Presidential Election 2016

2020-06-19 01:14:28

#5551

uziq: Member; +498|3719

oh please this is one of the most saccharine views you have ever expressed. you, who spends all day throwing around labels he can barely understand like ‘libtard’ and ‘socialist’, now wants to stress that ‘we’re all just human!!!!’

that’s a very convenient line for a white conservative to take during an era of BLM protests. very handy. in fact, suddenly having this access to hippie-acid consciousness really conveniently allows you to paint the BLM protestors as some warped, special-interest group who are only trying to divide society. neat!

you’re a dishonest phoney. i’m sure you’ve spent your whole life on long island looking at everyone as ‘just humans, maaaan, part of one great family’.

file this as example #2884619 of ‘white people who’d rather forget about race’.

Last edited by uziq (2020-06-19 01:17:05)

2020-06-19 06:22:47

#5552

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5625|London, England

uziq wrote:
oh please this is one of the most saccharine views you have ever expressed. you, who spends all day throwing around labels he can barely understand like ‘libtard’ and ‘socialist’, now wants to stress that ‘we’re all just human!!!!’

that’s a very convenient line for a white conservative to take during an era of BLM protests. very handy. in fact, suddenly having this access to hippie-acid consciousness really conveniently allows you to paint the BLM protestors as some warped, special-interest group who are only trying to divide society. neat!

you’re a dishonest phoney. i’m sure you’ve spent your whole life on long island looking at everyone as ‘just humans, maaaan, part of one great family’.

file this as example #2884619 of ‘white people who’d rather forget about race’.

It's how I was raised. Growing up in the 80s everyone was taught to be colorblind, that we're all equal, and should be treated equal. It's only recently that identity politics has come to the surface and gone mainstream and now being colorblind is considered a form of racism, because now it strips people of their identity. Identity politics is divisive on purpose. It divides people into grievance groups based on superficial characteristics like skin color, or inherent characteristics like sex. It divides based on whether someone has a disability. It is absolutely heinous. Instead of de-emphasizing differences between individuals, it heightens them. It causes friction. It causes racism.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2020-06-19 06:25:17

#5553

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6373|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:
From day 1 he got flak, absolutely. The same as Trump has been opposed.

The difference is that with a president like Clinton, when his party lost control of Congress, he at least made efforts to pass bipartisan legislation. When Obama lost the House and then the Senate, he was too proud to bend his neck and accept that he would have to give up some of his agenda in order to attain his larger goals. He instead wrote hundreds of executive orders, which are easy to overturn. He was praised by liberals for not compromising, but the result is his legacy is being erased. Unilateral action rarely works out.

So how much has any Republican President 'bent his neck' to attain larger goals? Has it ever happened?
Is Trump doing it now?
Wasn't Trump's very first act to try and tear up Obama's signature bill, Obamacare?

Isn't it the case that whenever a Republican is in all we hear is "He's the commander in chief, he was elected fair and square, the democrats need to get with the program and support the president" but when a democrat is in "we're going to fight every bill tooth and nail because its our duty to america"?

Is there any point arguing with you if all you do is ignore whats in front of you and parrot from your right-wing born again conservative blog rants?

Fuck Israel

2020-06-19 06:33:52

#5554

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5625|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:
From day 1 he got flak, absolutely. The same as Trump has been opposed.

The difference is that with a president like Clinton, when his party lost control of Congress, he at least made efforts to pass bipartisan legislation. When Obama lost the House and then the Senate, he was too proud to bend his neck and accept that he would have to give up some of his agenda in order to attain his larger goals. He instead wrote hundreds of executive orders, which are easy to overturn. He was praised by liberals for not compromising, but the result is his legacy is being erased. Unilateral action rarely works out.
So how much has any Republican President 'bent his neck' to attain larger goals? Has it ever happened?
Is Trump doing it now?
Wasn't Trump's very first act to try and tear up Obama's signature bill, Obamacare?

Isn't it the case that whenever a Republican is in all we hear is "He's the commander in chief, he was elected fair and square, the democrats need to get with the program and support the president" but when a democrat is in "we're going to fight every bill tooth and nail because its our duty to america"?

Is there any point arguing with you if all you do is ignore whats in front of you and parrot from your right-wing born again conservative blog rants?

I would say that right up until about 2006 there was a degree of civility and attempts at bipartisanship. Since then, there has been open hostility towards nay form of reconciliation and bipartisanship. The impeachment of Bill Clinton really did a number on our political class, and many of the people that are in the Senate now were in the Senate then as well. These people hold grudges. Maybe it will get better after they all retire or die off, but I doubt it.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2020-06-19 07:23:40

#5555

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6373|eXtreme to the maX

I don't remember either of the Bushes attempting any bipartisan anything.

Fuck Israel

2020-06-19 07:28:08

#5556

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5625|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't remember either of the Bushes attempting any bipartisan anything.

Bush Sr. caved in on tax increases to the Democrats and lost his re-election bid because of it.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2020-06-19 07:49:01

#5557

uziq: Member; +498|3719

Jay wrote:
uziq wrote:
oh please this is one of the most saccharine views you have ever expressed. you, who spends all day throwing around labels he can barely understand like ‘libtard’ and ‘socialist’, now wants to stress that ‘we’re all just human!!!!’

that’s a very convenient line for a white conservative to take during an era of BLM protests. very handy. in fact, suddenly having this access to hippie-acid consciousness really conveniently allows you to paint the BLM protestors as some warped, special-interest group who are only trying to divide society. neat!

you’re a dishonest phoney. i’m sure you’ve spent your whole life on long island looking at everyone as ‘just humans, maaaan, part of one great family’.

file this as example #2884619 of ‘white people who’d rather forget about race’.
It's how I was raised. Growing up in the 80s everyone was taught to be colorblind, that we're all equal, and should be treated equal. It's only recently that identity politics has come to the surface and gone mainstream and now being colorblind is considered a form of racism, because now it strips people of their identity. Identity politics is divisive on purpose. It divides people into grievance groups based on superficial characteristics like skin color, or inherent characteristics like sex. It divides based on whether someone has a disability. It is absolutely heinous. Instead of de-emphasizing differences between individuals, it heightens them. It causes friction. It causes racism.

shure, there was no racism, homophobia or ableism in the ‘80s. rock on dude!

2020-06-19 08:06:18

#5558

SuperJail Warden: Gone Forever; +644|3987

Jay wasn't an 80's kid. He was a 90's. I was born in 1990 but I am an early 2000's kid. I barely remember the first 9 years of life.

2020-06-19 08:16:12

#5559

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7039|PNW

I grew up (partly) in the 80s. Racism was spoonfed to kids at different intensities through peers, family, and the media, and fostered when displayed. This was true of the 90s as well. It seems like a silly angle for Jay to press.

There are people who were "taught to be colorblind" in the 80s who will still cross the street to avoid passing the most suburban looking black man walking his beagle on the sidewalk. Yes, even ones who think We Are the World is great stuff everyone should live by. Ho-hum.

2020-06-19 09:25:02

#5560

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5625|London, England

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I grew up (partly) in the 80s. Racism was spoonfed to kids at different intensities through peers, family, and the media, and fostered when displayed. This was true of the 90s as well. It seems like a silly angle for Jay to press.

There are people who were "taught to be colorblind" in the 80s who will still cross the street to avoid passing the most suburban looking black man walking his beagle on the sidewalk. Yes, even ones who think We Are the World is great stuff everyone should live by. Ho-hum.

I'm not saying the past was perfect and all kumbaya and everyone living together in peace. I'm saying that it was a good message, and a good ideal, and we were making progress towards that goal. It is now being completely unraveled by the identity politics crowd that are trying to divide people into political blocs based on superficial traits. Right now black nationalists are being patted on the back and told that their cause is noble and just. The reaction to black nationalism will be greater white nationalism. It could eventually spiral out of control. Racism begets racism, especially when you change the definition of racism to so that only white people can be racist, and all minority groups enter a consequence free environment.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2020-06-19 09:41:12

#5561

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7039|PNW

I don't think that's your viewpoint, that the 80s or 90s were perfect. I just think it was a weird angle, considering it didn't really work. "We're all colorblind now but let's continue to do racist stuff for funsies or just subconsciously."

White nationalist militia-types who rally around stuff like Ruby Rudge and Waco (and more recently Heemeyer) are fond of saying that there's a limit to how much people can take. It honestly seems like a bit of a double standard when the same sorts show up with beer guts and AR-15s to intimidate other people who are protesting against perceived injustices like excessive force and violent authoritarianism.

Meanwhile, from the sidelines shouts a concerned citizen, "be careful, you'll anger the white nationalists!"

2020-06-19 09:51:31

#5562

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5625|London, England

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I don't think that's your viewpoint, that the 80s or 90s were perfect. I just think it was a weird angle, considering it didn't really work. "We're all colorblind now but let's continue to do racist stuff for funsies or just subconsciously."

White nationalist militia-types who rally around stuff like Ruby Rudge and Waco (and more recently Heemeyer) are fond of saying that there's a limit to how much people can take. It honestly seems like a bit of a double standard when the same sorts show up with beer guts and AR-15s to intimidate other people who are protesting against perceived injustices like excessive force and violent authoritarianism.

Meanwhile, from the sidelines shouts a concerned citizen, "be careful, you'll anger the white nationalists!"

Did the people with beer guts and AR-15s hurt anyone or burn down any cities?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2020-06-19 10:12:14

#5563

SuperJail Warden: Gone Forever; +644|3987

Jay's solution to racism is like his solution to COVID, poverty, climate change, education, and crime: do nothing at all.

2020-06-19 10:15:28

#5564

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7039|PNW

@jay: Did you miss the recent action involving the murderous boogaloo man and his blood ink?

Maybe Porkchops McGee from the Michigan Fighting Weevils isn't doing much other than standing around with his sloppily-slung rifle giving black people the stink eye and being a living monument to implicit threat.

But a person holding a sign or carrying groceries or accompanying her parents is doing even less.

Yet here you are (in your occasionally roundabout manner) once again lumping them into looters and rioters. "Did people with beer guts and AR-15s burn down any cities." Please.

2020-06-19 10:22:39

#5565

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5625|London, England

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
@jay: Did you miss the recent action involving the murderous boogaloo man and his blood ink?

Maybe Porkchops McGee from the Michigan Fighting Weevils isn't doing much other than standing around with his sloppily-slung rifle giving black people the stink eye and being a living monument to implicit threat.

But a person holding a sign or carrying groceries or accompanying her parents is doing even less.

Yet here you are (in your occasionally roundabout manner) once again lumping them into looters and rioters. "Did people with beer guts and AR-15s burn down any cities." Please.

Porkchops McGee wasn't out protesting in favor of racism. He was out there trying to get his business reopened so he could feed his kids. Nothing about the anti-shutdown protests had anything to do with racism.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2020-06-19 10:32:51

#5566

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7039|PNW

Militia groups are responding to protesters and being involved in protests, though. In recent days:

Police detain armed militia members after man is shot at Albuquerque protest
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/polic … r-BB15xraS

also to summarize, re:

"White nationalism isn't a threat here, but take care to not anger the white nationalists."

k

2020-06-19 12:10:00

#5567

uziq: Member; +498|3719

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta … 1156016130

Any protesters, anarchists, agitators, looters or lowlifes who are going to Oklahoma please understand, you will not be treated like you have been in New York, Seattle, or Minneapolis. It will be a much different scene!

that's a president of the united states literally threatening violence against people using their first amendment right.

frightening stuff.

but remember it's not trump's fault that politics is so divisive. that scumbag obama started it!

2020-06-19 15:36:37

#5568

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5625|London, England

uziq wrote:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1273972301156016130

Any protesters, anarchists, agitators, looters or lowlifes who are going to Oklahoma please understand, you will not be treated like you have been in New York, Seattle, or Minneapolis. It will be a much different scene!
that's a president of the united states literally threatening violence against people using their first amendment right.

frightening stuff.

but remember it's not trump's fault that politics is so divisive. that scumbag obama started it!

Are you being willfully ignorant?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2020-06-19 16:01:42

#5569

uziq: Member; +498|3719

he is grouping together legal protestors with antifas and rioters.

nevermind that rioting and antifa activity has been at a minimum.

protestors have the right to show up wherever the fuck they want without an incited militia or presidential guard being threatened upon them.

2020-06-19 17:05:56

#5570

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5625|London, England

uziq wrote:
he is grouping together legal protestors with antifas and rioters.

nevermind that rioting and antifa activity has been at a minimum.

protestors have the right to show up wherever the fuck they want without an incited militia or presidential guard being threatened upon them.

When he specifically mentions Minneapolis, NYC and Seattle he is talking about the rioting, looting and arson. Lots of places had peaceful protests. Those cities were particularly bad.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2020-06-19 17:54:20

#5571

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,980|6899|949

What about when he specifically mentions protesters?

2020-06-19 18:14:17

#5572

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7039|PNW

Handy reference:

2020-06-20 01:48:59

#5573

uziq: Member; +498|3719

Jay wrote:
uziq wrote:
he is grouping together legal protestors with antifas and rioters.

nevermind that rioting and antifa activity has been at a minimum.

protestors have the right to show up wherever the fuck they want without an incited militia or presidential guard being threatened upon them.
When he specifically mentions Minneapolis, NYC and Seattle he is talking about the rioting, looting and arson. Lots of places had peaceful protests. Those cities were particularly bad.

the president named protestors in his tweet. protesting is not illegal.

words have meanings, jay. how many originalists has trump appointed to the supreme court? lol. republicans are oddly literal when it suits them but like to ‘read between the lines’ for the benefit of trump.

no president should be making vague threats of violence against protestors. it is completely shocking.

2020-06-20 01:52:21

#5574

uziq: Member; +498|3719

jay you are the worst libertarian i have ever encountered in my life. and they’re already a pretty piss-poor field of wannabes tbh.

the ‘so what? if police shoot you on your porch’ and ‘are you dumb? he means the other protestors’ libertarian. oh to have such lofty ideals!

2020-06-20 06:49:29

#5575

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6373|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't remember either of the Bushes attempting any bipartisan anything.
Bush Sr. caved in on tax increases to the Democrats and lost his re-election bid because of it.

Its not as if he 'reached out' to them he had no choice, bad luck for him.

Give us an example of a Republican 'reaching out' to the Democrats, then compare with all the effort Obama put into a consensus on gun control after Sandy Hook and the total stonewalling from the Republicans.

Fuck Israel

BF2S Forums Presidential Election 2016

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

uziq wrote:

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Board footer