Edykal,

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me.

You are justifying Antifa's violence because of your disagreement on an issue you deem to be part of the "boulder" i.e. an important and big issue.

Is that not violent rhetoric in itself? You also greatly exaggerate the amount of violent rhetoric that is from the right or alt-right. You're using the same logic of Antifa, that no matter who gets attacked, if they are considered "right-wing" in any aspect by anyone, it's okay to attack them for the "greater good."

Or really the "greater good" of Liberal/Marxist ideology, which is what it boils down to and not all of these other excuses.

Also, your long paragraphs that you constantly make out of nowhere are clearly calculated, manipulated and desperate word vomit.

At 7/10/18 10:38 AM, SolidPantsSnake wrote:

At 7/7/18 07:59 PM, EdyKel wrote: No, it's about the scale of things, with Trump supporters using this rare incident of a trump supporter being subject to harassment,

Plenty of restaurants and bars have refused service to people in MAGA hats, and harassment is common this is far from rare.

Like to back that up? I've only seen a couple of cases, and most of them deal with Trump officials - and even that is nothing new.

So no, it happens rarely, and I'm not going to include cases on the internet, or at a rallies, where it's hard to tell which side is harassing who more.

Oh, and here's today's action's of a Trump supporter. I could post more,if you want. They seem to be daily occurrences.

to cover up the chasm in difference to the daily harassment, and violence, towards minorities, and people on the left, from the right, and hoping that if they scream and pout loud enough that people will think that this is inductive of the left, and greater. It's like screaming over a splinter, hoping people will ignore the gaping knife wound on the other person.

Fine when Donald trump JR is retweeting this that is a fair point.

Funny you should mention this considering that Jr is getting as bad as his father at tweeting white nationalist propaganda.

Don't try to say silly shit when you know can't back it up.

How long has white nationalists been around?

Since the eugenics movement.

I'll give you a cookie for that since I set my self up for that. But just because a term wasn't around over 200 years ago or more doesn't mean it wasn't around in some form - see the following response on liberalism/conservatism.

The essence of white nationalism, or eugenics, goes much further back in time, will before the turn of the 20th century, and the height of Nazi Germany. Elements of these things existed in the form of racial views over non-white races as being inferior to whites, and cultural views against Interracial marriages, and mixed offspring, which go back hundreds of years. So, while eugenics is relatively a new term, it has been practiced for centuries as a cultural way of life which was reinforced by social pressures.

How long have Christian persecuted anyone who went against the grain of their society? And no, you can't use the whole Republican, Democrat argument, as an escape tactic. It's all about liberals, and conservatives, left, and right,

The terms left and right were not even used until the french revolution, and it wasn't until the 20th century that we started using them in the states. Also John Locke who many consider to be the father of liberalism was a christian, a Calvinist I believe, if i am wrong he was still some type of protestant.

You need to stop pretending that liberal, and conservative meant the same things as they do today back then. They don't.

I'm well aware of the history of those words, but the base meaning in them is just as relevant, and reflective of those times, as they do now. It's only the political silliness by either political group to constantly redefine them, using a combination of liberal and conservative ideas, to sell them, or vilify the the other side, which make them unique to this day and age. Liberalism means change and freedom, and open to other cultures and ideas. Conservatives means traditions and authority, and cautious to new ideas and other cultures. Basically, anything that challenged the status quo, establishment, traditions, culture, or authority, would be considered liberal (though, back then they would be considered trouble makers and heretics, and looked down upon or worse). Even within religion this was true.

Ever since Martin Luther took a stand against the Catholic church, which sparked off the protestant reformation, you had new sects of Christianity being created through rebellion, or splintering off, with groups seeking their own freedom to pursue their own beliefs. But, like anything, once something becomes established, and entrenched in a culture and government, it becomes steeped in traditional conservatism that tries to stamp out those who try to change it, or go against the grain, which just leads to a continuous cycle of rebellion. 500 years ago, you had wars among Christians, mostly Catholic and Protestant, digging their heels in against each other, and fighting and persecuting each other, depending on what country they controlled through the aristocracy, which led a lot of Christians to flee to other countries, including the American colonies - And that led to laws over separation of church and state, and freedom of religion, in the Constitution, which was then, as is now, considered to be liberal ideas.

The enlightenment was born from these religious conflicts, and persecutions, which led people to question the religious, and political, authority even more, leading to ideas of smaller government, and guaranteed individual rights. And that is where John Locke comes in. He very much followed, and further refined, English Empiricism, based on the ideas of the observation of the natural world and reasoning. He rejected a a lot of Christian views, and dogma. You could almost argue that he was more of a deist than Christian, later in life. While Lock did not suffer much persecution as other did for his views, many who followed in his footsteps, often forming secret societies of like minded individual, like the the Illuminati, and Freemasons, had to hide their activities underground to avoid being caught and arrested by a government controlled by the conservative views of the Christians.

The Constitution was very much based on the ideas of John Locke, and a lot of European aristocracy would describe the people of this country as being liberal, according to their standards . And we are a very liberal country with our democracy, and views on religious freedom, and individual rights. But that doesn't change the fact that elements of conservatism survived, and those liberal ideas were not extended to other races, gender, or religions outside of Christianity, which would take centuries to change, with conservatives being adverse to those changes, which still continues to this day - not as great, but definitely still there.

and the conservative Democrat of old left for the Republican party of now, while liberal Republicans of old left for the Democrat party. Our two party system have virtually changed places in the last 100 years,

They never left their parties they died out. Very old democrats from the south were still voting blue all the way into the 90's. It was the younger crowd that started voting red.

LOL. You mean like Michelle Bachman, or Rick Perry, to name a few. It's pretty well established that conservative Democrats started to switch parties from 1930's (after the New Deal), and especially during and after 1960's (after the civil rights act passed), because they didn't agree with socialistic ideas and race equality.

At 7/10/18 10:09 PM, DragonLimbo wrote: Edykal,

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me.

Don't give a shit. I'm inclined to think you are easily affected by words, since you once again misinterpreted what I said because you didn't like the sound of it.

You are justifying Antifa's violence because of your disagreement on an issue you deem to be part of the "boulder" i.e. an important and big issue.

Did I? Not really. I just don't give a shit. If antifa wants to get into scuffles with White nationalist, and they want to beat each other up, and get arrested, I have no real problem with that. I only care when innocents are involved. Otherwise, this is the least hypocritical position to take.

But I always like to watch people on the right squirm when I bring statistics up of actual violence, and harassment, coming from the right, with all their vitriol rhetoric, against minorities and the left. And all the right has is Antifa, which was formed in response, if misguided, to that vitriol rhetoric from the right that has led to violence against those groups. The right's inability to renounce that violence speaks volumes about their hypocrisy, because they don't want to recgnize it as a problem that is coming from their vitriol rhetoric. I also enjoy pointing out Trump who pretty much sounds like antifa with his actual promotion of violence against his opponents. It's like watching Trump supporters slap their own face, and get angry and then blame others for it.

Is that not violent rhetoric in itself? You also greatly exaggerate the amount of violent rhetoric that is from the right or alt-right. You're using the same logic of Antifa, that no matter who gets attacked, if they are considered "right-wing" in any aspect by anyone, it's okay to attack them for the "greater good."

If I said that whites are responsible for 98% of mass shootings, and imply they have violent tendencies, and keep promoting stories involving them, over and over, people will start to believe it - especially those who really want to believe it. If I said that Christians enjoy fucking kids, and abusing them, pointing out stories involving them over it, over and over, people will begin to believe it.

If you constantly promote negative stereotypes, over and over, echoed from various partisan sites, it will lead to attacks, and harassment, on such groups, and that is what is happening to minorities, and people on the left, from right-wing rhetoric, which spews out misleading statistics, and promote certain cases involving certain groups, over and over,, creating intense hatred towards them. It just a matter of time before some mentally ill, self righteous ass, armed person who can't control their anger, will ultimately be the first to lash out and harass, injure, or kill... such as this recent case. And that is what I consider vitriol rhetoric, which leads to violence against innocent people because it plays on emotions such as hate.

Or really the "greater good" of Liberal/Marxist ideology, which is what it boils down to and not all of these other excuses.

Son, the fact that you have to use the Marxist word shows just how dumb you are.

Also, your long paragraphs that you constantly make out of nowhere are clearly calculated, manipulated and desperate word vomit.

That's okay. I don't do it for you.

Again, how much of the right is speaking violent rhetoric? Pointing out statistics is not violent rhetoric, even if you believe that it leads to violence.

Blacks are responsible for a disproportionate amount of gun deaths in the US, so don't even lie.

At 7/11/18 04:56 AM, DragonLimbo wrote: Again, how much of the right is speaking violent rhetoric?

The current President (whom is, if I'm not mistaken, right wing) has a history of violent rhetoric, and it has a direct link to inciting more violence whenever he holds a rally. That is the current leader of the right wing.

Here's a story about a woman assaulting an immigrant (a legal resident) with a brick and using lies to get other men to assault him. You can parse what you want from that.

Blacks are responsible for a disproportionate amount of gun deaths in the US, so don't even lie.

You should link your sources if you actually want to make a point with this.

For the sake of argument, though, assuming you're 100% correct what are you want people in this country to do about it? What would your solution be?

man I don't know how i'd be able to jump into this thread.

At 7/11/18 04:38 AM, SolidPantsSnake wrote:

At 7/11/18 03:26 AM, EdyKel wrote: Like to back that up? I've only seen a couple of cases, and most of them deal with Trump officials - and even that is nothing new.

Saw cases back in 2017 not only that, the judge in this case backed the bar. Not only that the judge had no problem with political discrimination. Just a regular every day guy in a MAGA hat not even an official. Nothing new is right.:

And? That deals with one case, and that shit has been going for decades, with both political sides - I remember the Obama years, with people actually getting fired for their support of him, through the gears they wore, or stickers on their cars. It's nothing fucking new. People have the right to deny service to people they don't like, which incidentally, is exactly what the Supreme court just supported with their recent case over a baker denying service to gays. Here's a better example of service being denied. But, Trump supporters are lucky, since they can remove their hat to blend in, but you can't say the same thing for most minorities.

Again, I'll ask you to back it up, not with incidental cases, but hard fucking numbers that are greater than what you are arguing against, and

Oh, and here's today's action's of a Trump supporter. I could post more,if you want. They seem to be daily occurrences.

What proof at all do you have that it was a trump supporter you don't even have a name FFS? She's a black woman from LA not some white guy from Kentucky, Very weak. You think that any racist is automatically a trump supporter, racism existed long before trump was even born, NVM him being in office.

That is part of the fucking daily rhetoric of Trump and the right, against immigrants, who often deny accountability for their words. The idea that the people people in that link who don't support the rhetoric coming from the right over immigrants is a laugh. They certainly didn't get if from the left.

Don't try to say silly shit when you know can't back it up.

I said you made a fair point, that means I agreed. No need for the hostility, hell you're less hostile over disagreeing. But maybe you just misread that as sarcasm.

Then I am sorry for my misunderstanding. I thought you were being sarcastic.

So no, it happens rarely, and I'm not going to include cases on the internet, or at a rallies, where it's hard to tell which side is harassing who more.

Happens rarely, sorry no. The SPLC themselves even started a category for it after the election. It was more common than antisemitism according to them. I also don't feel like hearing your pebbles to boulder nonsense you always default to.

Yes. It's rare. You just showed how rare it is in comparison to other shit that is being directed at other minority groups from the right. Those things are10 times greater in comparison if you combine them. Of course, you could combine swastikas with Trump supporters to make it 1x less, since I'm sure a sizable portion of Trump supporters could get a twofer by claiming they were harassed when they wore swastikas. Pebble, boulder, and you know that.

Because Jews have the right to complain about antisemitism regardless of how common it is, and by your pebbles and boulder logic we don't. So those trump supporters can complain about political discrimination, even though judges might disagree, and do nothing.

Never said they didn't, but it's odd when you have Jews who are more against Antifa than Neo Nazis, and white nationalists, even though the former fights against them.

At 7/11/18 04:56 AM, DragonLimbo wrote: Again, how much of the right is speaking violent rhetoric? Pointing out statistics is not violent rhetoric, even if you believe that it leads to violence.

I think Gario pretty much covered it. And a lot of those statistics come from white nationalist sites, and are very wrong.

Blacks are responsible for a disproportionate amount of gun deaths in the US, so don't even lie.

And according to statistics they are twice as likely to being poor, twice as likely being denied a job if up against a white job applicant, twice as likely to be racially profiled and stopped and searched, and twice as likely to be sent to jail than a white person for the same crime. What's the excuse for whites over being behind the biggest mass shootings?

At 7/11/18 12:13 PM, EdyKel wrote:

And according to statistics they are twice as likely to being poor, twice as likely being denied a job if up against a white job applicant, twice as likely to be racially profiled and stopped and searched, and twice as likely to be sent to jail than a white person for the same crime.

those are legitimate reasons for murder?

At 7/11/18 03:30 PM, billybobthwarten wrote:

At 7/11/18 12:13 PM, EdyKel wrote:

And according to statistics they are twice as likely to being poor, twice as likely being denied a job if up against a white job applicant, twice as likely to be racially profiled and stopped and searched, and twice as likely to be sent to jail than a white person for the same crime.

those are legitimate reasons for murder?

Nice, but I have simple rebuttal to that.

Socio economics always play a role in these things, unless you are suggesting that there is something inferior about the black race, like they are more stupid and violent, to justify those numbers...

At 7/11/18 03:49 PM, EdyKel wrote:

unless you are suggesting that there is something inferior about the black race, like they are more stupid and violent, to justify those numbers...

interesting, since i merely asked a question. sounds like you're making that suggestion.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/race-and-homicide-in-america-by-the-numbers
http://jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/Combo%20Gun%20Violence.jpg

Whites are not more frequent shooters.

At 7/11/18 09:04 PM, billybobthwarten wrote:

At 7/11/18 03:49 PM, EdyKel wrote:

unless you are suggesting that there is something inferior about the black race, like they are more stupid and violent, to justify those numbers...

interesting, since i merely asked a question. sounds like you're making that suggestion.

Son, don't play this false dilemma game with me, because I'll play back harder.

I gave you a very good reason for those numbers, going by statistics, to explain the reason for it. This is just basic, basic, socio economics 101. But you ignored that, and I just turned it around on you by giving you an ultimatum of whither you support what I said or that your views are racist if you can't find another plausible reason for it. So, you can accept it ,or you don't. The ball is in your court still. Or you can't just walk away. at this point. Ican play this false

At 7/11/18 10:40 PM, @DragonLimbo wrote:

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/race-and-homicide-in-america-by-the-numbers
http://jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/Combo%20Gun%20Violence.jpg

Whites are not more frequent shooters.

And why do you think that is?

At 7/12/18 12:04 AM, EdyKel wrote:

Son, don't play this false dilemma game with me, because I'll play back harder.

you put the perspective out there, flip it any way you wish.

i, personally, do not wish to discuss merits of one race over another, ever.

This is just basic, basic, socio economics 101.

cool basic story.

if you want to get real though, the real cause, democrats. champions of the poor and minorities for how long?

But you ignored that, and I just turned it around on you by giving you an ultimatum of whither you support what I said or that your views are racist

yes, you did that.

The ball is in your court still. Or you can't just walk away. at this point.

sure thing, ref.

At 7/12/18 04:39 AM, billybobthwarten wrote:

At 7/12/18 12:04 AM, EdyKel wrote:

Son, don't play this false dilemma game with me, because I'll play back harder.

you put the perspective out there, flip it any way you wish.

i, personally, do not wish to discuss merits of one race over another, ever.

Then why did you even respond If you didn't want to discuss race? Was it because of your insecurity over it, or you just wanted to troll me? Your choice.

At 7/12/18 11:25 AM, Sause wrote: “Honey why did you make me hit you”

I think we should rename this thread to "Sause want respect as a Trump supporter".

Canada's Hudson's Bay store drops Ivanka Trump fashion line

Country’s oldest department store says it will be ‘phasing out this brand through the fall based on its performance’

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/13/canada-hudsons-bay-ivanka-trump-fashion-line

At 7/11/18 03:26 AM, EdyKel wrote: ing who more.

Oh, and here's today's action's of a Trump supporter. I could post more,if you want. They seem to be daily occurrences.

did you just assume that it was a trump supporter?

Why are you claiming that this is a daily occurance?

What about the guy who assaulted a teenager for wearing a MAGA hat and yelling racial slurs?

I think Gario pretty much covered it. And a lot of those statistics come from white nationalist sites, and are very wrong.

Oh can you just fkn stop. That politifact articule links to an FBI statistic.Are you claiming that the FBI website is a white nationalist website? wtf?

Stop blaming all trump supporters for the cause of violence. One individual shithead who resorts to violence over political views are terrorists.

At 7/18/18 11:17 PM, Sequenced wrote:

At 7/11/18 03:26 AM, EdyKel wrote: ing who more.

Oh, and here's today's action's of a Trump supporter. I could post more,if you want. They seem to be daily occurrences.

did you just assume that it was a trump supporter?

Why are you claiming that this is a daily occurance?

Because I doubt white nationalist, or people who are anti-migrant, voted for Hillary. Trump's rhetoric has only created further tensions against immigrants, and other minorities, with his liberal use of statistics, and highlights of crimes from them, which has only created more animosity and hate towards them.

What about the guy who assaulted a teenager for wearing a MAGA hat and yelling racial slurs?

Assumed? You mean throwing some drink at him at him, and taking his hat, is your definition of assault, compared to a brick to the head? Also, I believe that the guy's mother wanted him to deported, and he was eventually arrested for the theft of a hat, not assault.

I think Gario pretty much covered it. And a lot of those statistics come from white nationalist sites, and are very wrong.

Oh can you just fkn stop. That politifact articule links to an FBI statistic.Are you claiming that the FBI website is a white nationalist website? wtf?

Stop blaming all trump supporters for the cause of violence. One individual shithead who resorts to violence over political views are terrorists.

Because, most of the violence does come from the far right, and that is what the FBI statistics show. And Trump's rhetoric has only excited them, which is why we see a rise in violence against minorities in the last couple of years. It's no fucking coincidence.

At 7/18/18 11:39 PM, EdyKel wrote:

At 7/18/18 11:17 PM, Sequenced wrote:

Because I doubt white nationalist, or people who are anti-migrant, voted for Hillary. Trump's rhetoric has only created further tensions against immigrants, and other minorities, with his liberal use of statistics, and highlights of crimes from them, which has only created more animosity and hate towards them.

I'm pretty sure most trump people are against illegal immigration. not immigration as whole.

So what if white nationalists vote for president? Trump denounced violence on multiple occasions.

What if communists vote for Obama? Does that make obama anti american? You literally can't control people's beliefs and who they vote for.

What about the guy who assaulted a teenager for wearing a MAGA hat and yelling racial slurs?

Assumed? You mean throwing some drink at him at him, and taking his hat, is your definition of assault, compared to a brick to the head?

both of these occurrences are assaults..

the only difference is you're assuming that that women was a trump supporter. Do you even know minorities can be extremely racist to each other? I see this shit all the time in st louis.

Also, I believe that the guy's mother wanted him to deported,

Like my earlier statement, minorities can be racist to each other.

Stop blaming all trump supporters for the cause of violence. One individual shithead who resorts to violence over political views are terrorists.

Because, most of the violence does come from the far right, and that is what the FBI statistics show. And Trump's rhetoric has only excited them, which is why we see a rise in violence against minorities in the last couple of years. It's no fucking coincidence.

Yeah. I don't agree with the violence from the far right. I also don't agree with violence from the far left. One doesn't justify the other.

At 7/18/18 11:50 PM, Sequenced wrote:

At 7/18/18 11:39 PM, EdyKel wrote:

At 7/18/18 11:17 PM, Sequenced wrote:

Because I doubt white nationalist, or people who are anti-migrant, voted for Hillary. Trump's rhetoric has only created further tensions against immigrants, and other minorities, with his liberal use of statistics, and highlights of crimes from them, which has only created more animosity and hate towards them.

I'm pretty sure most trump people are against illegal immigration. not immigration as whole.

I keep coming across Trump supporters around here that don't seem to care. They seem to think that immigrant threaten their way of life, and think they bring in a disproportionate amount of crime and problems to this country

So what if white nationalists vote for president? Trump denounced violence on multiple occasions.

He has a hard time denouncing them, and only does it begrudgingly when he gets flack from some of the people in his own administration, and from some right wing sites. And let's not forget that on the campaign trail he promoted violence against protestors, and opposition - including towards the media.

It doesn't really help that he just went over to Europe and denounced immigration there, claiming it undermines European culture. And he has made it clear with past comments that he doesn't like immigrants from Muslim countries, or from Mexico, or from Africa, but doesn't mind people from Finland... So, you know what he was talking about which excites white nationalist.

Also, the fact that Trump's parents were immigrant, or that he married two immigrant himself, from Europe, says a lot about his views on immigration, especially from where they come from.

What if communists vote for Obama? Does that make obama anti american? You literally can't control people's beliefs and who they vote for.

Did they vote for a pro-capitalist president like Obama? How many communist are there in this country? There may be a 100,000, maybe a million, in a population of 350 million, so it's unlikely that anyone really cares about them. On the other hand, according a poll,1 in 10 americans are sympathetic to the white nationalist cause, which is over30 million people. And we know what seems to excite Trump's base, more than the economy, non-white immigrants.

I was just reading an article today about his staunchest supporters, white Evangelists, half of them are fucking scared about the declining white population.

What about the guy who assaulted a teenager for wearing a MAGA hat and yelling racial slurs?

Assumed? You mean throwing some drink at him at him, and taking his hat, is your definition of assault, compared to a brick to the head?

both of these occurrences are assaults..

But the guy wasn't charged with assault, and I think you know which is worse and happens more often.

the only difference is you're assuming that that women was a trump supporter. Do you even know minorities can be extremely racist to each other? I see this shit all the time in st louis.

Who excited his base about the evils of immigrant, which leads to such foolish behavior? It's the same vitriol rhetoric from Christians which led to violence against gays.

And while there might be something that could be considered racism among minorities against their own race, it's incredible rare that it leads to violence against them. And I think you are confusing much of that racism as just hate, just like white people hate what they consider as white trash.

Also, I believe that the guy's mother wanted him to deported,

Like my earlier statement, minorities can be racist to each other.

Wasn't a minority who said that.

Stop blaming all trump supporters for the cause of violence. One individual shithead who resorts to violence over political views are terrorists.

Because, most of the violence does come from the far right, and that is what the FBI statistics show. And Trump's rhetoric has only excited them, which is why we see a rise in violence against minorities in the last couple of years. It's no fucking coincidence.

Yeah. I don't agree with the violence from the far right. I also don't agree with violence from the far left. One doesn't justify the other.

I don't agree with it either, but I don't have much sympathy if people want to fight each other, like Antifa and white nationalist. Nor do I care about small shit that has been going on for the the past couple of decades that you can barely call assault. Mostly, I only care when it affects innocent people, kids, or if it goes belong just school yard antics.

At 7/19/18 01:09 AM, EdyKel wrote: They seem to think that immigrant threaten their way of life, and think they bring in a disproportionate amount of crime and problems to this country

Well, look at what happened to the Native Americans…

At 7/19/18 01:09 AM, EdyKel wrote:

Assumed? You mean throwing some drink at him at him, and taking his hat, is your definition of assault, compared to a brick to the head?

both of these occurrences are assaults..

But the guy wasn't charged with assault, and I think you know which is worse and happens more often.

they're both assaults.

Wasn't a minority who said that.

are you sure?

A suspect, identified as 30-year-old Laquisha Jones, was arrested late Tuesday on a charge of assault with a deadly weapon, according to a statement from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. Jones is being held on $200,000 bail, according to online booking records.

she's a black women. lmao

At 7/19/18 08:16 AM, Sequenced wrote: Stuff

don't bother dude he drinks the social justice and identity politics kool-aid everyday.

At 7/19/18 08:16 AM, Sequenced wrote: she's a black women. lmao

My bad.

At 7/19/18 09:03 AM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

At 7/19/18 08:16 AM, Sequenced wrote: Stuff

don't bother dude he drinks the social justice and identity politics kool-aid everyday.

Man, you have been pestering me for the past few days. Are you really that desperate for attention?

At 7/19/18 11:43 AM, EdyKel wrote: Man, you have been pestering me for the past few days. Are you really that desperate for attention?

I actually work in batches at a time given my schedule. but if you want I can always indulge you're just giving me an excuse:

and people say I don't have a sense of humor.

At 7/19/18 01:05 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

At 7/19/18 11:43 AM, EdyKel wrote: Man, you have been pestering me for the past few days. Are you really that desperate for attention?

I actually work in batches at a time given my schedule. but if you want I can always indulge you're just giving me an excuse:

and people say I don't have a sense of humor.

Oh, my sense of humor is just fine. Didn't you read it from that post?

At 7/19/18 01:19 PM, EdyKel wrote: Oh, my sense of humor is just fine. Didn't you read it from that post?

the tone of text is pretty hard to read you can't get a obvious sarcastic or mildy bemused tone to it. unless its really accented with context.

At 7/20/18 09:14 AM, FireFoxxy wrote: Maxine's supporters continue to show their true colors.

Yeah, and I believe that was after thousands of death threats to the point she started claiming that she might be killed by Trump supporters. That was also the day the proud boys were going to show up, but failed to do so. While I don't agree with the flag burning, it is their ultimate right to free speech. Though, I am sure the right is gleefully reporting on it, claiming they are anti- american, which is sorta double standards when they underreport on groups like the proud boys,who could easily be considered anti-American, but try to get around it by claiming they are only anti-government, as if that changes anything.

At 7/20/18 09:53 AM, FireFoxxy wrote: The hypocrisy and double standards of the left wing media is unbelievable. Love how they call these groups as racist, anti-government, violent(which they are clearly not) yet they refuse to call antifa and other leftist protesters even one of these.

The left has pretty much attacked antifa, and renounced them, and it's hard to to distinguish such far right group like the Proud Boys as anything but white nationalist, who, in their charter, describes themselves as pro-western, which is very much a white culture. Also, I believe, in their charter, one of their requirements to becoming a member is you have o get into an altercation with Antifa, which is an anti-racist group. They also demand their members to mate with white woman and have more white kids, while not allowing them to watch pornography and masturbate - which they see as counter productive.

At 7/20/18 01:20 PM, SolidPantsSnake wrote:

I see many many everyday democrats who don't like them. I have seen very few people in a government position share the sentiment, and even fewer media personalities

Truth. Democrat elected officials mostly support or ignore them. Media ignore them or paint them in the kindest light imaginable.