osarusan @ osarusan @kbin.social

Posts

1

Comments

357

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yes. Because you're a clown if you think Trump would be better.

I hear you man.

But still, if it goes on for 50 more years, would it ever be better to choose to eat a horse's shit over stale lima beans? Of course not.

We need to change the menu. But that's a different problem.

The question of whether to pick lima beans or horse shit is an easy one, and one that nobody should find controversial. And you should not feel bad for making the right decision there. Remember, your kids and neighbors have to eat whatever meal you choose too.

I think I still need to vote for him because of Republicans, but my God it will be hard to live with myself after I do.

Don't be hard on yourself for making the correct decision.

If someone tells you that you have swallow stale lima beans or horse shit and you pick the stale lima beans in hopes that you never have to do it again... well it sucks but those were the choices. If 4 years later you have to do the same thing again... well you do it, because eating stale lima beans is always going to be better than eating horse shit, and you're going to have to eat one of them.

You don't have to feel like the lima beans are your choice, your preference, or your fault or responsibility. They were one of two choices available, and you made the right one.

These clowns pretend like Joe Biden isn't doing what every other US politician and potential presidential candidate would be doing.

It's appalling, yes, and we should fight back against it. But to pretend like this is somehow unique to Biden shows a complete lack of awareness of US politics.

So it's not alarmist then. It's an accurate take.

See, I might have cared about OP's post being hypocritical or condescending. But then you went and posted something so outrageously dishonest, and when it was pointed out instead of owning up to your mistake and trying to do better, you doubled down on it and got pissy. But since you don't care, I guess that's where we end it.

Look at the text you wrote, and the parts that I bolded.

There is a difference between legitimate disagreement and dishonesty.

Pretending that OP is giving carte blanche to genocide or shrugging that off is an outright lie. Accusing them of anything else based on that lie is also dishonest.

You didn't answer the question though.

Do you think democracy in the US is the same today as it was 8 years ago?

And do you think that if Trump wins the election, democracy in the US will be the same 4 years from now as it is today?

No it wasn't, not even in the least. It's absolutely dishonest to pretend that's what it was.

Go after him for what he actually said instead of making up things to be angry about.

You thinking you have the more enlightened position simply because you are willing to carte blanche accept this behavior or foreign policy position from the candidate that will be better for the United States doesn’t make you a genius, it makes you self-rigtheous and self-centered. Real innocent people are really dying, and your ability to shrug that off in such a smug, self-satisfied way is truly appalling.

This really isn't at all what he said, and is an extremely dishonest thing to post.

You complain that your comments fall on deaf ears, but when you accuse people of things that are blatant lies, what do you expect?

Is it alarmist though? Do you think that if Trump wins the election, democracy in the US will be the same 4 years from now as it is today?

"I'm gonna vote for Jill Stein!"

These people are harassing children and spewing hate messages. No they're not violent terrorists, but they're closer to that than they are to debaters.

both sides allowed to voice their positions in neutral language

Neutral language? Are you kidding me??

This is not a debate. One side's position is "we want an after school club where we can learn about science and feel accepted." The other side's position is "you are evil and deserve to die." If you give those two positions equal time, you are not being neutral. And there is no "neutral language" for hate speech.

And you’re trying to argue that “New club starts after school, kids have fun” Is some gross misrepresentation of what you said?

Yes. Because that's not what I said at all. Go read what I actually fucking said.

It was a completely inoffensive article

It wasn't.

that you blatantly misrepresented so you could offended. Sorry, but you clearly tried hard to do so.

I didn't.

And I notice that you didn’t actually challenge any of my claims.

Because it was a dishonest troll comment that misrepresented what I said. Just like this one is too. There's nothing to challenge when all that you wrote was dishonest. And there's no reason to treat you seriously when you're just trolling.

Well I wouldn't have expected them to publish kids' names for exactly the reason you suggest. But getting quotes from them should have been possible. And in any case, whether they quote the kids or not, at the minimum I expect them not to platform the people spewing hate. I don't agree with you that what the article does is simply "shining a light." They're helping them out.

“New club starts after school, kids have fun”

Except this is not what I said at all.

Nice try at a dishonest post though. Read what I actually wrote and try again.

you had to try very hard to be offended by it.

Nah, I didn't have to try very hard at all. But clearly you put a lot of thought into being a troll. Hopefully you didn't hurt yourself.

Is it though?

"After School Satan Club"

Is that provocative? Is that offensive? Would you say that the school's evangelical "Good News Club" is provocative or trolling?

Calling is a Satan Club is "only to make Christians mad" but calling it a "Good News Club" is not trolling to make non-Christians mad? This says more about your own prejudices than anything else.

Articles like this are exactly what the club wants.

Yeah, probably.