‘Walk Away’ Founder Refused Service at Manhattan Electronics Store

originally posted by: c2oden
Do you think that I broad stroke or do you think that you do?

I think DB sarcastically did with "It shows how tolerant they are by letting him live.", as if some monolithic "they" actually exists, and I think I did sarcastically (yet clearly darker) in my similar reply while also pointing out that killing has already happened in today's heated political climate (which is largely fed by using such broad-stroke techniques). Thus, maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care.

As for you, I rarely see much from you beyond one to two line quips like...

originally posted by: c2oden
So that is what you have?
What else?

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: c2oden
Do you think that I broad stroke or do you think that you do?

I think DB sarcastically did with "It shows how tolerant they are by letting him live.", as if some monolithic "they" actually exists, and I think I did sarcastically (yet clearly darker) in my similar reply pointing out that killing has already happened in today's political climate (which is largely fed by using the broad-stroke technique). Thus, maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care.

As for you, I rarely see much from you beyond one to two line quips like...

originally posted by: c2oden
So that is what you have?
What else?

You have what you think to be true.
I have what I think to be true.
I think you are on wrong side.

That is it.

a reply to: c2oden

Considering that my main point was, "maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care."... your stance is interesting to say the least.

Why do you feel there should be more use of careless notions of political killings?

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: c2oden

Considering that my main point was, "maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care."... your stance is interesting to say the least.

Why do you feel there should be more use of careless notions of political killings?

I don't.
I don't like any of this.
But you seem like you do.

a reply to: c2oden

You said, "I think you are on wrong side".

My side is, "maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care".

Thus, why do you feel there should be more use of careless notions of political killings, or are you on the "wrong side" with me?

Have we finished talking about sarcasm?

Good.


So can anyone tell me when the public lynching is? They gonna string him up or just shoot him if he tries to utilize public accommodation anywhere again?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
So can anyone tell me when the public lynching is? They gonna string him up or just shoot him if he tries to utilize public accommodation anywhere again?

I don't think a single clerk constitutes "they". It was just some self-important idiot working a counter at an electronics store, and it seems he opted for just denying the guy purchase of a mic instead of a public lynching. Sorry to disappoint you.

a reply to: redmage

Good thing the gay guy didn't ask for a cake!

*whew*

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: c2oden

You said, "I think you are on wrong side".

My side is, "maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care".

Thus, why do you feel there should be more use of careless notions of political killings?

I don't.
I have never advocated "careless notions of political killings".

What about you?

originally posted by: c2oden
I have never advocated "careless notions of political killings".
What about you?

I've pointed out just how flawed such notions are since people seem to easily forget that they're actually happening in today's hyper-polarized political climate.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: [post=23566075]Metallicus[/post

I have more in common with real liberals

Interesting. What do you think those commonalities are Met?

Free speech, equal opportunity for all, for peace, against the death penalty, protecting civil rights to name a few.

I agree with Republicans maybe 50% of the time and Democrats 10% of the time. For the most part no party represents me so I suppose I am closest to a Libertarian at about 75% agreement, but still I don’t think it is possible for the dogma of a political party to accurately reflect the views of the individual.

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: c2oden
I have never advocated "careless notions of political killings".
What about you?

I've pointed out just how flawed such notions are since people seem to easily forget that they're actually happening.

The flaw is that people only see it when it suits them.

The idiot should have just said sorry, he was given opportunity to do so but didn't.

originally posted by: c2oden
The flaw is that people only see it when it suits them.

Perhaps that's why you think, "maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care" is the "wrong side".

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: c2oden
The flaw is that people only see it when it suits them.

Perhaps that's why you think, "maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care" is the "wrong side".

You can't do that.
It is dishonest.
I didn't say it.
But that is what you do, huh?

originally posted by: c2oden
You can't do that.
It is dishonest.
I didn't say it.
But that what is you do, huh?

Do I have to show you your own words?

originally posted by: c2oden
You have what you think to be true.
I have what I think to be true.
I think you are on wrong side.

That is it.

The main point of the post you were replying to was

originally posted by: redmage
Thus, maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care.

You did say it, and denying it now is what's dishonest.

If you're not addressing the main point of a post, then you need to be more specific in your replies, because you absolutely said, "I think you are on wrong side.".

originally posted by: redmage

originally posted by: c2oden
You can't do that.
It is dishonest.
I didn't say it.
But that what is you do, huh?

Do I have to show you your own words?

originally posted by: c2oden
You have what you think to be true.
I have what I think to be true.
I think you are on wrong side.

That is it.

The main point of the post you were replying to was

originally posted by: redmage
Thus, maybe such sarcasm regarding notions of killing should be considered before simply tossing it out there without a care.

You did say it, and denying it now is what's dishonest.

You can not be serious.
You quoted me, with things I did not say.

originally posted by: c2oden
You can not be serious.
You quoted me, with things I did not say.

Are you drunk? Everyone can plainly see that I quoted your exact post.

In fact, you quoted yourself and attributed to me.
Next level bs

This is not my post. It is your reply to my post where you quoted me.