Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

The thing that sticks out most about the story is how much race baiting is involved. MSM is very particular where they mention race in stories and when they don't. If a white person is perceived as the aggressor race is front and center.

Edited by Dante
Posted

The thing that sticks out most about the story is how much race baiting is involved. MSM is very particular where they mention race in stories and where they don't. If a white person is perceived as the aggressor race is front and center.

So true. But that's what sells. We have a profit driven media for better or for worse

Posted

The funny thing here is that nobody's freedom of speech was infringed upon. The protestors had their free speech rights protected by the police, Ms Manhart was free to exercise her right to free speech, and the news organizations were free to report on it however they chose to do so. In fact, the police protected the protestors' free speech rights by detaining Manhart for attempting to disrupt their protest. People tend to forget that the right of free speech is there to protect people when expressing unpopular viewpoints, and desecration of the flag, although it angers many, is constitutionally protected expression.

Posted

So true. But that's what sells. We have a profit driven media for better or for worse

 

Race baiting sells? Seriously? If you think that's true why is it?

Posted

Answer your own question! Why are you interested? Now try and figure that out, you can do it

 

Don't be such a chud. Answer his question, for crying out loud.

Posted

How's this for free speech?

 

Because the right to speak your mind does not equal the right to be taken seriously. And nobody takes those bozos seriously.

 

Everyone, however, takes whitey seriously. It's how we oppress the minorities.

Posted

His own question answers his question. No need for me to go further.

 

There's no need for you to go further because you can't go any further. You have to know what you're talking about in order to explain something, and you don't seem to know anything, so you don't ever explain a damn thing whenever you're pressed to do so. If that was ever in doubt, it was made crystal clear in the 'dangers of our new normal' thread, where you did nothing but avoid answering questions before ultimately running away.

Posted

Or what?

 

I literally have more coherent conversations with my dog.

 

And I don't mean that figuratively. I mean my dog is more literally capable of having a more coherent conversation than you provide on this board.

Posted

 

There's no need for you to go further because you can't go any further. You have to know what you're talking about in order to explain something, and you don't seem to know anything, so you don't ever explain a damn thing whenever you're pressed to do so. If that was ever in doubt, it was made crystal clear in the 'dangers of our new normal' thread, where you did nothing but avoid answering questions before ultimately running away.

Oh I can't? LOL, you are the one that stopped making "serious" statements that attempted analysis. Pity, they were pretty funny

 

I literally have more coherent conversations with my dog.

 

 

I believe that

Posted

Oh I can't? LOL, you are the one that stopped making "serious" statements that attempted analysis. Pity, they were pretty funny

 

What in the hell are you talking about? That's a really weak dodge, even for you.

Posted

Or what?

 

"Or what?" Really? You'll only have a discussion if you're threatened in some way?

 

And you wonder why people mock you. :rolleyes:

×
×
  • Create New...