NYC is considering removing statues of Washington and Columbus

[Ghost of a Rider]

I keep using the Hitler analogy because I retain hope that your Bingo brain can eventually process my very simple point.

It doesn't matter if you want to venerate Hitler for his art work. Objectively that still makes you a Hitler venerator.

Likewise, wanting to venerate a slaver like Washington, for whatever reason, still makes you a slaver venerator.

Wrong. This implies veneration of his slave ownership and that is not the case.

I don't care what your excuses are. It's irrelevant to me. Your veneration of slavers is what's useful to me politically and socially.

"Useful"? Useful how?

Not at all. Public support of monsters is how we cancel pieces of human trash and push them to the fringes of society.

Because it pisses you off.

You're the one who's been promoting the idea of emotional

Well you aren't yet but you could be, one day.

If we agree democratically to take responsibility for the mistreatment of Black Americans then yes. That's how democracy works.

Slaver colonies. That's the kind of shit you venerate huh?

I was speaking legally. Whether something is legal or not has an objective answer, no?

Maybe not according to the definition of justice that is a reference to your feelings but to the one that's a reference to the functioning of law, maybe. I don't really care how you feel about it, I care more about the debt being paid.

It doesn't mean those laws are based on what you find to be moral or unethical. Not unless you're the sole arbiter of the law. Are you?

Who's? Yours or mine?

To answer this we have the democratic process.

My confusion comes from your claiming to be morally opposed to slavery yet you seem to celebrate slaver colonies gaining their independence. Do you also root for the Taliban or Boko Haram?

What do you think I have been doing? It's hard getting through that cognitive dissonance. You have a romanticized view of slaver society.

I don't defend white moderates who make promises to the Black community that go unfulfilled, like their promise to pass the John Lewis voting rights act when the Democrats controlled the House. That's a far cry from Republicans however who actively target black voters to disenfranchise us. Take voter ID laws. The people who fight those things are black communities led by black advocates like Stacy Abrams who understand how these laws impact her community better than you do. For instance it doesn't affect a lot of voters but some older black voters don't have birth certificates. That's because they were born in the midst of segregation where many black families in the south were denied access to hospitals and were forced to give birth at home via midwives and didn't get proper documentation. Now that isn't a large number of people but if affects some though what's more damning are the instances where Republican legislators have "targeted black voters with surgical precision." That was an actual ruling by a court against North Carolina Republicans that was upheld by the Supreme Court. In that case Republican legislators looked up county records to find out what IDs black voters disportionately used verse white voters (which turned out to be county employee IDs) and tried to ban those. So in that case Black voters had IDs and Republicans wanted to disqualify them specifically to harm black voters. Then there are the instances of Republican legislators in places like Alabama who fought tooth and nail to deny adding a second black district to a state that is over 25% black.

I don't claim that white Democrats are heroes of the black community. I just think Republicans and conservatives are obviously worse. So obvious in fact they struggle to get more than 10% of the Black vote. That's a pretty definitive statement in and of itself. My solution to this however isn't to continue to rely on white liberals but to keep making the Democratic party and America itself blacker and browner.

How should I feel about you trying to explain to me how I should feel about white liberals?

It doesn't? If it doesn't why are you so afraid of cancel culture?

The same thing that's wrong with lying in general?

Tell me how do you know people are lying and don't genuinely find these people to be racist?

If its their honest opinion it can't be false. Opinions aren't true or false.

The majority that makes you worried about cancel culture.

/——/ “Brevity is the soul of wit.” - Some English guy a long time ago.

Perhaps. But I'm not going for wit, I'm just trying to get this jackass to look at things other than through the wrong end of the eyeglass.

 

[Curried Goats]

Wrong. This implies veneration of his slave ownership and that is not the case.

It asserts veneration of a slaver because objectively, that's what it is.

"Useful"? Useful how?

In pushing slaver venerators and their culture towards the fringes of society and ultimately, extinction.

Because it pisses you off.

Not at all. Your ignorant and vocal love of slavers amuses me and as I said, provides political and social opportunities to expose you as a deplorable mutant.

You're the one who's been promoting the idea of emotional

Yeah. I use rhetoric and emotion as weapons because they're useful as such.

Perhaps. But I'm not going for wit, I'm just trying to get this jackass to look at things other than through the wrong end of the eyeglass.

You're the one who doesn't clearly see slaver society for what it was or slavers for who they were. But we'll mock and shame that out of you yet.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I keep using the Hitler analogy because I retain hope that your Bingo brain can eventually process my very simple point.

It doesn't matter if you want to venerate Hitler for his art work. Objectively that still makes you a Hitler venerator.

Likewise, wanting to venerate a slaver like Washington, for whatever reason, still makes you a slaver venerator.

Wrong. This implies veneration of his slave ownership and that is not the case.

I don't care what your excuses are. It's irrelevant to me. Your veneration of slavers is what's useful to me politically and socially.

"Useful"? Useful how?

Not at all. Public support of monsters is how we cancel pieces of human trash and push them to the fringes of society.

Because it pisses you off.

You're the one who's been promoting the idea of emotional impact to get your point across. Don't try to crawfish now and tell me you're not emotional about it.

Well you aren't yet but you could be, one day.

Answer the question: why?

If we agree democratically to take responsibility for the mistreatment of Black Americans then yes. That's how democracy works.

That doesn't make it right.

I don't believe it will happen anyway. I believe the most recent numbers has around seventy percent of Americans opposing the idea.

Slaver colonies. That's the kind of shit you venerate huh?

Yeah, sure. But what really gets me charged is when they ate babies.

I was speaking legally. Whether something is legal or not has an objective answer, no?

In a legal context, yes. But not necessarily in a moral or fairness context.

You've been saying over and over about the legal justice of reparations. However, you haven't said what is morally or ethically just on this matter. So, assuming for a moment that legally mandated reparations will never happen, how do you think the issue should be resolved? Do you think that individuals should be held accountable in some way? If so, how?

Maybe not according to the definition of justice that is a reference to your feelings but to the one that's a reference to the functioning of law, maybe. I don't really care how you feel about it, I care more about the debt being paid.

And I don't care that you care more about the debt being paid. I didn't incur this debt.

It doesn't mean those laws are based on what you find to be moral or unethical.

I didn't say it was you stupid fuck.

Jesus Christ, what a moron.

Who's? Yours or mine?

Society's, dumbass. I would think that would be obvious.

My confusion comes from your claiming to be morally opposed to slavery yet you seem to celebrate slaver colonies gaining their independence. Do you also root for the Taliban or Boko Haram?

Just lately Hamas has been my favorite team.

What do you think I have been doing?

Getting confused about my morality.

It's hard getting through that cognitive dissonance. You have a romanticized view of slaver society.

You have a romanticized view of morality. You think morality is clean and neat and it is not.

I don't defend white moderates who make promises to the Black community that go unfulfilled, like their promise to pass the John Lewis voting rights act when the Democrats controlled the House. That's a far cry from Republicans however who actively target black voters to disenfranchise us. Take voter ID laws. The people who fight those things are black communities led by black advocates like Stacy Abrams who understand how these laws impact her community better than you do.

Okay then, explain how and why voter ID would negatively impact a black community.

For instance it doesn't affect a lot of voters but some older black voters don't have birth certificates. That's because they were born in the midst of segregation where many black families in the south were denied access to hospitals and were forced to give birth at home via midwives and didn't get proper documentation.

Do they have other types of ID? If not, how do they drive, buy liquor/cigarettes, travel, apply for a job, get married, etc?

I don't claim that white Democrats are heroes of the black community. I just think Republicans and conservatives are obviously worse. So obvious in fact they struggle to get more than 10% of the Black vote. That's a pretty definitive statement in and of itself. My solution to this however isn't to continue to rely on white liberals but to keep making the Democratic party and America itself blacker and browner.

I've asked you before why this was important and you wouldn't answer the question. Now I know it's exactly what I suspected: you think Republicans are racist. I even told you not to pussyfoot around and admit it but you wouldn't.

How should I feel about you trying to explain to me how I should feel about white liberals?

What? I clearly said it was what I would feel.

It doesn't? If it doesn't why are you so afraid of cancel culture?

I didn't say it doesn't work, I said it didn't work - in that particular case.

A better question would be: why are you participating in it?

The same thing that's wrong with lying in general?

There you go. So why do you lie?

Tell me how do you know people are lying and don't genuinely find these people to be racist?

Because, in my case, I know it's not true.

But it's not just people that are being falsely labeled as racist. There was a case where a black woman saw a decorative vase with cotton plants in it at Hobby Lobby, took a pic of it and posted it on social media and said something like "Really Hobby Lobby?", implying that it was racist.

Another one involved another black woman at Wal-Mart who wanted to buy some kind of black hair care product. At this particular store the black hair care products were in a locked case due to excessive theft. Because of this, an employee had to open the case and then escorted her to the checkout. The woman of course said Wal-Mart was racist.

There are many cases like this where blacks claim racism when it is clearly not.

If its their honest opinion it can't be false. Opinions aren't true or false.

That's just it, most often it's NOT an honest opinion.

Racism is a serious allegation that adjudges a person's overall character. But people are just throwing it out there for every minor thing like they're opining about the taste of mashed potatoes.

Alleging racism requires more considered thought and circumspection. But all too often it's nothing more than an emotional response to nothing more than a misunderstanding or disagreement on a particular issue.

The majority that makes you worried about cancel culture.

That doesn't answer the question. Majority of what?

 

[Leviticus]

Columbus I can understand but why Washington, unless they are embracing their istory as Loyalists during the revolution.

 

[Curried Goats]

Wrong. This implies veneration of his slave ownership and that is not the case.

That's the stink you accept when you venerate slavers. What aspect of the American Taliban and Boko Haram are you celebrating by the way?

"Useful"? Useful how?

By painting you as a deplorable piece of human trash who venerate slavers.

Because it pisses you off.

You're the one who's been promoting the idea of emotional impact to get your point across. Don't try to crawfish now and tell me you're not emotional about it.

That emotion is amusement. I don't believe in objective morality or righteousness but a lot of Americans do and I can use that.

Answer the question: why?

I've lost the context of what you're asking.

That doesn't make it right.

So feel free to cry about it.

I don't believe it will happen anyway. I believe the most recent numbers has around seventy percent of Americans opposing the idea.

Those numbers change dramatically as you poll younger Americans. It's not really the morality of slaver venerators we were changing, it's their children. When you strip away the propaganda of America's Founding and its history it turns out there's a lot to recognize as deplorable and to account for.

Yeah, sure. But what really gets me charged is when they ate babies.

No. They just stripped them from their wailing mothers to sell them into slavery themselves. There's really no need for hyperbole when we're talking about slaver Founders. The truth is damning enough.

In a legal context, yes. But not necessarily in a moral or fairness context.

So cry about it. See you keep talking about how things are unfair. I'm just bullying you and goading you into talking so much about for your love and veneration of slavers. Still don't get it?

Okay then, explain how and why voter ID would negatively impact a black community.


Do they have other types of ID? If not, how do they drive, buy liquor/cigarettes, travel, apply for a job, get married, etc?

Maybe they don't do those things. Your deflection doesn't take away from the fact that a court, an appellate court and the Supreme Court found that Republicans in North Carolina "targeted black voters with surgical precision" in order to make it harder for them to vote.

I've asked you before why this was important and you wouldn't answer the question. Now I know it's exactly what I suspected: you think Republicans are racist. I even told you not to pussyfoot around and admit it but you wouldn't.

Have you seen any of my other comments on this board? Of course I think Republicans are racist pieces of shit. I don't pussyfoot about with that. If you were curious you should of just asked, plainly.

A better question would be: why are you participating in it?

Because it's a useful tool like any other. Why wouldn't I want to push people I find to be deplorable to the fringes of society? Not violently mind you but through shame and ridicule and propaganda? And not only of them but people who support them, socially or financially.

But it's not just people that are being falsely labeled as racist. There was a case where a black woman saw a decorative vase with cotton plants in it at Hobby Lobby, took a pic of it and posted it on social media and said something like "Really Hobby Lobby?", implying that it was racist.

And? Did that hurt your feelings? Why are you telling me this story like I give a fuck? Learn to deal with disagreement and defend yourself.

Another one involved another black woman at Wal-Mart who wanted to buy some kind of black hair care product. At this particular store the black hair care products were in a locked case due to excessive theft. Because of this, an employee had to open the case and then escorted her to the checkout. The woman of course said Wal-Mart was racist.

There are many cases like this where blacks claim racism when it is clearly not.

Well boo fucking hoo for you.

That's just it, most often it's NOT an honest opinion.

Racism is a serious allegation that adjudges a person's overall character. But people are just throwing it out there for every minor thing like they're opining about the taste of mashed potatoes.

If you're not a racist what do you have to worry about?

Alleging racism requires more considered thought and circumspection. But all too often it's nothing more than an emotional response to nothing more than a misunderstanding or disagreement on a particular issue.

Does it require more consideration that your bullshit about IDs?

That doesn't answer the question. Majority of what?

Of the country. Of the culture. And untimely of its politics. Demographic change is coming and with it cultural change and fewer people who are going to be interested in venerating your favorite white slavers or denying their progeny economic justice.

 

[Curried Goats]

Columbus I can understand but why Washington, unless they are embracing their istory as Loyalists during the revolution.

He was a slaver who fought for slaver independence while owning men, women and children as property.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

That's the stink you accept when you venerate slavers. What aspect of the American Taliban and Boko Haram are you celebrating by the way?

By painting you as a deplorable piece of human trash who venerate slavers.

You didn't need that. You were going to paint me as racist anyway.

That emotion is amusement. I don't believe in objective morality or righteousness but a lot of Americans do and I can use that.

So you're not pissed off but you try to get others pissed off? Do you expect me to believe that?

I've lost the context of what you're asking.

Because you can't even keep up with your own bullshit.

You said that neither you or I was alive when Washington fought for our independence so my question is: If that's the case, why should I have to pay?

Those numbers change dramatically as you poll younger Americans.

How do you know they didn't poll younger Americans?

It's not really the morality of slaver venerators we were changing, it's their children. When you strip away the propaganda of America's Founding and its history it turns out there's a lot to recognize as deplorable and to account for.

And yet, again, here you are.

Tell me, what's it like growing up and living in a country you hate?

No. They just stripped them from their wailing mothers to sell them into slavery themselves.

Yeah, that too.

There's really no need for hyperbole when we're talking about slaver Founders. The truth is damning enough.

So why all the hyperbole from you?

So cry about it. See you keep talking about how things are unfair. I'm just bullying you and goading you into talking so much about for your love and veneration of slavers. Still don't get it?

You don't get that these comments were made in the context of reparations?

Idiot.

Maybe they don't do those things.

I don't believe that and neither do you.

Your deflection doesn't take away from the fact that a court, an appellate court and the Supreme Court found that Republicans in North Carolina "targeted black voters with surgical precision" in order to make it harder for them to vote.

Irrelevant. You haven't adequately explained how these blacks without IDs manage to buy and do things that ID is required for, other than to ignorantly suggest they don't do any of those things.

Have you seen any of my other comments on this board? Of course I think Republicans are racist pieces of shit. I don't pussyfoot about with that. If you were curious you should of just asked, plainly.

Then why did you not respond when I asked you to come out and say it?

Because it's a useful tool like any other.

So, useful for false and frivolous accusations of racism?

You do understand that this happens, yes?

Why wouldn't I want to push people I find to be deplorable to the fringes of society?

Because some of the people you find to be deplorable are not.

Not violently mind you but through shame and ridicule and propaganda?

If this goes on long enough, violence is inevitable. In fact, it has happened already.

And? Did that hurt your feelings?

No, I just thought it was stupid.

Why are you telling me this story like I give a fuck?

I'm telling this story because you don't give a fuck.

Learn to deal with disagreement and defend yourself.

Defend myself against what?

Well boo fucking hoo for you.

That's your response to false accusations of racism?

If you're not a racist what do you have to worry about?

If accusing someone of racism had no effect on anything then why bother? If it does have an effect then you tell me what that effect is and why it should bother me.

You're the one making the accusation so either back it up or or stop wagging your shit-stained tongue.

Does it require more consideration that your bullshit about IDs?

If it's something that cannot be proven with concrete evidence, yes.

Of the country. Of the culture.

No. You said: "If you don't like that the majority of people seem to be of the opinion that you're a racist maybe modify your behavior or learn not to care."

So what majority thinks I'm racist?

And untimely of its politics.

What the hell does this mean?

Demographic change is coming and with it cultural change and fewer people who are going to be interested in venerating your favorite white slavers or denying their progeny economic justice.

You didn't answer my question. If legally mandated reparations never happens, how do you think the issue should be resolved? Do you think that individuals should be held accountable in some way? If so, how?

 

[Curried Goats]

You didn't need that. You were going to paint me as racist anyway.

I don't even know you. You responded to me first. I didn't make you open your mouth to defend slavers.

So you're not pissed off but you try to get others pissed off? Do you expect me to believe that?

Is that what you think I'm doing? I'm not trying piss anyone off about statues. How angry is anyone over a statue? I'm shaming and ridiculing people for either A: being morons who are unable to see the incongruity in celebrating slavers as heroes for freedom and independence.... or B: being disgusting racists who aren't put off by their heroes mistreatment of Black men, women and children. And, I want to keep having this debate over and over and over again in front of young impressionable minds who have more access to information than any generation before them so they can see for themselves who's full of shit. It's not about changing your mind. It's about exposing and embarrassing you publicly. And it's not even really about statues. It's about your entire culture, it's framing of history and how emotionally fragile older white people are to examining the fairytale and fiction from fact so we can have an honest look at the depravity and violence this nation wrought on black bodies. We're coming for your entire culture.

You said that neither you or I was alive when Washington fought for our independence so my question is: If that's the case, why should I have to pay?

Because the force of law will compel you to.

How do you know they didn't poll younger Americans?

I've seen the polls.

Black and White Americans are far apart in their views of reparations for slavery

Those numbers are going to keep shifting my way the blacker and browner we get as a nation.

And yet, again, here you are.

Tell me, what's it like growing up and living in a country you hate?

I don't hate this country. You think this country is only the white racist parts? I live in a minority majority city. Grew up around Jamaican, Cuban, Dominican, Puerto Rican, Haitian and Black American families. The America I love is diverse, welcoming, loud, and vibrant. I love this country. It's heroes are Tubman, King, Chavez.... these people are American heroes. Not no damn slavers.

So why all the hyperbole from you?

What hyperbole? Washington was a slaver. That isn't hyperbole, it's just a fact.

Irrelevant. You haven't adequately explained how these blacks without IDs manage to buy and do things that ID is required for, other than to ignorantly suggest they don't do any of those things.

Why do you think I'm required to adequately explain your questions and assumptions? You have no clue about these people. You don't know if some don't drink, drive or fly. You don't know how these people are affected by the law except for the fact that a court found them to be specifically targeted by Republicans.

Then why did you not respond when I asked you to come out and say it?

Did you? I must of missed it. To be honest I don't remember much of the context of some these replies of your and I certainly don't care enough to keep scrolling back up to check. If I don't understand or remember what your asking about I just snip it.

So, useful for false and frivolous accusations of racism?

Your assumption is that they're false. I dont care about false assumptions because they don't have anything to do with me. If I'm accusing you of being a racist it's because I have some data point the is giving me that impression.

You do understand that this happens, yes?

Sure, I just don't understand why the fuck you think it has anything to do with me or my arguments.

Because some of the people you find to be deplorable are not.

Maybe. I keep an open mind. I'm willing to hear what exactly it is about a Slave State and it's success as a Slave State that you want to celebrate. Maybe you're not racist. Maybe you're just a moron who can't recognize obvious incongruity.

If this goes on long enough, violence is inevitable. In fact, it has happened already.

White racist views and white racist culture hasn't spurned violence against Black people? I'm not going to be scared from denouncing deplorable viewpoints and deplorable cultures because you fear monger about what might happen in the transition. That's life.

If accusing someone of racism had no effect on anything then why bother? If it does have an effect then you tell me what that effect is and why it should bother me.

I didn't say it doesn't have an affect, I asked if you're not a racist what are you worried about?

You're the one making the accusation so either back it up or or stop wagging your shit-stained tongue.

I don't have any problem backing up my claims slaver lover.

No. You said: "If you don't like that the majority of people seem to be of the opinion that you're a racist maybe modify your behavior or learn not to care."

So what majority thinks I'm racist?

I was talking about in the hypothetical where the public has tarred and feathered you as a racist. Maybe at that point its time for some self examination. If everyone thinks you're the asshole, maybe you are the problem.

You didn't answer my question. If legally mandated reparations never happens, how do you think the issue should be resolved? Do you think that individuals should be held accountable in some way? If so, how?

1. I don't think it's never going to happen. I think its only a matter of time.

2. It's not about holding you accountable. It's about economic justice for Black Americans. Obtaining that is the goal, not punishing you. Taxes is simply the way that's accomplished and realistically you probably won't even notice if it happens. It's not like they're going to send you a bill.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I don't even know you. You responded to me first. I didn't make you open your mouth to defend slavers.

When I first responded to you it was about the Democrat Party.

Is that what you think I'm doing? I'm not trying piss anyone off about statues. How angry is anyone over a statue?

You tell me. You've been going back and forth with me on this for five weeks.

This is your crusade. Believe me, I don't feel nearly as strongly about keeping the statues as you do about removing them.

I'm shaming and ridiculing people for either A: being morons who are unable to see the incongruity in celebrating slavers as heroes for freedom and independence.... or B: being disgusting racists who aren't put off by their heroes mistreatment of Black men, women and children. And, I want to keep having this debate over and over and over again in front of young impressionable minds who have more access to information than any generation before them so they can see for themselves who's full of shit.

So you want young people to see you're full of shit?

You think I jest but I do not. You are full of shit and anyone here with any sense can see that. You refuse to provide evidence for your allegations; you ignore pertinent questions and you fall back on deflection, insults and ridicule when you don't want to directly address comments.

A good (probably the best ) example of your bullshit is when I told you what my niece's husband said about the racism crusade, you said something like: "You shouldn't speak for your one black friend."

The only reason you would say something like this without actually knowing how many black friends I have is because I disagree with you about the statues, I'm white and you believe I'm racist. And of course, because you're full of shit.

It was a fucked up thing to say and you're a piece of shit for saying it.

It's not about changing your mind. It's about exposing and embarrassing you publicly. And it's not even really about statues. It's about your entire culture, it's framing of history and how emotionally fragile older white people are to examining the fairytale and fiction from fact so we can have an honest look at the depravity and violence this nation wrought on black bodies. We're coming for your entire culture.

Get ready for the violence.

Because the force of law will compel you to.

No. Morally and ethically speaking, why should I have to pay if I wasn't there?

I've seen the polls.

Black and White Americans are far apart in their views of reparations for slavery

Those numbers are going to keep shifting my way the blacker and browner we get as a nation.

Yeah, okay. But what will you do about the ones who still honor historical figures?

I don't hate this country.

Yes you do.

You think this country is only the white racist parts?

It's also the black racist parts.

I live in a minority majority city. Grew up around Jamaican, Cuban, Dominican, Puerto Rican, Haitian and Black American families. The America I love is diverse, welcoming, loud, and vibrant. I love this country. It's heroes are Tubman, King, Chavez.... these people are American heroes. Not no damn slavers.

Great, you're into diversity. Now, how about accepting those who admire historical figures?

What hyperbole?

"MUTANT DEPLORABLE RACIST MURDERING HUMAN PIECES OF SHIT!!!" Repeat ad nauseum.

Washington was a slaver. That isn't hyperbole, it's just a fact.

The hyperbole shows up when you want to convey just how much HUMAN PIECES OF SHIT! you think they are. For that matter, how much of a racist you think I am: "Do you also root for the Taliban or Boko Haram?"

Why do you think I'm required to adequately explain your questions and assumptions?

How does one explain a question?

You have no clue about these people.

You had no clue about me either but that didn't stop you from your racist remark.

You don't know if some don't drink, drive or fly.

Are you saying none of them do? I can see a few hundred here and there but ALL of them? That's got to be at least a couple million.

You don't know how these people are affected by the law except for the fact that a court found them to be specifically targeted by Republicans.

I did a little research on this to get some perspective and it seems that voter ID was not so much the issue as it was the redistricting and undoing of some of the voting rules put in place some years ago that resulted in higher black voter turnout.

They did some research to find out black voter practices and then changed the rules accordingly. Voter ID was not the issue, it was the fact that they targeted a certain area and changed some of the rules, allegedly to affect black voter turnout.

While this may have been unethical and maybe unconstitutional, Voter ID is still required to vote in North Carolina.

Did you?

Yes, I did. I don't know the post number but I said to stop pussyfooting around and say the Republican Party is racist and you refused to respond.

I must of missed it.

It's "I must HAVE missed it" not, I must OF missed it."

To be honest I don't remember much of the context of some these replies of your and I certainly don't care enough to keep scrolling back up to check. If I don't understand or remember what your asking about I just snip it.

What's hard to understand about "Say the Republican Party is racist.". As for remembering, there's nothing to remember. When you reply, the entire text of the post is right there.

Your assumption is that they're false.

Wrong. I say some of them are false and some of them are.

I dont care about false assumptions because they don't have anything to do with me.

What about your false assumptions?

If I'm accusing you of being a racist it's because I have some data point the is giving me that impression.

This only means you have a subjective reason for calling me racist. It still doesn't mean it's true.

Sure, I just don't understand why the fuck you think it has anything to do with me or my arguments.

1.) You just said: "Your assumption is that they're (false accusations of racism) false.". Now you're acknowledging that it does happen.

2.) Because you yourself have expressed many false assumptions throughout this discussion.

Maybe. I keep an open mind. I'm willing to hear what exactly it is about a Slave State and it's success as a Slave State that you want to celebrate. Maybe you're not racist. Maybe you're just a moron who can't recognize obvious incongruity.

I'm not just talking about slave-owning historical figures, I'm talking about any person you view as deplorable or racist.

White racist views and white racist culture hasn't spurned violence against Black people?

Of course it has but that's irrelevant to my point. If this racism crusade continues as the witch hunt it is; where people, events and various things are viewed as racist when they are not, people will get fed up at some point. We're almost at that point now.

I'm not going to be scared from denouncing deplorable viewpoints and deplorable cultures because you fear monger about what might happen in the transition. That's life.

That's fine as far as that goes. But what about false and flippant allegations? That's what I'm talking about. People are sick and tired of the offhand accusations over stupid shit like misconstrued words or a black person losing an award to a white person or a fucking decorative cotton plant.

As I said before, the word "racism" has lost all meaning.

I didn't say it doesn't have an affect, I asked if you're not a racist what are you worried about?

So you're saying it does have an effect? Okay, now we're getting somewhere. So what is the effect of accusing someone of racism? After that, explain to me why - even if I'm not a racist - I should be bothered by it.

I don't have any problem backing up my claims slaver lover.

So back it up.

I was talking about in the hypothetical where the public has tarred and feathered you as a racist. Maybe at that point its time for some self examination. If everyone thinks you're the asshole, maybe you are the problem.

That's the fucking point: people I know don't view me as racist.

1. I don't think it's never going to happen. I think its only a matter of time.

2. It's not about holding you accountable. It's about economic justice for Black Americans. Obtaining that is the goal, not punishing you. Taxes is simply the way that's accomplished and realistically you probably won't even notice if it happens. It's not like they're going to send you a bill.

You still haven't answered the question. I said, assuming for a moment it never happens, how do you think it should be resolved? Who should be morally, ethically and principally accountable for slavery and discrimination if reparations are off the table and financial restitution is not an option?

 

[Curried Goats]

When I first responded to you it was about the Democrat Party.

Remind me, where you trying to argue the Democratic party of today was morally responsible for slavery?

You tell me. You've been going back and forth with me on this for five weeks.

This is your crusade. Believe me, I don't feel nearly as strongly about keeping the statues as you do about removing them.

The Statues are only symbols. It's your culture we're coming for. Your inability to fully protect your idols is simply the evidence of your cultures crumbling facade.

So you want young people to see you're full of shit?

I'm not ashamed of my arguments or opinions. I'm happy to voice them and allow others to judge them as they see fit.

You think I jest but I do not. You are full of shit and anyone here with any sense can see that. You refuse to provide evidence for your allegations; you ignore pertinent questions and you fall back on deflection, insults and ridicule when you don't want to directly address comments.

This from the guy who still refuses to acknowledge the objective truth that venerating Washington means venerating a slaver.

A good (probably the best ) example of your bullshit is when I told you what my niece's husband said about the racism crusade, you said something like: "You shouldn't speak for your one black friend."

That's a good example of you not recognizing that your niece's husband doesn't have shit to do with anything. Learn what anecdotal evidence is and stop hiding behind people who may or may not exist.

My arguments are about people we both have some knowledge of and agree are real. Namely, Washington, you and myself. I don't use the words and beliefs of people who can't be verified to even exist as evidence in my arguments.

The only reason you would say something like this without actually knowing how many black friends I have is because I disagree with you about the statues, I'm white and you believe I'm racist. And of course, because you're full of shit.

I don't even care what color you are. What color you are has not a single fucking thing to do with whether Washington was a slaver or whether slaver venerators are pieces of human trash.

It was a fucked up thing to say and you're a piece of shit for saying it.

Then cry about it. I don't care.

Get ready for the violence.

If your response to people using their free speech to question your idols, your beliefs and your culture is violence or threats of violence tough tits. I guess we'll just have to defend ourselves from you violent pieces of shit.

No. Morally and ethically speaking, why should I have to pay if I wasn't there?

I didn't say you have to pay morally and no one can even make you pay morally other than you. Remember, morals are simply your feelings.

Yeah, okay. But what will you do about the ones who still honor historical figures?

Continue to point, laugh and ridicule them and their culture into social, cultural and political irrelevance.

It's also the black racist parts.

Except I don't celebrate Black racism. You do celebrate white slavers.

Great, you're into diversity. Now, how about accepting those who admire historical figures?

I accept that they get to but they don't get to without ridicule or criticism.

"MUTANT DEPLORABLE RACIST MURDERING HUMAN PIECES OF SHIT!!!" Repeat ad nauseum.

Propaganda is useful, especially if repeated over and over. That part is my rhetoric. I want to associate Slavers with human trash in contrast to how you associate them as freedom fighters.

My argument is two parts. One part objective and the other subjective. The first, that Washington was a slaver. That statues honor people. And that statues to Washington serve to honor a slaver. The second, subjective part is simply that slavery is wrong and slavers are trash.

My rhetoric only asks people to search their own morality and ask themselves if they think people who enslave men, women and children are trash.

Your rhetoric is a lie by omission and asks learned individuals to forget about all the slaves the freedom fighters kept as property.

The hyperbole shows up when you want to convey just how much HUMAN PIECES OF SHIT! you think they are. For that matter, how much of a racist you think I am: "Do you also root for the Taliban or Boko Haram?"

And? I don't use hyperbole as deflection from the fact that your slaver hero Washington enslaved children.

How does one explain a question?

You had no clue about me either but that didn't stop you from your racist remark.

Are you saying none of them do? I can see a few hundred here and there but ALL of them? That's got to be at least a couple million.

The only thing I'm saying is that a court, an appellate court and the Supreme Court found that Republicans in North Carolina had specifically targeted black citizens to harm their ability to vote. Whatever you're saying you need to qualify with your own evidence and your own commentary. I'm not making any assumptions whatsoever about what kinds of IDs they have or don't have and why. I'm simply providing objective evidence of Republicans attacking Black voting rights.

I did a little research on this to get some perspective and it seems that voter ID was not so much the issue as it was the redistricting and undoing of some of the voting rules put in place some years ago that resulted in higher black voter turnout.

Your subjective impressions don't really mean shit in the face of the rulings by three separate courts.

They did some research to find out black voter practices and then changed the rules accordingly. Voter ID was not the issue, it was the fact that they targeted a certain area and changed some of the rules, allegedly to affect black voter turnout.

Voter ID is only part of the issue. Yes Republicans also try to redistrict, close polling stations, and change voting times all in their effort to harass the Black vote. I simply focused on one particularly obvious scheme.

While this may have been unethical and maybe unconstitutional, Voter ID is still required to vote in North Carolina.

Are we debating what the law is or whether there's objective evidence of Republicans trying to harass Black voters?

Yes, I did. I don't know the post number but I said to stop pussyfooting around and say the Republican Party is racist and you refused to respond.


It's "I must HAVE missed it" not, I must OF missed it."

Feel free to cry about both those things.

What's hard to understand about "Say the Republican Party is racist.". As for remembering, there's nothing to remember. When you reply, the entire text of the post is right there.

I forget about you the moment I'm done replying to you guy.

This only means you have a subjective reason for calling me racist. It still doesn't mean it's true.

All we have are subjective opinions about one another. You have opinions about me that I don't agree with. That's how opinions work you clown.

1.) You just said: "Your assumption is that they're (false accusations of racism) false.". Now you're acknowledging that it does happen.

Of course. I'm not insane. It's just as crazy to think that no false accusations happen as it is to think all accusations are false. We all have to form our own opinions on these instances.

2.) Because you yourself have expressed many false assumptions throughout this discussion.

Feel free to feel that way my guy. I don't begrudge you your own feelings.

Of course it has but that's irrelevant to my point. If this racism crusade continues as the witch hunt it is; where people, events and various things are viewed as racist when they are not, people will get fed up at some point. We're almost at that point now.

See this is where we disagree. I agree, rationally, that there will be false accusations along with real ones. I don't agree that there's any witch hunt going on. It's a monster hunt. I get to be of the opinion that slavers and their slaver culture and their slaver loving progeny are monsters and racist pieces of shit. And I get to criticize and ridicule and belittle that culture as much as like. Welcome to America.

That's fine as far as that goes. But what about false and flippant allegations? That's what I'm talking about. People are sick and tired of the offhand accusations over stupid shit like misconstrued words or a black person losing an award to a white person or a fucking decorative cotton plant.

And? I don't care what you're sick and tired of. That's your problem.

As I said before, the word "racism" has lost all meaning.

That's okay we'll educate you.

So you're saying it does have an effect? Okay, now we're getting somewhere. So what is the effect of accusing someone of racism? After that, explain to me why - even if I'm not a racist - I should be bothered by it.

I don't know how to explain to you to be confident in yourself. I've never had anyone call me a name and make it so I had to reaffirm my entire life. It's something I was just born with I guess. I don't care what people outside of my loved ones think of me.

That's the fucking point: people I know don't view me as racist.

If you're self conscious and triggered by this maybe do some self examination as to why.

You still haven't answered the question. I said, assuming for a moment it never happens, how do you think it should be resolved? Who should be morally, ethically and principally accountable for slavery and discrimination if reparations are off the table and financial restitution is not an option?

To me this question makes absolutely no sense. No one can actually make you morally responsible for anything because morality isn't objectively really. It's subjective to you. Your morality is your own. If you feel responsible for something that's on you. I can have an opinion about you but I don't understand what you're asking me when you ask how I make someone morally responsible for something. I don't know how to even do that given my understanding of what morality is.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Remind me, where you trying to argue the Democratic party of today was morally responsible for slavery?

Nope.

The Statues are only symbols. It's your culture we're coming for. Your inability to fully protect your idols is simply the evidence of your cultures crumbling facade.

No. You've been saying you want the statues removed because you don't want public displays that venerate slavers.

I'm not ashamed of my arguments or opinions. I'm happy to voice them and allow others to judge them as they see fit.

So am I.

This from the guy who still refuses to acknowledge the objective truth that venerating Washington means venerating a slaver.

I can't acknowledge something which I don't entirely agree is an objective truth.

That's a good example of you not recognizing that your niece's husband doesn't have shit to do with anything.

Other than what he said, you're right.

Learn what anecdotal evidence is and stop hiding behind people who may or may not exist.

Hiding behind what? Even if he hadn't said it I'd still say the anti-racism crusade is out of hand.

My arguments are about people we both have some knowledge of and agree are real. Namely, Washington, you and myself. I don't use the words and beliefs of people who can't be verified to even exist as evidence in my arguments.

First of all, why would you need verification? Secondly, why would I even bother to provide verification for this when you won't provide verification that I venerate slavers?

I don't even care what color you are. What color you are has not a single fucking thing to do with whether Washington was a slaver or whether slaver venerators are pieces of human trash.

Bullshit. You said it because I'm white. I know damn well you wouldn't have said something like this to a black person. For that matter, you wouldn't have asked for verification.

Then cry about it. I don't care.

Deflection. It was a fucked up thing to say and you're a piece of shit for saying it.

If your response to people using their free speech to question your idols, your beliefs and your culture is violence or threats of violence tough tits. I guess we'll just have to defend ourselves from you violent pieces of shit.

That same free speech means one can freely venerate historical figures, right?

Don't hand me that shit about free speech as if I don't share the same right and as if you're not trying to stifle those who, by that same right, choose to honor who they choose to honor. Fucking hypocrite.

I didn't say you have to pay morally and no one can even make you pay morally other than you. Remember, morals are simply your feelings.

First, morals aren't feelings, they're ideals. Secondly, what is reparations if not restitution for a moral wrong? If that's not the case then all it is is the black community begging for money.

Continue to point, laugh and ridicule them and their culture into social, cultural and political irrelevance.

So even when the statues are all gone, you'll continue to try to stifle their free speech?

Except I don't celebrate Black racism.

No, you just ignore it.

I accept that they get to but they don't get to without ridicule or criticism.

No. I said: How about accepting those who admire historical figures.

Propaganda is useful, especially if repeated over and over. That part is my rhetoric. I want to associate Slavers with human trash in contrast to how you associate them as freedom fighters.

That's not propaganda or rhetoric, that's hysteria.

My argument is two parts. One part objective and the other subjective. The first, that Washington was a slaver. That statues honor people. And that statues to Washington serve to honor a slaver. The second, subjective part is simply that slavery is wrong and slavers are trash.

My rhetoric only asks people to search their own morality and ask themselves if they think people who enslave men, women and children are trash.

Your rhetoric is a lie by omission and asks learned individuals to forget about all the slaves the freedom fighters kept as property.

Again, how am I forgetting the slaves?

And? I don't use hyperbole as deflection from the fact that your slaver hero Washington enslaved children.

You use hyperbole because you're lazy. It's a cheap tactic. If the case for your position cannot be made through reason and logic then it can't be made.

The only thing I'm saying is that a court, an appellate court and the Supreme Court found that Republicans in North Carolina had specifically targeted black citizens to harm their ability to vote. Whatever you're saying you need to qualify with your own evidence and your own commentary. I'm not making any assumptions whatsoever about what kinds of IDs they have or don't have and why. I'm simply providing objective evidence of Republicans attacking Black voting rights.

And I'm not discussing what Republicans did, I'm simply talking about voter ID. The case in North Carolina has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

Your subjective impressions don't really mean shit in the face of the rulings by three separate courts.

My position was nothing more than that North Carolina still requires voter ID.

Voter ID is only part of the issue. Yes Republicans also try to redistrict, close polling stations, and change voting times all in their effort to harass the Black vote. I simply focused on one particularly obvious scheme.

For the purposes of deflection. We're not talking about what Republicans did.

Are we debating what the law is or whether there's objective evidence of Republicans trying to harass Black voters?

The law. I didn't bring that up about Republicans, you did.

Feel free to cry about both those things.

Feel free to learn grammar and word usage.

I forget about you the moment I'm done replying to you guy.

Irrelevant. I'm not talking about after you hit "Post Reply", I'm talking about when you hit "Reply". When you do, the entire text of my post is right there.

All we have are subjective opinions about one another. You have opinions about me that I don't agree with. That's how opinions work you clown.

I thought you were trying to shame, ridicule and intimidate. That's a lot more than just expressing opinion.

Of course. I'm not insane. It's just as crazy to think that no false accusations happen as it is to think all accusations are false. We all have to form our own opinions on these instances.

So you don't find false accusations of racism disturbing?

Feel free to feel that way my guy. I don't begrudge you your own feelings.

But you DO begrudge me for my views about the statues.

See this is where we disagree. I agree, rationally, that there will be false accusations along with real ones. I don't agree that there's any witch hunt going on. It's a monster hunt.

If innocents are being accused of racism then by definition, it is a witch hunt.

If you hysterical morons can't discern racism from non-racism, then I have no confidence you can even discern a monster.

And if you're okay with steamrolling the innocent along with the monsters then you're an even bigger piece of shit than Washington.

Fucking idiot.

I get to be of the opinion that slavers and their slaver culture and their slaver loving progeny are monsters and racist pieces of shit. And I get to criticize and ridicule and belittle that culture as much as like. Welcome to America.

Irrelevant. What you have the right to do is not at issue. Your mindless crusade serves no one and does nothing but foster anger and resentment.

And? I don't care what you're sick and tired of. That's your problem.

And I don't care that you hate statues. That's your problem.

That's okay we'll educate you.

You're the ones who fucked it up in the first place.

Before all this, people knew what racism was and was not. Now it's cotton plants.

I don't know how to explain to you to be confident in yourself. I've never had anyone call me a name and make it so I had to reaffirm my entire life. It's something I was just born with I guess. I don't care what people outside of my loved ones think of me.

Irrelevant and deflection. Don't pretend that you don't believe that calling someone racist has an effect. Otherwise there would be no point at all in expressing opinions.

So again, what is the effect you're going for when you call someone racist?

If you're self conscious and triggered by this maybe do some self examination as to why.

Shame, ridicule and fear. Remember saying those words?

To me this question makes absolutely no sense. No one can actually make you morally responsible for anything because morality isn't objectively really. It's subjective to you. Your morality is your own. If you feel responsible for something that's on you. I can have an opinion about you but I don't understand what you're asking me when you ask how I make someone morally responsible for something. I don't know how to even do that given my understanding of what morality is.

So then, no one today is actually morally or principally responsible for slavery? Yet you expect people today to pay for it?

 

[Curried Goats]

No. You've been saying you want the statues removed because you don't want public displays that venerate slavers.

That's simply one aspect of what I believe should be an intentional and concerted effort by good and decent people to push slaver culture towards cultural extinction.

I can't acknowledge something which I don't entirely agree is an objective truth.

That's fine. I don't mind you continuing to express your emotional fragility so plainly.

Other than what he said, you're right.

Hiding behind what? Even if he hadn't said it I'd still say the anti-racism crusade is out of hand.

If you're confident enough in your own opinion why do you need to bolster it by telling me about your niece's husband's opinion? Would you like to share the thoughts of your wife's cousin's, college roommate as well? All you're doing is sharing another person's opinion with me. Do two subjective opinions mean more objectively than one? Aren't they all equally subjective?

Bullshit. You said it because I'm white. I know damn well you wouldn't have said something like this to a black person.

You have no idea how I talk to other Black people. I'm cantankerous to everyone I find to have an inferior argument. I had an uncle punch me in the face once over a debate on gun control and I'm like a son to him. (I'm a gun owner and pro second amendment, with regulation. He's to the left of me.)

Deflection. It was a fucked up thing to say and you're a piece of shit for saying it.

It's not deflection. I accept that you feel that way, I just don't care.

That same free speech means one can freely venerate historical figures, right?

I'm not arguing against you having the legal right to venerate slavers with your free speech. I'm petitioning for the end to the public policy of slaver veneration, which is also my legal right.

Don't hand me that shit about free speech as if I don't share the same right and as if you're not trying to stifle those who, by that same right, choose to honor who they choose to honor. Fucking hypocrite.

Stifle how? With my free speech? What's wrong with that? What's wrong with me using my free speech to suggest that there's something rotten to the core in a culture that venerates slavers and something rotten to the core in people who venerate slavers? That's my right. You have a right to believe and say what you want. You don't have a right to have those words and beliefs be free from criticism.

First, morals aren't feelings, they're ideals.

Which are ultimately your feelings. Take a moment. Think about it.

Secondly, what is reparations if not restitution for a moral wrong? If that's not the case then all it is is the black community begging for money.

It is restitution for a moral and a financial wrong, that's not the same as saying you're morally wrong. Remember, and I have to keep repeating this because your arguments suggest you don't really understand but morality is subjective. This is simply how I feel. I feel Black Americans were wronged, morally and financially. You're free to feel differently. I feel they should be financially compensated. You're free to feel differently. I'm free to argue politically for public policies towards that goal. You're free to feel differently. If I'm successful in convincing a political majority to agree with me and it becomes public policy I still can't make you feel morally responsible. I can only make American tax payers financially responsible.

So even when the statues are all gone, you'll continue to try to stifle their free speech?

In what way have I suggested stifling free speech? I want to smother slaver culture until it dies but I want to do it legally. I want to use shame and ridicule to pressure people, organizations and advertisers to denounce it unequivocally wherever its found until its practitioners are ashamed to show their faces or voice their opinions in public and without public support it will fade away and die like an old relative left rocking away at a window sill as life carries on around them.

No, you just ignore it.

I don't ignore it it's just admittedly not a main concern of mine. Make it one of yours if you feel so strongly about it.

No. I said: How about accepting those who admire historical figures.

Accepting of them how? I accept they have a right to feel the way they do. I accept they have a right to venerate whomever they want with their own property, on their own property. I accept they have a right to petition the government for a public policy of slaver veneration. I'm just opposed to it as is my right.

That's not propaganda or rhetoric, that's hysteria.

Promote that then and see if it saves your slaver culture.

Again, how am I forgetting the slaves?

Again, you forget them when you characterize their slavers as Freedom Fighters or the Revolutionary War as the War for Independence. It's a lie by omission. It omits their existence from your characterization of men like Washington or Jefferson and the Revolutionary War itself. You wouldn't characterize any members of BoKo Haram as Freedom Fighters even though they certainly fight for their own liberty to kidnap and enslave others just as the slaver Founders did.

You use hyperbole because you're lazy. It's a cheap tactic. If the case for your position cannot be made through reason and logic then it can't be made.

It's effective. Look how emotional you've gotten over this debate and how it's caused you to refuse and accept basic objective facts. Like the fact that venerating Washington equates to venerating a slaver. You simply dislike the emphasis being placed on his slaving. You can't actually deny that he was a slaver though, can you? Can you? How much has that word broken you?

If you want to introduce caveats after that about why your veneration of a slaver doesn't make you a piece of human trash as I subjectively imply then have at it but your refusal to even accept a simple objective fact shows how my choice of the word veneration does as intended and strikes you slaver lovers to your cores. You don't want to accept that they were slavers. You don't want to be reminded of it. But that isn't reality. They were slavers. The colonies were slaver colonies and the State was a Slave State. Accept it and move on with your argument. Maybe the reason why you celebrate them and not slavers like Boko Haram could be because they weren't as successful as the slaver Founders. That's okay. I'm mean subjectively, to some mutants and monsters I'm sure it's fine but it would at least be objectively coherent. What does, "I can't acknowledge something which I don't entirely agree is an objective truth." even mean? Which part? The part about Washington being a slaver or the part about veneraters of Washington being veneraters of a slaver? Seems to me if the first part is true the second part must also be true.

And I'm not discussing what Republicans did, I'm simply talking about voter ID. The case in North Carolina has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

You were trying to mischaraterize the fight Black Americans have in maintaining their hard won voting rights as liberals telling Black people that we were too poor and stupid to get IDs. I don't know how you think a state court, an appellate court and the Supreme Court finding that the Republican Voter ID law in North Carolina targeted black voters with surgical precision has nothing to do with refuting that characterizatio but I suppose you're just that intellectually bankrupt.

For the purposes of deflection. We're not talking about what Republicans did.

No, you're not talking about it because you were trying to mischaraterize Black voter concerns as white liberal racism. I'm talking about it because it shows that line of reasoning and commentary to be entirely full of shit.

Feel free to learn grammar and word usage.

Feel free to learn what language actually is. All words and languages and rules of grammar are entirely made up and therefore, subjective. My first language is Jamaican patois which is as much a valid off shoot of Old English as American English is. The ultimate purpose of language is to communicate and if we can do that it serves its intended function. You're just being a salty bitch.

Irrelevant. I'm not talking about after you hit "Post Reply", I'm talking about when you hit "Reply". When you do, the entire text of my post is right there.

But not the context. Depending on the reply and how you replied the context might not be immediately clear without me scrolling up and reading what of my previous post you were responding to. I'm mostly not interested in having to do that. If your commentary is interesting enough then I might but for the most part, snip.

So you don't find false accusations of racism disturbing?

Disturbing? Depends on which incident we're talking about. Typically though I'm not moved by the opinions of randos on other randos.

But you DO begrudge me for my views about the statues.

I don't. I disagree with them and I find belittling them politically and socially advantageous.

If innocents are being accused of racism then by definition, it is a witch hunt.

Which has nothing to do with me and my criticism of actual monsters and their monster venerators. Again, I'm not going to stop calling out monsters just because you're afraid some people might be wrongly accused any more than I'd be against law enforcement because some innocent people will go to jail or be killed by an over zealous cop. Ironically, with regards to your feelings on reparations, this is what we have law suits for.

If you hysterical morons can't discern racism from non-racism, then I have no confidence you can even discern a monster.

Well let's see who's device is even functioning.

Is Washington a monster?

And if you're okay with steamrolling the innocent along with the monsters then you're an even bigger piece of shit than Washington.

Than a slaver? Than a man who owned men, women and children and stole the proceeds of their forced labor for his own benefit? That's a questionable barometer you have there. You sure it's set to deplorable?

Fucking idiot.

You're the guy who just suggested I'm worse than a child slaver.

Irrelevant. What you have the right to do is not at issue. Your mindless crusade serves no one and does nothing but foster anger and resentment.

So? Be angry and resentful. I don't care.

And I don't care that you hate statues. That's your problem.

It's a problem that can be solved with some demographic adjustments.

Irrelevant and deflection. Don't pretend that you don't believe that calling someone racist has an effect. Otherwise there would be no point at all in expressing opinions.

I agree it has an effect I just dont understand your point. I told you from the start I mean to use shame and ridicule to shape perspective and ultimately culture. Do you acknowledge the effectiveness of my strategy?

So again, what is the effect you're going for when you call someone racist?

The ridiculing of slaver culture until it dies from embarrassment and shame.

So then, no one today is actually morally or principally responsible for slavery? Yet you expect people today to pay for it?

Yes. I don't think I'm morally responsible when a cop kneels on a man's neck for nine minutes until he dies but I think the city should compensate his family and that they are going to do so with tax payer money because that's where their money comes from.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

That's simply one aspect of what I believe should be an intentional and concerted effort by good and decent people to push slaver culture towards cultural extinction.

Or push non-racists to violence...

That's fine. I don't mind you continuing to express your emotional fragility so plainly.

I don't agree it's an objective truth.

If you're confident enough in your own opinion why do you need to bolster it by telling me about your niece's husband's opinion?

I'm confident in my own opinion. You're not.

Having said that, that was an example to illustrate how even some blacks feel about the anti-racism crusade. It has turned into a religion and has all the hallmarks of such: irrational ideas; logically and scientifically unsupported accusations; cognitive dissonance; off-the-cuff and kneejerk accusations of blasphemy and heresy; and of course the biggest and most prevalent one: hypocrisy.

Would you like to share the thoughts of your wife's cousin's, college roommate as well? All you're doing is sharing another person's opinion with me. Do two subjective opinions mean more objectively than one? Aren't they all equally subjective?

Yes, they are. But does the fact that some blacks think the crusade is out of hand mean something? You certainly seem to think your opinion of me matters. Hell, you even went to the trouble of telling me why you think I'm racist. As if any of that means jack shit.

You have no idea how I talk to other Black people.

And you have no idea how many black friends I have. But that didn't stop you from saying what you said, did it?

I'm cantankerous to everyone I find to have an inferior argument. I had an uncle punch me in the face once over a debate on gun control and I'm like a son to him. (I'm a gun owner and pro second amendment, with regulation. He's to the left of me.)

So, violence.

It's not deflection. I accept that you feel that way, I just don't care.

Of course it was deflection. You chose not to comment on the fact he agrees that the crusade is ridiculous and instead chose to deflect with ridicule.

As I said before, it was a fucked up thing to say, even here. It was deflection, meant as ridicule, personal and false.

I'm not arguing against you having the legal right to venerate slavers with your free speech. I'm petitioning for the end to the public policy of slaver veneration, which is also my legal right.

Nope. You just said that after the statues are gone, you will continue to shame, ridicule and intimidate those who still do. You're full of shit.

Stifle how? With my free speech? What's wrong with that? What's wrong with me using my free speech to suggest that there's something rotten to the core in a culture that venerates slavers and something rotten to the core in people who venerate slavers? That's my right. You have a right to believe and say what you want. You don't have a right to have those words and beliefs be free from criticism.

Shame, ridicule and fear. Remember saying those words?

Which are ultimately your feelings. Take a moment. Think about it.

Ideals are not feelings you idiot. They are beliefs and beliefs aren't feelings either.

It is restitution for a moral and a financial wrong, that's not the same as saying you're morally wrong.

You're certainly saying somebody's wrong.

Remember, and I have to keep repeating this because your arguments suggest you don't really understand but morality is subjective. This is simply how I feel. I feel Black Americans were wronged, morally and financially.

That was never in question.

You're free to feel differently. I feel they should be financially compensated.

By a government and a population composed of people who are not guilty.

You're free to feel differently. I'm free to argue politically for public policies towards that goal. You're free to feel differently. If I'm successful in convincing a political majority to agree with me and it becomes public policy I still can't make you feel morally responsible. I can only make American tax payers financially responsible.

Meaning, morally responsible.

My tax money should go to the things I'm paying taxes for that benefit me and the country: national defense; public education; roads and infrastructure; social security; Medicaid and Medicare; paying down the national debt, etc..

Using my tax dollars to pay for a wrong I did not commit is like stealing money from my pocket.

Even by saying "financially responsible" it still comes down to morally responsible because - as I'm sure you would agree - the things that were down to hold them back financially were morally wrong, correct?

In what way have I suggested stifling free speech?

Shame, ridicule and fear.

I want to smother slaver culture until it dies but I want to do it legally.

And what will you do if it doesn't happen legally or takes too long?

I don't ignore it it's just admittedly not a main concern of mine. Make it one of yours if you feel so strongly about it.

So there you have it.

Accepting of them how? I accept they have a right to feel the way they do. I accept they have a right to venerate whomever they want with their own property, on their own property. I accept they have a right to petition the government for a public policy of slaver veneration. I'm just opposed to it as is my right.

That's not accepting them.

When the left talks about acceptance and tolerance of gays, minorities transgenders, etc., they're not talking about merely acknowledging they have the right to exist; you can't even criticize the communities in any way or you are labeled racist, homophobic or transphobic.

Look at the Dave Chappelle transgender controversy. When the uproar started after his standup a few years ago people went nuts and called him transphobic and tried to get him cancelled in spite of the fact that he said absolutely nothing critical or offensive about them and even told a story about a transgender friend.

I'm betting that now Chappelle understands just how absurd cancel culture has become if he didn't know already.

Promote that then and see if it saves your slaver culture.

It won't save anything but it will still be hysteria.

Again, you forget them when you characterize their slavers as Freedom Fighters or the Revolutionary War as the War for Independence. It's a lie by omission.

Bullshit.

It omits their existence from your characterization of men like Washington or Jefferson and the Revolutionary War itself.

No, it does not. Slavery was abolished but not until after the Civil War eighty years later. There's nothing that can be done about that but if you want to put up a monument in their memory, I'm all for it. Hell, I'll even chip in. The wonder is why one hasn't been put up already and if it was, what are you bitching about?

You wouldn't characterize any members of BoKo Haram as Freedom Fighters even though they certainly fight for their own liberty to kidnap and enslave others just as the slaver Founders did.

Boko Haram is a terrorist group.

It's effective. Look how emotional you've gotten over this debate and how it's caused you to refuse and accept basic objective facts.

If that's true, it's no more and no less than what you have rejected.

Like the fact that venerating Washington equates to venerating a slaver. You simply dislike the emphasis being placed on his slaving.

You can emphasize it all you want but it won't change anything; I will still credit him with fighting for our independence.

You can't actually deny that he was a slaver though, can you? Can you? How much has that word broken you?

I never denied he was a slaver.

If you want to introduce caveats after that about why your veneration of a slaver doesn't make you a piece of human trash as I subjectively imply then have at it but your refusal to even accept a simple objective fact shows how my choice of the word veneration does as intended and strikes you slaver lovers to your cores.

I never rejected the fact that Washington was a slaver. That's a given, historical fact and it would be pretty silly of me to deny it. If that's what you believe then I have even less respect for your powers of discernment.

You don't want to accept that they were slavers.

You don't get it; I've said from the very beginning that I accept this along with their achievements. I told you I can live with this and and even asked you if you could do the same. But, in your usual fashion of avoidance and deflection, you ignored it.

You don't want to be reminded of it. But that isn't reality. They were slavers. The colonies were slaver colonies and the State was a Slave State. Accept it and move on with your argument.

I moved on a long time ago from that. It's you who keeps holding on to it because you've been trying to convince me I'm racist and it's not working.

Maybe the reason why you celebrate them and not slavers like Boko Haram could be because they weren't as successful as the slaver Founders. That's okay. I'm mean subjectively, to some mutants and monsters I'm sure it's fine but it would at least be objectively coherent. What does, "I can't acknowledge something which I don't entirely agree is an objective truth." even mean?

Figure it out. I've explained my views on that multiple times already.

You were trying to mischaraterize the fight Black Americans have in maintaining their hard won voting rights as liberals telling Black people that we were too poor and stupid to get IDs.

Voter ID. That's all I'm talking about. I know blacks are not so poor and stupid as to have trouble getting an ID when most are already doing things that require ID. I'm not buying it.

As for the NC case, North Carolina had voter ID laws before this case and they still have them after. The case is irrelevant to what I'm talking about and apparently the law prevailed anyway. So what are you crying about?

I don't know how you think a state court, an appellate court and the Supreme Court finding that the Republican Voter ID law in North Carolina targeted black voters with surgical precision has nothing to do with refuting that characterizatio but I suppose you're just that intellectually bankrupt.

I'm discussing the ability of blacks to get ID, that's it. This is irrelevant to what I'm talking about.

No, you're not talking about it because you were trying to mischaraterize Black voter concerns as white liberal racism.

Are you saying blacks can't get IDs even with buying cigarettes and liquor and driving?

I'm talking about it because it shows that line of reasoning and commentary to be entirely full of shit.

As I said, you brought it up, not me. That being the case, you have misconstrued or conflated my line of reasoning.

Feel free to learn what language actually is. All words and languages and rules of grammar are entirely made up and therefore, subjective. My first language is Jamaican patois which is as much a valid off shoot of Old English as American English is. The ultimate purpose of language is to communicate and if we can do that it serves its intended function. You're just being a salty bitch.

It's not because you're Jamaican, dumbass. Everybody on the internet does this, writing "should of" instead of "should have".

This is a result of the internet requiring everyone to become writers (after a fashion) without ever having done any real reading or studying the matter. Therefore, they write what they think they hear. It's the same with the there/they're/their confusion. A lot of people don't understand the difference so they use them interchangeably.

Disturbing? Depends on which incident we're talking about. Typically though I'm not moved by the opinions of randos on other randos.

A false accusation is a false accusation. The incident doesn't matter.

And what the hell are "randos"?

I don't. I disagree with them and I find belittling them politically and socially advantageous.

Because you begrudge them.

Which has nothing to do with me and my criticism of actual monsters and their monster venerators. Again, I'm not going to stop calling out monsters just because you're afraid some people might be wrongly accused any more than I'd be against law enforcement because some innocent people will go to jail or be killed by an over zealous cop. Ironically, with regards to your feelings on reparations, this is what we have law suits for.

I'm not just talking about the issue of historical figures and their statues, I'm talking about any situation where you might falsely accuse someone of racism. You've already done so with me and I'm betting you've done it with others.

Well let's see who's device is even functioning.

Is Washington a monster?

I don't think so.

A better question: Am I a monster?

Than a slaver?

Yes.

Than a man who owned men, women and children and stole the proceeds of their forced labor for his own benefit? That's a questionable barometer you have there. You sure it's set to deplorable?

Why would it be?

You're the guy who just suggested I'm worse than a child slaver.

If you have no qualms about false accusations, yes.

So? Be angry and resentful. I don't care.

If I'm angry and resentful, I at least will not sit still and say nothing.

It's a problem that can be solved with some demographic adjustments.

Same.

I agree it has an effect I just dont understand your point. I told you from the start I mean to use shame and ridicule to shape perspective and ultimately culture.

So again, tell me what that effect is and tell me why I should be bothered.

Do you acknowledge the effectiveness of my strategy?

Hardly.

The ridiculing of slaver culture until it dies from embarrassment and shame.

On the person, dumbass.

Yes. I don't think I'm morally responsible when a cop kneels on a man's neck for nine minutes until he dies but I think the city should compensate his family and that they are going to do so with tax payer money because that's where their money comes from.

The difference is, this happened in this time where the people in government made to pay were in government went it happened.

As for the case itself, I think it was a gross miscarriage of justice because I don't believe Floyd died from Chauvin's knee on his neck.

 

[Curried Goats]

Or push non-racists to violence...

My words aren't responsible for your violence, you are. Learn to control yourself. I don't have to moderate my speech just because you're an emotionally stunted Bingo who can't handle criticism.

I don't agree it's an objective truth.

There's the emotionally stunted Bingo. Refuses to accept facts, threatens violence if I don't stop saying things that makes you uncomfortable.

Having said that, that was an example to illustrate how even some blacks feel about the anti-racism crusade. It has turned into a religion and has all the hallmarks of such: irrational ideas; logically and scientifically unsupported accusations; cognitive dissonance; off-the-cuff and kneejerk accusations of blasphemy and heresy; and of course the biggest and most prevalent one: hypocrisy.

Again, why do I give a shit about the opinion of your one black friend? Him being black doesn't make this opinion more significant to me. It's weird that you think it would.

And you have no idea how many black friends I have. But that didn't stop you from saying what you said, did it?

Buddy, I dont care.

Of course it was deflection. You chose not to comment on the fact he agrees that the crusade is ridiculous and instead chose to deflect with ridicule.

Because I don't care about the opinion of your black friend. I barely care about your opinion but at least it's relevant to our debate. Also I think it's weird that you think an opinion from a black person makes your opinion more valid. That's not how opinions work.

Nope. You just said that after the statues are gone, you will continue to shame, ridicule and intimidate those who still do. You're full of shit.


Shame, ridicule and fear. Remember saying those words?

I do remember saying that, and? Me shaming and ridiculing you doesn't prevent you from venerating slaves. It's supposed to make your veneration uncomfortable. As I said, you have a right to free speech not a right to be free from criticism.

Ideals are not feelings you idiot. They are beliefs and beliefs aren't feelings either.

They are. You're just too stupid to recognize that simple fact.

Your ideals are nothing more than the philosophical ideas that resonate with you emotionally. If you disagree then try to explain what you think ideals actually are.

You're certainly saying somebody's wrong.

Morally? The slaver Founders and the segregationists.

By a government and a population composed of people who are not guilty.

This isn't a court of law. No one is finding you guilty of anything. When your taxes go to programs to help the poor that isn't someone finding you guilty for poverty.

Meaning, morally responsible.

Some of us feel morally obligated to help the poor so we advocate for policies that help the poor but I can't make you feel morally responsible for anything. Explain how you think that's even possible.

My tax money should go to the things I'm paying taxes for that benefit me and the country: national defense; public education; roads and infrastructure; social security; Medicaid and Medicare; paying down the national debt, etc..

What you think your taxes should go towards is your opinion. Everyone else gets one too you fucking clown.

Using my tax dollars to pay for a wrong I did not commit is like stealing money from my pocket.

Taxes aren't theft you big fucking baby. If you don't like living in society, among other people, who's opinions are as valid as yours are, then fuck off into the woods.

Shame, ridicule and fear.


And what will you do if it doesn't happen legally or takes too long?

It's already taken too long. Try as you might though to insinuate I mean anyone violence that's simply incorrect. I understand the cost of violence. I've lost loved ones to violence. I don't wish violence on anyone. I will continue to use my free speech to advocate for my beliefs.

So there you have it.


That's not accepting them.

I don't have to accept anything other than your legal right to an opinion. I don't have to applaud it, cheer it or pat you on the back for it. I can point and laugh at it at my leisure.

When the left talks about acceptance and tolerance of gays, minorities transgenders, etc., they're not talking about merely acknowledging they have the right to exist; you can't even criticize the communities in any way or you are labeled racist, homophobic or transphobic.

That's the effectiveness of shame and ridicule. Lots of homophobes try to do the same it's just less effective in a society that supports the LGTBQ community. No one can legally stop you from criticizing gay people though. Just look around this board, people do it all the time.

Look at the Dave Chappelle transgender controversy. When the uproar started after his standup a few years ago people went nuts and called him transphobic and tried to get him cancelled in spite of the fact that he said absolutely nothing critical or offensive about them and even told a story about a transgender friend.

His standup wasn't offensive to you. I'm getting the feeling that you're such a Bingo that you don't know how opinions work. Let me help you out. Just like assholes, everyone's got one.

I'm betting that now Chappelle understands just how absurd cancel culture has become if he didn't know already.

I actually like Chappelle. I also find his jokes about trans people to be pretty ignorant from someone who's usually pretty thoughtful. I also didn't mind that some people who were offended tried to use their free speech to pressure his employer (Netflix) to drop him. That's fine. I'm not bothered by cancel culture because I recognize it for what it is, free speech. It's people exercising their right to voice their opinion and displeasure in an effort to affect change. You might disagree, that's fine too. Netflix did and told those people to go pound sand as was their right and I was okay with that as well.

No, it does not. Slavery was abolished but not until after the Civil War eighty years later. There's nothing that can be done about that but if you want to put up a monument in their memory, I'm all for it. Hell, I'll even chip in. The wonder is why one hasn't been put up already and if it was, what are you bitching about?

I'm not bitching about anything. I'm questioning you and your character for for propagandizing a Slaver rebellion as a War for Independence.

Boko Haram is a terrorist group.

Exactly. Those slaver Founders also terrorized and brutalized black families but for some reason you imagine Washington to be a better man.

You can emphasize it all you want but it won't change anything; I will still credit him with fighting for our independence.

I know. You're an emotional stunted Bingo. I've come to expect nothing less. You weren't alive then you clown and neither was I. He didn't fight for our Independence.

You don't get it; I've said from the very beginning that I accept this along with their achievements. I told you I can live with this and and even asked you if you could do the same. But, in your usual fashion of avoidance and deflection, you ignored it.

You don't get it. I don't celebrate the achievements of Slavers and monsters like Boko Haram or Washington.

I moved on a long time ago from that. It's you who keeps holding on to it because you've been trying to convince me I'm racist and it's not working.

I haven't been trying to convince you that you're racist. I've been telling you that I think you and people like you are racist and that you come from a racist culture and that I mean to see it made extinct. Arguing over our differences of opinion is pretty pointless. I'm still here because I'm just interested to see how ridiculous you'll get in your defense of Slavers.

Voter ID. That's all I'm talking about. I know blacks are not so poor and stupid as to have trouble getting an ID when most are already doing things that require ID. I'm not buying it.

As for the NC case, North Carolina had voter ID laws before this case and they still have them after. The case is irrelevant to what I'm talking about and apparently the law prevailed anyway. So what are you crying about?

I'm not crying. I'm explaining that your a racist with an obvious racist mischaraterization of the issue and I'm explaining why I believe that by pointing out the various ways Republicans have been found by courts of law to have targeted and minimized black voting power. All you're sharing with me is your opinion. When you find a court ruling saying liberals were targeting black voters you let me know.

I'm discussing the ability of blacks to get ID, that's it. This is irrelevant to what I'm talking about.

Are you saying blacks can't get IDs even with buying cigarettes and liquor and driving?

Nope. I've said nothing about liquor or cigarettes or driving. Stop trying to get me to make your argument for you and make it yourself you pussy.

This is a result of the internet requiring everyone to become writers (after a fashion) without ever having done any real reading or studying the matter. Therefore, they write what they think they hear. It's the same with the there/they're/their confusion. A lot of people don't understand the difference so they use them interchangeably.

Pussyclot, speech a speech. If yuh can overstand weh a nudda man a talk bout den mission accomplished. It dun do weh it need fi do.

A false accusation is a false accusation. The incident doesn't matter.

And what the hell are "randos"?

Random people or call them cannon fodder if you like. File it under "shit happens".

I'm not just talking about the issue of historical figures and their statues, I'm talking about any situation where you might falsely accuse someone of racism. You've already done so with me and I'm betting you've done it with others.

This is your opinion. When you tell me you're not racist I think you're full of shit. This is why it's stupid to argue opinions. I'd much rather you tell me what you disagree with, objectively, about the statement that veneraters of Washington venerate a Slaver. What's there to disagree with objectively?

I don't think so.

A better question: Am I a monster?

Do you venerate, respect or honor Washington? I don't think you're a monster just because. It's your love and respect for other monsters which forms my opinion of you.

So again, tell me what that effect is and tell me why I should be bothered.

You tell me. They’re your feelings you stunted Bingo. Why are you asking me to explain your feelings to you?

I've explained the effect to you. Are you bothered by the effects of accusations of homophobia and racism like you appeared to be above? Only you can answer that question.

The difference is, this happened in this time where the people in government made to pay were in government went it happened.

What are you talking about? Tax payers were made to pay for police killings of people like George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. And in the case of Japanese American internment their reparations came over 40 years later.

As for the case itself, I think it was a gross miscarriage of justice because I don't believe Floyd died from Chauvin's knee on his neck.

Call me curious, what are you basing this belief on?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

My words aren't responsible for your violence, you are. Learn to control yourself. I don't have to moderate my speech just because you're an emotionally stunted Bingo who can't handle criticism.

I've already said that if there's violence, it won't come from me.

There's the emotionally stunted Bingo. Refuses to accept facts, threatens violence if I don't stop saying things that makes you uncomfortable.

I never threatened violence. And I still don't believe it's an objective truth.

Again, why do I give a shit about the opinion of your one black friend? Him being black doesn't make this opinion more significant to me.

But it does make it more significant to me.

Buddy, I dont care.

I have no doubt you don't. Which makes you an even bigger piece of shit.

Because I don't care about the opinion of your black friend. I barely care about your opinion but at least it's relevant to our debate.

You've already made it clear that you don't care about my opinion so this is just hypocritical pabulum.

Also I think it's weird that you think an opinion from a black person makes your opinion more valid. That's not how opinions work.

Then why are you here expressing opinions at all?

I do remember saying that, and? Me shaming and ridiculing you doesn't prevent you from venerating slaves. It's supposed to make your veneration uncomfortable. As I said, you have a right to free speech not a right to be free from criticism.

Shame, ridicule and fear.

Again, this is what they did to the Jews in Germany. It may never come to that but that's how the Holocaust got started in the first place.

They are. You're just too stupid to recognize that simple fact.

Definition of Ideal:

1 a: of, relating to, or embodying an ideal
ideal beauty
b: conforming exactly to an ideal, law, or standard : PERFECT
an ideal gas

compare REAL sense 1c(4)

2 a: existing as a mental image or in fancy or imagination only
broadly : lacking practicality
b: relating to or constituting mental images, ideas, or conceptions

3 : of or relating to philosophical idealism
4 : existing as an archetypal idea
noun

1 : a standard of perfection, beauty, or excellence

2 : one regarded as exemplifying an ideal and often taken as a model for imitation

3 : an ultimate object or aim of endeavor : GOAL

4 : a subset of a mathematical ring that is closed under addition and subtraction and contains the products of any given element of the subset with each element of the ring

Nowhere here does it say anything about emotions or feelings.

Your ideals are nothing more than the philosophical ideas that resonate with you emotionally.

Your own explanation negates your argument. An ideal may or may not resonate with you emotionally but that still doesn't mean it IS an emotion.

If you disagree then try to explain what you think ideals actually are.

See definition above.

Morally? The slaver Founders and the segregationists.

So, since no one chose to hold them accountable, now we have to pay for it.

This isn't a court of law. No one is finding you guilty of anything. When your taxes go to programs to help the poor that isn't someone finding you guilty for poverty.

Irrelevant. Reparations are, by its very nature, restitution for a moral wrong.

Some of us feel morally obligated to help the poor so we advocate for policies that help the poor but I can't make you feel morally responsible for anything. Explain how you think that's even possible.

I didn't say make me feel responsible, I said hold me responsible. As in, blame me.

What you think your taxes should go towards is your opinion. Everyone else gets one too you fucking clown.

That doesn't make it any more right you fucking clown. Much of our tax money was used to fund the Vietnam War but a lot of people didn't agree with that either.

Taxes aren't theft you big fucking baby.

It is if the money is spent on a program or some such that people don't agree with (Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc).

If you don't like living in society, among other people, who's opinions are as valid as yours are, then fuck off into the woods.

"Because I don't care about the opinion of your black friend. I barely care about your opinion..."

This is your hypocrisy rearing its ugly head once again.

It's already taken too long. Try as you might though to insinuate I mean anyone violence that's simply incorrect. I understand the cost of violence. I've lost loved ones to violence. I don't wish violence on anyone. I will continue to use my free speech to advocate for my beliefs.

Violence was a last resort to every person, group or government that ever said they didn't want violence. Then, it becomes a last resort and so they resort to it.

The tenor of your language in this discussion tells me that violence is not entirely off the table. You say you don't want it and you don't believe in it and I believe it is true that this is how you honestly feel at this time. But people who feel as strongly as you do about an ideal have a tendency to allow their emotions to take over when they become angry or frustrated enough.

I don't have to accept anything other than your legal right to an opinion. I don't have to applaud it, cheer it or pat you on the back for it. I can point and laugh at it at my leisure.

So then, tolerance and acceptance are just talking points to you?

That's the effectiveness of shame and ridicule.

How is it effective to label someone a homophobe if they are not?

Lots of homophobes try to do the same it's just less effective in a society that supports the LGTBQ community. No one can legally stop you from criticizing gay people though. Just look around this board, people do it all the time.

Irrelevant.

You're arguing from the hypothetical position that any and all accusations of racism, homophobia, etc. are true. That is not the case and is the point I've been trying to get across to you.

His standup wasn't offensive to you. I'm getting the feeling that you're such a Bingo that you don't know how opinions work. Let me help you out. Just like assholes, everyone's got one.

I saw the video and he said nothing critical, offensive or transphobic in any way.

I actually like Chappelle. I also find his jokes about trans people to be pretty ignorant from someone who's usually pretty thoughtful.

What did he say that was ignorant about transgenders?

I also didn't mind that some people who were offended tried to use their free speech to pressure his employer (Netflix) to drop him. That's fine. I'm not bothered by cancel culture because I recognize it for what it is, free speech.

If free speech is all it is then the concept of cancel culture wouldn't even exist. You just related how they tried to pressure Netflix to drop him.

People have the right to express opinions and even to try to get an employer (Netflix) to cancel someone. But trying to get someone canceled goes beyond mere free speech.

We can say they have the right to try to get Chappelle canceled and they do. However, they do so because they know it's possible. In Chappelle's case they largely failed but they have been successful before with others. How many of these were pointless or based on false or frivolous opinions or accusations?

I'm not bitching about anything. I'm questioning you and your character

What does my character have to do with you?

for for propagandizing a Slaver rebellion as a War for Independence.

"Slaver Rebellion"? What the fuck are you talking about?

Exactly. Those slaver Founders also terrorized and brutalized black families but for some reason you imagine Washington to be a better man.

Better than Boko Haram? Absolutely.

I know. You're an emotional stunted Bingo. I've come to expect nothing less. You weren't alive then you clown and neither was I. He didn't fight for our Independence.

I'm afraid he did, however much anything else about him may disgust you.

You don't get it. I don't celebrate the achievements of Slavers and monsters like Boko Haram or Washington.

Irrelevant. All you had to do was answer the question when I asked and say: No, I can't accept both.

I haven't been trying to convince you that you're racist. I've been telling you that I think you and people like you are racist and that you come from a racist culture and that I mean to see it made extinct.

In other words, trying to convince me.

Arguing over our differences of opinion is pretty pointless. I'm still here because I'm just interested to see how ridiculous you'll get in your defense of Slavers.

I'm still here because I'm interested in watching your hypocrisy and seeing how far it goes.

I'm not crying. I'm explaining that your a racist with an obvious racist mischaraterization of the issue

So, are you telling me that blacks are, in fact, too poor and stupid to get IDs?

and I'm explaining why I believe that by pointing out the various ways Republicans have been found by courts of law to have targeted and minimized black voting power.

And it's still irrelevant.

Why is this so much to ask when most blacks have IDs already?

All you're sharing with me is your opinion. When you find a court ruling saying liberals were targeting black voters you let me know.

Irrelevant. Again, voter ID is the only thing I'm talking about. I don't care about this case as it's been resolved favorably for the blacks and I'm not interest in a pointless political party penis contest (cool alliteration, huh?).

Nope. I've said nothing about liquor or cigarettes or driving. Stop trying to get me to make your argument for you and make it yourself you pussy.

I.E., "I don't want to answer the question because the answer may serve to incriminate me as a hypocrite."

Pussyclot, speech a speech. If yuh can overstand weh a nudda man a talk bout den mission accomplished. It dun do weh it need fi do.

I guess that's supposed to mean something.

This is your opinion. When you tell me you're not racist I think you're full of shit. This is why it's stupid to argue opinions. I'd much rather you tell me what you disagree with, objectively, about the statement that veneraters of Washington venerate a Slaver. What's there to disagree with objectively?

Again, I've already explained that one multiple times.

Do you venerate, respect or honor Washington?

Respect? Yes.

I don't think you're a monster just because. It's your love and respect for other monsters which forms my opinion of you.

I don't agree he was a monster. So there you have it.

You tell me. They’re your feelings you stunted Bingo. Why are you asking me to explain your feelings to you?

Stupid fuck. I asked what effect you think your opinions will have on me.

What are you talking about? Tax payers were made to pay for police killings of people like George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.

Yes. I thought I explained that.

Call me curious, what are you basing this belief on?

The fact that he was stoned out of his gourd from fentanyl and who knows what else; that he was in a highly agitated state; that this agitation and the drugs likely aggravated his heart condition; that he was having trouble breathing when he was still standing upright and that I don't believe Chauvin exerted enough pressure with the one knee to restrict Floyd's airway.

Apparently the procedure was prohibited and for that he should have been reprimanded accordingly. But I don't think it's what killed Floyd.

 

[Curried Goats]

I've already said that if there's violence, it won't come from me.

I'm not deterred from believing what I believe or advocating for laws and policies I believe in just because some Bingo might act out violently. Are you?

Shame, ridicule and fear.

Again, this is what they did to the Jews in Germany. It may never come to that but that's how the Holocaust got started in the first place.

What do you propose as an alternative? That I don't have the right to shame and ridicule you? That you feel shame and ridicule might evolve into something else doesn't make me just like the Nazis.

Definition of Ideal:

1 a: of, relating to, or embodying an ideal
ideal beauty
b: conforming exactly to an ideal, law, or standard : PERFECT
an ideal gas

compare REAL sense 1c(4)

2 a: existing as a mental image or in fancy or imagination only
broadly : lacking practicality
b: relating to or constituting mental images, ideas, or conceptions

3 : of or relating to philosophical idealism
4 : existing as an archetypal idea
noun

1 : a standard of perfection, beauty, or excellence

2 : one regarded as exemplifying an ideal and often taken as a model for imitation

3 : an ultimate object or aim of endeavor : GOAL

4 : a subset of a mathematical ring that is closed under addition and subtraction and contains the products of any given element of the subset with each element of the ring

Nowhere here does it say anything about emotions or feelings.

It does your just too stupid to read between the lines. Beauty, perfection? These are subjectively based on your feelings. Fancy of your imagination sounds just about right to me. All these ideas are based on your subjective feelings.

Your own explanation negates your argument. An ideal may or may not resonate with you emotionally but that still doesn't mean it IS an emotion.

My explanation negates nothing. We believe in the ideals that connect to us emotionally. You feel your ideals are the right ones subjectively but there are no right ones objectively just as there are no objectively right or wrong goals. We each have our own goals. There are objectively better or worse ways to go about achieving those goals but that's about it. Beauty, perfection, goals, these are all subjective which should be a giant clue that they're about your feelings.

So, since no one chose to hold them accountable, now we have to pay for it.

Yep.

Irrelevant. Reparations are, by its very nature, restitution for a moral wrong.

Maybe but that doesn't make it your moral wrong, just your financial responsibility.

I didn't say make me feel responsible, I said hold me responsible. As in, blame me.

I agree that you're being held responsible financially, not morally. I don't even really understand what you mean by that. My taxes go to pay for things that I disagree with and feel no moral responsibility for whatsoever. I didn’t feel morally responsible when DeSantis used my tax dollars to try to punish ex felon voters that his own election board certified to vote. He's the immoral piece of shit who tried to do that.

That doesn't make it any more right you fucking clown. Much of our tax money was used to fund the Vietnam War but a lot of people didn't agree with that either.

Okay.....But only you can make yourself feel morally responsible for something. I can't make you feel something you feel no moral responsibility for.

It is if the money is spent on a program or some such that people don't agree with (Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc).

It isn't. That's just tough titties.

"Because I don't care about the opinion of your black friend. I barely care about your opinion..."

This is your hypocrisy rearing its ugly head once again.

That's not hypocrisy. Do you know what hypocrisy even means? That's apathy you moron.

So then, tolerance and acceptance are just talking points to you?

Legal realities. I'm lawfully required to respect your rights but that's it.

How is it effective to label someone a homophobe if they are not?

That's a strawman. I think shame and ridicule are effective strategies in politically and socially minimizing the affects and influence of homophobes.

You're arguing from the hypothetical position that any and all accusations of racism, homophobia, etc. are true. That is not the case and is the point I've been trying to get across to you.

I'm not. I'm arguing that calling people racists and homophobes and shaming and ridiculing their friends, family, employers, and neighbors, is a good way to minimize their political and social influence. That freedom to ridicule will inevitable harm someone I think unworthy of ridicule is just life. Enforcing the law will also inevitably result in innocent people going to jail that doesn't mean I think there shouldn't be any laws or law enforcement.

I saw the video and he said nothing critical, offensive or transphobic in any way.

That's your opinion, me and others felt differently.

What did he say that was ignorant about transgenders?

For example, in one of his stand ups he did a bit about black people in the hood putting on heels and pretending to be trans under the guise they have some extra social protection from things like police abuse but they don't. Trans people face some of the highest rates of abuse from, society, police, the justice system and sexual partners, then just about anyone. I understand the point his trying to make about the acceptance of violence against Black people in this country but this country accepts plenty of violence and hate against the LGTBQ community as well. He doesn't have to minimize that violence to make a point about violence against Black people.

If free speech is all it is then the concept of cancel culture wouldn't even exist. You just related how they tried to pressure Netflix to drop him.

Which is still freedom of speech and freedom of association. People are free to threaten Netflix with the only power they have, to cancel their subscriptions.

People have the right to express opinions and even to try to get an employer (Netflix) to cancel someone. But trying to get someone canceled goes beyond mere free speech.

In what way?

We can say they have the right to try to get Chappelle canceled and they do.However, they do so because they know it's possible.

Thats how freedom of speech, association and protest are supposed to work.

In Chappelle's case they largely failed but they have been successful before with others. How many of these were pointless or based on false or frivolous opinions or accusations?

You don't mean objectively false, you mean false according to your opinion kind of deflates the use of the word false there.

"Slaver Rebellion"? What the fuck are you talking about?

A bunch of slavers rebelled from their previous country to start their own Slaver society.

Better than Boko Haram? Absolutely.

Based on?

I'm afraid he did, however much anything else about him may disgust you.

That's because slavers disgust me.

So, are you telling me that blacks are, in fact, too poor and stupid to get IDs?

Nope. I'm telling you three separate courts found that Republicans target black voters.

Why is this so much to ask when most blacks have IDs already?

Why is what so much to ask? That Republicans don't target black voters? I don't know. Why don't you ask them.

I.E., "I don't want to answer the question because the answer may serve to incriminate me as a hypocrite."

Now I know you dont know what that word means.

Me not wanting to make assumptions about people's liquor and cigarette purchasing habits is not hypocrisy you moron. I don't know how they purchase, Iiquor or even if they do purchase liquor. I have no objective information about their liquor purchasing or consumption habits at all. All I know about them objectively, is that three separate courts found they were targeted by Republicans.

I don't agree he was a monster. So there you have it.

Then we agree to disagree.

Stupid fuck. I asked what effect you think your opinions will have on me.

I don't care. I care what affect they have on society in general.

The fact that he was stoned out of his gourd from fentanyl and who knows what else; that he was in a highly agitated state; that this agitation and the drugs likely aggravated his heart condition; that he was having trouble breathing when he was still standing upright and that I don't believe Chauvin exerted enough pressure with the one knee to restrict Floyd's airway.

So ignorance.... got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

Apparently the procedure was prohibited and for that he should have been reprimanded accordingly. But I don't think it's what killed Floyd.

The medical examiner who actually did the autopsy disagrees. I'm going with his opinion. So did the jury.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I'm not deterred from believing what I believe or advocating for laws and policies I believe in just because some Bingo might act out violently. Are you?

That's fine as long as the cause is just and the injustices are true. But what if an accusation of racism is not?

What do you propose as an alternative?

Exercise a little wisdom and thought before accusing someone. That would be a great start.

That I don't have the right to shame and ridicule you?

You can't shame and ridicule me. I've done nothing to be ashamed of.

Anyway, you certainly have the right to try but if shame, ridicule and fear is your first reaction then mistakes are more likely to be made.

That you feel shame and ridicule might evolve into something else doesn't make me just like the Nazis.

Irrelevant. It's not about what I feel, it's about what you feel. The way you feel right now about me, people who oppose removal of the statues and honor historical figures or anyone you would call "racist", "monster", "Deplorable mutant" or even Bingo" is poison to anything it touches, including yourself and to innocents.

It does your just too stupid to read between the lines. Beauty, perfection? These are subjectively based on your feelings. Fancy of your imagination sounds just about right to me. All these ideas are based on your subjective feelings.

It's the dictionary definition you fucking idiot.

My explanation negates nothing. We believe in the ideals that connect to us emotionally.

That doesn't mean your ideals are emotions.

Yep.

Fuck that.

Maybe but that doesn't make it your moral wrong, just your financial responsibility.

If it's not my moral wrong then it's not my financial responsibility.

I agree that you're being held responsible financially, not morally. I don't even really understand what you mean by that. My taxes go to pay for things that I disagree with and feel no moral responsibility for whatsoever. I didn’t feel morally responsible when DeSantis used my tax dollars to try to punish ex felon voters that his own election board certified to vote. He's the immoral piece of shit who tried to do that.

But apparently you held him morally responsible, yes?

Okay.....But only you can make yourself feel morally responsible for something. I can't make you feel something you feel no moral responsibility for.

No shit. Why are you talking about something neither one of us said?

It isn't. That's just tough titties.

You're obviously one of those who sees the government as the big burly hero who will take care of all your problems for you.

Me, I'm conservative, which means I want less government. I don't want those idiots doing any more than they have to because they fuck everything they touch. I don't want handouts or even stimulus checks.

That's not hypocrisy. Do you know what hypocrisy even means? That's apathy you moron.

You dumbass. Did you already forget that you just told me that others' opinions are as valid as mine?

Legal realities. I'm lawfully required to respect your rights but that's it.

Well, you see, if I or anyone said the same thing about gays, I'd be labeled homophobic. You know it, I know it.

I really don't care if you accept or tolerate me or any of the so called "deplorable mutants", that's not my point. My point is that, for liberals such as yourself, tolerance and acceptance has two, entirely different meanings: one for their pet victims and one for those they grudgingly have to legally tolerate such as MAGAs and whatnot.

For their pet victims such as gays, in addition to basic tolerance, you're also expected not to criticize them or shame, ridicule and intimidate them. If you do: HOMOPHOBE! For everybody they don't like, well, can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em.

That's a strawman. I think shame and ridicule are effective strategies in politically and socially minimizing the affects and influence of homophobes.

But what if someone you think is a homophobe is, in fact, NOT a homophobe? Understand?

How is that strategy effective when you get it wrong half the time? And you idiots do get it wrong half the time. I've seen this for myself. It's also the reason people are fed up with this shit.

I'm not. I'm arguing that calling people racists and homophobes and shaming and ridiculing their friends, family, employers, and neighbors, is a good way to minimize their political and social influence.

But what if you're wrong?

That freedom to ridicule will inevitable harm someone I think unworthy of ridicule is just life. Enforcing the law will also inevitably result in innocent people going to jail that doesn't mean I think there shouldn't be any laws or law enforcement.

Jesus, what a piece of shit you are.

For example, in one of his stand ups he did a bit about black people in the hood putting on heels and pretending to be trans under the guise they have some extra social protection from things like police abuse but they don't. Trans people face some of the highest rates of abuse from, society, police, the justice system and sexual partners, then just about anyone. I understand the point his trying to make about the acceptance of violence against Black people in this country but this country accepts plenty of violence and hate against the LGTBQ community as well. He doesn't have to minimize that violence to make a point about violence against Black people.

Okay, so, if he has it wrong about how much abuse transgenders receive at the hands of society, the justice system, etc. , does that necessarily make him transphobic and deserving of cancellation?

Which is still freedom of speech and freedom of association. People are free to threaten Netflix with the only power they have, to cancel their subscriptions.

Then it's a little more than the issue of free speech.

In what way?

In the way that people get cancelled or shunned when they don't deserve it.

You don't mean objectively false, you mean false according to your opinion kind of deflates the use of the word false there.

False is false.

When it comes down to opinion and all opinions are valid, what makes you right and the other guy wrong? And if you know that both of your opinions are subjective, why would you take the risk of erring on the side rash judgment? That is to say, if you know that you are at least fifty percent wrong, why would you forge ahead with character assassination?

A bunch of slavers rebelled from their previous country to start their own Slaver society.

No they didn't. Where did you get that shit from?

Besides, they already had their own slaver society and as far as I know, Britain never intervened on that issue.

Based on?

Washington was not a terrorist.

That's because slavers disgust me.

Fine. But your feelings notwithstanding, he still fought for our independence.

Nope. I'm telling you three separate courts found that Republicans target black voters.

How is that relevant to whether or not blacks can acquire IDs?

Thirty five states require IDs to vote at this time and they have nothing to do with the case in North Carolina.

Why is what so much to ask? That Republicans don't target black voters? I don't know. Why don't you ask them.

That they present ID to vote.

This "targeting black voters" tangent is your baby, not mine. If blacks are required to present ID to vote outside North Carolina then it has no relevance to this discussion.

Now I know you dont know what that word means.

What word?

Me not wanting to make assumptions about people's liquor and cigarette purchasing habits is not hypocrisy you moron.

If any blacks are buying liquor and cigarettes or traveling or driving, they have IDs.

I don't know how they purchase, Iiquor or even if they do purchase liquor.

You don't seriously expect me to believe none of them do, do you?

I have no objective information about their liquor purchasing or consumption habits at all. All I know about them objectively, is that three separate courts found they were targeted by Republicans.

Irrelevant.

Then we agree to disagree.

I don't care. I care what affect they have on society in general.

Bullshit. You've been bragging that I seem flustered by your opinions and views (I'm not) so don't pretend that this is not exactly what you were aiming for.

So ignorance.... got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

Irrelevant. You asked a question, I answered. Besides, everything I said was the absolute truth.

The medical examiner who actually did the autopsy disagrees. I'm going with his opinion. So did the jury.

The initial autopsy found no signs of asphyxiation (though the ME ruled homicide anyway). Then the family commissioned two other MEs to have a look because they didn't feel the state examiner adequately considered the impact of the knee on his neck. So the new MEs ruled homicide by asphyxiation even though there was still no sign of asphyxiation.

The family and the prosecution were determined from the beginning to make it out that Floyd died from the knee on his neck and is specifically why they hired the two MEs.

In my opinion, the family and prosecutors were biased and simply tried too hard to lay it at Chauvin's feet such that it did not appear objective.

 

[Curried Goats]

That's fine as long as the cause is just and the injustices are true. But what if an accusation of racism is not?

You tell me. I've already told you before, file it under shit happens.

Exercise a little wisdom and thought

That's just good rule for life in general.

You can't shame and ridicule me. I've done nothing to be ashamed of.

Sure. That's why who've engaged me this long about my opinion that slaver venerates aren't pieces of shit. Because you're not self conscious about it.

Anyway, you certainly have the right to try but if shame, ridicule and fear is your first reaction then mistakes are more likely to be made.

That's your opinion that you offer no evidence for. Acknowledging mistakes will happen isn't the same as agreeing they happen more often then not. Suffice it to say I don't share it.

It's the dictionary definition you fucking idiot.

And the definition relates to things that all have to do with your subjective feelings.

Is there objective beauty or things you find beautiful?

That doesn't mean your ideals are emotions.

It does you moron. Not one thing on there was an objective standard. They all related to things that were subjective to your own feelings.

If it's not my moral wrong then it's not my financial responsibility.

That's not how taxes work. Feel free to stamp your feet and cry about it.

But apparently you held him morally responsible, yes?

DeSantis? Yes.

You're obviously one of those who sees the government as the big burly hero who will take care of all your problems for you.

Wrong. I see it as a tool.

You dumbass. Did you already forget that you just told me that others' opinions are as valid as mine?

I said all opinions were equally valid. That means my opinion is as equally valid as your black friends. As I keep telling you, I don't care about your opinion, you care about mine. You're the one who responded to me first. I'm simply answering your questions. I don't care how you feel about these things.

Well, you see, if I or anyone said the same thing about gays, I'd be labeled homophobic. You know it, I know it.

And? Rightfully so. If you want to call me slaverphobic have at it. I'll wear the moniker proudly.

I really don't care if you accept or tolerate me or any of the so called "deplorable mutants", that's not my point. My point is that, for liberals such as yourself, tolerance and acceptance has two, entirely different meanings: one for their pet victims and one for those they grudgingly have to legally tolerate such as MAGAs and whatnot.

I think maybe you're confusing me with someone else. I never in my life have claimed bigots and racists should be tolerated beyond the legal sense. You don't have to tolerate what anyone tells you to, you just have to be able to tolerate the consequences of your speech. If you can't do that then keep your mouth shut you pussy.

For their pet victims such as gays, in addition to basic tolerance, you're also expected not to criticize them or shame, ridicule and intimidate them. If you do: HOMOPHOBE! For everybody they don't like, well, can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em.

Yeah. Gays have social support that you bigots and racists don't. Boo fucking hoo. To me this is a good thing. I enjoy watching you cry about it like a bitch. You just going to lay there and bleed bitch or are you going to do something about it?

But what if someone you think is a homophobe is, in fact, NOT a homophobe? Understand?

Yeah, I understand that the only defense you have of bigots is to pose hypotheticals about the innocents and in that case we just have to hope for the best.

How is that strategy effective when you get it wrong half the time? And you idiots do get it wrong half the time. I've seen this for myself. It's also the reason people are fed up with this shit.

Do we get it wrong half the time? That's nothing more that your supposition. And if people are getting fed up as you say then what do you have to worry about? Wouldn't that lead to political victory? If I genuinely believed the strategy of my political enemies were self defeating I'd encourage them like I encourage the Republican election of this Bingo Speaker.

Jesus, what a piece of shit you are.

Okay, so, if he has it wrong about how much abuse transgenders receive at the hands of society, the justice system, etc. , does that necessarily make him transphobic and deserving of cancellation?

That depends on the person. Some people did feel his comments were transphobic. I thought they just ignorant and poorly thought out.

When it comes down to opinion and all opinions are valid, what makes you right and the other guy wrong? And if you know that both of your opinions are subjective, why would you take the risk of erring on the side rash judgment? That is to say, if you know that you are at least fifty percent wrong, why would you forge ahead with character assassination?

If all opinions are valid there is no wrong you dumb Bingo. Just people with different opinions and different agendas. If I'm of the opinion that bananas taste good and you're of the opinion that they don't, I'm not 50% wrong. They taste good to me they don't to you. Simple. Both these things can be true at once.

No they didn't. Where did you get that shit from?

Besides, they already had their own slaver society and as far as I know, Britain never intervened on that issue.

Which part was wrong, objectively speaking? That they were a slaver society or that they rebelled from their previous society that was also a slaver society?

Washington was not a terrorist.

To slaves he was. Oh right, they don't matter to you.

Fine. But your feelings notwithstanding, he still fought for our independence.

Objectively wrong. You and I weren't alive. Trying making this an objective statement and it will reveal he only fought for the independence of some people. Other people he used force and brutality to keep enslaved.

How is that relevant to whether or not blacks can acquire IDs?

It's relevant to whether the framing of your argument is valid or just racist posturing bullshit.

Thirty five states require IDs to vote at this time and they have nothing to do with the case in North Carolina.

Which doesn't provide any objective evidence of your original claims about how liberals feel about black voters getting ID. My objective evidence of a court ruling do provide evidence of my claim about Republicans targeting black voters.

Your argument is supported by nothing but a non sequitur. ID laws in other states do not lend support to your claims about liberal sentiments and black voters.

This "targeting black voters" tangent is your baby, not mine. If blacks are required to present ID to vote outside North Carolina then it has no relevance to this discussion.

Yes. I fully acknowledge that my claim is supported by evidence and yours a fallacy.

If any blacks are buying liquor and cigarettes or traveling or driving, they have IDs.

Cool story. Doesn't change the fact that three separate courts found Republicans targeting black voter rights. If you ever wonder why your party can't get more than 12% of the Black vote maybe it's because when we're talking about assaults on our constitutional rights you're talking about liquor and cigarettes. You're a piece of shit racist and all you're talking has only strengthened that belief. Except now I also think you're a pussy and coward. It's fine by me if there are no proud racists left, it only lends support to my claim your culture is dying of shame. Good riddance.

You don't seriously expect me to believe none of them do, do you?

You know what? I think i just figured it out. Do you think when me and the courts say Republicans are targeting black voting rights that they mean to try and stop all black people from voting?

No you fool. The game is to make it a little hard here and there for some people, especially people who vote overwhelmingly Democrat like Black voters so that they can eek out victories in the margins. They do the same to college voters. Even if eliminating something like a state employee ID only affects a small percentage of black voters that might be enough in tight races.

The initial autopsy found no signs of asphyxiation (though the ME ruled homicide anyway). Then the family commissioned two other MEs to have a look because they didn't feel the state examiner adequately considered the impact of the knee on his neck. So the new MEs ruled homicide by asphyxiation even though there was still no sign of asphyxiation.

The family and the prosecution were determined from the beginning to make it out that Floyd died from the knee on his neck and is specifically why they hired the two MEs.

In my opinion, the family and prosecutors were biased and simply tried too hard to lay it at Chauvin's feet such that it did not appear objective.

The autopsy report said it found no external evidence of trauma to the neck. That's because there wasn't. If you grab someone's neck with your hands and squeeze real hard to choke them to death you'll find trauma such as bruising. In this case the pressure was on the neck was enough to restrict the airways but not enough to cause external bruising. The person who did that autopsy was the medical examiner who testified for the prosecution. Your thinking of the defense witness who was a former medical examiner and who's testimony was so out there that 100s of his colleges demanded an investigation into his for findings dealing with deaths in police custody.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You tell me.

An innocent person is unjustly accused of racism. This makes it a lie which in turn renders it immoral. This is a concept you're familiar with, yes?

So I'm an immoral human piece of shit for honoring a historical figure who also owned slaves but you can lie about someone's character and that's okay.

I've already told you before, file it under shit happens.

"Shit happens" refers to random events. Lying about someone is not random, it's a deliberate action.

Better yet, I'll file it under Curried Goats is a Lying Douchebag.

That's just good rule for life in general.

Glad you agree. Now use that when discussing important matters of race and prejudice.

Sure. That's why who've engaged me this long about my opinion that slaver venerates aren't pieces of shit. Because you're not self conscious about it.

And you've been here with me the whole time...

That's your opinion that you offer no evidence for.

I don't need evidence to know that when a person attacks another out of emotion and overzealousness that mistakes are more likely.

You are a zealot and the judgment of zealots cannot be trusted or taken seriously. You've already proven yourself to be a hypocrite on morality.

Acknowledging mistakes will happen isn't the same as agreeing they happen more often then not. Suffice it to say I don't share it.

If they happen AT ALL then it behooves you, for the sake of your credibility, to at the very least, apologize for it. But better to objectively examine and scrutinize before passing judgment.

And the definition relates to things that all have to do with your subjective feelings.

And? It still does not mean ideals are emotions. Why haven't you grasped that yet?

Is there objective beauty or things you find beautiful?

What does that have to do with anything?

It does you moron.

It does not you idiot. Emotion is a physical reaction to outside stimuli on the five senses. That does not constitute ideals. Ideals are a set of ideas or beliefs that you have developed.

Not one thing on there was an objective standard. They all related to things that were subjective to your own feelings.

Perhaps. But ideals are still not emotions. They may or may not be rooted in emotions but they are not themselves emotions.

That's not how taxes work. Feel free to stamp your feet and cry about it.

I already told you that if it came to pass I would have no choice but to pay. But I will never see it as just.

DeSantis? Yes.

Wrong. I see it as a tool.

...to take care of your problems for you.

I said all opinions were equally valid. That means my opinion is as equally valid as your black friends. As I keep telling you, I don't care about your opinion,

Then why are you still here?

And? Rightfully so. If you want to call me slaverphobic have at it. I'll wear the moniker proudly.

If it became a widely used woke term, of course you would.

Acceptance and tolerance of your pet victims will brook no criticism of any kind. Acceptance and tolerance of those you dislike are fair game.

I think maybe you're confusing me with someone else. I never in my life have claimed bigots and racists should be tolerated beyond the legal sense.

I know you didn't. That's my point, dumbass. You do, however, claim Chappelle is transphobic for maybe misunderstanding the plight of transgenders, yes?

You don't have to tolerate what anyone tells you to, you just have to be able to tolerate the consequences of your speech. If you can't do that then keep your mouth shut you pussy.

Can you tolerate someone else's speech you pussy?

Yeah. Gays have social support that you bigots and racists don't.

If acceptance and tolerance are a sound principle then it makes sense to principally accept and tolerate everyone. If you don't then, as I said, acceptance and tolerance are just a talking point and you're a hypocrite.

Yeah, I understand that the only defense you have of bigots is to pose hypotheticals about the innocents and in that case we just have to hope for the best.

Answer the question: What if someone you think is a homophobe is, in fact, NOT a homophobe?

Do we get it wrong half the time? That's nothing more that your supposition.

Based on observation.

And if people are getting fed up as you say then what do you have to worry about? Wouldn't that lead to political victory? If I genuinely believed the strategy of my political enemies were self defeating I'd encourage them like I encourage the Republican election of this Bingo Speaker.

It's got nothing to do with politics, dumbass.

That depends on the person. Some people did feel his comments were transphobic. I thought they just ignorant and poorly thought out.

So whose opinion is correct here, yours or theirs?

If all opinions are valid there is no wrong you dumb Bingo. Just people with different opinions and different agendas. If I'm of the opinion that bananas taste good and you're of the opinion that they don't, I'm not 50% wrong. They taste good to me they don't to you. Simple. Both these things can be true at once.

Answer the question: If you know that both of your opinions are subjective, why would you take the risk of erring on the side of rash or possibly incorrect judgment?

Which part was wrong, objectively speaking? That they were a slaver society or that they rebelled from their previous society that was also a slaver society?

The part where you called it a "slaver rebellion".

To slaves he was. Oh right, they don't matter to you.

The word probably didn't even exist at that time.

Objectively wrong. You and I weren't alive. Trying making this an objective statement and it will reveal he only fought for the independence of some people. Other people he used force and brutality to keep enslaved.

I've already said numerous times that he fought for the independence of the colonies from Britain.

It's relevant to whether the framing of your argument is valid or just racist posturing bullshit.

Answer the question: How is that relevant to whether or not blacks can acquire IDs?

Which doesn't provide any objective evidence of your original claims about how liberals feel about black voters getting ID.

I've seen videos of people going out on the streets and asking whites about blacks and voter ID and many of them said - in various ways - that it's difficult for blacks to get ID because they're "poor" and don't have the resources to get one. The same people also directly asked blacks if it's difficult for them to acquire IDs. The blacks invariably looked at them like they're crazy and said "Of course not!"

My objective evidence of a court ruling do provide evidence of my claim about Republicans targeting black voters.

Which is still irrelevant to the topic.

Your argument is supported by nothing but a non sequitur. ID laws in other states do not lend support to your claims about liberal sentiments and black voters.

Google for the videos.

Yes. I fully acknowledge that my claim is supported by evidence and yours a fallacy.

I never disputed the North Carolina case. I just don't think it's relevant.

Cool story. Doesn't change the fact that three separate courts found Republicans targeting black voter rights. If you ever wonder why your party can't get more than 12% of the Black vote maybe it's because when we're talking about assaults on our constitutional rights you're talking about liquor and cigarettes. You're a piece of shit racist and all you're talking has only strengthened that belief. Except now I also think you're a pussy and coward. It's fine by me if there are no proud racists left, it only lends support to my claim your culture is dying of shame. Good riddance.

Irrelevant. Blacks have no more difficulty than anyone else getting IDs.

You know what? I think i just figured it out. Do you think when me and the courts say Republicans are targeting black voting rights that they mean to try and stop all black people from voting?

Frankly, I haven't given it any more thought than what I looked up the other day and I don't give a shit.

No you fool. The game is to make it a little hard here and there for some people, especially people who vote overwhelmingly Democrat like Black voters so that they can eek out victories in the margins. They do the same to college voters. Even if eliminating something like a state employee ID only affects a small percentage of black voters that might be enough in tight races.

So blacks ARE too poor and stupid to get IDs?

The autopsy report said it found no external evidence of trauma to the neck. That's because there wasn't. If you grab someone's neck with your hands and squeeze real hard to choke them to death you'll find trauma such as bruising. In this case the pressure was on the neck was enough to restrict the airways but not enough to cause external bruising.

Irrelevant. The state ME did not rule homicide by asphyxiation because he found no signs of asphyxiation. He ruled homicide by "CARDIOPULMONARY ARREST COMPLICATING LAW ENFORCEMENT SUBDUAL, RESTRAINT, AND NECK COMPRESSION"

The person who did that autopsy was the medical examiner who testified for the prosecution. Your thinking of the defense witness who was a former medical examiner and who's testimony was so out there that 100s of his colleges demanded an investigation into his for findings dealing with deaths in police custody.

Wrong, I'm talking about Andrew Baker, the state ME.

Which brings up a point that connects to what I said earlier. The state ME had already ruled homicide and was testifying for the prosecution. So why did the family feel the need to bring in two other MEs and do yet another autopsy?

The two MEs were specifically brought in to look again at the neck compression aspect of it. In other words, they were bound and determined to emphasize the knee-on-the-neck. They wanted everyone to know, under no uncertain terms, that Floyd was killed by Chauvin's knee.

If the initial autopsy report already said homicide and mentioned neck compression, why? What was the point of bringing in the other two MEs? It makes no sense.

 

[Curried Goats]

An innocent person is unjustly accused of racism. This makes it a lie which in turn renders it immoral. This is a concept you're familiar with, yes?

That liars are bad? Sure.

So I'm an immoral human piece of shit for honoring a historical figure who also owned slaves but you can lie about someone's character and that's okay.

I'm not lying about anyone's character. It's my honest opinion that slaver veneraters are pieces of human shit. Just because I agree above that liars are bad doesn't mean I agree with any instance in which you accuse someone of lying. Maybe you're lying. That would par for the course for a piece of human shit like you.

And? It still does not mean ideals are emotions. Why haven't you grasped that yet?

Ideals are emotions, you're just too slow to grasp it.

It does not you idiot. Emotion is a physical reaction to outside stimuli on the five senses. That does not constitute ideals. Ideals are a set of ideas or beliefs that you have developed.

You've developed these ideas in a vacuum and not based on experiences from outside stimuli?

Perhaps. But ideals are still not emotions. They may or may not be rooted in emotions but they are not themselves emotions.

They are. They're just emotions you've assigned special importance to. Don't give me this may or may not be rooted in emotions bullshit. If you don't think they are emotions then explain to me what you think they actually are.

I already told you that if it came to pass I would have no choice but to pay. But I will never see it as just.

I don't care if you see it as just. My goal isn't for you to care but for Black Americans to receive reparations.

...to take care of your problems for you.

You're such a bitch. Government doesn't work any differently for me than it does for you. If that's how you wish to frame it then that framing exists for every part of government you support as well.

Then why are you still here?

I'm still trying to figure out what exactly you don't agree with, objectively, from the statement that veneraters of Washington venerate a slaver. We've established that they venerate Washington and that Washington was a slaver. What's to disagree with, objectively?

This is the only reason I'm still responding. Despite me telling you repeatedly that I don't care about your bitch feelings for some reason you keep trying to tell me about them.

I know you didn't. That's my point, dumbass. You do, however, claim Chappelle is transphobic for maybe misunderstanding the plight of transgenders, yes?

I thought his comments were transphobic. I don't know if he's transphobic. Maybe.

Can you tolerate someone else's speech you pussy?

I've been tolerating your speech this entire time and unlike you I've never suggested you should stop sharing your opinion because others might react violently.

If acceptance and tolerance are a sound principle then it makes sense to principally accept and tolerate everyone. If you don't then, as I said, acceptance and tolerance are just a talking point and you're a hypocrite.

What a lot of confused assumptions. Just because acceptance and tolerance is a sound principle in some instances doesn't mean it's a sound principle in all instances. And I've never advocated acceptance or tolerance. This was some position you've heard from other liberals and you think it applies to me. It doesn't.

Answer the question: What if someone you think is a homophobe is, in fact, NOT a homophobe?

What about it? What if I'm not wrong about you being a racist?

What ifs are stupid. Make an argument.

So whose opinion is correct here, yours or theirs?

Jesus you're stupid. Opinions aren't right or wrong, just different. They're expressions of how people feel. If someone feels you're a racist or a transphobe what position are you in to say their feelings are false? You can feel differently but that's about it.

Answer the question: If you know that both of your opinions are subjective, why would you take the risk of erring on the side of rash or possibly incorrect judgment?

I don't agree that my opinions and judgements are rash. That's simply your opinion. Is your opinion false or just different than my own?

Let me amend my earlier comment. I'm also sticking around to see if you can figure out what the fuck opinions are. It isn't this fucking hard my guy.

The part where you called it a "slaver rebellion".

They were slavers. They rebelled. What's objectively wrong with that description?

The word probably didn't even exist at that time.

Then use tyrant or slaver. Slaver and tyrant aren't better than terrorist. They're all pretty deplorable.

I've already said numerous times that he fought for the independence of the colonies from Britain.

Which were slaver colonies.

Answer the question: How is that relevant to whether or not blacks can acquire IDs?

Already answered. If you don't like my answer tough tits. I find your entire framing of the issue disingenuous and racist.

I've seen videos of people going out on the streets and asking whites about blacks and voter ID and many of them said - in various ways - that it's difficult for blacks to get ID because they're "poor" and don't have the resources to get one. The same people also directly asked blacks if it's difficult for them to acquire IDs. The blacks invariably looked at them like they're crazy and said "Of course not!"

You're confusing randos on the street and youtube with the real issue. Republicans targeting black voters is the real concern of black voters. Not confused rando white people.

I never disputed the North Carolina case. I just don't think it's relevant.

Of course you don't think Republicans efforts to target black voters is as important as some rando white persons thoughts on youtube. You're a racist. I wouldn't expect anything less.

Irrelevant. Blacks have no more difficulty than anyone else getting IDs.

Was anyone else born in a segregated country and denied hospital services and proper documentation?

So blacks ARE too poor and stupid to get IDs?

If that's your conclusion after you learn about black people born in the segregated South and denied proper services it's just more evidence of your racism.

Irrelevant. The state ME did not rule homicide by asphyxiation because he found no signs of asphyxiation. He ruled homicide by "CARDIOPULMONARY ARREST COMPLICATING LAW ENFORCEMENT SUBDUAL, RESTRAINT, AND NECK COMPRESSION"

Wrong, I'm talking about Andrew Baker, the state ME.

Baker testified against the police and he maintains that the neck restraint killed Floyd. Cardiopulmonary arrest is simply the technical term for your heart stopping which it tends to do when deprived of oxygen.

Which brings up a point that connects to what I said earlier. The state ME had already ruled homicide and was testifying for the prosecution. So why did the family feel the need to bring in two other MEs and do yet another autopsy?

The second autopsy was ordered by the family after the preliminary report released “revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation.” The family simply didn't trust the police or the prosecutors or the medical examiners office. Ultimately that preliminary report was correct and it was ruled subdural, restraint and neck compression. It doesn't mean he wasn't asphyxiated, it just means that the means by which he was deprived of oxygen wasn't "traumatic" in a medical sense.

The two MEs were specifically brought in to look again at the neck compression aspect of it. In other words, they were bound and determined to emphasize the knee-on-the-neck. They wanted everyone to know, under no uncertain terms, that Floyd was killed by Chauvin's knee.

That's what witnesses for interested parties do. The witness for the defense was brought in to say that neck compression didn't kill Floyd. Ultimately their testimony was less believable to the jury.

If the initial autopsy report already said homicide and mentioned neck compression, why? What was the point of bringing in the other two MEs? It makes no sense.

Again with these arguments that are basically admissions of your ignorance. Instead asking me over and over again if this and if that why don't you maybe try educating yourself before hand so you can present to me your argument rather than your ignorance?

2nd autopsy finds George Floyd died from asphyxia.