Oh, go on then, what do you think he claimed to kneel for, and how was it provably false?"a country that oppresses black people and people of color"?e. g. from yesterday: eu.usatoday.com/.../"bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder"?"Black Lives Matter demonstrated against the deaths of numerous African Americans by police actions, including those of Dontre Hamilton, Eric Garner, John Crawford III, Michael Brown, Ezell Ford, Laquan McDonald, Akai Gurley, Tamir Rice, Antonio Martin, and Jerame Reid, among others." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter#2014
If we were a country that oppresses black people and people of color, he wouldn't be a thing lmao. He's in the fucking NFL getting million dollar contracts. He's definitely a part of the top 1%. But he ain't sacrificing shit. He ain't like any of the Civil Rights activists that were fighting segregation. I respect THOSE people because they stood by the flag and wanted to be called Americans too. He's literally pissing on the graves of MLK and all the great Civil Rights activists during the segregation and Jim Crow years. He's not standing proudly by his fellow brothers and sisters. He's basically saying, "I'm going to do my own thing, I'm not with you" by kneeling. If you want to integrate with us, you follow what we do. Americans stand for the flag. By doing something else, you're showing that you do not respect the culture.
@ausmaster He's not oppressed, as long as he does what the NFL says he should do, but when he does something to stand up for his fellow brothers and sisters, he's punished; is that what you think not being oppressed is?I expect, in the 1960's, people like you were saying "they're better off than when they were slaves".
He's not standing up for his fellow brothers and sisters. He's not helping their cause by fucking kneeling for the flag. He could do ACTUAL good by talking to black communities, encouraging families to stay together instead of being stuck with a single parent. He could donate money to improve the schools and communities of the black ghetto areas. HE COULD DO SO MUCH MORE if he really cared. But by doing this, he isn't sacrificing anything. If he got shot while talking to a Black Ghetto community, thats something that deserves respect and that is a sacrifice.
@ausmaster I agree this does seem like just virtue signaling. No real substance do what he’s doing.
@goaded I thought we have already been through this? I recall telling you to fuck off because your a lying piece of shit who is such a ballless cuck because you can't handle being wrong? No, was I only thinking that? I'm tired of this game you play, you lie through your teeth (because your a piece of shit human being), and I present data. You don't like the data but instead of acting like an adult and accepting the truth even if you don't like it you decide to act like a cunt (or cuck, take your pick) and accuse those you disagree with of being racist (despite evidence to the contrary). You act like a piece of shit human being so I don't like talking to you so why do you feel the need to speak to me because we both know I will provide data and you will just bitch out accuse me of racism (again) then claim that I am ignorant even as you spout shit that is provably false? But you want data here, here is the fucking data you worthless prickles fuck.
@goaded Also BLM actively calling for the killing of cops and for whites to give up their jobs and homes to blacks also doesn't help, or the fact that every single occurrence of "police violence" was due to the suspect attacking the police officer or resisting arrest (or going for their gun or having a gun on them) and the whole "hands up don't shoot" being an out right fabrication (which was refuted by multiple eye witnesses (most of which where black)) etc. etc. Your a jack ass and I really hate that I have to insult you to hammer home just how much of an asshole you are but that's the only option left to me (because I cannot in good conscience censor you even if you are a racist, virtue signaling asshole. It would go against my principles (but god dammit you try my patience I've had to put up with your idiocy for far longer then any person should have to) in order to get you to just piss off and go virtue signal some where else (Or troll what ever it is your doing).
You know whats fucking weird. 2 years ago I was considered to be a part of the left since I was an actual Liberal/Libertarian. Now I am ashamed to even think that I was a part of that bullshit. I was very soso with Trump being elected but after he got elected and then fucking Antifa riots started happening and then I still remember the fucking Dallas Police shooting that BLM was directly was involved with. I disagreed with them at first but over time I just started to fucking hate them. And I still fucking hate them today. I consider them violent organizations because they're fucking known to incite violence. I educated myself politically and the left is not even credible in my eyes anymore. And I consider myself to be a moderate.
And even though this guy is throwing insults, the weird thing is I don't fucking blame him. I'm fed up with this shit too. I'm tired of fucking black activists falsely accusing people of being racist because they fucking disagree with them. I'm tired of feminists falsely accusing people of being sexist because they fucking disagree with them. I'm fucking sick of the left doing this bullshit. And they ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE THIS. This is why I cannot merely speak with them without having a defense mechanism in my head. I'm not sexist or racist but I can see why people become white supremacists, its people who get fed up with this bullshit that snap and go full blown extreme.
It ONLY depends on what you're SACRIFICING and NOT what you believe in?
@ausmaster The only reason why I am throwing out insults is because I have dealt with this asshole for the past two years. Every single time he lies, he dismisses all evidence, he then either misconstrues your statements intentionally misrepresenting your statements or just out right lies. Last time I had a discussion with him (again this has been happing for so long I can't put up with it any more) he after I pointed out and provided evidence that he was wrong, suggested I was racist because he didn't like what I had to say. That's when I started insulting him, just him. He is a piece of shit human being, not saying all liberals are (some are just naïve and ignorant) but he has proven that he is a scummy piece of shit human being and I have finally after two years of his idiocy have lost my patience with him. Normally I try very hard to avoid going this route but I don't know what else to do because speaking to him is like bashing your head against a brick wall.
@HereIbe No, never said that, it matters what your sacrificing and why your sacrificing it, I thought I made that pretty clear. Don't screw over others was just the primary issue (you can be racist all you want for instance (as Kaepernick is (if he actually believes his own lies) but as long as you don't screw over others I don't care).
You did not say that it depends on what one believes in. Your statement is "that depends on what your [sic] sacrificing". So, therefore, if a pedophile activist sacrificed his freedom, goodwill, etc. for the sake of pedophilia, he is doing a good thing, since the validity "depends on what your [sic] sacrificing", with no reference to what you believe in.
That's why I say its both and that it's a pretty fucking weak quote overall. If what you're believing in doesn't have any solid ground, you're fucked. If what you're sacrificing isn't relevant and/or significant enough, you're fucked. I just rather have people believe in something thats been throughly grounded a stable fundamental and then don't fucking go overboard with trying to execute it. You shouldn't be incentivized for getting shot over it. It's the fucking problem with Antifa and BLM. Yeah, Antifa can believe they're "fighting" against Nazis but they're fucking throwing themselves into violent confrontations with people who may or may not be nazis (Most of the time, they fucking arent). They lost all credibility with me once they started rioting and attacking people.
That wasn't with me, as far as I can see, but with @madhatters4, here:Why I Think White People Suffer the Most From Racism in the Modern World ↗Anyway, from a quick look though your links, there are some good statistics; black Americans commit significantly more crime than white Americans, especially murders.However:1. "[T]he test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them"2. You need to consider *why* black Americans commit more crime. (Hint: they're twice as likely to be unemployed, two and a half times more likely to be poor and unable to afford legal counsel, the war on drugs makes profits on illegal drugs a way to riches, most everyone thinks they're criminal based on the colour of their skin, about which they have no control; in that situation, I'd think I was excluded from society, wouldn't you?)
@HereIbe Your trying my patience. I stated that if what your sacrificing harms others its a scummy thing to do. I then followed that with explaining how Colin Kaepernick is an asshole because what he stands for is not researched and is not backed by any known facts and is provably false thus the part where what you believe in matters. Also the line, "I would say don't believe in anything … " and the line after, "and never sacrifice others..." covers everything I then paraphrased. I don't know why you decided to start a fight with me, it was rather pointless considering that I already addressed EVERYTHING your trying to argue (and its right their in writing so you know that I am stating that which is factually true). Also your comparison is completely unrelated, please troll some one else.
@goaded No, it was you, you suggested I was racist because you didn't like what I had to say, every interaction has had you dismiss what was stated (as you are now). Yes lets look at why their is greater black crime. . . broken homes. Whites who are more likely to be poor and unemployed by shear numbers (being 63% of the population) do not commit as many crimes, ergo we can state that it is not poverty that is the source of this higher then average (though it does contribute). We can also look at the time line, when did this start happening? The 60s. Well that doesn't make sense if its racism because we actually had laws that discriminated against them prior to the sixties meaning that it cannot be linked to that (or the stupid slavery argument). We can however link it to the break down of the family as the more children born out of wedlock and raised in single mother homes the more crime and poverty we see in the black community. Their is the source and solution to the problem.
Yeah I agree with hellionthesagereborn more here. Goaded is throwing out those classic progressive talking points. The one thing I learned though is that there is no damn foundation or substance beneath the claims. The foundation is rooted in Socialism which is a fucking abomination of a doctrine. I used to believe in Socialism and Communism but its all fucking bullshit.
@ausmaster That's what they do, they hit you when your young with the socialist propaganda before your even able to form your own opinion they are force feeding you their stories, then they appeal to your morality telling you that its the moral choice, they also exploit your and other peoples resentment by making it seem that the rich are taking from you when they are not so they can make the moral claim that its right to steal from them because its "yours" to begin with. They also try to tell you that its the system that is the problem but completely ignore that the system is flawed because people are flawed so their is no way imperfect people can create a perfect system. Though don't fall to the other problem of just jumping to the other side, question everything and let the data and facts show you the right path. That's why I don't block any one (even goaded) because if I believe in the truth I have to let it be attacked to show that it is still true.
Ah, I think I remember the conversation, now. It was the one where you were arguing along the lines that America is as safe a place to live as anywhere, as long as you ignore the blacks. And I was pointing out that they are Americans, too, and perhaps something should be done to help those fellow Americans, instead of lumping them all together, which has the effect of oppressing them.If he believes that black people are being shot more frequently than whites, he's right - even you don't disagree with those numbers.Your argument, correct me if I'm wrong, is that there are "good" reasons for those shootings (crime, perceived danger, etc.), but that hardly disproves that people with black skin are more likely to be shot by police than people with white skin. My argument, here, is there should be more of an effort to reduce the criminality, rather than just giving up on a large portion of your population.
That earlier conversation was here:Time To End Knife Crime ↗There's an article about the difference between how poor black people's experiences differ from poor white people's, here: www.washingtonpost.com/.../?utm_term=.a6e3806effc9"A poor black family, in short, is much more likely than a poor white one to live in a neighborhood where many other families are poor, too, creating what sociologists call the "double burden" of poverty."
@goaded Their you go being a racist prick again. I never said that, I said the majority of violence comes from the black community and that if you actually want to solve violence in the US you should start with the black community in general and more specifically the break down of the family within the black community. That's when you, as you have now tried to misrepresent my statement thus further solidifying my opinion that while you are probably an extreme leftist you are also trolling people. So again, fuck off asshole, your wrong, you have been proven wrong time and time again, and you can't argue a damn thing, you don't know what logic is and you sure as hell don't know what the truth is so all you have is ignoring pertinent information and misrepresentation (just like a leftist isn't it?). I am not going to waste any more time on you, some people are just perpetually stuck on stupid.
Well, anybody who is interested can go back and read what we both wrote and see who's right. Time To End Knife Crime ↗
Okay, I actually fucking read it and the problem being you're so stuck on giving people in the black communities unneeded sympathy. Yes, they fucking need help but they seriously need to pull their fucking bootstraps up and not leave it up to us to fix it for them. Like wheres the fucking incentive for them to fix their communities if they are just given free money and free sympathy from all their problems? I don't see a fucking change in their typical "fuck the police" lifestyle in the hood.
Police are unlikely to want to enforce the hood because nothing suggests that they respect cops more than they did a year ago. And wheres the change from being a place full of drugs and other very unwanted activities? If you want WIILLING people to actually turn hoods around, the attitude change needs to come from within. They can't be doing this "fuck the police" anymore if they want police to patrol more. They cannot be living the drug life if they want people to interact and include them in the surrounding communities. Just forcing people to try to help them won't do NOTHING if they are willing to only live the hood life. If the hoods wants to convince ME to invest in their communities, they need to show that they want it and are willing to do what's neccessary to turn this around. Otherwise, I will not sit there and let my money go towards the black market, drugs, and other various illegal things.
@ausmaster So, from what you write, I see that we have differing opinions on the subject. Fine, that's not unexpected, and I'd be happy to discuss it with you.Do you think I have "been proven wrong time and time again,  can't argue a damn thing,  don't know what logic is and  don't know what the truth is so all [I] have is ignoring pertinent information and misrepresentation"?
I think it's mostly on a pitfall that I didn't know existed when I was guillable enough to believe that Socialism was an appropriate solution to the common problems (reality check, it isn't and is a really abhorrent doctrine). You didn't go DEEP enough. You're only looking at the surface and believing the typical radical lies. Because one thing I learned that its fucking easy to blame others for problems, that its easier to swallow when you're told that it's not your fault and that you've been secretly oppressed all this time. So when he says all those things, it's referencing to how you keep arguing the radical marxist ideas that has been disproven several decades ago. That the actual truth is fucking complicated. I listened intensely to prominent political figures that practice stable poltical doctrines ("Classical" Liberal and Libertarian) and listened as they explain how we are repeating the same mistakes 30 years ago.
So yes, honestly, what he says seems true although I can't be definitely sure of "cant argue a damn thing". I'll have to read the arguments again when I wake up but in my opinion, yours is the losing side because you stepped into arguments that were beaten almost to death 30 years ago.
@ausmaster See, I don't see anywhere where I argue for "radical Marxist" ideas: can you show me where I did?I also don't see where either of you have proved me wrong about anything on here. Saying some ideas were proven wrong 30 years ago, isn't a proof that I'm wrong about anything, or even an argument, because it's not specific enough to be discussed.Things are significantly different from 30 years ago, and these conversations need to be re-hashed in light of those changes. In some respects things are more like the 1920's now than the 1980's.You also don't seem to see any gap between socialist policies and full-blown communism. It's not radical Marxism, for example, to call for more funding for education in deprived areas, regulation of drinking water supplies, or for more sensible drug laws that don't excessively affect PoC.
Well here's where you went into dicey territory, "The problem areas need decently funded police and schools providing a good education to all ages that want one, preferably staffed by people from the community, or from similar ones, who understand the problem." So, instead of changing within at the root, proposing measures to seemingly force change aka a more Equality of Outcome (a very Marxist idea). Because you imply that these areas are not getting the funding as perhaps another school district might, you must need to inject more funds for these specific problem areas? This goes again back to not being deep enough argument. WHY are they not getting the money as much as other districts supposedly? If that was the case, there There are two scenarios, there are not enough students or there are not enough eligible students that qualify for funding.
At least in Arizona, a student must attend school a set amount of hours throughout the school year for the education system to award money to the school for this student. So either the school is undesirable in the eyes of people in the school district (which could be the result of crime in the area) or that not enough students are attending school frequently enough to get awarded. This is why I dislike arguments that are simply "we need to give more money to THIS" because you're not guaranteeing that you're even FIXING the root problem in the first place. It's also not fair for the other school districts when you literally inject funds into problem districts, it would deinsentivise the retention of students. As a school, why would I care about keeping my students in my school when I could be bailed out by the government in these problem districts?
@ausmaster What you're saying doesn't follow. What's Marxist about providing education or police?Access to a decent education is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome; it's providing the bootstraps you want everyone to pull themselves up by.In my opinion, the root of the problem is lack of education, security, and opportunity (largely stemming from being poor in a poor community, and not the colour of anyone's skin). What do you think it is?
@goaded It's providing additional funding to a fundamentally equal playing field. If the funding mechanism is there, why do you need to give them additional money or change the funding mechanism so that it affects ONLY these communities? That's whats Marxist. You're not providing them with an opportunity, you're providing them a bailout. Same with police. Forcing police to patrol the areas more does not make them less comfortable or willing to patrol if there isn't a change in the attitude towards police in general in the black communities. You hear stories of police officers shooting black men, usually, they're fucking scared of the typical black stereotype. Nothing is indicating that ITS CHANGING. So they continue to be scared. Again, I still feel like you're still giving them unneeded sympathy when it's like a problem child that does not want to change and wants you to continue giving them cookies. Lack of security and education has DEEPER rooted causes than people being poor.
What I think would prove the MOST impact is social change. An encouragement of a different attitude towards life in general for those in the black communities. For example, lack of education. Nothing is being done to circumvent the pressure in black communities to join a gang. If you want more people to be involved with education, pressure must be made socially that the typical gang life is NOT more important than getting an education. Dealing drugs to make ends meet is NOT an appropriate way to alleviate the poverty in your family. Getting an education to be able to later provide a stable way to give funding to your family WILL. That's why I say change needs to happen WITHIN. There is no indication that typical hood life is on a decline, there's no indication that they want to get OUT of this mindset. Once they have proved that they want a better life than just the typical hood life, THEN we can talk about the opportunities to make a direct impact.
Because to be honest, what I would love to see in these black communities is people who were once part of the gang life have their lives turned around and pursue a passion towards protecting their communities. Like, have that person be encouraged to pursue education so that after high school, they can have a career in Law Enforcement and be one of the people who contributes to the social change.
@ausmaster Again, with the Marxism? Governments move money around, it's what they *all* do.Is the US government Marxist for taking money from California ($10,408 per person federal taxes, to $8,967 spending) and spending it in Arizona ($6,253, to $10,157)? "Every year, about 30 states receive more in federal spending than they pay in taxes, while the other 20 states bankroll the federal government. New Mexico and Mississippi are usually the greatest net beneficiaries of spending, receiving roughly $2 in spending for every dollar paid in taxes. New Jersey and Illinois are the greatest net contributors to the federal government, receiving about 60 cents in spending for every dollar paid in taxes. States in the Northeast, Great Lakes and Pacific Coast generally lose money to the federal government, while Southern and Great Plains states benefit." www.bloomberg.com/.../blame-fdr-and-lbj-for-moocher-paradox-in-red-states
@ausmaster The problem in the black communities started in the 60s with the family break down, itself stemmed by the sex culture that pretended like sex has no consequence (when everything else in life does) combined with welfare programs (which specifically targeted the black community) that gave women money ONLY if they had a child and no man in the house thus encouraging using children as a means of money and/or encouraging poor decisions on both men and women's part (her being less rigourus with her choices in partner i. e. going after a player instead of a stable guy because she has a safety net in the welfare system if things go poorly and in men because they could say they where contributing through child support and the welfare checks would help with the child rearing (when in reality what the child needed was a father to help guide them). If we wish to fix the black community this new "white mans burden" is not the way to go, all that does is reinforce the idea that blacks are
@ausmaster not capable of doing it on their own thus encouraging them to continue to not try and fix the problem (which is what we see now). I've explained all of this to him, showed him the data, showed him the historical data and he keeps going on and on about this because to him its not about fixing the problem, he doesn't care to fix it he only cares about the pat on the back he can give himself for his "righteous outrage" and "empathy" which has not helped the black community at all in nearly fifty years. This is why I just stopped interacting with him, he doesn't care, all he wants is that feel good feeling he gets from ridiculing others and acting like he is more moral.
You keep saying you've shown or proved something when, in this example, you've parroting New Right talking points from the 1960's, when they were opposing Nixon's Family Assistance Plan.For example, what evidence do you have that welfare programs specifically targeted the black community? Or that they gave women money ONLY if they had a child and no man in the house? (The second one, I can believe is true, and I'd agree that was a mistake; child benefit could have been paid whether or not there was both parents were there, but I expect that would have been rejected because of cost issues.)Reading around it, back in Nixon's day, a Republican president took a Democratic Senator as a special advisor. What happened to that kind of thing?
*you're just parroting
@goaded "Again, with the Marxism? Governments move money around, it's what they *all* do. Is the US government Marxist for taking money from California ($10,408 per person federal taxes, to $8,967 spending) and spending it in Arizona ($6,253, to $10,157)? "What the fuck do you mean in this case? There's a funding mechanism that says for every student, we will give you X amount. How is that "moving money around"? It's not like they fucking give the extra money they would have given back to OTHER schools. If they're struggling to get the students necessary to sustain, maybe they should look at solutions on how to get MORE students and retain them. You think its a lump sum of money that they give to a district based on whatever they feel its the criteria, it's fucking not.
Also, the Federal Tax is Progressive which is the child of Socialism. And last I checked, Socialism and Marxism have a common egalitarian view on the distribution of wealth. So what's your fucking point? They're similar and not TOO far off from each other.
@ausmaster OK, clearly you're going to keep calling anything other than no regulations and a flat tax Marxism, Communism, or Socialism, without any acknowledgement of the facts that they are not all the same, and that most governments in the world, including the US government, would fall under that umbrella. I'm going to start ignoring that nonsense and refer only to the points you're making.Taking money from Californians to spend in Arizona is taking money from where there is more and putting it where it's needed more. In the same way, you could spend more money on schools that need the money more.An equally good solution to the problem, from my point of view, would be to fund all the schools so that the wealth of the parents or community has no impact. Fund school books and exercise books and pens and pencils and calculators and computers and teachers and internet access and buildings and everything else they need from taxes, the same amount per child across the board.
Oh, also, these are hot off the presses:http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1536206338896.jpghttp://i.4cdn.org/pol/1536207806820.jpghttp://i.4cdn.org/pol/1536208448603.jpghttp://i.4cdn.org/pol/1536208622130.jpghttp://i.4cdn.org/pol/1536209042698.jpg
This can be done ALL DAY LONG!I love it. It's almost as funny as the putting the Hitler quotes on pictures of Taylor Swift, but not quite as funny as putting the Taylor Swift quotes on pictures of Hitler.
Thank you comrade Toadowsky ;) thumbs.gfycat.com/...eteDeepArabianhorse-small.gif
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
You mean like "Kill all Jews and enslave all other non-Aryans"?
Hitler risked his life. He died for his beliefs. He often wrote that one should be willing to sacrifice all for the sake of a belief, actually. Merely having beliefs strong enough to die for (LOTS of terrorists do that) is not enough. WHAT is believed in? THAT is what matters.
@HereIbe Nobody cares about Hitler; all he did was kill and destroy.
@DJZest, you just DO NOT GET IT! The SAME slogan applies EQUALLY AS WELL TO THE WORST EVILDOER as to the best man to have ever lived. When a slogan is that broad, it is meaningless, it is useless. Only idiots think it is wise.
@HereIbe Only cucks make use of all-caps, you cuck. Stop being a cuck and control your emotions.
@DJZest, oh, my, I touched a little nerve in your little snowflake body, didn't I? I'm SOOOOOO SORRY that your daddy never loved you.
@HereIbe That's alright. Thanks though.
There were 133 LEOs killed in the line of duty in 2017, 44 were shot to death (more died in vehicle accidents).In the same year, LEOs shot and killed 987 people.Some interesting stats:Fewer than half were white.339 were fleeing the scene.26 had a toy weapon.Sources:en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_American_police_officers_killed_in_the_line_of_dutywww.washingtonpost.com/.../
Fleeing while carrying a dangerous weapon is worth of force. They could shoot innocent bystanders to get away.While I'm not disagreeing that American cops are too trigger happy. The liberal media does overblow this.
Or not give a fk about their products.
Hey, Hitler had a lot of great ideas.http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1536209360978.jpg
History is written by the winners. Hitler lost WW2. http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1536245710805.jpg
@Bananaman177, funny how the winners of the wars between the USA and the native tribes now write history as if the USA were the villain, though.
Because the natives worked hard to let people know the truthAlso, people aren’t dumb. The British and Portuguese and Spaniards... etc were no saints
Your point? Yes, those ARE the reasons that history got revised regarding the conquest of North America, but it is also evidence that "history is written by the winners" is just bullshit in the end. Or do you believe that "history is written by the winners" AND that means that only "winners' history" actually ever gets written?
History is written by the winners. But on rare occasion, the winners may get their balls busted for inaccuracy.
And? If "history is written by the winners" is to be valid, it must always apply. If it does not, then it's just a hollow excuse.
@HereIbe That's because the people who currently write American History are subversive agents at war with America.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf3bajd4https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gnpCqsXE8g
@Bananaman177 But you said that it is the WINNERS who write history, SO THEY MUST BE THE WINNERS!
@HereIbe Well, the current conflict hasn't been decided yet, I would say they have a big lead, so they're WINNING, but their offense is beginning to stall and the opposition has been scoring enough points to shorten that lead, and although there's very little time left, it still really is anybody's game right now. Anybody can spend most of the game winning, but anybody who does can also miraculously lose, seemingly out of nowhere, for reasons no one could have ever predicted!That's the great thrill of History. Anything can happen and almost always does.
Well said, brother.
Heyyy do mean to me 😞
It's true though There is this other girl questioning " would tall guys date short girls? (If they are equally pretty) " lol I might as well quit GaG
This question is based on the whole Nike ad thing. So if you think it’s stupid that’s fine. I’m just asking what people are thinking about it.
My questions can’t always be winners I guess
Ofcourse not I cringe at my own questions as well lol
What if the goal is something beyond you, though? What about the GIs who died fighting the Nazis? They were left with nothing--they lost everything.
@HereIbe The dead have no desires.
And your silly-ass point? Or are you just pissing sophistry because you think it sounds smart?
@HereIbe And with that, I leave you to stew in your own juices. Pointless ad homs are a discussion killer. Good day.
You mean like believing in racial equailty (Rev. King)?
Exactly he was willing to sacrifice everything for that goal but if he'd have sacrificed everything for just that belief then you would be missing a prominent figure from the American civil Rights movement.
But he DID sacrifice everything.
Yes, for the movement not just his beliefs. If your willing to give up everything just so you can prove yourself right it's pathetic.I also think it's highly offensive of you to suggest that mlk only had everything taken from him because of what he believed and not the actions he took because of his beliefs.
Somebody got TRIGGERED!
Well maybe you should chill out then. Sorry that you felt the need to be sarcastic and condescending, if you feel the need to type in capitals then as I see it your the one SHOUTING and getting agressive.Want to talk about why you feel I'm wrong or are you so self conscious you can't even bring yourself to have a civil conversation with someone you disagree with?
I am so sorry that you are such an extremely delicate and fragile little snowflake of an anthropoid creature.
Ok but why are you the one resulting to insults. Seriously want to talk about this? I think talking about why you feel so threatened by my opinion that you have to attack me would be really good for you.
Attack? Little sissy, you have no CLUE what constitutes an attack.
An attack is an agressive action against some one. Are you sure your not talking about violence because that's not the same. Unless you think that mean words constitute violence. Reading your replies to me their quite agressive towards me so yeah they are attacks, text based attacks that don't mean shit but still.Oh wait your not trying to be a big man on the internet are you? That's precious!
What do you believe?http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1536246015798.jpg