|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 8, 2018 8:59:32 GMT -5
On Candace Owens (whose "gotcha" attempt was pathetic, imo):
I find it telling that her twitter account was reinstated so quickly, after she was initially banned. It seems that those little blue check marks do indeed mean that some animals are more equal than others (on twitter). And that's kind of a shame, imo. Russian bots and the like aside, I thought everyone was going to be held to the same standards there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 8, 2018 9:11:42 GMT -5
If you're actually trying to figure out why someone like me takes an anti-SJW position, I believe we've had threads about this before. Nah, I'm pretty sure I've got it figured out. I've taken your points (your and everyone else's, a d nauseam) and some of them I agree with. But it seems apparent that these sorts of discussions of the hypocrisy of the left basically provide some sort of psychological payoff. And really, I'm the same. Pointing out hypocrisy is gaining moral high ground. It's the equivalent of the would-be thread I've never started about fundamentalist Christians supporting Trump the adulterer. So yes, the hypocrisy is annoying, and we're all so much better than them. Beyond that... what? It's nothing new, on either side. And none of this is about politicians or policy...it's about people on Twitter, and you haven't provided any evidence that it's more than that. Yes, we all argue useless arguments on the Internet. As for whether or not SJWs are just an annoyance on the Internet, or a threat of worse things, time will tell. I know you and NT believe that the Alt Right is clearly the greater threat. To me, it's not so clear. The Alt Right is more likely to commit acts of violence. But it's not at all clear to me that the tiny numbers they represent can do more long-term damage to liberal democracy than an authoritarian, regressive leftist movement that wants to dismantle liberal democracy for ever so progressive reasons. I mean, they both want to dismantle our present society, I just think the Alt Right is a tiny fringe that seems scary because they do occasionally kill people, while the SJW movement is a groundswell of groupthink that threatens to reify society while appearing to be just a bunch of kids rioting in Portland. But I am open to the argument that I'm also overestimating their influence. |
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 8, 2018 10:50:49 GMT -5
Okay, where did I say I am aligned with Mike Cernovich? So much of your response was nonsense. Being sick of SJWs does not make me Alt Right. I'm on my phone and terrible at writing long replies on a small screen. But that part of your rant was the stupidest. I don't do "rants" and I definitely don't do "stupid." That's just your typical knee jerk reactionary way of dealing with the unpleasantness of aligning your hates with those of scumbags like Cernovich and being called on it. So sad, too bad.
Where did you say you were aligned with Mike Cernovich? I didn't say you were. You said this:
Mike Cernovich is a pig and anything you take away from him to use against someone else who offends you because they talk trash about White guys will have pig shit all over it. Now if you've got such a raging hard-on against Sarah Jeong or James Gunn that you'll happily accept the droppings from a pig, have fun with your reactionary boner, but don't bitch when someone calls you out for relying on Alt-Right whackjobs for your info.
That part of your rant was pretty stupid too.  |
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 8, 2018 10:55:15 GMT -5
On Candace Owens (whose "gotcha" attempt was pathetic, imo): I find it telling that her twitter account was reinstated so quickly, after she was initially banned. It seems that those little blue check marks do indeed mean that some animals are more equal than others (on twitter). And that's kind of a shame, imo. Russian bots and the like aside, I thought everyone was going to be held to the same standards there. If that were true a certain Donald John Trump would have been banned from Twitter ages ago. Pity that it's not.  |
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 8, 2018 11:04:41 GMT -5
I don't do "rants" and I definitely don't do "stupid."
Definitely a matter of opinion. Try responding to the longer answer I gave you. The idea that I have a raging hard-on against Sarah Jeong or James Gunn is entirely your fabrication. Also, Cernovich -> James Gunn, not Sarah Jeong. I am not sure who dug up Sarah Jeong's tweets and publicized them, but I don't think it was an organized Alt Right action. (And if it was, it's still a thing she did to herself.) Cernovich is the one who dug up James Gunn's tweets, but AFAIK there is no dispute that those actually were his tweets. Anyone else could have found them as well. So it's not a matter of "relying on a right-wing nutjob for my info," it's a matter of a right-wing nutjob digging up uncomfortable information and publicizing it for ideologically motivated reasons. The question then is how to react to it. Your reaction seems to be to dismiss anything coming from a nefarious source because to act on or acknowledge it would be to empower them. While I understand the sentiment, it does not work, and is unprincipled, to just ignore things that your enemy dug up because they're inconvenient. If Mike Cernovich discovered that some famous liberal celebrity or politician was a rapist, which I'm sure he would publicize with great glee, would you defend said rapist because Cernovich himself is a scumbag and a hypocrite and only doing it to go after his enemies? By all means, point out Cernovich's hypocrisy and abominable views, but that doesn't make the other thing not exist. |
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 8, 2018 13:22:03 GMT -5
So much of your response was nonsense...But that part of your rant was the stupidest. All right, so most of this rant was pretty typical -
I would, but whatever I say, you're only gonna call it a stupid, nonsensical rant, so why bother? I'm not here to enable your insatiable need to be pointlessly rude.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 8, 2018 13:34:20 GMT -5
Aug 8, 2018 14:22:03 GMT -4 nighttimer said: I would, but whatever I say, you're only gonna call it a stupid, nonsensical rant, so why bother? I'm not here to enable your insatiable need to be pointlessly rude. You're kidding, right? I can't believe you're calling me rude with a straight face. (Well, I don't know what your face looks like. But seriously, wow.) Yes, I thought much of your rant was nonsense and stupid. Because as usual, disagreeing with you = siding with Hitler. I did my best to address what there was of substance (the distinction between individual racism and institutional racism, hypocrisy on the right and the left, whether nor not we should ignore Jeong and Gunn's infractions because others are worse and theirs were pointed out by right-wing figures), but if you're gonna post a long rant/screed/polemic calling people racist, then get upset because it's not received with the gravity you think a wall of insults deserves, spare yourself the typing next time. |
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Aug 8, 2018 16:00:24 GMT -5
As for whether or not SJWs are just an annoyance on the Internet, or a threat of worse things, time will tell. I know you and NT believe that the Alt Right is clearly the greater threat. To me, it's not so clear. The Alt Right is more likely to commit acts of violence. But it's not at all clear to me that the tiny numbers they represent can do more long-term damage to liberal democracy than an authoritarian, regressive leftist movement that wants to dismantle liberal democracy for ever so progressive reasons. I mean, they both want to dismantle our present society, I just think the Alt Right is a tiny fringe that seems scary because they do occasionally kill people, while the SJW movement is a groundswell of groupthink that threatens to reify society while appearing to be just a bunch of kids rioting in Portland. But I am open to the argument that I'm also overestimating their influence. I don't think either extreme Alt-Movement is all that threatening because of their numbers, but when it comes to the Alt-Right, some of their more deplorable views are either agreed upon or shrugged off by a large portion of the Regular Right. (I may see it that way because my real life is in a heavily Right-leaning area.) Also, there seem to be a lot more politicians on the Right who hold those views. I don't see the same thing on the Left. Nor do I see any of the Left's views (that I can think of) as deplorable. Misguided sometimes, and that could cause problems if implemented, but not hateful and evil like toward immigrants, Muslims, LGBT, etc. I picture, if the Alt-Left infiltrated and took over governance, we'd be more like some Western European countries when it comes to larger, more restrictive and more intrusive government. Not what I want, at all, but.... I picture, if the Alt-Right infiltrated and took over governance, we'd be more like Russia. |
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 8, 2018 17:22:06 GMT -5
You're kidding, right? I can't believe you're calling me rude with a straight face. (Well, I don't know what your face looks like. But seriously, wow.) I am not kidding and you are rude. Rude as hell. You say you want to have a civil debate on a serious issue. You claim to desire to discuss matters in a reasoned way, but then you get your ass on your shoulders and backhand away anything that does not line up with your own limited perspectives. Not by a reasoned, sourced, verified rebuttal which might actually require you to find a supporting source beyond your own limited worldview. You're not about that life. Not one where you actually have to back up your shit-talking with actual--y'know--facts.
What Sarah Jeong tweeted was rude and it was tactless and it was not well-thought out.
But it wasn't racism.
That's okay. Because as usual, taking anything you say as honest, genuine or serious = huge fucking waste of time. I consider the sophomoric ravings and clueless droolings of a whiny White guy, because a 5'3' Asian woman hurt their poor widdle feelings to be asinine, immature and ignorant. Suck it up, buttercups and grow a pair. Not every non-White person in the world wants to be your best buddy. Shocking news I know. I'm sure the Special Black Friend you hang out with meant to tell you this someday, but there just never seemed to be the right moment... 
If that's your best it failed to impress. The only thing I am a little annoyed with is how you crammed 82 words into a run-on sentence and not once did you express a single fresh take or an original thought.
But that's kind of de rigueur whenever White guys get together for a bitch session about racism, but the only racism they wanna talk about is what they believe is racism directed at them .
|
|
|
|
Post by prozyan on Aug 8, 2018 17:49:35 GMT -5
I think what Jeong said (tweeted) was dumb, ill advised and wrong. On the same hand, I'm glad there was no such thing as Twitter when I was young as I said plenty of dumb, ill advised and wrong things. I'm not going to get into the racist or bigot debate because I believe people often use Twitter to say provocative and edgy things without revealing their true thoughts or feelings. I will agree with NT on the sentiment that white people in general are crazy quick to scream racism or to point out false equivalency such as "if there is Black Entertainment Television why is there no White Entertainment Television?" They don't realize that basically every channel that isn't BET is white entertainment television. Frederick Joseph's experience of wearing a mock Redskins shirt labelled "Caucasian" illustrates this: www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2018/08/02/my-caucasians-shirt-exposes-hypocrisy-over-racist-logos-redskins-column/888706002/ |
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 8, 2018 18:11:17 GMT -5
I don't think either extreme Alt-Movement is all that threatening because of their numbers, but when it comes to the Alt-Right, some of their more deplorable views are either agreed upon or shrugged off by a large portion of the Regular Right. (I may see it that way because my real life is in a heavily Right-leaning area.) Also, there seem to be a lot more politicians on the Right who hold those views. I don't see the same thing on the Left. Nor do I see any of the Left's views (that I can think of) as deplorable. Misguided sometimes, and that could cause problems if implemented, but not hateful and evil like toward immigrants, Muslims, LGBT, etc.
I don't see mainstream conservatives being any more approving of the Alt Right than mainstream liberals are of the extreme left.
I think an Alt-Left government would devolve to Soviet Russia, while an Alt-Right government would look more like Putin's Russia.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 8, 2018 18:34:36 GMT -5
I am not kidding and you are rude. Rude as hell. You say you want to have a civil debate on a serious issue. You claim to desire to discuss matters in a reasoned way, but then you get your ass on your shoulders and backhand away anything that does not line up with your own limited perspectives. Not by a reasoned, sourced, verified rebuttal which might actually require you to find a supporting source beyond your own limited worldview. You're not about that life. Not one where you actually have to back up your shit-talking with actual--y'know--facts.
Your propensity for projection is truly astounding.
I mean, I'll cop to being rude at times. But it is amazing to me that you think you aren't, and I have always returned the same level of civility that you offer.
As for your sources, you constantly link either to opinion pieces that agree with you, or facts about an incident that are not in dispute, and then claim you've "documented" your point of view.
That's actually a civil debate-worthy topic, but I think we've already covered that ground. You believe in the post-modern construction of racism: "prejudice + power." Under that construction, Sarah Jeong isn't capable of being racist, at least not in the US. I disagree, even on the level of how much power a non-white person is or is not capable of having, but you're trying to force a semantic debate over the actual issue. Suppose I agreed to use some word other than "racism" to describe Sarah Jeong's attitude towards white people. It wouldn't change anything else I have said about her.
This is just being purely insulting (and, dare I say it, rude) for effect. Everything I say is honest and genuine, and when I'm not being serious, it's obviously marked accordingly.
Right, so let's pretend that wasn't just rude gratuitous insulting and break that down as if it were meant to be a serious accusation.
1. "Sophomoric ravings and clueless droolings of a whiny White guy" - well, there isn't much to break down there. To the degree that it isn't just insulting posturing, it's an opinion, and purely yours, motivated by nothing more than antipathy. I'd challenge you to find anyone else familiar with my writing, even people who don't like me, who'd honestly and seriously characterize me in such a way.
2. Sarah Jeong did not hurt my feelings. You know she didn't and that that's not why I said she's "racist." You've said much worse, about me personally, and you haven't hurt my feelings.
3."asinine, immature and ignorant" - see #1.
4. "Suck it up, buttercups and grow a pair." - No way to read that but as insult and posturing. 5. "Not every non-White person in the world wants to be your best buddy. " - Not even every white person in the world wants to be my best buddy. I am not concerned with being anyone's best buddy. I am not sad that you and Sarah Jeong will never be my best buddy.
Isn't that supposed to be Special Black Friends? I know, you're trying to get as much mileage as you can out of my once pointing out that I know black people other than you and so was pretty sure you did not speak for all black people. I was being sardonic, and you knew that, but you've tried to spin it ever since as a "some of my best friends are black" story. It was dishonest then and dishonest now, and you know it. But it doesn't stop you from trotting it out, because you'll never pass up what you imagine to be a "gotcha" moment no matter how disingenuous.
Wow, you sure got me there! I often write posts on the fly and don't go back and edit them! Such a damning indictment.
I mean, I could go back and analyze the literary style of your long-winded walls of text, but it's so much easier to point out the deficiencies in the arguments themselves (which are so fresh and original).
Actually, every single one of us white guys in this thread also discussed the racism that's been directed at Sarah Jeong and even the racism that's been directed at you. So this is just plain false. It's another one of your kneejerk oneliners that sounds good because it's so blisteringly indignant, but doesn't actually match reality.
You are trying to tell a narrative of white guys crying because an Asian woman said mean things, pretending that it's impossible that the discussion could be any more nuanced than that (even though it clearly is) because you've become convinced that Barry Deutsch's straw man political cartoons are literal representations of white people you are talking to. Psst - Pogo was allegorical, not a literal talking possum!
|
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 8, 2018 20:43:55 GMT -5
I am not kidding and you are rude. Rude as hell. You say you want to have a civil debate on a serious issue. You claim to desire to discuss matters in a reasoned way, but then you get your ass on your shoulders and backhand away anything that does not line up with your own limited perspectives. Not by a reasoned, sourced, verified rebuttal which might actually require you to find a supporting source beyond your own limited worldview. You're not about that life. Not one where you actually have to back up your shit-talking with actual--y'know--facts.
Your propensity for projection is truly astounding. ...said the pot to the kettle?
Apparently, you're easily astonished (though I don't believe for a second you really are).
Your capacity to engage in complete and total self-delusion is an awesome thing to behold. Let's go back to another time but the same place.
Jesus. I could have sworn you were faking it, but you really don't remember what you write, do you?
Well, DUH. 
It's not MY job to link either to opinion pieces that disagree with me or provide counter-facts about an incident. Why the entire fuck should I be expected to shoot down my own point? That's the other guy's job, which in this case would be YOU!
Do you really not understand how this debating thing works?
No, I believe in the classic means in which racism works in America. Racism is prejudice backed with the power to enforce it. Jeong may indeed be prejudiced against White people, but has she acted on it by going out and verbally or physically assaulting random White people walking down the street? No. But a punk like Trump can and he wouldn't lose a single vote. Words without a malicious action to back them up is only empty trash talk. That's not worth getting all butt-hurt over. That's my standard. Nobody said you had to accept it and I'm certainly not about to change mine to make you feel better about yours.
For guys like you and Optimus, Gunn and Jeong are simply convenient scapegoats for your general disdain for "Social Justice Warriors," an Angry White Man term of derision that has become so muddled as to have no real meaning at all.
Oh, you mean like the way you dismiss any post you disagree with as "stupid" and a "rant?" Yikes! There's that pot again...
Wow. Did you steal that from Trump's Twitter feed?
Where's the poop emoji because a line like "Everything I say is honest and genuine" is certainly not being serious and is totally full of shit.
Okay. This could be fun.
Dadgummit! Wrong again. It wasn't fun at all. 
You're the one who played the "Some of My Best Friends Are..." card. There is no statue of limitations when that will ever stop being quite literally the lamest thing a White person can say to a Black person. Call it dishonest all you want and be mad all you like, but don't get touchy because I remember what you'd like to forget.
Not really. It's merely a strong sign you need to write less and edit more. Throwing in a period every now and then might help too.
Boy, does this board need a poop emoji because that---that there was some primo Grade-A bullshit.
You'd like to think you point out the deficiencies in the arguments made by others, but you're more likely to say "Bah! "Stupid!" "A rant!" That's what is easier for you and you're really really good at that. Putting in the work of pointing out the deficiencies in the arguments made by others? You ain't about that life.
No shit? Every single one of you White guys discussed the racism directed at Sarah Jeong and even me? Didn't you just say, " Everything I say is honest and genuine, and when I'm not being serious, it's obviously marked accordingly." I think you missed one, dude. Please direct me to the post by Optimus or robeiae or for that matter from you that discussed the racism that's been directed at me. Maybe because I'm not a White guy, I can't find it?  From your lips to God's ear. See? Confession is good for the soul.
Psst - Pogo might not be the best example you could have come up with. Walt Kelly had some issues of his own with literal representations of Black people.  
You got your humble/brag on about how easy it is to point out the deficiencies in the arguments themselves, but oddly enough you chose the example of Pogo which is lousy with grotesquely offensive racial stereotypes.
When James Baldwin said, "I can't believe what you say because I see what you do" I doubt this is what he had in mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 8, 2018 21:27:35 GMT -5
Apparently, you're easily astonished (though I don't believe for a second you really are).
Actually, I genuinely am astounded that you are complaining about incivility on my part and pretending to be the victim.
I do remember what I wrote. What of it? I conceded then that I can be rude when pissed off, as I concede now. I still maintain that I have offered you the same level of civility you offer me. Go ahead, find me a case where I personally attacked you where you were being civil. (No, not where you were calling me racist and stupid and evil but not in those exact words, just in words that made it clear that's what you were saying.)
You trying to make a huge point out of my admitted flaws and pretending to be innocent of the same thing or worse is what I referred to as projection.
You want civil dialog, I am happy to engage (and I'll try not to be rude). But I make no such promises when your mode of engagement is to bloviate at length about how stupid and racist and ignorant all the white men disagree with you are.
Yes, I do. Do you understand the difference between a subjective opinion and empirical fact? You keep claiming you have "documented your sources" - well gee willikers, if I knew all you need for me to "document my sources" after you've posted a link to someone's opinion is to post a link to someone else with the opposite opinion, I would have wrapped up all these "debates" a lot faster! Silly me, I thought substantiating a point of view with actual facts followed by your own logical reasoning and laying out how you arrived at your conclusion was how most people did it.
I do not disagree with your differentiation. But again, no one (here) compared Sarah Jeong to Trump, or David Duke, or Mike Cernovich, or Hitler. For guys like you and Optimus, Gunn and Jeong are simply convenient scapegoats for your general disdain for "Social Justice Warriors," an Angry White Man term of derision that has become so muddled as to have no real meaning at all
.No, it's not muddled, except perhaps in your mind, because you don't pay attention, because everything we say is "Angry White Man derision" and you don't bother to respond beyond the level of posting cartoons and snide comments about Angry White Men.
You will find plenty of posts that I disagree with - even by you - that I did not dismiss as stupid rants. You do post a lot of stupid rants.
....Ya know, arguing back and forth about which of us calls the other one stupid oftenest and with the least justification is just tiresome, so tell ya what, I am going to unilaterally stop, whatever you decide to do. There, satisfied? (Don't answer, I don't really care.)
.... though you're not going to make it easy if you can't do better than that.
No, I did not.
Quote me the quote, quoter of quotes. Let's go back to this alleged "Some of my best friends are black" moment. I stand by my interpretation of my words.
Ya know, maybe that is true of my forum posts, but it's still irrelevant. I mean, what's next, we gonna start dinging each other for typos? Great, I'll give you that one, I sometimes write long run-on sentences. Are you happy? Here's your trophy.
Actually, just like now, even when my snap response was "Bah! A rant!" I actually went through it and pointed out all the deficiencies in your arguments. So you're being dishonest claiming I do not do the work. You may find my arguments unconvincing (no "maybe" there, but that's not the point) but yes, I do actually address your points. Usually each and every one of them, at greater length than the effort is worth.
Opty didn't comment on that particular post - the other one I recall, which I am not going to go searching for because I don't remember the thread or enough of the exact wording and I don't bookmark past discussions for the purpose of trotting out grudges like you do, is a discussion where we were talking about you and agreeing that you undoubtedly have justifiable reasons for being angry and have experienced racism, but it doesn't justify calling every white guy who disagrees with you racist. That discussion may have been during one of your time-outs.
So no, I don't think I missed one, dude.
:eyeroll: Okay, I'll give you that one - I picked Pogo because it was the first and most notable political cartoon figure that suited my (admittedly flippant) purpose. I thought about referring to Oliphant or Opus the Penguin, but the former is an artist, not a character, and as political as Bloom County might have been, it ain't quite the same thing. I did not remember the racist caricatures that frequented Pogo strips (I think the last time I actually read a book of Pogo strips was when I was a teenager). One Bonafide Racism Point for you, and next time I'll pick fucking Doonesbury. Mea culpa.
|
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Aug 9, 2018 11:42:38 GMT -5
You'll either get over it or you won't. So you're conceding you're both astounded  and pissed off?  There have been times where you briefly lapsed into being a serious debater instead of a snark machine and directly asked me to explain a point or elaborate and expand on one and I have complied. Sometimes it went well and sometimes it didn't, but when it didn't your default setting was to declare it as a rant. One can only offer so many chances to engage in an intelligent discussion before it becomes painfully apparent, only one side is really trying. As far as offering and receiving civility goes, as usual you're flattering yourself. You can be a nasty piece of work when you want to and you always seem to want to, so regarding civility, I'll paraphrase what El Hajj Malik El-Shabazz once said: “ I believe in the brotherhood of man and civility toward all men, but I don't believe in civility with anybody who doesn't want civility with me. I believe in treating people right, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to treat somebody right who doesn't know how to return the treatment.” Well, if you don't have any examples where I've called you racist and stupid and evil in those words, I don't have to defend myself over something I've never said, and if I inferred you were racist and stupid and evil in more opaque and duplicitous weasel words, the burden of proof is upon you to produce them. If you choose to share your personal failings and character flaws with complete strangers on the Internet, that's your choice. Mine is not to overshare with strangers I have little- to-nothing in common with. Pfft. Stuff and nonsense. Your persecution complex is showing. I've never said in print, online or vocally that ALL White men who disagree with me are stupid and racist and ignorant. I will say that SOME of the White men who disagree with me are stupid and racist and ignorant. My "mode of engagement" is to not bullshit you or anyone else on race-related matters and that means I may have to use words which are both blunt and pointed. I enjoy a spirited and lively debate, but I will not throttle back on calling b.s. on anyone who wants to assert their Alpha Male status by taking out their pee-pee and whizzing all over a post of mine as "stupid" and a "rant." It's rude, disrespectful and uncivil and I'm not here to play those kinds of games with you or anybody else. Respect is a two-way street and where none is given, none shall be received. All the bad blood and animus that both sides have contributed to is not going to magically disappear, but it's never too late to reach a level of tolerance and patience that heretofore has not existed. Yes I do know the difference between subjective opinion and empirical fact. I know because it was my job to know. You can speculate this is not the case, but I daresay you'd be hard-pressed to substantiate it. Without unduly flattering myself, I'd like to think of myself as a fairly accomplished researcher for data and information. Now you may have a different approach which works well for you, Amadan. Not directly, but there was a lot of sneering at Jeong as the personification everything you hate about the so-called "SJW's" and if she's not as much of a racist shitbag as Hitler, Cernovich, Duke or Trump, it's only because she's younger and less accomplished than they are. Give her time and maybe she'll sink to that level of hate. For guys like you and Optimus, Gunn and Jeong are simply convenient scapegoats for your general disdain for "Social Justice Warriors," an Angry White Man term of derision that has become so muddled as to have no real meaning at all I pay attention to what's worth paying attention to and your impending development of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome from pounding the keyboard so hard with righteous indignation over a small Asian woman throwing shade at Angry White Men is not worth paying attention to. Either you want me to respond or you don't, but if I do and when I do, you don't get to tell me how I should respond. I do not respond to Angry White Men. I respond to Reasonable White Man. Make up your mind which sort of White Man you are. Rubber meets glue. Bounces off me and sticks to you. This sort of childish retort is all you deserve as a response. Okay. Now that is certainly a big-ass lie. You care, Amadan. You can't help yourself not to care. If you don't want me to answer, don't ask a question and then answer your own question. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works. Just gonna keep digging that hole, huh? Okay. Here ya go. Spin away. Start spinning... This is starting to cut into my lunch hour, so I'll wrap this up, skip over the other parts not worth the time it would take to respond to and get to the good part.
 |
|
and pissed off? 