ones who are "truly" independent are just less likely to vote at all.

So the end result has been the die-hards are still choosing the nominees (without many moderates left in the party to reign that choice in), and the "responsible adults" who've gone independent are still ultimately voting for them. And, to hold their legislative victories in the face of dwindling support, the GOP has simply focused its attention on gerrymandering and voter suppression (which it bloodlessly refers to as "turnout control")- both of which help insulate more extreme candidates from legislative pressure.

Couple that with the huge amount of dark money out there, and the constant threat by groups like Americans for Prosperity and the Koch Brothers network, and there's really not much the "responsible adults" can do.

[Back]

Yup, it's all the right's fault but the Republicans are waking up and realizing they lost their party to madness. I am hopeful the responsible adults regain control of the GOP.

This guy's opinion is pretty spot on. The GOP is so extreme now compared to what it was. That Trump was even considered a candidate and winning is the result. Now with their habitual finger pointing they are claiming the left is the one that's extreme. The democrats haven't changed at all.

[Tisket]

The democrats haven't changed at all.

Quite simply the most ignorant thing you have ever said.

[Gelston]

Quite simply the most ignorant thing you have ever said.

If he wants to say that the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession, and Jim Crowe, that is fine with me.

[Parkbandit]

The democrats haven't changed at all.

And Backlash isn't taking this laying down! HE WANTS THE BELT!

[RichardCranium]

This guy's opinion is pretty spot on. The GOP is so extreme now compared to what it was. That Trump was even considered a candidate and winning is the result. Now with their habitual finger pointing they are claiming the left is the one that's extreme. The democrats haven't changed at all.

Which side is ANTIFA on?

[Back]

Which side is ANTIFA on?

ANTIFA has always been around in one form or another. I've only heard it called that this year. They aren't a product of the DNC anymore than the KKK is a product of the RNC.

[cwolff]

Which side is ANTIFA on?


ANTIFA has always been around in one form or another. I've only heard it called that this year. They aren't a product of the DNC anymore than the KKK is a product of the RNC.

Ya I never heard it have a name before. I bet it pisses them off that they have a name because it's so "establishment".

Back, I think you're right but I'd say this: While the KKK will turn out to vote GOP and is part of the alt-right subset, ANTIFA can not be counted on to vote at all. To be legit in that community they kind of have to be opposed to everything.

[Back]

Ya I never heard it have a name before. I bet it pisses them off that they have a name because it's so "establishment".

Back, I think you're right but I'd say this: While the KKK will turn out to vote GOP and is part of the alt-right subset, ANTIFA can not be counted on to vote at all. To be legit in that community they kind of have to be opposed to everything.

Yeah, I get the feeling they probably shop at Whole Foods and read the city paper while drinking cold French pressed fair trade coffee when they are not out protesting in their all black Urban Outfitters gear.

Anarchists have been around forever and have protested every global meeting event like the G20.

[Neveragain]

Just want to make sure that when you two are done having gay sex that you clean up after yourselves in here.

The KKK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

8731

[cwolff]

Yeah, I get the feeling they probably shop at Whole Foods and read the city paper while drinking cold French pressed fair trade coffee when they are not out protesting in their all black Urban Outfitters gear.

Anarchists have been around forever and have protested every global meeting event like the G20.

I'm not so sure. The ones I know are more inclined to live in squats, dumpster dive (and pissed at Whole Foods because they lock their dumpsters), don't read the paper, travel by hopping trains and wear hand me down thrift shop clothes.


Just want to make sure that when you two are done having gay sex that you clean up after yourselves in here.

The KKK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See what I mean. Klan supporter and internet GOP activist.

[Neveragain]

I'm not so sure. The ones I know are more inclined to live in squats, dumpster dive (and pissed at Whole Foods because they lock their dumpsters), don't read the paper, travel by hopping trains and wear hand me down thrift shop clothes.



See what I mean. Klan supporter and internet GOP activist.

Hey, at least I don't have Backs dick hanging out of my mouth right now. I'll take being accused of being a KKK member over that any day.

[cwolff]

Hey, at least I don't have Backs dick hanging out of my mouth right now. I'll take being accused of being a KKK member over that any day.

Yes I believe you would. You'd rather be a racist than have someone call you gay. SMDH

That's your response? "You're Gay!" Is this the part where I'm supposed to say "Nuh Uh, You're gay!"

I don't expect you to write it out here but I encourage to at least admit to yourself that your response is pretty fucking stupid.

[Neveragain]

Yes I believe you would. You'd rather be a racist than have someone call you gay. SMDH

That's your response? "You're Gay!" Is this the part where I'm supposed to say "Nuh Uh, You're gay!"

I don't expect you to write it out here but I encourage to at least admit to yourself that your response is pretty fucking stupid.

Just as stupid as yours and Back's KKK circle jerk. But of course I think that was the point of calling you out for being a flaming homosexual.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccEbUhKHsJI

[Parkbandit]

Backlash: "I can post dumb stuff"

Cwolff: "I can post dumber stuff"

Backlash: "NO ME!"

Cwolff: "NO MEE!"

We now away the Champion time4fun to put you two idiots back in your place...

[Ashliana]

If he wants to say that the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession, and Jim Crowe, that is fine with me.

It's fine if you say the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession and Jim Crowe -- as long as you correctly identify the fact that those Democratic states were southern, conservative, white and rural, and correctly note that in 2017, the descendants of those people are almost exclusively Republican: every state that seceded for the Confederacy voted for Donald Trump, with one exception: Virginia (and even Virginia only narrowly happened because of the populated urban centers, esp. near DC).

But by all means, console yourself that half of the GOP's voter base isn't intensely racist because 152 years ago when Lincoln died, he was a "Republican." Likewise, pretend that the same states didn't perpetuate the same discrimination you're decrying with crocodile tears during reconstruction and beyond.

Perhaps someday you'll convince someone who's ever opened a history book.

[Gelston]

It's fine if you say the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession and Jim Crowe -- as long as you correctly identify the fact that those Democratic states were southern, conservative, white and rural, and correctly note that in 2017, the descendants of those people are almost exclusively Republican: every state that seceded for the Confederacy voted for Donald Trump, with one exception: Virginia (and even Virginia only narrowly happened because of the populated urban centers, esp. near DC).

But by all means, console yourself that half of the GOP's voter base isn't intensely racist because 152 years ago when Lincoln died, he was a "Republican." Likewise, pretend that the same states didn't perpetuate the same discrimination you're decrying with crocodile tears during reconstruction and beyond.

Perhaps someday you'll convince someone who's ever opened a history book.

Look at this idiot not reading the context to my statement and going off on a tangent.

[Parkbandit]

It's fine if you say the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession and Jim Crowe -- as long as you correctly identify the fact that those Democratic states were southern, conservative, white and rural, and correctly note that in 2017, the descendants of those people are almost exclusively Republican: every state that seceded for the Confederacy voted for Donald Trump, with one exception: Virginia (and even Virginia only narrowly happened because of the populated urban centers, esp. near DC).

But by all means, console yourself that half of the GOP's voter base isn't intensely racist because 152 years ago when Lincoln died, he was a "Republican." Likewise, pretend that the same states didn't perpetuate the same discrimination you're decrying with crocodile tears during reconstruction and beyond.

Perhaps someday you'll convince someone who's ever opened a history book.

OH SHIT! OUT OF RETIREMENT!

NOW WE HAVE A FATAL FOUR WAY!!!

[time4fun]

It's fine if you say the Democrats are the party of slavery, secession and Jim Crowe -- as long as you correctly identify the fact that those Democratic states were southern, conservative, white and rural, and correctly note that in 2017, the descendants of those people are almost exclusively Republican: every state that seceded for the Confederacy voted for Donald Trump, with one exception: Virginia (and even Virginia only narrowly happened because of the populated urban centers, esp. near DC).

But by all means, console yourself that half of the GOP's voter base isn't intensely racist because 152 years ago when Lincoln died, he was a "Republican." Likewise, pretend that the same states didn't perpetuate the same discrimination you're decrying with crocodile tears during reconstruction and beyond.

Perhaps someday you'll convince someone who's ever opened a history book.

I've never understood why these people keep using that ridiculous argument. They know full well that those old Dems became Republicans, they know full well that WE know that, and they're well aware that today is not 100 years ago.

What is the point of using an argument that you know EVERYONE in the room recognizes as BS?

[cwolff]

Look at this idiot not reading the context to my statement and going off on a tangent.

Speaking of context, I've wondered what this is about.


He already won dumbest post when he created this thread and then accused everyone else of tribalism.

Are you hung up on this binary us vs. them thinking. That seems to be a common problem here. In this case, (if this is the case and I apologize if I'm reading it wrong) you missed the opportunity to learn something by ignoring the article which happens to be the title of this thread, because of this false equivalency.

[Gelston]

Speaking of context, I've wondered what this is about.



Are you hung up on this binary us vs. them thinking. That seems to be a common problem here. In this case, (if this is the case and I apologize if I'm reading it wrong) you missed the opportunity to learn something by ignoring the article which happens to be the title of this thread, because of this false equivalency.

Um, the VERY TITLE of this thread is something you claim to be against. Keep being retarded.

[cwolff]

Um, the VERY TITLE of this thread is something you claim to be against. Keep being retarded.

What do I claim to be against? This article, and it's title, blames republicans for going too far right and just in general being ignorant. I completely agree with that.

[Ashliana]

Look at this idiot not reading the context to my statement and going off on a tangent.

Ah, it's that time for Gelston's alternate reality wherein the thread doesn't exist in its entirety, where he, Tgo, PB, etc., weren't reveling in revisionist history, wherein he doesn't have an established history of blaming (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?90261-Thread-for-Things-That-Made-You-Laugh-Today&p=1779822&highlight=slavery#post1779822) "Democrats" for slavery.

"Context."

[Neveragain]

I completely agree with that.

Dude the article reads like it was written by a communist sycophant.

Let's explore some of the language being used, just from your quote: "self-deluded" "unenlightened" "stuff of superstition, cults and fascism" "the brainwashed right" "Republicans have to cheat to win local, state and national elections." "their self-serving, oligarchical motives." "anti-democratic tactics" "dissemination of fake news".

There is no help for you if you can read an article filled with so much bullshit and eat it up like a faggot in a hot dog factory.

[Wrathbringer]

Ah, it's that time for Gelston's alternate reality wherein the thread doesn't exist in its entirety, where he, Tgo, PB, etc., weren't reveling in revisionist history, wherein he doesn't have an established history of blaming (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?90261-Thread-for-Things-That-Made-You-Laugh-Today&p=1779822&highlight=slavery#post1779822) "Democrats" for slavery.

"Context."

lol @ your rep

[Gelston]

Ah, it's that time for Gelston's alternate reality wherein the thread doesn't exist in its entirety, where he, Tgo, PB, etc., weren't reveling in revisionist history, wherein he doesn't have an established history of blaming (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?90261-Thread-for-Things-That-Made-You-Laugh-Today&p=1779822&highlight=slavery#post1779822) "Democrats" for slavery.

"Context."

Hey dumbass, the guy said the Democrat party has never changed. That is precisely what I was replying to. Stop being an idiot.

[time4fun]

Hey dumbass, the guy said the Democrat party has never changed. That is precisely what I was replying to. Stop being an idiot.

Yeah, except that the argument wasn't that Dems had "never changed", it was commentary on recent political polarization. Your statement intentionally twisted an argument beyond the original scope, and it was basically a three year-old's response.

Like most of the things that you've been posting in this thread.

Context.

[RichardCranium]

But by all means, console yourself that half of the GOP's voter base isn't intensely racist because 152 years ago when Lincoln died, he was a "Republican."

Do you honestly believe that fifty percent of Republicans are racist or is that just hyperbole?

[Neveragain]

Do you honestly believe that fifty percent of Republicans are racist or is that just hyperbole?

It's hyperbole but it's all they have because they smoked their last brain cell when they became Bernie Sanders supporters.

[Gelston]

Yeah, except that the argument wasn't that Dems had "never changed", it was commentary on recent political polarization. Your statement intentionally twisted an argument beyond the original scope, and it was basically a three year-old's response.

Like most of the things that you've been posting in this thread.

Context.

No, his exact words were "This guy's opinion is pretty spot on. The GOP is so extreme now compared to what it was. That Trump was even considered a candidate and winning is the result. Now with their habitual finger pointing they are claiming the left is the one that's extreme. The democrats haven't changed at all."

The Republicans have changed, the democrats haven't. Stop being a dumbass.

[time4fun]

Do you honestly believe that fifty percent of Republicans are racist or is that just hyperbole?

It's probably more accurate to say that the GOP is the party where racists go. It's also the party where people who are comfortable with racism tend to go. You have to be comfortable with birtherism and voter suppression laws that target minority voters with "almost surgical precision" (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/?utm_term=.af08fdcbc6bb) in order to be a Republican.

And a lot of that comfort likely comes from the racial hegemony of the GOP. 86% of registered Republicans are white (http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/13/1-the-changing-composition-of-the-political-parties/), compared to 70% of the electorate. Meanwhile, 57% of Democrats are white.

In the last 24 years, Republicans have become 6% less white, while Democrats have become 19% less white. Meanwhile, the electorate on the whole has become 14% less white.

[Gelston]

Only white people are racists in time4fun land.

[Neveragain]

It's probably more accurate to say that the GOP is the party where racists go. It's also the party where people who are comfortable with racism tend to go. You have to be comfortable with birtherism and voter suppression laws that target minority voters with "almost surgical precision" (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/?utm_term=.af08fdcbc6bb) in order to be a Republican.

And a lot of that comfort likely comes from the racial hegemony of the GOP. 86% of registered Republicans are white (http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/13/1-the-changing-composition-of-the-political-parties/), compared to 70% of the electorate. Meanwhile, 57% of Democrats are white.

In the last 24 years, Republicans have become 6% less white, while Democrats have become 19% less white. Meanwhile, the electorate on the whole has become 14% less white.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qnay5Zwyxwo

[Ashliana]

Do you honestly believe that fifty percent of Republicans are racist or is that just hyperbole?

No, I don't think 50% of Republicans are mustache-twirling racists. Everybody, to some extent, harbors prejudices of some kind and severity, including Democrats.

Depending on how broadly you define "racist," in terms of a person being a caricature who runs around calling every person of another race they see an epithet, versus someone who merely thinks their race is superior to others, to someone who willfully embraces a worldview that's been painstakingly, dishonestly hand-crafted to appeal to those "skeptical" of other racial groups -- then yes, up to 50%.

[time4fun]

Only white people are racists in time4fun land.

Inaccurate.

But don't confuse structural racism with individual racism.

And, obviously, whatever you do- keep trying to change the subject so you don't have to discuss the actual issues in the thread.

[Gelston]

Inaccurate.

But don't confuse structural racism with individual racism.

And, obviously, whatever you do- keep trying to change the subject so you don't have to discuss the actual issues in the thread.

So you didn't claim the Republican party was inherently more racist because it has a higher percentage of white members. Okay.

[Wrathbringer]

It's probably more accurate to say that the GOP is the party where racists go. It's also the party where people who are comfortable with racism tend to go. You have to be comfortable with birtherism and voter suppression laws that target minority voters with "almost surgical precision" (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/?utm_term=.af08fdcbc6bb) in order to be a Republican.

And a lot of that comfort likely comes from the racial hegemony of the GOP. 86% of registered Republicans are white (http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/13/1-the-changing-composition-of-the-political-parties/), compared to 70% of the electorate. Meanwhile, 57% of Democrats are white.

In the last 24 years, Republicans have become 6% less white, while Democrats have become 19% less white. Meanwhile, the electorate on the whole has become 14% less white.

omg ***RETARD ALERT*** EVERYONE EVACUATE IMMEDIATELY

[Haldrik]

What's this folder? never been here before.

[Haldrik]

omg ***RETARD ALERT*** EVERYONE EVACUATE IMMEDIATELY

Statistics scare you? Makes sense. Ignorance is straight up magical.

[Wrathbringer]

Statistics scare you? Makes sense. Ignorance is straight up magical.

DEAR GOD THERE'S TWO RETARDS NOW!!!

[Haldrik]

Lol time4fun.

You will never convince these people of anything. Why do you bother? Let them ruin Obamacare, lose their health insurance for preexisting condition of obesity, and then die. At no point in this chain of events will they realize they were wrong. You can only help people who want to help themselves. Let it all crash and burn for all I care. Us idiot liberals with actual education and jobs will end up just fine.

[Neveragain]

Statistics scare you? Makes sense. Ignorance is straight up magical.

I mean if we're going to use actual statistics:

8732

Rep. comment: "What the hell is wrong with you?"

There's nothing wrong with me, these are statistical facts.

[Haldrik]

I mean if we're going to use actual statistics:

8732

Relevance? Also using that casually is pretty racist. It perpetuates a stereotype that is completely false.

[Wrathbringer]

I mean if we're going to use actual statistics:

8732

wow, a large portion of the black population is clinically retarded. This explains a lot.

[Gelston]

Dem yeller peoples have the highest average IQ.

[Neveragain]

Relevance? Also using that casually is pretty racist. It perpetuates a stereotype that is completely false.

Do statistics scare you so much that we can't talk about them without you going fully autistic?

[Neveragain]

wow, a large portion of the black population is clinically retarded. This explains a lot.

Let me see if I can find the bell curve on the "immigrants" invading Europe. It's fucking really bad, most likely due to generations of inbreeding.

[Neveragain]

Average I.Q. of a Syrian refugee is 89.

German labor experts "Syrian "refugees" are worthless unemployables."

http://www.vdare.com/posts/german-labor-experts-syrian-refugees-worthless-unemployables

Hell lets just put it all on the table:

8733

[time4fun]

I mean if we're going to use actual statistics:

8732

Yeah...congrats right wingers of PC.

THIS is the guy you count among your own.

[RichardCranium]

Yeah...congrats right wingers of PC.

THIS is the guy you count among your own.

Pretty sure he's ignored by everyone but you. But you also take Macgyver seriously, so....

[Neveragain]

Yeah...congrats right wingers of PC.

THIS is the guy you count among your own.

Just facts Time4makebelieve. We can't pretend to be fixing things if we are unable to accept reality.

[Neveragain]

Weird how unemployment is highest among blacks in your most Liberal areas.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2016/unemployment-rates-for-african-americans-by-state-in-2015.htm

[Back]

I'm not so sure. The ones I know are more inclined to live in squats, dumpster dive (and pissed at Whole Foods because they lock their dumpsters), don't read the paper, travel by hopping trains and wear hand me down thrift shop clothes.

I don't know any personally but c'mon you just know there are some rich-kid anarchist wannabes in that group. Hell you have to have access to the internet to know where and when to protest.

The people who live off the grid I think are more hardcore conservative ultra religious survivalists.

Regardless there are crackpots in any group you look at.

And to comment on something else you mentioned... yeah, KKK probably does vote straight republican ticket while ANTIFA, and it's really not fair to compare these two groups in any other respect than that they are extremist groups, probably either vote green party or protest by not voting at all.

[cwolff]

No, his exact words were "This guy's opinion is pretty spot on. The GOP is so extreme now compared to what it was. That Trump was even considered a candidate and winning is the result. Now with their habitual finger pointing they are claiming the left is the one that's extreme. The democrats haven't changed at all."

The Republicans have changed, the democrats haven't. Stop being a dumbass.

If anything the Dems are moving right. Aren't you old enough to see the swing in the GOP? It's a TOTALLY different party from their beloved Reagan years. They've become so right wing that Obama governed to the right of Nixon.


Lol time4fun.

You will never convince these people of anything. Why do you bother? Let them ruin Obamacare, lose their health insurance for preexisting condition of obesity, and then die. At no point in this chain of events will they realize they were wrong. You can only help people who want to help themselves. Let it all crash and burn for all I care. Us idiot liberals with actual education and jobs will end up just fine.

To quote Metallica, "Sad but true"


I don't know any personally but c'mon you just know there are some rich-kid anarchist wannabes in that group. Hell you have to have access to the internet to know where and when to protest.

The people who live off the grid I think are more hardcore conservative ultra religious survivalists.

Regardless there are crackpots in any group you look at.

And to comment on something else you mentioned... yeah, KKK probably does vote straight republican ticket while ANTIFA, and it's really not fair to compare these two groups in any other respect than that they are extremist groups, probably either vote green party or protest by not voting at all.

True. I can't help but think how many were at protest Coachella (DAPL) when if they really cared about the environment they would have been home promoting HRC.