I think he’s going for self-awareness if I had to guess.What am I missing?
I think he’s going for self-awareness if I had to guess.What am I missing?
What am I missing?
You are not "without sin" when it comes to villifying Trump because you don't agree with/like him. That's all I was getting at.
I thought it was obvious, but the point of the post you quoted was vilifying someone over a FALSE claim. I have not done such with Donald Trump. All my vilification is based in fact. There IS a difference.
I would qualify that as “assumed facts”. You often deconstuct things into unsubstantiated fantasies, IMHO.
I would say that some of your villification is based in fact (facts you don't agree with/like, obviously, and that's fine). Some of the villifiation has been based on more subjective criteria (ie. you just don't like the man - also fine, but to pretend that the villification is solely based on fact is disingenuous IMHO). I also agree that most people do this, myself included. Your post just seemed to indicate that you are somehow above this. As jamil said, it was to do with self-awareness.I thought it was obvious, but the point of the post you quoted was vilifying someone over a FALSE claim. I have not done such with Donald Trump. All my vilification is based in fact. There IS a difference.
I'd ask for an example, but I know better. It's one of the things I have grown to understand "if you say something about Kut, there's no need to provide a cite, as it will simply be accepted as true."
I'd ask for an example, but I know better. It's one of the things I have grown to understand "if you say something about Kut, there's no need to provide a cite, as it will simply be accepted as true."
You mean like his sheets and hood comment about Trump? Or that INGO would become Stormfront Lite without the staff to keep us in check?I would qualify that as “assumed facts”. You often deconstuct things into unsubstantiated fantasies, IMHO.
Playing the victim and referring to himself in 3rd person. Interesting.Found it.
From what ive read this is not new. The supreme court ruled in 1997 that immigrant children cannot be help in detention centers like the adults so these shelters were established. So by my reading on this supreme court decision we can stop blaming Trump.
Well there you go. Why does't the media simply say this? Why haven't they?
Oooh, You can expect to get talked down to pretty harshlyFIFY
Oooh, You can expect to get talked down to pretty harshly
Well, I hope you don't end up getting banned.I wouldn't expect any other type of response.
We don’t have to take the agents kids, we only need to surround their schools and scare the **** out of them and worry the **** out of the agents frm CBE ICE & REGULAR BORDER PATROL AGENTS. WE NEED TO SCARE THE **** OUT OF THEM! NEED TO MAKE THEIR CHILDREN WORRY NOW. WE SHOULD HACK THIS SYSTEM, GET THE ADDRESSES OF THE ICE AGENTS CBP AGENTS AND SURROUND THEIR HOMES IN PROTEST. WE SHOULD FIND OUT WHAT SCHOOLS THEIR CHILDREN GO TO AND SURROUND THE SCHOOLS IN PROTEST. THESE AGENTS ARE DOING THIS CUZ THEY WANT TO DO IT. THEY LIKE DOING THIS. ****
Found it.
You mean like his sheets and hood comment about Trump? Or that INGO would become Stormfront Lite without the staff to keep us in check?
I thought I saw in another thread that you said you don't play the victim. I could be wrong...
Sorry, but this gets tiresome.
Oooh, You can expect to get talked down to pretty harshly