who else has covid?

[YDB95]

I suppose condoning riots, the murders of police and counter protesters, destruction of property, looting, Autonomous Zone rapes, ignoring Biden's sexual assault accuser, spreading the virus through mass gatherings, and the list goes on, gives you the high ground on decency, does it?

Let me know when you find someone who has condoned any of those, and I'll let you know what I think. (Protip: a peaceful protest is not a riot.)

 

[ThePlumTiger66]

Let me know when you find someone who has condoned any of those, and I'll let you know what I think. (Protip: a peaceful protest is not a riot.)

You have, with many of your posts.

 

[Lazaran]

Let me know when you find someone who has condoned any of those, and I'll let you know what I think. (Protip: a peaceful protest is not a riot.)

Oddly enough, I do have that idiot on ignore. I'm not sure which one of the butt hurt RWCJ created this alt in response to the GB purge, but whoever it is has some real issues.

SAD!!!

 

[ThePlumTiger66]

Oddly enough, I do have that idiot on ignore. I'm not sure which one of the butt hurt RWCJ created this alt in response to the GB purge, but whoever it is has some real issues.

SAD!!!

Shuddup, Rory.

(Still pissed that someone, I don't know who got you banned?)

 

[YDB95]

You have, with many of your posts.

Yeah, no. I am not responsible for your misreading of anyone else's comments. A peaceful protest is not a riot, no matter how badly you want to play George Wallace here.

 

[ThePlumTiger66]

Yeah, no. I am not responsible for your misreading of anyone else's comments. A peaceful protest is not a riot, no matter how badly you want to play George Wallace here.

You're as bad as Delux.

You lie to people's faces and expect them to believe it.

Stick around after your next post, I may or may not be back.

 

[YDB95]

You're as bad as Delux.

You lie to people's faces and expect them to believe it.

Stick around after your next post, I may or may not be back.

Feel free to show me where I condoned any of what you listed, then. You made the accusation, you can back it up.

 

[KeithD]

No one who supports Trump at this point has any business lecturing anyone else on decency, end of story.

Yep, anyone still with Trump is a moral degenerate and has given up their "human being" card.

 

[ThePlumTiger66]

Let me know when you find someone who has condoned any of those, and I'll let you know what I think. (Protip: a peaceful protest is not a riot.)

You may say, "How high," when people say jump, but I don't.

A recent post of yours (Go look it up, and while you're at it, go through your history and see what you're willing to excuse) said something along the lines of, "When the number of innocent police men who have been murdered equal the number of innocent black people..."

You see, you didn't speak against murdering innocent police men, did you? You defended their deaths by saying and meaning, "The police can spare those lives because BLM isn't even yet." That's condoning their deaths. Their murders. And you've said much to the same every time you argue that "It's not their fault."

Protip: What you say has a resonance. You can't hide behind "Well, that's not what I literally said" because unlike your fellow lefties, the rest of us aren't aren't putting up with your bullshit.

 

[YDB95]

You may say, "How high," when people say jump, but I don't.

Neither do I. But I also don't make claims I can't back up with anything but bucketloads of attitude.

A recent post of yours (Go look it up, and while you're at it, go through your history and see what you're willing to excuse) said something along the lines of, "When the number of innocent police men who have been murdered equal the number of innocent black people..."

You see, you didn't speak against murdering innocent police men, did you? You defended their deaths by saying and meaning, "The police can spare those lives because BLM isn't even yet."

First of all, do not put words in my mouth. I never said anything that could even remotely be construed as meaning what you claim I said - quotes and all - in that last line.

Secondly, the point of what I DID say obviously went so far over your head that you didn't even hear the whoosh. I was responding to your argument that BLM needs to accept that not all cops are bad apples. Overlooking the fact that no one ever said they all were, my point was it doesn't matter to George Floyd's family (and the many, many others we've all heard so much about) that most cops wouldn't kneel on his neck until it killed him. BLM is a reaction to the fact that far, far too many cops ARE bad apples. There simply is not a reciprocal epidemic of good cops being murdered. If you construed that as meaning I'd be OK with it if there were, that's strictly on you and your extremely twisted world view.

Protip: What you say has a resonance. You can't hide behind "Well, that's not what I literally said"

Too funny. You're saying this in a forum where right-wingers routinely argue that the Southern strategy is a myth. Wow.

 

[ThePlumTiger66]

First of all, do not put words in my mouth. I never said anything that could even remotely be construed as meaning what you claim I said - quotes and all - in that last line.

I don't have to put words in your mouth.

Your words are right there, for all to see, and your meaning is clear in the context you present it: You condone the murder of an innocent police officer because they haven't suffered like the African American community. It can be excused.


Do yourself a favor and remember what you've said.

Here you go, one time, just to laugh at you. Don't say that I've never try to be accommodating to you. (Delux is going to be jealous.)

When the number of innocent policemen who've been murdered by #BLM protesters is anywhere near the number of innocent Black people who've been murdered by cops, then you can argue that. Until then, you're only demonstrating just why #BLM is so vital.

Until then...

 

[YDB95]

I don't have to put words in your mouth.

Your words are right there, for all to see, and your meaning is clear in the context you present it:

Evidently not, if you're seeing this:

You condone the murder of an innocent police officer because they haven't suffered like the African American community. It can be excused.

Nope. Never said that or anything remotely like that.

Since you brought up context, here is the context of what I did say:
1. PaulieJay pointed out - correctly - that 93% of BLM protests have been nonviolent.
2. You questioned the statistic without showing a scintilla of evidence that it's wrong ("One broken bottle, one person touched...") Perhaps, but you never gave us any reason to believe that 93% nonviolent didn't really mean nonviolent. You just implied that there probably was some violence that they didn't count. If so, you ought to be able to show an example or two. Of course, we now know that when pressed to do that, you just make stuff up.
3. PaulieJay said, "What can I say, there are peaceful protestesters but then there are one or two bad apples but you can't condem the whole thing, ya know." I don't necessarily agree, but that's beside the point. The point is, regardless of how you or I or PaulieJay define "nonviolent", you haven't provided any evidence that the overwhelming majority of BLM protests were not in fact nonviolent.
4. You said, "Until BLM views the women and men of law enforcement with such understanding, just one is enough to convict them all." (Again, you still haven't even provided "just one" example of violence at an ostensibly nonviolent protest!)
5. In response to the ensuing mini-debate over that, I said, "When the number of innocent policemen who've been murdered by #BLM protesters is anywhere near the number of innocent Black people who've been murdered by cops, then you can argue that. Until then, you're only demonstrating just why #BLM is so vital."

In other words, you were arguing in essence that #BLM should just accept that most cops are decent human beings and look the other way on the epidemic of often-fatal police brutality against blacks. Why? Because there might have been some minor property damage in a protest somewhere that wasn't reported. (I say "minor" because it just doesn't pass the smell test that a substantial amount of damage would be ignored.) Looking past the utter heartlessness of that comment, I pointed out that the obverse has not been happening: Black people have not been murdering cops. I never said anything remotely like condoning violence against cops; my point is that it hasn't been happening. Ergo, it's absurd for you to call for #BLM to look the other way on the violence that really has been happening the other way around. ESPECIALLY if your entire argument is based on the assumption - and it IS an assumption until you provide some evidence - that some non-violent protests weren't really non-violent.

Now, getting back to the core of the issue, where is your evidence that the 93% figure is wrong?

 

[ThePlumTiger66]

Your words damned you.

It doesn't matter how long of a post you wrote to deflect from the fact that you condone the murder of police until everything even.

Here are your words again ... and I'll post your bullshit every time you deny it.

When the number of innocent policemen who've been murdered by #BLM protesters is anywhere near the number of innocent Black people who've been murdered by cops, then you can argue that. Until then, you're only demonstrating just why #BLM is so vital.

[/b]
Evidently not, if you're seeing this:



Nope. Never said that or anything remotely like that.

Since you brought up context, here is the context of what I did say:
1. PaulieJay pointed out - correctly - that 93% of BLM protests have been nonviolent.
2. You questioned the statistic without showing a scintilla of evidence that it's wrong ("One broken bottle, one person touched...") Perhaps, but you never gave us any reason to believe that 93% nonviolent didn't really mean nonviolent. You just implied that there probably was some violence that they didn't count. If so, you ought to be able to show an example or two. Of course, we now know that when pressed to do that, you just make stuff up.
3. PaulieJay said, "What can I say, there are peaceful protestesters but then there are one or two bad apples but you can't condem the whole thing, ya know." I don't necessarily agree, but that's beside the point. The point is, regardless of how you or I or PaulieJay define "nonviolent", you haven't provided any evidence that the overwhelming majority of BLM protests were not in fact nonviolent.
4. You said, "Until BLM views the women and men of law enforcement with such understanding, just one is enough to convict them all." (Again, you still haven't even provided "just one" example of violence at an ostensibly nonviolent protest!)
5. In response to the ensuing mini-debate over that, I said, "When the number of innocent policemen who've been murdered by #BLM protesters is anywhere near the number of innocent Black people who've been murdered by cops, then you can argue that. Until then, you're only demonstrating just why #BLM is so vital."

In other words, you were arguing in essence that #BLM should just accept that most cops are decent human beings and look the other way on the epidemic of often-fatal police brutality against blacks. Why? Because there might have been some minor property damage in a protest somewhere that wasn't reported. (I say "minor" because it just doesn't pass the smell test that a substantial amount of damage would be ignored.) Looking past the utter heartlessness of that comment, I pointed out that the obverse has not been happening: Black people have not been murdering cops. I never said anything remotely like condoning violence against cops; my point is that it hasn't been happening. Ergo, it's absurd for you to call for #BLM to look the other way on the violence that really has been happening the other way around. ESPECIALLY if your entire argument is based on the assumption - and it IS an assumption until you provide some evidence - that some non-violent protests weren't really non-violent.

Now, getting back to the core of the issue, where is your evidence that the 93% figure is wrong?

What is this "non-violent" attempt at deflection you're talking about?

We're talking about violence.

You may as well start posting about your favorite TV shows if you think stating "non-violent" protest will save you.

 

[Lazaran]

.
I have yet to find a single killing of a police officer where the perp was proved to be a member of BLM. Even Micah Johnson, the notorious Dallas sniper was not found to be affiliated with BLM. He did support the new Black Panther party, so if people want to point fingers, at least point them at the correct group. The pattern I've seen developing, is opportunistic violence and looting by outside actors during or after peaceful BLM protests.

To compare BLM to the historic record of police use of extreme prejudice is laughable. Things have only improved over the past 60 years because groups like BLM have protested the racial bias in law enforcement and other institutions.

Holding BLM accountable for what some non-affiliated member of the public does is ridiculous. Holding the institution of law enforcement responsible for the action of its members is quite appropriate.

To conflate the two is beyond apples to oranges. It's an obvious attempt at deflection and distraction.

SAD!!!

 

[KeithD]

.
I have yet to find a single killing of a police officer where the perp was proved to be a member of BLM. Even Micah Johnson, the notorious Dallas sniper was not found to be affiliated with BLM. He did support the new Black Panther party, so if people want to point fingers, at least point them at the correct group. The pattern I've seen developing, is opportunistic violence and looting by outside actors during or after peaceful BLM protests.

To compare BLM to the historic record of police use of extreme prejudice is laughable. Things have only improved over the past 60 years because groups like BLM have protested the racial bias in law enforcement and other institutions.

Holding BLM accountable for what some non-affiliated member of the public does is ridiculous. Holding the institution of law enforcement responsible for the action of its members is quite appropriate.

To conflate the two is beyond apples to oranges. It's an obvious attempt at deflection and distraction.

SAD!!!

We don't need no facts to stir up our dumb base.

 

[ThePlumTiger66]

Are you stupid, or just an asshole?

.
I have yet to find a single killing of a police officer where the perp was proved to be a member of BLM. Even Micah Johnson, the notorious Dallas sniper was not found to be affiliated with BLM. He did support the new Black Panther party, so if people want to point fingers, at least point them at the correct group. The pattern I've seen developing, is opportunistic violence and looting by outside actors during or after peaceful BLM protests.

To compare BLM to the historic record of police use of extreme prejudice is laughable. Things have only improved over the past 60 years because groups like BLM have protested the racial bias in law enforcement and other institutions.

Holding BLM accountable for what some non-affiliated member of the public does is ridiculous. Holding the institution of law enforcement responsible for the action of its members is quite appropriate.

To conflate the two is beyond apples to oranges. It's an obvious attempt at deflection and distraction.

SAD!!!

 

[butters]

i heard that claudia conway (kellyanne's 15 year old daughter) had given up the news about her mother's infected state on tik tok.. but i didn't know she'd also said this:

Before former White House aide Kellyanne Conway could admit to a positive COVID-19 test following the event, one of her children shared their suspicions on TikTok. Conway’s 15-year-old daughter Claudia Conway posted a video Friday following Trump’s announcement that her mother was “coughing all around the house.” In another post hours later she announced that her mom tested positive for COVID-19, followed by another video with her feelings about it. “im furious. wear your masks. dont listen to our idiot fucking president piece of shit. protect yourself and those around you,” the video caption read.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...istleblower-of-our-time?utm_campaign=trending

 

[butters]

i can't imagine why she'd be cross about it...

 

[JackLuis]

Superspreader Trump events have now infected 34 people affiliated with White House: report

Yet more coronavirus infections linked to the White House were reported on Wednesday, shortly before the vice presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Mike Pence.

“The coronavirus outbreak has infected ’34 White House staffers and other contacts’ in recent days, according to an internal government memo, an indication that the disease has spread among more people than previous known in the seat of American government,” ABC News reported Wednesday.