Liberals
Re: Liberals
Moira was a bisexual New Yorker who lived with both her boyfriend and her girlfriend and everyone got along just fine. But yeah, she and Skyhawk do share the habit of not knowing what the fuck they are talking about and trying to project that failing on to their opponent.
__
You can't hang a man for killing a woman who's trying to steal his horse.
You can't hang a man for killing a woman who's trying to steal his horse.
Re: Liberals
That I don't consider publicly keeping a record of quotes from yourself to be a sign of narcissism. However I don't think it's a sign of being an asshole.Derived Absurdity wrote:I'm putting words in your mouth, huh? And what words would those be?
I worded it poorly yesterday; guess I was tired.
Common sense is another word for prejudice.
- Cassius Clay
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2419
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 8:03 pm
Re: Liberals
Moira was actually a 54 year old fat dude from Oklahoma.
__
You can't hang a man for killing a woman who's trying to steal his horse.
You can't hang a man for killing a woman who's trying to steal his horse.
Re: Liberals
I disliked Moira way before it was cool. Just sayin'.
WORDS IN THE HEART CANNOT BE TAKEN
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:07 am
Re: Liberals
You must be tired a lot.phe_de wrote:That I don't consider publicly keeping a record of quotes from yourself to be a sign of narcissism. However I don't think it's a sign of being an asshole.Derived Absurdity wrote:I'm putting words in your mouth, huh? And what words would those be?
I worded it poorly yesterday; guess I was tired.
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 1289
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:20 am
Re: Liberals
CashRules wrote:Moira was a bisexual New Yorker who lived with both her boyfriend and her girlfriend and everyone got along just fine.
At least one of those people is hawt.CashRules wrote:Moira was actually a 54 year old fat dude from Oklahoma.
Re: Liberals
aels wrote:I disliked Moira way before it was cool. Just sayin'.
Samsies! She seemed desperate to prove that she was as smart or smarter than everyone else.
Re: Liberals
And I never, ever bought the 'Oh, I'm a hot redhead 18 year old bisexual with two live-in partners'. STOP THAT. YOU ARE NOT.
WORDS IN THE HEART CANNOT BE TAKEN
Re: Liberals
Yah, pretty much.aels wrote:And I never, ever bought the 'Oh, I'm a hot redhead 18 year old bisexual with two live-in partners'. STOP THAT. YOU ARE NOT.
- Cassius Clay
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2419
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 8:03 pm
Re: Liberals
On the topic of old forum members that some people have a problem with... what was the name of that one woman who always had drama with Brandon? The one who was an active Wikipedia contributor, and got freaked out when Brandon mentioned he knew which user she was?
Re: Liberals
I would not be surprised to find out that Malk and Moira are the same person.
__
You can't hang a man for killing a woman who's trying to steal his horse.
You can't hang a man for killing a woman who's trying to steal his horse.
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 1289
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:20 am
Re: Liberals
Malkatraz
Re: Liberals
Who was moira?
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 1289
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:20 am
Re: Liberals
She was a 51-year-old man from Oklahoma and a 19-year-old bisexual girl from New York with two live in partners and a broken leg who knew everything. Castor had a crush on him/her.
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:07 am
Re: Liberals
Lol, it's happening again. More violence at Trump rallies, more liberals condemning it. The exact same people who have literally been saying Trump is going to be the end of the world don't want anyone to actually try to stop him. I honestly don't get how these people function, I don't know what they want.
Re: Liberals
Because violence at Trump appearances is such an effective method of stopping him. . . .?Derived Absurdity wrote:he exact same people who have literally been saying Trump is going to be the end of the world don't want anyone to actually try to stop him.
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:07 am
Re: Liberals
It's not. But they're not complaining that it's ineffective, they're complaining that people are doing it at all.
I just don't get how, if you say for almost a year that Trump represents an existential threat to Hispanics and Muslims and that he would destroy the world and that he's the end of democracy and that he's Hitler/Mussolini/Mao/Satan all rolled into one, you would be mad at some people sort of overreacting in an attempt to stop him. If he's so bad, why is it okay to just wing it and hope for the best on Election Day? Why shouldn't you do whatever you think is necessary to stop him?
Because they're not complaining that it doesn't work, they're complaining that it's violent at all. I was always told that violence is okay if it's against something that represents an existential threat to you. Then it's basically self-defense. Violence was necessary to defeat Germany, it was necessary to defeat the communists, it was necessary to defeat slavery, etc., and only hippies who don't understand how the real world works would disagree. So why is violence against Trump and his supporters not necessary, if he's as bad as everyone says he is? Lol, people defend Hillary Clinton's violent record by saying violence is sometimes necessary and then look at Trump rallies and say violence is never ever ever necessary. It just seems like some blatant double standards to me.
I just don't get how, if you say for almost a year that Trump represents an existential threat to Hispanics and Muslims and that he would destroy the world and that he's the end of democracy and that he's Hitler/Mussolini/Mao/Satan all rolled into one, you would be mad at some people sort of overreacting in an attempt to stop him. If he's so bad, why is it okay to just wing it and hope for the best on Election Day? Why shouldn't you do whatever you think is necessary to stop him?
Because they're not complaining that it doesn't work, they're complaining that it's violent at all. I was always told that violence is okay if it's against something that represents an existential threat to you. Then it's basically self-defense. Violence was necessary to defeat Germany, it was necessary to defeat the communists, it was necessary to defeat slavery, etc., and only hippies who don't understand how the real world works would disagree. So why is violence against Trump and his supporters not necessary, if he's as bad as everyone says he is? Lol, people defend Hillary Clinton's violent record by saying violence is sometimes necessary and then look at Trump rallies and say violence is never ever ever necessary. It just seems like some blatant double standards to me.
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:07 am
Re: Liberals
Derived Absurdity wrote:https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/738614060778815488
![no [no]](./images/smilies/no.gif)
I never called Trump fascist. But I know that physically harming a politician and his/her supporters is a fascist tactic.
Basically, Michael Tracey is advocating fascism to prevent fascism.
Common sense is another word for prejudice.
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:07 am
Re: Liberals
I don't think you know what fascism means.
But that's okay, no one else does either.
But that's okay, no one else does either.
Re: Liberals
True that.Derived Absurdity wrote:I don't think you know what fascism means.
But that's okay, no one else does either.
I guess I used "fascist" and "violently authoritarian" as synonyms.
Common sense is another word for prejudice.
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:07 am
Re: Liberals
Again, if someone represents an existential threat to you, I don't think advocating violence against him or her would be "violently authoritarian" as it would be just basic self-defense.
Re: Liberals
Except that in this case, it would play right into the narrative that right wing nuts like to spin about being bullied victims of liberals. I think the best weaponry against Trump is to deflate him and his supporters through cruel mockery.Derived Absurdity wrote:Again, if someone represents an existential threat to you, I don't think advocating violence against him or her would be "violently authoritarian" as it would be just basic self-defense.
Re: Liberals
I don't think the pundits who criticize trump while simultaneously denouncing the violence at his rallies are guilty of having a double standard per se; they're being hyperbolic when comparing him to [insert evil dictator here], and they know they're being hyperbolic.
Violence is acceptable only very rarely, and I don't think Trump represents anything close to enough of a threat to warrant advocating violence.
Violence is acceptable only very rarely, and I don't think Trump represents anything close to enough of a threat to warrant advocating violence.
...the only people for me are the mad ones...
-
- Ultimate Poster
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:07 am
Re: Liberals
Eh, sorry, that article isn't really too convincing. If there are specific points you want me to address let me know, but I'll give my overall thoughts on the matter:
Trump may be a giant asshole, all his supporters may be giant assholes, but assholes are allowed freedom of speech, assembly, and association too. If a group of anti-Trumpers want to peacefully protest outside of a rally then that is their right. If Trump supporters attack them then the aggressors should be arrested and vice-versa.
But to think that in order to protect against some perceived threat against civil liberties we get carte blanche to violate the actual civil liberties of others through violence is, to me, non-sensical bullshit.
Now, I don't want to be misconstrued, I hate Trump, but to me the only thing that separates him from other politicians is that he isn't pc.![giveup [giveup]](./images/smilies/giveup.gif)
Trump may be a giant asshole, all his supporters may be giant assholes, but assholes are allowed freedom of speech, assembly, and association too. If a group of anti-Trumpers want to peacefully protest outside of a rally then that is their right. If Trump supporters attack them then the aggressors should be arrested and vice-versa.
But to think that in order to protect against some perceived threat against civil liberties we get carte blanche to violate the actual civil liberties of others through violence is, to me, non-sensical bullshit.
Now, I don't want to be misconstrued, I hate Trump, but to me the only thing that separates him from other politicians is that he isn't pc.
![giveup [giveup]](./images/smilies/giveup.gif)
...the only people for me are the mad ones...