Lurker > Nomadic View

They know who youre sending and receiving messages/calls from, but not the content.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Funkydog posted...

We're all doomed~

Thats Xan.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Get both. Can never have too many evil mages.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Thats a pretty tasteless joke.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Im really sorry to hear that. Stay strong, man.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

DarkProto05 posted...

These gun nut hugers don't want their right to bear arms interfered with but have no problem interfering with freedom of speech and telling people like LeBron James to shut up and dribble.

My bad. I missed when Queen Coulter wrote that into law.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

OneThatFollows posted...

Republicans can either get in on a gun control legislation now or lose any say when they get their rears kicked in 2020.

Any stamping of feet and gnashing of teeth at the behest of their NRA doms will just make their inevitable losses in the next election that much worse.

Doubt it. If anything this is harmful to Democrats. Gun control, without more specificity, is a losing argument with the majority of Americans.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Teddytalks posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Experiencing a tragedy does not make someone, much less a child, an expert on policy.

It does allow them to advocate change.

It like you guys hate democracy or something.

They can advocate for change regardless of their experience of a tragedy. Thats all fine. But the appeal to emotion as evidence for a change has no seat at the table. If you want to use statistical data and even comparisons to other countries, that all has some logical basis. However, the notion that Im sad therefore gun control is a losing argument.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Experiencing a tragedy does not make someone, much less a child, an expert on policy.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

The Second Amendment isnt going anywhere. Keep crying, Ill buy a boat.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Heineken14 posted...

Like, a North and South America?

First thing I thought of.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Liberals blamed Trump for the fucking hurricane that hit Texas. All hail the god-President.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Considering that they were literally enslaved, yeah, they undeniably were systematically oppressed.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Just make murder illegal.

That way gun nuts can keep their guns AND no one will get killed anymore! Win/win
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Error is a Russian bot.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

*marked*
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

robellr13 posted...

Thats some of the white peoples problem. They are ignorant to the dilemma they have caused themselves. All we ask is that you take notice and yall act like it doesnt exist. Thats what bother us the most.

You got a gasoline tank in the middle of a house fire and you act confused when we questioned you for burning it.

Thats certainly some colorful mental illustrations, but can you elaborate on what actual events contribute to that ideology?
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

EggNogPrince posted...

Wasn't there an admin who said she wouldn't date black men because of cultural differences?

Yeah, she was the gamespot hire.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

JustMyOpinion posted...

Marked for censor bypass in the first post.

lol

I did that too.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Lorenzo_2003 posted...

Yes, sort of. I mean it would have been weird if Black Panther was played by a Chinese guy.

If that was the case, sure. But its a historically black figure from Africa that takes place in Africa. It makes sense that the overwhelming majority of people in the film are black. Id think it odd if it were otherwise.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Not at all.

I think the obsession with race on this movie is pretty ridiculous.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

School work and maybe a little WoW during breaks.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

So, its basically just a shitty hotel?
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Just anecdotally my Barnes and Noble is always pretty packed. I go there about once a week or so with my daughter and let her pick out a book.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

r4X0r posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

r4X0r posted...

Oh snap. This is going badly for OP.

At least I'm actually risking something for what I believe in. If you really believed Republican were a shoe in you'd bet your account too.

What do you believe in? Tell me the platforms you believe in that are going to win the Democrats the House.

I'm not interested in gambling with you. I'm interested in having a conversation with you. You thus far are unable to actually do that.

I think the Democrats will overtake the House simply because that has been the trend in history at least as long as Ive been alive. Pendulum politics.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

r4X0r posted...

What do the Democrats have to run on? More taxes? More illegal aliens? More unemployment?

Trump says ridiculous things on Twitter, and we think thats bad.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

The Fucking Bunch of Idiots was grossly neglige....oops I mean extremely careless in their handling of the investiga...oops I mean matter.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Im going to take a wild stab and guess you were using tragedies of history as some equivalent to some modern day trivial matter.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

King Rial posted...

Not worth the moderation...

---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Error1355 posted...

Topics like this are the same as seeing someone speeding on a highway and not getting instantly pulled over and claiming there are no speed limits on that road anymore.

No, it isnt. In your analogy the law enforcement officer has no knowledge of the offense. In this actual scenario that the TC is explaining, the incident was reported to the moderation staff that actively decided it was not a violation.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

knutjob posted...

Asking for censorship of conflicting views isn't making you seem not closed minded

Hes only asking for consistency. Either moderate both sides or allow both sides.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Different needs depending on the person. Price would likely be the dominant factor, but comfort, storage space, and seating are factors as well.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Monday-Thursday I always eat at home. Friday and Saturday I usually eat out. Sunday is a toss up.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Kineth posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Talking about specific incidents is completely fair game in singling out something, but that isnt what the topic stated. The topic was about the practice in general, and its implication that it wasnt common practice.

I think the implication is that they go well beyond the average rate, not that no one else does similar things.

Thats absolutely a fair point! And thats all I was fishing for was some justification on why its different from one side to the other. Im not agreeing with you on that assertion, I believe to the contrary, but at least youre providing logic.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Talking about specific incidents is completely fair game in singling out something, but that isnt what the topic stated. The topic was about the practice in general, and its implication that it wasnt common practice.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Some school require clear backpacks.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

NibeIungsnarf posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Its absolutely a valid argument if youre arguing that its abhorrent for one side, but not the other

Nobody did that.

You literally made that up to serve your position.

Its absolutely happening in this topic. When someone makes the comparison that another network is doing the same practice its Dont talk about muh CNN!

I just want a straight answer if its an acceptable practice either way. If its not, then I dont understand why the practice itself isnt the issue of the topic rather than a specific network doing it.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Doom_Art posted...

Nomadic View posted...

CNN

Doom_Art posted...

*whataboutism alarm goes off*

AAAAAAHHHHHHH HE DID THE THING

*flails arms*

Yeah, thats exactly what Im addressing. Why single out one side? If you have a problem with the practice then you have a problem with both sides Id assume. Whats the difference between the two?

Because this topic isn't about CNN, and pointing out that CNN sucks too does nothing to make Fox suck any less.

It kinda does. Either the standard is abhorrent or it isnt. Singling our one side for a general practice while ignoring the other doesnt make sense.

Say you're in court on trial for murdering someone. The evidence is insurmountable. The judge asks you to give your defense, so you say

"But the 9/11 terrorists murdered 3000 people!"

How do you see this scenario playing out for you

Its obviously going to be irrelevant in a trial. However, thats not the point Im making. Im not trying to absolve Fox of the practice. Im trying to learn what the standard of acceptance for the practice is. No one argues that the 9/11 terror attacked werent a tragedy. Im just trying to get an answer if the practice itself is unacceptable or not. If so, is it unacceptable when anyone does it?
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

NibeIungsnarf posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Nomadic View posted...

So, is it ok or not for CNN to do the same thing? If not, then why single out Fox?

The Republicans playbook

Any criticism of Fox is to be responded to with criticism of CNN

Any criticism of Trump is to be responded to with criticism of Hillary

Well, is it ok or not? Do you only have a problem with the one side doing the practice or not?

How do you ever have a conversation about an issue if any interjection of BUT SOMEONE ELSE DID IT TOO! is okay at any point of the dicussion? Because you can do that about literally anything.

Its absolutely a valid argument if youre arguing that its abhorrent for one side, but not the other. If thats your criticism then it cuts both ways. At least explain what separates the two.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Nomadic View posted...

Doom_Art posted...

Nomadic View posted...

CNN

Doom_Art posted...

*whataboutism alarm goes off*

AAAAAAHHHHHHH HE DID THE THING

*flails arms*

Yeah, thats exactly what Im addressing. Why single out one side? If you have a problem with the practice then you have a problem with both sides Id assume. Whats the difference between the two?

Because this topic isn't about CNN, and pointing out that CNN sucks too does nothing to make Fox suck any less.

It kinda does. Either the standard is abhorrent or it isnt. Singling our one side for a general practice while ignoring the other doesnt make sense.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Nomadic View posted...

So, is it ok or not for CNN to do the same thing? If not, then why single out Fox?

The Republicans playbook

Any criticism of Fox is to be responded to with criticism of CNN

Any criticism of Trump is to be responded to with criticism of Hillary

Well, is it ok or not? Do you only have a problem with the one side doing the practice or not?
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Doom_Art posted...

Nomadic View posted...

CNN

Doom_Art posted...

*whataboutism alarm goes off*

AAAAAAHHHHHHH HE DID THE THING

*flails arms*

Yeah, thats exactly what Im addressing. Why single out one side? If you have a problem with the practice then you have a problem with both sides Id assume. Whats the difference between the two?
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

So, is it ok or not for CNN to do the same thing? If not, then why single out Fox?
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

Patchwork posted...

Both the Clintons should just retire into obscurity so we can focus on our current horrible political situation.

Absolutely not. The Clintons are a gift to the Republican Party.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

CJayC went after assholes like that in court. I dont know if SBallen will actually do anything or not, but CJayC stood up for us.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>

I need an emotional support glock with me everywhere I go.
---

{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>