Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael823
(Post 931748)
Whatever KJUN. Go ahead and throw me under the bus even more, when you can just check my posts and see that is not the case. "Oh I respect your opinion, it's honest. But there's... well, their opinions are just the boy crying wolf. At least be honest with yourself and say you have a personal problem with us, because nothing in this thread was crying wolf, and wasn't any more against the grain than any other post.
|
Actually, when y'all post as one and answer for each other, I DO have a problem with y'all. When Michael posts as Micheal, I have very little problems with Micheal. If Ricky wouldn't be speaking for you half of the time, I think very few people would have a problem with you.
However, my feelings aside for Ricky or you, that is irrelevant. One or both of you are famous for calling anyone that doesn't like his policies a racist. That's calling Wolf, and your (you, Ricky, or both) doing that is why I offer you so little slack. I don't appreciate the name calling, and I don't forget lightly. It doesn't bother me because I know why I hate the man so much, and it has nothing to do with race. Your intent to libel my character is what has me so disgusted with your discussion techniques. Y'all cry WOLF too much for many people to care about it any longer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael823
(Post 931748)
I'm not buying it. The ones that are now quiet, are the ones that realize their demonstrations were built on fear mongering and hate speech, and now they have no choice but to take a back seat.
And the vocal ones are just being more vocal now because they're opportunistic, and find it the best time to speak up.
|
Excuse me for pointing out that you are speaking from ignorance. Do you even KNOW the group of people I'm referring to? These ARE rightw-ing extremists. Do you even know a real member of the firearm culture? I mean a law-abiding citizen that feels his firearms are an extension of his self. No offense, but someone barely old enough to buy a pistol is unlikely to know about the group I'm discussing. Again, don't feel compelled to answer something that you know nothing about. Just let it go and try to find out info before posting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael823
(Post 931748)
That's because "lynch" wouldn't have been a likely term used on Palin, especially seeing the anti Palin folks aren't nearly as filled with hate and violent threats as the anti Obama folks.
I think a term used for Palin running this country into the ground might have been field dressing rather than lynching ;)!
Enough of the spade comment diversion. I clearly knew no other meaning, and you never brought it up in the original thread, or to the many others that have used it before too.
|
It isn't a diversion. ...and I used lynch to describe a white guy that needed it. It is a real question: why is it OK for you to use a racially charged word (through claimed ignorance that I don't believe) but nobody else can use a word that you find offensive if they don't mean it in an offensive way? WHAT is the difference? I use lynch, and I don't mean it racially. You use spade and don't mean it racially. Why am I wrong and you are right? Is it because you can do no wrong?
...oh, and to everyone else, governments SHOULD be held responsible when they do actuions that harm their people. When they go against the people's wishes and hurt them, they SHOULD fear for their lives - not just their jobs or future salaries!
|