Right Wing Repugnants Once Argued Moral Grounds For Impeachment

cawacko said:
"You guys"? There are conservatives that support gay marriage just like there are liberals who don't. If you considered yourself tolerant in 2008 how could you support Clinton or Obama?
Click to expand...

Liberals don't support gay marriage today? Huh? Another example of you talking out of your ass. That's kinda your style, isn't it? You say something really broad and obtuse, then spend the rest of your time walking it back or re-defining.

Talk about entitled!
 
cawacko said:
If you considered yourself tolerant in 2008 how could you support Clinton or Obama?
Click to expand...

2008 was ten years ago. It's 2018 and in 2018 Conservatives are the ones who oppose gay marriage and are bigoted against gay people. So instead of trying to jury-rig the past to fit your present narrative, you actually deal in the present like an adult?
 
LV426 said:
Liberals don't support gay marriage today? Huh? Another example of you talking out of your ass. That's kinda your style, isn't it? You say something really broad and obtuse, then spend the rest of your time walking it back or re-defining.

Talk about entitled!
Click to expand...

You think there aren't liberals today who don't support gay marriage? A simple Google search would let you know that's false
 
Flash said:
And how has your hatred and ridicule stopped stopped those confrontations and reduced bigotry?
Click to expand...

Nazis are afraid to go out in public now because they know they'll get punched in the face.

It's why Richard Spencer no longer has a career. It's why most of those racist Conservative groups at Charlottesville last summer are gone now.

So it seems to be working quite well.
 
LV426 said:
Are you fucking kidding me!?

We let an entire political party re-brand itself after the disaster of Bush by stapling teabags to their faces and screaming about the debt and deficit they caused, and were treated as legitimate.

That was accommodation. We accommodated the entitlement those Conservatives felt they had to run away from Bush, but only stopping only long enough to burn the Bush/Cheney shirts.

We accommodated them again in 2015, when, after achieving nothing with the power those teabags got, they took the teabags off and put on the red hats.

We accommodated their re-branding when we shouldn't have, accommodated their entitlement to be taken seriously, and what did they give us back? Trump.

Fuck them.
Click to expand...

We accommodated them? Those people did what they were free to do. The voters accommodated them by defeating 1,000 Democratic officials during the Obama years. Were we supposed to do something that prevented their freedom to vote and rebrand?
 
LV426 said:
2008 was ten years ago. It's 2018 and in 2018 Conservatives are the ones who oppose gay marriage and are bigoted against gay people. So instead of trying to jury-rig the past to fit your present narrative, you actually deal in the present like an adult?
Click to expand...

So a decade ago you didn't consider yourself tolerant then is what you're acknowledging even though it was commonly commincated as a liberal position?
 
Flash said:
For example, a speaker at a college who want opposes affirmative action
Click to expand...

Who are you talking about specifically?

NOTICE HOW FLASH HERE SPEAKS VERY VAGUELY AND AMBIGUOUSLY WITHOUT MENTIONING SPECIFICS. That's no accident; it's by design.

So you're presenting a hypothetical and pretending it's an actual thing.
 
Flash said:
He is not intolerant--he just thinks it is bad policy harmful to all concerned. This guy just wants to speak peacefully to students interested in hearing his view. Those who shout him down or block entrance to the hall are intolerant of his views. That is inherent liberal intolerance.
Click to expand...

Notice the gratuitous use of improper nouns when actual names and events would suffice just as well.

Who is this mystery person to whom you're referring, and why do I get the sense you're leaving some key pieces of information out...exculpatory evidence that would undermine your position and argument?
 
Flash said:
I am not trying to be clever. It is just that I am having trouble getting across a simple concept you keep missing.
Click to expand...

It's not a simple concept. It's not a concept at all.


Flash said:
f a liberal says "I hate gun owners"that is not a reaction against intolerance. It is initiating intolerance. The gun owner who says "I hate people who hate gun owners" is the reaction caused by liberal intolerance.
Click to expand...

Being a gun owner is a choice. Being gay isn't.

So that attempt at equivalence did a belly-flop. Wanna try something else?


I can understand why you want to hate people for views you oppose.
Click to expand...

If you don't oppose bigotry and intolerance, then you are of dubious moral character and you have questionable judgment as a human being.
 
LV426 said:
Nazis are afraid to go out in public now because they know they'll get punched in the face.

It's why Richard Spencer no longer has a career. It's why most of those racist Conservative groups at Charlottesville last summer are gone now.

So it seems to be working quite well.
Click to expand...

But if Robert Byrd were still alive, he would still be getting re-elected. With the accepted silence from the liberal left.
 
Sailor said:
But if Robert Byrd were still alive, he would still be getting re-elected. With the accepted silence from the liberal left.
Click to expand...

I don't seem him trying to silence Minister Farrakhan or complaining about Democrats meeting with him after all his anti-semitism.
 
cawacko said:
I don't seem him trying to silence Minister Farrakhan or complaining about Democrats meeting with him after all his anti-semitism.
Click to expand...

It is that whole "do as I say, not as I do" mentality of newer liberals. Just fucked in the head. This country will never see some of the great liberals like JFK ever again.
 
LV426 said:
Who are you talking about specifically?

NOTICE HOW FLASH HERE SPEAKS VERY VAGUELY AND AMBIGUOUSLY WITHOUT MENTIONING SPECIFICS. That's no accident; it's by design.

So you're presenting a hypothetical and pretending it's an actual thing.
Click to expand...

A speaker opposing affirmative action is pretty specific (not vague). That is not just a hypothetical but something that has happened on several occasions going back many years. It is an actual thing.

By who did you mean the person's name? That is not important but one person who this was done to was a black guy who was a regent on the U. of California board --Ward Connerly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top