Der's comments about how he was open to immigration reform until people at protests started waving Mexican flags reminded me of this article. I am sure people will be quick to explain to me how it's not true, but...
QuoteImagine: Protest, Insurgency and the Workings of White Privilege
By Tim Wise
April 20, 2010
Let's play a game, shall we? The name of the game is called "Imagine." The way it's played is simple: we'll envision recent happenings in the news, but then change them up a bit. Instead of envisioning white people as the main actors in the scenes we'll conjure—the ones who are driving the action—we'll envision black folks or other people of color instead. The object of the game is to imagine the public reaction to the events or incidents, if the main actors were of color, rather than white. Whoever gains the most insight into the workings of race in America, at the end of the game, wins.
So let's begin.
Imagine that hundreds of black protesters were to descend upon Washington DC and Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Capitol and White House, armed with AK-47s, assorted handguns, and ammunition. And imagine that some of these protesters--the black protesters--spoke of the need for political revolution, and possibly even armed conflict in the event that laws they didn't like were enforced by the government. Would these protesters--these black protesters with guns--be seen as brave defenders of the Second Amendment, or would they be viewed by most whites as a danger to the republic? What if they were Arab-Americans? Because, after all, that's what happened recently when white gun enthusiasts descended upon the nation's capital, arms in hand, and verbally announced their readiness to make war on the country's political leaders if the need arose.
Imagine that white members of Congress, while walking to work, were surrounded by thousands of angry black people, one of whom proceeded to spit on one of those congressmen for not voting the way the black demonstrators desired. Would the protesters be seen as merely patriotic Americans voicing their opinions, or as an angry, potentially violent, and even insurrectionary mob? After all, this is what white Tea Party protesters did recently in Washington.
Imagine that a rap artist were to say, in reference to a white president: "He's a piece of shit and I told him to suck on my machine gun." Because that's what rocker Ted Nugent said recently about President Obama.
Imagine that a prominent mainstream black political commentator had long employed an overt bigot as Executive Director of his organization, and that this bigot regularly participated in black separatist conferences, and once assaulted a white person while calling them by a racial slur. When that prominent black commentator and his sister--who also works for the organization--defended the bigot as a good guy who was misunderstood and "going through a tough time in his life" would anyone accept their excuse-making? Would that commentator still have a place on a mainstream network? Because that's what happened in the real world, when Pat Buchanan employed as Executive Director of his group, America's Cause, a blatant racist who did all these things, or at least their white equivalents: attending white separatist conferences and attacking a black woman while calling her the n-word.
Imagine that a black radio host were to suggest that the only way to get promoted in the administration of a white president is by "hating black people," or that a prominent white person had only endorsed a white presidential candidate as an act of racial bonding, or blamed a white president for a fight on a school bus in which a black kid was jumped by two white kids, or said that he wouldn't want to kill all conservatives, but rather, would like to leave just enough--"living fossils" as he called them--"so we will never forget what these people stood for." After all, these are things that Rush Limbaugh has said, about Barack Obama's administration, Colin Powell's endorsement of Barack Obama, a fight on a school bus in Belleville, Illinois in which two black kids beat up a white kid, and about liberals, generally.*
Imagine that a black pastor, formerly a member of the U.S. military, were to declare, as part of his opposition to a white president's policies, that he was ready to "suit up, get my gun, go to Washington, and do what they trained me to do." This is, after all, what Pastor Stan Craig said recently at a Tea Party rally in Greenville, South Carolina.
Imagine a black radio talk show host gleefully predicting a revolution by people of color if the government continues to be dominated by the rich white men who have been "destroying" the country, or if said radio personality were to call Christians or Jews non-humans, or say that when it came to conservatives, the best solution would be to "hang 'em high." And what would happen to any congressional representative who praised that commentator for "speaking common sense" and likened his hate talk to "American values?" After all, those are among the things said by radio host and best-selling author Michael Savage, predicting white revolution in the face of multiculturalism, or said by Savage about Muslims and liberals, respectively. And it was Congressman Culbertson, from Texas, who praised Savage in that way, despite his hateful rhetoric.
Imagine a black political commentator suggesting that the only thing the guy who flew his plane into the Austin, Texas IRS building did wrong was not blowing up Fox News instead. This is, after all, what Anne Coulter said about Tim McVeigh, when she noted that his only mistake was not blowing up the New York Times.
Imagine that a popular black liberal website posted comments about the daughter of a white president, calling her "typical redneck trash," or a "whore" whose mother entertains her by "making monkey sounds." After all that's comparable to what conservatives posted about Malia Obama on freerepublic.com last year, when they referred to her as "ghetto trash."
Imagine that black protesters at a large political rally were walking around with signs calling for the lynching of their congressional enemies. Because that's what white conservatives did last year, in reference to Democratic party leaders in Congress.
In other words, imagine that even one-third of the anger and vitriol currently being hurled at President Obama, by folks who are almost exclusively white, were being aimed, instead, at a white president, by people of color. How many whites viewing the anger, the hatred, the contempt for that white president would then wax eloquent about free speech, and the glories of democracy? And how many would be calling for further crackdowns on thuggish behavior, and investigations into the radical agendas of those same people of color?
To ask any of these questions is to answer them. Protest is only seen as fundamentally American when those who have long had the luxury of seeing themselves as prototypically American engage in it. When the dangerous and dark "other" does so, however, it isn't viewed as normal or natural, let alone patriotic. Which is why Rush Limbaugh could say, this past week, that the Tea Parties are the first time since the Civil War that ordinary, common Americans stood up for their rights: a statement that erases the normalcy and "American-ness" of blacks in the civil rights struggle, not to mention women in the fight for suffrage and equality, working people in the fight for better working conditions, and LGBT folks as they struggle to be treated as full and equal human beings.
And this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis.
Game Over.
*(Denver Post December 29, 1995)
QuoteAnd this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis.
:lmfao:
Let's play the game of "Imagine," only, this time, let's imagine that the writer of the scenarios is interested in letting the reader determine the insights, rather than trying to force the reader to accept the writer's interpretation of what is to be learned.
White people are better. It's not privilege so much as superior genetic heritage.
QuoteImagine that a prominent mainstream black political commentator had long employed an overt bigot as Executive Director of his organization, and that this bigot regularly participated in black separatist conferences, and once assaulted a white person while calling them by a racial slur. When that prominent black commentator and his sister--who also works for the organization--defended the bigot as a good guy who was misunderstood and "going through a tough time in his life" would anyone accept their excuse-making? Would that commentator still have a place on a mainstream network? Because that's what happened in the real world, when Pat Buchanan employed as Executive Director of his group, America's Cause, a blatant racist who did all these things, or at least their white equivalents: attending white separatist conferences and attacking a black woman while calling her the n-word.
Heh, didn't the guy who wrote that article remember the controversy over Obama's bigoted (and Black) pastor?
Admittedly the guy never assaulted anyone, but his bigoted musings were, at least initially, shrugged off as understandable, given the context of the times.
So we're supposed to be imagining a Louis Farrakhan speaking engagement? :unsure:
Interesting.
Imagine if Faeelin wasn't gay, would he still be such a Weenie? :hmm:
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 08:55:20 AM
QuoteAnd this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis.
:lmfao:
Eh, I agree it's over the top, but I can't help but compare Der's comments about the protests over immigration reform (They had Mexican flags!) to a lot of the stuff the Teabaggers are doing, or the way a lot of the right snarked and criticized the gay community for its protests after Prop 8 but represents the tea party as Americans expressing their right to assemble.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 22, 2010, 09:52:49 AM
Imagine if Faeelin wasn't gay, would he still be such a Weenie? :hmm:
No, I'd be an even more insufferable ass. Imagine Neil if he was as awesome as he thinks he is.
Probably get a better response at EUOT
Quote from: Faeelin on April 22, 2010, 10:06:54 AM
Imagine Neil if he was as awesome as he thinks he is.
Neil doesn't think he's that awesome, or he wouldn't seek validation like he does.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 22, 2010, 10:22:17 AM
Quote from: Faeelin on April 22, 2010, 10:06:54 AM
Imagine Neil if he was as awesome as he thinks he is.
Neil doesn't think he's that awesome, or he wouldn't seek validation like he does.
You're confused. Neil is merely giving the masses an opportunity to admire His Internet brilliance.
Quote from: Faeelin on April 22, 2010, 10:05:37 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 08:55:20 AM
QuoteAnd this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis.
:lmfao:
Eh, I agree it's over the top, but I can't help but compare Der's comments about the protests over immigration reform (They had Mexican flags!) to a lot of the stuff the Teabaggers are doing, or the way a lot of the right snarked and criticized the gay community for its protests after Prop 8 but represents the tea party as Americans expressing their right to assemble.
I love that the article uses as its "typical" examples the worst possible extremist's, and assumes that this is representative of the entirety of the Evil Racist Right.
And then you come along, look at derspeiss making a single particular complaint about a very particular instance, and think "Hey, this is JUST what that guy was talking about!" Hell, the guy in question is bonkers, and your attempt to tie in derspeiss in is even MORE bonkers.
It is like you are intentionally setting out to show how completely dis-associated with actual arguments you can make a bunch of hyperbole illustrate.
Quote from: Faeelin on April 22, 2010, 10:05:37 AM
Eh, I agree it's over the top, but I can't help but compare Der's comments about the protests over immigration reform (They had Mexican flags!) to a lot of the stuff the Teabaggers are doing, or the way a lot of the right snarked and criticized the gay community for its protests after Prop 8 but represents the tea party as Americans expressing their right to assemble.
You missed my point in the other thread, but I have to admit I'm similarly confused by what you're trying to put forth here.
Are you saying my comments remind you of the tea party protests? Or are you saying I'm giving the tea partiers a pass for doing the same stuff illegal immigrants did in their protests?
Quote from: Malthus on April 22, 2010, 09:02:47 AM
QuoteImagine that a prominent mainstream black political commentator had long employed an overt bigot as Executive Director of his organization, and that this bigot regularly participated in black separatist conferences, and once assaulted a white person while calling them by a racial slur. When that prominent black commentator and his sister--who also works for the organization--defended the bigot as a good guy who was misunderstood and "going through a tough time in his life" would anyone accept their excuse-making? Would that commentator still have a place on a mainstream network? Because that's what happened in the real world, when Pat Buchanan employed as Executive Director of his group, America's Cause, a blatant racist who did all these things, or at least their white equivalents: attending white separatist conferences and attacking a black woman while calling her the n-word.
Heh, didn't the guy who wrote that article remember the controversy over Obama's bigoted (and Black) pastor?
Admittedly the guy never assaulted anyone, but his bigoted musings were, at least initially, shrugged off as understandable, given the context of the times.
I don't think they were shrugged off.
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 10:35:59 AM
Quote from: Faeelin on April 22, 2010, 10:05:37 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 08:55:20 AM
QuoteAnd this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis.
:lmfao:
Eh, I agree it's over the top, but I can't help but compare Der's comments about the protests over immigration reform (They had Mexican flags!) to a lot of the stuff the Teabaggers are doing, or the way a lot of the right snarked and criticized the gay community for its protests after Prop 8 but represents the tea party as Americans expressing their right to assemble.
I love that the article uses as its "typical" examples the worst possible extremist's, and assumes that this is representative of the entirety of the Evil Racist Right.
And then you come along, look at derspeiss making a single particular complaint about a very particular instance, and think "Hey, this is JUST what that guy was talking about!" Hell, the guy in question is bonkers, and your attempt to tie in derspeiss in is even MORE bonkers.
It is like you are intentionally setting out to show how completely dis-associated with actual arguments you can make a bunch of hyperbole illustrate.
I didn't see the word typical in there once.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 11:21:41 AM
I don't think they were shrugged off.
They certainly were
initially. The notion advanced by the Obama camp (and by Obama himself) was that the reverend was from a different time, and that his statements have to be understood in the context of the times; otherwise he's a great guy, doing good work.
Only after some time (and further embarrasing statements) did Obama throw him under the bus.
Quote from: Malthus on April 22, 2010, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 11:21:41 AM
I don't think they were shrugged off.
They certainly were initially. The notion advanced by the Obama camp (and by Obama himself) was that the reverend was from a different time, and that his statements have to be understood in the context of the times; otherwise he's a great guy, doing good work.
Only after some time (and further embarrasing statements) did Obama throw him under the bus.
Wasn't shrugged off by Berkut and Hans who were quite smug about the whole thing.
Quote from: Malthus on April 22, 2010, 09:02:47 AM
QuoteImagine that a prominent mainstream black political commentator had long employed an overt bigot as Executive Director of his organization, and that this bigot regularly participated in black separatist conferences, and once assaulted a white person while calling them by a racial slur. When that prominent black commentator and his sister--who also works for the organization--defended the bigot as a good guy who was misunderstood and "going through a tough time in his life" would anyone accept their excuse-making? Would that commentator still have a place on a mainstream network? Because that's what happened in the real world, when Pat Buchanan employed as Executive Director of his group, America's Cause, a blatant racist who did all these things, or at least their white equivalents: attending white separatist conferences and attacking a black woman while calling her the n-word.
Heh, didn't the guy who wrote that article remember the controversy over Obama's bigoted (and Black) pastor?
Admittedly the guy never assaulted anyone, but his bigoted musings were, at least initially, shrugged off as understandable, given the context of the times.
According to the initial post, the article was first written in 1995.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 11:25:19 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 10:35:59 AM
I love that the article uses as its "typical" examples the worst possible extremist's, and assumes that this is representative of the entirety of the Evil Racist Right.
And then you come along, look at derspeiss making a single particular complaint about a very particular instance, and think "Hey, this is JUST what that guy was talking about!" Hell, the guy in question is bonkers, and your attempt to tie in derspeiss in is even MORE bonkers.
It is like you are intentionally setting out to show how completely dis-associated with actual arguments you can make a bunch of hyperbole illustrate.
I didn't see the word typical in there once.
It's his ninth word.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 22, 2010, 12:13:35 PM
According to the initial post, the article was first written in 1995.
I didn't catch that. Still, it kinda undermines the point of posting it now.
Edit: wait a second, the article
specifically refers to "President Obama", so that excuse won't wash.
QuoteImagine that a rap artist were to say, in reference to a white president: "He's a piece of shit and I told him to suck on my machine gun." Because that's what rocker Ted Nugent said recently about President Obama.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 22, 2010, 12:13:35 PM
According to the initial post, the article was first written in 1995.
I believe he's citing a source from 1995 in the paragraph about Rush Limbaugh; hence the "*" at the end of that paragraph and at the bottom.
Quote from: grumbler on April 22, 2010, 12:18:26 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 11:25:19 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 10:35:59 AM
I love that the article uses as its "typical" examples the worst possible extremist's, and assumes that this is representative of the entirety of the Evil Racist Right.
And then you come along, look at derspeiss making a single particular complaint about a very particular instance, and think "Hey, this is JUST what that guy was talking about!" Hell, the guy in question is bonkers, and your attempt to tie in derspeiss in is even MORE bonkers.
It is like you are intentionally setting out to show how completely dis-associated with actual arguments you can make a bunch of hyperbole illustrate.
I didn't see the word typical in there once.
It's his ninth word.
I thought it was of.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdepts.washington.edu%2Fcivilr%2Fimages%2Fbpp%2Fwsa%2Fblack%2520panthers_1968.jpg&hash=7ac28bc27bbfd2573fae6111a964ac4866d7b33a)
Dumb column is dumb.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2010, 11:05:05 AM
You missed my point in the other thread, but I have to admit I'm similarly confused by what you're trying to put forth here.
Are you saying my comments remind you of the tea party protests? Or are you saying I'm giving the tea partiers a pass for doing the same stuff illegal immigrants did in their protests?
The latter, actually. But I suppose in general I think the protests of tea parties have been covered much more symapthetically than other protests in the last few years.
Quote from: JonasSalk on April 22, 2010, 01:18:27 PM
Dumb column is dumb.
Dude, please change your avatar. :P
Quote from: Faeelin on April 22, 2010, 01:19:05 PM
The latter, actually. But I suppose in general I think the protests of tea parties have been covered much more symapthetically than other protests in the last few years.
So in your opinion I should show as much scorn for US citizens protesting their government as I should for people who are here illegally demanding things they are not entitled to?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 12:40:19 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 22, 2010, 12:18:26 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 11:25:19 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 10:35:59 AM
I love that the article uses as its "typical" examples the worst possible extremist's, and assumes that this is representative of the entirety of the Evil Racist Right.
And then you come along, look at derspeiss making a single particular complaint about a very particular instance, and think "Hey, this is JUST what that guy was talking about!" Hell, the guy in question is bonkers, and your attempt to tie in derspeiss in is even MORE bonkers.
It is like you are intentionally setting out to show how completely dis-associated with actual arguments you can make a bunch of hyperbole illustrate.
I didn't see the word typical in there once.
It's his ninth word.
I thought it was of.
Nope.
1. I
2. love
3. that
4. the
5. article
6. uses
7. as
8. its
9. "typical"Right there. Ninth word, as noted earlier.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2010, 01:38:26 PM
So in your opinion I should show as much scorn for US citizens protesting their government as I should for people who are here illegally demanding things they are not entitled to?
Not the issue. Tea party people are also demanding things they are not "entitled to."
As for the immigration protesters being "here illegally" that is generally false. The bulk of those protesters were also US citizens, according to random sampling.
Not that you should let mere facts get in the way of a good froth.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fforbestadvice.com%2FFanClubs%2FNancyPelosi%2FNancy_Pelosi_Young_Bikini.jpg&hash=d361ffb667fdb16c7bfe961a95dd2f03c1951604)
Quote from: Faeelin on April 22, 2010, 01:19:05 PMBut I suppose in general I think the protests of tea parties have been covered much more symapthetically than other protests in the last few years.
Yeah, teabagger is such an honorific.
Quote from: grumbler on April 22, 2010, 01:46:47 PM
Not the issue. Tea party people are also demanding things they are not "entitled to."
Oh, like citizenship for a country they entered illegally & reside/work in illegally? Damn those tea partiers!
QuoteAs for the immigration protesters being "here illegally" that is generally false. The bulk of those protesters were also US citizens, according to random sampling.
Not that you should let mere facts get in the way of a good froth.
Oh, okay. I'll take your word for it. Thanks. Kinda odd for US citizens to be waving Mexican flags like crazy.
Anyway, I'm sure some were citizens, but there were still large numbers of illegals who had the
cojones to demand citizenship. It's like an uninvited guest who shows up at a party at your house & then demands that you let him move in.
You know, I've never actually had Diet Dr. Pepper, seeing as how I'm not a raging fatass.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2010, 02:22:04 PM
Oh, okay. I'll take your word for it. Thanks. Kinda odd for US citizens to be waving Mexican flags like crazy.
It's kinda odd for several states to incorporate the flag of the greatest enemy of the US into the state flags. They call it heritage. Bleh.
The US is privileged indeed if its "greatest enemy" is a country it has fought merely one war with, and that war was a war of conquest and annexation - on the US's part.
Also, language like that ignores the fact that we are at least nominally part of your country. It certaintly doesnt encourage reconciliation or anything like it.
Oddly enough, I'm in agreement with derspiess on this.
If people want to move to America that is great. If they want to become Americans even better. But this requires a certain commitment to the new country and an acceptance that you must leave part of the old behind. There is no "We're bringing Mexico with us" Bring the food, even the language for all I care, but the flags and the loyalties have to change.
I don't really understand the need for Hispanics to push so hard for amnesty and all that. Don't they realize the people coming from Mexico are the peasantry or worse? You don't see middle class white Americans pushing for hillbilly rights.
Its very strange to me.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 04:01:03 PM
It's kinda odd for several states to incorporate the flag of the greatest enemy of the US into the state flags. They call it heritage. Bleh.
AFAIK only the Caliphate of South Carolina has the crescent moon on it. :unsure:
;)
There is a load of difference between these people betraying the US to show support for a foreign country and state flags putting the Union Jack on them. In fact, I think it is a Hindu symbol of peace. :hmm:
Silly article.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 04:01:03 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2010, 02:22:04 PM
Oh, okay. I'll take your word for it. Thanks. Kinda odd for US citizens to be waving Mexican flags like crazy.
It's kinda odd for several states to incorporate the flag of the greatest enemy of the US into the state flags. They call it heritage. Bleh.
Which states have the union jack in them? :huh:
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 22, 2010, 10:11:09 AM
Probably get a better response at EUOT
:lmfao:
It's cute that you people still think of EUOT as some sort of Eurocommie stronghold.
Quote from: Sahib on April 22, 2010, 05:24:08 PM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 22, 2010, 10:11:09 AM
Probably get a better response at EUOT
:lmfao:
It's cute that you people still think of EUOT as some sort of Eurocommie stronghold.
Too many kids on there for me.
Quote from: derspiess on April 22, 2010, 02:22:04 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 22, 2010, 01:46:47 PM
Not the issue. Tea party people are also demanding things they are not "entitled to."
Oh, like citizenship for a country they entered illegally & reside/work in illegally? Damn those tea partiers!
Uh, yeah. Yeah, sure. * backs away slowly*
QuoteOh, okay. I'll take your word for it. Thanks. Kinda odd for US citizens to be waving Mexican flags like crazy.
Kinda odd for one to speak of rallies in which some Mexican flags were waved to now be full of people "waving Mexican flags like crazy," but if that rant makes you feel better, go for it. Truth is over-rated when it comes to emotional satisfaction.
QuoteAnyway, I'm sure some were citizens, but there were still large numbers of illegals who had the cojones to demand citizenship.
I am sure that there are illegal immigrants who demand citizenship, just as there are people who claim that the earth is flat. Not sure what either has to do with this discussion, though.
QuoteIt's like an uninvited guest who shows up at a party at your house & then demands that you let him move in.
Good analogy, Marti.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 04:01:03 PMIt's kinda odd for several states to incorporate the flag of the greatest enemy of the US into the state flags. They call it heritage. Bleh.
Only one state (Mississippi) has the old Army of Northern Virginia battle flag on it, not "several" and the CSA was certainly not the greatest "enemy" of the US. Rather, it sought--rightly or wrongly--to preserve the US through secession, the ultimate check on government.
Now make a post that says "lol slavery" and get your facts wrong again, please.
Quote from: Barrister on April 22, 2010, 05:20:26 PMWhich states have the union jack in them? :huh:
Sandwich Islands Hawaii.
Quote from: Sahib on April 22, 2010, 05:24:08 PM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 22, 2010, 10:11:09 AM
Probably get a better response at EUOT
:lmfao:
It's cute that you people still think of EUOT as some sort of Eurocommie stronghold.
:lmfao:
Overstatement much?
Quote from: JonasSalk on April 22, 2010, 06:38:36 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 04:01:03 PMIt's kinda odd for several states to incorporate the flag of the greatest enemy of the US into the state flags. They call it heritage. Bleh.
Only one state (Mississippi) has the old Army of Northern Virginia battle flag on it, not "several" and the CSA was certainly not the greatest "enemy" of the US. Rather, it sought--rightly or wrongly--to preserve the US through secession, the ultimate check on government.
Now make a post that says "lol slavery" and get your facts wrong again, please.
Well hello there. :yeahright:
Yeah word of advice: Habbakus brother is slightly crazy in his politics. :P
Quote from: Jaron on April 22, 2010, 07:04:59 PM
Yeah word of advice: Habbakus brother is slightly crazy in his politics. :P
Is that who Jonas Salk is?
I believe so.
Yes it is.
Quote from: Sahib on April 22, 2010, 05:24:08 PM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 22, 2010, 10:11:09 AM
Probably get a better response at EUOT
:lmfao:
It's cute that you people still think of EUOT as some sort of Eurocommie stronghold.
They've gone all Hansie and Ron Paul-libertardian crazy over there. :(
:lol: Have they, now? I find that hard to believe.
Quote from: Habbaku on April 22, 2010, 07:21:46 PM
:lol: Have they, now? I find that hard to believe.
It's true.
Quote from: Jaron on April 22, 2010, 07:16:53 PM
I believe so.
Maybe he'll tell us about how states actually have rights.
I need to know what side Mart is on this so that I know the other side is correct.
Quote from: Jaron on April 22, 2010, 07:04:59 PM
Yeah word of advice: Habbakus brother is slightly crazy in his politics. :P
National independence is crazy?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 07:41:20 PM
Quote from: Jaron on April 22, 2010, 07:16:53 PM
I believe so.
Maybe he'll tell us about how states actually have rights.
Nah, only people do, but not black people.
Habbaku's brother is lettow? :lol:
When you can't disprove, play the name game!
Quote from: JonasSalk on April 22, 2010, 08:27:21 PM
When you can't disprove, play the name game!
I prefer both.
Hmm, looks like time for Raz to once again defend his claim that he is the craziest poster on Languish, because he seems to have real competition this time!
*pops popcorn*
Quote from: Razgovory on April 22, 2010, 08:24:49 PM
Habbaku's brother is lettow? :lol:
Lettow is amusing, so, no. Habbaku's little brother is lettow's little brother.
Quote from: grumbler on April 22, 2010, 09:05:07 PM
Hmm, looks like time for Raz to once again defend his claim that he is the craziest poster on Languish, because he seems to have real competition this time!
*pops popcorn*
I think I made my case today in other threads. I kinda have a headache.