Christianity Today Op Ed

[lilpixieofterror]

You're grasping at straws, Lilpix. Gerrymandering yes, that's been going on since the 1800's which is why the drawing of districts need be taken out of the hands of the politicians. The rest of your post is nonsense. But democrats aren't the ones requiring stricter and unnecessary ID laws, they aren'tthe ones tactically closing polling stations in democrat districts, or moving them at the last minute to confuse voters, they aren't the ones throwing voters off the rolls at the last minute for no good reason, they aren't the ones requiring college students to travel back to their home states in order to vote. It's only the republicans who are coming up with all these schemes and more to suppress the democrat vote, and the reason is because they know they will have a difficult time winning without these suppression tactics. There would most likely be a Black woman Governor of Georgia today had it not been for the suppression tactics employed by her very opponent in the last election.

Most countries require you to present an ID to vote Jimmy. Ask the foreigners around here if their countries do, unless you think the black/brown people are too stupid to get one and need the white man to do it for him. Do you believe that non whites are not smart enough to do so? Racist liberals are always a funny breed.

[Mountain Man]

I answered it quite clearly. Never answer a yes/no question, without clarification.

Yep... too often a simple "yes" or "no" leads to "Ah, so that means you believe..." followed by something you don't actually believe.

[DivineOb]

I answered it quite clearly. Never answer a yes/no question, without clarification.

I honestly don't know whether you agree or disagree with what I said. Can you give me a "lean yes" or a "lean no" if you don't want to give an absolute answer?

[lilpixieofterror]

"Odd last minute voter registration" ... one of those things is not like the others.

But, regardless, this is like saying "Well, we'll always have murders so I can't really support increasing the police department's budget after we zeroed it out last year." There is voter suppression, in many forms, throughout America today. And while both sides don't engage in it to the same degree, you do find it implemented to protect both Democratic and Republican politicians.

But there are plenty of ways to lessen voter suppression and ways to get rid of some its forms entirely. Why it's so difficult for Republican-leaning folk to sign onto those anti-suppression methods would be confusing if the answer weren't so clear.

Bringing it back around to fascism and authoritarianism, you've got one group of people who are pushing for greater democratic representation, even when it might negatively impact their own party's (or the party they lean toward's) control. The liberal push to end Connecticut's gerrymanders is an example here. On the other end, you have a group of people who staunchly and consistently oppose ending various forms of suppression, even when shown hard data demonstrating the disenfranchising effect. They are, fundamentally, anti-democratic in their approach to political power.

If you want to be calling people fascist, that's a much better place to start.

--Sam

Sam the jackass, always assume the worst and throw a fit when your opponents return the favor. Once a jackass, always a jackass, eh Sam?

[lilpixieofterror]

I honestly don't know whether you agree or disagree with what I said. Can you give me a "lean yes" or a "lean no" if you don't want to give an absolute answer?

The answer is obvious, read it.

[Teallaura]

Excuses?

I called dead racists racist fools and then you got angry at me over it.

That's not an excuse. That's you messing up, giving a tepid apology and then not reflecting afterwards.

Be better

You first. Lobbing insults and then acting surprised when you make someone mad. But hey, so what if you hurt my feelings, right? Just some Southern traitor - what do you care?

YOU ASKED - which was why I explained what angered me. I gave a sincere apology you haven't the grace to simply accept.

[DivineOb]

The answer is obvious, read it.

The only answer I can come up with when I read your replies is "no, I don't want to say I will condemn Republicans for suppressing votes." I really don't want to read into what people on here write because that will only cause confusion and delay.

If you don't want me to think your answer is 'no' can you please just be explicit?

If someone else can interpret LPoT's meaning can you please let me know what it is?

[lilpixieofterror]

The only answer I can come up with when I read your replies is "no, I don't want to say I will condemn Republicans for suppressing votes." I really don't want to read into what people on here write because that will only cause confusion and delay.

If you don't want me to think your answer is 'no' can you please just be explicit?

If someone else can interpret LPoT's meaning can you please let me know what it is?

[DivineOb]

Sam can speak for himself I'm sure.

So, do you agree that what Justin Clark, one of Trump's top re-election advisors said, was wrong?

"Traditionally it's always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,"

https://www.businessinsider.com/leak...-clark-2019-12

[Jaecp]

You first. Lobbing insults and then acting surprised when you make someone mad. But hey, so what if you hurt my feelings, right? Just some Southern traitor - what do you care?

YOU ASKED - which was why I explained what angered me. I gave a sincere apology you haven't the grace to simply accept.

Again, I never insulted you.

At worst, I insulted your grandfather or great grandfather or something by saying, you know, something true.

Your complete lack of remorse for the accusations you made and your inability to even articulate how I insulted you makes your apology suspect. You only did so because at least two moderators went "wait what?"

You can have Grace when you demonstrate that you know why what you did was wrong

[Jaecp]

Sam can speak for himself I'm sure.

So, do you agree that what Justin Clark, one of Trump's top re-election advisors said, was wrong?

"Traditionally it's always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,"

https://www.businessinsider.com/leak...-clark-2019-12

Oh snap! Thanks that's a good find! Missed this over the holidays!

[Teallaura]

The only answer I can come up with when I read your replies is "no, I don't want to say I will condemn Republicans for suppressing votes." I really don't want to read into what people on here write because that will only cause confusion and delay.

If you don't want me to think your answer is 'no' can you please just be explicit?

If someone else can interpret LPoT's meaning can you please let me know what it is?

You're proving her point. She started out with the theme that the anti-Trump crowd always uses the least charitable explanation against their opponents. This is exactly that - and kinda silly since she already said it's just wrong regardless of who does it.

Also, 'your guys did it too' is not a defense - it's a deflection. So, can you stop deflecting and address the allegation of Democrat wrongdoing?

[DivineOb]

You're proving her point. She started out with the theme that the anti-Trump crowd always uses the least charitable explanation against their opponents. This is exactly that - and kinda silly since she already said it's just wrong regardless of who does it.

Also, 'your guys did it too' is not a defense - it's a deflection. So, can you stop deflecting and address the allegation of Democrat wrongdoing?

I asked her multiple times to be clear. And then I said I would only come to the conclusion I was approaching regretfully. How is that trying to be uncharitable?

Can you quote what she's said which indicates her answer is "yes" rather than "no" to my question?

Edit:

Here is her first response to me, after which she insisted she already answered the question

You will always find this sort of stuff going on. Oddly drawn districts, ballet boxes mysteriously disappearing/appearing at the perfect moment, odd last minute voter registration, etc. Is there an issue? Sure, but remember, not only one party does it.

How is that an answer to my question about whether she would join me in condemning the behavior?

[Jaecp]

Nah man, she'd rather defend lpot for her standard evasive answers (was it her or mm that said to never answer a yes or no or whatever?) Than explain how I called her a traitor

[Teallaura]

Again, I never insulted you.

At worst, I insulted your grandfather or great grandfather or something by saying, you know, something true.

Your complete lack of remorse for the accusations you made and your inability to even articulate how I insulted you makes your apology suspect. You only did so because at least two moderators went "wait what?"

You can have Grace when you demonstrate that you know why what you did was wrong

You don't get to tell ANYONE else how to feel. Period.

You ASKED so I explained - I don't HAVE to prove anything here.

I drew a perfectly logical and utterly uncharitable inference - you had already been hurling insults WITH NO APOLOGY. I acknowledged I went too far and apologized - you don't deserve more than that.

Rogue wanted me to back it up - I did. KG and I tangle on similar things all the time. So no, that wasn't why I thought better of it. You have that honor with something you said.

Here's how I saw it - you called me a traitor by association and a racist by implication - and it really ticked me off because, as you'd said, we'd had a pleasant conversation to that point. I then drew the rational - and uncharitable - conclusion in retaliation. You then said something that made me regret it and I apologized. That wasn't good enough for you and you used my explanation - WHICH YOU ASKED FOR - as an excuse to browbeat me.

You just wanna hurt me more and I'm tired of playing. I don't retract my apology because you were owed it. But I'm putting you on ignore.