Abrams calls for removal of Confederate faces off Stone Mountain

[Sparko]

I suspect that if they had another strategy, they'd use it.

Their rhetoric is so wide of the mark I don't even find it insulting.

I remember when Jaecp tried to use that tactic when arguing about the "snowflakes" and the Indian thing. It is a childish ploy. I see the liberals do that all the time when someone says something they don't like, they do a twitter attack or something like that condemning them for their "wrong" view and many times the person will capitulate and apologize, in order to avoid the mob.

[Sparko]

Yet you STILL can't get it right...



If Duke said mayonnaise is a good condiment because it is white, does that automatically mean it is bad, and that any mayonnaise eaters are racists? That's about the level of stupid you are bringing up here.




Trump is trying to run a country. He's getting ZERO help from the drive-by media.

[One Bad Pig]

I LIKE that mayo!

[Zymologist]

I LIKE that mayo!

You like mayo?

I think I find that more disturbing than your clear Nazi loyalties.

[Sparko]

I LIKE that mayo!

Nazi!!!!

[RumTumTugger]

For Tass and the other leftist on this board that want to shut down views they disagree with.

[One Bad Pig]

You like mayo?

I think I find that more disturbing than your clear Nazi loyalties.

These days, I just make my own.

[Sparko]

These days, I just make my own.

Just like the Nazi KKK, Duke does, apparently!

[Sparko]

For Tass and the other leftist on this board that want to shut down views they disagree with.

Good video. Which means Tassy and JimL, et al won't watch it.

[RumTumTugger]

Good video. Which means Tassy and JimL, et al won't watch it.

Well you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink it was a thought. of course they could watch it and then falsely call Tim Pool names. btw Tim Pool doesn't consider himself to be a conservative he considers himself to be a classic liberal. So if Tass, JimL and Starlight try to say he is alt right they are barking up the wrong tree.

[Darth Executor]

Your position might be stronger if it were not for the fact that most people don't agree with it. "Republican lawmakers this weekend took President Donald Trump to task over what they deemed a weak response to white supremacist groups and violent clashes in Charlottesville..." (Politico.) Plus Trump's two business advisory groups fell apart because of his remarks on Charlottesville. One can hardly accuse business leaders of being "PC socialist dupes."

Republican lawmakers are overwhelmingly hated by their voters, who most certainly don't agree with this. In fact we just had pelosi and ryan do a turn-around thanks to the fact that the leftist media can't keep antifa violence from showing up on the internet.

[JimL]

JimL your typical liberal strategy of trying to shame your opponent by accusing them of being some horrible racist bigot so they are on the defensive isn't going to work here on theologyweb. We don't fall for such juvenile tactics here. You are the ones who have been ignoring antifa and left violence and refusing to condemn them and actually promoting that violence is a good solution when someone does not agree with you. Remember Starlight defending punching Nazis? And here you are trying to justify physical violence by claiming that hate speech is violence. No it isn't. Whether from the left or right. It is not violence. Violence is physical. Trying to characterize words as violence is another left strategy, like the feminists who call speech "rape"

This country has a constitution that allows free speech. That means speech from people you don't agree with. And hate speech. If you are so against hate speech then why haven't you condemned the left who speaks hate speech all the time? What about when a senator said she wanted Trump assassinated? Wasn't that hate speech? Under your "rules" she should have been beat up with a baseball bat, right? Or when Kathy Griffin held up a decapitated head of Trump. Why didn't you advocate beating the snot out of her?

If anyone is inconsistent here, it is you, Tassman, and Starlight. You want to accuse us of being Nazis because we want to protect Free Speech - for everyone? How insane is that? You want to limit or shut down free speech and call US fascists?

We all know who the fascists are around here and it ain't the conservatives.

Wrong, I'm not against free speech of any kind, I'm just pointing out how you conservatives automatically come to the defense of the white supremacists racists in your conservative party and automatically attack, condemn and assign the guilt of instigator to the counter protesters that stand against them. You weren't there, you don't know, yet, like Trump himself, that is what you do.

[Psychic Missile]

How is burning a cross on one's own property intimidation?

It matters on a case by case basis. For example, burning a cross in your yard in full view of your black next door neighbor's family get-together. Plus intent, of course.

[One Bad Pig]

Wrong, I'm not against free speech of any kind, I'm just pointing out how you conservatives automatically come to the defense of the white supremacists racists in your conservative party and automatically attack, condemn and assign the guilt of instigator to the counter protesters that stand against them.

Hey, thanks for confirming I was correct.

You weren't there, you don't know, yet, like Trump himself, that is what you do.

Ah, your other favorite tactic of turning others' accusations against them, without bothering to stop and think about whether or not it makes any sense first.

[Bill the Cat]

Burning a cross for the purpose of intimidation is illegal in the US.