[drunkle]

allan:

so, there are issues to elections other than whether or not “liberals love melanin”? fancy that!

“exalting blacks” vs niger lover… that may be your definition, your interpretation of gold’s statement, but it is definitely not mine. especially considering the fact that no other issue on obama was raised!

ok, you acknowledge racism exists. but do you shrug it off and say it’s not your problem? or excuse it by saying it’s human nature? hey, it’s human nature to rape and pillage, is that ok too?

finally, getting back to this:
“When confronted with a strong line of attack, Drunkle fell back on a common theme: Accuse the accuser of a more serious, but completely unrelated, flaw. In this case, racism.”

do you still think that i made a cop out comment when his post was completely empty of anything other than race?

[drunkle]

allan:

so, there are issues to elections other than whether or not “liberals love melanin”? fancy that!

“exalting blacks” vs niger lover… that may be your definition, your interpretation of gold’s statement, but it is definitely not mine. especially considering the fact that no other issue on obama was raised!

ok, you acknowledge racism exists. but do you shrug it off and say it’s not your problem? or excuse it by saying it’s human nature? hey, it’s human nature to rape and pillage, is that ok too?

finally, getting back to this:
“When confronted with a strong line of attack, Drunkle fell back on a common theme: Accuse the accuser of a more serious, but completely unrelated, flaw. In this case, racism.”

do you still think that i made a cop out comment when his post was completely empty of anything other than race?

[drunkle]

allan:

so, there are issues to elections other than whether or not “liberals love melanin”? fancy that!

“exalting blacks” vs niger lover… that may be your definition, your interpretation of gold’s statement, but it is definitely not mine. especially considering the fact that no other issue on obama was raised!

ok, you acknowledge racism exists. but do you shrug it off and say it’s not your problem? or excuse it by saying it’s human nature? hey, it’s human nature to rape and pillage, is that ok too?

finally, getting back to this:
“When confronted with a strong line of attack, Drunkle fell back on a common theme: Accuse the accuser of a more serious, but completely unrelated, flaw. In this case, racism.”

do you still think that i made a cop out comment when his post was completely empty of anything other than race?

[drunkle]

allan:

so, there are issues to elections other than whether or not “liberals love melanin”? fancy that!

“exalting blacks” vs niger lover… that may be your definition, your interpretation of gold’s statement, but it is definitely not mine. especially considering the fact that no other issue on obama was raised!

ok, you acknowledge racism exists. but do you shrug it off and say it’s not your problem? or excuse it by saying it’s human nature? hey, it’s human nature to rape and pillage, is that ok too?

finally, getting back to this:
“When confronted with a strong line of attack, Drunkle fell back on a common theme: Accuse the accuser of a more serious, but completely unrelated, flaw. In this case, racism.”

do you still think that i made a cop out comment when his post was completely empty of anything other than race?

[drunkle]

allan:

so, there are issues to elections other than whether or not “liberals love melanin”? fancy that!

“exalting blacks” vs niger lover… that may be your definition, your interpretation of gold’s statement, but it is definitely not mine. especially considering the fact that no other issue on obama was raised!

ok, you acknowledge racism exists. but do you shrug it off and say it’s not your problem? or excuse it by saying it’s human nature? hey, it’s human nature to rape and pillage, is that ok too?

finally, getting back to this:
“When confronted with a strong line of attack, Drunkle fell back on a common theme: Accuse the accuser of a more serious, but completely unrelated, flaw. In this case, racism.”

do you still think that i made a cop out comment when his post was completely empty of anything other than race?

[drunkle]

allan:

al and jesse have run presidential bids and yet they did not receive the “melanin loving liberal” vote. true or false?

perceiving someone as “exalting blacks” is not equivalent as perceiving someone as a “niger lover” to you?

do you think racism does not exist and has not ever existed?

[drunkle]

allan:

al and jesse have run presidential bids and yet they did not receive the “melanin loving liberal” vote. true or false?

perceiving someone as “exalting blacks” is not equivalent as perceiving someone as a “niger lover” to you?

do you think racism does not exist and has not ever existed?

[drunkle]

allan:

al and jesse have run presidential bids and yet they did not receive the “melanin loving liberal” vote. true or false?

perceiving someone as “exalting blacks” is not equivalent as perceiving someone as a “niger lover” to you?

do you think racism does not exist and has not ever existed?

[drunkle]

allan:

al and jesse have run presidential bids and yet they did not receive the “melanin loving liberal” vote. true or false?

perceiving someone as “exalting blacks” is not equivalent as perceiving someone as a “niger lover” to you?

do you think racism does not exist and has not ever existed?

[drunkle]

allan:

al and jesse have run presidential bids and yet they did not receive the “melanin loving liberal” vote. true or false?

perceiving someone as “exalting blacks” is not equivalent as perceiving someone as a “niger lover” to you?

do you think racism does not exist and has not ever existed?

[drunkle]

allan:

are you disagreeing with me fundamentally that gold’s post was pure ad hominem? he posited that wolf was an academic loser trying to make a buck. that’s it. pure personal attack and no substance. whether or not that’s a “strongly stated opinion” has nothing to do with whether or not it was a personal attack that completely avoids the issues. exactly as you claim that i’m doing in the obama thread.

[drunkle]

allan:

are you disagreeing with me fundamentally that gold’s post was pure ad hominem? he posited that wolf was an academic loser trying to make a buck. that’s it. pure personal attack and no substance. whether or not that’s a “strongly stated opinion” has nothing to do with whether or not it was a personal attack that completely avoids the issues. exactly as you claim that i’m doing in the obama thread.

[drunkle]

allan:

are you disagreeing with me fundamentally that gold’s post was pure ad hominem? he posited that wolf was an academic loser trying to make a buck. that’s it. pure personal attack and no substance. whether or not that’s a “strongly stated opinion” has nothing to do with whether or not it was a personal attack that completely avoids the issues. exactly as you claim that i’m doing in the obama thread.

[drunkle]

allan:

are you disagreeing with me fundamentally that gold’s post was pure ad hominem? he posited that wolf was an academic loser trying to make a buck. that’s it. pure personal attack and no substance. whether or not that’s a “strongly stated opinion” has nothing to do with whether or not it was a personal attack that completely avoids the issues. exactly as you claim that i’m doing in the obama thread.

[drunkle]

allan:

are you disagreeing with me fundamentally that gold’s post was pure ad hominem? he posited that wolf was an academic loser trying to make a buck. that’s it. pure personal attack and no substance. whether or not that’s a “strongly stated opinion” has nothing to do with whether or not it was a personal attack that completely avoids the issues. exactly as you claim that i’m doing in the obama thread.

[Author]

Posts