(05-05-2014 11:06 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 10:46 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 01:47 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 01:36 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 11:49 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Who was saying he was not a racist bigot last week?

I can't stand fit, but he didn't say nobody was calling him a racist bigot, he said people were defending him...

But the implication here is pretty clear... Either he meant people were saying that he was not a bigot or the defending a persons offensive speech behavior is the same thing as sanctioning the behavior.

I want him to put a steak in the ground.

No... the implication was pretty clear, there is a lot of racist bigots on this board who defended the clippers' owner for being racist bigot. It isn't that hard to understand

Who... Who defending anything he said and how?

Saying a mans personal life should not be invaded and puniched for offensive speech is not defense of that speech....

The fact that you cut out most of my original response to your post should tell you all you need to know...

(05-05-2014 11:59 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 11:06 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 10:46 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 01:47 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 01:36 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  I can't stand fit, but he didn't say nobody was calling him a racist bigot, he said people were defending him...

But the implication here is pretty clear... Either he meant people were saying that he was not a bigot or the defending a persons offensive speech behavior is the same thing as sanctioning the behavior.

I want him to put a steak in the ground.

No... the implication was pretty clear, there is a lot of racist bigots on this board who defended the clippers' owner for being racist bigot. It isn't that hard to understand

Who... Who defending anything he said and how?

Saying a mans personal life should not be invaded and puniched for offensive speech is not defense of that speech....

The fact that you cut out most of my original response to your post should tell you all you need to know...

Which is what? That you either can't or won't offer a response?

so who? What post and when? should be pretty simple- all in a thread or two. Have at it!

(05-05-2014 11:59 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 11:06 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 10:46 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 01:47 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 01:36 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  I can't stand fit, but he didn't say nobody was calling him a racist bigot, he said people were defending him...

But the implication here is pretty clear... Either he meant people were saying that he was not a bigot or the defending a persons offensive speech behavior is the same thing as sanctioning the behavior.

I want him to put a steak in the ground.

No... the implication was pretty clear, there is a lot of racist bigots on this board who defended the clippers' owner for being racist bigot. It isn't that hard to understand

Who... Who defending anything he said and how?

Saying a mans personal life should not be invaded and puniched for offensive speech is not defense of that speech....

The fact that you cut out most of my original response to your post should tell you all you need to know...

No the fact you can't point at a post where anyone actually defended what he said should tell us all we need to know..

(05-06-2014 12:47 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 11:59 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 11:06 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 10:46 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 01:47 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  But the implication here is pretty clear... Either he meant people were saying that he was not a bigot or the defending a persons offensive speech behavior is the same thing as sanctioning the behavior.

I want him to put a steak in the ground.

No... the implication was pretty clear, there is a lot of racist bigots on this board who defended the clippers' owner for being racist bigot. It isn't that hard to understand

Who... Who defending anything he said and how?

Saying a mans personal life should not be invaded and puniched for offensive speech is not defense of that speech....

The fact that you cut out most of my original response to your post should tell you all you need to know...

No the fact you can't point at a post where anyone actually defended what he said should tell us all we need to know..

should I start with the attack the gold digger post, the "she ain't all that" post, or the privacy post... or the post that some dumbasses got all upset because I said that the owner of the clippers and anyone who agrees with his comments should have their teeth kicked in.

(05-06-2014 12:46 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 11:59 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 11:06 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 10:46 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(05-05-2014 01:47 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  But the implication here is pretty clear... Either he meant people were saying that he was not a bigot or the defending a persons offensive speech behavior is the same thing as sanctioning the behavior.

I want him to put a steak in the ground.

No... the implication was pretty clear, there is a lot of racist bigots on this board who defended the clippers' owner for being racist bigot. It isn't that hard to understand

Who... Who defending anything he said and how?

Saying a mans personal life should not be invaded and puniched for offensive speech is not defense of that speech....

The fact that you cut out most of my original response to your post should tell you all you need to know...

Which is what? That you either can't or won't offer a response?

so who? What post and when? should be pretty simple- all in a thread or two. Have at it!

meh... go read the post

(05-06-2014 01:13 AM)randaddyminer Wrote:  should I start with the attack the gold digger post, the "she ain't all that" post,

Sure first please establish that they can not both be terrible people. Then find for me an instance where someone said her general whoreness (and yes, she is a whore) excuses his bad behavior (including supporting her whoreness or making racist statements)

Quote:or the privacy post...

This is another great angle to attack for you! All you need to do is show (1) bad people don't deserve privacy and that (2) the fact another poster believes people should have privacy means that what they do in thepr privacy (like make racist statements) is A.O.K.

Quote:or the post that some dumbasses got all upset because I said that the owner of the clippers and anyone who agrees with his comments should have their teeth kicked in.

So you believe in violence towards people who, while bad, have not committed a crime.. Please who me logically how opposing violence towards people who are wrong but not committing a crime means you support their point of view.