CenterBHSFan;1872495 wrote:I get that everything "political" is chaotic, but I'm confused on what social norms are being decimated:

Even if they were, I'd be hard-pressed to defend "political norms," at least. Our political norms have been little more than a game of capture the flag for several decades.

Also, who wants to abolish the electoral college? I would certainly consider that a "norm." It's been around for a couple hundred years.

i am glad political norms are being destroyed. THey are the worst form of norms

Not gonna lie, Hillary signing books in the dairy aisle at Costco brought the lulz.

O-Trap;1872497 wrote:Even if they were, I'd be hard-pressed to defend "political norms," at least. Our political norms have been little more than a game of capture the flag for several decades.

Also, who wants to abolish the electoral college? I would certainly consider that a "norm." It's been around for a couple hundred years.

I was meaning the fact that republicans are turning on republicans, democrats are turning on democrats = chaotic. I'm not saying that is a norm.
Yes, your example of the electoral college issue is also correct.

CenterBHSFan;1872520 wrote:I was meaning the fact that republicans are turning on republicans, democrats are turning on democrats = chaotic. I'm not saying that is a norm.
Yes, your example of the electoral college issue is also correct.

It's great.

There used to be more (any) people to cross the aisle and work bipartisanly....but honestly that died first in the Democratic party when Pelosi and Harry Reid became minority, and then later majority, leaders. They are two of the worst politicians in our history.

iclfan2;1872484 wrote:Ha not sure if kidding, extremely conservative on twitter.

He does reportedly have an IQ of 180. But I've never heard his politics, because why would anyone follow James Wood on twitter?

It's probably slightly more truthful than Steven Seagal being a former Seal . But apparently Woods did ace the SAT and get a full-ride to MIT (180 is a ridiculous claim, that puts you like in the top-5 smartest people in the entire world or something).

CenterBHSFan;1872520 wrote:I was meaning the fact that republicans are turning on republicans, democrats are turning on democrats = chaotic. I'm not saying that is a norm.
Yes, your example of the electoral college issue is also correct.

Sorry. I was more snarking at the writer than you. I agree with your remarks on the topic.

Haven't seen anyone post about the shooting in which a black immigrant injured 7 and killed 1 at a white church, and was then held at gunpoint by a parishioner. It doesn't fit much of the media narrative so maybe that's why everyone isn't talking about it like they did the Charleston one? (I realize the body count was higher).
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/09/25/us/tennessee-shooting-probe/index.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

iclfan2;1873605 wrote:Haven't seen anyone post about the shooting in which a black immigrant injured 7 and killed 1 at a white church, and was then held at gunpoint by a parishioner. It doesn't fit much of the media narrative so maybe that's why everyone isn't talking about it like they did the Charleston one? (I realize the body count was higher).
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/09/25/us/tennessee-shooting-probe/index.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I posted about this on FaceSpace earlier today, but I agree that it's perhaps tellingly odd that it's not making headlines.

O-Trap;1873632 wrote:I posted about this on FaceSpace earlier today, but I agree that it's perhaps tellingly odd that it's not making headlines.

When I first heard the story, I thought "here we go". But they were saying it was a masked gunman, which doesn't fit the profile of your typical white shooter angry with the world. Of course, "masked" would have made for juicy headlines speculating about a white supremacist (although I thought it equally likely that it could be an anarchist that wanted people to think that).

But since they caught the guy and it wasn't a white supremacist....well, I imagine many sad faces in news rooms. But now you have an immigrant issue, possibly a terrorist angle and I guess, I don't know, but apparently neither Trump nor Fox have jumped on that. Not to mention it was a "good guy with a gun" saving a bunch of lives.

I suppose after they all get done running the "take a knee" story into the ground, they'll get around to this one.

gut;1873635 wrote:I suppose after they all get done running the "take a knee" story into the ground, they'll get around to this one.

Don't hold your breath lol!

O-Trap;1873632 wrote:I posted about this on FaceSpace earlier today, but I agree that it's perhaps tellingly odd that it's not making headlines.

There is nothing tellingly odd about it whatsoever; where the hell have you been for the last 8 years?

QuakerOats;1873658 wrote:There is nothing tellingly odd about it whatsoever; where the hell have you been for the last 8 years?

"Tellingly" odd, yes. Tellingly, as in lending credence to a suspected reason. Odd, as in out of step with the way that other similar stories are treated.

O-Trap;1873707 wrote:"Tellingly" odd, yes. Tellingly, as in lending credence to a suspected reason. Odd, as in out of step with the way that other similar stories are treated.

It's pretty simple, actually. The right doesn't want to jump on the "good guy with a gun" story until they know the shooter wasn't mentally ill. The left is avoiding the "how did he ever get a gun" angle until they know the shooter WAS mentally ill.

gut;1873712 wrote:It's pretty simple, actually. The right doesn't want to jump on the "good guy with a gun" story until they know the shooter wasn't mentally ill. The left is avoiding the "how did he ever get a gun" angle until they know the shooter WAS mentally ill.

More or less, this was what I was getting at. I probably should have articulated it more thoroughly, as you have.

gut;1873712 wrote:It's pretty simple, actually. The right doesn't want to jump on the "good guy with a gun" story until they know the shooter wasn't mentally ill. The left is avoiding the "how did he ever get a gun" angle until they know the shooter WAS mentally ill.

I'm more annoyed with why isn't this an act of "black hate" similar to the Roof case? Why does race and hatred only matter when the shoe is on the other foot?

iclfan2;1873733 wrote:I'm more annoyed with why isn't this an act of "black hate" similar to the Roof case? Why does race and hatred only matter when the shoe is on the other foot?

Because slavery.

#staywoke

iclfan2;1873733 wrote:I'm more annoyed with why isn't this an act of "black hate" similar to the Roof case? Why does race and hatred only matter when the shoe is on the other foot?

Is there any eviden've that Emanuel Samson is a black nationalist that hates whites like there is evidence that Dylan Roof is a white nationalist who hates blacks?

You guys really have to think a little harder about this stuff tbh.

superman;1873749 wrote:Because slavery.

#staywoke

Maybe we will find thr photos of Samson with black separatist logos and such.

BoatShoes;1873784 wrote:Is there any eviden've that Emanuel Samson is a black nationalist that hates whites like there is evidence that Dylan Roof is a white nationalist who hates blacks?

You guys really have to think a little harder about this stuff tbh.

Why does the reason matter? If Roof shot and killed all those black church goers and wasn't a "nationalist" does it matter?? You need to think harder. Motive shouldn't have any reason to cover or not cover a heinous crime.

Do you not have to have A) hate in your heart for those people or B) be fucked up in the head? Why does it matter?

iclfan2;1873786 wrote:Why does the reason matter? If Roof shot and killed all those black church goers and wasn't a "nationalist" does it matter?? You need to think harder. Motive shouldn't have any reason to cover or not cover a heinous crime.

Do you not have to have A) hate in your heart for those people or B) be fucked up in the head? Why does it matter?

You have changed your point from your original post. Hope that helps.

The media is covering the crime.

Moreover, my guess is you would be one of the first ones posting about how the motive mattered if the guy said Allahu Akbar.

What do you want to bet I can find a post of yours expressing such a sentiment on this forum?

White and black vs Muslim are totally different things. You know, one has thousands of years of history as terrorists.
Also you never answered the question. Do you think if Roof was just some random white dude it would have been covered any less?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

iclfan2;1873811 wrote:White and black vs Muslim are totally different things. You know, one has thousands of years of history as terrorists.
Also you never answered the question. Do you think if Roof was just some random white dude it would have been covered any less?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

THOUSANDS:RpS_lol: - and sure you're right TOTALLY different. I suppose 200 years of racial subjugation is irrelevant. But let's stop even trying to pretend you want to have a rational, consistent and coherent viewpoint on when to consider motive in these things and just move on.

to answer your retarded question - YES! If you swapped Roof and Samson or that if there was not clear evidence that Dylan Roof was a white supremacist - a proudly self-described white supremacist at that - the incident would've been covered completely differently!!! The guy said to police "Somebody had to do it. Black People are Killing White People every day. What I did is so miniscule compared to what they do to white people every day" and "Our people are superior. That's just a fact." and that his goal was to "agitate race relations". During the shooting he said "y'all are raping our white women. Y'all are taking over the world."

In Sampson's case it sounds like he was baptized at that church and was having various emotional issues and that there was no racial motivation - e.g. he didn't say "Y'all are raping our black women. Y'all are taking over the world." etc.

In normal America (as compared to everything is an affront to muh conservatism Merica) it is not hard to understand why the Dylan Roof murders got even more media coverage than the average mass shooting that happens weekly in America.

So, at 3:30am enduring my insomnia (which sucks btw to have this going on) I watched Dave Rubin's latest interview with Red Pill Black. Fascinating study on how things work behind the scenes, media hit-pieces, intersectionality issues, conservative/liberal and how everything has been mashed together during the last several years. It is a long interview and I know that not many people will be interested in putting forth the time to watch/listen to it, but I truly think that most everybody on this forum would be interested in it.

[video=youtube;BSAoitd1BTQ][/video]

[h=2]If she does not like 'The Cat in the Hat', why then did she dress like that?[/h]The Massachusetts elementary school librarian who rejected Dr. Seuss books donated by the first lady because they contained “racist mockery,” was previously photographed dressed as the Cat in the Hat.





Can't make this stuff up ..........

Liberalism is a crippling disease