Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Spectator UK)   RIP, diversity of opinion (1770-2014)   (spectator.co.uk ) divider line
    More: Sad, free speeches, English Defence League, New York Times best-seller, New Statesman, Brandeis University, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, diversity, Leveson Inquiry  
•       •       •

6071 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Apr 2014 at 1:21 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



743 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-04-17 03:36:56 PM  

SovietCanuckistan: Dafuq happened in 1770? Saint Reagan holy essence spawned the seed of 'Merica?


Voltaire. "Reverend, I hate what you write, but I will give my life so that you can continue to write."  

Which became the more commonly (but incorrectly) attributed quote along the lines of "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
 
2014-04-17 03:38:05 PM  

Bloody William: lantawa: HeartBurnKid: Of course Baathism is a real thing.  So are socialism and Marxism, as well as fascism.  The problem is, to many people, the meaning of the latter three (as well as the former, if your post is any indication) is simply "disagreeing with me".

That would be, and is, an incorrect statement. Radical liberal political strategists have stooped to incredibly unethical methodology in their political tactics by coalescing their messages under Baathist-type suppression of opposing views. Quality political dialogue is now much more difficult to find in the West, precisely because of Middle Eastern political influence. We are through more than one looking glass in the political arenas of the West. "Disagreeing with me," yah, my sweet tookus that's what it means..

What the fark are you talking about?


Something that you obviously know nothing about......
 
2014-04-17 03:38:32 PM  

Gulper Eel: But having made their bed, they were too chickenshiat to sleep in it.


Well yes, welcome to every PR farkup everywhere.  That still has nothing to do with eliminating diversity of opinion.
 
2014-04-17 03:40:34 PM  

BSABSVR: Gulper Eel: But having made their bed, they were too chickenshiat to sleep in it.

Well yes, welcome to every PR farkup everywhere.  That still has nothing to do with eliminating diversity of opinion.


Yeah but apparently we're supposed to "respect" bigotry because free speech or something.
 
2014-04-17 03:40:37 PM  

lantawa: Something that you obviously know nothing about......


I'm sorry, adding "the fark" to my question might have made it seem antagonistic more than confused. I'll reword.

Would you please explain to me what the fark you are talking about, because I honestly don't know what the fark you're talking about and would like some clarification so I can perhaps remove the admittedly incredulous the fark from my statement?
 
2014-04-17 03:42:11 PM  

skozlaw: Bloody William: As for the other examples in that whinefest? We're not Ireland, England, or Australia, you victimized little shiat.

Uh.... The Spectator isn't a U.S. publication...


I confused it with the American Spectator.
 
2014-04-17 03:42:39 PM  

BSABSVR: That still has nothing to do with eliminating diversity of opinion.


I think it does. Not that they'll remember much about what the other graduation speakers have to say, but now it's guaranteed to be something along the usual forgettable blah blah blah go forth and blah blah blah you're too hung over to remember any of this blah blah blah and in conclusion blah blah blah good luck with that 200 grand in debt.
 
2014-04-17 03:44:41 PM  

lantawa: UrukHaiGuyz: You sound more than a little paranoid. How is Ba'athism any more relevant to the U.S. political debate than Marxism, Maoism, etc.? It's completely irrelevant as its goals and inception were tied deeply to the history of Arab states, and a desire to modernize. It has literally nothing to do with the function of our government or constitution.

If the right would stop plucking random irrelevant ideologies from around the world to use a boogeymen and focus on practical governance for a minute we might be able to get something done once in a while.

You sound like you don't know what you're talking about. And obtuse; you seem to be obtuse, as well. Maybe you can settle your thoughts with a nice canine dish and some beer. That'd probably get you back on track so that a meaningful dialogue could be initiated.


You jump into the thread with equally paranoid and vague ramblings about how liberals in the U.S. are Ba'athists and you want to talk about meaningful dialogue? Not sure if crackpot or weird troll.

/'grats on your expansive vocabulary, though
//makes me lean more towards crackpot
///also....canine dish? wat
 
2014-04-17 03:45:59 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: also....canine dish? wat


muslims don't eat dogs

get it
 
2014-04-17 03:46:24 PM  
 
2014-04-17 03:46:31 PM  

Bloody William: lantawa: HeartBurnKid: Of course Baathism is a real thing.  So are socialism and Marxism, as well as fascism.  The problem is, to many people, the meaning of the latter three (as well as the former, if your post is any indication) is simply "disagreeing with me".

That would be, and is, an incorrect statement. Radical liberal political strategists have stooped to incredibly unethical methodology in their political tactics by coalescing their messages under Baathist-type suppression of opposing views. Quality political dialogue is now much more difficult to find in the West, precisely because of Middle Eastern political influence. We are through more than one looking glass in the political arenas of the West. "Disagreeing with me," yah, my sweet tookus that's what it means..

What the fark are you talking about?


img.fark.net
 
2014-04-17 03:46:46 PM  

stpauler: Gulper Eel: stpauler: It seems the author doesn't understand the often repeated "free speech doesn't mean free from consequences".

By and large these aren't cases of businesses doing as they see fit - these are governments cracking down on a free press, and even supposedly liberal journalists asking governments to crack down on those who disagree with them.

Let's see:
In Galway, at the National University of Ireland, a speaker who attempts to argue against the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) programme against Israel is shouted down with cries of 'farking Zionist, farking pricks... Get the fark off our campus.'
Sounds like two people got their free speech. And no government involvement

In California, Mozilla's chief executive is forced to resign because he once made a political donation in support of the pre-revisionist definition of marriage.
Yeah, don't see the government here either.


At Westminster, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee declares that the BBC should seek 'special clearance' before it interviews climate sceptics, such as fringe wacko extremists like former Chancellor Nigel Lawson.

The BBC is owned and run by....the government itself. Moreover, they were found to be giving climate skeptics favorable coverage. The BBC has come under fire from the chairman of an influential committee of MPs for favouring climate change sceptics in its coverage - and, according to documents seen by the Guardian, replied by saying that putting forward opinions not backed by science is part of its role.


In Massachusetts, Brandeis University withdraws its offer of an honorary degree to a black feminist atheist human rights campaigner from Somalia.
And still not the government. And OH NOES! They withdrew an honorary degree? Yet she can still speak her mind?


In London, a multitude of liberal journalists and artists responsible for everything from Monty Python to Downton Abbey sign an open letter in favour of the first state restraints on the ...


It seems the right is attempting to do to the word 'diversity' what they did to the word 'liberal'.
 
2014-04-17 03:47:35 PM  

Infernalist: lantawa: HeartBurnKid: Of course Baathism is a real thing.  So are socialism and Marxism, as well as fascism.  The problem is, to many people, the meaning of the latter three (as well as the former, if your post is any indication) is simply "disagreeing with me".

That would be, and is, an incorrect statement. Radical liberal political strategists have stooped to incredibly unethical methodology in their political tactics by coalescing their messages under Baathist-type suppression of opposing views. Quality political dialogue is now much more difficult to find in the West, precisely because of Middle Eastern political influence. We are through more than one looking glass in the political arenas of the West. "Disagreeing with me," yah, my sweet tookus that's what it means..

Rubbish.  The Baathists used the Iraqi government to shut down dissent through violence and intimidation of violence.

Left leaning people in America simply mock and scorn those on the right.  If you see the two things as even remotely the same thing, you're either insane, retarded or a troll.


Your opinion is rubbish.  The "mocking and scorning" is part of the willful ignorance that comes from methodical, dogmatic dismissal of legitimate opposing views.  If you can't see the connection between the two things, you're either a low-IQ sycophant for Obama, or an indoctrinated member of your movement who is fearfully denying the truth.
 
2014-04-17 03:48:28 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Take 20.


How is boycotting not exercising free speech, whether by an individual or a company? You can't force people to be customers.
 
2014-04-17 03:49:20 PM  
First of all, as the public, we have never had the universal right to free speech. Secondly, did this asshat of a writer find the same problem with Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-A? If not, then STFU. Hobby Lobby is in the Supreme Court attempting to stifle free associations between consenting adults.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the only place anymore it seems where complete and total free speech is allowed is within the political system itself, and any corporation that has direct and close ties to the government (Fox News, I'm looking at you ya bunch of liars). Politicians have free reign to pretty much say whatever the hell they want. About the only thing they can't do is literally hold a noose in one hand and a poster threatening the president in the other hand.
 
2014-04-17 03:50:55 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: How is boycotting not exercising free speech


because liberals did it, duh
 
2014-04-17 03:50:55 PM  

Gulper Eel: BSABSVR: That still has nothing to do with eliminating diversity of opinion.

I think it does. Not that they'll remember much about what the other graduation speakers have to say, but now it's guaranteed to be something along the usual forgettable blah blah blah go forth and blah blah blah you're too hung over to remember any of this blah blah blah and in conclusion blah blah blah good luck with that 200 grand in debt.


Ok.  So the commemcement speaker will suck.  Why is that controlling speech?  Ali was given a different option that would have put her "kill all the Muslims" philosophy on similar footing with Ahmedinijhad's "kill all the Jews" philosophy as far as having the opportunity to voice that opinion at a University.  She chose not to take it.  She has no fundamental right to a commencement address just because she won't be reading Doctor Suess.
 
2014-04-17 03:51:23 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Take 20.


lol no

change the channel or stay mad
that dog's been well-beaten in this threads
 
2014-04-17 03:51:40 PM  

lantawa: Your opinion is rubbish.  The "mocking and scorning" is part of the willful ignorance that comes from methodical, dogmatic dismissal of legitimate opposing views.


lantawa: Your opinion is rubbish.


lantawa: The "mocking and scorning" is part of the willful ignorance that comes from methodical, dogmatic dismissal of legitimate opposing views.


Two statements. Directly undermining each other. Next to each other.

THIS IS WHY YOU ARE MOCKED AND SCORNED.
 
2014-04-17 03:51:41 PM  

sprawl15: UrukHaiGuyz: also....canine dish? wat

muslims don't eat dogs

get it


Ah, gotcha, thanks. I'm having a really hard time trying to make sense of this guy. He keeps on about "methodologies" and "tactics" without ever bothering to explain in detail what he's talking about. Very strange indeed.
 
2014-04-17 03:51:44 PM  

skozlaw: Jjaro: I'd argue views on homosexuality were coming around in 2008 as well

Which is immaterial since I was talking about the Clinton administration's behavior being in-line with the prevailing attitude of the time.


.
And I was saying Eich's views were inline with the prevailing attitute in 2008.  Although, I was referring to Hillary, not neccesary Bill.


skozlaw: Jjaro: Which is why over half of CA, one of the more liberal states in the country, voted for Prop 8 in the first place

No, "over half of CA" did not vote for prop 8. Over half of the people who showed up did. So 52% of 80% of registered voters - which is 78% of eligible voters - voted for prop 8. So, no, nowhere near half of CA voted for prop 8. It doesn't really matter what the state as a whole thinks if a good chunk of it can't be bothered to actually go vote to make it happen, which is a constant problem for the democratic party in every state.


Okay, you have me here.  Over half of the people who voted in a Presidential Election, and whom voted overwhelmingly for Obama, voted for Prop 8.  Not half of the state.  I apologize for not specifying.

skozlaw: Jjaro: he did in fact, apologize

No, he did not. The foundation offered an apology, not Eich.


Yes, he did.  Nice try though. "Before his resignation, Eich posted an apology on his blog for the "pain" he said his views had caused. He vowed to uphold a culture of equality as Mozilla's CEO, including maintaining the nonprofit's health benefits for same-sex couples "

http://news.yahoo.com/mozilla-ceos-exit-tests-silicon-valleys-tolera nc e-012554106--sector.html

2008, while only 6 years ago, was a hell of a lot different in terms of acceptance of gay marriage.  I just think its absurd that all these people were so adament that he resign.  I understand why he had to, and unlike some, I don't neccesarily think Mozilla is at fault.  It pretty much had to happen.  But I do agree with the point of this article, which can be witnessed pretty clearly by observing many Fark members, where dissenting opinion is simply not tolerated.
 
2014-04-17 03:52:53 PM  

lantawa: . Quality political dialogue is now much more difficult to find in the West, precisely because of Middle Eastern political influence.


img.fark.net
 
2014-04-17 03:52:56 PM  

lantawa: Infernalist: lantawa: HeartBurnKid: Of course Baathism is a real thing.  So are socialism and Marxism, as well as fascism.  The problem is, to many people, the meaning of the latter three (as well as the former, if your post is any indication) is simply "disagreeing with me".

That would be, and is, an incorrect statement. Radical liberal political strategists have stooped to incredibly unethical methodology in their political tactics by coalescing their messages under Baathist-type suppression of opposing views. Quality political dialogue is now much more difficult to find in the West, precisely because of Middle Eastern political influence. We are through more than one looking glass in the political arenas of the West. "Disagreeing with me," yah, my sweet tookus that's what it means..

Rubbish.  The Baathists used the Iraqi government to shut down dissent through violence and intimidation of violence.

Left leaning people in America simply mock and scorn those on the right.  If you see the two things as even remotely the same thing, you're either insane, retarded or a troll.

Your opinion is rubbish.  The "mocking and scorning" is part of the willful ignorance that comes from methodical, dogmatic dismissal of legitimate opposing views.  If you can't see the connection between the two things, you're either a low-IQ sycophant for Obama, or an indoctrinated member of your movement who is fearfully denying the truth.


So, a troll. Fair enough, but you're not very good at it.
 
2014-04-17 03:53:28 PM  

BSABSVR: Bloody William: lantawa: HeartBurnKid: Of course Baathism is a real thing.  So are socialism and Marxism, as well as fascism.  The problem is, to many people, the meaning of the latter three (as well as the former, if your post is any indication) is simply "disagreeing with me".

That would be, and is, an incorrect statement. Radical liberal political strategists have stooped to incredibly unethical methodology in their political tactics by coalescing their messages under Baathist-type suppression of opposing views. Quality political dialogue is now much more difficult to find in the West, precisely because of Middle Eastern political influence. We are through more than one looking glass in the political arenas of the West. "Disagreeing with me," yah, my sweet tookus that's what it means..

What the fark are you talking about?

[img.fark.net image 285x171]


Nice.  Childishly stupid and indicative of a juvenile mentality, but well done, son.  American eagle gif spews cum from a man's loins; it's all part of a meaningful debate about political methodology.  You should be so proud of yourself.  Gold stars all around....
 
2014-04-17 03:54:43 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: I'm having a really hard time trying to make sense of this guy. He keeps on about "methodologies" and "tactics" without ever bothering to explain in detail what he's talking about.


i talked to some scientists and they are pretty sure it's mostly anger at being kicked out of a club for not bathing
 
2014-04-17 03:55:41 PM  

whidbey: Yeah but apparently we're supposed to "respect" bigotry because free speech or something.


Thank you for stating so clearly that she's the bigot.

Not the medieval shiats who carved her up when she was a child.
Not the goons who forced her into an arranged marriage.
Not the savages who threaten her life to this day, and have tailed her around the world.
Not the professional victims at CAIR who see a bigot behind every package of bacon.
Not the useful idiot snowflakes who are uncomfortable with what she has to say about their faith.
Not the easily-cowed administrators who couldn't be bothered to learn the first thing about her until the heat was on, and then promptly folded.

Nope, SHE's the Islamophobe. (shun.jpg)

Not only should we have the right to call out this monstrousness, we have the duty to do so, to offend the easily-offended (especially those who use 'offense' as a pretext to shut down debate), and whatever may be most noxious to their adherents and defenders, to do those very things and then some.

Yes, even if she hangs out with those awful neocons sometimes.
 
2014-04-17 03:55:46 PM  

lantawa: Nice.  Childishly stupid and indicative of a juvenile mentality, but well done, son.  American eagle gif spews cum from a man's loins; it's all part of a meaningful debate about political methodology.  You should be so proud of yourself.  Gold stars all around....


I gotta admit that really you put you people in your place. Sit down, John.
 
2014-04-17 03:55:49 PM  
There speaks the voice of a generation: celebrate diversity by enforcing conformity.
 
2014-04-17 03:56:21 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: Dancin_In_Anson: Take 20.

How is boycotting not exercising free speech, whether by an individual or a company? You can't force people to be customers.


Obamacare would like a word with you.

/amidoing it right
 
2014-04-17 03:56:43 PM  

Felgraf: Libertarians: "The free market will prevent people from discriminating! People just won't shop at places whose proprietors discriminate!"

*PREMISE ACTUALLY WORKS FOR ONCE*

"ZOMG HOW DARE YOU USE SUCH TERRIBLE FORCE THIS IS THE WORST THING EVER."



Looks like those well-farked chickens have come home to roost in a bed of their own making...  or something.

Regardless, please cry more sweet, sweet helpless victim tears.
 
2014-04-17 03:57:43 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: How is boycotting not exercising free speech, whether by an individual or a company?


It's not. Why not watch the video and get back to me?
 
2014-04-17 03:58:19 PM  

whidbey: change the channel or stay mad


Yeah...um...whut?
 
2014-04-17 03:58:26 PM  
Mark Steyn is usually the least derpy of right wing pundits.

This column is beneath him.
 
2014-04-17 03:58:41 PM  

lantawa: American eagle gif spews cum from a man's loins


I'm certain I heard that at the last poetry slam I went to.
 
2014-04-17 03:58:46 PM  

mrshowrules: UrukHaiGuyz: Dancin_In_Anson: Take 20.

How is boycotting not exercising free speech, whether by an individual or a company? You can't force people to be customers.

Obamacare would like a word with you.

/amidoing it right


Oh, nice! :) Very much so. Apparently the government is the one exception, unless you're talking to "taxes are theft" nutballs.
 
2014-04-17 03:59:27 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: UrukHaiGuyz: How is boycotting not exercising free speech, whether by an individual or a company?

It's not. Why not watch the video and get back to me?


Because I have work to do as well. Why not just answer the simple question?
 
2014-04-17 03:59:58 PM  

Gulper Eel: whidbey: Yeah but apparently we're supposed to "respect" bigotry because free speech or something.

Thank you for stating so clearly that she's the bigot.

Not the medieval shiats who carved her up when she was a child.
Not the goons who forced her into an arranged marriage.
Not the savages who threaten her life to this day, and have tailed her around the world.
Not the professional victims at CAIR who see a bigot behind every package of bacon.
Not the useful idiot snowflakes who are uncomfortable with what she has to say about their faith.
Not the easily-cowed administrators who couldn't be bothered to learn the first thing about her until the heat was on, and then promptly folded.

Nope, SHE's the Islamophobe. (shun.jpg)

Not only should we have the right to call out this monstrousness, we have the duty to do so, to offend the easily-offended (especially those who use 'offense' as a pretext to shut down debate), and whatever may be most noxious to their adherents and defenders, to do those very things and then some.

Yes, even if she hangs out with those awful neocons sometimes.


Dude whatever it is you're so slyly trying to defend, it means I probably have to read tfa, so no.

Here are the points I'm concerned with:

1. The "right" to make bigoted statements or actions without consequence
2. The "right" to be ignorant without consequence (global warming)
3. The "right" to continue being bigoted or ignorant without consequence
 
2014-04-17 04:01:07 PM  

Flappyhead: There were a lot of words in that article but for some reason it all read like


I'll never understand why right wing media tries so hard to portray themselves as whiny little crybabies with massive persecution complexes (sprinkled with a dash of hypocrisy).
 
2014-04-17 04:01:22 PM  
Why bother winning the debate when it's easier to close it down?
 
2014-04-17 04:01:55 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: whidbey: change the channel or stay mad

Yeah...um...whut?


Oh it's the "I don't know what you're talking about card
so I'll keep posting that same stupid link I got called out a bunch of last times card"

it's a double play
 
2014-04-17 04:03:21 PM  

Bloody William: lantawa: Your opinion is rubbish.  The "mocking and scorning" is part of the willful ignorance that comes from methodical, dogmatic dismissal of legitimate opposing views.

lantawa: Your opinion is rubbish.

lantawa: The "mocking and scorning" is part of the willful ignorance that comes from methodical, dogmatic dismissal of legitimate opposing views.

Two statements. Directly undermining each other. Next to each other.

THIS IS WHY YOU ARE MOCKED AND SCORNED.


You're really threatened by this, aren't you.  All caps screaming, disregarding that I'm simply responding to someone else's assertion that my thinking is "rubbish."  And I know, exactly, the political persuasions of anyone who "mocks and scorns" me.  Truth be told, it doesn't bother me in the least.  I'm just sad that you've been brainwashed by whatever thinking process it is that makes you think that you have some sort of groupthink truth that gives you great powers.  Anytime I see someone drag out the "royal We", I know that I'm dealing with an immature intellect.
 
2014-04-17 04:03:27 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: Dancin_In_Anson: UrukHaiGuyz: How is boycotting not exercising free speech, whether by an individual or a company?

It's not. Why not watch the video and get back to me?

Because I have work to do as well. Why not just answer the simple question?


I'll cut to the chase:

The boycott against Mozilla was wrong, because their agenda got an innocent man fired from his job.
 
2014-04-17 04:05:13 PM  

lantawa: Bloody William: lantawa: Your opinion is rubbish.  The "mocking and scorning" is part of the willful ignorance that comes from methodical, dogmatic dismissal of legitimate opposing views.

lantawa: Your opinion is rubbish.

lantawa: The "mocking and scorning" is part of the willful ignorance that comes from methodical, dogmatic dismissal of legitimate opposing views.

Two statements. Directly undermining each other. Next to each other.

THIS IS WHY YOU ARE MOCKED AND SCORNED.

You're really threatened by this, aren't you.  All caps screaming, disregarding that I'm simply responding to someone else's assertion that my thinking is "rubbish."  And I know, exactly, the political persuasions of anyone who "mocks and scorns" me.  Truth be told, it doesn't bother me in the least.  I'm just sad that you've been brainwashed by whatever thinking process it is that makes you think that you have some sort of groupthink truth that gives you great powers.  Anytime I see someone drag out the "royal We", I know that I'm dealing with an immature intellect.


For a "mature intellect" you sure as hell have a hard time making an actual direct point. Shine on, though. You're more interesting than the usual claptrap.
 
2014-04-17 04:06:21 PM  

lantawa: You're really threatened by this, aren't you.  All caps screaming, disregarding that I'm simply responding to someone else's assertion that my thinking is "rubbish."  And I know, exactly, the political persuasions of anyone who "mocks and scorns" me.  Truth be told, it doesn't bother me in the least.  I'm just sad that you've been brainwashed by whatever thinking process it is that makes you think that you have some sort of groupthink truth that gives you great powers.  Anytime I see someone drag out the "royal We", I know that I'm dealing with an immature intellect.


Is it something I said that's making you not want to actually explain your statements or offer any sort of evidence or logic behind them? Because this might surprise you, but your assertions are not self-evident. They seem disconnected, jarring, and paranoid, and if you can't actually back them up they're going to keep seeming disconnected, jarring, and paranoid.
 
2014-04-17 04:06:39 PM  

colon_pow: Why bother winning the debate when it's easier to close it down?


2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-04-17 04:08:02 PM  

grumpfuff: Jjaro: And Cheney, and other Republicans, supported Gay Mariage before Obama or Clinton "came around."

O rly?

/angry at him for being against it when it became more politically convenient


I did not know that about Obama.  But yeah, kinda damning he regressed on that stance before Biden essentially forced him to embrace it again.


Wooly Bully: Jjaro: Wooly Bully: Jjaro: I didn't know critcizing a stance is the same as trying to get someone fired.

Unless you can substantiate it with evidence, the accusation you made that those petitioners "didn't care about their team's stance" (that is what you said) is a lie.

How do you want me to prove a negative?  There's not gonna be a news article of "Gay rights activists don't chide Obama for his stance."  I'm speaking from personal experience.  I don't remember many people beating Obama (or other Democrats) up over his early statements on gay marriage.  If I am wrong, please, I am more than happy to be corrected.

You made a baseless accusation of hypocrisy. The burden's now on you to show they are hypocrites; apparently you can't, so admit that in the absence of actual evidence of hypocrisy you were wrong to make the charge.


It wasn't baseless.  As I said, I am speaking from personal experience.  And the evidence is the lack of the same sort of public calls/petitions of disdain against Obama or Hillary for not supporting gay marriage on the national level until it become political beneficial for them to do so.
 
2014-04-17 04:09:17 PM  

whidbey: lantawa: Nice.  Childishly stupid and indicative of a juvenile mentality, but well done, son.  American eagle gif spews cum from a man's loins; it's all part of a meaningful debate about political methodology.  You should be so proud of yourself.  Gold stars all around....

I gotta admit that really you put you people in your place. Sit down, John.


Got it.  You're throwing your voice into the ring to back up the childish cum-spewing eagle gif that was posted by your comrade.  Stand in the corner, Mortimer.  While you're at it, how about giving me some feedback on the Baathist movement and the points that I've brought up.  You know, real discussion.
 
2014-04-17 04:09:18 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Take 20.


And you are trying to prove...what?
 
2014-04-17 04:09:38 PM  

Jjaro: I did not know that about Obama.  But yeah, kinda damning he regressed on that stance before Biden essentially forced him to embrace it again.


He's stated in the past that personally he believes marriage is between a man and a woman. These are views I disagree with and they do make him slightly bigoted in a religiously fueled way, but they are also views he has not only not acted upon, but shows no inclination to act upon. He recognizes that his personal beliefs in this should not be codified into law.
 
2014-04-17 04:10:07 PM  

lantawa: BSABSVR: Bloody William: lantawa: HeartBurnKid: Of course Baathism is a real thing.  So are socialism and Marxism, as well as fascism.  The problem is, to many people, the meaning of the latter three (as well as the former, if your post is any indication) is simply "disagreeing with me".

That would be, and is, an incorrect statement. Radical liberal political strategists have stooped to incredibly unethical methodology in their political tactics by coalescing their messages under Baathist-type suppression of opposing views. Quality political dialogue is now much more difficult to find in the West, precisely because of Middle Eastern political influence. We are through more than one looking glass in the political arenas of the West. "Disagreeing with me," yah, my sweet tookus that's what it means..

What the fark are you talking about?

[img.fark.net image 285x171]

Nice.  Childishly stupid and indicative of a juvenile mentality, but well done, son.  American eagle gif spews cum from a man's loins; it's all part of a meaningful debate about political methodology.  You should be so proud of yourself.  Gold stars all around....


You are asking me to take something called liberal baathism seriously.  I have better things to do.  OSomehow, none of them involve rape rooms or one party rule.  Ergo, you're a moron and a crazy person, so shove that condescension straight up your farking ass,  "son".
 
Displayed 50 of 743 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report