no...
Donald Fires FBI Director who's investigating Russian Election Hacking
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Why the f*** are you watching Sean Hannity to know that people are regurgitating his b*******? That ain't good for your psyche man
Clinton was elected Pres in 1992.
Last edited:
so this is why Dutch got banned???? trolling????
lessee......
unibomber was something of a "liberal", some say. The dude who shot up the congressional R baseball practice was pretty much dedicated to making the world safe, and free from Trump-like Republicans.
It is actually factual that the Democrat Party from the Civil War era down to this time has quite a number of notable racists leading tickets and active in the party. Fulbright was Bill Clinton's most beloved/influential. Byrd the KKK man was a Democrat.
With Democrats I think I could make a fair case..... with reasonable balanced points pro and con.... that exploitation of race is pretty much a tactic.
People probably don't like the truth much, generally.
That's why freedom of speech is a necessary line item on human rights, and I would argue that we have a predominant sort of JFC member in the politics club that really doesn't like basic human rights.
Dutch was a necessary anti-dote to the stifling suppression of points of view I see in here. You need Dutch to pretend to be reasonable folks with a little humor or tolerance.
I see Bullet openly talking about and advocating running people outta here. You don't think that is offensive.
I have lost respect I once had for Colton since he followed Mitt's RINO hate campaign against Trump.
@alt13
I respect Sean Hannity. I didn't back in the day when he wasn't a big supporter of Ron Paul. There was the crazy music intro. But basically I see him as asking important questions of the status quo existing in the D party, a R loyalist. I look for his sources, and he does have facts pretty well lined up in regard to the Clinton scandals and the DumpTrump campaign.
I don't care to try to have "reasonable" conversations with those in here who are still beating the drums on "collusion" between Trump and Putin. I mean I'm sure Putin might have tried, but he had a whole lot more business with Hillary.
totally discredited campaign against Trump.
I respect Sean Hannity. I didn't back in the day when he wasn't a big supporter of Ron Paul. There was the crazy music intro. But basically I see him as asking important questions of the status quo existing in the D party, a R loyalist. I look for his sources, and he does have facts pretty well lined up in regard to the Clinton scandals and the DumpTrump campaign.
I don't care to try to have "reasonable" conversations with those in here who are still beating the drums on "collusion" between Trump and Putin. I mean I'm sure Putin might have tried, but he had a whole lot more business with Hillary.
totally discredited campaign against Trump.
You can try and spin this however you want, no one really cares. But for the record.
Dutch was banned for repeatedly making offensive comments an various subjects such as women, muslims and the political left. He was unable to express his views in anything other than an over the top, aggressive and offensive manner and he more then earned his ban. He was neither enlightening or a fresh take on issues because he chose not to. He refused to be despite me asking him to. Repeatedly.
As for @colton, he has done far more to build up, promote and sustain this site than you have. he is also far more promoting of discussion and rational debate than you are. Something that is far more deserving of respect. Also he didn't issue the final ban, I did. Happily, I might add.
As for @Bulletproof, he has openly advocated for a ban on dutch. Loudly and frequently. But it has only been Dutch he wants gone not "people" as you state. The way I see it is this. If I say good morning to someone and that person yells at me that person is a douche. If I say good morning to the next half dozen people I see and they all yell at me then I am probably doing something wrong. That's what he have here. Many posters have a problem with Dutch and few with Bullet. So in this case it's Dutch that is the problem not Bullet.
In short, "insert a bunch of things that would get me a warning with points or a ban".
Dutch had bad manners. I don't like people that can't conduct them self with a reasonable level of decency. That's why Dutch got banned, after possibly 100s of reported posts over the years. After several small suspensions and a few large suspensions. I absolutely did want Dutch gone. But I hadn't reported any of his posts for over a month because I had him on ignore.
Babe, this will be something like the 5th or 6th time I've had to remind you of this...
Between 2008-2012 I posted A LOT about the libertarian point of view. I considered myself a libertarian leaning towards objectivism. At that time you showered me with praise, sent me pos reps telling me to keep up the good fight, responded to threads telling people they need to listen to what I'm saying.
But there was always a problem there. For one, no one would believe me when I said I believed in the libertarian ideology I was advocating for as a philosophical point of view, not a practical political point of view. I would frequently say "You can't get there from here," meaning that libertarianism, as I envisioned it, was not something that could be inserted into the U.S. piecemeal. But that didn't mean I didn't believe in libertarian ideals. Well, I got tired of that misunderstanding. I got tired of advocating for a libertarian fantasy that could never exist in my world. So, eventually I stopped talking about the fantasy of a bright shining libertarian future and now talk more about the world we actually live in and ways to make that world work as well as possible, regardless of which side of the aisle wins or loses.
I believe in personal liberty. I believe that each of us owns our own existence and that we have no inherent obligation to anyone else other than our minor children. I believe that all interactions between people should be voluntary. I believe in the concept of non-initiation of force. I believe that lying, stealing, cheating and coercion are types of force one often uses against another, especially those in a position of power used against those in who are in need.
But all you see in me now is that I'm some sort of agent of George Sooros and a liberal trying to what, silence someone advocating for libertarianism. Babe, I could help dutch really understand what libertarianism means, instead of the elementary school version of it he has advocated for here. I'm not afraid of points of view I expressed FAR more successfully than Dutch ever has.
So who is it here who is hiding from the truth? You are babe. It's you.
Babe, this will be something like the 5th or 6th time I've had to remind you of this...
Between 2008-2012 I posted A LOT about the libertarian point of view. I considered myself a libertarian leaning towards objectivism. At that time you showered me with praise, sent me pos reps telling me to keep up the good fight, responded to threads telling people they need to listen to what I'm saying.
But there was always a problem there. For one, no one would believe me when I said I believed in the libertarian ideology I was advocating for as a philosophical point of view, not a practical political point of view. I would frequently say "You can't get there from here," meaning that libertarianism, as I envisioned it, was not something that could be inserted into the U.S. piecemeal. But that didn't mean I didn't believe in libertarian ideals. Well, I got tired of that misunderstanding. I got tired of advocating for a libertarian fantasy that could never exist in my world. So, eventually I stopped talking about the fantasy of a bright shining libertarian future and now talk more about the world we actually live in and ways to make that world work as well as possible, regardless of which side of the aisle wins or loses.
I believe in personal liberty. I believe that each of us owns our own existence and that we have no inherent obligation to anyone else other than our minor children. I believe that all interactions between people should be voluntary. I believe in the concept of non-initiation of force. I believe that lying, stealing, cheating and coercion are types of force one often uses against another, especially those in a position of power used against those in who are in need.
But all you see in me now is that I'm some sort of agent of George Sooros and a liberal trying to what, silence someone advocating for libertarianism. Babe, I could help dutch really understand what libertarianism means, instead of the elementary school version of it he has advocated for here. I'm not afraid of points of view I expressed FAR more successfully than Dutch ever has.
So who is it here who is hiding from the truth? You are babe. It's you.
When I came here, it's true as you say I found reasons to see the good in you. I used to have a good time with OneBrow because he took the time of day to try to straighten me out.... after actually listening to what I said.
I think the turning point in my view of you came when I was prattling about oh whatever... herbal remedies, maybe.... and you rolled out the hate and started asking who the hell I thought I was knowing as much as you thought I thought I did. I think in all fairness you applied that hate over a period of time, and it was evident you intended to run me outta here.
So I'm saying.... I think your claim about being exclusive to wanting to run Dutch out is false. I remember some other that have been treated that way in this forum, and I don't recall you standing up for any of them.
I think Stoked is just dead wrong.
I took Dutch as being perhaps abrupt, taunting, mocking, and insulting.... but I could see his point vis a vis the self-adulating politically correct fashions of thought prevailing in some peoples current views. The way you can tell when you're actually wrong is just this: If you can't bear being mocked, you are likely really, really wrong.
He indeed lacked manners and tact. He lives somewhere.... say in Holland as he claims..... says he's Jewish and black. When I was in Israel there were quite a lot of Ethiopian Jews there. Many of them were the most orthodox believers you could find. Standing at the wailing wall doing their prayers.
If he is Ethiopian, he's come from places where his life has indeed been under attack. I don't think he was all that bad you couldn't laugh a bit sometimes or actually enter into a discussion of his points.
Dutch I think had a valid point of view. He was sad to see America going down the drain, so to speak, as the world's bastion of true hope..... human liberty and human rights.... under a rising sea of "liberal" statism.