Shots fired at GOP Congressional baseball practice

[agent00f]

WTF is wrong with you to equate anything I've said as evidence of my defending "self-avowed race realists" (your words not mine) Seriously motherfucker explain exactly how you can logically use anything I've said is evident of what you are saying? Why even quote my post when your reply has nothing to do with it or the question I posed to you?

It's a simple matter of fact that you & Jaskalas sorts make a choice of whom to disparage, and it's clear as day you always choose libtards pointing out the truth of the matter as this very sentence does, as opposed to the very long list of objectively terrible people you largely identify with. They are enabled by your actions, and your lot know this all too well which is rather why you'll persist no matter how obvious the consequences. In fact I'll make this plain as day: you'll never in your life talk shit about all those 2nd amendment "watering the tree of liberty" peers by themselves, but then of course come in here pretending to be stricken by watering of that tree and it's only "fair and balanced" that libtards are equally bad and so on.

Playing dumb about this trivial factual reality only works with the most naive of libtards.

 

[davmat787]

It's a simple matter of fact that you & Jaskalas sorts make a choice of whom to disparage, and it's clear as day you always choose libtards pointing out the truth of the matter as this very sentence does, as opposed to the very long list of objectively terrible people you largely identify with. They are enabled by your actions, and your lot know this all too well which is rather why you'll persist no matter how obvious the consequences.

Playing dumb about this trivial reality only works with the most naive of libtards.

But what you're suggesting goes against exactly what I'm saying and anyone with basic word comprehension can see that. Either I haven't clearly explained myself or more likely you're simply not interested in legitimate and honest discourse, and instead posting baseless accusations of racism. That's such an old trick in this forum and everyone sees right through it and as evidence of your increasing douche baggery which appears to have no limits.

Damnit I'm going to sound like Moonie but you're behavior and rhetoric is exactly what you purport to see as justification for the shooting of Scalise as well as future violence. As I said earlier violence from the political extremism on the left and right is two sides of the same coin, both symptomatic of the same disease. Those of us in between the two extremes have far more in common than not.

 

[agent00f]

But what you're suggesting goes against exactly what I'm saying. Either I haven't clearly explained myself or more likely you're simply not interested in legitimate and honest discourse, and instead posting baseless accusations of racism. That's such an old trick in this forum and everyone sees right through it and as evidence of your increasing douche baggery which appears to have no limits.

I'll make this plain as day: you'll never in your life talk shit about all those 2nd amendment "watering the tree of liberty" peers by themselves or the actual racists, etc, but then of course come in here pretending to be stricken by watering of that tree and it's only "fair and balanced" that libtards are equally bad and you're the Real honest operator and so on.

You're literally the picture perfect posterchild of absolute conservative degeneracy.

 

[davmat787]

I'll make this plain as day: you'll never in your life talk shit about all those 2nd amendment "watering the tree of liberty" peers by themselves or the actual racists, etc, but then of course come in here pretending to be stricken by watering of that tree and it's only "fair and balanced" that libtards are equally bad and you're the Real honest operator and so on.

You're literally the picture perfect posterchild of absolute conservative degeneracy.

WTF is wrong with you? You couldn't be more wrong in your assumptions and accusations of me. Only a fucking idiot would think a few forum posts is evidence of what you accuse.

You're not interested in honest discourse, instead content to be a troll with your.feable and baseless accusations. I'm not interested in any further exchange with you as it's completely transparent and been seen coming a million times before. What would be really pathetic is if you really believe in what you're posting.

Your words have no life experience behind them, that is apparent as well.

 

[agent00f]

WTF is wrong with you? You couldn't be more wrong in your assumptions and accusations of me. Only a fucking idiot would think a few forum posts is evidence of what you accuse.

You're not interested in honest discourse, instead content to be a troll with your.feable and baseless accusations. I'm not interested in any further exchange with you as it's completely transparent and been seen coming a million times before. What would be really pathetic is if you really believe in what you're posting.

Let's be very empirical and count up the number of times you or Jaskalas have chosen to say anything bad about the Rand Paul/chucky/roflmouth types (shouldn't take too long to count to ~zero), vs the number of times you & him have tried to mouth off about the people pointing this out in this thread alone.

I'm sure you've suddenly become far too dumb to understand what's being said here through all that fake indignation, just like all your peers who also reliably play dumb to absolve responsibility from the consequences of their objectively evil behavior.

 

[davmat787]

Let's be very empirical and count up the number of times you or Jaskalas have chosen to say anything bad about the Rand Paul/chucky/roflmouth types (shouldn't take too long to count to ~zero) and compare against the number of times you try to talk shit about the people pointing this out in this thread alone.

I'm sure you've suddenly become far too dumb to understand what's being said here through all that fake indignation.

You use the word empirical and go on to make an assumption in the same sentence and as your data? You're a fucking clown!

Even if the answer is zero that proves nothing idiot. A lack of something is not empirical (your word again) evidence. It's not my responsibility to meet your bullshit threshold. Just because someone hasn't posted on subjects X, Y, and Z (which you just subjectively defind) is not evidence of their position on the subjects. Everyone knows this. You're mental gymnastics are lame and boring and all too easily shot down.

 

[agent00f]

Even if the answer is zero that proves nothing idiot. A lack of something is not empirical (your word again) evidence. It's not my responsibility to meet your bullshit threshold. Just because someone hasn't posted on subjects X, Y, and Z (which you just subjectively defind) is not evidence of their position on the subjects. Everyone knows this. You're mental gymnastics are lame and boring and all too easily shot down.

The lack of something is very much empirical evidence, for example your lack of any moral scruples is plain evidence of underlying degeneracy. People for whom virtue means something simply don't act the way you do.

Speaking of psychology, that of the self-interest here can't be more obvious. It's very much in your/Jaskalas/et al's interests to carry water for their peers no matter how empirically evil, because their votes are useful in a democratic society. Get in good with the 2nd amendment violence folks & so on by diverting blame to them libtards, and maybe they'll help lower your taxes slightly and whatnot, that's all there is to it beneath all the fake rationalization.

 

[davmat787]

The lack of something is very much empirical evidence, for example your lack of any moral scruples is plain evidence of underlying degeneracy. People for whom virtue means something simply don't act the way you do.

Speaking of psychology, that of the self-interest here can't be more obvious. It's very much in your/Jaskalas/et al's interests to carry water for their peers no matter how empirically evil, because their votes are useful in a democratic society. Get in good with the 2nd amendment violence folks & so on by diverting blame to them libtards, and maybe they'll help lower your taxes slightly and whatnot, that's all there is to it beneath all the fake rationalization.

So the lack BLM movement isn't concerned with all lives or white lives too but that doesn't equate to racism or a lack of caring of all lives asshole. The burden to meet you're just defined threshold isn't on me and no one other than a total idiot would think their arbitrary threshold somehow is evidence for anything.

If you knew the reality and background of who you're baselessly accusing of racism you'd be thoroughly embarrassed, that is if you had any shame. All these baseless accusations of racism coming from all over the place online cheapens real racism and thus part of the problem, that is you are part of the problem.

 

[agent00f]

So the lack BLM movement isn't concerned with all lives or white lives too but that doesn't equate to racism or a lack of caring of all lives asshole. The burden to meet you're just defined threshold isn't on me and no one other than a total idiot would think their arbitrary threshold somehow is evidence for anything.

If you knew the reality and background of who you're baselessly accusing of racism you'd be thoroughly embarrassed, that is if you had any shame. All these baseless accusations of racism coming from all over the place online cheapens real racism and thus part of the problem, that is you are part of the problem.

Let's be very clear, fiscal conservatives would probably bring back slavery or at least segregation if it meant saving enough on their taxes, which is exactly the reason for their courtship of dixiecrats after the latter got kicked out of the democratic party. It's a very straightforward transactional exchange of political interests. Same as for the 2A shitheads and so on. To be absolutely crystal, that doesn't mean you're racist or violent, you just carry water for their cause in exchange for some financial gain.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

@davmat787...it's pretty clear that agent00f has mental health issues. Just saying.

 

[agent00f]

@davmat787...it's pretty clear that agent00f has mental health issues. Just saying.

No great surprise that Doc Savage Fan and davmat787 agree with our resident klansman on that matter and most all others.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

No great surprise that Doc Savage Fan and davmat787 agree with our resident klansman on that matter and most all others.

Obviously!

Rational thought is not your forte.

 

[agent00f]

Obviously!

Rational thought is not your forte.

It's entirely rational to point out that most all conservatives largely see eye to eye with their peers, since it perfectly explains a host of resulting behavior like water carriage as demonstrated above.

 

[davmat787]

@davmat787...it's pretty clear that agent00f has mental health issues. Just saying.

I've quickly come to the same conclusion, that or your garden variety troll who thinks that after reading a few posts from others he is then qualified to make blanket accusations of racism.

It's such an old and tired form of trolling.

 

[DrunkenSano]

I've quickly come to the same conclusion, that or your garden variety troll who thinks that after reading a few posts from others he is then qualified to make blanket accusations of racism.

It's such an old and tired form of trolling.

Unfortunately you fell for the bait from the troll, you can tell from the majority of threads he posts in that he purposefully derails threads and tries to inject racism into everything. It's his modus operandi.

 

[agent00f]

I've quickly come to the same conclusion, that or your garden variety troll who thinks that after reading a few posts from others he is then qualified to make blanket accusations of racism.

It's such an old and tired form of trolling.

Unfortunately you fell for the bait from the troll, you can tell from the majority of threads he posts in that he purposefully derails threads and tries to inject racism into everything. It's his modus operandi.

I really can't be more prescient. We literally have self-avowed "race realist" members in the thread (aka the klan, ie. those peers you can't criticize any more than trump w/ david duke), and instead your lot & Jaskalas still choose to proclaim BLM or I or liberals in general as the Real racists, and the actual racists are the Real victims no doubt just like here. Hope whatever tax break the GOP is promising will be worth any divine justice for such life choices:

So the lack BLM movement isn't concerned with all lives or white lives too but that doesn't equate to racism or a lack of caring of all lives asshole. The burden to meet you're just defined threshold isn't on me and no one other than a total idiot would think their arbitrary threshold somehow is evidence for anything.

If you knew the reality and background of who you're baselessly accusing of racism you'd be thoroughly embarrassed, that is if you had any shame. All these baseless accusations of racism coming from all over the place online cheapens real racism and thus part of the problem, that is you are part of the problem.

 

[Meghan54]

From the GAO's Apr. 2017 report on extremist attacks:
http://www.gao.gov/assets/690/684243.pdf

Far right violent extremist attackers are characterized by ECDB as having
beliefs that include some or all of the following:

Fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation);

Anti-global;

Suspicious of centralized federal authority;

Reverent of individual liberty (especially right to own guns; be free of taxes);

Belief in conspiracy theories that involve a grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty;

Belief that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent; and

Belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating
in or supporting the need for paramilitary preparations and training or
survivalism.

In addition, according to the ECDB, many persons having violent extreme
far right views express support for some version of white supremacy, the Ku Klux Klan, and neo-Nazism.

(The ECDB is the U.S. Extremist Crime Database, maintained by National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), at the University of Maryland. START is a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Center of Excellence.)

Since the September 11 attacks, 85 attacks in the United States by violent
extremists—associated with both radical Islamist and far right ideologies—have resulted in 225 fatalities.

Of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far right wing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73 percent) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27 percent). The total number of fatalities is about the same for far right wing violent extremists and radical Islamist violent extremists over the approximately 15-year period (106 and 119,respectively). However, 41 percent of the deaths attributable to radical Islamist violent extremists occurred in a single event—an attack at an Orlando, Florida night club in 2016.

Nice table beginning on Page 29 that details all right wing extremist attacks that resulted in deaths.....all 62 right wing incidents and the associated 106 victims since 9/11 through 11/2015.

 

[dank69]

So the lack BLM movement isn't concerned with all lives or white lives too but that doesn't equate to racism or a lack of caring of all lives asshole. The burden to meet you're just defined threshold isn't on me and no one other than a total idiot would think their arbitrary threshold somehow is evidence for anything.

If you knew the reality and background of who you're baselessly accusing of racism you'd be thoroughly embarrassed, that is if you had any shame. All these baseless accusations of racism coming from all over the place online cheapens real racism and thus part of the problem, that is you are part of the problem.

See, agent isn't actually accusing you of racism. He is just saying you happily look the other way when your peers say racist shit because they are useful idiots to your true cause. But then you had to go and parrot this "BLM are the real racists" shit so even if you are not racist, you're just as ignorant as any racist.

 

[davmat787]

See, agent isn't actually accusing you of racism. He is just saying you happily look the other way when your peers say racist shit because they are useful idiots to your true cause. But then you had to go and parrot this "BLM are the real racists" shit so even if you are not racist, you're just as ignorant as any racist.

You misunderstood my post as agreeing with the BLM as being racist or just as likely my tendency to long windedness rather than brevity clouded my point. I was pointing out the fallacy in such thinking hoping he might see a similar mistake in his thinking. Just as the BLM focuses on black lives and not inclusive of other races is not indicative of racism my not accusing others of racism by posting these accusations isn't indicative of me being racist correct? I don't think one can diagnose racism in someone based on some political forums save for the extreme. Anyway shouting out racism is almost always done in attempt to silence a differing view point or group especially in a forum like this. It's incredibly lazy and I'm not falling for it. I hope all that makes sense and clarifies my post.

And you mention my "true cause". What do you suppose that is? No doubt you have pigeon holed me as something or belonging to some ideology so please share exactly what you think my "true cause" is?

 

[soundforbjt]

I don't know, I don't watch either. What difference does it make? Looks like you're saying her comments are justified. If calling someone out deserves comments like that from an elected official, wow.

How about Democrat Devine who ran for mayor in Rahway, NJ who tweeted #huntgopcongressman and #huntrepublicans. Guess that's ok too. No, not at all violent. Don't condemn it though, go ahead and justify more violence like you already have.

I'm not condoning it. I just find it ridiculous that conservatives are quick to find liberals "guilty" of something they've started. You conservatives really do the victim bit well. Look at tha ad conservatives ran in the Georgia election this week.

 

[dank69]

You misunderstood my post as agreeing with the BLM as being racist or just as likely my tendency to long windedness rather than brevity clouded my point. I was pointing out the fallacy in such thinking hoping he might see a similar mistake in his thinking. Just as the BLM focuses on black lives and not inclusive of other races is not indicative of racism my not accusing others of racism by posting these accusations isn't indicative of me being racist correct? I don't think one can diagnose racism in someone based on some political forums save for the extreme. Anyway shouting out racism is almost always done in attempt to silence a differing view point or group especially in a forum like this. It's incredibly lazy and I'm not falling for it. I hope all that makes sense and clarifies my post.

And you mention my "true cause". What do you suppose that is? No doubt you have pigeon holed me as something or belonging to some ideology so please share exactly what you think my "true cause" is?

That's exactly my point though. You are trying to show that he cannot identify you as a racist simply because you haven't passed some test, but he is not identifying you as a racist. If anything, he is identifying you as a racist enabler, which is clearly not the same thing.

This idea that shouting racism is done to silence a differing point of view is fucking nonsense, by the way. Sure, that can and does happen, but to claim it as "almost always" the case is pure bullshit. In fact, saying that is actually a more clear cut case of trying to silence the opposition in that you are basically dismissing out of hand any accusation of racism as not valid.

As for your true cause, I have no idea what it may be. Agent clearly believes yours to be securing tax cuts for yourself like any other conservative. If I had to guess, my money would be on you claiming "fiscal conservatism" though.

 

[davmat787]

That's exactly my point though. You are trying to show that he cannot identify you as a racist simply because you haven't passed some test, but he is not identifying you as a racist. If anything, he is identifying you as a racist enabler, which is clearly not the same thing.

This idea that shouting racism is done to silence a differing point of view is fucking nonsense, by the way. Sure, that can and does happen, but to claim it as "almost always" the case is pure bullshit. In fact, saying that is actually a more clear cut case of trying to silence the opposition in that you are basically dismissing out of hand any accusation of racism as not valid.

As for your true cause, I have no idea what it may be. Agent clearly believes yours to be securing tax cuts for yourself like any other conservative. If I had to guess, my money would be on you claiming "fiscal conservatism" though.

Well your previous post indicated you had clear knowledge of my supposed "true cause", and used it as proof of a bigger point. But now you admit you have no idea what it is but surely you had something in mind when writing those words?

And who are these (ideological I assume you mean) peers you speak of? I'd love to meet some, especially since I've failed to identify one in my time on this forum. So you're making an awful lot of assumptions, something I thought you were better than based on the whole of your posts as I remember them.

You seem to have labeled me as conservative, as if that can be viewed any more monolithically than the label of liberal. The political spectrum is vast and more nuanced than just those two terms allow for don't you think?

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

I think their point may be that, in a time and place as polarized and rapidly degenerating as today's America, it's worth making it clear that you stand against this sort of thing. The time for silence is long past; we're now at the point where standing by means tacitly agreeing with these people. Get loud in your opposition.

 

[dank69]

Well your previous post indicated you had clear knowledge of my supposed "true cause", and used it as proof of a bigger point. But now you admit you have no idea what it is but surely you had something in mind when writing those words?

And who are these (ideological I assume you mean) peers you speak of? I'd love to meet some, especially since I've failed to identify one in my time on this forum. So you're making an awful lot of assumptions, something I thought you were better than based on the whole of your posts as I remember them.

You seem to have labeled me as conservative, as if that can be viewed any more monolithically than the label of liberal. The political spectrum is vast and more nuanced than just those two terms allow for don't you think?

When I used the words true cause, I was simply echoing agent's posts, as I was just trying to clarify for you how you were reading his posts wrong. So your interpretation of my post as indicating I have any clear knowledge is an assumption by you, not me. I have no problem admitting I have no clear knowledge, because I know I have no clear knowledge about anything.

We are all peers on this forum, but yes, I believe in the context of this discussion, agent is talking about your conservative peers.

It is agent who has labeled you as a conservative, and he has explained his reasons for doing so. Instead of refuting his claim, you instead resorted to refuting a claim he never made. That is the only point I was trying to make for you.

Now, you asked and I answered: I am guessing you self identify as a fiscal conservative. Will you at least do me the service of confirming or denying this?

 

[davmat787]

When I used the words true cause, I was simply echoing agent's posts, as I was just trying to clarify for you how you were reading his posts wrong. So your interpretation of my post as indicating I have any clear knowledge is an assumption by you, not me. I have no problem admitting I have no clear knowledge, because I know I have no clear knowledge about anything.

We are all peers on this forum, but yes, I believe in the context of this discussion, agent is talking about your conservative peers.

It is agent who has labeled you as a conservative, and he has explained his reasons for doing so. Instead of refuting his claim, you instead resorted to refuting a claim he never made. That is the only point I was trying to make for you.

Now, you asked and I answered: I am guessing you self identify as a fiscal conservative. Will you at least do me the service of confirming or denying this?

Sure but you must then tell me what you think I'm defined as.

I believe government spending should be reduced because politicians of both parties appear incapable of directing tax revenue in a completely unbiased and unselfish manner devoid of lobbyist pressure and pork that inevitably results from backroom trading of support and votes.

I would support reducing annual defense spending by 8 - 12% for 4 straight years while directing those funds to greater education, social, and infrastructure spending.

I would gladly increase my tax liability if it resulted in a reversal of the deterioration middle class and associated problems.

I just don't see any reason to think we're capable of electing a body deserving of increased tax revenue.

So what label do those few tid bits add up to?