Oh, I thought you were calling me racist. Which would have been very meta. It’s because you’re so fucking dim that you’re not able to communicate effectively. But I think I’m getting the hang of your prose, I’ll work harder in the future to poke through the chicken-entrails of your retard scrawl in order to divine the meaning.
Conservatives are trying to ruin America. I don’t think they do it on purpose. They do it because they’ve been lied to by the nonsense media that exists on the right. You’re so pissed off that you can’t think straight. But the things you’re pissed off about are largely not true.
Posting “This thread is filled with a bunch of racists.” each time someone critiques Cain for doing something stupid, and then LOL’ing about it because this is what your tiny brain thinks Lib’rals are like…
That’s dropping a turd. At least you’ve learned not to do it in GD.
Are you talking about Cain? If so, then you are, by default, a racist. That’s how it works.
Or, in other words, because they’re not smart enough to know what’s best. You could have saved yourself a ton of time and just typed that out to begin with.
They’re not? Again I ask, how many examples would you like? Actually, let me amend the aforementioned question. How many examples from this board would you like, as it’d be too easy otherwise. Well, easier than it already is. The, “Oh, you dislike Obama/something Obama does? Then you must be a racist” sentiment really isn’t all that hard to find. In fact, it’s been used for, oh, 20+ years, though it’s generally restricted to those on the political and social right.
What is this guy thinking running for president. What we need is a guy who is really articulate. Not only that, someone who can give GREAT speeches, who can gat a crowd going. I tell ya, if we could get a president like that…
—Wait.
Never mind.
Nooo, but I’d say writing things you don’t believe in, in a manner you think is annoying when done to you, and doing so deliberately to get a rise out of people is pretty much the textbook definition of trolling.
You’re as horrible at it as you are at your own actual arguments, of course, but a bad troll is still a troll.
Actually, entirely derailing a thread supposedly started to demean a particular presidential candidate and turning it into a spot light performance of content free verbal drool being scooped up by everyone else in the thread is . . . excellent trolling. That’s pretty much an icon of trolling at its most effective.
Also the fifth guy in the category I mentioned in my first post.
Cain’s campaign is blaming Perry’s campaign for leaking the info about the harassment allegations and payoff. Perry’s campaign is claiming innocence, but is blaming Romney’s campaign. This is starting to look like a circular firing squad.
This part is interesting:
But then if Cain was telling his 2004 campaign people about a harassment case, why was he so surprised and forgetful when it was recently brought up? Did he not tell his current campaign people?
Once you realised that you had been caught out, you squeezed out some horseshit and tried to pass it off as something resembling truth. Only in your bizarro world of self deception does “I say my piece then leave it at that” mean “I argue for page after page after page after page but in the end let someone else have the last word.”
In other words, you are disingenuous wanker, and when you are caught out you respond by being a disingenous wanker.
Listen fuckwit, if you go for the big words, at least check on them. It’s not like you’re internet deprived, and cant do that. Otherwise it just makes you look like a mouthpiece parroting right wing radio hosts without ever reading on the subject. On the other hand, it’s a pretty apt definition of your presence on the Dope so far.
*and I can only wonder why the “other side of the ISLE” thing always come up under Conservatives’ fingers. Maybe it is the correct way to write it, but I doubt it. Hence why I asked and not stated.