birdog1960 Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 not only is that completely lacking any class whatsoever, I have to laugh at the way you make a sweeping generalization about people making generalizations. it's not sweeping, it's directed at those that defended bundy in the thread. it's well documented on this very site.
B-Large Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 nothing needs to be subtly changesd cuz that's about as subtle as a brick. it's overtly racist referring to an entire race as "they" as if everyone black is identical and all are lazy and unprincipled. but again, that's not the point here. the point is that you and the gang of merry men (who btw apparently feel entitled to rule the board - ie the gatorman thread) defend a statement like this while being appalled at taxation for public health reasons. it's ostensibly about freedom and liberty to you folks and not having others decide what's best for you. that holds as long as you're talking about yourself or someone that looks like you. it seems to stop when others are the object. reading back, TYTT was not defending the statement itself, his issue was the literal misconstruing of the actual quote. I don't think anyone here would say Blacks are worse off today, than under Slavery. Heck, just ask Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods.
birdog1960 Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 reading back, TYTT was not defending the statement itself, his issue was the literal misconstruing of the actual quote. I don't think anyone here would say Blacks are worse off today, than under Slavery. Heck, just ask Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods. yes, any reasonable person would find it ridiculous on it's face. some posting here did not and bunday did actually say it. unfortunately, he is someone.
IDBillzFan Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 it's not sweeping, it's directed at those that defended bundy in the thread. it's well documented on this very site. Oh, so, like, basically, everyone who disagrees with you. Got it.
birdog1960 Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 Oh, so, like, basically, everyone who disagrees with you. Got it. it's an observation. argue your reasoning as to why you believe it's incorrect.
Chef Jim Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 ironic considering many of the cons here defended a man that called for the reinstitution of slavery, yet are outraged at taxing cigarettes. it seems moral outrage is extremely selective and illogical in your little knitting circle. Selective moral outrage? Uhh, yeah. What's wrong with that? Even if anyone here did defend his racist remarks regarding slavery what on earth does that have to do with railing against overtaxation.
3rdnlng Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 yes, any reasonable person would find it ridiculous on it's face. some posting here did not and bunday did actually say it. unfortunately, he is someone. Who posting here did not think it was a foolish statement?
birdog1960 Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 Selective moral outrage? Uhh, yeah. What's wrong with that? Even if anyone here did defend his racist remarks regarding slavery what on earth does that have to do with railing against overtaxation. what is the argument against taxation of cigarettes based on? individual rights, correct? if not, then provide an alternative basis. you can't reasonably argue for individual rights while defending a pro slavery (can we at least agree bundy's statement was this?) statement.
Chef Jim Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 what is the argument against taxation of cigarettes based on? individual rights, correct? if not, then provide an alternative basis. you can't reasonably argue for individual rights while defending a pro slavery (can we at least agree bundy's statement was this?) statement. You have got to be !@#$ing kidding me?? Who the hell is defending pro slavery? You are now officially insane in my book.
Azalin Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 it's not sweeping, it's directed at those that defended bundy in the thread. it's well documented on this very site. those that defended Bundy? your own words: 'you and the gang of merry men (who btw apparently feel entitled to rule the board - ie the gatorman thread)' I believe you also used the term 'lily white'. there's no need for you to make race an issue here.
birdog1960 Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 (edited) You have got to be !@#$ing kidding me?? Who the hell is defending pro slavery? You are now officially insane in my book. i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you haven't read the bundy thread. if after reading it, you do not label some of the posters there insane as well, then your label will be "not worthy of consideration" those that defended Bundy? your own words: 'you and the gang of merry men (who btw apparently feel entitled to rule the board - ie the gatorman thread)' I believe you also used the term 'lily white'. there's no need for you to make race an issue here. read the bundy thread. where was your outrage over the posts "needlessly" making race an issue there? Edited May 1, 2014 by birdog1960
Azalin Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 read the bundy thread. where was your outrage over the posts "needlessly" making race an issue there? you did it there, too?
Chef Jim Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you haven't read the bundy thread. if after reading it, you do not label some of the posters there insane as well, then your label will be "not worthy of consideration" I don't give a flying flip what you think is worthy of consideration.
birdog1960 Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 I don't give a flying flip what you think is worthy of consideration. my sentiments exactly towards your characterization. the purpose of the post was to illustrate your hypocrisy. it did.
DC Tom Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 Again, he said no such thing. And nobody defended him for it.
birdog1960 Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 And nobody defended him for it. so then what purpose do you ascribe to 3rd's most recent post citing a black man's response to questioning of bundy's statement?
DC Tom Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 so then what purpose do you ascribe to 3rd's most recent post citing a black man's response to questioning of bundy's statement? Messing with your head.
birdog1960 Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 Messing with your head. if you can't beat em, be an !@#$...
DC Tom Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 if you can't beat em, be an !@#$... You go with your strengths.
Chef Jim Posted May 1, 2014 Posted May 1, 2014 (edited) my sentiments exactly towards your characterization. the purpose of the post was to illustrate your hypocrisy. it did. So if I call you insane without also calling everyone insane that you consider insane I'm a hypocrite? That's fan!@#$ingtastic!! Edited May 1, 2014 by Chef Jim
Recommended Posts