[quote]Sloth wrote:
jawara wrote:
I’m a conservative and I’m not a rich white man.
Conservatism is best for the non-white/rich man.[/quote]
I strongly disagree. Please dont get me started…
[quote]jawara wrote:
Sloth wrote:
jawara wrote:
I’m a conservative and I’m not a rich white man.
Conservatism is best for the non-white/rich man.
I strongly disagree. Please dont get me started…[/quote]
I should’ve, and meant, to say that Conservatism is best for the non-white and non-rich man.
[quote]Gael wrote:
Standard Donkey wrote:
Gael wrote:
Standard Donkey wrote:
John S. wrote:
Gael wrote:
jp_dubya wrote:
Gael wrote:
And LOL – “there are more trees in America today than when America was founded.”
A nice propaganda bit, but the sad part is he probably doesn’t realize that the only reason this is true is because at it’s founding, America was 13 colonies along the east coast.
I can’t believe you guys eat this shit up.
Did you agree with anything from the ones that you watched?
Some, yes. Most of it is rhetorical opinion – hard to refute. He includes very few facts, and when he does, he is generally wrong.
Like what? He seems spot on to me most of the time.
Do not waste your time, common sense is a foreign concept to the left.
Read the thread, dipshit. I already provided two factual errors.
Yes, but they were bengign and completely irrelevent… Let’s not resort to personal insults shall we? Something about name calling just seems so…high school.
Wow. First you insult me, then you whine about being insulted? Absurd, and pathetic. [/quote]
Surely you jest. I said please no PersonaL insults. I made a comment about the left as a general people group, you called me a dipshit. It’s ok though, reading is hard. You certainly are a strange one.
And I believe the burden of proof is upon you, because you are the one who made the claim regarding his supposed false information. Do not try to delegate your task to me when you fail to produce a compelling argument.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
jawara wrote:
Sloth wrote:
jawara wrote:
I’m a conservative and I’m not a rich white man.
Conservatism is best for the non-white/rich man.
I strongly disagree. Please dont get me started…
I should’ve, and meant, to say that Conservatism is best for the non-white and non-rich man.[/quote]
Why do you feel that way?
[quote]MaddyD wrote:
jp_dubya wrote:
Gael wrote:
And LOL – “there are more trees in America today than when America was founded.”
A nice propaganda bit, but the sad part is he probably doesn’t realize that the only reason this is true is because at it’s founding, America was 13 colonies along the east coast.
I can’t believe you guys eat this shit up.
Did you agree with anything from the ones that you watched?
I know you did not ask me but I want to answer About the agreeing with, I agree with some of what he says.
like the issue with guns I agree with for one.
He does have alot of factual errors and he is just being a cheerleader spewing republican propraganda,but he does make alot of good valid points along with his invalid ones.
How he is going about it and standing up for his convictions and how he speaks with passion is respectable,and any opened minded smart person would do well to atleast listen and give his arguments a chance to be heard. thats my opinion on it, hes doing his thing and doing it pretty good.
I mean its gotten all of your guys’ attention didn’t it? and isnt that the point, to get as many people to listen as possible?
[/quote]
Agreed.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
The dude should run for president. He’s better than all of the current candidates put together. [/quote]
He’d get my vote…He did a great job! My favorite was the how many liberals are horny to get Obama’s scraps. That was a great analogy and it hits it strait on the head.
[quote]Gael wrote:
Unfortunately he makes a lot of factual errors.
“What do you think white people just came over to africa and ‘took’ slaves? Nuh uh.”
Despite his smugness, this guy should read some of the journals of slave ship captains. There are plenty of first hand accounts of plundering, looting, and capturing/enslaving most the natives and killing the rest. In England, the euphemized term for these contracted thugs were “privateers” (see for example, John Hawkins)
Unfortunately, it seems most people, rather than seeking the truth, are perfectly content to latch onto small scraps of opinion and become crusaders.
But don’t let me interrupt your cheerleading.
[/quote]
And you should read history. Many slaves were captured and sold to the europeans and americans by african and arab slave traders.
[quote]pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
Unfortunately he makes a lot of factual errors.
“What do you think white people just came over to africa and ‘took’ slaves? Nuh uh.”
Despite his smugness, this guy should read some of the journals of slave ship captains. There are plenty of first hand accounts of plundering, looting, and capturing/enslaving most the natives and killing the rest. In England, the euphemized term for these contracted thugs were “privateers” (see for example, John Hawkins)
Unfortunately, it seems most people, rather than seeking the truth, are perfectly content to latch onto small scraps of opinion and become crusaders.
But don’t let me interrupt your cheerleading.
And you should read history. Many slaves were captured and sold to the europeans and americans by african and arab slave traders.[/quote]
Alot of the slaves that were sold into slavery were tribes that had been conquered by other tribes. But you are right it’s just that alot of people just don’t want to see it and blame “whitey” for everything thats wrong in the world.
[quote]Gael wrote:
And LOL – “there are more trees in America today than when America was founded.”
A nice propaganda bit, but the sad part is he probably doesn’t realize that the only reason this is true is because at it’s founding, America was 13 colonies along the east coast.
I can’t believe you guys eat this shit up.[/quote]
Do you have evidence to the contrary? That the current land mass of the U.S. has fewer tree now than in the olden days? If you’re calling out the facts, it would be useful to back up your rebuttal. Saying “nu uh” really isn’t good enough.
[quote]pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
Unfortunately he makes a lot of factual errors.
“What do you think white people just came over to africa and ‘took’ slaves? Nuh uh.”
Despite his smugness, this guy should read some of the journals of slave ship captains. There are plenty of first hand accounts of plundering, looting, and capturing/enslaving most the natives and killing the rest. In England, the euphemized term for these contracted thugs were “privateers” (see for example, John Hawkins)
Unfortunately, it seems most people, rather than seeking the truth, are perfectly content to latch onto small scraps of opinion and become crusaders.
But don’t let me interrupt your cheerleading.
And you should read history. Many slaves were captured and sold to the europeans and americans by african and arab slave traders.[/quote]
Did I say otherwise?
[quote]pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
And LOL – “there are more trees in America today than when America was founded.”
A nice propaganda bit, but the sad part is he probably doesn’t realize that the only reason this is true is because at it’s founding, America was 13 colonies along the east coast.
I can’t believe you guys eat this shit up.
Do you have evidence to the contrary? That the current land mass of the U.S. has fewer tree now than in the olden days? If you’re calling out the facts, it would be useful to back up your rebuttal. Saying “nu uh” really isn’t good enough.[/quote]
Hey Beowolf, here’s a case in point for you.
Apparently not.
Gael, I’d like to introduce you to a concept, it’s called “trolling someone”.
It’s happening to you right now.
Ain’t it incredible?
[quote]Gael wrote:
pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
Unfortunately he makes a lot of factual errors.
“What do you think white people just came over to africa and ‘took’ slaves? Nuh uh.”
Despite his smugness, this guy should read some of the journals of slave ship captains. There are plenty of first hand accounts of plundering, looting, and capturing/enslaving most the natives and killing the rest. In England, the euphemized term for these contracted thugs were “privateers” (see for example, John Hawkins)
Unfortunately, it seems most people, rather than seeking the truth, are perfectly content to latch onto small scraps of opinion and become crusaders.
But don’t let me interrupt your cheerleading.
And you should read history. Many slaves were captured and sold to the europeans and americans by african and arab slave traders.
Did I say otherwise?
[/quote]
Then what was the rant about reading slave ship captan’s blogs?
And since you are so familiar with the truth, what, exactly and precisely is the truth?
[quote]pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
Unfortunately he makes a lot of factual errors.
“What do you think white people just came over to africa and ‘took’ slaves? Nuh uh.”
Despite his smugness, this guy should read some of the journals of slave ship captains. There are plenty of first hand accounts of plundering, looting, and capturing/enslaving most the natives and killing the rest. In England, the euphemized term for these contracted thugs were “privateers” (see for example, John Hawkins)
Unfortunately, it seems most people, rather than seeking the truth, are perfectly content to latch onto small scraps of opinion and become crusaders.
But don’t let me interrupt your cheerleading.
And you should read history. Many slaves were captured and sold to the europeans and americans by african and arab slave traders.
Did I say otherwise?
Then what was the rant about reading slave ship captan’s blogs?
And since you are so familiar with the truth, what, exactly and precisely is the truth?
[/quote]
No rant. I was just pointing out that this:
“What do you think white people just came over to africa and ‘took’ slaves? Nuh uh.”
is false. And it is false even if it was sometimes true that Europeans would purchase existing slaves. Not sure how you got so confused.
[quote]Gael wrote:
pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
Unfortunately he makes a lot of factual errors.
“What do you think white people just came over to africa and ‘took’ slaves? Nuh uh.”
Despite his smugness, this guy should read some of the journals of slave ship captains. There are plenty of first hand accounts of plundering, looting, and capturing/enslaving most the natives and killing the rest. In England, the euphemized term for these contracted thugs were “privateers” (see for example, John Hawkins)
Unfortunately, it seems most people, rather than seeking the truth, are perfectly content to latch onto small scraps of opinion and become crusaders.
But don’t let me interrupt your cheerleading.
And you should read history. Many slaves were captured and sold to the europeans and americans by african and arab slave traders.
Did I say otherwise?
Then what was the rant about reading slave ship captan’s blogs?
And since you are so familiar with the truth, what, exactly and precisely is the truth?
No rant. I was just pointing out that this:
“What do you think white people just came over to africa and ‘took’ slaves? Nuh uh.”
is false. And it is false even if it was sometimes true that Europeans would purchase existing slaves. Not sure how you got so confused.[/quote]
You are disagreeing with the statement that whites by and large did not go over to Africa and just take slaves, but you agree with it the fact that they did not?
Sorry for my confusion!
Pat,
This guy tried to claim that Europeans did not enslave free Africans. While this was often true, it was by no means always true.
[quote]Gael wrote:
Pat,
This guy tried to claim that Europeans did not enslave free Africans. While this was often true, it was by no means always true.[/quote]
Now that is a little weak.
Not his hyperbole, given the nature of his rants, but your nitpicking, given the nature of his rants.
His obvious point was that the evil White Men did not just appear in paradise and enslaved Africa’s proud nations but that Africans had enslaved themselves before and Europeans were just one more customer.
Which is essentially correct.
I liked it, I do not totally agree with him, but I liked it. I think it was so fast because there was a lot of editing done to that clip
He’s at it again! Just awesome.
This dude has spent a lot of time in church.
Not criticizing, just observing his speech patterns.