User Tag List

Page 26 of 35 FirstFirst ... 162425262728 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 342

Thread: A new dead horse to beat: What are your reactions to the NFL's anti-kneeling rule?

  1. #251
    Senior Member Chocolate Lab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,631
    Quote Originally Posted by townsend View Post
    I’ll happily put my cards on the table. I’d be interested to see where the people who think Antifa is an organization of consequence get their info. (Honestly organization is probably a generous description there are dog walking groups that are more organized)
    I feel the same way about the neo-Nazi losers, but you've cited them about 100 times as an example of the Evil Right and I doubt you'd say they basically don't exist.
    2014=2009, 2015=2010?

    The Garrett Song

  2. The following user likes this post:


  3. #252
    Senior Member Angrymesscan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,313
    Quote Originally Posted by L.T. Fan View Post
    I registered more than 50 years ago and simply I haven’t changed it. During that period I have gained a lot of history and insights to the political, economic, and ethics process in this country. I see very little in the Democratic philosophy that runs parallel to my own though process. I have evolved to another thought process and it is a type of evolution that the older I get the more conservative my views are.
    Cheeky sob... You made it sound as if you were D to gain the no bias vote of confidence... Hats off, well played good sir.
    So who is the last D president you voted for?
    @Rev supporter

  4. #253
    Senior Member mschmidt64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    13,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab View Post
    I feel the same way about the neo-Nazi losers, but you've cited them about 100 times as an example of the Evil Right and I doubt you'd say they basically don't exist.
    Yup.

    Townsend is the epitome of "just enough knowledge to be dangerous." He has done his wikipedia reading enough to go in depth on various histories and transgressions but his own personal biases paint everything on the right as way more diabolical than their leftist equivalents. Of course, everything the left does is much more harmless than an organized, oppressive, scheming alt-right.

    Wait, this sounds like Alex Jones talking about a left wing conspiracy.

  5. #254
    Senior Member L.T. Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    16,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Angrymesscan View Post
    Cheeky sob... You made it sound as if you were D to gain the no bias vote of confidence... Hats off, well played good sir.
    So who is the last D president you voted for?
    Clinton. Bill that is.
    Since Day One

  6. #255
    Senior Member townsend's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5,370
    Quote Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
    Yup.

    Townsend is the epitome of "just enough knowledge to be dangerous." He has done his wikipedia reading enough to go in depth on various histories and transgressions but his own personal biases paint everything on the right as way more diabolical than their leftist equivalents. Of course, everything the left does is much more harmless than an organized, oppressive, scheming alt-right.

    Wait, this sounds like Alex Jones talking about a left wing conspiracy.
    I posted a couple links from NYT & the and the anti defamation league. Obviously there’s plenty more info on Gamergate, The Proud Boys, etc at multiple credible publications. You’re so certain that the extremist left is comparable, but just a fundamental analysis of their memberships and activities proves otherwise. Surely you don’t believe Alex Jones’ rambling conspiracies are on the same level as the NYT? (That’d be like calling Gorsuch or Pelosi part of the fringe)

    This isn’t an abstract thing, extremist incidents, group numbers, the people who’ve been harrassed, assaulted and killed by the radical right are data points simple enough to fit in an excel spread sheet, and the numbers just don’t compare. Now I’ve generally tried to be respectful in our interactions, because even though I believe you’re fundamentally wrong on this, and I don’t consider you a partisan, and I think that if you’re open to it you can look at information objectively.

    So the question is, what level of proof do you need to see that the radical right is more organized, is recruiting far more heavily, is exponentially more violent than these leaderless, disorganized, impermanent, and non-lethal “Antifa” groups.

  7. #256
    Senior Member BipolarFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Up my ass
    Posts
    9,456

  8. #257
    Senior Member mschmidt64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    13,920
    Quote Originally Posted by townsend View Post
    I posted a couple links from NYT & the and the anti defamation league. Obviously there’s plenty more info on Gamergate, The Proud Boys, etc at multiple credible publications. You’re so certain that the extremist left is comparable, but just a fundamental analysis of their memberships and activities proves otherwise. Surely you don’t believe Alex Jones’ rambling conspiracies are on the same level as the NYT? (That’d be like calling Gorsuch or Pelosi part of the fringe)

    This isn’t an abstract thing, extremist incidents, group numbers, the people who’ve been harrassed, assaulted and killed by the radical right are data points simple enough to fit in an excel spread sheet, and the numbers just don’t compare. Now I’ve generally tried to be respectful in our interactions, because even though I believe you’re fundamentally wrong on this, and I don’t consider you a partisan, and I think that if you’re open to it you can look at information objectively.

    So the question is, what level of proof do you need to see that the radical right is more organized, is recruiting far more heavily, is exponentially more violent than these leaderless, disorganized, impermanent, and non-lethal “Antifa” groups.
    Yes, you've posted all those numbers before.

    I take specific issue with your classification of all of them. I take issue with what acts of violence are classified as committed by the "right," and what acts of violence are NOT classified as "by the left." I take issue of what groups you consider fringe. I take issue with the reporting on their membership numbers. All of it.

    I don't believe Alex Jones's rambling is on par with the NYT, of course, and I think I've said as much. However, the NYT, plain and simple, is biased and not always trustworthy as a source. I do not trust "the NYT" when "The NYT" is really one or two editors with clear axes to grind who are framing information in a way that makes it look good to progressive causes. There can be no simpler demonstration about this than the ridiculous and patently false and fraudulent reporting on gun deaths and gun crime in America, in which both sides can obviously have a point and yet the main stream media be basically a liar about all of it.

    Trump coverage is the exact same. The media wants to create a firestorm of right wing extremism and violence to curry voters favor against conservative politicians. You've fallen for it.

    No, I do not believe there is any epidemic of right wing kooks and provacateurs out there. Whether the numbers are 10,000 nationwide or 40,000 nationwide or whatever, the numbers of true race warriors and people who are more racist than "just making amusing or off colored stereotypes from their living room," is a minute and inconsequental amount, ROUGHLY on par with the amount of college aged radical douche bags who are burning down laboratories that do experiments on animals or punching "nazis" in the face on the street. With the word "roughly" meaning, equivalent in influence in the national consciousness and dialogue, regardless of actual body count.

  9. The following 2 users like this post:


  10. #258
    El Presidente' skidadl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    9,306
    Quote Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
    Yes, you've posted all those numbers before.

    I take specific issue with your classification of all of them. I take issue with what acts of violence are classified as committed by the "right," and what acts of violence are NOT classified as "by the left." I take issue of what groups you consider fringe. I take issue with the reporting on their membership numbers. All of it.

    I don't believe Alex Jones's rambling is on par with the NYT, of course, and I think I've said as much. However, the NYT, plain and simple, is biased and not always trustworthy as a source. I do not trust "the NYT" when "The NYT" is really one or two editors with clear axes to grind who are framing information in a way that makes it look good to progressive causes. There can be no simpler demonstration about this than the ridiculous and patently false and fraudulent reporting on gun deaths and gun crime in America, in which both sides can obviously have a point and yet the main stream media be basically a liar about all of it.

    Trump coverage is the exact same. The media wants to create a firestorm of right wing extremism and violence to curry voters favor against conservative politicians. You've fallen for it.

    No, I do not believe there is any epidemic of right wing kooks and provacateurs out there. Whether the numbers are 10,000 nationwide or 40,000 nationwide or whatever, the numbers of true race warriors and people who are more racist than "just making amusing or off colored stereotypes from their living room," is a minute and inconsequental amount, ROUGHLY on par with the amount of college aged radical douche bags who are burning down laboratories that do experiments on animals or punching "nazis" in the face on the street. With the word "roughly" meaning, equivalent in influence in the national consciousness and dialogue, regardless of actual body count.
    Racist

  11. #259
    Senior Member townsend's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5,370
    Quote Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
    Yes, you've posted all those numbers before.

    I take specific issue with your classification of all of them. I take issue with what acts of violence are classified as committed by the "right," and what acts of violence are NOT classified as "by the left." I take issue of what groups you consider fringe. I take issue with the reporting on their membership numbers. All of it.

    I don't believe Alex Jones's rambling is on par with the NYT, of course, and I think I've said as much. However, the NYT, plain and simple, is biased and not always trustworthy as a source. I do not trust "the NYT" when "The NYT" is really one or two editors with clear axes to grind who are framing information in a way that makes it look good to progressive causes. There can be no simpler demonstration about this than the ridiculous and patently false and fraudulent reporting on gun deaths and gun crime in America, in which both sides can obviously have a point and yet the main stream media be basically a liar about all of it.

    Trump coverage is the exact same. The media wants to create a firestorm of right wing extremism and violence to curry voters favor against conservative politicians. You've fallen for it.

    No, I do not believe there is any epidemic of right wing kooks and provacateurs out there. Whether the numbers are 10,000 nationwide or 40,000 nationwide or whatever, the numbers of true race warriors and people who are more racist than "just making amusing or off colored stereotypes from their living room," is a minute and inconsequental amount, ROUGHLY on par with the amount of college aged radical douche bags who are burning down laboratories that do experiments on animals or punching "nazis" in the face on the street. With the word "roughly" meaning, equivalent in influence in the national consciousness and dialogue, regardless of actual body count.
    Actually NYT has received a lot of reasonable criticism for their soft profile of a whire nationalist, and they’re frequent fluff pieces of right wing buffoons like Peterson or Shapiro, their ideas of how to help incels by “redistribution of sex”, and their willingness to give climate change deniers a platform, Maggie Haberman’s flaccid and chummy coverage of the white house (and her outrage over Michelle Wolfe’s smokey eye joke.

    Obviously no source is perfect source, and any newspaper will have some bias, but honestly in many ways NYT has been softer on the alt-right than even right leaning publications.

    Also buas doesn’t make facts wrong. If an Eagle’s fan says they have a better team than a Cowboys fan, they’ll probably bring up the score of the Superbowl. They’re simultaneously biased, and objectively correct,

    Finally I think you should look into diving a little deeper into the impact of this radicalism. The Charleston shooting had a meaningful impact in this country, as did Charlottesville. I don’t think one person on UVA campus will forget seeing a bunch of assholes in Tiki Torches chant “Jews will not replace us”, likewise the men and women in local synagogues that had men with AK-47s post up outside their church,

    The difference between leftists and right wing extremists is how frequently they show up in force, intimidate and attack journalists (Gavin McGinness just had his guys show up to a journalists house to threaten his family, and are even represented by politicians (not even in the sheepish apologizing of Trump, but sincere elected officials that fully endorse white nationalism.) The alt-right is jockeying to be a political force, and it’s doing so with the usual playbook far right organizations have relied on to gain a foothold. That just doesn’t exist on the left.

  12. #260
    Administrator boozeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    47,641

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •