Hypocrisy of the left

[headoverheels 333]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Everyone knows and understands the basic hypocrisy of the right wing. It needs no special thread of it's own. It is understood.

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by headoverheels

[turtlespeed 226]

7 hours ago, Coreece said:

What ever happened to good old fashion fucked in the head?  "Sexual Orientation" makes it sound like it's part of the LGBTQP movement or something.

But I agree, if there are ways to convince people to get help, great.  I say we should fund lobotomies if necessary.

That is exactly what some on the left would have you believe.

Its deplorable.

[wmw999 2,544]

I had a friend once who met Jeffrey Dahmer. Yeah, that one; she was a death penalty appeal lawyer. She said he was the sickest (as in mentally ill) person she ever met. Most of the people she defended were very mentally ill, and/abused horrifically as children. She hoped none of them ever saw the outside of a prison, but that it would be hard to call many of them mentally fit to be legally responsible for their actions. 
Wendy P. 

[billvon 3,074]

11 hours ago, gowlerk said:

That's the slightly funny thing about this thread. Everyone knows and understands the basic hypocrisy of the right wing. It needs no special thread of it's own. It is understood. Indeed, that this thread even exists is part of it.

It has long been a truism that the best place for a gay man to meet a potential life partner is in the buffet line of the local "traditional family values" political fundraiser.

[JerryBaumchen 1,442]

15 hours ago, billvon said:

It has long been a truism that the best place for a gay man to meet a potential life partner is in the buffet line of the local "traditional family values" political fundraiser.

Hi Bill,

Right up there with, 'You get more sex from a church pew than a barstool.'

Jerry Baumchen

[JoeWeber 2,836]

On 8/13/2020 at 5:03 PM, airdvr said:

All good examples however, I'm talking about the myriad of social programs that are complete failures.

myriad: countless or extremely great in number. So more like Trump lies, not social programs.

What's your line did you say? Commercial Real Estate? What would be your opinion of the IRS social program for wealthy commercial real estate investors that allowed Trump to take a $915,000,000 Net Operating Loss in 1995? Given that he didn't report any cancelled debt, and because it was then an approved IRS welfare program, it's is likely he did the ol' stock for debt swapperoo. And all of it as legal as food stamps those wasteful Social Security disability payments. Of course it's completely different as well as being not the same because somehow, some way, some day those NOL's will trickle down to someone, somewhere or something.

Edited August 16, 2020 by JoeWeber

[airdvr 210]

On 8/15/2020 at 11:50 AM, gowlerk said:

That's the slightly funny thing about this thread. Everyone knows and understands the basic hypocrisy of the right wing. It needs no special thread of it's own. It is understood. Indeed, that this thread even exists is part of it.

Only in a forum dominated by liberals.

[airdvr 210]

5 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

myriad: countless or extremely great in number. So more like Trump lies, not social programs.

What's your line did you say? Commercial Real Estate? What would be your opinion of the IRS social program for wealthy commercial real estate investors that allowed Trump to take a $915,000,000 Net Operating Loss in 1995? Given that he didn't report any cancelled debt, and because it was then an approved IRS welfare program, it's is likely he did the ol' stock for debt swapperoo. And all of it as legal as food stamps those wasteful Social Security disability payments. Of course it's completely different as well as being not the same because somehow, some way, some day those NOL's will trickle down to someone, somewhere or something.

What would I say?  It's a legal loophole.  If you don't like it change it.

[JoeWeber 2,836]

6 minutes ago, airdvr said:

What would I say?  It's a legal loophole.  If you don't like it change it.

Well, if you weren't fully hypnotized by the right wing media meme about tax dollar paid social programs only being abused by the lazy poor, you might say that we really need to look at the thing inside of all four corners and stop focusing on the obvious: social programs designed to assist those who are poor, disabled, hungry, without medical care, aged, alone, scared and uncertain about their futures because they are never going to give back what they were given. 

[normiss 855]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

Only in a forum dominated by liberals.

I'll never understand why white wingers consider everyone not in lock step with their hatred of the world is always considered a liberal.

It's like all white wingers are still in 6th grade. They can't have a discussion without screaming and calling people names.

[airdvr 210]

22 minutes ago, normiss said:

I'll never understand why white wingers consider everyone not in lock step with their hatred of the world is always considered a liberal.

It's like all white wingers are still in 6th grade. They can't have a discussion without screaming and calling people names.

Name calling...white wingers...good one.

[normiss 855]

1 minute ago, airdvr said:

Name calling...white wingers...good one.

It was my point of responding to the non-stop assault of childish names. Apparently at least that part caught your attention.

It seems your name calling sling and my response are the only options in AmeriKKKa these days.

It really sucks. We could be so much better as a nation, like we used to be.

[Coreece 190]

10 hours ago, normiss said:

10 hours ago, airdvr said:

Name calling...white wingers...good one.

It was my point of responding to the non-stop assault of childish names. Apparently at least that part caught your attention.

It seems your name calling sling and my response are the only options in AmeriKKKa these days.

All he said was "a forum dominated by liberals" and then you called him a white winger in AmeriKKKa while in another thread someone called him ignorant and prejudiced.

Those seem to be your answers to anyone on the right that might disagree with you on a handful of issues. You just lump them all together with the white supremacists - "they're just racist, xenophobic, misogynistic, homophobes - It's funny when they have gay babies"  and just recently from another poster - "I'm happy to make generalizations (about religion)" 

In the past you bitched about my language while using similar language yourself.  You bitched when I said "this cuntry" as not being classy, yet you actually referred to your "bitch ex-girlfriend"  as a "right cunt" - and then you always have some bullshit excuse about how it's ok for you, but not anyone else that disagrees with you.  And a lot of your attacks were just because you're impervious to subtle nuance and don't even bother trying to understand where the other person is coming from.  Just like with Wendy's comment - you should've known better that she wasn't trying to insult you.

I mean really, how can anyone take seriously your outrage in the face of such blatant hypocrisy?

 

11 hours ago, normiss said:

It really sucks. We could be so much better as a nation, like we used to be.

Look in the mirror, brah.

[gowlerk 2,251]

21 minutes ago, Coreece said:

All he said was "a forum dominated by liberals" and then you called him a white winger in AmeriKKKa while in another thread someone called him ignorant and prejudiced.

Airdvr seems to be a pretty intelligent guy. He also often appears to be ignorant in the literal sense of the word of many things he comments on. Just an observation. Words like ignorant should be used very sparingly in a forum like this.

[airdvr 210]

Another example.

[gowlerk 2,251]

2 minutes ago, airdvr said:

Another example.

I'm not sure how you see this as an example of left wing hypocrisy. I see it as an example of the ignorance I just spoke of. It is simply a repost of a meme. With no way to check if it is accurate, no link, nothing. It's just something that caught your eye, offended you, and without any research you have decided to accept it as fact and to post it here with no context and no comment at all. That is ignorant in my view.

[airdvr 210]

Just now, gowlerk said:

I'm not sure how you see this as an example of left wing hypocrisy. I see it as an example of the ignorance I just spoke of. It is simply a repost of a meme. With no way to check if it is accurate, no link, nothing. It's just something that caught your eye, offended you, and without any research you have decided to accept it as fact and to post it here with no context and no comment at all. That is ignorant in my view.

My comment is at the top.  Quite obvious that WaPo thinks Bagdadi is a great leader while Trump's brother only has his suit against his niece as an identifier.

[gowlerk 2,251]

26 minutes ago, airdvr said:

My comment is at the top.  Quite obvious that WaPo thinks Bagdadi is a great leader while Trump's brother only has his suit against his niece as an identifier.

How you could draw either of those conclusions from the headlines is beyond me. Although I will agree that people in general, especially on social media have responded in a very cold and callous way to the death of Trump's brother. But once again, have you made any effort at all to confirm that this meme is accurate?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

My comment is at the top.  Quite obvious that WaPo thinks Bagdadi is a great leader while Trump's brother only has his suit against his niece as an identifier.

Actually Wapo said it was a mistake, should never have happened and changed the headline.

[jakee 1,563]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

My comment is at the top.  Quite obvious that WaPo thinks Bagdadi is a great leader while Trump's brother only has his suit against his niece as an identifier.

That's an impossible conclusion to draw. Why do you think austere religious scholars are great leaders? Personally I don't think the discription carries any positive connotations at all, though I know it would for others. It definitely doesn't mean that, though. Also consider that was the second of three they used, the first calling him 'terrorist in chief', the third 'extremist leader', and they immediately apologised for ever using the one you posted. 

 

You, on the other hand, haven't even acknowledged the absurdity of your claim that the Ted talk chick represents leftist hypocrisy towards pedophiles, let alone apologised for it. Funny how often the right's attacks on the left backfire like that. Almost as if they're wrong most of the time.

[JerryBaumchen 1,442]

16 hours ago, airdvr said:

Only in a forum dominated by liberals.

Hi airdvr,

From what I believe is your definition of 'liberal,' then this country is truly liberal.

Hillary beat Trump by nearly 3 million votes.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-officially-wins-popular-vote-29-million/story?id=44354341#:~:text=Clinton had 2%2C864%2C974 votes more than Trump%2C the,candidate in U.S. history%2C according to the AP.

Jerry Baumchen

[airdvr 210]

And yet she's not in the White House.  Gotta get the votes that count.

[wmw999 2,544]

Because some votes are more important than others.

Wendy P.

[JerryBaumchen 1,442]

11 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Because some votes are more important than others.

Wendy P.

Hi Wendy,

Therein lies the problem.

Of course, it never is a problem when their person wins.

Jerry Baumchen

[Phil1111 1,149]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

And yet she's not in the White House.  Gotta get the votes that count.

and when that doesn't work call in the Russians.

"Says the media cut out his request of Russian hackers to find Hillary Clinton’s emails “right at the end so that you don’t see the laughter, the joke.” Politifact:

"Trump said the media distorted his "Russia, if you’re listening" comment in 2016 by cutting out "the laugher, the joke." 

The laughter was not cut. The full video shows that no laughter followed. 

Trump has recast the delivery and response of his 2016 press conference in an effort to distort the media’s coverage. We rate this statement False."