This is truly insulting or at least as insulted as one can be on an anonymous forum. To say I'm not upset about Trump's win? I comforted a gay women while she literally cried on my shoulder on election night as it became apparent he was actually going to win!

Seriously dude. I'm putting up with you maybe because I'm a masochist or just too stubborn to back down. But you'd have lost most people long ago by attributing such falsehoods to them as you've done me.

I might not be the sharpest knife in the drawer and I may not even know where I stand on certain issues and therefore like to play both sides to see who has the best argument and ideologies that I am comfortable with. But you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who recoiled at the idea of a Trump presidency more than I did. I'm still in shock hoping to wake up from a bad nightmare before the 20th. Maybe for different reasons than you, but there are so many reason to be petrified of what the next 4 years might bring to this country I'm sure many of them must overlap.

See, this is what I don't like. You have to prove where you stand to the forum to prove that you belong. It's like a witch hunt.

It's absolutely bizarre that Lestat has somehow internalized "Trump is bad" but not any of the underlying principles that make Trump bad.

Political correctness and the SJWs are out of control, ****ing Milo makes good points, global warming is a hoax, black lives matter is racist against non-blacks and our beloved hard working troops, all that ****...


Buddy I got some real good news for you about our President. You ain't got a thing to worry about.

ON THE OTHER HAND, if you aren't full of **** about your principles, my dude you may want to re-evaluate your ****ing reading list.

You won't, because I'm right about you. The first step is admitting you have a problem, and you won't even admit Stan has one, and he voted for the President that made your friend cry.

As for the future of media, look no further than this two-part article:

Winter is coming: prospects for the American press under Trump (part 1)

Winter is coming: prospects for the American press under Trump (part 2)

The website itself is a project from the journalism school at NYU which covers "the fate of the press in a digital era and the challenges involved in rethinking what journalism is today".

Pretty depressing to read. I don't see how this can be completely reversed.

Maybe I do have fascist tendencies and I just don't know it? I don't see how. I'm about as anti-government as you can get. I want as much government out of our lives as possible (while still recognizing the need for government), and I'm VERY worried about fascism under Trump. I always thought of fascism as something akin to a police state where one dictator sets the agenda, controls the media, etc.. Something Trump would seem to love implementing. I find the thought repugnant. So I'm not sure where you're getting that I'm a fascist. If I am, then I'll need it explained in further detail how I exhibit fascist ideas. Because I just don't see it.

First they didn't understand the boy who cried wolf, now they're confused about what a witch hunt is. The fact witches don't exist is very important here!

Also to close the book on Milo, let's bring Lestat up to speed on why he was banned from Twitter. Note that in our generosity libs gave him a ton of opportunities to educate himself and all we got was a that he was "goofy" and made "salient points".

http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/20/12...s-transparency

Lestat, there's no question here. That's what you support. That's the kind of man you are. You think Milo has a first amendment right to lead his legion of misanthropic troll fans in bombarding Leslie Jones with racial and sexist abuse on a private company's social media service. His banning was, if not a violation of the first amendment, a blow against the free discourse of ideas.

And you have the unmitigated gall to whine about how we treat you here?


Unbelievable. It's **** like this that make you bull**** about civil reasoned discussion so transparently bull****. Literal white supremacists on the right are "goofy" provocateurs who probably make some good points, but if anyone on the left raises their voice they are silencing dissent.

And when I said you can stop pretending about the Stan ****, what I meant was that you kept on phrasing it in this dishonest "Hey guys, WE should be nicer to THEM for our own good". What you meant, what you've always meant was "Hey guys, YOU should be nicer to ME for my own good". You can see how the second one is less persuasive.

Minor detail. You're being a nit-troll.

It's about where you turn when the libertarian principles inevitably fall apart.

Here's some bull**** I posted awhile back:

Just going to throw this out there but Lestat being the flag bearer for the be nicer brigade is depressing me. I STILL think there is 5 percent of the country that is flippable that would make all the difference if they had access to intelligent and well reasoned discourse instead of Fox news and rush Limbaugh. I mean hell my own views have been drastically shaped by what I've read in this forum over the last 8 years. They only get that if we are willing to try to convert them rather than give up on them.

Whoa! I NEVER said global warming is a hoax! Are you kidding me?

I also didn't say BLM is racist against non-blacks. I just think it's rather silly when Native Americans are treated just as harshly. And I certainly never said anything about any hard working troops. You seem to be good and going back and citing. Where would you come up with this?! If anything, I think it's racist against blacks themselves. You know, it's possible to care about two things at once. That is, I can care about police shooting blacks and be vehemently against that and want those cops locked up forever and not see another instance of it. But I can also think a much more important issue is caring about black on black crime. Again, let's talk facts: If you could eliminate one of these problems. Cops killing blacks. Or blacks killing blacks. Which would end tomororw? Hint: They are both important, but one brings more misery to black neighborhoods than the other. Take all the fatherless black, white, and every other color children and look how those numbers correlate with higher crime, getting a worse education, and making it harder to escape poverty or get divorced from a welfare state.

So I can turn the question around on you. You accuse me of never defending Kaepernick or BLM and always siding with racists like Sterling, Breitbart, etc. and assume that to mean I'm not a liberal and must be an alt.right.

But how come I never hear you criticize our own government of atrocities like our drone strikes killing thousands of innocents, or being in bed with the most misogynistic country with the one of the worst human rights records in the world Saudi Arabia?

You blame the problem on people like me, but I never hear you criticize the Democrats for their part they've played in creating a welfare state to gain the votes of the poor (many who are black)? You think our liberal government is perfectly blameless for any racial problems and inequality in our country? So much easier to call people like me racist, rather than dig down deep into why racism still persists in 2017. Hint: It's NOT because of people like me! A lot has to do with our government failing minorities.

Is that so? Does the same hold true for the gays and lesbians I know? How about Muslims and other minorities?

How about you being kind enough to present me with one? My main sources are Huffington Post, NPR, CNN, TYT (which led me into Jimmy Dor), and CNN. I do NOT read Breitbart at all except when following the occassional link
a conservative friend sends me. So what are some good FACT BASED news sources you'd recommend?

You probably are on some things, but nowhere near as much as you think you are overall.

So again, you feel that fully 25% of our fellow Americans have a problem with racism. Why don't we start with you defining what racism even means. Maybe that's where I'm totally missing the mark. I define it as someone who believes their race is superior to another or who looks down on other races and harbors resentment or hate towards them. I also include not recognizing or or worse, failing to care that their privileges came at the expense of other races being suppressed. I labeled Stan a racist for the reason that he does not recognize the full extent of his privilege. We both agree that's a problem, but I afford Stan more leeway because I think he's salvageable and can be shown he is privileged in ways he's never before considered. So what's your definition of racism so I can be sure we're on the same page if we run into each other again on here?

Lestat, you're not supposed to actually type it out. They invented dog whistles for people like you to use to keep up the ruse!

So you think Democrats have been helpful to blacks and minorities over the last 20 years? Care to name some of their successes?

Was it Bill Clinton's passing the tougher crime bill? Was that the big breakthrough that really was the best thing for blacks and minorities? Let's just put more of them in jail. That turned out to be REAL helpful, didn't it?

Yeah I'm sure they're grunching due to the great laws passed by Dems that incarcerate minorities at a higher rate than ever before. I've been in jail with blacks that understand this. How can't you?

Here's a recent one from California. Which party do you think the people who voted for this identify with?

You guys are honestly going to attest that Democrats have had minority interests at heart all along? You're all blind!

Wait... A REPUBLICAN praised this? OMFG! Why are incarceration rates so ridiculously high to begin with? Did they start climbing with Bill Clinton?

Who allows private prisons to profit? The government? Get the **** out! But government has nothing to do with racism in America, right? I must've been out of my mind to suggest such a thing or that people like Fly might want to look at our own government before labeling 25% of his fellow Americans as the impetus for racial problems in this country.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2016/...en-this-person

Lestat, which party do you think the people who voted for prop 47 tend to identify with?



Speaking of successes by Democrats, thanks for bringing that up!

Excuse me if I don't jump for joy that after 30 years they finally righted an unforgivable wrong that had thousands of minorities unnecessarily locked up in cement cells for years. Kudos for finally getting common sense right for a change?

Again, you don't get brownie points for correcting unspeakable wrongs. It's about time is all I have to say. Don't go presenting righting a tragedy as some kind of ****ing success story.

"Can you name anything good Democrats have done in the last 20 years?"
"No they did this bad thing first, those don't count!"

Dude you must be new here to think you're WOKE or something by pointing out the role of incarceration as if this forum wasn't reading Michelle Alexander years ago. Get the **** out of here acting like you're dropping some hot new knowledge Fly hasn't heard before. Incarceration was bipartisan policy from Nixon through GWB and only one party is now working to try to undo the damage.

Also, unrelated:

Careful with that phrase, someone might wonder if you pulled it straight from Bill O'Reilly's Twitter.