Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
Fairweather

Libtards on Parade: Alcoholism, Corruption, Murder

Recommended Posts

the notorious RBG sleeps through everything dawg, didn't you know that? :yawn:

 

the state of the union's gotta be one of the best drinking game events in 'merica - shit, drinking 'fore that is like drinking 'fore a graduation, no?

 

oregon's gov'n going down i get i suppose, though i don't see how that's necessarily a blow to liberalism, 'specially since the libtards turning on him was the proverbial straw that broke his back

 

maybe i didn't follow the unc thing closely enough - was the killer a liberal? :crazy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

maybe i didn't follow the unc thing closely enough - was the killer a liberal? :crazy:

 

A bona-fide God-hatin R-bashin anti-capitalist ChristianandMoooslim-hatin Rachael Maddow-lovin Huffingtonpost readin atheist with lotsa guuuns surprised you didn't heer. Recon you didn't cuz the librul media only reports on haters they hate and not the hate that questions the narrative.

 

Conservatard killer = hate crime

Libtard killer = "parking dispute"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of substance abuse--try to stay on topic there, Sleepy. 9_9

 

...and speaking of Democrat nutjobs, well, I guess it's better to believe in something. :lmao:

Edited by Fairweather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bona-fide God-hatin R-bashin anti-capitalist ChristianandMoooslim-hatin Rachael Maddow-lovin Huffingtonpost readin atheist with lotsa guuuns surprised you didn't heer. Recon you didn't cuz the librul media only reports on haters they hate and not the hate that questions the narrative.

 

Conservatard killer = hate crime

Libtard killer = "parking dispute"

 

haters gonna hate. same ole tired song

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

maybe i didn't follow the unc thing closely enough - was the killer a liberal? :crazy:

 

A bona-fide God-hatin R-bashin anti-capitalist ChristianandMoooslim-hatin Rachael Maddow-lovin Huffingtonpost readin atheist with lotsa guuuns surprised you didn't heer. Recon you didn't cuz the librul media only reports on haters they hate and not the hate that questions the narrative.

 

Conservatard killer = hate crime

Libtard killer = "parking dispute"

you quite sure you're not tilting at windmills there dr. q? from fox to npr, what i heard was "yeah, this looks like a hate-crime" - the "parking dispute" narrative as i recall came from the police (but hey, maybe they're libturds too? :) )

 

i don't like the "hate-crime" concept and never have - why the fuck does the motive matter? murdering 3 people b/c they're muslims is just as bad as murdering them b/c they're annoying neighbors - the punishment should be the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I agree with Fairweather on this though. Conservatives are morally superior and rarely commit crimes or make political gaffes.

 

I think it's safe to say there are douchebags on both ends of the political spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It makes a difference for lesser crimes I think cause sentencing can be greater

maybe i'm too liberal, but i don't think the government or anybody else should be able to tell me how to think or what to believe, and if i want that freedom, i can't in good faith deny it to others

 

so....feel free to scream to the mountain-tops your towering hatred of jews, gentiles, n' dirty-dirty towel-heads, i don't care - everything changes when you put your hand to them though, and then the punishment should be as swift and severe as would be for any other clueless twat :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

aren't liberals for the most expansive free speech possible? and isn't free thought a necessary precursor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aren't liberals for the most expansive free speech possible? and isn't free thought a necessary precursor?

 

Yes, of course. Which is why it's perfectly legal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aren't liberals for the most expansive free speech possible? and isn't free thought a necessary precursor?

 

Yes, of course. Which is why it's perfectly legal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

 

"Yelling fire in a crowded theater!" A tired refrain of control-fetish leftists. Never mind that there might actually be a fire from time to time.

 

Sadly, Ivan, your sentiments are no longer true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what Ivan was getting at was his distaste for the "thought policing" inherent in hate crimes. Ivan was saying the intent shouldn't matter, the action or crime should.

 

Intent, though, is an element of every crime. The reason someone engages is a potential criminal act always matters.

 

For example, let's say you saw a bike that looked exactly like yours and you took it thinking it was your bike. Turns out it was someone else's. But you never formed the intent to steal so your not guilty of anything. Intent to steal would have to be proven to convict you of theft.

 

In a hate crime, if the intent to harm someone because they are gay or black or whatever can be shown, a harsher punishment is appropriate, because that is worse than just beating someone up because they called you an asshole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying I disagree with you at all re intent here, Pete. As usual, the theme I'm pushing has more to do with the hypocrisy of the American liberal than anything else. For example, these folks typically argue strongly against three strikes laws which, at their heart, apply intent on a meta level. But these same liberals also express a desire to apply intent broadly when the victim resides within a protected class or represents a challenge to the (perceived) status quo. Again, I'm not saying the latter is necessarily wrong--only that liberals generally lack any hint of a consistent view. And not just on this topic.

 

My concern with Crux's predictable simile is that it is used by liberals to beat down speech that may be completely benign or satirical. Imagine a scenario where half the theatergoers didn't make it out of the building in time because no one had the courage to yell "fire" for fear of violating some new contrived or imposed social norm.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imagine a scenario where half the theatergoers didn't make it out of the building in time because no one had the courage to yell "fire" for fear of violating some new contrived or imposed social norm.

 

this is just silly. you will not be guilty of anything for yelling "fire" when there is in fact a fire. everyone knows that. you need a better example of what you are trying to say.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it really is legal to yell "Fire" in a theater (regardless of whether the speech is true or false), so...

Edited by Crux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, really?

 

Gee, that seems kinda dangerous... Wouldn't it be possible someone might get hurt?

 

Speech that can potentially do real harm to someone is protected by the 1st Amendment?

 

My apology to FW for thread drift on this awesome thread!

 

d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we made theaters with proper entrances and exits we could yell Fire all we wanted to.

 

Obviously, it's an architectural problem.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, how about "a lot of muslims are terrorists."

 

this is completely incorrect.

 

while there is no quantifiable definition of "a lot", as in 30% of whatever is "a lot", there is a assumed quantity the "a lot" means. For the sake of discussion, lets say that "a lot" means in excess of 10%. I would bet that most people would think that "a lot" would exceed 10% of a given population, but lets stick with that for now.

 

But to say that "a lot" of muslims are terrorists is to say that a good number of muslims are terrorists. There are about 1.6 billion muslims in the world. If "a lot" of them are terrorists, there would be 160 million terrorists in the world. There is no way anyone could resists at group that large.

 

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140506/14033627137/how-many-terrorists-are-there-not-as-many-as-you-might-think.shtml

 

there is an estimate that there are 184,000 terrorists worldwide. Assuming they are all muslim (as most white americans do regardless of Oklahoma bombings show) this comes out to 0.000115 or .0115% of muslims are terrorists. This is NOT a lot by any reasonable person. I find it shocking that you would say such an obvious stupid thing.

 

a better way to phrase it is a lot of terrorists are muslim.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gene, you miss the point of the exercise, which is that libtard political correctness has become so convoluted and confusing that nobody knows what to say or think these days. This was the point of the theater speech reply as well. The fact that you unhinged yourself with the Islam example reveals something about you and your fellow libs that was, well, exactly my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever consider the possibility that you are but one of the <1% or so that don't "know what to say or think" anymore?. Instead of "nobody knows what to say or think"??

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×