Oh man am I up in the rotation for "2p2 posters that you bizarrely obsess over for a few weeks at a time"? Great.

But that said, it's absolutely hilarious the way you blunder into threads and ask people to bring you up to speed. It's funny! Because of how stupid you are, and how you literally never have any idea what's going on.

Just ignorant would not be as specific as person can be willfully ignorant. Being unaware is more specific and speaks towards the intention portrayed from the analogy.

Also the analogy was made from a position of awareness ( as well as in a lampooning style) Demonstrating how a person can still dislike a style of music, but be aware of stereotypes they can form from it. How else can a person reject forming a racial, ethnic, or other prejudicial stereotypes if they are not aware of how they can?

Prejudice is more or less synonymous with implicit/explicit bias.

In these posts you totes don't care about, in this forum you obviously could EASILY live without, how many pages of strongly worded opinions do you think you've written?

Let's assume 250 words per double spaced page, and conservatively like 30 words per emphatically expressed post. Should account for the occasional "lol" or 5 word response. You've written, what, 10k posts per year?

30 words per post x 10k posts = 300k words. 300k words / 250 words per page = 1,200 pages per year. Mind you, these are strongly worded opinion pieces too! That's like the amount of pages in the entire Twilight Saga each and every year bro.

But...totally don't care. Totally. Don't. Care.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistakes_were_made

There's a big word for this too, can't remember it.

I'm not committing that fallacy as I am not evading any of the mistakes that were made in the context of my usage of the phrase. I simply reject the faux moral outrage directed at Bruce for having emotions and behaving mutually adversarial. I mean his "crime" there is saying fighting words to a crowd who has no problem being aggressive and adversarial themselves.You may want to study up on exaggeration rhetoric devices, the the trend is to exaggerate Bruce's mistakes and diminish any attribute that doesn't justify endless moralistic denigration and guilt by association accusations. for them.

Would the word I flipped out about be "literally"?

I like the word "arrogance," so that can't be it.

Keep getting yourself all worked up, my friend. It is quite amusing.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-2014...ard-1414192776

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...p-their-voters
Fly, there are endless examples. Most people understand how politics works, and that politicians on all sides use whatever means will get them votes. This has been true since the beginning of time.

78% Say Politicians Play ‘Race Card’ Just to Get Reelected: http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public..._get_reelected

No, it was arrogant.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...postcount=1243

Yeah what do you know, it was it. Funny how that **** works. Knowing how to read is the gift that keeps giving.

LOL man you're in what, month 6 of carrying the torch for the dearly departed here?

You have one example of an anonymous mailer, which doesn't even call anyone or anything racist. If there are endless examples, you can find one of a liberal politician calling something or someone racist to discredit it.

LOL like I said. This isn't a thing you know about from actual first hand knowledge, this is a thing(just like the "race baiting" discussion) where you see racists complaining about something and randomly give them credibility.


Then, and this is the arrogant thing, then you think the people patiently explaining the most basic elements of American politics to you are UNAWARE of how "race baiting" is used.

Notice, weirdly, that quotes like this:
Somehow don't provoke FoldN to give G.K. Butterfield or liberals writ large the benefit of the doubt.

(I do highly recommend reading at least the second article that FoldN, which is just incredibly tone deaf smh white people ****)

Two incredible quotes:

!!! That's the example of Republican race baiting!

LOL how awful of them to state the obviously true. FFS that was them being charitable, it is pretty much solely motivated by racism, but this extraordinarily dumb article is literally just a list of times that Democrats alleged that racism exists, with no attempt to analyze the merits of those claims.

Fly, response to the fact that you write more than enough passionately-worded essays here each and every year to fill a couple Tolkein novels? How does that jive with you not caring about this place nor about participating herein?

Oh, yeah! I am not really OK with using that word instead of a more appropriate word. I mean, unless the appearance that your posts are MadLibs is because they literally are MadLibs.

Lol. Remember that time you decided that I was racist? This is kind of like that in terms of accuracy.

DIB you made some weird assumptions about the number of posts he has, or how many per year he makes, when that info is readily available. Your streak of making terrible reads is still intact.

Is it a psychology word or a political word? Do you mean "big word" in terms of Zikzak's vocabulary or Fly's?

This, if you were trolling and there really isn't a big word, would be awesome and evil.

It was my impression that there'd be no math.

Wow, you're really gonna go with this "your side" is magically immune from dirty politics? Only conservatives play on race and when liberals do it it's always right. I guess that makes sense. How else could you maintain such certitude required to spew such morally justified hate? Fwiw, I think it's worse when conservatives do it, but lol at believing both sides don't skew the truth and abuse race for votes. Explains so much.

Alright, so according to TheDuker he made 708 posts in Q1 of 2014 with an average of 55 words per post. Assuming the data was consistent throughout 2014, that would mean 2832 posts x 55 wpp = 155,760 words. Divide that by 250 words per page and we're at 623 pages.

Would you care about somewhere you went to write over 600 passionately-worded pages each and every year for a ****ing decade? That's equivalent in length to writing 3 doctoral-level dissertations each year. And we all know the level of care he puts into his posts; each one is essentially dripping with emotion.

But I guess my read is off, amirite?! Just more wild assumptions by DIB!

No matter how ****ty the thread, DIB can always pop in and make it worse.

Odd to use Duke's numbers but extrapolate and guess when he actually gave numbers for an entire year.

Also, the reads thing was supposed to be a pun about how you can't read. This info is all available, you don't need to guess at the math.

Given you somehow think Bruce modded SMP then this is a bit rich

Oh snap

Also, it's always so telling what you find objectionable to comment on and what you don't.

Excellent, so help me leave the thread with a simple "read."

We know how much he writes. We know the amount of passionate energy that goes into his writing.

Do you buy that he doesn't give a **** about this place? Would you go so far as to say he actually cares a great deal about it?

Isn't it against site-wide rules to comment on post count?

As best I can tell, no one has ever accused you of dogwhistling yourself, just going to bat for dogwhistlers.