It has been my personal experience, unfortunately not limited just to the example I described, that neo-nazis and anti-semites, are usually not “just standing there”.
Then slug them for that.
Yep.
Who cares? I don’t feel the need to make arguments nazis would find compelling. But I do want recourse to the law should someone slug me because they don’t like what I have to say.
I agree. Knowing that anyone who punches them is breaking the law should not make nazis feel safer.
The Nazi scum should see it as quid pro quo.
Oh, grow up, crybaby! You said you didn’t remember; I provided a link to your own post, to jog your memory. I didn’t call you a Nazi except in your dreams.
However, at this point I’m happy to call you a crybaby.
ETA: FWIW, it’s some poster named M_____ that seemed especially hostile to Ms. Felarca several years ago, and eager to defend Nazis. (I’m not being cute — I don’t keep tabs on all the right-wing whiners.)
You referred to “neo-Nazi bucks (some right here on this message-board)”. I didn’t remember any neo-Nazis posting in such a thread, and so didn’t know who you’d had in mind; and, upon googling, you — linked to my post.
Thing is, I would’ve been glad to see her get arrested, and see her face prosecution, and see her spend time behind bars, if she’s guilty of assault. I said so then; I stand by it now. If you don’t think I’m a neo-Nazi, then you’re — merely correct.
Nah, that would be the mainstream Democrat platform. There are plenty of liberals who are willing to call out the other side, but the Democratic Party leadership - and yes, I’m including Nancy Pelosi here - has been around too long.
Sure, they’re experienced, will come the retort. But the problem is, too much of their experience is from when conservatives actually made some sort of sense, we really were more of a center-right country, and they didn’t think being loud and proud Democrats would fly.
They may have been right in 1995, but they’re wrong about it now. But their minds are still in the same old place. So they let Republicans give hundreds of billions of dollars to their rich buddies, as long as they can sneak in a pittance for people who really need the money, rather than calling the Republicans out on their use of this crisis to shovel more money at the rich. (Good thing we means-tested that $1200, huh?)
I’d like to see Democrats get mad as hell about some of the shit that’s going on now. About how Trump’s against relief for strapped state governments, and his staff admits that he’s doing it so he can hold over governors’ heads the threat of giving them nothing when their states are in need. About how someone’s profiteering like crazy as states have to bid up the price of PPE against each other: while I don’t want profiteers to swing by the neck from lampposts (I’d be satisfied if they were tossed down to Gitmo and never let out), I think it would be good if some Dems got mad enough to suggest it. About how, even after managing to outbid others and pay through the nose for medical supplies, the Administration mysteriously hijacks the supplies and nobody ever finds out where they went.
Dems should be fucking livid about this stuff. They should be visibly angry about it when the subject comes up, and they need to bring it up constantly if they don’t get asked about it.
People like AOC are getting mad. People like Steny Hoyer aren’t. There’s your divide.
Sounds about right. But those two are at the outer edges. I think the yellow streak runs right through the middle.
I prefer the CBS Sunday morning show to Chuck Todd, because it more often has a 4 Democrats to 0 Republican mix in the round table panel discussion instead of the 3 to 1 ratio that is usually on NBC and ABC.
That’s interesting, I haven’t watched that one. How do they handle Republican bullshit like Alternative Facts?
Interesting how you ignore the one thing you can’t rebut. liberals attack Trump all the time. Thus your claim that they never attack anyone is fucking false.
You also seem to forget that the conservatives they attack are people on this very message board. So they aren’t saying mean things behind their back and then being nice to their face.
But I can go on. I can pull up every liberal article that attacks people. I can bring up Clinton’s “deplorable people.” I can bring up all the people who actively cancel people. I can bring up Bill Maher, who I hate, but who attacks people all the fucking time. I can bring up Pelossi, who has not only attacked Trump but also those in her own party.
There are countless examples of liberals attacking people. Are you going to come up with excuses for all of them, or accept that you were posting nonsense?
Because I’m tired of it. The only thing this shit does is help Trump, by making it seem like both sides are bad. It’s still both side-ism. It’s just a stereotype the right started, but, for some reason, left “free thinkers” love to adopt that nonsense.
Let me guess: you also think SJWs are a real thing, and not a term made up by the right to mock the left. You think not being racist is being “politically correct.” You think that everyone is “virtue signaling” and don’t actually mean what they say.
They’re all right wing bullshit contributions to try and replace actual thought–the only way they can win.
That doesn’t wash, because, right below the post where he quotes you, he says this:
So he flat out said you were not the person he was talking about.
Hell, I forgot she was mentioned in this thread. Here’s another liberal who, according to TriPolar, never attacks anyone. Nevermind her constant attacks on the right, and even sometimes on the left. ’
Again, the claim is delusional.
I don’t see that his quip flatly rules it out; put yourself in my shoes for a moment, and ask if the exchange could fairly be summed up as follows: he refers to “neo-Nazi bucks (some right here on this message-board)” — but, at that point, without actually recalling which posters they were. He then gets asked about it, googles it, and quotes my post — not remembering, before googling, that I was one of the posters in that thread; he’d only remembered thinking to himself that some “neo-Nazi bucks” posted in it.
In that case, could he truthfully wrap up the post by saying he didn’t remember that I was one of the posters — adding that he doesn’t pay that much attention? Seems to me that it works either way: he could say it while ruling me out, but he could just as easily say it while ruling me in — because it’s just a blandly accurate statement about which details he remembered when, and why.
Again, the “claim” was not made in earnest.
That said, when she attacks, she tends to come with facts to back her up, and not just partisan cant.
I’m rarely seeing any more right wing assholes on PBS Newshour anymore. They used to talk to Matt Shlapp-head or his idiot wife once in a while, and some right wing pundit from (I think) Arizona - forgot his name - almost just as annoying. But other than Judy recently talking to Pence (who convincingly put on Mr. SeriousFace while going on about the pandemic - good fast-forward material) the newshour has become more and more refreshingly devoid of increasingly disingenuous right wing commentators, which probably explains the decrease in seeing them.
Oh and one or two shower-worthy chats with Meadows and Doug Collins in the capitol in the last couple months, and that pretty well just about does it.