The First Black Republican Presidential Nominee Will Be.....

[Grumblenuts]

I've talked about European slavery. If you have to lie to make your point, your point isn't worth making.

And no, once again, just because I don't kiss your ass like the white leftists here, that doesn't make me racist. That argument is old and busted.

Run along now, kid. I suggest you find someplace on the internet where your racism isn't challenged.

Your argument is tired son. You argue against documented history, court cases and public policy. That's what you're challenging and you're challenging it with only your opinion. So let's talk about Corrigan v. Buckley. This case is an example of how the government helped whites enforce racist policy. I doubt if you know anything about that case and decision. But when I say that the government has given whites everything they have, you want to argue claiming that you aren't kissing any black persons ass and that somehow you're ****** the hero because you challenge the black man you call a racist because he refuses to genuflect to your punk lily white ass.

The fact you know nothing about this case is a reason why you don't want to discuss the years after slavery and it is why you best leave this argument before I stick my black foot so far up your white ass, that you can walk while sitting on it.

You call me a racist and you do that based on your white fragility.

You're retarded.

So you know nothing about Corrigan v. Buckley but you want yo argue with me and call me a racist. Now that's retarded. Do you know what a deed clause is? A restrictive covenant? Contract selling? C'mon Mr. I'm the white man that bows to no negro. Because when I say that Whites have benefitted from racist law and policy, you choose to disagree, woof about what ass you won't kiss, then call me a racist for saying things like that. These things happened after slavery so talking about who owns who today us just a diversion and its all you got. You decided you could go from high school to the pros, but you ain't Kevin Garnett. White racist shit talk don't work here son. I ain't posting memes junior, I'm posting legal cases and decisions from the United States Supreme court. You have no challenge for this.

That's nice. Go play.

He says he want's to discuss the case, then mentions NOTHING about the case. He does spew a lot of racist bullshit though.


Did he think no one would notice? Or is he so stupid that he did not notice?

Oh my, look who's fallen to appealing to ridicule now, big fella? High time you cut back on the flaming fallaciousness, I'd say. This flagrant fellatio with popguns is all felonious failure as well. For mercy's sake.. find a room, fuckface!

 

[Grumblenuts]

Republicans struggle to elect blacks to Congress. Electing one as president won't happen in this century.

I don't know why this is an issue for Democrats in the first place since they don't like conservatives anyway. If you don't like conservatives or conservative values, you're not going to like a black Republican. And if a black Republican does get nominated, it's unlikely he/she would be elected and Democrats would be largely responsible for this. The reason being because a lot of black Democrats already consider conservative blacks as sellouts and Uncle Toms.

All of this nonsense about black Republican presidential nominees is just farting in a hurricane. Speaking for myself, I don't care how many blacks the Republican party has. A black person will either choose to be Republican or not, I don't give a shit and I don't want some kind of quota. If the Republican party doesn't have what a black person wants, shut the **** up and become a Democrat. Same goes for white people.

You're right. Tried being a Democrat for many years. They're "conservative" too. Hell, Trump is busy now playing reverse Clinton. More socialist programs than the most progressive Democrat dare imagine. There's never truly been any liberal choice. Conservative either. Both are good and essential to check one another. Truth is we are vastly represented by those who simply beg best for major corporate campaign cash while lying best to the voters. Untelevised revolution is required.

 

[Correll]

I've talked about European slavery. If you have to lie to make your point, your point isn't worth making.

And no, once again, just because I don't kiss your ass like the white leftists here, that doesn't make me racist. That argument is old and busted.

Run along now, kid. I suggest you find someplace on the internet where your racism isn't challenged.

Your argument is tired son. You argue against documented history, court cases and public policy. That's what you're challenging and you're challenging it with only your opinion. So let's talk about Corrigan v. Buckley. This case is an example of how the government helped whites enforce racist policy. I doubt if you know anything about that case and decision. But when I say that the government has given whites everything they have, you want to argue claiming that you aren't kissing any black persons ass and that somehow you're ****** the hero because you challenge the black man you call a racist because he refuses to genuflect to your punk lily white ass.

The fact you know nothing about this case is a reason why you don't want to discuss the years after slavery and it is why you best leave this argument before I stick my black foot so far up your white ass, that you can walk while sitting on it.

You call me a racist and you do that based on your white fragility.

You're retarded.

So you know nothing about Corrigan v. Buckley but you want yo argue with me and call me a racist. Now that's retarded. Do you know what a deed clause is? A restrictive covenant? Contract selling? C'mon Mr. I'm the white man that bows to no negro. Because when I say that Whites have benefitted from racist law and policy, you choose to disagree, woof about what ass you won't kiss, then call me a racist for saying things like that. These things happened after slavery so talking about who owns who today us just a diversion and its all you got. You decided you could go from high school to the pros, but you ain't Kevin Garnett. White racist shit talk don't work here son. I ain't posting memes junior, I'm posting legal cases and decisions from the United States Supreme court. You have no challenge for this.

That's nice. Go play.

You can't talk about these things now can you. You don't have any clue about them. If you did, you'd be running your mouth. You came here to **** with me and got your racist white ass kicked with a quickness.

Do you consider yourself an American?

 

[Correll]

Your argument is tired son. You argue against documented history, court cases and public policy. That's what you're challenging and you're challenging it with only your opinion. So let's talk about Corrigan v. Buckley. This case is an example of how the government helped whites enforce racist policy. I doubt if you know anything about that case and decision. But when I say that the government has given whites everything they have, you want to argue claiming that you aren't kissing any black persons ass and that somehow you're ****** the hero because you challenge the black man you call a racist because he refuses to genuflect to your punk lily white ass.

The fact you know nothing about this case is a reason why you don't want to discuss the years after slavery and it is why you best leave this argument before I stick my black foot so far up your white ass, that you can walk while sitting on it.

You call me a racist and you do that based on your white fragility.

You're retarded.

So you know nothing about Corrigan v. Buckley but you want yo argue with me and call me a racist. Now that's retarded. Do you know what a deed clause is? A restrictive covenant? Contract selling? C'mon Mr. I'm the white man that bows to no negro. Because when I say that Whites have benefitted from racist law and policy, you choose to disagree, woof about what ass you won't kiss, then call me a racist for saying things like that. These things happened after slavery so talking about who owns who today us just a diversion and its all you got. You decided you could go from high school to the pros, but you ain't Kevin Garnett. White racist shit talk don't work here son. I ain't posting memes junior, I'm posting legal cases and decisions from the United States Supreme court. You have no challenge for this.

That's nice. Go play.

He says he want's to discuss the case, then mentions NOTHING about the case. He does spew a lot of racist bullshit though.


Did he think no one would notice? Or is he so stupid that he did not notice?

He's counting on the usual leftist response: Do Not Question The Black Person.

Rational people, however, don't do that.

I've pointed out to him, that when the lefties give him a pass on saying stupid shit, that they are in effect, giving him a racist pat on the head, while when I call him on his stupidity, I am actually showing him the respect of judging his words based on their actual content.


He has not replied to that. On some level, it must be killing him to hear it.

 

[Correll]

1. So, you open by stating that you do not care what my race is.

2. Then you immediately cite my race as a reason to dismiss my views. IMMEDIATELY.

3. My views and experiences are just as valid as yours.

4. The Union vets who accepted the flying of the Confederate Flag at the Blue and Grey Reunion in Gettysburgh, they fought for years, many were wounded, or lost limbs, saw friends and family killed. How does your moral authority trump theirs?

5. Attacking whites for having any pride in their culture and/or heritage, is what you want to do IF YOU WANT A RETURN TO WHITE RACISM AGAINST YOU AND YOURS. Do you think that tearing down those statues and banning those flags are going to build feelings of inclusion and tolerance in whites, or the exact opposite?

Seriously? Now I think you just want to argue for the sake of being obtuse. I have patiently listened to your opinion and repeatedly expressed that it is your right to believe what you wish, while making it clear that I have the same right.

That is far from "dismissing" what you had to say, I'm just not changing my view in order to placate you, that is what appears to be your problem.

Now you are being redundant and attempting to put your personal spin on what I am stating.

There is a difference between me not caring what race you are personally, versus you NOT experiencing certain things that I did because of racial differences.

You couldn't have experienced what I did based on that. And like it or not, that is something that is just a reality.
.......

And that is you bringing up my race and your race as the reason(s) why your view is more valid. That you put the spin in there of "experience" is just another way of saying race.


Cause on someone of YOUR race could experience that, and I can't EXPERIENCE it, because of my race.


I was not a Union vet, no. But the Union vets were part of the generation that decided on a policy of reconciliation with the South.


Who are you to renege on that reconciliation? What moral authority do you have, that trumps those that fought and suffered to defeat the Confederacy?

Those who fought and suffered at the Confederacy are now long dead. The desire of some to commemorate their choice to do so, is their prerogative, but not a personal choice of mine.

Furthermore, where have I stated that MY opinion is more "valid" than yours?

What I stated is that there are events that I experienced that YOU did not, based on a number of of obvious factors.

That is not the same as me stating that your opinions are not "valid".

They obviously are to you, which at the risk of me sounding redundant like you are, is your right.

As far as me "reneging" on the so called reconciliation between the Confederacy and the union, I do not possess the political influence to do do.

However, I do have the right as citizen, to not agree with the opinion that the Confederate flag is not just "a harmless symbol".


Just as you have the right to believe that it is.
......

But your side of the divide is not leaving at that. THey are taking steps to drive from the public square any public display of such history or pride AND to marginalize anyone that disagrees with you on this or similar issues.


It is all part of a general anti-white stance, where even saying "white" in relation to white people, is seen and treated as taboo.


(unless it is to attack them, of course)

So now, we are finally at the root cause of you

1. So, you open by stating that you do not care what my race is.

2. Then you immediately cite my race as a reason to dismiss my views. IMMEDIATELY.

3. My views and experiences are just as valid as yours.

4. The Union vets who accepted the flying of the Confederate Flag at the Blue and Grey Reunion in Gettysburgh, they fought for years, many were wounded, or lost limbs, saw friends and family killed. How does your moral authority trump theirs?

5. Attacking whites for having any pride in their culture and/or heritage, is what you want to do IF YOU WANT A RETURN TO WHITE RACISM AGAINST YOU AND YOURS. Do you think that tearing down those statues and banning those flags are going to build feelings of inclusion and tolerance in whites, or the exact opposite?

Seriously? Now I think you just want to argue for the sake of being obtuse. I have patiently listened to your opinion and repeatedly expressed that it is your right to believe what you wish, while making it clear that I have the same right.

That is far from "dismissing" what you had to say, I'm just not changing my view in order to placate you, that is what appears to be your problem.

Now you are being redundant and attempting to put your personal spin on what I am stating.

There is a difference between me not caring what race you are personally, versus you NOT experiencing certain things that I did because of racial differences.

You couldn't have experienced what I did based on that. And like it or not, that is something that is just a reality.
.......

And that is you bringing up my race and your race as the reason(s) why your view is more valid. That you put the spin in there of "experience" is just another way of saying race.


Cause on someone of YOUR race could experience that, and I can't EXPERIENCE it, because of my race.


I was not a Union vet, no. But the Union vets were part of the generation that decided on a policy of reconciliation with the South.


Who are you to renege on that reconciliation? What moral authority do you have, that trumps those that fought and suffered to defeat the Confederacy?

Those who fought and suffered at the Confederacy are now long dead. The desire of some to commemorate their choice to do so, is their prerogative, but not a personal choice of mine.

Furthermore, where have I stated that MY opinion is more "valid" than yours?

What I stated is that there are events that I experienced that YOU did not, based on a number of of obvious factors.

That is not the same as me stating that your opinions are not "valid".

They obviously are to you, which at the risk of me sounding redundant like you are, is your right.

As far as me "reneging" on the so called reconciliation between the Confederacy and the union, I do not possess the political influence to do do.

However, I do have the right as citizen, to not agree with the opinion that the Confederate flag is not just "a harmless symbol".


Just as you have the right to believe that it is.
......

But your side of the divide is not leaving at that. THey are taking steps to drive from the public square any public display of such history or pride AND to marginalize anyone that disagrees with you on this or similar issues.


It is all part of a general anti-white stance, where even saying "white" in relation to white people, is seen and treated as taboo.


(unless it is to attack them, of course)

So now, after numerous posts, we are finally at the root cause of your anguish over the Confederate flag not being universally accepted by all Americans.

And not sharing your view of it, is the equivalent of being me being "anti white.

That is simply astonishing. Especially since I have not personally criticized your embrace of it at all.

In fact, I've reinforced your right to believe as you wish.

Your view of my personal non acceptance of the Confederate flag as an "anti white" position, in spite of the fact that I personally viewed it as a symbol of anti civil rights, and saw it as such, because it was an ever present symbol of belief to those whose fundamental ideology was that people "like me" were not entitled as citizens such rights.

I get it now.

In your view, people like me, who actually saw what it stood for in my lifetime, should just acquiesce and assume an empathetic and passive posture because those like you who were not even here to experience what those like me did, just because YOU happen to consider it to be an "anti white" assault on the white population as a whole..

Correct?

YOu are stating that blacks are morally superior to whites because of their "experiences" that whites cannot have because of race.


You are trying to dance around stating the the basis of your difference in rules, is based on skin color.


That you judge whites, as a race, to not be able to have the "experiences" that you have had, and thus to not be able to understand your "experiences",


is just an evasive and lawyer speak way of avoiding admitting that you have different rules for people depending on their race.


And whites are low man on the totem pole, in your view.



That is what is anti-white about it.



I reject your race based rules. My "experiences" and the things I have personally "viewed" are just as valid as yours.


The "experiences" of millions, tens of millions of Americans for whom those symbols have been harmless symbols of regional pride are just as valid as yours.


And for you, and/or people like you to demonize them, or marginalize them, or call them names, based on that, is an assault on them and me and mine.


A symbolic one, sometimes. But not always.

 

[Correll]

Your argument is tired son. You argue against documented history, court cases and public policy. That's what you're challenging and you're challenging it with only your opinion. So let's talk about Corrigan v. Buckley. This case is an example of how the government helped whites enforce racist policy. I doubt if you know anything about that case and decision. But when I say that the government has given whites everything they have, you want to argue claiming that you aren't kissing any black persons ass and that somehow you're ****** the hero because you challenge the black man you call a racist because he refuses to genuflect to your punk lily white ass.

The fact you know nothing about this case is a reason why you don't want to discuss the years after slavery and it is why you best leave this argument before I stick my black foot so far up your white ass, that you can walk while sitting on it.

You call me a racist and you do that based on your white fragility.

You're retarded.

So you know nothing about Corrigan v. Buckley but you want yo argue with me and call me a racist. Now that's retarded. Do you know what a deed clause is? A restrictive covenant? Contract selling? C'mon Mr. I'm the white man that bows to no negro. Because when I say that Whites have benefitted from racist law and policy, you choose to disagree, woof about what ass you won't kiss, then call me a racist for saying things like that. These things happened after slavery so talking about who owns who today us just a diversion and its all you got. You decided you could go from high school to the pros, but you ain't Kevin Garnett. White racist shit talk don't work here son. I ain't posting memes junior, I'm posting legal cases and decisions from the United States Supreme court. You have no challenge for this.

That's nice. Go play.

He says he want's to discuss the case, then mentions NOTHING about the case. He does spew a lot of racist bullshit though.


Did he think no one would notice? Or is he so stupid that he did not notice?

Oh my, look who's fallen to appealing to ridicule now, big fella? High time you cut back on the flaming fallaciousness, I'd say. This flagrant fellatio with popguns is all felonious failure as well. For mercy's sake.. find a room, fuckface!

When he talks shit about talking about a case, and does NOT talk about the case at all, but instead makes multiple personal and racist attacks, often using racist slurs, yes, it is time to insult the race baiting asshole BACK.


So, you'll supposedly anti-racist right? Yet, you're not calling IM2, on his use of racist anti-white slurs?


Why is that?

Rhetorical question. I know why. You defer to the black man.


Because black has moral superiority in your world. ANd judging people by race and finding one group inferior to another is racist.


Unless the inferior group is whites. Then it is ok.


You feeling any discomfort with any of this, or does it all seem completely reasonable to you?

 

[daveman]

You said something right for a change.

I support gays legally owning firearms for self-protection. It's a basic human right and applies to everyone.

The left doesn't. The left wants people to be defenseless. I'd ask you to think about it, but you're sadly not capable.

Your inability to accept reality in no way alters reality.

LOL

Your delusions are not reality.

Look, Skippy, it's not my fault if you can look directly at something and claim it doesn't exist.

Eliminating the Second Amendment is not the left's position. Neither of the only two remaining Democrat candidates for president propose eliminating it. Biden himself bitchslapped someone recently for falsely attributing that position to him.

You're ******* deranged.

More so than I thought as now I see you really do b'lieve your delusions are real.

Ummm, Biden said he was going to appoint Beta to run gun policy.

You know, Beta, the guy who said he was going to take away people's ARs?

Meanwhile, in the reality you pretend doesn't exist:

Over a Third of Democrats Would Repeal Second Amendment

Repeal the Second Amendment -- That's the New York Times, by the way.

Why It’s Time to Repeal the Second Amendment

Repealing the Second Amendment isn't easy but it's what March for Our Lives students need

Repeal the Second Amendment

You can screech NUH UH!! all you want, but it's pointless.

 

[katsteve2012]

Seriously? Now I think you just want to argue for the sake of being obtuse. I have patiently listened to your opinion and repeatedly expressed that it is your right to believe what you wish, while making it clear that I have the same right.

That is far from "dismissing" what you had to say, I'm just not changing my view in order to placate you, that is what appears to be your problem.

Now you are being redundant and attempting to put your personal spin on what I am stating.

There is a difference between me not caring what race you are personally, versus you NOT experiencing certain things that I did because of racial differences.

You couldn't have experienced what I did based on that. And like it or not, that is something that is just a reality.
.......

And that is you bringing up my race and your race as the reason(s) why your view is more valid. That you put the spin in there of "experience" is just another way of saying race.


Cause on someone of YOUR race could experience that, and I can't EXPERIENCE it, because of my race.


I was not a Union vet, no. But the Union vets were part of the generation that decided on a policy of reconciliation with the South.


Who are you to renege on that reconciliation? What moral authority do you have, that trumps those that fought and suffered to defeat the Confederacy?

Those who fought and suffered at the Confederacy are now long dead. The desire of some to commemorate their choice to do so, is their prerogative, but not a personal choice of mine.

Furthermore, where have I stated that MY opinion is more "valid" than yours?

What I stated is that there are events that I experienced that YOU did not, based on a number of of obvious factors.

That is not the same as me stating that

Seriously? Now I think you just want to argue for the sake of being obtuse. I have patiently listened to your opinion and repeatedly expressed that it is your right to believe what you wish, while making it clear that I have the same right.

That is far from "dismissing" what you had to say, I'm just not changing my view in order to placate you, that is what appears to be your problem.

Now you are being redundant and attempting to put your personal spin on what I am stating.

There is a difference between me not caring what race you are personally, versus you NOT experiencing certain things that I did because of racial differences.

You couldn't have experienced what I did based on that. And like it or not, that is something that is just a reality.
.......

And that is you bringing up my race and your race as the reason(s) why your view is more valid. That you put the spin in there of "experience" is just another way of saying race.


Cause on someone of YOUR race could experience that, and I can't EXPERIENCE it, because of my race.


I was not a Union vet, no. But the Union vets were part of the generation that decided on a policy of reconciliation with the South.


Who are you to renege on that reconciliation? What moral authority do you have, that trumps those that fought and suffered to defeat the Confederacy?

Those who fought and suffered at the Confederacy are now long dead. The desire of some to commemorate their choice to do so, is their prerogative, but not a personal choice of mine.

Furthermore, where have I stated that MY opinion is more "valid" than yours?

What I stated is that there are events that I experienced that YOU did not, based on a number of of obvious factors.

That is not the same as me stating that your opinions are not "valid".

They obviously are to you, which at the risk of me sounding redundant like you are, is your right.

As far as me "reneging" on the so called reconciliation between the Confederacy and the union, I do not possess the political influence to do do.

However, I do have the right as citizen, to not agree with the opinion that the Confederate flag is not just "a harmless symbol".


Just as you have the right to believe that it is.
......

But your side of the divide is not leaving at that. THey are taking steps to drive from the public square any public display of such history or pride AND to marginalize anyone that disagrees with you on this or similar issues.


It is all part of a general anti-white stance, where even saying "white" in relation to white people, is seen and treated as taboo.


(unless it is to attack them, of course)

So now, we are finally at the root cause of you

Seriously? Now I think you just want to argue for the sake of being obtuse. I have patiently listened to your opinion and repeatedly expressed that it is your right to believe what you wish, while making it clear that I have the same right.

That is far from "dismissing" what you had to say, I'm just not changing my view in order to placate you, that is what appears to be your problem.

Now you are being redundant and attempting to put your personal spin on what I am stating.

There is a difference between me not caring what race you are personally, versus you NOT experiencing certain things that I did because of racial differences.

You couldn't have experienced what I did based on that. And like it or not, that is something that is just a reality.
.......

And that is you bringing up my race and your race as the reason(s) why your view is more valid. That you put the spin in there of "experience" is just another way of saying race.


Cause on someone of YOUR race could experience that, and I can't EXPERIENCE it, because of my race.


I was not a Union vet, no. But the Union vets were part of the generation that decided on a policy of reconciliation with the South.


Who are you to renege on that reconciliation? What moral authority do you have, that trumps those that fought and suffered to defeat the Confederacy?

Those who fought and suffered at the Confederacy are now long dead. The desire of some to commemorate their choice to do so, is their prerogative, but not a personal choice of mine.

Furthermore, where have I stated that MY opinion is more "valid" than yours?

What I stated is that there are events that I experienced that YOU did not, based on a number of of obvious factors.

That is not the same as me stating that your opinions are not "valid".

They obviously are to you, which at the risk of me sounding redundant like you are, is your right.

As far as me "reneging" on the so called reconciliation between the Confederacy and the union, I do not possess the political influence to do do.

However, I do have the right as citizen, to not agree with the opinion that the Confederate flag is not just "a harmless symbol".


Just as you have the right to believe that it is.
......

But your side of the divide is not leaving at that. THey are taking steps to drive from the public square any public display of such history or pride AND to marginalize anyone that disagrees with you on this or similar issues.


It is all part of a general anti-white stance, where even saying "white" in relation to white people, is seen and treated as taboo.


(unless it is to attack them, of course)

So now, after numerous posts, we are finally at the root cause of your anguish over the Confederate flag not being universally accepted by all Americans.

And not sharing your view of it, is the equivalent of being me being "anti white.

That is simply astonishing. Especially since I have not personally criticized your embrace of it at all.

In fact, I've reinforced your right to believe as you wish.

Your view of my personal non acceptance of the Confederate flag as an "anti white" position, in spite of the fact that I personally viewed it as a symbol of anti civil rights, and saw it as such, because it was an ever present symbol of belief to those whose fundamental ideology was that people "like me" were not entitled as citizens such rights.

I get it now.

In your view, people like me, who actually saw what it stood for in my lifetime, should just acquiesce and assume an empathetic and passive posture because those like you who were not even here to experience what those like me did, just because YOU happen to consider it to be an "anti white" assault on the white population as a whole..

Correct?

YOu are stating that blacks are morally superior to whites because of their "experiences" that whites cannot have because of race.


You are trying to dance around stating the the basis of your difference in rules, is based on skin color.


That you judge whites, as a race, to not be able to have the "experiences" that you have had, and thus to not be able to understand your "experiences",


is just an evasive and lawyer speak way of avoiding admitting that you have different rules for people depending on their race.


And whites are low man on the totem pole, in your view.



That is what is anti-white about it.



I reject your race based rules. My "experiences" and the things I have personally "viewed" are just as valid as yours.


The "experiences" of millions, tens of millions of Americans for whom those symbols have been harmless symbols of regional pride are just as valid as yours.


And for you, and/or people like you to demonize them, or marginalize them, or call them names, based on that, is an assault on them and me and mine.


A symbolic one, sometimes. But not always.

That is total bullshit, and is you spinning MY words as an "anti white" narrative.

I never stated that I begrudge your views in any way.

In fact, I have REPEATEDLY stated that you are free to believe as you choose, just as I am.

AND, I have also stated that I have a right to disagree with your views about the Confederate flag, soley based on my own experiences with it.

You are apparently itching for a nonsensical fight over what YOU deem as me having beliefs that do not mirror yours.

Over and over, I have expressed that YOU are free to think as you wish, and have also reinforced that I can as well.

Do you not understand the difference between "You COULD NOT" experience what I did, versus ""You DID NOT experience what I did"?

Or are you just too obstinate to understand what I am saying?

The fact that you are even attempting to futilely arguie that point is astounding beyond any sense of reason.

Your "position" is obviously one that seeks to identify any hint of of what you perceive to be "anti white" discrimination, and you tirelessly seek to exploit that to your advantage, by attempting to label any rebuttal to your rhetoric as being an "anti white" conspiracy.

And to that, I say "BULLSHIT"

 

[IM2]

Your argument is tired son. You argue against documented history, court cases and public policy. That's what you're challenging and you're challenging it with only your opinion. So let's talk about Corrigan v. Buckley. This case is an example of how the government helped whites enforce racist policy. I doubt if you know anything about that case and decision. But when I say that the government has given whites everything they have, you want to argue claiming that you aren't kissing any black persons ass and that somehow you're ****** the hero because you challenge the black man you call a racist because he refuses to genuflect to your punk lily white ass.

The fact you know nothing about this case is a reason why you don't want to discuss the years after slavery and it is why you best leave this argument before I stick my black foot so far up your white ass, that you can walk while sitting on it.

You call me a racist and you do that based on your white fragility.

You're retarded.

So you know nothing about Corrigan v. Buckley but you want yo argue with me and call me a racist. Now that's retarded. Do you know what a deed clause is? A restrictive covenant? Contract selling? C'mon Mr. I'm the white man that bows to no negro. Because when I say that Whites have benefitted from racist law and policy, you choose to disagree, woof about what ass you won't kiss, then call me a racist for saying things like that. These things happened after slavery so talking about who owns who today us just a diversion and its all you got. You decided you could go from high school to the pros, but you ain't Kevin Garnett. White racist shit talk don't work here son. I ain't posting memes junior, I'm posting legal cases and decisions from the United States Supreme court. You have no challenge for this.

That's nice. Go play.

He says he want's to discuss the case, then mentions NOTHING about the case. He does spew a lot of racist bullshit though.


Did he think no one would notice? Or is he so stupid that he did not notice?

He's counting on the usual leftist response: Do Not Question The Black Person.

Rational people, however, don't do that.

I asked if the chump knew anything about the case correll. Just like I asked your punk ass to show the national policy of anti white racism you have yet to show. Stay out of adult conversations boy.

Now chump, I asked if you knew anything about Corrigan v. Buckley. If you new anything about the case I don't have to mention anything. So Mr. I will question all blacks because a want to show all the other racists that I ain't scared, do you know anything about that case?

 

[IM2]

The right seems to have a fixation on guns and gays.

You said something right for a change.

I support gays legally owning firearms for self-protection. It's a basic human right and applies to everyone.

The left doesn't. The left wants people to be defenseless. I'd ask you to think about it, but you're sadly not capable.

That's a lie. But you're a dumb ass, so this is expected. OBTW White & Black Guns: A History Of Gun Control For Black People

It's a lie? Of course it isn't. Don't be silly.

Why do Democrat-led cities such as Chicago and Baltimore have such high gun death rates when they have such restrictive gun control?

It is not a lie and no, we won't be discussing right wing memes. Seems that's all you got. First it's the blacks still own slaves today meme and now the democrat-Baltimore- Chicago meme. I'm surprised you didn't add Detroit.

Ooooh, right, Detroit's a liberal shithole, too.

Meanwhile, using the standards you yourself set, you're too cowardly to discuss the Democratic Party's criminalization of self-defense and the horrible effects it's had on Democrat-controlled cities.

Since the democratic party has not criminalized self defense and you don't necessarily need a gun for self defense, there is nothing to discussed. So don't run from the questions I asked you son. I live in a republican state that was fucked up by a republican governor and legislator. Your memes are irrelevant.

 

[IM2]

Your argument is tired son. You argue against documented history, court cases and public policy. That's what you're challenging and you're challenging it with only your opinion. So let's talk about Corrigan v. Buckley. This case is an example of how the government helped whites enforce racist policy. I doubt if you know anything about that case and decision. But when I say that the government has given whites everything they have, you want to argue claiming that you aren't kissing any black persons ass and that somehow you're ****** the hero because you challenge the black man you call a racist because he refuses to genuflect to your punk lily white ass.

The fact you know nothing about this case is a reason why you don't want to discuss the years after slavery and it is why you best leave this argument before I stick my black foot so far up your white ass, that you can walk while sitting on it.

You call me a racist and you do that based on your white fragility.

You're retarded.

So you know nothing about Corrigan v. Buckley but you want yo argue with me and call me a racist. Now that's retarded. Do you know what a deed clause is? A restrictive covenant? Contract selling? C'mon Mr. I'm the white man that bows to no negro. Because when I say that Whites have benefitted from racist law and policy, you choose to disagree, woof about what ass you won't kiss, then call me a racist for saying things like that. These things happened after slavery so talking about who owns who today us just a diversion and its all you got. You decided you could go from high school to the pros, but you ain't Kevin Garnett. White racist shit talk don't work here son. I ain't posting memes junior, I'm posting legal cases and decisions from the United States Supreme court. You have no challenge for this.

That's nice. Go play.

You can't talk about these things now can you. You don't have any clue about them. If you did, you'd be running your mouth. You came here to **** with me and got your racist white ass kicked with a quickness.

"Hello, Central Casting? I have a part for a guy. 'Angry Black Man'. Yes, the angrier, the better....Right. Lots of calling people racist, lots of arrogance, lots of 'bowing up', as the kids say...You have a guy? Awesome! Have his agent call him!"

Your phone should be ringing any minute with a gig.

If white men can be angry about some shit they imagine, I can be pissed off about what really happens. So you just keep running because you can't discuss what has gone on since slavery ended because it crushed that little lie whites like you have made up. I beat your ass, and you know it. I Beat Correll long ago. He's a joke, a whiny snot nose joke, now you have joined the Correll the clown club.

 

[IM2]

You said something right for a change.

I support gays legally owning firearms for self-protection. It's a basic human right and applies to everyone.

The left doesn't. The left wants people to be defenseless. I'd ask you to think about it, but you're sadly not capable.

Your inability to accept reality in no way alters reality.

LOL

Your delusions are not reality.

Look, Skippy, it's not my fault if you can look directly at something and claim it doesn't exist.

Eliminating the Second Amendment is not the left's position. Neither of the only two remaining Democrat candidates for president propose eliminating it. Biden himself bitchslapped someone recently for falsely attributing that position to him.

You're ******* deranged.

More so than I thought as now I see you really do b'lieve your delusions are real.

He can't help himself. Cognitive dissonance has set in. He calls himself challenging the black man as the great savior of the racist right. The fearless hero who will not bow to the black man like his imaginary liberals do. He ain't scurred to tell the black man about himself, yet he cannot discuss a court case that shows how the government helped whites practice racism because he knows that by discussing this case, he will be shown how whites have benefitted from racism just as I have said and that will kill his crying about my racism.

 

[IM2]

Republicans struggle to elect blacks to Congress. Electing one as president won't happen in this century.

I don't know why this is an issue for Democrats in the first place since they don't like conservatives anyway. If you don't like conservatives or conservative values, you're not going to like a black Republican. And if a black Republican does get nominated, it's unlikely he/she would be elected and Democrats would be largely responsible for this. The reason being because a lot of black Democrats already consider conservative blacks as sellouts and Uncle Toms.

All of this nonsense about black Republican presidential nominees is just farting in a hurricane. Speaking for myself, I don't care how many blacks the Republican party has. A black person will either choose to be Republican or not, I don't give a shit and I don't want some kind of quota. If the Republican party doesn't have what a black person wants, shut the **** up and become a Democrat. Same goes for white people.

You're right. Tried being a Democrat for many years. They're "conservative" too. Hell, Trump is busy now playing reverse Clinton. More socialist programs than the most progressive Democrat dare imagine. There's never truly been any liberal choice. Conservative either. Both are good and essential to check one another. Truth is we are vastly represented by those who simply beg best for major corporate campaign cash while lying best to the voters. Untelevised revolution is required.

AMEN!!

 

[Grumblenuts]

When he talks shit about talking about a case, and does NOT talk about the case at all,

Ah, you're talking shit again. Big surprise.

but instead makes multiple personal and racist attacks, often using racist slurs,

You mean like you're doing now. Yeah, I get it.

yes, it is time to insult the race baiting asshole BACK.

Indeed, you reap exactly what you sow.

So, you'll supposedly anti-racist right?

What?

Yet, you're not calling IM2, on his use of racist anti-white slurs?

No, I'm calling you out on yours. Far as IM2, turnabout is fair play. You projecting your own shitty behavior onto others is what's bullshit.

Why is that?

Rhetorical question. I know why. You defer to the black man.

Talking to yourself now.. Seen a shrink lately?

Because black has moral superiority in your world. ANd judging people by race and finding one group inferior to another is racist.

Well thanks for asking.. but no, that ain't my world. I can imagine talking to yourself being so much easier than all that pesky waiting, listening, and considering though..

Unless the inferior group is whites. Then it is ok.


You feeling any discomfort with any of this, or does it all seem completely reasonable to you?

No, you do seem disturbingly nuts.

 

[Correll]

You're retarded.

So you know nothing about Corrigan v. Buckley but you want yo argue with me and call me a racist. Now that's retarded. Do you know what a deed clause is? A restrictive covenant? Contract selling? C'mon Mr. I'm the white man that bows to no negro. Because when I say that Whites have benefitted from racist law and policy, you choose to disagree, woof about what ass you won't kiss, then call me a racist for saying things like that. These things happened after slavery so talking about who owns who today us just a diversion and its all you got. You decided you could go from high school to the pros, but you ain't Kevin Garnett. White racist shit talk don't work here son. I ain't posting memes junior, I'm posting legal cases and decisions from the United States Supreme court. You have no challenge for this.

That's nice. Go play.

He says he want's to discuss the case, then mentions NOTHING about the case. He does spew a lot of racist bullshit though.


Did he think no one would notice? Or is he so stupid that he did not notice?

He's counting on the usual leftist response: Do Not Question The Black Person.

Rational people, however, don't do that.

I asked if the chump knew anything about the case correll. Just like I asked your punk ass to show the national policy of anti white racism you have yet to show. Stay out of adult conversations boy.

Now chump, I asked if you knew anything about Corrigan v. Buckley. If you new anything about the case I don't have to mention anything. So Mr. I will question all blacks because a want to show all the other racists that I ain't scared, do you know anything about that case?

1. I demonstrated national policies of anti-white discrimination many times. Your stone walling is just you being too stupid to know how stupid you look.


2. Actually, you asked someone else that. I was just pointing out how you asked the question, and then just posted race baiting shit. I never heard of it. But I guessed from your words that it was in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War, I was right wasn't I?

 

[Correll]

When he talks shit about talking about a case, and does NOT talk about the case at all,

Ah, you're talking shit again. Big surprise.

but instead makes multiple personal and racist attacks, often using racist slurs,

You mean like you're doing now. Yeah, I get it.

yes, it is time to insult the race baiting asshole BACK.

Indeed, you reap exactly what you sow.

So, you'll supposedly anti-racist right?

What?

Yet, you're not calling IM2, on his use of racist anti-white slurs?

No, I'm calling you out on yours. Far as IM2, turnabout is fair play. You projecting your own shitty behavior onto others is what's bullshit.

Why is that?

Rhetorical question. I know why. You defer to the black man.

Talking to yourself now.. Seen a shrink lately?

Because black has moral superiority in your world. ANd judging people by race and finding one group inferior to another is racist.

Well thanks for asking.. but no, that ain't my world. I can imagine talking to yourself being so much easier than all that pesky waiting, listening, and considering though..

Unless the inferior group is whites. Then it is ok.


You feeling any discomfort with any of this, or does it all seem completely reasonable to you?

No, you do seem disturbingly nuts.

1. What racial slurs have I used, supposedly?


2. YOur excuses for giving IM2 a pass, are completely pathetic.

 

[Grumblenuts]

If white men can be angry about some shit they imagine, I can be pissed off about what really happens.

That sums up this topic neatly, and many others I've seen. Just trying to picture all these put upon "white people" clutching their pearls while pounding out this daily stream of insufferable dreck... Yuck!! Makes perfect sense to be a proud, surviving, marginalized minority. Hard finding much to celebrate about identifying as a member of a neck crushing majority.

 

[Faun]

Republicans struggle to elect blacks to Congress. Electing one as president won't happen in this century.

I don't know why this is an issue for Democrats in the first place since they don't like conservatives anyway. If you don't like conservatives or conservative values, you're not going to like a black Republican. And if a black Republican does get nominated, it's unlikely he/she would be elected and Democrats would be largely responsible for this. The reason being because a lot of black Democrats already consider conservative blacks as sellouts and Uncle Toms.

All of this nonsense about black Republican presidential nominees is just farting in a hurricane. Speaking for myself, I don't care how many blacks the Republican party has. A black person will either choose to be Republican or not, I don't give a shit and I don't want some kind of quota. If the Republican party doesn't have what a black person wants, shut the **** up and become a Democrat. Same goes for white people.

So a black Republican can't get elected without support from Democrats?

Thanks for admitting that many Republicans and conservatives are racist. I already knew that but it's nice to see your side admit it.

 

[Faun]

You said something right for a change.

I support gays legally owning firearms for self-protection. It's a basic human right and applies to everyone.

The left doesn't. The left wants people to be defenseless. I'd ask you to think about it, but you're sadly not capable.

Your inability to accept reality in no way alters reality.

LOL

Your delusions are not reality.

Look, Skippy, it's not my fault if you can look directly at something and claim it doesn't exist.

Eliminating the Second Amendment is not the left's position. Neither of the only two remaining Democrat candidates for president propose eliminating it. Biden himself bitchslapped someone recently for falsely attributing that position to him.

You're ******* deranged.

More so than I thought as now I see you really do b'lieve your delusions are real.

Ummm, Biden said he was going to appoint Beta to run gun policy.

You know, Beta, the guy who said he was going to take away people's ARs?

Meanwhile, in the reality you pretend doesn't exist:

Over a Third of Democrats Would Repeal Second Amendment

Repeal the Second Amendment -- That's the New York Times, by the way.

Why It’s Time to Repeal the Second Amendment

Repealing the Second Amendment isn't easy but it's what March for Our Lives students need

Repeal the Second Amendment

You can screech NUH UH!! all you want, but it's pointless.

Dumbfuck, banning AR's doesn't repeal the Second Amendment. You morons are dumber than shit.

 

[IM2]

Correll, you have not shown any policy of national anti white discrimination. You can't because one does not exist. I asked if daveman knew anything about the case. If he did, we would have discussed it. But he didn't. Since he didn't I have no reason to discuss it. So you go look it up and learn that this decision allowed the government at every level to help enforce racially restrictive covenants in housing thereby enforcing racism nationally. These covenants lasted into the late 1960's by government decree but still operate in agreements right now. So when I sat whites have what they do because of the government, this is one example of that. And that, is what a national policy of anti black discrimination is. It is not an opinion repeated among racist losers like your false claim.