“Woke”

[LV426]

And, it just gives you something more to argue about.

All anecdotes are filtered through a prism of bias...so what you are observing, Flash, is all through a lens of bias that you have convinced yourself is not because you have convinced yourself that you are wise and experienced enough to see through the bias.

I don't think you're capable of that, which is why you still won't say what "discrimination" your "wife" experienced more than I will ever know...you know that any answer you give is going to be picked apart because it's bullshit.

You don't want that bullshit to be picked apart, which is why you're stalling on that question.

I know you've seen that question too, so you're purposefully avoiding it...that doesn't give me confidence in the truth of what you're saying you observed.

 

[Flash]

If it's not something that can be verified, then why are you saying it? Is it because you don't have anything empirical to share?

Why the fuck are you even opening your mouth if you're just gonna tell tall tales?

Yes, the Supreme Court opinion was empirical and supported my argument. I gave you a court case and personal example but you didn't like the outcome or the fact that you were wrong. You had rather argue about trivia.

 

[LV426]

I did post the Supreme Court decision which struck down the AZ law requiring more proof of citizenship, but that is not proof I had two students who were non-citizens that registered to vote.

I don't really know or care what point you're trying to make here without having to go back to that specific thread and re-read what was written there because of your bad habit of oversimplification.

Is this going to be another instance of you misremembering what I wrote like the whole "Trump will try to cancel the election", only you left out the "try to", and then refused to actually link to the post until I did for you?

So you acted like how you think I act, only I have the receipts.

 

[LV426]

You just don't like facts that challenge your political beliefs and somewhat limited knowledge of some subjects.

I love having my beliefs challenged because I love to talk about my beliefs...all of them.

But if those challenges are based in inherent biases and given circumstances you'll never verify, then I get pretty miffed.

I don't like being bullshitted, especially by people who aren't good at it...and most everyone on JPP is not good at it, including you.

 

[Flash]

All anecdotes are filtered through a prism of bias...so what you are observing, Flash, is all through a lens of bias that you have convinced yourself is not because you have convinced yourself that you are wise and experienced enough to see through the bias.

I don't think you're capable of that, which is why you still won't say what "discrimination" your "wife" experienced more than I will ever know...you know that any answer you give is going to be picked apart because it's bullshit.

You don't want that bullshit to be picked apart, which is why you're stalling on that question.

I know you've seen that question too, so you're purposefully avoiding it...that doesn't give me confidence in the truth of what you're saying you observed.

I'm not stalling. I told you clearly I am not giving you personal information because you abuse it by lying or forgetting what you said. You said you give no personal information other than location. It is ashamed the posters cannot give applicable personal examples without being attacked. I have seen you do that to other posters. Your posts always deteriorate into name calling when you have nothing else of substance to contribute. To you politics is the art of hating others.

 

[LV426]

Yes, the Supreme Court opinion was empirical and supported my argument.

Without going back to the actual thread, I don't know what you're talking about.

You do this frequently...you invoke things in other threads that you think are gotchas, but when we go back into the thread, what we end up finding is that you didn't read what was posted, didn't accurately quote it, and rushed to get out a sloppy response.

I gave you a court case and personal example but you didn't like the outcome or the fact that you were wrong. You had rather argue about trivia.

Not sure what you're talking about here, but I suspect it's you misremembering what I said or leaving out the parts of what I said in order to paint a false picture...like when you left out the "try to".

You do that kind of thing all the time, and that's why I call you Bad Faith Flash.

 

[LV426]

I'm not stalling. I told you clearly I am not giving you personal information because you abuse it by lying or forgetting what you said. You said you give no personal information other than location. It is ashamed the posters cannot give applicable personal examples without being attacked. I have seen you do that to other posters. Your posts always deteriorate into name calling when you have nothing else of substance to contribute. To you politics is the art of hating others.

If you won't verify a claim, then the claim is bullshit.

FULL STOP.

 

[LV426]

I'm not stalling. I told you clearly I am not giving you personal information because you abuse it by lying or forgetting what you said. You said you give no personal information other than location. It is ashamed the posters cannot give applicable personal examples without being attacked. I have seen you do that to other posters. Your posts always deteriorate into name calling when you have nothing else of substance to contribute. To you politics is the art of hating others.

So basically, Flash is telling me that his wife faces more discrimination than I will ever know, but he can't get specific because it is personal information? What do you mean? I don't understand. You invoked your wife, and now you're telling me to mind my own business?

You are the one who brought her into this, Flash.

 

[Flash]

Without going back to the actual thread, I don't know what you're talking about.

You do this frequently...you invoke things in other threads that you think are gotchas, but when we go back into the thread, what we end up finding is that you didn't read what was posted, didn't accurately quote it, and rushed to get out a sloppy response.




Not sure what you're talking about here, but I suspect it's you misremembering what I said or leaving out the parts of what I said in order to paint a false picture...like when you left out the "try to".

You do that kind of thing all the time, and that's why I call you Bad Faith Flash.

It was very simple. I said it is not hard to register to vote even if you are not a citizen and gave the example of two students who registered although they were not citizens. You didn't believe me and I posted a Supreme Court case overturning an AZ law which was trying to establish more proof of citizenship.

A simple factual issue. Your biases assumed I was arguing there is a lot of election fraud which went against your beliefs so you had to start with your insults and drama even though I clearly proved the simple fact to be correct.

I never argued there was a lot of election fraud but that is what some conservatives believe so you had to argue against that evil strawman and didn't accept my argument because some of the things I said challenged your liberal preconceptions.

Holding a certain belief does not mean you have to accept all the arguments used to support that belief even when they are false. It is easy for non-citizens to register and that causes big problems in the courts for jury duty; but, that does not mean a lot of them are voting or there is a lot of voter fraud. You don't need to support all of the arguments to support a belief.

 

[LV426]

It was very simple. I said it is not hard to register to vote even if you are not a citizen and gave the example of two students who registered although they were not citizens. You didn't believe me and I posted a Supreme Court case overturning an AZ law which was trying to establish more proof of citizenship.

A simple factual issue. Your biases assumed I was arguing there is a lot of election fraud which went against your beliefs so you had to start with your insults and drama even though I clearly proved the simple fact to be correct.

I never argued there was a lot of election fraud but that is what some conservatives believe so you had to argue against that evil strawman and didn't accept my argument because some of the things I said challenged your liberal preconceptions.

Holding a certain belief does not mean you have to accept all the arguments used to support that belief even when they are false. It is easy for non-citizens to register and that causes big problems in the courts for jury duty; but, that does not mean a lot of them are voting or there is a lot of voter fraud. You don't need to support all of the arguments to support a belief.

Again, without going back to the thread, I can't speak to any of this...and when it comes to YOUR MEMORY, we've come to find out that it's not exactly as sharp as you want everyone to think it is.

 

[Flash]

If you won't verify a claim, then the claim is bullshit.

FULL STOP.

You claimed Trump was going to cancel the 2020 election and did not verify it. He did not. You did not say "try" and cancel it. Therefore, your claim was bullshit. See, you try to bullshit the same as the other posters--you are no different except for your superiority complex.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Uh, no. It’s never ok to be racist.

But hating whites isn't racist, because whites aren't really people - right?

However, nobody is perfect and we all simply try to be the best person we can be.

You may wish to do a wee bit of introspection, Herr Comrade..

 

[Flash]

Again, without going back to the thread, I can't speak to any of this...and when it comes to YOUR MEMORY, we've come to find out that it's not exactly as sharp as you want everyone to think it is.

I never claimed I have a sharp memory. I said you often lie or have a poor memory like telling another poster I said I had an Asian wife. Pure BS.

 

[Jarod]

But hating whites isn't racist, because whites aren't really people - right?



You may wish to do a wee bit of introspection, Herr Comrade..

Who hates whites?

 

[Jarod]

But hating whites isn't racist, because whites aren't really people - right?



You may wish to do a wee bit of introspection, Herr Comrade..

Hating whites because they are white is racist dumbshit.

 

[cawacko]

I did no know there was going to be a test, but yes to me 18 months ago was a long time for me...

I remember thinking he set up fake strawmen and then knocked them down with oversimplified rational. He came off sounding like a Professor who never really experienced the real world.

I disagree when he said Woke was reverse racism and that it oversimplified racial issues, defining people as racist or not-racist, which is not reality.

Not a test, this is a discussion board. I am simply asking your opinion. Now you won't get much argument from me regarding Professors living in Ivy Towers and not understanding the real world but considering this guy has been black his whole life and written about racial issues for a couple of decades, how has he not experienced the real world racially?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hating whites because they are white is racist dumbshit.

Why do you hate whites, if not because we are white?

Do you ever condemn your party for this racism?

Racism in America, from the Trail of Tears to BLM, has and continues to be driven by the shameful democrat party.

democrats, democrats never change.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Trump made thousands of such remarks.

Nonsense.

 

[Jarod]

Why do you hate whites, if not because we are white?

Do you ever condemn your party for this racism?

Racism in America, from the Trail of Tears to BLM, has and continues to be driven by the shameful democrat party.

democrats, democrats never change.

Who signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964? I don’t hate White people.

Who defends the Confederate flag? Who fights for statues of Robert E Lee?

Who desegregated school?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Who signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Ulysses Grant. Oh wait, that was the civil rights act of 1866, after he had kicked your ass and made you free your slaves. I KNOW, Eisenhower. Oops, that was the 1957 civil rights act.

Interesting thing about ALL 4 Civil Rights acts - a greater percentage of Republicans voted for them than democrat. In fact, in the 1866 act - ZERO filthy democrats voted for it. You did better in 1964 - a little better.

I don’t hate White people.

Your filthy party does. Whites are the official scapegoat to whom all the ills of the world are blamed on.