POLL: Should treasonous, racist bastards be allowed to remain on ET?

[Gabfly1]

Quote from traderNik:

...Since you already know 100% for sure that the member to whom you refer won't be banned, this thread becomes sort of pointless, and is just a way for you to say 'I object to this guy using the word 'niggardly' as a thinly veiled racist epithet'. If you feel that way, you should just start a thread saying as much, right? That's what will strike guys on here as whiny - the fact that you already know nothing will happen...

I do not refer to the isolated use of a single word. I refer to an established pattern of behavior.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from traderNik:

...EDIT: Just saw what you posted re: moderators saying that if evidence was presented, action would be taken. T-Dog, please tell me that you don't actually believe that. If that were the case, HWCBM (He Who Cannot Be Mentioned) would be gone permanently.

I saw a moderator's post assuring the reader. Let's see if he goes back on his word should the evidence in question be presented.

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from Gabfly1:
I do not refer to the isolated use of a single word. I refer to an established pattern of behavior.

Yes, I know. It doesn't make any difference. And you know that for sure, right? You may want things to be different, but there's a part of you that knows that as a result of this thread, no one will be banned. In fact, we all know that. That's what makes it seem whiny.

Quote from Gabfly1:
I saw a moderator's post assuring the reader. Let's see if he goes back on his word should the evidence in question be presented.

You've shown evidence that the member used the word 'niggardly' in reference to Barack Obama. Is there something about that that's against the TOU?

Nope. Right? See what I mean? You know what he meant, and I know what he meant, but that doesn't matter, does it. Ask a lawyer.

 

[Gabfly1]

Hoodooman, thank you for the clarification. "Treasonous" should be replaced with "seditious" in the thread title and text. Much appreciated.

 

[Hello]

No it isnt, it is only a principle you live by when you think you can use it as a tool against your political opponents, as evidenced below, when you said "Chris Matthews heart was in the right place" after his comment about Obama. You are just like every other democrat cry baby we have on this site who pretends to be against racism only when it is a political opponent. You have already said that words have "contextually different meanings" when they come from right wingers, so why on earth would anyone take you seriously?

Quote from Gabfly1:


I will complain about hate speech, racism and treason wherever and whenever I see it. It is a principal that I live by.

Quote from Gabfly1:

I agree. And although I think Matthews' heart was in the right place, his head was fully up his ass. As for Limbaugh and Beck, they have a record of nibbling at the periphery of racist commentary. For them to have said it, it would have had a contextually different meaning.

 

[Hello]

Here is another instasnce of Gabfly1 calling a a right winger a racist, with NO EVIDENCE just because he was from the right, and agreed with other peoples opinions on politics, who he thought was racist.

By his own standards, of accusing someone of being a racist just because they agreed with someone else on politics, that would make gabfly1 a pedophile for agreeing with optional777 on politics, and defending optional777 who has been questioned for that by many people on this site. So basically Gabfly1 is on here accusing right wingers of being racist, with no evidence then sticking up for optional777 because of supposed lack of evidence, this is hypocrisy at its finest.

Obviously i dont think like this, but i am just proving what a baby Gabfly1 is and what a joke it is when he makes accusations of racism towards other members.

See how that works?

Quote from Gabfly1:

I am not going to waste my time reviewing your vacuous posts. And while I was definitive in everything else I said about you, such as your being a lying liar, I wrote in the post that you quoted that I thought you were a racist. I continue to think so because I have seen posts of yours that both agreed with and defended other posters who have openly been questioned as racists by myself and others. And so, it's a heuristic kind of thing: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck and gets along with other ducks, then I am liable to think it's a duck. See how that works?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Gabfly1:

... "Treasonous" should be replaced with "seditious" in the thread title and text...

As a Canadian shouldn't you be more worried about the Quebec separatism movement?
http://www.linksnorth.com/canada-history/quebecsep.html
Or has that little issue died down enough that you now have time to obsess over US politics?


Or maybe you're concerned there are US citizens that might overthrow the Canadian Parliament.

Or is your Parliament still suspended?

 

[mgookin]

POLL: Should treasonous, racist bastards be allowed to remain on ET?

I didn't know Hank Paulson and George Bush were on here. What screen names do they use?

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from mgookin:
POLL: Should treasonous, racist bastards be allowed to remain on ET?

I didn't know Hank Paulson and George Bush were on here. What screen names do they use?

You know what? I have to say that's a pretty gratuitous shot against George Bush. Whatever else he might be, I never saw one shred of evidence that he's a racist. If I'm wrong and I missed something which would provide even strong circumstantial evidence, please set me straight and provide links and/or citations.

I recently saw an interview with Donna Brazile in which she objected strongly to the suggestion that he's in any way racist.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from Hello:

No it isnt, it is only a principle you live by when you think you can use it as a tool against your political opponents, as evidenced below, when you said "Chris Matthews heart was in the right place" after his comment about Obama. You are just like every other democrat cry baby we have on this site who pretends to be against racism only when it is a political opponent. You have already said that words have "contextually different meanings" when they come from right wingers, so why on earth would anyone take you seriously?

Either you are being intentionally obtuse or you're an idiot. Quite possibly both. In the quote that you posted I referred to consistent patterns established over time as compared to isolated gaffes.