AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 12 Posted September 12 8 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I believe you said the nurse hates "someone." You're worried about the nurse projecting her views of an entirely different person to you in violation of the law and whatever moral responsibility she might have. I'm concerned that, taken to a logical extreme, your projection makes it pretty tough for anyone to trust one another. What about those Minnesota lawmakers? Not that it remotely justifies anything here. Point is, people on both sides are wrong, and it all has to stop. There is still some mystery surrounding the political affiliation of the person responsible for killing the Minnesota lawmakers. It's both wrong. I also believe their is more rejoice over Charlie Kirk's death than the Minnesota law makers. Again both situations are terrible and do nothing but further the divide in this country. 1
Big Blitz Posted September 12 Posted September 12 1 minute ago, SectionC3 said: As far as I know, anti-LGBTQ and anti-abortion. 2024 GOP primary voter, which I mention only because I suspect you're going to get into the Twitter trash about alleged "leftism." As much as the point is this story is just not for today - we know nothing about why he targeted who he did. A state politician. We have his writings and ramblings. We do not know how he voted or his motives. And Minnesota has erased this story. We do know, that what the left’s rhetoric brought on here, was an assassination for the world to see of Charlie Kirk.
SectionC3 Posted September 12 Posted September 12 1 minute ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: There is still some mystery surrounding the political affiliation of the person responsible for killing the Minnesota lawmakers. It's both wrong. I also believe their is more rejoice over Charlie Kirk's death than the Minnesota law makers. Again both situations are terrible and do nothing but further the divide in this country. Irrespective of the affiliation, he was a pretty socially conservative guy. Not that it really matters. You're right about the rejoicing, largely because Kirk was a more public figure. It's all wrong and it all has to stop. Just now, Big Blitz said: As much as the point is this story is just not for today - we know nothing about why he targeted who he did. A state politician. We have his writings and ramblings. We do not know how he voted or his motives. And Minnesota has erased this story. We do know, that what the left’s rhetoric brought on here, was an assassination for the world to see of Charlie Kirk. Again, you paint with a broad brush. And you downplay the Minnesota point. Didn't that guy target a whole bunch of Democrats? Where's the outrage about that? If we're really going to fix this, we can't have this selective anger. It's all wrong or none of it is wrong. And, to be clear, all of this BS is wrong.
Royale with Cheese Posted September 12 Posted September 12 11 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I believe you said the nurse hates "someone." You're worried about the nurse projecting her views of an entirely different person to you in violation of the law and whatever moral responsibility she might have. I'm concerned that, taken to a logical extreme, your projection makes it pretty tough for anyone to trust one another. Why did you put "someone" in quotes? She did specifically state she hates conservatives. We didn't assume that, she said those words. You then tried to use and example of an elevator guy putting peoples lives at risk because you ASSUME he hates liberals. I mean come on. Yes, she has an oath, it's a legal oath. You 100% knows she hates you because she said those exact words. That is not a projection or anything else. She said those words.
JDHillFan Posted September 12 Posted September 12 38 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: You have again proved my point. Extrapolating what one or two or even some people say on Twitter to a broad group is a big part of the problem on both sides. Another problem is an unwillingness to note that there are hundreds of thousands of people on social media channels (a large part of modern life you don’t seem aware of or are unwilling to acknowledge exists) that have cheered the murder. 100% of those people are on the left side of the political spectrum.
SectionC3 Posted September 12 Posted September 12 2 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said: Why did you put "someone" in quotes? She did specifically state she hates conservatives. We didn't assume that, she said those words. You then tried to use and example of an elevator guy putting peoples lives at risk because you ASSUME he hates liberals. I mean come on. Yes, she has an oath, it's a legal oath. You 100% knows she hates you because she said those exact words. That is not a projection or anything else. She said those words. It was your word upthread. 1 minute ago, JDHillFan said: Another problem is an unwillingness to note that there are hundreds of thousands of people on social media channels (a large part of modern life you don’t seem aware of or are unwilling to acknowledge exists) that have cheered the murder. 100% of those people are on the left side of the political spectrum. Social media is a big part of life. The shoe fits on both feet. Of course nobody should cheer the murder. It's abhorrent. All of the abhorrent stuff on social media has to stop, and it runs both ways. Let's not pretend it's a one-sided issue.
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 12 Posted September 12 1 minute ago, SectionC3 said: It was your word upthread. Social media is a big part of life. The shoe fits on both feet. Of course nobody should cheer the murder. It's abhorrent. All of the abhorrent stuff on social media has to stop, and it runs both ways. Let's not pretend it's a one-sided issue. It's not a one sided issue, but it definitely is more left leaning. Reddit is a place where you can openly be as vile against conservatives as you want and you will be cheered on. Blu sky Tik tok Insta I could keep going
Royale with Cheese Posted September 12 Posted September 12 (edited) 38 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Irrespective of the affiliation, he was a pretty socially conservative guy. Not that it really matters. You're right about the rejoicing, largely because Kirk was a more public figure. It's all wrong and it all has to stop. Again, you paint with a broad brush. And you downplay the Minnesota point. Didn't that guy target a whole bunch of Democrats? Where's the outrage about that? If we're really going to fix this, we can't have this selective anger. It's all wrong or none of it is wrong. And, to be clear, all of this BS is wrong. Charlie Kirk was a popular world wide figure. Yeah I'm sad the Minnesota Lawmakers died but it's not the conservatives fault it's not a bigger story on social media. Why are you putting that on the conservatives? We are outraged at what happened to Kirk so we are loud about it. Why weren't the liberals outraged as much as we are outraged about Kirk? You guys could have made the story bigger but you didn't. Stories get bigger on social media when more people are talking about it. You guys chose not to talk about it and that's your fault. Think about it this way. The Liberals had more outrage for George Floyd, a drug addicted, woman beater, pregnant women assaulter and lifelong felon than the Minnesota Lawmakers. 99.9% of the liberals outraged over George Floyd probably have never known or still know the Minnesota Lawmakers names. Think about that. The liberals have more outrage over proper pronouns and what is a woman than the death of the Minnesota Lawmakers. Think about that. The liberals are talking more about Kirk's death than the Minnesota Lawmakers deaths. Think about that. Edited September 12 by Royale with Cheese 1 1
JDHillFan Posted September 12 Posted September 12 3 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: It was your word upthread. Social media is a big part of life. The shoe fits on both feet. Of course nobody should cheer the murder. It's abhorrent. All of the abhorrent stuff on social media has to stop, and it runs both ways. Let's not pretend it's a one-sided issue. It is a problem on both sides. People like you will only address it head on if it’s someone from the other side. Makes your current soapbox a bit wobbly. 2
BillsFanNC Posted September 12 Author Posted September 12 Seems like a nice guy. C section should invite him over. 1 1
Big Blitz Posted September 12 Posted September 12 33 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Irrespective of the affiliation, he was a pretty socially conservative guy. Not that it really matters. You're right about the rejoicing, largely because Kirk was a more public figure. It's all wrong and it all has to stop. Again, you paint with a broad brush. And you downplay the Minnesota point. Didn't that guy target a whole bunch of Democrats? Where's the outrage about that? If we're really going to fix this, we can't have this selective anger. It's all wrong or none of it is wrong. And, to be clear, all of this BS is wrong. Why? Sorry not to downplay it but politicians unfortunately are targets. Reagan by a lunatic that wanted to impress Jodie Foster for example. This is different. Completely f…ing different
JDHillFan Posted September 12 Posted September 12 9 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Seems like a nice guy. C section should invite him over. Cancel culture for this assh*le is definitely good. Jauronimo has a sad.
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 12 Posted September 12 Just now, JDHillFan said: Cancel culture for this assh*le is definitely good. Jauronimo has a sad. No no, we're hypocrites for trying to get these monsters out of public positions.
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 12 Posted September 12 1 minute ago, Big Blitz said: I didn't know Jauronimo wrote for rolling stone! 1
Royale with Cheese Posted September 12 Posted September 12 Pretty much every offer letter you sign can fire you if you represent the company in a negative light. This is negative.
Big Blitz Posted September 12 Posted September 12 The left either has no clue who Charlie was or imo they just don’t care.
Jauronimo Posted September 12 Posted September 12 1 hour ago, boyst said: I'd have to read the exact dialogue to believe this. @Jauronimo do you know what he is talking about? I do know what he's talking about. He was ranting and raving about the equivalent of litter boxes in school bathrooms and drag shows for kids which he believes to be the major issues of our time. With all the actual issues facing the nation I cannot be bothered to care about every bit of rage bait he can scrounge up from the depths of the internet. And NC believes he scored a major victory that day in my dismissal of his Libs of Tik Tok smoking gun.
JDHillFan Posted September 12 Posted September 12 7 minutes ago, Jauronimo said: I cannot be bothered to care… But drag shows is the thing that reeled you in? Fascinating.
Jauronimo Posted September 12 Posted September 12 Just now, JDHillFan said: But drag shows is the thing that reeled you in? Fascinating. Reeled me into what?
Recommended Posts