|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 10, 2016 15:47:11 GMT -5
That old man beaten up by "Hillary supporters"? It was a traffic incident. Not that I condone beating up someone over a traffic incident, of course. That's barbaric behaviour.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Nov 10, 2016 16:13:10 GMT -5
Protesting =/= rioting. There's been little to no violence. There's been worse following sporting events. Articles on violent Trump protesters being assaulted here, here, here and here. So you have two conservative London tabloids. A story that's been debunked. And Michelle Malkin's Twitter accumulator. Great sources.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Nov 10, 2016 16:21:26 GMT -5
Quoting Malkin is like going to Charles Manson for youth-counseling advice.
|
|
|
Post by Lolatadatodo on Nov 10, 2016 16:42:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Nov 10, 2016 16:45:14 GMT -5
I'm not seeing how that's offensive. Sure, I can say black people moving forward, but "The Black Vote" is a term used by basically every political pundit out there. Minority turn out is essential to every election. And for some reason, many didn't show up to the polls. Broward County is a predominantly black area that the Dems count on HEAVILY to combat the blue collar whites of the panhandle. And even though the county remained blue, they didn't get the turnout initially expected. That you don't see how it's offensive is unsurprising. I guess kids who are called "Fatty," "Four-Eyes," and "Pimple-Puss" also should just grin and bear it, since the schooolyard bully who gave them those nicknames doesn't see how it's offensive. Using "black" as an adjective is far different from using it as a noun. It's called nuance. As for the conclusion you're drawing about turnout problems, it's clear that you either didn't read or understand my and now Slam's references to the gutting of the Voting Rights Act and Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion, in which he wisely informed us that "our country has changed. While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.” Because so much has changed, as this election proved. Heeding Roberts' words, a number of states, like Texas, North Carolina and Wisconsin (northernmost fiefdom of the Koch Empire), realizing that "current conditions" had apparently changed much of the US into an economic and political Paradise for "certain voters," moved to immediately make it that much tougher for "certain voters" to exercise their right to cast a vote by demanding outlandish ID requirements, closing polling places and redistricting precincts that were notable for the number of votes received by a certain party. Come on, Warlover, either step up your game or run back under the bridge and get back to threatening the Gruff brothers. Good lord What doesn't offend you guys? I've never seen such a gathering of ultra-PC snowflakes in my life.
|
|
|
Post by Lolatadatodo on Nov 10, 2016 16:47:47 GMT -5
That you don't see how it's offensive is unsurprising. I guess kids who are called "Fatty," "Four-Eyes," and "Pimple-Puss" also should just grin and bear it, since the schooolyard bully who gave them those nicknames doesn't see how it's offensive. Using "black" as an adjective is far different from using it as a noun. It's called nuance. As for the conclusion you're drawing about turnout problems, it's clear that you either didn't read or understand my and now Slam's references to the gutting of the Voting Rights Act and Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion, in which he wisely informed us that "our country has changed. While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.” Because so much has changed, as this election proved. Heeding Roberts' words, a number of states, like Texas, North Carolina and Wisconsin (northernmost fiefdom of the Koch Empire), realizing that "current conditions" had apparently changed much of the US into an economic and political Paradise for "certain voters," moved to immediately make it that much tougher for "certain voters" to exercise their right to cast a vote by demanding outlandish ID requirements, closing polling places and redistricting precincts that were notable for the number of votes received by a certain party. Come on, Warlover, either step up your game or run back under the bridge and get back to threatening the Gruff brothers. Good lord What doesn't offend you guys? I've never seen such a gathering of ultra-PC snowflakes in my life. You literally used Bill Clinton to deflect from Trump's misogyny. Because it hurt your feels to talk about it and admit it. Who is the special snowflake again?
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 10, 2016 16:49:31 GMT -5
Bostonians had no business throwing that tea in the water. They should been home reconciling themselves with the government. Yes. They should. Total waste of good tea.
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Nov 10, 2016 16:51:17 GMT -5
Good lord What doesn't offend you guys? I've never seen such a gathering of ultra-PC snowflakes in my life. You literally used Bill Clinton to deflect from Trump's misogyny. Because it hurt your feels to talk about it and admit it. Who is the special snowflake again? Huh? Yeah, Trump is a misogynist. I don't dispute this. I just find it comical how offended some dems are by it while they champion politicians like Bill Clinton and JFK.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 10, 2016 17:06:20 GMT -5
Huh? Yeah, Trump is a misogynist. I don't dispute this. I just find it comical how offended some dems are by it while they champion politicians like Bill Clinton and JFK. Do you? I guess it is laughable when you have the most valued life on the planet. You get to sit back and laugh and gloat and mock because he did not make light of sexually assaulting your gender, mock your disability, insult people of your religion, or threaten to deport your people. You know absolutely nothing about his life. Making assumptions about it doesn't strengthen your case.
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Nov 10, 2016 17:07:05 GMT -5
Huh? Yeah, Trump is a misogynist. I don't dispute this. I just find it comical how offended some dems are by it while they champion politicians like Bill Clinton and JFK. Do you? I guess it is laughable when you have the most valued life on the planet. You get to sit back and laugh and gloat and mock because he did not make light of sexually assaulting your gender, mock your disability, insult people of your religion, or threaten to deport your people. *edit* (Deleted post)*edit* Yes, it's laughable. Comedy gold, actually. If you can't spot the hypocrisy in it, then I don't even know what else to say. And there we go again with the "all Trump supporters are racists, misogynists, and evil" rhetoric. Haha good stuff
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Nov 10, 2016 17:08:12 GMT -5
Honestly, I don't know you well enough to make that kind of judgment about your thought process. You're relatively new here. That's not a criticism, but rather a statement of fact. There are a lot of people here who I know from our previous home at CBR and whose basic personalities (at least online) are pretty well-known to me. Personally, I'm glad you're here, because you bring perspectives that are in much-needed supply around here, as a woman, as a mother, and as a mother of a disabled child. Just from reading your posts, I understand where your fears come from, and I don't believe you're naive enough to believe that everything was going to be instantly better if Hillary had been elected. However, I think you, and others, are overreacting as to how bad things are going to be, particularly in relation to how they are now. My father has been making racist, sexist, misogynistic, and homophobic statements for decades, long before Donald Trump was anything more than a real estate developer in New York and New Jersey, and he did so because he's a deeply flawed individual because of his upbringing, not because anyone told him it was acceptable to express those things or acted similarly. This election didn't bring these people out, it merely put the focus on them, and anything, be it home invasions or child abductions or police shootings or whatever, will seem worse when enough scrutiny is put on them, because that is what the media will be discussing and Facebookers will be sharing and folks will talking about at the water cooler at work. If you need somewhere to talk about it, this is a good place, and if you need someone to talk to, feel free to message me. The future may not be as good as you'd hoped, but it probably won't be as bad as you fear today. Blessings to you and yours. Richard As the "other", I suppose I should try to defend myself. I guess because I've established certain aspects of my personal life here, I am no longer visible to you. Thanks for making me feel welcome. So you understand where our fear comes from? Uh-huh. It's difficult for me to avoid divulging some really personal information here to respond to that. If there's a chance that sexual violence has or may increase due to a segment of the country that feels enabled by the election of Trump, I have the right to be scared that it might, whether I've lived through it before or not. I have genuinely felt less safe this year, in a town that I've spent a significant portion of my life. Not simply from reading things online, but from actual daily interactions with people in my community and even certain establishments here. When you're a part of society that is more likely to be considered "prey" or simply "lesser", you will understand the feeling that I'm talking about and when it increases. It is not imaginary. It is not childish. It is difficult for me to sum up with words or slogans to satisfy the very people who are usually responsible for causing me to feel this fear. If Clinton was the president elect right now I would actually be more worried about my personal safety, because I live in a very pro-Trump-Pence rural area, and there would no doubt be even more anger than there already is. And hey, maybe my spoiled little *** should get out there and protest in front of my town hall where I will probably be pelted with half-filled, open plastic bottles tossed from passing cars; which has actually happened to me twice this year; while simply walking. This is why I do all my errands two towns over now, just from the fear of one of these situations escalating. I wrote a long response, but upon second thought, I deleted it, because I'm not going to escalate this discussion. You obviously have experienced something that is causing this fear in your life of the future under President Trump, and there is nothing to be gained by dissecting it. The one thing I will address is your first comment. My use of the term "others" was not in veiled reference to you, but rather to individuals I have seen on CNN since the election speaking about the results. I meant no slight, and if you felt that I was being unwelcoming or treating you as invisible, I apologize for hurting you, as that was not my intent. I'm done with this thread as of now, as I don't see any worthwhile debate happening, just a tearing of the bonds between individuals on the forum that may never be repaired. I don't want to be the cause of any further fracturing of our community, as this is too important a place for me, so I'm going to gracefully bow out and encourage others to do the same. Dian Sometimes, I'm sorry for whatever happened to you to cause this pain, and I'm sorry you are now living in fear. I can't do anything to change your past, but I will pray that your pain is lessened and eventually forgotten, and that your fears are never made manifest by actual events. Blessings, Richard
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Nov 10, 2016 17:17:24 GMT -5
As the "other", I suppose I should try to defend myself. I guess because I've established certain aspects of my personal life here, I am no longer visible to you. Thanks for making me feel welcome. So you understand where our fear comes from? Uh-huh. It's difficult for me to avoid divulging some really personal information here to respond to that. If there's a chance that sexual violence has or may increase due to a segment of the country that feels enabled by the election of Trump, I have the right to be scared that it might, whether I've lived through it before or not. I have genuinely felt less safe this year, in a town that I've spent a significant portion of my life. Not simply from reading things online, but from actual daily interactions with people in my community and even certain establishments here. When you're a part of society that is more likely to be considered "prey" or simply "lesser", you will understand the feeling that I'm talking about and when it increases. It is not imaginary. It is not childish. It is difficult for me to sum up with words or slogans to satisfy the very people who are usually responsible for causing me to feel this fear. If Clinton was the president elect right now I would actually be more worried about my personal safety, because I live in a very pro-Trump-Pence rural area, and there would no doubt be even more anger than there already is. And hey, maybe my spoiled little *** should get out there and protest in front of my town hall where I will probably be pelted with half-filled, open plastic bottles tossed from passing cars; which has actually happened to me twice this year; while simply walking. This is why I do all my errands two towns over now, just from the fear of one of these situations escalating. I wrote a long response, but upon second thought, I deleted it, because I'm not going to escalate this discussion. You obviously have experienced something that is causing this fear in your life of the future under President Trump, and there is nothing to be gained by dissecting it. The one thing I will address is your first comment. My use of the term "others" was not in veiled reference to you, but rather to individuals I have seen on CNN since the election speaking about the results. I meant no slight, and if you felt that I was being unwelcoming or treating you as invisible, I apologize for hurting you, as that was not my intent. I'm done with this thread as of now, as I don't see any worthwhile debate happening, just a tearing of the bonds between individuals on the forum that may never be repaired. I don't want to be the cause of any further fracturing of our community, as this is too important a place for me, so I'm going to gracefully bow out and encourage others to do the same. Dian Sometimes, I'm sorry for whatever happened to you to cause this pain, and I'm sorry you are now living in fear. I can't do anything to change your past, but I will pray that your pain is lessened and eventually forgotten, and that your fears are never made manifest by actual events. Blessings, Richard Well said I'm just going to keep away from this thread. I realize the vast majority of the posters here aren't only liberal, but extremely so. So I'll just bow out and let the "Hillary good, Trump bad" discussion commence.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Nov 10, 2016 17:38:27 GMT -5
That you don't see how it's offensive is unsurprising. I guess kids who are called "Fatty," "Four-Eyes," and "Pimple-Puss" also should just grin and bear it, since the schooolyard bully who gave them those nicknames doesn't see how it's offensive. Using "black" as an adjective is far different from using it as a noun. It's called nuance. As for the conclusion you're drawing about turnout problems, it's clear that you either didn't read or understand my and now Slam's references to the gutting of the Voting Rights Act and Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion, in which he wisely informed us that "our country has changed. While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.” Because so much has changed, as this election proved. Heeding Roberts' words, a number of states, like Texas, North Carolina and Wisconsin (northernmost fiefdom of the Koch Empire), realizing that "current conditions" had apparently changed much of the US into an economic and political Paradise for "certain voters," moved to immediately make it that much tougher for "certain voters" to exercise their right to cast a vote by demanding outlandish ID requirements, closing polling places and redistricting precincts that were notable for the number of votes received by a certain party. Come on, Warlover, either step up your game or run back under the bridge and get back to threatening the Gruff brothers. Good lord What doesn't offend you guys? I've never seen such a gathering of ultra-PC snowflakes in my life. Or it could be that people would like the same kind of decorum that you would teach your four-year old child. So he doesn't blurt out every ridiculous offensive thing that comes into his mind. At least people used to do that with children. Because there were social norms for them to observe. Now, of course, that's all a bunch of PC nonsense and people are just "telling it like it is"when they spout bile and vitriol. It's clearly not okay to be an ultra-PC snowflake. But it's more than fine to be a . But I'm sure you're not offended. Just like whiny-ass Trump was more than happy to dish it out, but wanted to piss, moan and sue as soon as it came back at him.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,083
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 10, 2016 18:25:24 GMT -5
In other news, bigoted d**kheads and a**hats continue to act like bigoted d**kheads and a**hats. The KKK probably would've marched whether Trump won or lost. Just change out the words "Donald Trump victory" for "Hillary Clinton protest".
|
|
|
Post by Lolatadatodo on Nov 10, 2016 18:36:21 GMT -5
In other news, bigoted d**kheads and a**hats continue to act like bigoted d**kheads and a**hats. The KKK probably would've marched whether Trump won or lost. Just change out the words "Donald Trump victory" for "Hillary Clinton protest". Wowwww.
|
|