Gun control debate (merged)

#14,951
#14,951
Electric Orange said:
Is that a symbol of hate? You sir are a racist. And full of hatred.
Click to expand...
1Jj9.gif
 
#14,953
#14,953
0nelilreb said:
LOL you scold him for a bad site then quote the huffing paint post ? 😂
Click to expand...

Actually the 'scolding' comes from the content of the article as being fake, I demonstrated as much. The overtly racist website from which it originated was why it was blocked. If there's an issue with the content of the huffpost article, I'm all ears. Do you see the distinction and difference between the credibility of the two articles or are you just looking to make a superficial zing?
 
#14,954
#14,954
Septic said:
Actually the 'scolding' comes from the content of the article as being fake, I demonstrated as much. The overtly racist website from which it originated was why it was blocked. If there's an issue with the content of the huffpost article, I'm all ears. Do you see the distinction and difference between the credibility of the two articles or are you just looking to make a superficial zing?
Click to expand...

Actually .. you blasted his source then talked about how it was just light work for you to discredit the article . I didn’t read your Huffpost article , Huffpost is a progressive leftist media that always comes from that perspective. No zing on my part just pointing out the humor in quoting Huffpost on anything and thinking people will not roll their eyes .
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and Electric Orange
#14,955
#14,955
0nelilreb said:
Actually .. you blasted his source then talked about how it was just light work for you to discredit the article . I didn’t read your Hiffpost article , Huff post is a progressive leftist media that always comes from that perspective. No zing on my part just pointing out the humor in quoting Huffpost on anything and thinking people will not roll their eyes .
Click to expand...

Again, the "article" he cited was inherently wrong, misleading and completely ridiculous with no other objective than to gin up low information outrage. My pointing out that the overtly racist, anti-semetic turd of a source lends to why the article was foisted as 'news' to begin with. Again, if there's an issue with the Huffpost article content, including bias or inaccurate facts - point them out. Otherwise it would appear that you're looking for a cheap zing, and missing.
 
#14,956
#14,956
0nelilreb said:
Actually .. you blasted his source then talked about how it was just light work for you to discredit the article . I didn’t read your Huffpost article , Huffpost is a progressive leftist media that always comes from that perspective. No zing on my part just pointing out the humor in quoting Huffpost on anything and thinking people will not roll their eyes .
Click to expand...
Which then became not about hate in the article but about the legitimacy of the article. And the proof was Huffington Post. Hardest I've laughed all morning so far.
 
#14,958
#14,958
Septic said:
Again, the "article" he cited was inherently wrong, misleading and completely ridiculous with no other objective than to gin up low information outrage. My pointing out that the overtly racist, anti-semetic turd of a source lends to why the article was foisted as 'news' to begin with. Again, if there's an issue with the Huffpost article content, including bias or inaccurate facts - point them out. Otherwise it would appear that you're looking for a cheap zing, and missing.
Click to expand...

See this is the point where I tell you to go back and read what I said slower . I told you I didn’t read your huff article because it’s from a progressive left site known for their slanted article . I was pointing out the humor in you scolding him for his site then using an extremely biased one yourself as a source .
 
#14,959
#14,959
Electric Orange said:
Which then became not about hate in the article but about the legitimacy of the article. And the proof was Huffington Post. Hardest I've laughed all morning so far.
Click to expand...

You're babbling and trying to deflect from the fact that we all now know where you get your narrative from.

To be fair, I linked three source to prove how your unz.com article sat on a throne of lies - there are many more regarding this. Keep focusing on the huffpo article that you can't seem to find fault with, it's totally distracting from the fact that your article was full of sht.
 
#14,961
#14,961
Septic said:
You're babbling and trying to deflect from the fact that we all now know where you get your narrative from.

To be fair, I linked three source to prove how your unz.com article sat on a throne of lies - there are many more regarding this. Keep focusing on the huffpo article that you can't seem to find fault with, it's totally distracting from the fact that your article was full of sht.
Click to expand...
How am I deflecting from where I got the source from if I posted the source? That seems like circular reasoning.
 
#14,962
#14,962
0nelilreb said:
He already knows what they are and do , he either couldn’t find a better source or he just tried to slip that one by on you .
Click to expand...
Then he called me names and sent me a picture of an actor who advocates wearing blackface while calling me the racist.

Sniff sniff , wipes tears

He showed me
 
#14,963
#14,963
0nelilreb said:
See this is the point where I tell you to go back and read what I said slower . I told you I didn’t read your huff article because it’s from a progressive left site known for their slanted article . I was pointing out the humor in you scolding him for his site then using an extremely biased one yourself as a source .
Click to expand...

So just to be clear, you're superficially inserting yourself into the conversation and after being challenged about accuracy and facts - your defense is that you wanted to zing without putting in any effort into it?

Gotcha.

Thanks for your input.
 
#14,964
#14,964
Septic said:
So just to be clear, you're superficially inserting yourself into the conversation and after being challenged about accuracy and facts - your defense is that you wanted to zing without putting in any effort into it.

Gotcha.

Thanks for your input.
Click to expand...

You really don’t want to go there do you ? Inserting ourselves in others conversations ? I don’t need a defense to say your source is extremely biased to the left . Now if I wanted a cheap “zing” as you keep bring up , I could have asked why you didn’t just pull up a mother jones or a vanity fair article they have about the same credibility. 😂
 
#14,965
#14,965
Electric Orange said:
How am I deflecting from where I got the source from if I posted the source? That seems like circular reasoning.
Click to expand...

I don't think that you intended on anyone pointing out that the reason your message was blocked was because the source of your article was a flaming dog turd of racism.

If you weren't deflecting from it, perhaps you should take this opportunity to start. Your holocaust denying, Jew hating source for that 'article' isn't a good look for you personally to the rational among us. There's a reason sane people don't cite stormfront for credible journalism.
 
#14,966
#14,966
Septic said:
I don't think that you intended on anyone pointing out that the reason your message was blocked was because the source of your article was a flaming dog turd of racism.

If you weren't deflecting from it, perhaps you should take this opportunity to start. Your holocaust denying, Jew hating source for that 'article' isn't a good look for you personally to the rational among us. There's a reason sane people don't cite stormfront for credible journalism.
Click to expand...
So you speak for all "the rational among us"
There's also a reason HuffPo keeps cutting staff
 
#14,967
#14,967
Septic said:
A bit more than that but I suspect none of it will trump what many perceive as an inalienable right.

Leader Of Dylann Roof-Worshipping Neo-Nazi Group Under Police Investigation | HuffPost

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article244250682.html

Alternatively, we could all wait until he goes full dylan roof before we look at each other dumbfoundedly and wonder what more could have been done.

Weird how this sort 'right to bear arms in case of a tyrannical government' stuff provokes outrage while nothing but crickets come out of the same group when tear gas and federal troops are being used against civilians exercising their rights.
Click to expand...

Actually the tear gas and fed troops are being used against those committing actual crimes not just "protesting" but i know some like to conflate the two to make a political point.
And to be sure, you are advocating that someone get punished for a crime he "might" commit because of his political beliefs?
 
#14,970
#14,970
0nelilreb said:
You really don’t want to go there do you ? Inserting ourselves in others conversations ? I don’t need a defense to say your source is extremely biased to the left . Now if I wanted a cheap “zing” as you keep bring up , I could have asked why you didn’t just pull up a mother jones or a vanity fair article they have about the same credibility. 😂
Click to expand...

Lets.

You keep focusing on the source of one of the articles I offered, conveniently dodging having to refute the content. It should be easy if it's as 'biased' as you proclaim. I simply noted that his 'article' (i use that term loosely) was full of erroneous and misleading nonsense, while also pointing out that the sources history lends to why it would do so and why it is banned.

Difference and distinction. You're better than this, weird place to plant a flag.
 
#14,973
#14,973
Septic said:
Lets.

You keep focusing on the source of one of the articles I offered, conveniently dodging having to refute the content. It should be easy if it's as 'biased' as you proclaim. I simply noted that his 'article' (i use that term loosely) was full of erroneous and misleading nonsense, while also pointing out that the sources history lends to why it would do so and why it is banned.

Difference and distinction. You're better than this, weird place to plant a flag.
Click to expand...

Ok let’s since you can’t seem to comprehend that I’ve repeatedly said that I didn’t read the article because your source is horribly biased . I started by pointing out the fact that you chose to school him about his source then tried to one up him with a huff post piece . I know you know better . I’m guessing you got lazy and pulled up the first article you saw . Trying to defend the Huff post on anything is a weird hill to die on . Do better .
 
#14,974
#14,974
0nelilreb said:
Ok let’s since you can’t seem to comprehend that I’ve repeatedly said that I didn’t read the article because your source is horribly biased . I started out by pointing out the fact that you chose to school him about his source then tried to one up him with a huff post piece . I know you know better , I’m guessing you got lazy and pulled up the first article you saw . Trying to defend the Huff post on anything is a weird hill to die on . Do better .
Click to expand...

Nah I comprehend it, I just don't buy it.

I suspect you've read it and haven't found the meat and potatoes to support your position that it's a biased article. Instead doubling down on 'itZ HuFfpo' so it simply must be biased; this may appear to be a convenient mechanism to dodge egg on your face, but it makes you look small and defeated.

Intellectually lazy isn't an attribute I'd have previously described you as, I guess that is something I was wrong about.
 
#14,975
#14,975
Septic said:
Nah I comprehend it, I just don't buy it.

I suspect you've read it and haven't found the meat and potatoes to support your position that it's a biased article. Instead doubling down on 'itZ HuFfpo' so it simply must be biased; this may appear to be a convenient mechanism to dodge egg on your face, but it makes you look small and defeated.

Intellectually lazy isn't an attribute I'd have previously described you as, I guess that is something I was wrong about.
Click to expand...

Apparently unlike you , i don’t read Huff post articles , I learned better a long time ago . I guess next you’ll be pulling videos and posting articles from TYT to back your claims . Unfortunately trying to pull off defending Huff post is something I thought would be beneath you . I overestimated how low your bar was set , I’ll readjust your “ Continuum “ .
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top