Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 3:47 PM, Joe in Winslow said:

 

I thought not.

 

You're an intellectual fraud. And yes, a hypocrite.

 

 

Expand  

1. I call out your hypocrisy.

2. You tell me to reconcile YOUR opinions.

3. You call me a hypocrite when I can't?

 

Brilliant. 

 

 

 

 

Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 3:53 PM, Jauronimo said:

1. I call out your hypocrisy.

2. You tell me to reconcile YOUR opinions.

3. You call me a hypocrite when I can't?

 

Brilliant. 

 

 

 

 

Expand  

 

I think your memory's a bit faulty, hypocrite.

 

1) I call YOUR hypocrisy out pointing out your unending devotion to "science" and indefinite lockdowns.

2) you get redass

 

Yes, it was rather brilliant if I say so myself.

 

  • Haha (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 3:52 PM, B-Man said:

 

So this is nothing about George Floyd..............Thanks,

 

Your statement that the guilty policemen will get off wasn't serious..........

 

 

 

 

Who was paying ?

 

Expand  

Yes the officer would have gotten off without video. Also the DA said there was evidence that supports not criminally charging the officer. So yes it's very likely that officer would have walked without the protests.

 

This has happened over and over again, no matter who is President.

 

Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 3:52 PM, B-Man said:

 

So this is nothing about George Floyd..............Thanks,

 

Your statement that the guilty policemen will get off wasn't serious..........

 

 

 

 

Who was paying ?

 

Expand  

 

Is this true?  about the tear gas?  Not that it substantively matters to me, because they were asked to move and they didn't listen. 

Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 3:57 PM, Joe in Winslow said:

 

I think your memory's a bit faulty, hypocrite.

 

1) I call YOUR hypocrisy out pointing out your unending devotion to "science" and indefinite lockdowns.

2) you get redass

 

Yes, it was rather brilliant if I say so myself.

 

Expand  

 

Set the record straight then Joe. Below is where you have stood on the issues.  How does this make sense?

 

Government force used to impose quarantines: Tyranny 

Government force to restrict hours on private enterprise: Tyranny

Military force to enforce curfews, dispel assembly, and put down looting/civil unrest: Justified

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 3:51 PM, Wacka said:

Times like this bring out the libtards like when a house is fumigated for roaches.  They are coming out of every nook and cranny.  This country needs to be fumigated and all the roaches  removed.?

Expand  

So I take it you support the use of gas on the peaceful protesters yesterday in DC?

Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 4:02 PM, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Yes the officer would have gotten off without video. Also the DA said there was evidence that supports not criminally charging the officer. So yes it's very likely that officer would have walked without the protests.

 

This has happened over and over again, no matter who is President.

 

Expand  

The answer is to criminally charge people in this country when a loud mob of people say we should, regardless of the actual evidence?

 

*not saying that is the case in the Minneapolis case, but your post seems to indicate that is a good strategy going forward.

Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 4:04 PM, SectionC3 said:

So I take it you support the use of gas on the peaceful protesters yesterday in DC?

Expand  

Peaceful is not throwing stuff at the cops or setting a church on fire..

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 4:03 PM, Magox said:

 

Is this true?  about the tear gas?  Not that it substantively matters to me, because they were asked to move and they didn't listen. 

Expand  

 

Yes.

 

It was smoke canisters.

They were warned 3 times, they refused to move back. These were NOT peaceful protesters

 

 

 

  On 6/2/2020 at 4:04 PM, SectionC3 said:

So I take it you support the use of gas on the peaceful protesters yesterday in DC?

Expand  

 

 

False .............as usual.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 5
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 4:04 PM, Jauronimo said:

 

Set the record straight then Joe. Below is where you have stood on the issues.  How does this make sense?

 

Government force used to impose quarantines: Tyranny 

Government force to restrict hours on private enterprise: Tyranny

Military force to enforce curfews, dispel assembly, and put down looting/civil unrest: Justified

 

 

 

Expand  

 

Oh. My. God.

 

You're obtuse aren't you? I CALLED YOU OUT FOR YOUR HYPOCRITICAL VIEW THAT:

 

Government force used to impose quarantines: JUSTIFIED

Government force to restrict hours on private enterprise: JUSTIFIED

Military force to enforce curfews, dispel assembly, and put down looting/civil unrest: NOT SO MUCH

 

So let's sum this up for you since you're having difficulty on the topic.

 

If you think *I* am a hypocrite for what you posted, then you're also tacitly admitting your OWN hypocrisy. Ya dig?

 

That clear enough for you? Or are you too wrapped up in the emotion of your own blisteringly hot virtue signalling to SEE just what a complete and utter jackass you actually are?

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

I want everyone to know, that Governor Murphy from New Jersey believes this:

 

  Quote

 

Governor Phil Murphy began his daily COVID-19 briefing by honoring the peace actions of the weekend seeking justice for the late George Floyd, killed by police in Minneapolis, Minnesota a week ago.

“I support these protests and I thank the thousands of residents who peacefully and respectfully took part,” said Murphy. “This is a transformational moment of our time. …Peaceful protesting is the way we get to a better place.”

He addressed the apparent disconnect between his own executive order shutting down nonessential businesses and his support for the protests, which concentrated populations in violation of social distancing.

“It’s one thing to protest – I don’t want to make light of this and I’ll probably get lit up by everybody who owns a nail salon in the state, but it’s one thing to protest what day nail salons are opening and it’s another to come out in peaceful protest overwhelmingly about somebody who was murdered right before our eyes.


 

Expand  

 

 

In other words, via his dictate, those law abiding rubes who were protesting about their livelihoods being destroyed, again by DICTATE, that the protests from "nail salon" owner's isn't nearly as important as those that protest for social justice.

 

Who the ***** is he to say something like that?

 

These people disgust me.  I don't know if I have felt as angry about our political discourse than what we are having right now.  The counter argument is completely vacuous and bankrupt.  They don't have a leg to stand on.

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 4:09 PM, Magox said:

I want everyone to know, that Governor Murphy from New Jersey believes this:

 

 

 

In other words, via his dictate, those law abiding rubes who were protesting about their livelihoods being destroyed, again by DICTATE, that the protests from "nail salon" owner's isn't nearly as important as those that protest for social justice.

 

Who the ***** is he to say something like that?

 

These people disgust me.  I don't know if I have felt as angry about our political discourse than what we are having right now.  The counter argument is completely vacuous and bankrupt.  They don't have a leg to stand on.

Expand  

 

He's almost as big a douchebag as Jauronimo.


Almost.

 

Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 4:06 PM, B-Man said:

 

Yes.

 

It was smoke canisters.

They were warned 3 times, they refused to move back. These were NOT peaceful protesters

 

 

 

 

 

False .............as usual.

 

 

 

Expand  

 

 

So no tear gas?

 

Wasn't that the justification that was used for "warfare"?

 

If true, it just gets worse and worse for these people attempting to make these INFOWAR sort of looney claims.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
  On 6/2/2020 at 3:23 PM, Tiberius said:

He obviously appealed to people's prejudices running for office. He didn't scapegoat immigrants for a non-existent crime wave for no reason. He scapegoated immigrants as criminals for a reason. To win votes 

Expand  

He didn't scapegoat immigrants, period. He absolutely platformed on border control and cracking down on people entering the country illegally. He correctly called out that specific group as criminals because they entered illegally. Conflating that group with legal immigrants is akin to Conflating the Westboro baptists with Christians. It is disingenuous and counterproductive.

 

Perhaps a more relevant comparison, it is like conflating violent agitators and rioters with protesters. Don't do that.

Edited by BuffaloHokie13
Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 4:06 PM, Wacka said:

Peaceful is not throwing stuff at the cops or setting a church on fire..

Expand  

 

Was the church burning at the moment gas was used?  And were “cops” under duress at the moment the gas was used? 

Posted
  On 6/2/2020 at 4:05 PM, Sig1Hunter said:

The answer is to criminally charge people in this country when a loud mob of people say we should, regardless of the actual evidence?

 

*not saying that is the case in the Minneapolis case, but your post seems to indicate that is a good strategy going forward.

Expand  

Not at all. When someone loses a life due to poor judgement by police then the police should be charged accordingly. 

 

I always respect and will continue to respect police. I won't judge police based on a bad few. I don't judge anyone based on a bad few.

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...