Is MSNBC Ramping Up Racial Tensions To Tag LGBT Agenda Onto New "Civil Rights Fury"?

[bodecea]

Pogo {above} My point was Maddow's shrill evocation of CHRISTIAN! in conjunction with her monologue that was as you say..about white supremicists..and yes, you can find that shrill interjection at I believe 13:30 but I gave 13:20 just to be sure you catch it. You are welcome of course to cue up anywhere you like in the 40+ minute broadcast if you have that kind of time on a weekday.

Have you ever noticed, when people are talking about "minority tensions" or "racial tensions" or women's rights" and so on, it's always about the Republicans against everyone else?

Well I think the emphasis at MSNBC is the CHRISTIAN-republicans. Christianity is engaged in a struggle for its very life against the cult of LGBT (associated falsely with my party-the democrats; of which there are millions upon millions of christians still, especially black and hispanic christians). After all, the legally-aggressive cult is forcing christians to abdicate their Jude 1 New Testament mandate, to assimilate themselves instead into the rainbow-fold by legal force.. The two concepts are diametrically opposed so christians are being forced, literally, by the aggressive LGBT cult, through legal channels, to choose between eternal damnation and follow secular legal-force, or destitution by being sued into poverty for failing to abdicate their religion.

Maddow seems very gleeful at this catch-22 her fellows have put christians in. That includes democratic christians and republican ones. There should be a bipartisan movement to stamp out the scourge that is threatening the 1st Amendment so brazenly...and democracy/freedom itself..

Really? That word has your panties all wadded up? Did you not get the context? That they were trying to take over Eric Cantor's position? The Jewish Eric Cantor?

 

[Syriusly]

Did you try YouTube? Anything significant winds up on YouTube.
Could be that it wasn't significant...

Yeah, sorry, here's the youtube podcast thing. Cue up to about 13:20.

No shock here- Silhuoette is lying again.

Here is what she claimed:

Last nights' Rachael Maddow show was all about equating christians (all of them presumably?) with white supremicists' movement.

And of course that doesn't happen anywhere on the video. Christian are mentioned exactly once- citing a supposed Scalise quote talking about "America being a Christian Nation".

Nothing about homosexuals. Nothing about equating Christians with white supremacists.

Just another Silhouette lie.

 

[Syriusly]

MSNBC is ramping up racial tensions just to ramp up racial tensions and perhaps spark some kind of national uprising. Gays might be a beneficiary but not intended to be the primary beneficiary.

Yeah, like the benefit hadn't crossed Maddow's mind until you just said that just now.. Maddow isn't stupid. She's laser-sharp and UBER devoted to the LGBT Agenda. Those two things are indisputable facts.

Whether or not she would 'go there' is a matter of her own personal integrity. I hope it is still intact and that I am wrong about my gut feeling. MSNBC presides over and edits & manages the Maddow Show and Sharpton's show. I'm sure it's just a coincidence the two platforms pushing (it) for "civil rights" at the same time on the same network....

All you keep demonstrating is that you are delusional.

 

[Syriusly]

that the best evidence for delusional behavior I've ever seen.
I SAW THAT BROADCAST and am a regular viewer of trms.
MS Maddow
INFERED nothing you wish she did.

Well, with how she emphasized CHRISTIAN! in a shrill voice at 13:20-30 in the youtube link I provided, let's just say that we can keep an eye on future programming at MSNBC to see if that outlet will continue fanning the flames of racial "civil rights" tensions or not. Then perhaps they will prove me wrong..

You are delusional.

 

[daws101]

I put no.

Because what MSDNC and the rest of the party media seek is the complete dissolution of American culture. The promotion of homosexuality isn't an end in itself, but only a means to the end of establishing a centrally managed, authoritarian state. Anything which damages the family structure and the concepts of individualism and liberty are promoted by the left. The goal is the destruction of the nation that once stood for liberty and opportunity, replacing it with yet another peoples cesspool.

I put no.

Because what MSDNC and the rest of the party media seek is the complete dissolution of American culture. The promotion of homosexuality isn't an end in itself, but only a means to the end of establishing a centrally managed, authoritarian state. Anything which damages the family structure and the concepts of individualism and liberty are promoted by the left. The goal is the destruction of the nation that once stood for liberty and opportunity, replacing it with yet another peoples cesspool.

 

[Silhouette]

We'll just watch the broadcasts and see what happens from there.

 

[Silhouette]

Well last night's broadcast Maddow was taking more veiled pot-shots at christians by featuring one famous one who had fallen from grace and besmeared the religion he belonged to...making references to the "christian C-street house" in Washington, tied with a semi-famous philanderer Senator of semi-recent infamy...

Digging back in the bag a little. Tying "christians" to "sexual kinkyness" and thereby alluding as how "the religion is bogus anyway" [not quotes, but the gist of it]. She went on to note how sexual infidelity isn't against the law, because she knows the edicts of her own faith and its hallmark permissiveness. But she did put the Senator on the stake and lit the pyre for his lobbying indiscretions and paying off mouths. The broadcast was a bit hypocritical of her really on her professed outrage at sexual hanky panky. I always find it amusing when a homosexual feigns shock and disgust at someone being polysexual. Who is she to judge the sex life of another?

She had visited the theme awhile back *yawn*....

From 2011:

Most recently covered by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow (1, 2), Washington D.C.'s "C Street House" has over the past two weeks become the center of a media firestorm. Along with GOP Senator Tom Coburn, sex-scandal embroiled GOP leaders Senator John Ensign and South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford have been tied to the row house, assessed to be worth 1.84 million dollars, which is registered as a church and provides Washington politicians with substantially lower than market rate rent. Coburn and Ensign have lived at the C Street house, while Sanford has participated in its Bible study group. Ensign s C Street House Owned By Group Touting Plans For Christian World Control Bruce Wilson

Apparently Ms. Maddow isn't aware that the nature of christianity isn't to be immediately perfect. It is to subscribe to a program of striving to resist the temptation to evil. It goes without saying that only saints achieve the gold ring. The vast majority of regular christans are daily engaged in ******* up and then trying to atone for their sins. But it was a good call of Maddow's to cut him short for his trying to cover up his transgressions. Christians are supposed to admit their wayward behavior as part of the atonement process. Making amends is part of that too.

I just don't like seeing a very bad example of christians paraded around as "all christians are like this". That is false. The Maddow Show should air an apology. To do otherwise would seem as bigoted as saying "all gays have AIDS".

 

[bodecea]

that the best evidence for delusional behavior I've ever seen.
I SAW THAT BROADCAST and am a regular viewer of trms.
MS Maddow
INFERED nothing you wish she did.

Well, with how she emphasized CHRISTIAN! in a shrill voice at 13:20-30 in the youtube link I provided, let's just say that we can keep an eye on future programming at MSNBC to see if that outlet will continue fanning the flames of racial "civil rights" tensions or not. Then perhaps they will prove me wrong..

Because he was running against a Jew. Hello.

 

[Skylar]

Did you try YouTube? Anything significant winds up on YouTube.
Could be that it wasn't significant...

Yeah, sorry, here's the youtube podcast thing. Cue up to about 13:20.

No shock here- Silhuoette is lying again.

Here is what she claimed:

Last nights' Rachael Maddow show was all about equating christians (all of them presumably?) with white supremicists' movement.

And of course that doesn't happen anywhere on the video. Christian are mentioned exactly once- citing a supposed Scalise quote talking about "America being a Christian Nation".

Nothing about homosexuals. Nothing about equating Christians with white supremacists.

Just another Silhouette lie.

That would certainly explain why Silo could never cite anything Maddow actually said that offended him.

 

[Skylar]

Well last night's broadcast Maddow was taking more veiled pot-shots at christians by featuring one famous one who had fallen from grace and besmeared the religion he belonged to...making references to the "christian C-street house" in Washington, tied with a semi-famous philanderer Senator of semi-recent infamy...

Then quote the veiled pot shots. You can't....as when you actually cite Maddow from last night's show, nothing she said matches the batshyte you imagined.

Once again, you've offered us nothing more than another epic paraphrase fail.

 

[Silhouette]

Well we'll just keep watching the programs to see if Sharpton and Maddow fan the racial "civil rights" tensions on the street or if they back off and let the players cool down a bit so people's lives will be saved.

 

[Skylar]

Well we'll just keep watching the programs to see if Sharpton and Maddow fan the racial "civil rights" tensions on the street or if they back off and let the players cool down a bit so people's lives will be saved.

So that's it? 10 pages of weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.......and it turned out your entire melodramatic mascara fest was purely imaginary?

I told you that on page 2. You could have saved yourself a day.

 

[Silhouette]

MSNBC fanning the flames of racial tensions over the last month or so has not been "imaginary". Now they have "islamics kill gays" to ramp up sympathy for a false civil rights movement. The theme is the same, the players are different. Lets see if racial tensions die down in the US in the aftermath of MSNBC's media "urgings"..

 

[PaintMyHouse]

MSNBC fanning the flames of racial tensions over the last month or so has not been "imaginary". Now they have "islamics kill gays" to ramp up sympathy for a false civil rights movement. The theme is the same, the players are different. Lets see if racial tensions die down in the US in the aftermath of MSNBC's media "urgings"..

Tensions die down when the cops stop killing unarmed ******* for a time.

 

[Silhouette]

MSNBC fanning the flames of racial tensions over the last month or so has not been "imaginary". Now they have "islamics kill gays" to ramp up sympathy for a false civil rights movement. The theme is the same, the players are different. Lets see if racial tensions die down in the US in the aftermath of MSNBC's media "urgings"..

Tensions die down when the cops stop killing unarmed ******* for a time.

They also die down when MSNBC stops running nonstop "civil rights" anger/outrage-pieces back to back..

We have a black president, or hasn't Sharpton heard yet?

 

[Pogo]

Well we'll just keep watching the programs to see if Sharpton and Maddow fan the racial "civil rights" tensions on the street or if they back off and let the players cool down a bit so people's lives will be saved.

MSNBC has that kind of influence?
That's strange because the rest of the board insists nobody watches it.

Which way you wanna play this?

 

[Skylar]

MSNBC fanning the flames of racial tensions over the last month or so has not been "imaginary". Now they have "islamics kill gays" to ramp up sympathy for a false civil rights movement. The theme is the same, the players are different. Lets see if racial tensions die down in the US in the aftermath of MSNBC's media "urgings"..

Laughing.....so let me see if I get this straight. This was the premise of your thread:

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to deduce that as support for gay marraige wanes in the general public, while lower federal courts act in contempt of Windsor on the specific Finding on question of law in Windsor: "Do states have the power to deliberate and Find on gay marriage or not?" Windsor was clear that they do.. :Gay Marriages in States Forced by Circuit Courts to Allow Them Are Not Legal Page 29 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum LGBT activists like MSNBC will be in desperation-mode... Perhaps desperate enough to incite murders and revenge killings and tensions between the races in general in order to tag on the cult of LGBT's movement onto a "live civil rights issue" in order to put the jolt paddles back on their lifestyle movement "as civil rights movement"?

Based on a Maddow show you watched. Turned out, Maddow didn't say any of the batshyte nonsense you attributed to her in infamous 'episode' that convinced you of your equally batshit little theory.

And you're still trying to schuck the same silly conspiracy 'effect', despite your 'cause' not existing?

Sil.....you're really bad at this.

Oh, and you're also factually deluded. Gay marriage support is on the rise. And has been in the majority range for about 3 years. You've literally hallucinated waning support for gay marriage as an imaginary motivation for MSNBC to conduct 'Operation Batshyte'. Which, of course, never happened.

Is there any part of your claims that isn't some kind of politically induced LSD trip?

 

[Skylar]

Well we'll just keep watching the programs to see if Sharpton and Maddow fan the racial "civil rights" tensions on the street or if they back off and let the players cool down a bit so people's lives will be saved.

MSNBC has that kind of influence?
That's strange because the rest of the board insists nobody watches it.

Which way you wanna play this?

Oh, you're missing out on the greater delusion. You have to follow the conspiracy back a few steps before you can get a real sense of just how ******* nutty it is.

Silo is insisting that MSNBC is inciting racial violence so they can slip in mention of LGBT community and gain sympathy for their cause. And why would they need to do this? Because per Sil, support for gay marriage is waning. And what's Sil's evidence of this? Why, a straw poll from THIS BOARD asking about if churches should be forced to accomidate gay weddings. Which Sil insists is really means that Americans don't support gay marriage.

So.......MSNBC is inciting racial violence across the nation.......because of a USMB poll.

Can't you just smell the batshyte?

 

[Silhouette]

MSNBC has that kind of influence?
That's strange because the rest of the board insists nobody watches it.

Which way you wanna play this?

Uh, I've never said people don't watch MSNBC? And even if it was just ten people in Missouri who watched MSNBC, that's enough to incite a riot there. Ever see a gasoline fire take off? It starts slowly in one corner and then inches along until it finds a big pool of it and WHAM! the whole thing flares up sky high in an instant.

That is what MSNBC needs to knock off. Report the news, don't create it..

You claim I'm walking lockstep with some political ideology. I'm not. Your ilk are the ones insisting on "uniformity of thought", not me. If you look far enough back in my posts you will find me chewing out Fox News years back when Beck and Palin were stirring up and inciting riotous conditions in the public towards Obama (2008 campaign) and since. Beck I still believe is responsible indirectly for the lunatic who was "inspired" to go shoot Gabby Giffords... Beck was stumping for his healthcare industry pals and fanning all sorts of Armageddon flames of social unrest. They finally asked him to leave. I think it was a compromise with the Obama Administration who might have felt they had a line on revoking Murdoch's citizenship for owning a media outlet as a naturalized citizen and using that outlet with his majority stockholder pal and foreign Prince, Ahwleed Talal of Saudi Arabia to incite civil unrest on American soil.

I still think they should've revoked Murdoch's citizenship. It is illegal for a foreigner to own a US Media outlet. That goes for major stockholders using proxies (talking to you Prince Talal). That guy owns more media in this country than Americans do, if my memory serves me. Those who control information control a nation.

Again I say to both networks: Report the news, do not create it.

 

[Skylar]

MSNBC has that kind of influence?
That's strange because the rest of the board insists nobody watches it.

Which way you wanna play this?

Uh, I've never said people don't watch MSNBC? And even if it was just ten people in Missouri who watched MSNBC, that's enough to incite a riot there. Ever see a gasoline fire take off? It starts slowly in one corner and then inches along until it finds a big pool of it and WHAM! the whole thing flares up sky high in an instant.

Is this like your panty shitting ebola scare nonsense where you start talking about nuclear melt downs and the end of civilization.....save this time its MSNBC that stars in your fantasy?

You claim I'm walking lockstep with some political ideology. I'm not.

Oh, you're your own special scent of batshit, Sil. You're literally arguing that MSNBC incited racial violence in places like Missouri as a cover for gay marriage support because gay marriage support was waning.

There's not a single part of your accusation that isn't at least a little crazy.