|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 26 2017 01:17 Dromar wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:53 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On September 26 2017 00:11 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:10 zlefin wrote:On September 26 2017 00:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:02 NewSunshine wrote:On September 25 2017 23:58 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:52 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 25 2017 23:44 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:28 Sadist wrote: [quote]
Its devisive because people are idiots and arent asking why they are kneeling even though its been said over and over.
People dont stand in their homes when watching on tv. Is that disrespectful?
Our president is a divisive scumbag. If you want to talk about divisive look at the orange bag of hot air. Our president is at least trying to unite the country into one unified nation by bringing national pride back and at least have the courage to fully stand up to NK's dictatorship. You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons? Dude you are putting words into people's mouth and that's not cool. It temporarily left during the election (or even prior to that as dems was carefully setting up for a Hillary win, but failed) when dems played identity politics by pitting LGBT/PoC/women against white heterosexual males. It was basically identity politics vs economical nationalism in 2016 and we all know what decision people came to. So I know you and others like to say "identity politics" like it's some kind of filthy word, but what would you have discriminated peoples do? All the systemic racism PoC face, the rights continuously being contested/denied for LGBT folk, and even the sexism that women put up with, you just want them to keep quiet and not rock the boat? Identity politics is real politics. Because when you're constantly treated like shit because of how you look or how you live, your existence has been made political by the people doing it. Plain and simple. You can clearly protest without painting one subset of the nation into horrible monsters. And using violent manners in shutting down dissenting thoughts in various platforms is DEFINITELY NOT helping. Instead it would be much more efficient to be to nice to dissenting voices and present them with provable facts (none of that wage gap/rape epidemic bs) first instead of going at it w/ "You are racists/sexists/(insert your favorite buzzword here) if you are not with us!". Plain and simple. you're not presenting us with provable facts to support your arguments. I'm presenting you with logic and reason. This is the problem. You are not. How is it logical to say the president is trying to unite the country? Almost none of his actions ever have had that effect. His number one way to respond to questions is blaming someone else or saying 'but what about this other person he/she is worse than me'. He holds grudges against those who don't agree with him and constantly flames them instead of trying to understand their reasoning. He is rude and calls people names. There is no way to logically conclude from this that he is trying to unite a nation. Just none. Well, I'm not saying that I agree with RiK, but... There is a logical basis from which to say that Trump is trying to unite the country. There's a ton of evidence to support the notion that Trump is incompetent and incapable of doing things without messing them up. Based on that and his actions, one could presume that at least some of his unnecessary comments on Twitter are an attempt to rebuild national pride and unite the people, as RiK suggests. He's just really bad at it and has no clue that what he's doing is the opposite. Trying and succeeding are two different things. Whether or not you think this logical basis is the most reasonable one is up to you. I think that is a charitable interpretation of Trump's actions, and one that I could get behind. It doesn't change much, though.
|
On September 26 2017 01:19 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:17 Dromar wrote:On September 26 2017 00:53 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On September 26 2017 00:11 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:10 zlefin wrote:On September 26 2017 00:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:02 NewSunshine wrote:On September 25 2017 23:58 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:52 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 25 2017 23:44 RealityIsKing wrote: [quote]
Our president is at least trying to unite the country into one unified nation by bringing national pride back and at least have the courage to fully stand up to NK's dictatorship. You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons? Dude you are putting words into people's mouth and that's not cool. It temporarily left during the election (or even prior to that as dems was carefully setting up for a Hillary win, but failed) when dems played identity politics by pitting LGBT/PoC/women against white heterosexual males. It was basically identity politics vs economical nationalism in 2016 and we all know what decision people came to. So I know you and others like to say "identity politics" like it's some kind of filthy word, but what would you have discriminated peoples do? All the systemic racism PoC face, the rights continuously being contested/denied for LGBT folk, and even the sexism that women put up with, you just want them to keep quiet and not rock the boat? Identity politics is real politics. Because when you're constantly treated like shit because of how you look or how you live, your existence has been made political by the people doing it. Plain and simple. You can clearly protest without painting one subset of the nation into horrible monsters. And using violent manners in shutting down dissenting thoughts in various platforms is DEFINITELY NOT helping. Instead it would be much more efficient to be to nice to dissenting voices and present them with provable facts (none of that wage gap/rape epidemic bs) first instead of going at it w/ "You are racists/sexists/(insert your favorite buzzword here) if you are not with us!". Plain and simple. you're not presenting us with provable facts to support your arguments. I'm presenting you with logic and reason. This is the problem. You are not. How is it logical to say the president is trying to unite the country? Almost none of his actions ever have had that effect. His number one way to respond to questions is blaming someone else or saying 'but what about this other person he/she is worse than me'. He holds grudges against those who don't agree with him and constantly flames them instead of trying to understand their reasoning. He is rude and calls people names. There is no way to logically conclude from this that he is trying to unite a nation. Just none. Well, I'm not saying that I agree with RiK, but... There is a logical basis from which to say that Trump is trying to unite the country. There's a ton of evidence to support the notion that Trump is incompetent and incapable of doing things without messing them up. Based on that and his actions, one could presume that at least some of his unnecessary comments on Twitter are an attempt to rebuild national pride and unite the people, as RiK suggests. He's just really bad at it and has no clue that what he's doing is the opposite. Trying and succeeding are two different things. Whether or not you think this logical basis is the most reasonable one is up to you. I think that is a charitable interpretation of Trump's actions, and one that I could get behind. It doesn't change much, though.
Oh I agree completely. I think it's much more likely that Trump just starts shit "for the ratings," and to make himself feel good/important/powerful. But I thought I'd bring it up nonetheless.
|
On September 26 2017 01:18 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:14 NewSunshine wrote:On September 26 2017 01:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 00:59 Velr wrote: @reality If you would start your statements with a reason or even a little argument, posters probably would react diffrently to you.
There have been plenty of people as far out there, compared to most people here, as you that managed to get into actual discussions. Most not long term but well, atleast there were actual exchanges. About half of the people responding to him are shitposting. Singling RiK out for the shittiness in the thread is badly misplaced. He barged into the thread with a garbage post that showed no education on actual issues, and doubled down when people called him on it. Garbage in, garbage out. You and Danglars know this very well. Not really. I see the same type of shit in response to most of my posts, as does Danglars. Y'all are oblivious to how shitty most of your posting is on a consistent basis. not to be a parrot here but i think he covered that under garbage in garbage out
jokes aside, well put sunshine. i think that most accurately and generously sums shit up. kudos on being more elegant.
|
wow just skimming through ...what's up with all the "he said, she said" bs?
|
On September 26 2017 01:18 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote: you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you. please, don’t avoid the question. and what an absurd reply. that doesn’t mean i can come here and tell you you’re an ignorant flame baiter and say it’s Congress’s fault for xyz reason and back pedal all day claiming ‘it’s congress and this is the us politics thread ok?’
Unless you are just here specifically to mischaracterize people that that criticize extremists, please don't cherry pick.
I was responding to:
"You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons?"
At that point, it stopped being about the NFL, it became about Trump uniting the country and making examples of people trying to divide it.
|
On September 26 2017 00:27 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:23 Plansix wrote: RealityIsKing comes here to troll up this thread from time to time by making wild claims with no evidence. Like claiming that “this is why Trump won,” but providing nothing to prove he is correct. When challenged, he argues that he doesn’t need to provide evidence because he is the all powerful logical, rational thinker. Hes not even on wufflys level where he doesn't even put much effort into them. Mostly just inane obvious famebait from the sc2 strategey dark ages. Definitely a king among shitposters/flamebaiters/and trolls. I'm guessing that's the principal reason he arouses ire. Libs dot want posters moving in on their territory.
|
On September 26 2017 01:24 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:18 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote: you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you. please, don’t avoid the question. and what an absurd reply. that doesn’t mean i can come here and tell you you’re an ignorant flame baiter and say it’s Congress’s fault for xyz reason and back pedal all day claiming ‘it’s congress and this is the us politics thread ok?’ Unless you are just here specifically to mischaracterize people that that criticize extremists, please don't cherry pick. I was responding to: "You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons?" At that point, it stopped being about the NFL, it became about Trump uniting the country and making examples of people trying to divide it. A man wanting equal rights for his race is now dividing the country by wanting everyone to be united in their rights.
Thats some backwards ass logic right there.
|
|
On September 26 2017 01:26 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:24 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:18 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote: you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you. please, don’t avoid the question. and what an absurd reply. that doesn’t mean i can come here and tell you you’re an ignorant flame baiter and say it’s Congress’s fault for xyz reason and back pedal all day claiming ‘it’s congress and this is the us politics thread ok?’ Unless you are just here specifically to mischaracterize people that that criticize extremists, please don't cherry pick. I was responding to: "You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons?" At that point, it stopped being about the NFL, it became about Trump uniting the country and making examples of people trying to divide it. A man wanting equal rights for his race is now dividing the country by wanting everyone to be united in their rights. Thats some backwards ass logic right there.
Clearly said that at that point, it stopped being about the NFL/flag issues.
That's some irrelevant ass response right there.
|
On September 26 2017 01:31 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 26 2017 01:24 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:18 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote: you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you. please, don’t avoid the question. and what an absurd reply. that doesn’t mean i can come here and tell you you’re an ignorant flame baiter and say it’s Congress’s fault for xyz reason and back pedal all day claiming ‘it’s congress and this is the us politics thread ok?’ Unless you are just here specifically to mischaracterize people that that criticize extremists, please don't cherry pick. I was responding to: "You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons?" At that point, it stopped being about the NFL, it became about Trump uniting the country and making examples of people trying to divide it. A man wanting equal rights for his race is now dividing the country by wanting everyone to be united in their rights. Thats some backwards ass logic right there. Clearly said that at that point, it stopped being about the NFL/flag issues. That's some irrelevant ass response right there.
except you specifically called out the kneelers as being divisive in your second post. i’ll leave it to you to re-evaluate its relevance.
for your reference, lest you accuse me of mischaracterization again: On September 25 2017 23:25 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2017 23:21 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:The issue of race is why they began kneeling in the first place. Also brought more divisiveness into the country, which is bad.
|
On September 26 2017 01:29 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:25 Danglars wrote:On September 26 2017 00:27 Sermokala wrote:On September 26 2017 00:23 Plansix wrote: RealityIsKing comes here to troll up this thread from time to time by making wild claims with no evidence. Like claiming that “this is why Trump won,” but providing nothing to prove he is correct. When challenged, he argues that he doesn’t need to provide evidence because he is the all powerful logical, rational thinker. Hes not even on wufflys level where he doesn't even put much effort into them. Mostly just inane obvious famebait from the sc2 strategey dark ages. Definitely a king among shitposters/flamebaiters/and trolls. I'm guessing that's the principal reason he arouses ire. Libs dot want posters moving in on their territory. this is the only thing that makes sense. any tips on keeping you from being outraged for the sake of it next? I've been offering my commentary on what's true about the political scene, protests, and the broader society. You'll have to get more specific on what you view as "outraged for the sake of it." Right now your side suffers from setting low standards that RiK meets and exceeds.
|
Weridly this tweet works in preview but not in post. Basically Anthony Weiner has gotten 21 months for sexting a minor
|
If anything, the kneeling for the national anthem shows that there is no form of protest that is acceptable. It is silence, non-violent and harms no one. It is barely even disrespectful, since kneeling is still a sign of respect. Yet, it is deemed an attack on this fictional Unity of our nation by the president. Because suggesting that our county has divides is far more terrible than the things that caused the division.
|
On September 26 2017 01:32 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:31 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 26 2017 01:24 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:18 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote: you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you. please, don’t avoid the question. and what an absurd reply. that doesn’t mean i can come here and tell you you’re an ignorant flame baiter and say it’s Congress’s fault for xyz reason and back pedal all day claiming ‘it’s congress and this is the us politics thread ok?’ Unless you are just here specifically to mischaracterize people that that criticize extremists, please don't cherry pick. I was responding to: "You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons?" At that point, it stopped being about the NFL, it became about Trump uniting the country and making examples of people trying to divide it. A man wanting equal rights for his race is now dividing the country by wanting everyone to be united in their rights. Thats some backwards ass logic right there. Clearly said that at that point, it stopped being about the NFL/flag issues. That's some irrelevant ass response right there. except you specifically called out the kneelers as being divisive in your second post. i’ll leave it to you to re-evaluate its relevance. for your reference, lest you accuse me of mischaracterization again: Show nested quote +On September 25 2017 23:25 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:21 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:The issue of race is why they began kneeling in the first place. Also brought more divisiveness into the country, which is bad.
Then he should quote those instead instead of a totally irrelevant one if he so wishes me to respond, but then again people can just backtrack not too far to see my explanation of the unnecessarily flag/anthem protest if you TRULY want to have a clear discussion instead of randomly quoting me to simply just be insulting.
|
Norway28560 Posts
The fact is that Trump's overall behavior throughout his entire life, and his campaign only exacerbated this, has been so offensive to so many people that there's virtually nothing he can possibly do to be a unifying figure, aside from upping his badness so that even more people unite in hating him. At this point he could cure cancer, and I'd still think he's a shitty guy.
Supporting him because he's a fighter and you thought he would lead your side to winning bigly, I can see the logic behind that, even if I don't support his goals or think he's competent enough to win lasting victories. But supporting him because he's a unifying figure? Doesn't fly. I can accept LL's argument that people liked Obama more than they liked his policies, there's definitely some truth to that. But there's significantly more truth to that there are more people who like Trump's policies than there are people who like him, and to be a unifying figure, you have to be liked.
(preemptive I don't think Hillary would have been a unifying figure either, even if I vastly prefer her policy wise)
|
Target is raising its minimum hourly wage for its workers to $11 starting next month and then to $15 by the end of 2020 in a move it says will help it better recruit and retain top-quality staff and provide a better shopping experience for its customers.
The initiative, announced Monday, is part of Target’s strategy to reinvent its business, which includes remodeling stores, expanding online and opening up smaller urban locations.
Target quietly raised entry-level hourly wages to $10 last year from $9 from the previous year, following initiatives by Walmart and others to hike wages in a fiercely competitive marketplace.
But Target’s hike to $15 per hour far exceeds not only the federal minimum of $7.25 per hour but the hourly base pay at Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, and plenty of its other retail peers whose minimum hourly pay now hovers around $10.
As part of its $2.7bn investment in workers, Walmart had raised its entry-level hourly pay for workers to $9 in 2015 and then to $10 in 2016. With Target’s large influence in the retail, its hike could force some rivals to match the pay in order to compete.
“We see this not only as an investment in our team but an investment in an elevated experience for our guests and the communities we serve,” Brian Cornell, CEO of Target, told reporters on a call Friday.
Target shares fell 2% early Monday morning as investors worried about how much the wage hike would hurt the bottom line. Target reiterated its third-quarter and full-year profit guidance but said that it would update investors early next year about how higher wages will affect long-term profits.
The changes come amid growing concern for the plight of the hourly worker. Thousands of workers have staged protests to call attention to their financial struggles and to fight for $15 hourly pay. Last November’s election of a Republican-controlled Congress dampened hopes of an increase in the $7.25 per-hour federal minimum wage. But advocates have continued to press for hikes on the state and local level.
At the same time, competition for workers has heated up, and retailers, worried by the threat of e-commerce, are falling behind. As shoppers get more mobile-savvy, retailers are seeking sales staff who are more skilled at customer service and in technology such as using iPads to check out inventory. But with the unemployment rate near a 16-year low, the most desirable retail workers feel more confident in hopping from job to job.
Thirty-two percent of all first jobs in the US are in retail, according to the National Retail Federation.
Hourly pay at restaurants and hotels is up 3.5% from a year earlier, a much better raise than the 2.5% gain for all employees. For workers at transportation and warehousing companies, where e-commerce growth is fueling hiring, pay is up 2.7% in the past year. Retailers, however, have lifted pay just 1.8% in the past year. That may be spurring more workers to leave for better opportunities: separate government data shows the number of retail workers quitting their jobs this year and last is at the highest in a decade.
The average hourly pay for cashiers is now $10.14, according to the Hay Group’s survey of 140 retailers with annual sales of at least $500m. A year ago, the hourly pay was $9.79.
Target says that its minimum hourly wage of $11 is higher than the minimum wage in 48 states and matches the minimum wage in Massachusetts and Washington. It says the pay hike will affect thousands of its more than 300,000 workers, but it declined to quantify the percentage of its workforce. It said the increase to $11 per hour will apply to the more than 100,000 hourly workers that Target will be hiring for the holiday season.
Target declined to say what the average pay will be for its hourly workers with the increased wages.
Ken Perkins, president of Retail Metrics, called Target’s decision “astute.” But he says only healthy rivals will be able to afford to match Target’s hourly pay hike, creating a larger divide between thriving stores and those that are struggling.
“Target is really trying to gain market share in an environment where there is tremendous upheaval,” Perkins said. But he believes that there may be only a few dozen retailers like Best Buy, Home Depot and Walmart that can mirror what Target is doing.
Target’s wage increases come as the discounter is seeing signs that its turnaround efforts are starting to win back shoppers
Walmart has been benefiting from an investment in its workers. The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer has seen lower turnover among workers and has gotten much better scores by customers for its service. Walmart’s namesake US division reported a 1.8% increase in revenue at stores opened at least a year during its fiscal second quarter, marking the 12th straight period of gains. Walmart’s wage investments, however, did take a big bite out of profits.
Source
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Target definitely styles itself as a somewhat classier-than-average retailer, so this move definitely makes perfect sense for them.
|
Target is A+. Way better version of Kmart.
|
On September 26 2017 01:43 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:32 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:31 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 26 2017 01:24 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:18 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote: you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you. please, don’t avoid the question. and what an absurd reply. that doesn’t mean i can come here and tell you you’re an ignorant flame baiter and say it’s Congress’s fault for xyz reason and back pedal all day claiming ‘it’s congress and this is the us politics thread ok?’ Unless you are just here specifically to mischaracterize people that that criticize extremists, please don't cherry pick. I was responding to: "You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons?" At that point, it stopped being about the NFL, it became about Trump uniting the country and making examples of people trying to divide it. A man wanting equal rights for his race is now dividing the country by wanting everyone to be united in their rights. Thats some backwards ass logic right there. Clearly said that at that point, it stopped being about the NFL/flag issues. That's some irrelevant ass response right there. except you specifically called out the kneelers as being divisive in your second post. i’ll leave it to you to re-evaluate its relevance. for your reference, lest you accuse me of mischaracterization again: On September 25 2017 23:25 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:21 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:The issue of race is why they began kneeling in the first place. Also brought more divisiveness into the country, which is bad. Then he should quote those instead instead of a totally irrelevant one if he so wishes me to respond, but then again people can just backtrack not too far to see my explanation of the unnecessarily flag/anthem protest if you TRULY want to have a clear discussion instead of randomly quoting me to simply just be insulting. ok so, having done that, you have no explanation to offer? again, specifically, how a man kneeling against racial inequality is to blame for divisiveness?
|
On September 26 2017 02:11 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:43 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:32 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:31 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:26 Gorsameth wrote:On September 26 2017 01:24 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:18 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote: [quote]
If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest.
Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you. please, don’t avoid the question. and what an absurd reply. that doesn’t mean i can come here and tell you you’re an ignorant flame baiter and say it’s Congress’s fault for xyz reason and back pedal all day claiming ‘it’s congress and this is the us politics thread ok?’ Unless you are just here specifically to mischaracterize people that that criticize extremists, please don't cherry pick. I was responding to: "You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons?" At that point, it stopped being about the NFL, it became about Trump uniting the country and making examples of people trying to divide it. A man wanting equal rights for his race is now dividing the country by wanting everyone to be united in their rights. Thats some backwards ass logic right there. Clearly said that at that point, it stopped being about the NFL/flag issues. That's some irrelevant ass response right there. except you specifically called out the kneelers as being divisive in your second post. i’ll leave it to you to re-evaluate its relevance. for your reference, lest you accuse me of mischaracterization again: On September 25 2017 23:25 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:21 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:The issue of race is why they began kneeling in the first place. Also brought more divisiveness into the country, which is bad. Then he should quote those instead instead of a totally irrelevant one if he so wishes me to respond, but then again people can just backtrack not too far to see my explanation of the unnecessarily flag/anthem protest if you TRULY want to have a clear discussion instead of randomly quoting me to simply just be insulting. ok so, having done that, you have no explanation to offer? again, specifically, how a man kneeling against racial inequality is to blame for divisiveness?
You can read my explanation on post #176463.
|
|
|
|