Crime Argue with a gay kid get fired...more persecutions by LGBTQ+

No, they don't but left-wing media will edit clips or outright lie about the other side to push that false narrative you're buying into. They've been caught multiple times.

Then explain to me how come Trump only became a Republican darling after he jumped on the racist birther theory.

Not wanting people to enter the country illegally doesnt mean you're anti-immigrant or anti-Mexican.

Repubs aren't against immigration. They're specifically against illegal immigration.

And part of the reason they are against illegal immigration is because most of the people coming in are Mestisos or Amerindians. If the ilelgals were all White, there would still be opposition to illegal immigration, but the opposition from the rightwing base would be more muted.
 
Last edited:
They do care, which is why they vote Democrat. If they didn't care, they would not vote or vote R.

They came/come here for jobs, education and liberties. And the reason most immigrants are relatively free is because of progressive movements, including the Civil Rights movement of the 60s. Opportunities and freedoms have gone up for non Whites post Civl Rights era. Immigrants will support the party that is amneable to these gains and wants to advance them, ergo they support the Dems.


A substantial portion of the GOP base wants to cut back on immigration, and some want a time out.


They care about supporting the party that is amneable to keep or increasing current immigration numbers. With a Trump admin and Trumpian Republicans in power, immigration and refugee numbes would be cut.
If you think about the GOP being stuck in a race against time to rig everything to be as undemocratic as possible before the party becomes a permanent minority, it makes some sense as a rational strategy.

The other option would be to drop all the nativist. nonsense that’s becoming even more unpopular by the day, but that’s what gets boomers and edgelords out to the polls to pass more tax cuts.

Tough dilemma, but current GOP leadership isn’t exactly made up of problem solvers, so I don’t expect any there is any strategy other than dialing up the crocodile tears when things go wrong.
 
Then explain to me how come Trump only became a Republican darling after he jumped on the racist birther theory.
Trump was a populist candidate that appealed to the average Joe who votes Republican. A lot of Republicans, especially establishment Repubs hated and still hate him.

And part of the reason they are against illegal immigration is because most of the people coming in are Mestisos or Amerindians. If the ilelgals were all White, they would still be opposition to illegal immigration, but the opposition would be more muted.
The European illegals aren't running across the border in droves. Visa overstays are easier to keep track of than a bunch of people running into the country without our knowledge.
 
S

Trump said Mexican illegal immigrants were rapists , drug dealers and crimminals, and only at the end, almost like a side note, did he say some are good people.

Did he say some were good people?

Do you believe politifact???

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best," Trump said. "They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Kaine has embellished the controversy by saying Trump has said "all Mexicans are rapists." The Democrat doesn’t come close to proving his claim; all of the Trump quotes Kaine’s campaign sent us pertain to unauthorized immigrants crossing the Mexican border into the U.S.

No doubt, many Latinos have taken umbrage with what Trump actually has said. But Kaine put an insult into the mouth of Trump that never was uttered.

So we rate Kaine’s statement False.


https://www.politifact.com/factchec...ine-falsely-says-trump-said-all-mexicans-are/
 
The criticism is against cops using force when they didn't have to; like people running away, or otherwise not being an imminent threat. No one is saying cops can not use deadly force if their life or the life of others are in danger.

Lol - that's absurdly untrue and you know it.

In many of the cases we see, there is an element of hindsight bias - police thought the person had or was going for a weapon, but after the fact we find out that they didn't. In that instant where they had to make a split second decision, they did what they thought they had to do to save their life or the life of someone else. Which again, if you actually want to stop this from happening, stop putting police in these situations. Emphasize the importance of complying with police instructions. And when someone is complying and still gets killed, or is given instructions that don't make sense and ends up getting killed for trying follow those absurd commands, I'm all for prosecuting the police.
 
I think it should be allowed to laugh at a queer boy in a dress same as a woman with a stash. Both are equally shit.
 
Last edited:
Lol - that's absurdly untrue and you know it.

In many of the cases we see, there is an element of hindsight bias - police thought the person had or was going for a weapon, but after the fact we find out that they didn't. In that instant where they had to make a split second decision, they did what they thought they had to do to save their life or the life of someone else. Which again, if you actually want to stop this from happening, stop putting police in these situations. Emphasize the importance of complying with police instructions. And when someone is complying and still gets killed, or is given instructions that don't make sense and ends up getting killed for trying follow those absurd commands, I'm all for prosecuting the police.

You, like all biased pro police defenders, are always giving the police the benefit of the doubt and putting the onus on the civilians. No one forced them to be LEOs, they choose it.

If police can't stop being trigger happy and prone to brute force where it is not needed, they shouldn't be cops. There are far too many incidents of cops using deadly force at the drop of a hat.
 
Did he say some were good people?

Do you believe politifact???

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best," Trump said. "They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Kaine has embellished the controversy by saying Trump has said "all Mexicans are rapists." The Democrat doesn’t come close to proving his claim; all of the Trump quotes Kaine’s campaign sent us pertain to unauthorized immigrants crossing the Mexican border into the U.S.

No doubt, many Latinos have taken umbrage with what Trump actually has said. But Kaine put an insult into the mouth of Trump that never was uttered.

So we rate Kaine’s statement False.


https://www.politifact.com/factchec...ine-falsely-says-trump-said-all-mexicans-are/
And the "and some, I assume, are good people" is like an afterthought. Even throwing in the "good people" as an afterthought was too hard for him to stomach, so he says "I assume".

If he had said the following, it wouldn't be an issue : they area sending good people , but a few are rapists and bringing in drugs.

I am criticising him for that comment, not based on what the media reported, but based on his own words.
 
Trump was a populist candidate that appealed to the average Joe who votes Republican. A lot of Republicans, especially establishment Repubs hated and still hate him.
It is very telling of the Republican base that they only embraced Trump after he jumped onto a racist conspiracy theory.

The European illegals aren't running across the border in droves. Visa overstays are easier to keep track of than a bunch of people running into the country without our knowledge.
Europeans came here in droves in the late 1800s and early 1900s. There was some resistance to their emmigration , particularly those not from Anglo-Germanic culture, but ultimately they were still seen as White.

Pat Buchanan has written a lot about illegal immigration and finds fault with the liberal argument that today's immigrants will just assimilate like European immigrants from yesteryear, arguing that the later were of the same culture as Americans.

Here is an article where Pat says race matters on matters of immigration.
https://www.stwnewspress.com/opinio...cle_a2ea3522-fb09-11e7-bd94-ff8ba53cf7e8.html
 
You, like all biased pro police defenders, are always giving the police the benefit of the doubt and putting the onus on the civilians. No one forced them to be LEOs, they choose it.

If police can't stop being trigger happy and prone to brute force where it is not needed, they shouldn't be cops. There are far too many incidents of cops using deadly force at the drop of a hat.

I put the onus on citizens to comply with police orders, because decent citizens should comply with police orders. If you spend thirty seconds thinking about it, you understand the necessity of citizens being required to comply with police. How the hell would society work if you didn't have to comply with police? And what would be the purpose of having police, if you didn't have to comply with them? A cop tries to pull you over for speeding and you decide you haven't done anything wrong so you just ignore him. A woman calls the police because her husband beat the shit out of her. Husband tells the police he didn't do anything, so he's not going with them. Sorry ma'am, he's not going to comply, nothing we can do! It's literally their job to force you to comply - that's the entire point of having a police force - enforcing the fucking law. When they come to do that, you aren't the person that gets to decide if you were breaking the law, and you shouldn't be. Understanding that this is how it has to work, you should understand that when police tell you to do something or try to arrest you, even if you think you're innocent, you should still comply.


And, no one forced them to be police officers, but society needs police officers - they perform a necessary function in that the vast majority of us would rather not do. I sure as hell don't want to be a cop, and I especially wouldn't want to be a cop in a high crime area.

None of that is to say I don't think police should be held accountable when they commit crimes or perform poorly - and I'm not just talking about killing people either. If I get pulled over and think the cop was an asshole, I should be able to easily file an incident report with an independent body, where that independent body can get the body cam footage (which sure as hell shouldn't be stored on a police server) and evaluate my complaint. That independent body should have the power to get the police officer fired or even work with prosecutors if legal action should occur. So, no, I'm not a 'biased pro police defender'. I'm a decent citizen who understands both the necessity of police compliance, and the fact that increased police compliance would reduce the frequency of people being killed by police, while also wanting police to be held to higher standards and fully prosecuted when they commit crimes.
 
Last edited:
I put the onus on citizens to comply with police orders, because decent citizens should comply with police orders. If you spend thirty seconds thinking about it, you understand the necessity of citizens being required to comply with police. How the hell would society work if you didn't have to comply with police? And what would be the purpose of having police, if you didn't have to comply with them? A cop tries to pull you over for speeding and you decide you haven't done anything wrong so you just ignore him. A woman calls the police because her husband beat the shit out of her. Husband tells the police he didn't do anything, so he's not going with them. Sorry ma'am, he's not going to comply, nothing we can do! It's literally their job to force you to comply - that's the entire point of having a police force - enforcing the fucking law. When they come to do that, you aren't the person that gets to decide if you were breaking the law, and you shouldn't be. Understanding that this is how it has to work, you should understand that when police tell you to do something or try to arrest you, even if you think you're innocent, you should still comply.


And, no one forced them to be police officers, but society needs police officers - they perform a necessary function in that the vast majority of us would rather not do. I sure as hell don't want to be a cop, and I especially wouldn't want to be a cop in a high crime area.

None of that is to say I don't think police should be held accountable when they commit crimes or perform poorly - and I'm not just talking about killing people either. If I get pulled over and think the cop was an asshole, I should be able to easily file an incident report with an independent body, where that independent body can get the body cam footage (which sure as hell shouldn't be stored on a police server) and evaluate my complaint. That independent body should have the power to get the police officer fired or even work with prosecutors if legal action should occur. So, no, I'm not a 'biased pro police defender'. I'm a decent citizen who understands both the necessity of police compliance, and the fact that increased police compliance would reduce the frequency of people being killed by police, while also wanting police to be held to higher standards and fully prosecuted when they commit crimes.
No you are putting all the blame on the civilians when cops violate liberties, when you excuse police behavior by blaming the civilians for running or resisting arrest.

If people have to comply with police, then police need to be held to a higher standard, penalities for cops needs to be more severe. They need to be charged with kidnapping if they arrest someone without cause, and in violation of civil liberties.
 
It is very telling of the Republican base that they only embraced Trump after he jumped onto a racist conspiracy theory.
Millions of average Republicans didn't vote for Trump based on the birther thing.

Europeans came here in droves in the late 1800s and early 1900s. There was some resistance to their emmigration , particularly those not from Anglo-Germanic culture, but ultimately they were still seen as White.

Pat Buchanan has written a lot about illegal immigration and finds fault with the liberal argument that today's immigrants will just assimilate like European immigrants from yesteryear, arguing that the later were of the same culture as Americans.

Here is an article where Pat says race matters on matters of immigration.
https://www.stwnewspress.com/opinio...cle_a2ea3522-fb09-11e7-bd94-ff8ba53cf7e8.html
What does this have to do with anything we're talking about?
 
Millions of average Republicans didn't vote for Trump based on the birther thing.

I’ll say this, the birther conspiracy topic was brought up in the war room this week and many conservatives tried their best to spin it as anything but racist, while I didn’t see a single conservative admit it was racist. I’m sure there are conservatives who see it for what it is, but they seem to be the minority.

actually I should say they probably almost all see it for what it is but only a minority have a problem with it being a racist attack.
 
Last edited:
No you are putting all the blame on the civilians when cops violate liberties, when you excuse police behavior by blaming the civilians for running or resisting arrest.

If people have to comply with police, then police need to be held to a higher standard, penalities for cops needs to be more severe. They need to be charged with kidnapping if they arrest someone without cause, and in violation of civil liberties.
Cops violate liberties because that's what the free people of this country voted in their legislators to do.

People have no one to blame for police brutality but themselves.

If people don't want the cops up our asses 24/7 then everyone needs to pull up their big boy pants and accept the responsibility that comes with more, not less liberties.
 
No you are putting all the blame on the civilians when cops violate liberties, when you excuse police behavior by blaming the civilians for running or resisting arrest.

If people have to comply with police, then police need to be held to a higher standard, penalities for cops needs to be more severe. They need to be charged with kidnapping if they arrest someone without cause, and in violation of civil liberties.

Do you understand that this is not an if? That it is the fundamental way policing must work?
 
Do you understand that this is not an if? That it is the fundamental way policing must work?
I know it is not an "if" , so my point is that since people have to comply, police need to face severe repercussions for illegal action.
 
Did he say some were good people?

Do you believe politifact???

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best," Trump said. "They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Kaine has embellished the controversy by saying Trump has said "all Mexicans are rapists." The Democrat doesn’t come close to proving his claim; all of the Trump quotes Kaine’s campaign sent us pertain to unauthorized immigrants crossing the Mexican border into the U.S.

No doubt, many Latinos have taken umbrage with what Trump actually has said. But Kaine put an insult into the mouth of Trump that never was uttered.

So we rate Kaine’s statement False.


https://www.politifact.com/factchec...ine-falsely-says-trump-said-all-mexicans-are/

Blah blah blah.

LOL banned!
 
Saying dude was going on a homophobic rant and harassing the kid BECAUSE he was wearing a dress.

I see no evidence of either in this video. He is arguing with a kid wearing a dress. We don't see what leads up to it. I think the old dude is a smarmy prick I would not like in real life. But not seeing why this guy is getting fired over this..

The old dude walking from the bathroom back to table is believable. Old dude getting irritated at dress dude being loud and screaming profanities is believable...because well he is doing it in the video.

Funny how you think that gay people always talk about being persecuted....you would think they would be against it....seems like they are just fine with persecuting people as long as it is not them....


^ the only facts we have


Man Fired, Family Doxxed Over Viral Video Of Alleged ‘Homophobia’ To Male In Prom Dress. Here’s His Side Of The Story.

Nashville resident Sam Johnson was fired from his position as CEO of healthcare company Visuwell on Monday, his family was doxxed online, and he has received a deluge of threats. But that “enormous volume of hate,” Johnson told The Daily Wire, is based on a false, media-inflamed narrative stemming from an out-of-context viral video.

The onslaught was sparked by a video of Johnson that recently went viral online, appearing to show him engaging in alleged “homophobia,” though, notably, not once in the video does Johnson utter any homophobic slur or use any profanity.

The mainstream narrative, based on a 59-second video clip, contends that Johnson targeted, harassed, bullied, and spewed homophobia to an 18-year-old male for wearing a dress to his prom. Here’s what the video seems to show:

The video, taken at a hotel before prom, opens with the teen, Dalton Stevens, telling Johnson, “I chose what I wanna wear so you can f*** off.” Johnson, hands in his pockets, quietly responds, “Is that right?” Johnson is then followed and asked leading questions by Stevens’ boyfriend, Jacob Geitmann, the teen filming Johnson. “You think he looks gross? Looks disgustin’?” he asks. “You look like …,” Johnson starts to say. In response, Stevens screams at him, “I look like what, you f***ing b****?” “You look like an idiot,” Johnson calmly says in reaction to the cursing. “Get the f*** away from me!” Stevens screams. “Keep talking. You look like a moron,” Geitmann tells Johnson. “I’m sorry, I’m gorgeous,” Stevens says. “Are you?” Johnson responds. Johnson then appears to try to block Geitmann from filming him. “No, sir, I can f***ing record you all I want,” says Geitmann.

Johnson spoke to The Daily Wire on Tuesday and refuted the mainstream narrative by adding context to the video.

“They had been at the hotel/restaurant for an hour, causing a scene and being loud and obnoxious,” Johnson said. “I was perturbed that the management wasn’t doing anything to protect the rest of us who were paying customers with our kids present. These teens were only there to take pictures and cause a public scene.”

“There are many lies in the mainstream articles and interviews including the allegations of homophobic name-calling and ‘following’ him,” Johnson said, referring to Stevens.

One of those false allegations was published in an NBC report, Johnson told The Daily Wire.

“Stevens alleged that Johnson called him ‘stupid,’ as well as vulgar names, in a homophobic manner and that Johnson told him that he has ‘hair on your chest, you shouldn’t be wearing a dress,'” the NBC report said.

“I never said those things, that’s a lie,” Johnson unequivocally told The Daily Wire.

“Stevens was spewing all sorts of vile statements and trying to coax me into agreeing to them,” he added. “You can hear him doing it on the video.”

Johnson told The Daily Wire he did say Stevens looked like “an idiot,” but said nothing homophobic. Notably, as the video shows, Johnson was called names by Stevens and Geitmann. He was told to “f*** off” and called a “b****” and a “moron” during the video clip.

Johnson says he was heading back to his table when the video starts rolling, making it appear as if he is following Stevens, though he is not.

“The door I was headed towards in the video led back to the table I was sitting at with my family,” he told The Daily Wire. “[Stevens] headed in that same direction all of a sudden, which made it appear I was following him to the uninformed viewer of their social post, which I was not doing. I was simply returning to my family at the restaurant, when they escalated the conversation with more foul and vile language and leading statements about what they thought I might be thinking, trying to get me to agree with their words.”

Johnson made similar assertions in a statement to Newsweek on Monday, emphasizing that the allegations are “entirely false” and the interaction “wasn’t anything personal or involving a dress.”

“We had just sat down for dinner at this restaurant that we frequent, and I was returning from the restroom when I was presented with their loud cursing,” he recalled. “Making it about the dress was their idea and they edited out most of the exchange. I have no ill will towards anyone or their personal choices, so long as it does not harm me or my family.

Johnson disclosed to The Daily Wire that he’s received death threats since the video clip’s release and was terminated from his position as CEO of Visuwell.

“I have now been the target of an enormous volume of hate, threat — including death threats — and constant harassment ever since they posted that encounter to TikTok and Twitter,” Johnson said. “I’ve also now been forced out of my job due to Visuwell’s customers, mostly hospitals, demanding my removal.”

Visuwell announced Johnson’s termination on Monday, writing via Twitter: “We unequivocally condemn the behavior exhibited by Sam Johnson in a recent video widely circulated on social media,” the company said. “After investigating the matter and speaking to individuals involved, the VisuWell BOD has chosen to terminate Mr. Johnson from his position as CEO, effective immediately. Gerry Andrady, our President and COO, will lead the company through this important time.”




https://www.dailywire.com/news/man-...ale-in-prom-dress-heres-his-side-of-the-story



The guy is a fucking moron for hassling the kid.
 
If you think about the GOP being stuck in a race against time to rig everything to be as undemocratic as possible before the party becomes a permanent minority, it makes some sense as a rational strategy.

The other option would be to drop all the nativist. nonsense that’s becoming even more unpopular by the day, but that’s what gets boomers and edgelords out to the polls to pass more tax cuts.

Tough dilemma, but current GOP leadership isn’t exactly made up of problem solvers, so I don’t expect any there is any strategy other than dialing up the crocodile tears when things go wrong.

My opinion as well. With changing demographics, their party will become a minority but the problem is that the features that make them that define them are too baked into the cake. It would have been like democrats jumping sides on very ideologically consistent issues like lgbt, women, and minority rights for the sake to win an election. It would never work. The democratic base wouldn't allow it.
 
Back
Top