Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

The Mollie Tibbetts Murder — Political Version


Juxtatarot

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

I wonder about the young woman's interrupted timeline, what might she have been, what might she have done?  Would she have had kids and grandkids, would she have touched or changed lives for the better?  In large measure I have wasted my gifts.

From what I’ve read about her it looks as though she had a lot going for her. It’s a shame. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

Huh?  What whole thing? 

First post on this page, by me.  Those two were all fired up about either what was said (or wasn’t said) in the shootings thread here.  Apparently it was said.  I just wanted to rile them up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, matttyl said:

First post on this page, by me.  Those two were all fired up about either what was said (or wasn’t said) in the shootings thread here.  Apparently it was said.  I just wanted to rile them up.

I would like to see the actual quotes, but assuming they are accurate, it made it extremely difficult to find and verify the statement that All gun owners have blood on their hands, and explains why no one could quote the exchange before this (including the OP). So it is stipulated that there was one person in that entire thread who said that indirectly one time in answer to a question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Tobias mentioned culture where the guy lives here in the US first.  Why do you need an explanation of one culture remark but not the other?

psst....it's because with most of these guys, if you mention "culture" and you're discussing people who are "dark skinned" that makes you a racist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

psst....it's because with most of these guys, if you mention "culture" and you're discussing people who are "dark skinned" that makes you a racist

I'm only seeing parts of this conversation but now seems like a good time to get things all cleared up if we're misunderstanding what was meant. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Officer Pete Malloy said:

I know a guy who got a timeout for saying “I like MAGA hats. It lets me know right up front what kind of [hammer, screwdriver, pair of pliers] I’m dealing with.”

Toby or Mr. CIA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, squistion said:

I would like to see the actual quotes, but assuming they are accurate, it made it extremely difficult to find and verify the statement that All gun owners have blood on their hands, and explains why no one could quote the exchange before this (including the OP). So it is stipulated that there was one person in that entire thread who said that indirectly one time in answer to a question.

I told you where they were.  I'm not sure how to quote an exact post, but here is the page (page 184), almost exactly half way down the page, by BigSteelThrill.  "Pro-gun, pro-NRA people have a hand in the bloodshed.  You could go back 100 pages and see the same thing being stated."

So not only gun owners (who one would think simply by their ownership of a gun would in fact be "pro gun"), but all pro gun people "have a hand in the bloodshed", which is analogous to "blood on their hands".  Not only that, he's also acknowledging that the same things have been said for the past 100 pages - so my 1 minute thread search likely didn't catch every instance of it being said.  Another poster tried to clarify his statement with "What you're left with is telling every gun owner (in here or in society) that they have a hand in bloodshed", to which he replied, "yep."

I think I only posted a few times in that thread, because common sense went out the window.  When someone here posted that someone else said something in that thread, my initial reaction was "they probably did".  Turns out that, yep, that pretty much was said.  Some other crazy stuff said as well from my quick skim of a few pages - like gun owners like their guns more than they like children's lives.  Yeah, that will go over will in a civil conversation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, timschochet said:

Butcher Boy’s comments were quite bigoted and awful. I think anyone who reacts angily to them is pretty justified, don’t you? 

Just please put him on ignore and hope others don't respond to him.  He's an obvious troll who copies and pastes others comments from right-wing sites.  Responding to him does a disservice to the rest of us.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎8‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 0:45 PM, rodg12 said:

Why in the world would you base anything on anecdotal evidence?  Oh, that's right, you're a Republican.  That's what they do to cause fear and divisiveness amongst their base.  Pathetic.

Wrong, buddy. Swing and a miss. Independent voter. Last 4: Kerry, Obama, Johnson, Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

psst....it's because with most of these guys, if you mention "culture" and you're discussing people who are "dark skinned" that makes you a racist

No...it’s been explained alreadybthat Tobias’ post needed no explanation and the point was clear and not racist.

Corncobs post was unclear and at best was borderline racist. Maybe HellToupee can answer for him now that he is back?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

psst....it's because with most of these guys, if you mention "culture" and you're discussing people who are "dark skinned" that makes you a racist

No, in this case it was because someone suggested the murderer acted as he did as a product of "his culture" rather than "our culture." So by pointing out that he's been in the US for years I was highlighting that whatever the poster might have meant by that would have to be reconciled with the fact that "his culture" is at least in part American culture. At no point did anyone bring up skin color.

Next time maybe don't speak for me?  I know you hate it when people rush to make everything about race, but it seems to me that's exactly what you did here. If you really want me to respond to a point raised by a poster I obviously have on ignore, just ask me. I'm happy to respond to any questions from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, squistion said:

Of course I am, in this case All was a sweeping generalization like, let's say, making the statement All Mexicans are rapists versus Some Mexicans are rapists. It mischaracterized what those who are calling for common sense gun reform are saying (as it would be similarly irresponsible to label all gun owners as holding the same position or assign collective guilt).

People have gotten time outs for saying All Trump supporters are _______ and the mods don't consider it an excuse to say that normal people knew exactly what was meant.

If you make a factual claim on this forum you are expected to back it up, the burden is upon you to do so, not those who dispute your claim. Otherwise people could make up stuff like there was massive voting fraud in New Hampshire or other such nonsense and not be held accountable.

 

Okay. You want to argue semantics. Take a look at the two posts below. BB's and the original. They are not exact. I've bolded the differences so you don't have to spend a lot of time comparing. If you want posts to be evaluated based on extremes. Then you have to concede that the two posts are not exactly the same. 

On 8/23/2018 at 11:08 AM, butcher boy said:

It wasn’t just politicians that killed Mollie, although a good number of them share the blame here.

You must also put blame on the Educrats and our school systems that filled Mollie's little head with mush.

She was no different than any other 20 year old taught in America. Indoctrinated to believe in the goodness of illegals and other dangerous types.

 

On 8/23/2018 at 11:48 AM, dawgtrails said:

To: xzins

To be fair - it wasn’t just politicians that killed Mollie.

You must add in the Educrats and our school systems that filled her little head with mush.

She was no different than any 20 year old taught in America. Indoctrinated to believe in the goodness of muzzies, illegals and other dangerous types.

 

7 posted on 8/23/2018, 9:57:00 AM by Responsibility2nd

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, KCitons said:

Okay. You want to argue semantics. Take a look at the two posts below. BB's and the original. They are not exact. I've bolded the differences so you don't have to spend a lot of time comparing. If you want posts to be evaluated based on extremes. Then you have to concede that the two posts are not exactly the same. 

 

 

Yup.  It's called paraphrasing.  "Muzzies" is not a term I'm comfortable using for example so I omitted it, but the overall idea that Educrats sharing part of the blame was what I agreed with and wanted to post about.   Apart from the racist terms, I couldn't have said it better than Responsibility2nd, so there it is.  

And yes, I think it's ridiculous having to include a credit to "Responsibility2nd" from an anonymous forum.  If people used real names and this was a publication, it would be different.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, butcher boy said:

Yup.  It's called paraphrasing.  "Muzzies" is not a term I'm comfortable using for example so I omitted it, but the overall idea that Educrats sharing part of the blame was what I agreed with and wanted to post about.   Apart from the racist terms, I couldn't have said it better than Responsibility2nd, so there it is.  

And yes, I think it's ridiculous having to include a credit to "Responsibility2nd" from an anonymous forum.  If people used real names and this was a publication, it would be different.  

Just to be clear, I don't agree with what was said. (by you, or by Resposnsibility2nd) But, I don't think it's right to silence someones opinion. This was the argument in the kneeling thread. You don't have to agree with the message, or how it is being delivered. But our country has the freedom to allow people to do so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, squistion said:

You made a claim that people in the Shootings thread said that all gun owners have blood on their hands.

It is was an untrue claim. I asked you documentation in the form of a quote but you couldn't provide it, because it doesn't exist.

Instead you asked me to search the thread to find something that wasn't there. One can not prove a negative.

Lol.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

May I politely ask what this has to do with anything?

And why you felt the need to post it?

Thanks!

political thread, is it not? GOP bellyaches about immigration....yet here this guy sits...….

 

Cristhian Rivera, charged in Mollie Tibbetts' death, worked at a farm owned by a prominent Iowa Republican family

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2018/08/21/mollie-tibbetts-undocumented-immigrant-accused-killing-worked-farm-owned-republican-iowa-craig-lang/1059482002/

 

 

Edited by bicycle_seat_sniffer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, bicycle_seat_sniffer said:

political thread, is it not? GOP bellyaches about immigration....yet here this guy sits...….

 

Cristhian Rivera, charged in Mollie Tibbetts' death, worked at a farm owned by a prominent Iowa Republican family

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2018/08/21/mollie-tibbetts-undocumented-immigrant-accused-killing-worked-farm-owned-republican-iowa-craig-lang/1059482002/

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, it's very possible that I am.

 Rs complain about ILLEGAL immigration. Didn't this person pass whatever he has to pass to look like a legal immigrant? Stolen id or something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/24/2018 at 0:32 PM, AAABatteries said:

Just please put him on ignore and hope others don't respond to him.  He's an obvious troll who copies and pastes others comments from right-wing sites.  Responding to him does a disservice to the rest of us.

yes please put everyone on ignore who doesn't agree with you ....gotta demand the entire world see's things your way and if they don't? the left is hateful, mean, intolerant and unappetizing and can't even discuss things on message boards

that's typical liberal right there - bravo ! congrats

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

yes please put everyone on ignore who doesn't agree with you ....gotta demand the entire world see's things your way and if they don't? the left is hateful, mean, intolerant and unappetizing and can't even discuss things on message boards

that's typical liberal right there - bravo ! congrats

Par for the course among most liberal outlets.

Either silence/ignore/shadow ban or outright suspend/ban any critics.

See CNN, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and unfortunately FBG.

No surprise that most Trump supporters, conservatives, and moderates abandoned all political threads. I guess that is how Joe (or the mods) want things, but it is a disservice to the community.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Officer Pete Malloy said:

One illegal immigrant killed someone!  We need that wall!

One bad guy kills someone with a gun doesn’t mean we need more laws.

Are you saying we don't need more gun laws?

If your comment is pointing out the hypocrisy, then that must mean you are for both or none.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Officer Pete Malloy said:

One illegal immigrant killed someone!  We need that wall!

One bad guy kills someone with a gun doesn’t mean we need more laws.

Seriously.  How do conservatives not see the hypocrisy in this?  Thousands of people are killed by, commit suicide, and kids accidentally kill themselves with this country's beloved guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KCitons said:

Are you saying we don't need more gun laws?

If your comment is pointing out the hypocrisy, then that must mean you are for both or none.  

I don't think so.  I think it is reasonable to be against illegal immigration and also against Trump's wall.  Also, only a tiny percentage of liberals support open borders.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

I don't think so.  I think it is reasonable to be against illegal immigration and also against Trump's wall.  Also, only a tiny percentage of liberals support open borders.

 

Sure. But based on OPM's post, he is comparing the two as though they are exclusive. I think there are conservatives that want changes to gun regulations and want a wall. Only a tiny percentage want the wall and no gun regulation. 

6 hours ago, Officer Pete Malloy said:

One illegal immigrant killed someone!  We need that wall!

One bad guy kills someone with a gun doesn’t mean we need more laws.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Juxtatarot said:

I don't think so.  I think it is reasonable to be against illegal immigration and also against Trump's wall.  Also, only a tiny percentage of liberals support open borders.

 

This isnt really true. Sure they may say that they dont want open borders, but they essentially just wordsmith. The same people that say that they dont want open borders get up in arms when somebody is deported for being wanted for a crime in mexico. Or the same people get upset when somebody gets deported for committing a crime here, but that crime wasnt really that bad. So sure they don't support 100% no questions asked borders where known international terrorists could walk right by a customs agent and enter the country, but that's not really what is being discussed because such a position is ridiculous and nobody supports it. Being opposed to a wall, getting pissed when people that are here illegally get deported, wanting to eliminate ICE, wanting less border security, and all the other stances that essentially would make it incredibly easy to just walk across the border somewhere along the thousands of miles of border is pretty much the same as supporting open borders. They basically just want to have their cake and eat it too. 

From wikipedia...

Quote

A border may be an open border due to a lack of legal controls or intentional legislation allowing free movement of people across the border (de jure), or a border may be an open border due to lack of adequate enforcement or adequate supervision of the border

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

This isnt really true. Sure they may say that they dont want open borders, but they essentially just wordsmith. The same people that say that they dont want open borders get up in arms when somebody is deported for being wanted for a crime in mexico. Or the same people get upset when somebody gets deported for committing a crime here, but that crime wasnt really that bad. So sure they don't support 100% no questions asked borders where known international terrorists could walk right by a customs agent and enter the country, but that's not really what is being discussed because such a position is ridiculous and nobody supports it. Being opposed to a wall, getting pissed when people that are here illegally get deported, wanting to eliminate ICE, wanting less border security, and all the other stances that essentially would make it incredibly easy to just walk across the border somewhere along the thousands of miles of border is pretty much the same as supporting open borders. They basically just want to have their cake and eat it too. 

From wikipedia...

 

Thanks for telling me what I really want...I had no idea!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, parasaurolophus said:

This isnt really true. Sure they may say that they dont want open borders, but they essentially just wordsmith. The same people that say that they dont want open borders get up in arms when somebody is deported for being wanted for a crime in mexico. Or the same people get upset when somebody gets deported for committing a crime here, but that crime wasnt really that bad. So sure they don't support 100% no questions asked borders where known international terrorists could walk right by a customs agent and enter the country, but that's not really what is being discussed because such a position is ridiculous and nobody supports it. Being opposed to a wall, getting pissed when people that are here illegally get deported, wanting to eliminate ICE, wanting less border security, and all the other stances that essentially would make it incredibly easy to just walk across the border somewhere along the thousands of miles of border is pretty much the same as supporting open borders. They basically just want to have their cake and eat it too. 

From wikipedia...

 

I don't agree that the border and immigration policy beliefs of the vast majority of liberals would fit under the Wikipedia definition of open borders.  Frankly, if you do think it does, it makes me think you are viewing this in a highly partisan way.

Edited by Juxtatarot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...