America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 5 years ago by Speyside. 204 replies replies.
5 Pages<12345>
This is unacceptable!
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
tailgater Offline
#51 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 11:16 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
If you can't tell the difference between "discrimination" due to a person doing or saying something stupid, and "discrimination" due to being born a different race, sexuality... Then maybe you shouldn't be having adult discussions.

Hell, people are even given a pass on their religion in civil rights protections... Something I don't think belongs, since it's a choice they make.


So it's OK to ban the muslims?
tailgater Offline
#52 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 11:24 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
HuckFinn wrote:
Stopped reading after "The left.."


Then you missed it.

Had something to do with putting your foot in and shaking it all about.

Don't worry.
It was pretty hokey.
tailgater Offline
#53 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 11:28 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:


For what it's worth, my first comment was in regard to tail... Who always wants to pretend righty is being discriminated against....


Not even close to being accurate.

I don't care if righty is discriminated against.

I simply point out the media bias and hypocrisy.

Didn't mean to ruffle your feathers.
Or is that a boa?
HuckFinn Offline
#54 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 11:31 AM EST
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
tailgater wrote:
Then you missed it.

Had something to do with putting your foot in and shaking it all about.

Don't worry.
It was pretty hokey.


Stopped reading after "Then.."
delta1 Offline
#55 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 12:18 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
tailgater wrote:
Then you missed it.

Had something to do with putting your foot in and shaking it all about.

Don't worry.
It was pretty hokey.



there you go again, pokey...
RMAN4443 Offline
#56 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 12:41 PM EST
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
delta1 wrote:
there you go again, pokey...

I'm Gumby damnit!!!!!Anxious
victor809 Offline
#57 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 12:42 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Tail... If it were applied "evenly" I wouldn't care that much about religion. I consider religion to be a choice, just like choosing to be a neonazi or any other choice people make. I don't personally see a difference between a religious person and an individual who stubbornly refuses to understand logical arguments,and as such says or does stupid and possibly damaging things because of it. In fact, that description can fit all religions and the trump talking heads.

However, our constitution protects religions in the same way it protects races. (Hell, it protected religion before it cared about women or brown people)... As long as it's in our constitution, then we have to protect religions and we have to do it in a manner that provide the same freedom to everyone.

If you want to take that out of the constitution... Just change it to something like "you want to be religious? You're on your own... If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough! " Then I'll support your movement. But till then, I support the fair and equitable application of our laws.
HuckFinn Offline
#58 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 1:18 PM EST
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
victor809 wrote:
Tail... If it were applied "evenly" I wouldn't care that much about religion. I consider religion to be a choice, just like choosing to be a neonazi or any other choice people make. I don't personally see a difference between a religious person and an individual who stubbornly refuses to understand logical arguments,and as such says or does stupid and possibly damaging things because of it. In fact, that description can fit all religions and the trump talking heads.

However, our constitution protects religions in the same way it protects races. (Hell, it protected religion before it cared about women or brown people)... As long as it's in our constitution, then we have to protect religions and we have to do it in a manner that provide the same freedom to everyone.

If you want to take that out of the constitution... Just change it to something like "you want to be religious? You're on your own... If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough! " Then I'll support your movement. But till then, I support the fair and equitable application of our laws.


Don't entirely agree that people choose their religion. Kids sure don't.
And if you grow up in a strictly orthodox family/community the odds are you're inescapingly locked in for life.
Even intelligent people. Only a small percentage ever break with 'tradition' statistically.

Somewhere along the line I think it becomes permanently embedded .
No escape. No choice. And no difference between that level of brainwashing and skin color imo.

Just my take.
tailgater Offline
#59 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 4:37 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Tail... If it were applied "evenly" I wouldn't care that much about religion. I consider religion to be a choice, just like choosing to be a neonazi or any other choice people make. I don't personally see a difference between a religious person and an individual who stubbornly refuses to understand logical arguments,and as such says or does stupid and possibly damaging things because of it. In fact, that description can fit all religions and the trump talking heads.

However, our constitution protects religions in the same way it protects races. (Hell, it protected religion before it cared about women or brown people)... As long as it's in our constitution, then we have to protect religions and we have to do it in a manner that provide the same freedom to everyone.

If you want to take that out of the constitution... Just change it to something like "you want to be religious? You're on your own... If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough! " Then I'll support your movement. But till then, I support the fair and equitable application of our laws.





You used the term "religion" when referring to what you feel is just a stupid choice that should be fair game for discrimination.

What you meant to say was "Christianity".

Stop being obtuse.

tailgater Offline
#60 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 4:38 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I think I used obtuse wrong.

Somebody correct me, please.

Thank you.
HuckFinn Offline
#61 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 5:38 PM EST
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
I find it amusing that Huckabee praised the Supreme Court's decision to allow the baker to refuse the gay couple their cake but is upset that a restaurant refused her service.

Was it an all-you-can-eat?
DrafterX Offline
#62 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 5:51 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
So, turns out Sarah and her husband returned to their room after the assault but the rest of her family proceeded to another restaurant... The manager of the Gay Hen and her LTBJ employees followed and continued to assault the family even tho Sarah wasn't there...
That's some serious hate... Mellow
HuckFinn Offline
#63 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 5:59 PM EST
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
DrafterX wrote:
So, turns out Sarah and her husband returned to their room after the assault but the rest of her family proceeded to another restaurant... The manager of the Gay Hen and her LTBJ employees followed and continued to assault the family even tho Sarah wasn't there...
That's some serious hate... Mellow

So, room service?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#64 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 6:20 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,394
HuckFinn wrote:
I find it amusing that Huckabee praised the Supreme Court's decision to allow the baker to refuse the gay couple their cake but is upset that a restaurant refused her service.




When are you ever going to fully understand the truth?

The baker refused to decorate a cake the way they wanted...he didn't refuse them a cake. He offered them several. Because he was an "artist" and didn't like what they wanted to do he simply refused. The Supreme Court backed his play. Why? Because they were seeking out someone to tear down and appear like they were victimized.

Sarah went to a public restaurant and didn't order some special item...nor to have it served by some special whim. She was targeted because of her employment. Let that sink in.

The Left is in full unhinged mode and the middle is eroding out from under them. The Left will be people like you and Waters bleeting in the wind.
victor809 Offline
#65 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 6:40 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Ah yes tail.... Your famous "I know what you are thinking better than you do" technique.

As long as you are convinced that you know what a person is thinking or meaning better than they do, it is impossible to have a worthwhile discussion with you.

I meant exactly what I said. Now go play with someone who will tolerate that sort of bs.
MACS Offline
#66 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 7:14 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
tailgater wrote:
I think I used obtuse wrong.

Somebody correct me, please.

Thank you.



Depends. Do you think he's doing it deliberately, or do you think he's just slow-witted? If you think he's doing it deliberately, you used it incorrectly. If you think he's just stupid... you used it right.
MACS Offline
#67 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 7:16 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
victor809 wrote:
Ah yes tail.... Your famous "I know what you are thinking better than you do" technique.

As long as you are convinced that you know what a person is thinking or meaning better than they do, it is impossible to have a worthwhile discussion with you.

I meant exactly what I said. Now go play with someone who will tolerate that sort of bs.


Victor... you do that sh*t all the time, here.
victor809 Offline
#68 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 7:32 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
... I'm gonna have to ask for proof on that MACS.

Find me an equivalent to tails "when you say religion is a stupid choice you really just mean Christianity".
victor809 Offline
#69 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 7:34 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
And deliberately or non-deliberately he used the word obtuse correctly.
In the event that it was deliberate, you would say "deliberately obtuse" but not pointing that out is still acceptable.

MACS Offline
#70 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 7:49 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
victor809 wrote:
... I'm gonna have to ask for proof on that MACS.

Find me an equivalent to tails "when you say religion is a stupid choice you really just mean Christianity".



Proof? Check your profile history, bro. You've done that crap to me a few times... either by putting words in my mouth or by extrapolating my meaning with your own thoughts. If you say you haven't... you're a liar. You have... and not just to me.
victor809 Offline
#71 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:00 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
If it's that easy then provide a link.
tailgater Offline
#72 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:16 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Ah yes tail.... Your famous "I know what you are thinking better than you do" technique.

As long as you are convinced that you know what a person is thinking or meaning better than they do, it is impossible to have a worthwhile discussion with you.

I meant exactly what I said. Now go play with someone who will tolerate that sort of bs.


Dude.
If I want to converse with a liar I'll head down to the car dealership.

You were very pleased with yourself when you said it's OK to lump "religion" into the category of "choice" and therefore it's OK to discriminate.
Then the very obvious slapped you in the face.
Muslim.

You KNOW it's not OK to discriminate against a Muslim.
But isn't that a choice?

So it's obvious to everyone what you meant.
If you think otherwise, then I'll modify it: Obvious to everyone but you.

No mind reading necessary.
But nice misdirection.
Half a point for that.
Otherwise: Fail
Epicly
tailgater Offline
#73 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:20 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
And deliberately or non-deliberately he used the word obtuse correctly.
In the event that it was deliberate, you would say "deliberately obtuse" but not pointing that out is still acceptable.



Don't give me too much credit.

I used the word.
Then I felt it may have been used wrong.

Nothing deliberate on my part.
tailgater Offline
#74 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:24 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
MACS wrote:
Depends. Do you think he's doing it deliberately, or do you think he's just slow-witted? If you think he's doing it deliberately, you used it incorrectly. If you think he's just stupid... you used it right.


Ohhhh.

Victor is a lot of things, but not slow witted.
I felt he was obfuscating quite deliberately. But there's another word that I wanted to use.

It'll come to me.
Or Frank will save the day.
he's good wif words.
HuckFinn Offline
#75 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:26 PM EST
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
DrMaddVibe wrote:
When are you ever going to fully understand the truth?

The baker refused to decorate a cake the way they wanted...he didn't refuse them a cake. He offered them several. Because he was an "artist" and didn't like what they wanted to do he simply refused. The Supreme Court backed his play. Why? Because they were seeking out someone to tear down and appear like they were victimized.

Sarah went to a public restaurant and didn't order some special item...nor to have it served by some special whim. She was targeted because of her employment. Let that sink in.

The Left is in full unhinged mode and the middle is eroding out from under them. The Left will be people like you and Waters bleeting in the wind.

Guess the irony is lost on someone like you...

Talk about being unhinged! LOL...do you hear yourself???
*dumb question*

Both businesses had the same right to refuse. "No soup for you!" Seinfeld?
No lines were crossed.

You're so freaking unhinged yours is the only voice you can hear. Why address anyone, me?

So, in the future, if you're go off on some "the left..."rant, direct it to someone who gives a ****.
tailgater Offline
#76 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:40 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
HuckFinn wrote:
Guess the irony is lost on someone like you...

Talk about being unhinged! LOL...do you hear yourself???
*dumb question*

Both businesses had the same right to refuse. "No soup for you!" Seinfeld?
No lines were crossed.

You're so freaking unhinged yours is the only voice you can hear. Why address anyone, me?

So, in the future, if you're go off on some "the left..."rant, direct it to someone who gives a ****.




You really don't see the difference, do you?

Wow.
Talk about partisan blindness.
frankj1 Offline
#77 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:43 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
tailgater wrote:
Ohhhh.

Victor is a lot of things, but not slow witted.
I felt he was obfuscating quite deliberately. But there's another word that I wanted to use.

It'll come to me.
Or Frank will save the day.
he's good wif words.



coy? he was being coy?
MACS Offline
#78 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:44 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
victor809 wrote:
If it's that easy then provide a link.


You know it. I know it. The whole damn board knows it. I'm not going to waste time digging through old posts here. The search function sucks. But rest assured... if I come across an example, I'll be sure to top it.
tailgater Offline
#79 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 8:46 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
coy? he was being coy?


No.

Keep at it.
frankj1 Offline
#80 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 9:32 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
less than honest?
He was being less than honest?
Speyside Offline
#81 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 9:46 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Disingenuous, quiddling, pretentious?
frankj1 Offline
#82 Posted: Mon, Jun 25 2018, 10:21 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
I was trying to use little words that tail might recognize.
victor809 Offline
#83 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 12:55 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Dude.
If I want to converse with a liar I'll head down to the car dealership.

You were very pleased with yourself when you said it's OK to lump "religion" into the category of "choice" and therefore it's OK to discriminate.
Then the very obvious slapped you in the face.
Muslim.

You KNOW it's not OK to discriminate against a Muslim.
But isn't that a choice?

So it's obvious to everyone what you meant.
If you think otherwise, then I'll modify it: Obvious to everyone but you.

No mind reading necessary.
But nice misdirection.
Half a point for that.
Otherwise: Fail
Epicly



Perhaps english isn't your first language?

I didn't say it was "ok to lump religion into the category of choice and therefore it's ok to discriminate"...

I said I DO lump religion into the category of choice, but our laws state that we do not discriminate against religion.

You seem to think you got some "gotcha" with muslims..... I consider islam to be a choice... it isn't acceptable to discriminate against them any more than against a christian or a buddhist. I don't necessarily think that's a great law, as I believe ALL religions to be a choice. But that's the law and it must be applied evenly.

I am typing in english, I don't see how this is something you are having trouble understanding.

victor809 Offline
#84 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 12:57 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
MACS wrote:
You know it. I know it. The whole damn board knows it. I'm not going to waste time digging through old posts here. The search function sucks. But rest assured... if I come across an example, I'll be sure to top it.


Dude... you post all the time about how you're so sexually attracted to me that you can't stop touching yourself.

You know it, I know it. The whole damn board knows it. I'm not going to wste time digging through old posts here. The search function sucks. But rest assured.... you definitely post it ALL THE TIME.
Ewok126 Offline
#85 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 5:27 AM EST
Joined: 06-25-2017
Posts: 4,356
Sarah Sanders Huckabee?

I think shes hawt! That double chin, man I bet she could chug a c0ck like nobody's business. It gives me a chubby just thinking about it.

Give that poor woman another triple burger with extra cheese and stop the hate!

The more chins shes got the less space I got to fill when the time comes. As they say, the grand canyon is tight if you pack enough meat into it! Herfing jester
DrMaddVibe Offline
#86 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 7:21 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,394
tailgater wrote:
You really don't see the difference, do you?

Wow.
Talk about partisan blindness.





Even when shown the truth he backpedals his tricycle to his safe spot. Fools.
tailgater Offline
#87 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 8:09 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Perhaps english isn't your first language?

I didn't say it was "ok to lump religion into the category of choice and therefore it's ok to discriminate"...

I said I DO lump religion into the category of choice, but our laws state that we do not discriminate against religion.

You seem to think you got some "gotcha" with muslims..... I consider islam to be a choice... it isn't acceptable to discriminate against them any more than against a christian or a buddhist. I don't necessarily think that's a great law, as I believe ALL religions to be a choice. But that's the law and it must be applied evenly.

I am typing in english, I don't see how this is something you are having trouble understanding.



Oh.

So you DO it.
But it's not OK.

No habla.
victor809 Offline
#88 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 9:32 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
If you don't understand the statement, perhaps you should use the non-english speaking cbid discussion forum....


It's gonna be on the other side of that wall over there....
JadeRose Offline
#89 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 10:40 AM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
Her eyes are too close together and one wanders a bit. She shouldn't be out in public anyway. No one should have to look at that.



and Drafter is ugly, too.
DrafterX Offline
#90 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 10:59 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
that's how TW described you... Mellow
victor809 Offline
#91 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 11:21 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Jade... Don't stoop to the same level we see from conservative critics regarding women.

Her skill as a press secretary has nothing to do with her looks. We shouldn't judge her looks. We don't make the same comments about the ancient decrepit men who are on both sides of the aisle.

Criticisms of her should focus on the horrendous damage she has done to the credibility of the office and the press briefings, and her gaslighting of the American people.
JadeRose Offline
#92 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 11:28 AM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
Ugly has nothing to do with sex. Drafter is ugly, too. No one wants to see that either. Just trying to keep America aesthetically pleasing.
tailgater Offline
#93 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 11:30 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Jade... Don't stoop to the same level we see from conservative critics regarding women.

Her skill as a press secretary has nothing to do with her looks. We shouldn't judge her looks. We don't make the same comments about the ancient decrepit men who are on both sides of the aisle.

Criticisms of her should focus on the horrendous damage she has done to the credibility of the office and the press briefings, and her gaslighting of the American people.


So that's why you never mocked Trumps appearance...


Consistency is key.
You seem to have a new calling card every day.

And let's face it.
Her eyes scare the hell outta me.
DrafterX Offline
#94 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 11:40 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
She's give Fred Sanford alot to talk about... Mellow
tailgater Offline
#95 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 11:45 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Mmmm.
Cookies.
victor809 Offline
#96 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 11:55 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
I call him the orange moron.
I've probably made fun of his hair.
I believe I also pointed out he was probably a lot fatter than his Dr claimed.

I admit I occasionally make fun of a politicians looks... I laughed when people pointed out mcconnel looks like a turtle.

But I specifically don't do it to female politicians because we have too many years of history of valuing women solely by their looks. Falling back on appearance when criticizing female politicians is a cheap and easy attack and shows a lack of creativity.

We don't care if a male politician is attractive (even if we mock his orangeness or vanity weave of hair)... But people like to post about how attractive their sides female talking heads are compared to the other side... Or how attractive their sides female congresspeople are compared to the other side. Which means they are still valuing female appearance for a job which does not require men to be attractive.

Society has a double standard in place. That will lead to inconsistencies. When people stop pretending a female politician's appearance is somehow relevant then I'll probably stop criticizing people for being lazy and falling back on that attack.
JadeRose Offline
#97 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 12:03 PM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
Jesus, Vic. Settle down. Did you forget where you are? I give no **** about her looks. She's a turd that should be flushed like the rest of her ilk. I was just looking for an excuse to abuse Drafter.


Trust me, I'm equal opportunity in my dislike of political figures.
JadeRose Offline
#98 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 12:05 PM EST
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
I edited my original post to make you happy and be inclusive.
HuckFinn Offline
#99 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 12:13 PM EST
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
victor809 wrote:
Jade... Don't stoop to the same level we see from conservative critics regarding women.

Her skill as a press secretary has nothing to do with her looks. We shouldn't judge her looks. We don't make the same comments about the ancient decrepit men who are on both sides of the aisle.

Criticisms of her should focus on the horrendous damage she has done to the credibility of the office and the press briefings, and her gaslighting of the American people.



Vic, she's just a regurgitater with a big mortgage.
She's "just following orders"

Personally, I feel bad for her. What a horrible gig.
victor809 Offline
#100 Posted: Tue, Jun 26 2018, 12:46 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Just following orders... Nothing good ever was explained with "just following orders"...

I don't feel bad for her. She can leave the job at any time.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages<12345>
Back to Top