Posts made by raphjd

Why do people come to this section just to complain that this section exists?

I bet they would have no problem with this section if every post was slagging off non SJWs.

Obama isn't your average liberal.  He's not one of the people with his face covered setting fire to a building while people are in to prevent "wrong speak".

You still haven't explained why liberals love illegals, while ridiculing those who went the legal route.  We've seen that here.

@inkball:

@raphjd:

Liberals do themselves no favors by constant flaming of anyone who they deem "wrong think/speak".    They can't discuss whatever topic it is, they just do personal attacks.   If it's in person, then liberals get extremely violent.

Raphjd, I never flamed or personally attacked anyone. Meanwhile, jojojojo3 calls me "shit" and "stupid butt slutt." This is a clear violation of your own rules against name calling.

As hmmfer mentions, this entire thread was created to stigmatize and attack liberals.

In the future, please use the REPORT button on the specific post so I can find it/them.

I disagree about calling you "shit".  He was comparing you to Santorum, whom he said is shit.  He was saying you both are equally intolerant, just on opposite sides.

I do agree with about "stupid butt slut".  That is uncalled for and he was given a warning for that.

As for this thread, it may be about insulting liberals, but look how many we have that are nothing more than flaming non liberals.  We have one thread that says that anyone who is a conservative (more like anyone who isn't far left) is a racist because of guilt by association.

I hate the way political parties on both sides are acting.  This shit started back during Clinton with the "contract with America".

Neither party is the "good side" of this.

Liberals do themselves no favors by constant flaming of anyone who they deem "wrong think/speak".    They can't discuss whatever topic it is, they just do personal attacks.  If it's in person, then liberals get extremely violent.

I think it's funny how liberals on YouTube got butt hurt over liberal videos getting banned for actual violations, after years of liberals doing false DMCAs against those they didn't like.

WOW, who would have thunk it.  A liberal with no argument, just personal attacks.

You proved my point about liberals refusing to have any discussion.  THANK!!!! :cheers:

In reality, real psychologists have weighed in on this topic.

In reality, most psychologists are liberals.  They are gonna make themselves look better, not worse.

He said that a few people outside the gay hive mind has made the site "distasteful".

@Negrescence:

Admissions to sights such as stormfront and other supremacist sites increased tenfold with the rise of Trump. Their has been a rise of racial antagonism and the federal hate map has seen an increase in hate groups.  More hate groups are parading in the streets and holding more announced gatherings they otherwise would have been more discreet about. They have indeed been more embolden by Trumps rhetoric and their desire to "get their country back".

Do you not see the connection between BLM and other bullshit like "white people go around" forcing white students to walk through a creek to get to class and the rise in whites pushing back?

Facebook hates wrong think, er um conservative views, but they have no problem with videos showing live puppies being fed to snakes or beheading videos.

All social media is pretty far left leaning.

Instead of blaming women for their failings, you blame some made up crap.    You believe women have no agency.

You ignore female privilege.

You ignore feminists fighting against gender equality.

You are a sexist.

@YoungGun:

@raphjd:

Your only point is no female US President.   The rest of it is a bunch of crap.

You have no rebuttal to my points so you claim that I'm confused.   Typical SJW bullshit.

You demand that we ignore the lunatic fringe, but fighting against gender equality is mainstream feminism.

There are actually more points, but the President point alone invalidates your whole argument so you definitely need to defend that if nothing else.  So far you have not, which means you've formed opinions based on a truth you clearly can't even justify.  That betrays a lack of objectivity and a trend towards bias and emotional decision-making.  AKA that's why I claimed you've been programmed by the right.  You should have thought through all the arguments on all sides, and if you haven't, then at least admit when you haven't and be willing to admit when you're wrong/uninformed/etc.  Instead you want to play games and try changing topics when you can't defend points.  It's a credibility-destroying tactic and shows you're arguing out of ego or agenda instead of truth-seeking or higher values.

As Trudeau said, it's extremely difficult to get women to run for office.

If women wanted a woman President, it would happen.  There would be nothing men could do to stop it.

This is where you blame "patriarchy".

Now refute my points.

Your only point is no female US President.  The rest of it is a bunch of crap.

You have no rebuttal to my points so you claim that I'm confused.  Typical SJW bullshit.

You demand that we ignore the lunatic fringe, but fighting against gender equality is mainstream feminism.

I'll talk with you, since "raphjd" either lacks the intelligence to stay on topic (I could see going off on a tangent here and there as we all do that, but when it's pointed out to him and he is literally just repeating himself over and over again–then there's nowhere for us to go) or knows he can't counter logical arguments based on truth, so he's just relying on reciting the same talking points which have little to do with the points that I brought up.

I'll ignore the personal attack.

You have no points that are worthwhile and you have no answer for the things I have talked about except "the patriarchy".    "The Patriarchy" is you answer for everything.

Why did feminists fight against gender neutral sex crime laws in the UK?  THE PATRIARCHY

Why did feminists fight against a gender neutral retirement age?  THE PATRIARCHY

You excuse away everything feminists do to prevent true gender equality.    You ignore all examples of female privilege, while screaming that everything oppresses women.

:police:  Please don't attack a child for the sins of the parents.  :police:

Feminists and their cucks only want gender equality in ways that suits women.  They have no fucking interest in real gender equality.

Feminists want 50/50 in the boardroom, but don't fucking dare mention the Sanitation Dept not being 50/50.

Hillary is extremely horrible, especially her idiotic feminist comments.  Blame penis all you want on her not getting elected, but it was all her and that crackhead liberal race baiting, identity politics and whatnot that turned so many people off.

The First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, is a feminist and for a decade she has done nothing to bring gender equality to Scotland.  Sure, she's brought feminism and feminist laws, but she has refused to give Scotland gender equality.    This has happened in other countries too.

Feminists created all kinds of lunatic bullshit like; stare-rape, talk-rape, birth-rape, lie-to-a-gold-digger-for-sex-rape, man-spreading, man-splaining and countless other things just to have something to bitch about and pretend to be victims.

Feminists pull fire alarms to prevent lectures on men's health issues.  The riot to prevent a lecture on male suicide.  They prevent men from having a safe space on campus.

Feminists hate MRAs, but constantly fight against gender equality and men's issues.

Even feminist cucks occasionally break ranks and admit that feminists/ism has no interest in men's issues.  It's only about the vag.

:police:  Feel free to post away.  :police:

This applies to everyone from whatever political leaning.

@royalcrown89:

@raphjd:

I am calm.  Not sure why you'd say I'm not.

RC is claiming guilt by association, while ignoring his side's guilt by association.  Actually, he's demanding  :blink: that the topic is forbidden in HIS thread.

How is asking you to refute my claims "ignoring my side's guilt?" What you are trying to do is minimize what this topic is about by bringing an irrelevant argument. Like I've said, I made an argument backed up by reputable sources and instead of providing your own sources to refute those claims, you tried to deflect and you never even attempted to refute my claims. You know what that means? 95-98% of what you say is wholly irrational based on either some mild form of mental illness or just old-fashioned racism. Hard to discern which it is or if it's a combination of both. <<< my standard reply to you from now on (I gave you ample chances this time)

LOL, you are still nothing but a sad little person.

I'm only refuting your guilt by association.  If it applies to your enemies, then it applies to your side as well.

By your logic; you worship a Congressman who is a proven liar, therefore you are a proven liar.

@royalcrown89:

Yeah, this is all relevant because Hillary Rodham Clinton is president right now. You people are impossible.

How so?

She is a public political figure so we can talk about her.

I am calm.  Not sure why you'd say I'm not.

RC is claiming guilt by association, while ignoring his side's guilt by association.  Actually, he's demanding  :blink: that the topic is forbidden in HIS thread.