Angela Corey Learns of the Verdict

[gnadfly]

1) The Stupid Race.

2) The non-Stupid Race.

Yes, your stance against Zimmerman was racist. So is your anti-gun stance.

Funny thing. When WTF used the term "darkie", you didn't condemn it, although you posted on that thread. Telling.

[Guest123018-4]

The smell of the Obama administration was all over this trial.

Another case of the Obama administration attacking the law abiding while violating the laws they are sworn to uphold.

I would put it out there that they intended for Zimmerman to get off from this sham of a trial. It is evident by the actions of the prosecution.

The moral of the story; if yo is getting yo ass beat by a black person and you got any white in you at all, you better just take the beating and not pop a cap in his ass.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

The smell of the Obama administration was all over this trial.

The moral of the story; if yo is getting yo ass beat by a black person and you got any white in you at all, you better just take the beating and not pop a cap in his ass.

Sharpton didn't say it in these words .. but he's looking for a different standard for persecuting those who kill Black people. A lower burden of proof for a conviction.

I'm not sure what he will do with the Black people killing Black people. We will see.

If all these whiners would gang up on the Chicago killers like they do Zimmerman, the homicide rate in Chicago would be zero. March in the streets there. Burn the businesses.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

I don't watch NASCAR Old-Racist

Originally Posted by Old-T

And now you are also tacking on the "racist" term, so I'll ask you the same 2 questions I have asked IBBuffoon a number of times without getting an answer:

(1) What race am I?

(2) What race am I supposedly biased against?

Originally Posted by gnadfly

1) The Stupid Race.

2) The non-Stupid Race.

Hmmm, Gonad, does that answer the question--even remotely? No, it doesn't. I guess you and IB must have studied together for the quiz. Sorry, that's a good solid F. But then we didn't have very high expectations that you would be able to answer such a "complicated" question. Why should we actually expect you to back up your slanderous comments. Nope. You're the consummate angry bully--call him out on his stupid comments and he can't back it up.

I know ripping apart your stupid post is too easy, but nonetheless while I'm at it let's see what you are really saying: I am supposedly biased against the non-stupid race. Your words above. Yet at various times you have claimed I am biased against Hispanics, whites, and blacks. So those are the "non-stupid" races? So, since I am part of the "stupid race" (again, your words) does than mean I am Asian? Alute? Pacific Islander? DeNe? I'm sorry, but you will have to narrow down your answer a little more than that.

[QUOTE=gnadfly;1053406397]
Yes, your stance against Zimmerman was racist. So is your anti-gun stance./QUOTE]
No, and no. Sorry, you got three answers wrong, even though I only asked one question. Pretty impressive of you!

My stance against Zimmerman was a stance against a macho gun-toting vigilante who violated plenty of rules and common sense. I never said anything to claim he did those things because he was Hispanic (unlike some poster on here who repeatedly makes derogatory comments about Hispanics and refuses to comment on certain soccer posts that caught him is serious leaps of illogic about Hispanics, violence, and soccer).

My stance on guns is rather similar: I think they should be registered. I think they should be kept out of the hands of felons, etc. I don't believe that carrying guns decreases crime across the board and have posted a number of statistics that show Texas big cities are a lot more dangerous than some places like NYC. Sorry if data contradicts the Texan Machismo, but that doesn't make my gun stance "racist". By the way I have multiple guns in my house for target shooting, hunting, etc., all legal, all voluntarily registered, and I have no plans to give them up.


[QUOTE=gnadfly;1053406397]
Funny thing. When WTF used the term "darkie", you didn't condemn it, although you posted on that thread. Telling.[/QUOTE]

How much are you paying IBBuffoon to study under him? First you copy his "racist" non-answer, now you mimic his "you didn't complain about XXX so you must agree with it" bullshit. Be careful about the logical implication of that line of deception: I bet I can find LOTS of onerous posts on this board that you didn't specifically object to--does than mean I can quote you as agreeing with them?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old-T

I can find LOTS of onerous posts on this board that you didn't specifically object to--does than mean I can quote you as agreeing with them?

Depends on who you ask. IMO one reason are there are so many posts is some on here take a failure to refute as an agreement to the validity of the statements and/or accusations. Personally, a lot of the shit on here isn't worthy of a response, but the empty-heads who cherry-pick lines from posts (and articles) and then flat out misrepresent what was written, just to make a point, almost beg for a response just to prevent being branded as some offensive personality. (chumming a bit to stir up some childishness)

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Depends on who you ask. IMO one reason are there are so many posts is some on here take a failure to refute as an agreement to the validity of the statements and/or accusations. Personally, a lot of the shit on here isn't worthy of a response, but the empty-heads who cherry-pick lines from posts (and articles) and then flat out misrepresent what was written, just to make a point, almost beg for a response just to prevent being branded as some offensive personality. (chumming a bit to stir up some childishness)

Sadly I think you are spot-on about this.