Do you disagree?

Yeah, I've noticed that. He jumps at the chance to label something someone says as racist faster than Fly, but hilariously he misses the mark every time.

That's because I use racist in the sense of "intentionally harmful to minorities".

You and Fly et al use it in the sense of "against the interests of the DNC".

That's where the confusion comes in.

Rjoe got fired from a job forcing workers to pay dues to a bargaining agency that no longer represents their interests, and most recently worked for one of the most corrupt pieces of garbage to ever hold public office. His job was to misrepresent economics, foreign policy, morality, and reality so that his team could win.

His team in both of these endeavors is on the side of destroying hope while waving a banner proclaiming it, killing jobs while claiming to create them, blowing a fake enemy to bits while claiming to know them best, etc etc. It is nigh imposible to be more wrong about life the universe and everything in it.

And I will certainly not be lectured on equality by such a person. He works for and celebrates the party of slavery period.

ETA: the thing that hurts more is that I know he is a good person, and that his personal motivation is to help his fellow man. That he does so much to harm them is very jimmy rustling. If he were a sociopath like others ITT I wouldn't get so upset.

I think its funny that you tried to go in that direction from what I said.

Well, the starting point of any argument claiming a restriction on convicted felons possessing guns is racist would be to begin with the assumption that minorities just can't help themselves from committing felonies, is it not?

Technically my position was eliminated, you should get that right :P

But nice to see NeBlis going full crazy. Lirvapartdeux.

It is not.

Go on...

Noted ftr

nice ninja, see also mine

NeBlis appears to be quite mad

I have a really bad habit of editing every post about 3 seconds after I hit post reply, that I'll admit.

NeBlis, by the way, was trying to get around to the sharecropper/plantation idea that the Democrats court African Americans by buying their votes with welfare, which makes them dependent on government.

lol, wut? No. Why would anyone ever start with that assumption?

Yeah, it seemed pretty obvious where he was going with that.

Crying wolf ITT?

Ha, I almost used those words but there's already like 3 threads going talking about that :P

Because they're racist *******s. Thus I said anyone who makes that argument is a racist.

Who made that argument ITT?

Yea, he's a two trick pony rjoe.

Are you following along?

I informed you that you that we already have laws on the books which remove guns from the hands of dangerous people, namely convicted felons.

M2B asked me if I viewed that law as racist.

I said no, to believe that law is racist would have to begin with the assumption minorities can't help themselves from committing felonies.

M2B LOL'd.

Wookie stated I was incorrect. I am awaiting clarification.

No ones "made that argument". I think M2B thought I was, but stereotyping people is dumb, so you shouldn't do it.

DblBarrelJ.

If a black person is more likely to face a felony conviction than a white person when they commit the same action, it's not racist to say that restrictions on felons disproportionately harm minorities.

Oh come on, can't make it that easy on them.

ITT calling an argument racist and stupid = arguing in favor of whatever you just called racist and stupid.

[X] Thread delivers.