Tucker's attempt to normalize Nick Fuentes

220,370 Views | 2911 Replies | Last: 1 hr ago by Mothra
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

RINOs are killing us


Its deeper than RINOs bro... its the entire Republican party

We only have a handful of people in Congress who actually represent the people... and they are the ones getting targeted and removed by the party itself (i.e. Massie, Greene)




So true. We just need to survive this era of Boomer-dominated politics.

So that we can replace the Republican Party with a right-wing version of the Democrats, and the identity politics that dominate it? Do you really believe that to be a winning strategy? How is it working for the Democrats, currently? I would argue not so well.


Yes, I do think it's a winning strategy. The republicans have it all right now and they're still total losers.

I would be interested in discussing why you believe identity politics will help garner more support, especially given the shrinking white electorate. Why do you think an increasingly diverse country is going to flock to a Republican Party that focuses on whiteness?


The winning strategy is embracing what resonates with the young people, and young men on the right have decided to reject neoconservatism. Look at polling and voting data, young people vote overwhelmingly for the Thomas Massies and James Fishbacks of the world. Neither of them talk about "whiteness"

Now, obviously, all of us on the right want America to be a predominantly white country, but candidates have shown they can still attract younger voters without talking about those things.

Ok, so then what do you believe Massie and Fishback are focusing on that is registering with young "conservative" voters? And how does that apply to the broader spectrum of the population, and not just young, white men, who are predominantly the individuals who support guys like Massie and Fishback?


Foreign policy, fiscal responsibility, immigration reform, pro-life.

Issues which can apply to anyone.


To add to Fishback, I like his vice tax on Onlyfans creators. That is a brilliant policy!
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

RINOs are killing us


Its deeper than RINOs bro... its the entire Republican party

We only have a handful of people in Congress who actually represent the people... and they are the ones getting targeted and removed by the party itself (i.e. Massie, Greene)




So true. We just need to survive this era of Boomer-dominated politics.

So that we can replace the Republican Party with a right-wing version of the Democrats, and the identity politics that dominate it? Do you really believe that to be a winning strategy? How is it working for the Democrats, currently? I would argue not so well.


Yes, I do think it's a winning strategy. The republicans have it all right now and they're still total losers.

I would be interested in discussing why you believe identity politics will help garner more support, especially given the shrinking white electorate. Why do you think an increasingly diverse country is going to flock to a Republican Party that focuses on whiteness?


The winning strategy is embracing what resonates with the young people, and young men on the right have decided to reject neoconservatism. Look at polling and voting data, young people vote overwhelmingly for the Thomas Massies and James Fishbacks of the world. Neither of them talk about "whiteness"

Now, obviously, all of us on the right want America to be a predominantly white country, but candidates have shown they can still attract younger voters without talking about those things.

Ok, so then what do you believe Massie and Fishback are focusing on that is registering with young "conservative" voters? And how does that apply to the broader spectrum of the population, and not just young, white men, who are predominantly the individuals who support guys like Massie and Fishback?


Foreign policy, fiscal responsibility, immigration reform, pro-life.

Issues which can apply to anyone.

Interesting. Sounds suspiciously similar to the current Republican Party. Let me read between the lines a bit.

With respect to foreign policy, it's all about the Jews, right? I mean, let's just be honest - these guys tote the old line that Israel dictates foreign policy, and the Iran conflict and war on Hamas has been quite triggering. That's what you mean by foreign policy - don't let the Jews dictate foreign policy, right?

I suspect there's also the isolationist bent as well.

With respect to fiscal responsibility, this is of course a traditional Republican principle, and my biggest complaint about the Trump admin. It's also nothing new.

Regarding immigration reform, well, the current iteration of the party doesn't want reform but control, and that is happening. Our borders are no longer open. In what way would a, say, Fishback disagree with Trump on immigration? Let me guess: visas?

As for pro-life, the party is already staunchly pro-life.

Again, if my assumptions above are correct, this is already by and large the party. But again, I think this is truly about a hyper-focus on the Jews. And I am not sure how that is appealing to the population as a whole.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

RINOs are killing us


Its deeper than RINOs bro... its the entire Republican party

We only have a handful of people in Congress who actually represent the people... and they are the ones getting targeted and removed by the party itself (i.e. Massie, Greene)




So true. We just need to survive this era of Boomer-dominated politics.

So that we can replace the Republican Party with a right-wing version of the Democrats, and the identity politics that dominate it? Do you really believe that to be a winning strategy? How is it working for the Democrats, currently? I would argue not so well.


Yes, I do think it's a winning strategy. The republicans have it all right now and they're still total losers.

I would be interested in discussing why you believe identity politics will help garner more support, especially given the shrinking white electorate. Why do you think an increasingly diverse country is going to flock to a Republican Party that focuses on whiteness?


The winning strategy is embracing what resonates with the young people, and young men on the right have decided to reject neoconservatism. Look at polling and voting data, young people vote overwhelmingly for the Thomas Massies and James Fishbacks of the world. Neither of them talk about "whiteness"

Now, obviously, all of us on the right want America to be a predominantly white country, but candidates have shown they can still attract younger voters without talking about those things.

Ok, so then what do you believe Massie and Fishback are focusing on that is registering with young "conservative" voters? And how does that apply to the broader spectrum of the population, and not just young, white men, who are predominantly the individuals who support guys like Massie and Fishback?


Foreign policy, fiscal responsibility, immigration reform, pro-life.

Issues which can apply to anyone.


To add to Fishback, I like his vice tax on Onlyfans creators. That is a brilliant policy!

Also kind of ironic since he's a bit of a pervert who diddles teenage girls.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

RINOs are killing us


Its deeper than RINOs bro... its the entire Republican party

We only have a handful of people in Congress who actually represent the people... and they are the ones getting targeted and removed by the party itself (i.e. Massie, Greene)




So true. We just need to survive this era of Boomer-dominated politics.

So that we can replace the Republican Party with a right-wing version of the Democrats, and the identity politics that dominate it? Do you really believe that to be a winning strategy? How is it working for the Democrats, currently? I would argue not so well.


Yes, I do think it's a winning strategy. The republicans have it all right now and they're still total losers.

I would be interested in discussing why you believe identity politics will help garner more support, especially given the shrinking white electorate. Why do you think an increasingly diverse country is going to flock to a Republican Party that focuses on whiteness?


The winning strategy is embracing what resonates with the young people, and young men on the right have decided to reject neoconservatism. Look at polling and voting data, young people vote overwhelmingly for the Thomas Massies and James Fishbacks of the world. Neither of them talk about "whiteness"

Now, obviously, all of us on the right want America to be a predominantly white country, but candidates have shown they can still attract younger voters without talking about those things.


You have to get inside the Boomercon skull, Mothra and Oldbear do NOT want this..... They hate the idea of white Americans defending themselves. Now they'll fight for Israel remaining a Jewish ethnostate with their dying breath, but when it comes to white Americans becoming a minority in America whats the big deal? History... culture... tradition... heritage are all superficial qualities that dont define what it means to be American... but when speaking about Israel all those attributes are critically important to what makes someone Israeli and why the land there belongs to them!

LOL. Your silly mischaracterizations are always humorous, made especially funny by the pearl-clutching about my tone just a few posts above. If there's a bigger snowflake on this board, I don't know him.

What would you propose regarding America heading toward a white minority? A race war? Internment camps for foreigners? Gas chambers?
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

RINOs are killing us


Its deeper than RINOs bro... its the entire Republican party

We only have a handful of people in Congress who actually represent the people... and they are the ones getting targeted and removed by the party itself (i.e. Massie, Greene)




So true. We just need to survive this era of Boomer-dominated politics.

So that we can replace the Republican Party with a right-wing version of the Democrats, and the identity politics that dominate it? Do you really believe that to be a winning strategy? How is it working for the Democrats, currently? I would argue not so well.


Yes, I do think it's a winning strategy. The republicans have it all right now and they're still total losers.

I would be interested in discussing why you believe identity politics will help garner more support, especially given the shrinking white electorate. Why do you think an increasingly diverse country is going to flock to a Republican Party that focuses on whiteness?


The winning strategy is embracing what resonates with the young people, and young men on the right have decided to reject neoconservatism. Look at polling and voting data, young people vote overwhelmingly for the Thomas Massies and James Fishbacks of the world. Neither of them talk about "whiteness"

Now, obviously, all of us on the right want America to be a predominantly white country, but candidates have shown they can still attract younger voters without talking about those things.


You have to get inside the Boomercon skull, Mothra and Oldbear do NOT want this..... They hate the idea of white Americans defending themselves. Now they'll fight for Israel remaining a Jewish ethnostate with their dying breath, but when it comes to white Americans becoming a minority in America whats the big deal? History... culture... tradition... heritage are all superficial qualities that dont define what it means to be American... but when speaking about Israel all those attributes are critically important to what makes someone Israeli and why the land there belongs to them!

LOL. Your silly mischaracterizations are always humorous, made especially funny by the pearl-clutching about my tone just a few posts above. If there's a bigger snowflake on this board, I don't know him.

What would you propose regarding America heading toward a white minority? A race war? Internment camps for foreigners? Gas chambers?


You mean do the exact same things that you support when Israel does them?

Ok sure!
BigGameBaylorBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

RINOs are killing us


Its deeper than RINOs bro... its the entire Republican party

We only have a handful of people in Congress who actually represent the people... and they are the ones getting targeted and removed by the party itself (i.e. Massie, Greene)




So true. We just need to survive this era of Boomer-dominated politics.

So that we can replace the Republican Party with a right-wing version of the Democrats, and the identity politics that dominate it? Do you really believe that to be a winning strategy? How is it working for the Democrats, currently? I would argue not so well.


Yes, I do think it's a winning strategy. The republicans have it all right now and they're still total losers.

I would be interested in discussing why you believe identity politics will help garner more support, especially given the shrinking white electorate. Why do you think an increasingly diverse country is going to flock to a Republican Party that focuses on whiteness?


The winning strategy is embracing what resonates with the young people, and young men on the right have decided to reject neoconservatism. Look at polling and voting data, young people vote overwhelmingly for the Thomas Massies and James Fishbacks of the world. Neither of them talk about "whiteness"

Now, obviously, all of us on the right want America to be a predominantly white country, but candidates have shown they can still attract younger voters without talking about those things.

Ok, so then what do you believe Massie and Fishback are focusing on that is registering with young "conservative" voters? And how does that apply to the broader spectrum of the population, and not just young, white men, who are predominantly the individuals who support guys like Massie and Fishback?


Foreign policy, fiscal responsibility, immigration reform, pro-life.

Issues which can apply to anyone.

Interesting. Sounds suspiciously similar to the current Republican Party. Let me read between the lines a bit.

With respect to foreign policy, it's all about the Jews, right? I mean, let's just be honest - these guys tote the old line that Israel dictates foreign policy, and the Iran conflict and war on Hamas has been quite triggering. That's what you mean by foreign policy - don't let the Jews dictate foreign policy, right?

I suspect there's also the isolationist bent as well.

With respect to fiscal responsibility, this is of course a traditional Republican principle, and my biggest complaint about the Trump admin. It's also nothing new.

Regarding immigration reform, well, the current iteration of the party doesn't want reform but control, and that is happening. Our borders are no longer open. In what way would a, say, Fishback disagree with Trump on immigration? Let me guess: visas?

As for pro-life, the party is already staunchly pro-life.

Again, if my assumptions above are correct, this is already by and large the party. But again, I think this is truly about a hyper-focus on the Jews. And I am not sure how that is appealing to the population as a whole.


At face value, it sounds the same as the current GOP but there's important distinctions.

Immigration: We need to restrict H1Bs, end birthright citizenship, as well as ramp up deportations.

The GOP claims fiscal responsibility as a cornerstone of their beliefs but when have they ever practiced that?

Foreign Policy: Yes, foreign policy in regard to ISRAEL. And this is actually the one issue that appeals to people on both sides of the aisle. No one likes Israel, we could easily appeal to independent voters on this issue.
Sic 'em Bears and Go Birds
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

Mothra said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

The_barBEARian said:

BigGameBaylorBear said:

RINOs are killing us


Its deeper than RINOs bro... its the entire Republican party

We only have a handful of people in Congress who actually represent the people... and they are the ones getting targeted and removed by the party itself (i.e. Massie, Greene)




So true. We just need to survive this era of Boomer-dominated politics.

So that we can replace the Republican Party with a right-wing version of the Democrats, and the identity politics that dominate it? Do you really believe that to be a winning strategy? How is it working for the Democrats, currently? I would argue not so well.


Yes, I do think it's a winning strategy. The republicans have it all right now and they're still total losers.

I would be interested in discussing why you believe identity politics will help garner more support, especially given the shrinking white electorate. Why do you think an increasingly diverse country is going to flock to a Republican Party that focuses on whiteness?


The winning strategy is embracing what resonates with the young people, and young men on the right have decided to reject neoconservatism. Look at polling and voting data, young people vote overwhelmingly for the Thomas Massies and James Fishbacks of the world. Neither of them talk about "whiteness"

Now, obviously, all of us on the right want America to be a predominantly white country, but candidates have shown they can still attract younger voters without talking about those things.

Ok, so then what do you believe Massie and Fishback are focusing on that is registering with young "conservative" voters? And how does that apply to the broader spectrum of the population, and not just young, white men, who are predominantly the individuals who support guys like Massie and Fishback?


Foreign policy, fiscal responsibility, immigration reform, pro-life.

Issues which can apply to anyone.

Interesting. Sounds suspiciously similar to the current Republican Party. Let me read between the lines a bit.

With respect to foreign policy, it's all about the Jews, right? I mean, let's just be honest - these guys tote the old line that Israel dictates foreign policy, and the Iran conflict and war on Hamas has been quite triggering. That's what you mean by foreign policy - don't let the Jews dictate foreign policy, right?

I suspect there's also the isolationist bent as well.

With respect to fiscal responsibility, this is of course a traditional Republican principle, and my biggest complaint about the Trump admin. It's also nothing new.

Regarding immigration reform, well, the current iteration of the party doesn't want reform but control, and that is happening. Our borders are no longer open. In what way would a, say, Fishback disagree with Trump on immigration? Let me guess: visas?

As for pro-life, the party is already staunchly pro-life.

Again, if my assumptions above are correct, this is already by and large the party. But again, I think this is truly about a hyper-focus on the Jews. And I am not sure how that is appealing to the population as a whole.


At face value, it sounds the same as the current GOP but there's important distinctions.

Immigration: We need to restrict H1Bs, end birthright citizenship, as well as ramp up deportations.

The GOP claims fiscal responsibility as a cornerstone of their beliefs but when have they ever practiced that?

Foreign Policy: Yes, foreign policy in regard to ISRAEL. And this is actually the one issue that appeals to people on both sides of the aisle. No one likes Israel, we could easily appeal to independent voters on this issue.


Agree with everything but the last sentence, and would argue there are plenty of candidates that meet that criteria.

Disagree with the last part, and of course knew it was all about Israel. Israel isn't as unpopular as you perceive, especially outside of your demographic. That doesn't mean that everyone supports the Israeli govt. or should turn a blind eye to its bad conduct. But there are too many Christians who don't subscribe to the heretical replacement theology, and still understand God's covenant with the Jewish people remains. Now, as the country grows less Christian, perhaps that tide will turn, and you will see Israel destroyed, as you guys hope. But I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Realitybites
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

But there are too many Christians who don't subscribe to the heretical replacement theology, and still understand God's covenant with the Jewish people remains.


You've self identified as a Calvinist in the past.

"Calvinists do not adhere to dispensationalism because the two systems rely on fundamentally incompatible hermeneutics and views of church history.

Covenant vs. Dispensations: Classical Calvinism is historically linked to Covenant Theology, which views God's plan as a continuous covenant of grace from Adam through the Church, whereas dispensationalism emphasizes distinct, separate dispensations and a strict dichotomy between Israel and the Church.

Eschatological Differences: Traditional Calvinism is typically Amillennial or Postmillennial, rejecting the dispensationalist emphasis on a literal future millennium and a pre-tribulation rapture, which John Calvin himself criticized as "childish."

Interpretive Conflicts: Dispensationalism's rigid literal interpretation often contradicts the Reformed "Analogy of Faith," particularly regarding the continuity of the New Covenant, the identity of spiritual Israel, and the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints."

Interesting comment given your self professed religious tradition.
Realitybites
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:


Also kind of ironic since he's a bit of a pervert who diddles teenage girls.


This discussion has been had before, but you insist on bearing false witness about Fishback just as you have about Tucker Carlson. But you're ready to move on from Epstein. You claim to be a Calvinist, but you reject the covenant theology of Calvinism as heretical.

Maybe you're just a Mossad intern.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:




They must have been practicing "heretical replacement theology" and deserved it... dont these Christians know that they exist only follow the noahide laws and be slaves that live and die for the capricious interests of jews and the state of Israel?
EatMoreSalmon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:


Atheist gonna Atheist. When you have no moral compass, you become a Hitler fanboy.



Religion and Morality can be mutually exclusive.

But I understand that is too nuanced for you to comprehend.




The monks in Greece weren't on the path to Moscow and being occupied by Greek or British snipers.
Hitler had already proved that if the monks got in the way of fascist progress, he would go back on his word anyway.

The allied soldiers on the ground at Monte Cassino were convinced the Germans had snipers there. After 29 days of fighting in that one place, the Allies bombed it. Of course, the Germans just moved into the rubble and continued sniping from there.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

Mothra said:

But there are too many Christians who don't subscribe to the heretical replacement theology, and still understand God's covenant with the Jewish people remains.


You've self identified as a Calvinist in the past.

"Calvinists do not adhere to dispensationalism because the two systems rely on fundamentally incompatible hermeneutics and views of church history.

Covenant vs. Dispensations: Classical Calvinism is historically linked to Covenant Theology, which views God's plan as a continuous covenant of grace from Adam through the Church, whereas dispensationalism emphasizes distinct, separate dispensations and a strict dichotomy between Israel and the Church.

Eschatological Differences: Traditional Calvinism is typically Amillennial or Postmillennial, rejecting the dispensationalist emphasis on a literal future millennium and a pre-tribulation rapture, which John Calvin himself criticized as "childish."

Interpretive Conflicts: Dispensationalism's rigid literal interpretation often contradicts the Reformed "Analogy of Faith," particularly regarding the continuity of the New Covenant, the identity of spiritual Israel, and the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints."

Interesting comment given your self professed religious tradition.

Your critique assumes there is one single, uniform "Calvinist" or "Reformed" view, but historically and theologically that isn't really the case. While classical Calvinism has often been paired with covenant theology, not everyone who holds to Calvinistic soteriology adopts the full covenantal framework - especially on Israel and the Church.

My own view reflects that distinction. I affirm some Calvinist convictions about salvation, but I don't hold to a replacement theology or a complete identification of Israel with the Church. As I've pointed out before, passages like Romans 911 preserve a meaningful role for ethnic Israel and make it difficult to say God's covenantal promises are simply absorbed or subsumed by the Church.

At the same time, I'm not fully dispensational either, since I don't adopt its entire system or eschatology. So I'm drawing from multiple traditions where I think Scripture warrants it.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

Mothra said:


Also kind of ironic since he's a bit of a pervert who diddles teenage girls.


This discussion has been had before, but you insist on bearing false witness about Fishback just as you have about Tucker Carlson. But you're ready to move on from Epstein. You claim to be a Calvinist, but you reject the covenant theology of Calvinism as heretical.

Maybe you're just a Mossad intern.

Indeed, the discussion has been had before, and you were wholly unable to refute the facts presented about both Fishback and Carlson. In fact, when I attempted to engage you on the topics, you tucked tail and ran, as you so often do in our discussions. I am sure this instance will be no different.

As to Fishback, the core facts are not in dispute: he has acknowledged a relationship with an 18-year-old former student, Keinah Fort, despite a significant age gap and a prior student-teacher dynamic. The central point of contention is whether that relationship began when she was still 17, as she alleged in court filings, along with the claim that he encouraged secrecy. Those allegations were serious enough to be formally raised, and they align with the timeline of events that followed - namely, the purported Christian shacking up with the teen shortly after she turned 18, over her parents' objections. At minimum, the timing raises legitimate questions about when and how the relationship actually began.

So no, this is not "bearing false witness." It is accurately describing acknowledged facts alongside disputed allegations and drawing reasonable inferences from them. The only version of events being rejected here is the one that would paint the situation in the most charitable possible light.

What is interesting, though, is the sudden concern about "false witness." That principle doesn't seem to carry much weight when it's politically inconvenient - especially considering your willingness to overlook or defend public figures who traffic in far more demonstrably false claims on a regular basis (see Candace Owens). That inconsistency speaks for itself.

And as for your theological jab, as pointed out above, there is no single, monolithic "Calvinist" position that every adherent is required to parrot. We aren't Orthodox.

Now run along and disappear, Poor Man's Sam Lowry, as you so often do.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

Realitybites said:




They must have been practicing "heretical replacement theology" and deserved it... dont these Christians know that they exist only follow the noahide laws and be slaves that live and die for the capricious interests of jews and the state of Israel?

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?

Perhaps they could go settle in Gaza, where the Muslims will be much more hospitable.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Realitybites said:




They must have been practicing "heretical replacement theology" and deserved it... dont these Christians know that they exist only follow the noahide laws and be slaves that live and die for the capricious interests of jews and the state of Israel?

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?

Perhaps they could go settle in Gaza, where the Muslims will be much more hospitable.


Perhaps you can go settle in Israel when Massie becomes President.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?


I never said that.

Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Realitybites said:




They must have been practicing "heretical replacement theology" and deserved it... dont these Christians know that they exist only follow the noahide laws and be slaves that live and die for the capricious interests of jews and the state of Israel?

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?

Perhaps they could go settle in Gaza, where the Muslims will be much more hospitable.


Perhaps you can go settle in Israel when Massie becomes President.

Massie will be President about the same time Rosie O'Donnell holds that office.

Which is to say, not in this century.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Realitybites said:




They must have been practicing "heretical replacement theology" and deserved it... dont these Christians know that they exist only follow the noahide laws and be slaves that live and die for the capricious interests of jews and the state of Israel?

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?

Perhaps they could go settle in Gaza, where the Muslims will be much more hospitable.


Perhaps you can go settle in Israel when Massie becomes President.

Massie will be President about the same time Rosie O'Donnell holds that office.

Which is to say, not in this century.


You said the same thing about Trump in 2015
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

Oldbear83 said:

The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Realitybites said:




They must have been practicing "heretical replacement theology" and deserved it... dont these Christians know that they exist only follow the noahide laws and be slaves that live and die for the capricious interests of jews and the state of Israel?

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?

Perhaps they could go settle in Gaza, where the Muslims will be much more hospitable.


Perhaps you can go settle in Israel when Massie becomes President.

Massie will be President about the same time Rosie O'Donnell holds that office.

Which is to say, not in this century.


You said the same thing about Trump in 2015

Nope.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:



Not a surprise. As I said before, the Woke Left and Woke Right share much in common.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:



A made up quote.

You really need to google what you cite.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Realitybites said:




They must have been practicing "heretical replacement theology" and deserved it... dont these Christians know that they exist only follow the noahide laws and be slaves that live and die for the capricious interests of jews and the state of Israel?

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?

Perhaps they could go settle in Gaza, where the Muslims will be much more hospitable.


Perhaps you can go settle in Israel when Massie becomes President.

We all have our pipe dreams...
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?


I never said that.



Ah, so all Jews need to die in your book, not just the Israeli govt.

Got it.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?


I never said that.



Ah, so all Jews need to die in your book, not just the Israeli govt.

Got it.


This post is so stupid and pathetic I debated even replying to it at all.

The constant libel and defamatory strawmans are the last resort of someone who has lost the argument and lacks the character to concede.

Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?


I never said that.



Ah, so all Jews need to die in your book, not just the Israeli govt.

Got it.


This post is so stupid and pathetic I debated even replying to it at all.

The constant libel and defamatory strawmans are the last resort of someone who has lost the argument and lacks the character to concede.



Stupid and pathetic would describe the vast majority of your posts.

And of course, you can't defend your prior statements. I get it. You have vile beliefs and positions.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

The_barBEARian said:

Mothra said:

Wait a sec. I thought you guys said there was a distinction between Jews and the Israeli govt. What gives?


I never said that.



Ah, so all Jews need to die in your book, not just the Israeli govt.

Got it.


This post is so stupid and pathetic I debated even replying to it at all.

The constant libel and defamatory strawmans are the last resort of someone who has lost the argument and lacks the character to concede.



Stupid and pathetic would describe the vast majority of your posts.

And of course, you can't defend your prior statements. I get it. You have vile beliefs and positions.


 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.