What would make people feel less ostracized from P&R?

[B.B. Hemingway]

 

If that were the case wouldn't they ALL be limited in life?

No. Systemic disadvantages don't stop everybody, and credit to those who fight and overcome it. It's just a cost that reduces the odds of success and perpetuates that cycle.

 

The other argument is that black culture is responsible for holding people back. This is not an "individual responsibility" argument.

 

 

Is the white kid raised in a trailer park, with a meth-head mother, living off the government, also a victim of systematic disadvantages? Living in rural Missouri, I can assure you that he gets looked at differently then the kid raised by a good, financially stable family. If his black counterpart gets to cry "systematic disadvantages", then shouldn't he be allowed the same excuse?

[JJ Husker]

 

 

 

Knapp, I know your not directing your comment specifically towards me, but for 84 and Bnls comments were theirs alone and there were more than enough posters who lambasted them for their views. Those I speak of did not side one way or the other, they simply have an opinion they feel should be heard. Heck, we have a mod who sees the issue to which I speak, you have JJ and Teach cringing at trying to share an honest opinion and neither of them would be considered supporters of DT.

Nobody is stopping them from voicing their opinions. They are crying because people show, through facts, that what they're saying is wrong. They don't want to have a conversation, they want to be agreed with and told that their opinions are correct.

 

This is not a safe space for people who only want to listen to their echo chamber opinions. If that's what they want, they need to go somewhere else. This is a healthy place of good conversation, where opinions are challenged by sharp people.

 

I can handle being told I'm wrong, being shown I'm wrong. It's one of the best parts of this forum. In just the past ten days I've been shown, through solid arguments & sourced material, that opinions I've held are either factually incorrect or outright wrong. Should I complain that I'm being oppressed? Nope. I learned from it and thanked the guy who showed me - even encouraged him to post more.

 

If people aren't capable of handling that, that's their problem, not this forum's.

 

I dragged this over from the Immigration Ban topic so as not to clutter it up over there.

 

I'm glad you can handle being told you're wrong cuz here comes a healthy dose of it.

 

I haven't claimed anyone is stopping me from voicing my opinion.

I haven't been crying about anything. I was simply fed up with some of the discussion and I really have nothing worthwhile to add or any impetus to do so.

I don't recall being shown I was "wrong" but I have changed my mind/opinion about a few things which I have openly admitted to.

When I do participate, I most surely want to have a conversation. Can you provide proof of your claim that "they want to be agreed with and told that their opinions are correct"?

 

I agree that this is generally a place of healthy conversation. But, it also can be a place where people can post a simple opinion or statement and 2 or 3 others will jump on it, twist and contort it, and then wrongly restate what it must really mean. Sorry, but too much of that can get old real fast. If you fail to perceive that view of things, it is only because possibly you agree with the people doing it and want to see it that way. As an example, if a person says it makes sense to review vetting procedures and possibly that could reveal a way to make them better, it really could be just that simple. Logic dictates that is a truthful statement and it doesn't require debunking through showing how safe we have been or repeatedly posting the vetting procedures we are currently using. Plus, it doesn't mean that person supports the ban or Trump or that they must think all Muslims are a problem. But that is exactly what was happening in that thread. Sorry but it can get rather tiresome trying to participate in a conversation like that when so much time and effort has to be put into to explaining how the way some people chose to interpret a simple statement is just plain wrong.

I'm sure most people thought our airline security could not be improved upon prior to 911 just like many now seem to think there is not one thing we could possibly do to improve our vetting of immigrants or refugees. Sure, it's a valid point that since we have not had any serious problems that what is currently going on is excessive but that is why I changed my mind about the ban being a good idea. Since the vetting procedures seem to be doing a good job, I'm now of the opinion that simply reviewing them without instituting the ban would be a better way to go. I also assumed, wrongly apparently, that when the ban was introduced that measures would be taken to prevent some of the problems we've seen with legitimate US citizens being detained or delayed. I never once considered that US student traveling overseas to visit family might be prevented re-entry to the country. All these things played a role in me changing my mind. It really had nothing to do with being shown I was "wrong" or desiring a safe place where my opinions would be validated.

 

So, in a nutshell, the post of yours' I just replied to is 98% bullsh#t.

I'm glad we got that cleared up.

 

 

I absolutely can handle you thinking I'm wrong. I also don't have a problem poking holes in your logic.

 

To the bold - TAKODA said that you were "cringing at trying to share an honest opinion." I didn't say YOU said anyone was stopping you. But the other bold statement sure seems to indicate you feel discouraged. If you have a concern about your name being dragged into this, respond to TAKODA, not me.

 

You think I twist what you're saying? So do you. It's a matter of opinion. You let that "get old real fast," that's not my fault.

 

What do you mean when you say "2 or 3 others will jump on it" regarding their opinion? Are you referring to fact-checking, which seems to be at the center of this argument? Isn't that what people really are upset about? They don't want their opinion shown to be baseless, as in the argument over vetting procedures? We have a stringent vetting process, but over and over and over the argument comes up that we have to shut down immigration to recheck the vetting process. THAT is bullsh#t, JJ. You do not shut down an entire plant that operates at 99% efficiency to check one process. If you have a problem with that kind of fact-checking, that's on you.

 

You can drop your mic all you want. All this amounts to is proving my point, the bold/underlined in my post above.

 

 

Bravo!

 

It's nice to see JJ helping you get over your fear of too many words.

 

This is another classic case of responding to things that weren't said or claimed. But I understand, we all get these preconceived notions of what somebody must be trying to say. As Mark Twain said- "The trouble with the world is not that people know too little; it's that they know so many things that just aren't so."

 

You're right that Takoda made the initial statement about "cringing" but you didn't choose to exempt me from your reply so am I to assume you were directing some of that at me or not? I chose to make that assumption, if I was wrong in doing so then I apologize. But based on the rest of your reply I'll continue assuming at least some of it was directed at me.

 

I didn't claim "you" twist what I say or even that it was things I said that were twisted. I only stated that some people say things and some others twist them. Whether or not it is my statements or you or others doing it, it does get old. It sidetracks the conversation and wastes time for those who have to reiterate what it is they really said and point out how the other person got it wrong.

 

I was not referring to fact checking in any way in my post. I have no problem with fact checking or providing evidence. IN fact I like seeing facts provided. I tend to post primarily from my opinions and experiences and I am somewhat lazy when it comes to going out and finding supporting evidence for my some of my views. I like that others around here are better about that than I am. Additionally, I have stated at least a couple times that I now think it would've been wiser to simply review the vetting procedures without shutting down immigration or implementing a ban. My original position was that a temporary ban was not a bad thing but then when the examples of how they were screwing it up started rolling in, I changed my mind. However, no matter how thorough the current vetting procedures appear to be or how successful they have apparently been, I don't think it is a bad idea to frequently review them and tweak them if necessary. No amount of facts or debunking can disprove that from being a valid opinion. As in my prior example, I'm sure prior to the events of 911 most people thought our airline security was more than sufficient. I think we can agree now that wasn't the case.

 

But all of this is just my opinion and not indicative at all of my thoughts about Trump. My personal opinion is that he believes, right or wrong, that we have serious shortcomings in our vetting procedures and their implementation. I am not extremely enthused about what procedures he would use or the manner in which he would implement them. I think most of this current ban is just a dog & pony show for his supporters and a misguided effort to try to prove that he's doing a better job of making us safer than Obama. I'm still not sold on the claims he is doing this for his business interests or that he has an across the board problem with Muslims. Just because I agree with one itsy bitsy portion of it (the vetting review) does not mean I like or support how he is doing it or even why he is doing it.

 

Most of this discussion and my decision to bail on the forum for awhile was precipitated by the people who were jumping on BRI for his vote. The logic leaps were setting world records there for awhile. A vote for a candidate never means a person tacitly endorses everything that politician does or stands for. Especially in this election when almost every person here has acknowledged both candidates sucked and they were just picking what they perceived to be the lesser evil. Whenever I see somebody being treated unfairly like that I will call bullsh#t on it and, if it gets too bad, I may step away from it for awhile and hope that people get reality dialed back into focus.

 

If teach keeps pushing for a word limit, I'll cut him I tend to do my share of rambling on but if there's a problem around here, it isn't with the amount of words, often times though there is a problem with the quality or logic of the words.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

 

 

 

 

 

And knapp your continued veiled attacks that you must assume is you being sly and skirting the rules aren't going unnoticed either. Be a man and just say my name and get it over with. Of course that may be considered a personal attack and we can't have that. But you have a knack for just sliding that stuff in to different threads from time-to-time hoping they go unnoticed while your posse of followers +1's your fun.

 

 

I have ZERO problem calling you out by name, BRI. None. I'm not breaking a single rule in anything I post. NOTHING I have posted refers to you. If you think so, that's on you.

 

Frankly, I don't think about you or your opinions when I post this stuff.

 

Don't believe you for a second that you weren't meaning that towards me and while we let things slide in the politics and religion forum some of this is getting out of control and spills out into other parts of the board from time-to-time. That's where it becomes even more of a problem. It starts showing up in status updates, then it spills into recruiting, it gets reined in and then put in the woodshed. You get the point, folks don't want to visit this part of the board. Is that their problem? Or this part of the boards problem? I'm not sure that's as easy an answer as folks would like to think.

 

 

Then take it up with the rest of the mods and stop threatening me in this forum. Seriously. Go to the Mod forum and accuse me of "veiled attacks that you must assume is you being sly and skirting the rules" about you. Provide proof, and listen to what they tell you.

 

If you don't want people posting political commentary or references to this forum in Status Updates, stop them. You're a Mod. You can do that. Make a rule addendum and prohibit any political talk outside this forum. Easily fixed.

 

Please show me where I threatened you at any point and time in here? I never did, sorry if you feel that way, that's your issue as well. You can feel free to take it up with the mods and admin's yourself if you'd like. You created this thread for a discussion, I pointed out some issues that have led to some of this, you didn't like that.

 

 

OK.

 

And knapp your continued veiled attacks that you must assume is you being sly and skirting the rules aren't going unnoticed either. Be a man and just say my name and get it over with. Of course that may be considered a personal attack and we can't have that.

 

 

Very first thing you said. It's a reference to Rule #1:

 

 

#1 - No Flaming/Trolling/Defamatory posts

Strong opinions are encouraged, and debated is not only welcomed – it's the main reason the board exists. If what you are considering posting doesn’t advance the issue being discussed – if it’s just taking a “shot” at someone – then either don’t post it, or phrase it in a way that meets the rules. There is absolutely no reason to verbally attack another user (aka flaming), and/or posting a message for the express purpose of generating a negative response (trolling). Any defamatory posts made against HuskerBoard, its representatives, or any other member may result in an immediate ban or temporary account disablement.Posts outside of the general theme of the topic which you are posting within will be moved or deleted.

 

 

I've underlined the consequences for that for you. If you're not threatening me with the consequences of a personal attack accusation, that was an exceedingly poor choice of words.

 

Did I ever say if you continue X then Y is going to happen? No, I was simply pointing out something that I noticed and I also noticed that it is my opinion you are leaving out names so you don't get in trouble for a personal attack. I've bolded the section I'm getting at with this conversation. I believe you are phrasing it in a way to avoid a personal attack because you've been a mod and you know what goes on. This isn't rocket science. It's what it is and there have been no threats made that I can see that will fit you trying to point the finger of blame back on me here. I mean I could beat around the bush, but that's useless to me and I don't have time for it.

 

You didn't like me asking you to remember a conversation we had, in the republican utopia thread, about Trump and posters being attacked or piled on when they showed support of him before the elections in another thread. You wanted proof, links, pictures, whatever.

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/82305-the-republican-utopia/

 

As you can see there are several folks that don't think they can speak freely here. I can only guess there are plenty of others who won't respond. There are several posters that have created that environment through their constant questioning and barrage of posts in response to something a "Trump supporter" posted. To me it seems like the response from some folks around here is to "overwhelm them with information" so that way they trip up somewhere and then "we've got them!" Of course that's THEIR problem for feeling that way.................not the problem of the folks who may have created that environment by not being open to listening and understand where folks are coming from.

 

Of course that just might be my racist astounding ignorance for voting for such a buffoon of a man who is going to do nothing good and has destroyed this country in exactly 11 days. Maybe that's my problem.........

[zoogs]

Is the white kid raised in a trailer park, with a meth-head mother, living off the government, also a victim of systematic disadvantages? Living in rural Missouri, I can assure you that he gets looked at differently then the kid raised by a good, financially stable family. If his black counterpart gets to cry "systematic disadvantages", then shouldn't he be allowed the same excuse?

There are two questions here, in my view:

 

1 -- Should these people be helped using government assistance? Absolutely.

2 -- Is their situation comparable to the brutal history of oppression of black people in the US? No. And the existence of other people who struggle should not serve to discount the unique plight and tardy recovery of American black people.

 

Note also that white people growing up in trailer parks with meth head mothers, while they bear the brunt of some pretty unfair derision, do not paint a picture to the nation of the deficiencies of "white culture". This is a key distinction, IMO. The financially stable white family bears zero of the costs of cultural views about meth heads in Missouri. This is not the case for any black person, as pervasive as negative attitudes about "black culture" are.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

We've already had a debate in the Woodshed about the P&R forum, its place on the board and it "spilling" into other parts of the forum. I believe the Shed would be a better avenue to continue arguing this particular concern.

 

BRI, I respect your opinion on this forum, but it draws a considerable amount of ire from you while I almost never see you post anything about the arguments and behavior that spill out from the recruiting forum. My sincerest apologies if you have; but, my overall point is things spill out from several forums on this board. P&R may do so more than others, but, that's also the nature of politics in general.

I've seen it, other mods have jumped on those situations, I don't pay as much attention to recruiting as I use to. There are several folks in there doing a fantastic job keeping those things squared away. We all have areas where we pay attention on the board just by nature of what interests us. We probably deal with it a lot more in other areas than you see. You'd have to be on here non-stop to probably see it all.

[B.B. Hemingway]

 

 

 

If that were the case wouldn't they ALL be limited in life?

 

No, they wouldn't be. That's like arguing in defense of slavery in the 1800's because SOME black people are free, or get to live in the master's house.

 

General truths apply to the aggregate - they are not an inflexible gospel truth that applies to every individual.

So the effects of slavery are different for each black person in 2017? And would that same concept of general truths also apply to White privilege? Because some people seem to think that's all encompassing....

 

 

 

Again, please understand the distinction between generalizations and individual circumstances.

 

A) Yes, some people are idiots. You know they are. I know they are. Best not to pay attention to them or attach them to one side or the other.

 

B) When people are referring to things like white privilege, there's an assumed presupposition that we are talking in terms of generalities. As in, even though some white people go through absolutely awful lives with hardly any luxuries of any kind, white races in general still enjoy a position of power within our culture.

 

 

I understood where you were coming from originally, but appreciate the clarification. Like I referred to earlier in this thread, I won't disregard the past atrocities that black people have been through, but at some point, well, "boot straps".....You're obviously more sympathetic about the situation then I am, which is fine, it wouldn't be the first time I was told that I lack compassion (Likely goes back to where I came from, and where I am today).

[Atbone95]

 

I'm being serious too - that is a great, reputable TED talk. Regardless of leaning, it's a good video.

 

I feel like I've been kicked around for my pro-Trump views on here, which is why I stopped posting about them.

Is this what they describe in that TED Talk?

 

I know this is going to sound pretty sh**ty, but I am so happy that I get to come here and read all of the comical statements by the very grumpy Democrats (or just general non-Trump supporters). Why? Because, I'm making what I assume to be a safe assumption that you live here in Nebraska. And, because you live here in Nebraska, regardless of how loudly you scream and wring your hands and cry, your opinion won't be reflected in the final result. That would be true, unless you live in Omaha in which case the Democrats might swing the district like 2008, but polling is showing that is quite unlikely to happen this year.

 

So you can whine and moan, and go on and on about how Trump is a racist, sexist, sexual assault monster and a dictator and a demagogue and whatever other label you want to throw on there. You can deny the Clinton corruption, and defy common knowledge (or attempt to spend 2-3 minutes learning why) that the Wikileaks are genuine and have been verified using tracing technology to be authentic. At the end of the day, I can get my laughs while the state stays true to its Republican roots.

 

Is that sh**ty of me to say? Probably. But that is our political system. YOLO.

What do I see in Trump? I see a smart businessman (and if you hit me with "but he bankrupted", I might come through the computer and slap you - the man is worth more than any of us could ever dream to be). I see a leader who's whole life, his entire success, has centered around being a figurehead at the top who just hires the smartest people money can buy around him, and let's them run free. I honestly see a candidate who isn't steeped in filth, who at least gives America a shot to feel like some semblance of our own opinion matter - not the "private opinions" that are common in Washington.

Thank God, I've been pretty lonely in this forum over the last two days. Nice to see NUance, a fresh wind in this dark, desolate place.

https://www.facebook.com/outlawmorgan/videos/1185760541518837/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

 

Jumped getting into his car in the parking lot. F&$@k your one-sided rhetoric.

If you think you've been "kicked around," how would you describe these quotes?

 

Ohhhhhhh Knapp. This is why I left.

 

I'm sure you had quite a few gems (directed at me) you could have quoted when you scrolled back and found those, but those wouldn't support your argument. Understandable.

[B.B. Hemingway]

 

Is the white kid raised in a trailer park, with a meth-head mother, living off the government, also a victim of systematic disadvantages? Living in rural Missouri, I can assure you that he gets looked at differently then the kid raised by a good, financially stable family. If his black counterpart gets to cry "systematic disadvantages", then shouldn't he be allowed the same excuse?

There are two questions here, in my view:

 

1 -- Should these people be helped using government assistance? Absolutely.

2 -- Is their situation comparable to the brutal history of oppression of black people in the US? No. And the existence of other people who struggle should not serve to discount the unique plight and tardy recovery of American black people.

 

Note also that white people growing up in trailer parks with meth head mothers, while they bear the brunt of some pretty unfair derision, do not paint a picture to the nation of the deficiencies of "white culture". This is a key distinction, IMO.

 

 

Agree completely on the bolded.... Where we differ is how much of that has to do with their distant, history of opression, and how much of that has to do with the culture they've developed in their neighborhoods. I'm not so arrogant to put my foot down and say "I'm right!!", but I think it'd be naive to insist that the inner-city culture they've cultivated has nothing to do with their circumstances, in general.

[Landlord]

How distant can it be when there are plenty of people still alive today who can't stand sharing restaurants with blacks because they grew up in the segregated south?

 

 

 

The culture of inner-cities is a circular epidemic that can't be tied to any ONE thing, but to many things that influence each other, only to become influenced by those same things. It's a cycle that some thankfully escape, but many get stuck in forever. How much different are they than white people? I was fortunate to escape my hometown, but the majority of my friends never did. Only difference is that the cycle they are perpetuating is an average, unassuming once instead of a violent, hopeless one.

[zoogs]

I'm not so arrogant to put my foot down and say "I'm right!!", but I think it'd be naive to insist that the inner-city culture they've cultivated has nothing to do with their circumstances, in general.

I think I would say if you want to pin it on inner city culture (I can't say I'm very familiar with it), then consider what it grew out of. When people are trapped and when so much of society has historically, and even currently as is now evident been hostile to their advancement, there's no "Prep School, Harvard, Wall Street" culture or whatever else to be had. Every enterprise you turn to, you face obstacles. The avenues that remain where anything is even possible are limited. It's how people stay trapped. The other lanes are occupied and don't think you belong.

 

I appreciate the discussion, by the way. Glad we had the chance to break out a substantive one here in this thread, of all places

[B.B. Hemingway]

How distant can it be when there are plenty of people still alive today who can't stand sharing restaurants with blacks because they grew up in the segregated south?

 

 

 

The culture of inner-cities is a circular epidemic that can't be tied to any ONE thing, but to many things that influence each other, only to become influenced by those same things. It's a cycle that some thankfully escape, but many get stuck in forever. How much different are they than white people? I was fortunate to escape my hometown, but the majority of my friends never did. Only difference is that the cycle they are perpetuating is an average, unassuming once instead of a violent, hopeless one.

 

Again, I agree with you on the difference between the two cultures (poor whites/poor blacks), but where you, and I differ is what/who is responsible for the violence they "have" to endure? Are people gunning each other down in poverty stricken Indonesia? That's a serious question, because I don't know..

[B.B. Hemingway]

 

I'm not so arrogant to put my foot down and say "I'm right!!", but I think it'd be naive to insist that the inner-city culture they've cultivated has nothing to do with their circumstances, in general.

I think I would say if you want to pin it on inner city culture (I can't say I'm very familiar with it), then consider what it grew out of. When people are trapped and when so much of society has historically, and even currently as is now evident been hostile to their advancement, there's no "Prep School, Harvard, Wall Street" culture or whatever else to be had. Every enterprise you turn to, you face obstacles. It's how people stay trapped.

 

I appreciate the discussion, by the way. Glad we had the chance to break out a substantive one here in this thread, of all places

 

 

 

Hey, I'm always up for a good discussion. I'm not to proud to try and understand, or learn something, and I'm not to insecure to defend my own beliefs...

[zoogs]

[knapplc]

 

 

I'm being serious too - that is a great, reputable TED talk. Regardless of leaning, it's a good video.

 

I feel like I've been kicked around for my pro-Trump views on here, which is why I stopped posting about them.

Is this what they describe in that TED Talk?

 

I know this is going to sound pretty sh**ty, but I am so happy that I get to come here and read all of the comical statements by the very grumpy Democrats (or just general non-Trump supporters). Why? Because, I'm making what I assume to be a safe assumption that you live here in Nebraska. And, because you live here in Nebraska, regardless of how loudly you scream and wring your hands and cry, your opinion won't be reflected in the final result. That would be true, unless you live in Omaha in which case the Democrats might swing the district like 2008, but polling is showing that is quite unlikely to happen this year.

 

So you can whine and moan, and go on and on about how Trump is a racist, sexist, sexual assault monster and a dictator and a demagogue and whatever other label you want to throw on there. You can deny the Clinton corruption, and defy common knowledge (or attempt to spend 2-3 minutes learning why) that the Wikileaks are genuine and have been verified using tracing technology to be authentic. At the end of the day, I can get my laughs while the state stays true to its Republican roots.

 

Is that sh**ty of me to say? Probably. But that is our political system. YOLO.

What do I see in Trump? I see a smart businessman (and if you hit me with "but he bankrupted", I might come through the computer and slap you - the man is worth more than any of us could ever dream to be). I see a leader who's whole life, his entire success, has centered around being a figurehead at the top who just hires the smartest people money can buy around him, and let's them run free. I honestly see a candidate who isn't steeped in filth, who at least gives America a shot to feel like some semblance of our own opinion matter - not the "private opinions" that are common in Washington.

Thank God, I've been pretty lonely in this forum over the last two days. Nice to see NUance, a fresh wind in this dark, desolate place.

https://www.facebook.com/outlawmorgan/videos/1185760541518837/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

 

Jumped getting into his car in the parking lot. F&$@k your one-sided rhetoric.

If you think you've been "kicked around," how would you describe these quotes?

 

Ohhhhhhh Knapp. This is why I left.

 

I'm sure you had quite a few gems (directed at me) you could have quoted when you scrolled back and found those, but those wouldn't support your argument. Understandable.

 

You left because people can quote your own words back to you? OK.

 

You're welcome to look for "gems." You can click the links on the quotes and go to each conversation and see what "gems" I directed at you. Near as I can recall, I haven't been too concerned with your opinions in this forum, based mostly on the aggressive tone of those posts. It wasn't an auspicious beginning here. But you're free to look. All my posts are in there.

[Atbone95]

 

 

 

I'm being serious too - that is a great, reputable TED talk. Regardless of leaning, it's a good video.

 

I feel like I've been kicked around for my pro-Trump views on here, which is why I stopped posting about them.

Is this what they describe in that TED Talk?

 

I know this is going to sound pretty sh**ty, but I am so happy that I get to come here and read all of the comical statements by the very grumpy Democrats (or just general non-Trump supporters). Why? Because, I'm making what I assume to be a safe assumption that you live here in Nebraska. And, because you live here in Nebraska, regardless of how loudly you scream and wring your hands and cry, your opinion won't be reflected in the final result. That would be true, unless you live in Omaha in which case the Democrats might swing the district like 2008, but polling is showing that is quite unlikely to happen this year.

 

So you can whine and moan, and go on and on about how Trump is a racist, sexist, sexual assault monster and a dictator and a demagogue and whatever other label you want to throw on there. You can deny the Clinton corruption, and defy common knowledge (or attempt to spend 2-3 minutes learning why) that the Wikileaks are genuine and have been verified using tracing technology to be authentic. At the end of the day, I can get my laughs while the state stays true to its Republican roots.

 

Is that sh**ty of me to say? Probably. But that is our political system. YOLO.

What do I see in Trump? I see a smart businessman (and if you hit me with "but he bankrupted", I might come through the computer and slap you - the man is worth more than any of us could ever dream to be). I see a leader who's whole life, his entire success, has centered around being a figurehead at the top who just hires the smartest people money can buy around him, and let's them run free. I honestly see a candidate who isn't steeped in filth, who at least gives America a shot to feel like some semblance of our own opinion matter - not the "private opinions" that are common in Washington.

Thank God, I've been pretty lonely in this forum over the last two days. Nice to see NUance, a fresh wind in this dark, desolate place.

https://www.facebook.com/outlawmorgan/videos/1185760541518837/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

 

Jumped getting into his car in the parking lot. F&$@k your one-sided rhetoric.

If you think you've been "kicked around," how would you describe these quotes?

 

Ohhhhhhh Knapp. This is why I left.

 

I'm sure you had quite a few gems (directed at me) you could have quoted when you scrolled back and found those, but those wouldn't support your argument. Understandable.

 

You left because people can quote your own words back to you? OK.

 

You're welcome to look for "gems." You can click the links on the quotes and go to each conversation and see what "gems" I directed at you. Near as I can recall, I haven't been too concerned with your opinions in this forum, based mostly on the aggressive tone of those posts. It wasn't an auspicious beginning here. But you're free to look. All my posts are in there.

 

No, I'm good. Not worth my time.

 

Very ironic you made this thread, though. Saw Teach's status update and thought "There's no f'ing way". Even proved me right the second I got in here, when I made a polite, constructive post. But here we are, I suppose.