Russia Investigation Heating Up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwolff

The support is deep on the libertarian side of the conservative movement. I think what many of us are disgusted by is that the same people who freak out about the anthem, BLM, etc...have been so very silent about the Bundy situation. So much sympathy from the right. The "good people on both sides" bullshit.

---

The libertarian support for the Bundy's is not so much for the family but rather who ultimately has rights to land. Of course you and I have already gone over this, your argument was that government is a better caretaker of land than private citizens. Then I pointed out that private citizens were using that land to graze cattle and in comparison government has used land to test nuclear weapons. That's when you knew you lost the argument and went silent as usual.

This is you:

How terrible
http://global.alltech.com/sites/defa..._cropped_0.jpg

This is how land should be managed
https://i.imgur.com/Jj3W9WN.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwolff

No. Is that why theres been so much hatred levelled at BLM? Because they didn't stand up for a white guy getting shot by cops?

What's illuminating is that you've all made BLM and protesting police brutality by black people a wedge issue.

---

No, I am using your own argument against you. Just because an organization supports one thing over another doesn't make it racist. I mean besides obvious racist remarks/organizations.

Here is the thing, I can get behind a police brutality argument. It is when you try to play the racism card that you lose me. I think the police are fast to escalate situations and use force when not reasonably necessary. I just don't think it is because the person is black/brown/whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwolff

No. Is that why theres been so much hatred levelled at BLM? Because they didn't stand up for a white guy getting shot by cops?

What's illuminating is that you've all made BLM and protesting police brutality by black people a wedge issue.

---

This is called deflecting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drauz

No, I am using your own argument against you. Just because an organization supports one thing over another doesn't make it racist. I mean besides obvious racist remarks/organizations.

Here is the thing, I can get behind a police brutality argument. It is when you try to play the racism card that you lose me. I think the police are fast to escalate situations and use force when not reasonably necessary. I just don't think it is because the person is black/brown/whatever.

---

Is it possible that much of the POC community disagree with you and think that the police do target them compared to white people? Because I believe that is what's happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

The libertarian support for the Bundy's is not so much for the family but rather who ultimately has rights to land. Of course you and I have already gone over this, your argument was that government is a better caretaker of land than private citizens. Then I pointed out that private citizens were using that land to graze cattle and in comparison government has used land to test nuclear weapons. That's when you knew you lost the argument and went silent as usual.

This is you:

How terrible
http://global.alltech.com/sites/defa..._cropped_0.jpg

This is how land should be managed
https://i.imgur.com/Jj3W9WN.gif

---

You just defeated your own argument by trying to be outrageous with that blanket statement about the government nuking the western states.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

This is called deflecting.

---

No gelly. I answered his question directly with the word "no" then followed up with questions of my own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwolff

No gelly. I answered his question directly with the word "no" then followed up with questions of my own.

---

Why is it no? You didn't want to expound upon that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

Why is it no? You didn't want to expound upon that?

---

Why would it be racist? That makes no sense. Its like saying AARP are ageists because they don't lobby for young people. BLM is nothing for white people to be so threatened by.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwolff

Why would it be racist? That makes no sense. Its like saying AARP are ageists because they don't lobby for young people. BLM is nothing for white people to be so threatened by.

---

You can retire at any age though. And who said anything about being "threatened"? Are you scared of BLM, cwolff?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

You can retire at any age though. And who said anything about being "threatened"? Are you scared of BLM, cwolff?

---

Ya, you don't have shit to say. You just want to be heard. I'm recognizing that you've not addressed the deflection statement and Ill take that to mean you're admitting you were wrong.

As for the AARP comparison you know the point I'm making but prefer to ignore it because you can't address it. As for me, of course I'm not threatened by BLM. You don't hear that from me here and I'm surprised by how threatened you guys are by it. It makes no sense.