I never google Victor's vocabulary... 🤐

DrafterX wrote:

So we'll ignore the original post and twist it to suit your discussion points.

I never said anyone rejected anyone.

Here's the point in a nutshell:
The supposed haters gave Jenner less flack then the supposed embracers did.

Didn't mean to upset yours and Victors ghey-meter, but this isn't about lifestyle.

tailgater wrote:

Well, if you want to characterize a whole group of people, liberals, conservatives, I hardly think isolated incident characterizes anyone. I mean it is hardly condemns liberals as a group - bad apples not withstanding.

But I reckon the crux of the biscuit is that you believe that liberals are hypocritical and probably disingenuous people. As a group. On average. Typically. So, is your point that some liberals are bad, or a that liberals are bad?

Brewha wrote:

I'm a lib, I'm good. and Joe likes me.


not that way, you sickos.

frankj1 wrote:

😊

tailgater wrote:

Wow.

I didn't say, nor imply, that any one group was bad.
You tell me not to generalize, but then you post this?

tailgater wrote:

I was trying to make you look good...

frankj1 wrote:

And on a close read, you will find that I was asking you if you really thought Liberals were bad as a group.

So I can assume that feel that liberals are as good and fine as conservatives. An if you see and incident of them acting poorly, that is just an isolated incident.

I mean some of your best friends are liberal, right?

Brewha wrote:

I was trying to make you look good...

frankj1 wrote:

Frank and TG sitting in a tree.....

o:)

Brewha wrote:

Tell me when you're finished on this tangent so we can discuss what were earlier in the thread.

tailgater wrote:

Ha!

That last line coming from a guy who says it is night, when it is day.

King of the tangental contradictions.

Your crown, your majesty....

teddyballgame wrote:

This isn't a tangent. Your theme of this post is that Jenner isn't getting crap from Republicans for being trans, but is getting crap from LGBT people for being republican.

I simply pointed out that no group, no matter how accepting the say they will be about some things, is ever accepting of all "ideas" nor should they be. It's childish to use the excuse "they are supposed to be all accepting, so they should accept this idea"... Not all ideas are good. Some are just dumb (like the idea of being accepting of all ideas, or the idea that you can get HepC from your shoes)... some are truly harmful (like the idea that one racial group is inferior to another, or that trump will make a good president). To feign shock that a group which does not say anywhere that it accepting of all ideas, would not be accepting of an idea... is disingenuous.

But you knew that going into this thread. You just wanted to argue.

victor809 wrote:

I'm neither unreasonable nor angry.
You said in your first post that we hear liberals or LGBT or whoever is "more inclusive"... Then you decided to poke fun at that idea by pointing out they are not being inclusive of one being Republican.

I'm merely pointing out that your initial argument, that liberals or LGBT are supposed to be more inclusive, is too much a blanket statement to really be accurate. Without that fundamental argument in place (teddyballs strawman he's so badly wanted) the rest of the argument falls to the wayside. I don't think I had given your post much thought... Inaccurate but not really I'll intentioned... I only got involved when you wanted to dig in on the idea that libs accept anyone.

victor809 wrote: