Can I still put white sheets on my bed? ...Or, no?

[ClosedCaption]

All the assorted problems we have out there and the one thing liberals have chosen to make the "Issue of the Moment" is something they believe they can goad the right into a "racial" stand-off about.

And just as planned here you are defending it. Check, Mate

These exaggerations remind me of guys crying about not even being able to "compliment" a woman without being accused of sexual harassment.

Or people who complain they cant beat their kids because CPS will be called

 

[blackhawk]

The latest crusade from the 'tolerant' liberal left, seems to be the good ol' Confederate flag! Imagine that? All the assorted problems we have out there and the one thing liberals have chosen to make the "Issue of the Moment" is something they believe they can goad the right into a "racial" stand-off about. Who ever saw something like that coming?

With all the talk about how the Confederate flag is somehow a "symbol of racist hate" I have to ask, am I still allowed to use white sheets on my bed? Because I really do like the white sheets, always have preferred them. 100% cotton and mother-******* high thread count. Egyptian cotton are The Best!

But... I really don't know if it is appropriate anymore. White sheets are clearly a "symbol of racist hate" as much as the Confederate battle flag. So are pickup trucks and mullets, but I am mainly concerned about the white sheets. I don't want to offend anyone... what if I brought home a lady of a different race and she saw my white sheets and freaked out? I would never forgive myself for being so politically incorrect! So I really do need some input from radical liberal lefties on this... ARE white sheets still okay?

As for the Confederate battle flag... I don't care, take it down, erase it from all the history books... pretend it never existed. After all, we don't allow people to run around waving the Swastika flag anymore... oh wait, we do? Yes, we call that "freedom of speech" and we tolerate it. But the Confederate flag, even though it has been hijacked by racist hate groups and turned into a symbol of racial hate, is a different story. You see, it can be politically used to get some stupid republican to say something really stupid and libs can turn that into "republican calls for return to slavery" and destroy them. So yeah, get rid of it... burn it... forget about it.

But... the white sheets? ...Yes or no?

If the sheets have some other color mixed in with the white your good if there solid white nope that's racist.

So they have to be "trans-colored" is what you're saying? Nice. lol

We must show diversity in our sheet selection.

Don't forget, the thread count is important.

Looking at the thread count would be racial profiling.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Too bad the OP can't show a single state house flying either the BP or the Rainbow flags.

Instead he just rants on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about his imaginary "liberal agenda" because he can't make a cogent argument to save his pathetic excuse for a life.

Too bad all you can do is troll around like a drunk old man at a titty bar searching for something coherent to say.

Ironic that the OP accuses others of his own shortcomings.

Still can't answer any of those questions, can you?

You always lose when it comes to playing stump-the-OP-chump because you can't defend your own OP.

 

[Pogo]

I have a question for liberals. What if the guy had been waving the American flag in his pictures, would you demand that flag be removed from every location in which it flies? If not, why not?

No. And the question "why not" has no function. The question would be, why should it be removed on that basis?" -- not why should it not. Besides which, you don't need to hypothesize the Stars & Stripes in place of the Stars & Bars in the kid's photos -- we already have plenty of Ku Klux Klan gatherings/marches flying Old Glory in their obsession with "100% Americanism", so that ship has already sailed.

On that basis is the operative phrase above. Absent that basis I'd like to see all flags removed, in general, everywhere. They stir up the same kind of shit as organized religions do, and in exactly the same way.

 

[Pogo]

Found object from Googly Images -- make of it what ye will...

 

[LoneLaugher]

Purchasing white sheets for your bed could be considered micro-aggressive, and might create a micro-offense to a hypersensitive individual.

So only multicultural or trans-colored sheets are allowed now, unless you want to suffer the "consequences".

The hotel industry has some new costs coming up because of this, but **** them, they didn't build those hotels, someone else made that happen.

.

You've outdone yourself with lameness.

 

[Boss]

Too bad the OP can't show a single state house flying either the BP or the Rainbow flags.

Instead he just rants on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about his imaginary "liberal agenda" because he can't make a cogent argument to save his pathetic excuse for a life.

Too bad all you can do is troll around like a drunk old man at a titty bar searching for something coherent to say.

Ironic that the OP accuses others of his own shortcomings.

Still can't answer any of those questions, can you?

You always lose when it comes to playing stump-the-OP-chump because you can't defend your own OP.

Hmm.. How did I accuse someone of my shortcomings? (This should be interesting.)

I did answer your question, pinhead.. where were you? I said that I DON'T KNOW if your examples would be considered "racial hate" because... how the **** do we know anymore? The left has just up and decided to start making things into "racial hate" regardless of viewpoints or opinions, history or tradition. None of that matters to a goofy liberal with an agenda. You've all decided this flag represents race hate and that's all there is to it... debate is over, no listening to anything else, no need in arguing anymore. Well, ya don't get to determine what MY opinions and views are. I disagree with you.

The Confederate flag is part of our history and history is good, bad and ugly. Shoving it into a closet and trying to pretend it never existed is an extremely ignorant way to find open-minded tolerance. In fact, it is the epitome of intolerance. Those who take the time to study history realize the flag never symbolized racial hate and the issue of slavery was not about racial hate, nor was segregation for that matter. This was just the viewpoints people had at the time and it didn't have a thing to do with "hate" of someone based on race. Now, you don't have to believe that, it's up to you. But you don't control what other people think and you never will.

The OP makes a brilliant point because white sheets are just as much a "symbol of race hate" as the Confederate flag. They are an object that has been hijacked by extremists and misused for something other than it's original purpose. Now, if we are embarking on a society which seeks to 'cleanse' us of anything offensive, then we need to ban ******* white sheets! Along with a lot of other offensive symbols like the gay pride flag and black panther logo.

My point is, the Constitution does not say that you have the right to freedom of expression so long as no one is offended by it! That caveat is made nowhere in our founding documents or laws. I have the right to offend you! You have the right to offend me, and you often do! Freedom of speech can often be offensive and liberals in particular have made a career out of being "in your face" offensive for the past 70 years or more. Suddenly, symbols are being banned because they are "offensive" and this is quite interesting to me.

Maybe you want to live in a society where government dictates what you can think? Maybe you think it's the role of government to mandate what is "proper" in the way of viewpoints? Again... I don't agree with you! I want everyone to be able to freely express their views in this country, EVEN IF they want to pervert the meaning of the Confederate battle flag and use it to incite race hate. That's THEIR right and THEIR business, not YOURS! You have the right to disagree with them, you have the right to protest what they believe, you have the right to not respect their beliefs. You do not have the right to destroy history and claim some moral high ground.

 

[Pogo]

Banning offensive symbols has nothing to do with Liberalism though. That would be anti-Liberal.
Democratic freedom of speech is messy. It's supposed to be. Not because anybody likes messy but because that's the inevitable price of open discourse.

 

[Boss]

Banning offensive symbols has nothing to do with Liberalism though. That would be anti-Liberal.
Democratic freedom of speech is messy. It's supposed to be. Not because anybody likes messy but because that's the inevitable price of open discourse.

Well you wouldn't THINK banning symbols had anything to do with Liberalism but as we see by this, that is merely a myth. They are complete hypocrites who want to pick and choose which symbols to ban due to their offensive nature. I've always maintained that Liberals are the most ANTI-Freedom and ANTI-liberty people there are! They want THEIR viewpoint to be the ONLY viewpoint that is acceptable and all OTHER views silenced. They are more than willing to use the powers of government to implement this hypocrisy on the American public.

 

[Pogo]

Banning offensive symbols has nothing to do with Liberalism though. That would be anti-Liberal.
Democratic freedom of speech is messy. It's supposed to be. Not because anybody likes messy but because that's the inevitable price of open discourse.

Well you wouldn't THINK banning symbols had anything to do with Liberalism but as we see by this, that is merely a myth. They are complete hypocrites who want to pick and choose which symbols to ban due to their offensive nature. I've always maintained that Liberals are the most ANTI-Freedom and ANTI-liberty people there are! They want THEIR viewpoint to be the ONLY viewpoint that is acceptable and all OTHER views silenced. They are more than willing to use the powers of government to implement this hypocrisy on the American public.

Liberals wrote the First Amendment. All of the Amendments for that matter. Free speech and 'all men are created equal' are the essentials of Liberalism. So if the action you're looking at is not Liberalism --- then stop calling the actor a Liberal.

 

[Boss]

Banning offensive symbols has nothing to do with Liberalism though. That would be anti-Liberal.
Democratic freedom of speech is messy. It's supposed to be. Not because anybody likes messy but because that's the inevitable price of open discourse.

Well you wouldn't THINK banning symbols had anything to do with Liberalism but as we see by this, that is merely a myth. They are complete hypocrites who want to pick and choose which symbols to ban due to their offensive nature. I've always maintained that Liberals are the most ANTI-Freedom and ANTI-liberty people there are! They want THEIR viewpoint to be the ONLY viewpoint that is acceptable and all OTHER views silenced. They are more than willing to use the powers of government to implement this hypocrisy on the American public.

Liberals wrote the First Amendment. All of the Amendments for that matter. Free speech and 'all men are created equal' are the essentials of Liberalism. So if the action you're looking at is not Liberalism --- then stop calling the actor a Liberal.

Well now you are talking about "classical liberals" which all our founding fathers were, but this is nowhere remotely close to what Liberals are today. The "classical liberal" is more aligned with what Libertarian Conservatives are today, or the Tea Party. Today's Liberal is a Socialist-Fascist. They believe they should control government and the people and steamroller everyone who doesn't agree with their view. This flap over the flag is a perfect example of what Liberals want... a society where they call all the shots, they decide what you can and can't believe, and if you don't go along with them, they'll destroy you. Socialist-Fascists!

 

[Pogo]

Banning offensive symbols has nothing to do with Liberalism though. That would be anti-Liberal.
Democratic freedom of speech is messy. It's supposed to be. Not because anybody likes messy but because that's the inevitable price of open discourse.

Well you wouldn't THINK banning symbols had anything to do with Liberalism but as we see by this, that is merely a myth. They are complete hypocrites who want to pick and choose which symbols to ban due to their offensive nature. I've always maintained that Liberals are the most ANTI-Freedom and ANTI-liberty people there are! They want THEIR viewpoint to be the ONLY viewpoint that is acceptable and all OTHER views silenced. They are more than willing to use the powers of government to implement this hypocrisy on the American public.

Liberals wrote the First Amendment. All of the Amendments for that matter. Free speech and 'all men are created equal' are the essentials of Liberalism. So if the action you're looking at is not Liberalism --- then stop calling the actor a Liberal.

Well now you are talking about "classical liberals" which all our founding fathers were, but this is nowhere remotely close to what Liberals are today. The "classical liberal" is more aligned with what Libertarian Conservatives are today, or the Tea Party. Today's Liberal is a Socialist-Fascist. They believe they should control government and the people and steamroller everyone who doesn't agree with their view. This flap over the flag is a perfect example of what Liberals want... a society where they call all the shots, they decide what you can and can't believe, and if you don't go along with them, they'll destroy you. Socialist-Fascists!

There is no such thing as "classical Liberal". That's a bullshit term invented by the Jonah Goldberg ilk who try to sell Doublethink terms like "Liberal Fascism". It's the only way they can explain the Doublethink.

Liberalism is Liberalism. It doesn't morph through time. A term cannot be defined as the opposite of itself. Think about it.

Actually you already thought about it at the beginning of post 49. Stay with that.
Again I repeat -- your issue is not "what Liberalism is"; it's who you're defining as a "Liberal".

 

[Moonglow]

Banning offensive symbols has nothing to do with Liberalism though. That would be anti-Liberal.
Democratic freedom of speech is messy. It's supposed to be. Not because anybody likes messy but because that's the inevitable price of open discourse.

Well you wouldn't THINK banning symbols had anything to do with Liberalism but as we see by this, that is merely a myth. They are complete hypocrites who want to pick and choose which symbols to ban due to their offensive nature. I've always maintained that Liberals are the most ANTI-Freedom and ANTI-liberty people there are! They want THEIR viewpoint to be the ONLY viewpoint that is acceptable and all OTHER views silenced. They are more than willing to use the powers of government to implement this hypocrisy on the American public.

Liberals wrote the First Amendment. All of the Amendments for that matter. Free speech and 'all men are created equal' are the essentials of Liberalism. So if the action you're looking at is not Liberalism --- then stop calling the actor a Liberal.

Well now you are talking about "classical liberals" which all our founding fathers were, but this is nowhere remotely close to what Liberals are today. The "classical liberal" is more aligned with what Libertarian Conservatives are today, or the Tea Party. Today's Liberal is a Socialist-Fascist. They believe they should control government and the people and steamroller everyone who doesn't agree with their view. This flap over the flag is a perfect example of what Liberals want... a society where they call all the shots, they decide what you can and can't believe, and if you don't go along with them, they'll destroy you. Socialist-Fascists!

There is no such thing as "classical Liberal". That's a bullshit term invented by the Jonah Goldberg ilk who try to sell Doublethink terms like "Liberal Fascism". It's the only way they can explain the Doublethink.

Liberalism is Liberalism. It doesn't morph through time. A term cannot be defined as the opposite of itself. Think about it.

Actually you already thought about it at the beginning of post 49. Stay with that.

It can if you think you can change it for a lame ass argument......

 

[Boss]

Banning offensive symbols has nothing to do with Liberalism though. That would be anti-Liberal.
Democratic freedom of speech is messy. It's supposed to be. Not because anybody likes messy but because that's the inevitable price of open discourse.

Well you wouldn't THINK banning symbols had anything to do with Liberalism but as we see by this, that is merely a myth. They are complete hypocrites who want to pick and choose which symbols to ban due to their offensive nature. I've always maintained that Liberals are the most ANTI-Freedom and ANTI-liberty people there are! They want THEIR viewpoint to be the ONLY viewpoint that is acceptable and all OTHER views silenced. They are more than willing to use the powers of government to implement this hypocrisy on the American public.

Liberals wrote the First Amendment. All of the Amendments for that matter. Free speech and 'all men are created equal' are the essentials of Liberalism. So if the action you're looking at is not Liberalism --- then stop calling the actor a Liberal.

Well now you are talking about "classical liberals" which all our founding fathers were, but this is nowhere remotely close to what Liberals are today. The "classical liberal" is more aligned with what Libertarian Conservatives are today, or the Tea Party. Today's Liberal is a Socialist-Fascist. They believe they should control government and the people and steamroller everyone who doesn't agree with their view. This flap over the flag is a perfect example of what Liberals want... a society where they call all the shots, they decide what you can and can't believe, and if you don't go along with them, they'll destroy you. Socialist-Fascists!

There is no such thing as "classical Liberal". That's a bullshit term invented by the Jonah Goldberg ilk who try to sell Doublethink terms like "Liberal Fascism". It's the only way they can explain the Doublethink.

Liberalism is Liberalism. It doesn't morph through time. A term cannot be defined as the opposite of itself. Think about it.

Actually you already thought about it at the beginning of post 49. Stay with that.
Again I repeat -- your issue is not "what Liberalism is"; it's who you're defining as a "Liberal".

Well the term "classical liberal" is used to delineate the differences between modern liberals and liberals of old. Sorry if that bothers you but the Liberal of today stands for virtually nothing a Liberal of yesterday stood for. So whether Socialist-Fascists hijacked Liberalism or Liberalism changed, the reality is they are not one in the same.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Liberals don't want to ban the flag.

 

[Pogo]

Banning offensive symbols has nothing to do with Liberalism though. That would be anti-Liberal.
Democratic freedom of speech is messy. It's supposed to be. Not because anybody likes messy but because that's the inevitable price of open discourse.

Well you wouldn't THINK banning symbols had anything to do with Liberalism but as we see by this, that is merely a myth. They are complete hypocrites who want to pick and choose which symbols to ban due to their offensive nature. I've always maintained that Liberals are the most ANTI-Freedom and ANTI-liberty people there are! They want THEIR viewpoint to be the ONLY viewpoint that is acceptable and all OTHER views silenced. They are more than willing to use the powers of government to implement this hypocrisy on the American public.

Liberals wrote the First Amendment. All of the Amendments for that matter. Free speech and 'all men are created equal' are the essentials of Liberalism. So if the action you're looking at is not Liberalism --- then stop calling the actor a Liberal.

Well now you are talking about "classical liberals" which all our founding fathers were, but this is nowhere remotely close to what Liberals are today. The "classical liberal" is more aligned with what Libertarian Conservatives are today, or the Tea Party. Today's Liberal is a Socialist-Fascist. They believe they should control government and the people and steamroller everyone who doesn't agree with their view. This flap over the flag is a perfect example of what Liberals want... a society where they call all the shots, they decide what you can and can't believe, and if you don't go along with them, they'll destroy you. Socialist-Fascists!

There is no such thing as "classical Liberal". That's a bullshit term invented by the Jonah Goldberg ilk who try to sell Doublethink terms like "Liberal Fascism". It's the only way they can explain the Doublethink.

Liberalism is Liberalism. It doesn't morph through time. A term cannot be defined as the opposite of itself. Think about it.

Actually you already thought about it at the beginning of post 49. Stay with that.
Again I repeat -- your issue is not "what Liberalism is"; it's who you're defining as a "Liberal".

Well the term "classical liberal" is used to delineate the differences between modern liberals and liberals of old. Sorry if that bothers you but the Liberal of today stands for virtually nothing a Liberal of yesterday stood for. So whether Socialist-Fascists hijacked Liberalism or Liberalism changed, the reality is they are not one in the same.

Then you're simply using the wrong term. Don't blame them for your misapplication.

The only "hijacking" was by the Red Scare demagoguists of the postwar era who deliberately conflated "Liberal" with "Democrat" in a quest for demonization of their opposition. That had no relation to reality. George Bush the First (read: Lee Atwater) did the same thing in the 1988 presidential campaign, applying "Liberal" as a dirty word to his opponent Dukakis. Didn't matter whether Dukakis was a Liberal or a leftist; the conveyance was pure emotion.

And also pure 100% Bullshit. Liberalism founded this country. Period. Do not enable the Dumb-Down brigade. They are self-serving dickheads.

 

[Boss]

Then you're simply using the wrong term.

Well I am using the term society uses today to define the left. I didn't cause that. I also didn't create "far right conservative" and I think the term is an oxymoron. Conservatives are (by definition) not extremists. Therefore, can't be "far" anything. They oppose radicalism. Conservatives are the alternative to radical extremism. Now that I've said that, let's watch the "clown parade" file in to lament their bullshit about the "far right!"

 

[Pogo]

Then you're simply using the wrong term.

Well I am using the term society uses today to define the left. I didn't cause that. I also didn't create "far right conservative" and I think the term is an oxymoron. Conservatives are (by definition) not extremists. Therefore, can't be "far" anything. They oppose radicalism. Conservatives are the alternative to radical extremism. Now that I've said that, let's watch the "clown parade" file in to lament their bullshit about the "far right!"

Liberal is not left though. That's a low-info conflation, regardless who started it. There's no reason to perpetuate a false definition.

Seems to me "far right conservative" is functional. You'd need that term to distinguish from "mainstream conservative" or "moderate conservative".

"Radical extremism" on the other hand, could be a redundancy.

 

[Boss]

Then you're simply using the wrong term.

Well I am using the term society uses today to define the left. I didn't cause that. I also didn't create "far right conservative" and I think the term is an oxymoron. Conservatives are (by definition) not extremists. Therefore, can't be "far" anything. They oppose radicalism. Conservatives are the alternative to radical extremism. Now that I've said that, let's watch the "clown parade" file in to lament their bullshit about the "far right!"

Liberal is not left though. That's a low-info conflation, regardless who started it. There's no reason to perpetuate a false definition.

Seems to me "far right conservative" is functional. You'd need that term to distinguish from "mainstream conservative" or "moderate conservative".

"Radical extremism" on the other hand, could be a redundancy.

Again... Conservative does not have an ambiguous meaning, it is clearly defined and it simply represents the opposite of an extremist or radical. There is no such thing as "mainstream or moderate" conservative... you are either a Conservative or you're not a Conservative. Just as you are either a radical extremist or you're not a radical extremist. There are no moderate or mainstream radical extremists.

 

[Old Rocks]

...from the top of the state house?

Ahh,, So this is JUST about the state houses? It's NOT about putting pressure on Wal-mart to stop selling the flag and stuff like that?

Note that the OP CAN'T answer any of the questions and instead deflects with an absurd canard.

No one is putting any pressure on Wal-mart.

Corporations across the board decided that they didn't want to be associated with racist symbols because that might harm their revenue.

That is how capitalism works.

They did the same thing when red states tried to pass laws that discriminated against gays.

They don't agree with Republican anti-minority policies that causes loses to their bottom lines.

There is pressure being put on anyone who is selling or displaying that flag. The fact that you and your cabal have decided to make it into a "racist symbol" is putting pressure on society.... and you LOVE that! It's what you LIVE for!

Does anyone here think for one second that this stops at the statehouses? That liberals only want to remove the "offensive symbol" from officially flying over their government buildings and that's ALL? Has ANY liberal here indicated they have the slightest clue that the flag is not a racist hate symbol for many who have ancestors who died under it?

Once again the OP fails to answer the legitimate questions posed to him and instead derails his own thread by attacking "liberals".

Here, try again;

Like what would it mean to fly a white sheet from the top of the state house?

What does it mean to fly the American flag from the top of the state house?

What would it mean to fly the ISIS flag from the top of the state house?

Again, I DON"T KNOW what it would mean to a goofy-ass liberal with an agenda! Could be that your goofy ass sees a white sheet and automatically assumes I am being racist in displaying it. How the **** am I supposed to know what your goofy ass assumes? You people have jumped the tracks on the crazy train a long time ago.

It's funny... I don't see any call for removal of that stupid "rainbow pride" flag and it's offensive to Christians and all morally decent people who believe in the sanctity of traditional marriage... it's divisive and hateful just as much as the Confederate flag and it was created to be that way.

What about this one?

Why do we not have any calls for it to be removed and expunged from our view?

I'll tell you why... it's because you people have double standards.
Tolerance is a ONE-WAY STREET!
You expect society to cater to YOUR views and respect YOU but you don't want to do that for anyone else.

Now I am trying to be a bit less beligerant in my posts, however, you are completely over the line. You are one dumb ******* bigot. The Confederate Battle Flag represented the fight for the enslavement of a people. An immoral stand that cost over a half million American lives, and poisoned all too many minds in this nation to this day. That was demonstrated by the horrific crime that kid committed. And people like you are an accessory to that crime.