I don’t even understand what you are trying to say

This really doesn’t surprise me at all. Being confused about things seems like a default for you.

Right, which is the second of the two options. I’m assuming this is also accompanied by you occasionally standing in front of a mirror saying: “I am not stupid. I am not a traitor. People like me.” Delusion’s a powerful thing.

the hate and rudeness I have received here guaranteed that I won’t vote Democrat. No way.

Which, in the eyes of rational people, makes you an idiot and a traitor. An idiot, because you’re letting your bruised ego get in the way of making the only rational choice in the upcoming election, potentially causing a much greater amount of harm in the future. And a traitor, because the person you’re most benefitting by your aforementioned idiocy is someone who has already committed treason against his country, and has stated on several occasions that he would like to do away with basic tenets of democracy if he gets elected.

So, you might balk at both labels, but both are accurate. If you don’t like it, you have two options: either change your behavior, or pretend that self-affirmations will actually alter reality.

I mean, that’s basically saying that someone who uses slang isn’t speaking their native language. Poopensharten and cuckstoel might not be explicitly Dutch, but they’re Dutch-ish in an otherwise Dutch sentence.

It’s not? Could’ve fooled Google Translate.

Nobody will ever be able to convince me that Dutch is a serious language developed by people who weren’t just trying to troll both English and German speakers.

Not sure how that’s supposed to ease the anxiety of Canadians.

I mean, anything can look like a conspiracy to a layperson who pays zero attention to 60 years of incremental progress and focuses solely on the end result. It’s the same reason why people think vaccines are evil, or that 5G towers cause COVID.

Bro, a worm ate part of his brain, and then died because of mercury poisoning. Doing something blatantly obvious and stupid is par for the course for him now. Like, this is the same guy who chainsawed off the head of a beached whale and strapped it to his car’s roof.

Well that’s not true. You’re very pro-genocide, as long as it’s against Palestinians. That’s pretty political.

The kids ARE alright!

Man, I’m going to feel like a real dick if English isn’t your first language, but “not condoning” is very much not the same thing as “condemning”. For example, I would not condone anybody hurling insults at you, especially if I think they’re over the top. That being said, I wouldn’t condemn it either. Do you see the difference?

I’m not obligated to explain myself to you. :)

True - your obligation is merely to your own conscience. If you ever get tired of being a garbage human being, you’re going to have some serious soul searching to do.

I don’t have to explain anything to you or do anything of the sort.

Yup. Called it. No wonder you are acting like such a weasel. You are at the very least ok with it, and at most support it. But you don’t want anybody else to know that about you, so you’re trying to pretend you’re taking some kind of moral high ground.

You know what the moral high ground actually is? Condemning genocide. It’s possibly the most basic moral test that exists, and you failed it spectacularly. I stand by every negative thing I’ve said about you.

It’s not my job to condemn, support, or even comment on every article someone else posts

No, it certainly isn’t. But the fact that you declined to respond to OP, and chose to respond to someone criticising OP instead is very telling about your priorities.

Also, just to be clear, I do like Israel. My girlfriend is Jewish, and I’ve been there—it’s a beautiful place. That doesn’t mean I have to agree with their leaders or condone genocide.

Ok, crazy hypothetical time here… let’s say that we were discussing some other famous genocide. You can pick any one you’d like. And let’s say that some piece of shit posted an article on the channel you moderate saying that “hey - actually it’s not a genocide, it’s just, like, pre-emptive self defence, guys”, and someone calls that person out. If someone responds to that by saying: “Hey, I like <name_of_country>”, would you take that to mean “I really like the rivers and hills, and I have a passing familiarity with the place”, or would you not take the dumbest possible interpretation, and instead treat it as if instead of being a complete nonsequitor, it was in the context of the conversation to date? When you said: “I like Israel”, it was in the context of Israel committing a genocide. Who gives a shit if the place is pretty? The conversation had nothing to do with how scenic the country is, but rather how terrible their government is.

By implying–actually saying–that I support genocide is a gross distortion of the facts and you should feel icky about yourself.

You want me to feel icky about interpreting the things you said in the way that makes the most sense? Maybe in the future, if you don’t want to be misunderstood, be clear about what you’re talking about, and don’t try to weasel out of responsibility. Your entire whining response to me between that post and this boils down to you not taking responsibility for being obtuse.

I believe in diversity of opinion in that community.

Ah yes - classic liberal thinking: “People who deplore genocide and people who cheer it on should be equally heard!” Fuck you.

But don’t lie and say I support genocide.

Ok - condemn Israel, and condemn the poster who posted an apologetics piece about Israel’s genocide. I don’t give a shit how pretty you think the countryside of Israel is.

The article posted by the OP in that instance was a bullshit apologetic thinkpiece about how the people opposed to Israel’s genocide of Palestinians are just ignorant, which includes the re-framing of genocide into “self-defense”. You not only didn’t have a problem with that, but you essentially defended OP against someone who did - me. At no point did you condemn any of the morally bankrupt positions the article OP posted took, and then you went and said that you like Israel. Could just be that you said that just to antagonize me, and you don’t actually mean it. If that’s the case, then at the very best, you’re a disingenuous jackass who doesn’t take the genocide seriously. At worst, you’re a supporter of it.

Which is it?

It’s actually pretty funny that you and OP are seeing eye to eye on this, considering you want the US to stop funding Israel’s genocide, and OP is 100% cool with Israel’s genocide. Politics makes for some strange bedfellows, indeed.

This really is quite pathetic when you think about it. The primary duty of a political party is to get their candidate on the ballot in all 50 states. Fuckery in Nevada aside, the Green Party has only managed to get Stein on the ballot in 38 states. Like, it’d be one thing if they managed to get her on the ballot in all 49 other states and just got screwed in NV, but they completely failed to do their job in 11 other states besides Nevada. And when it comes down to it, the problem in NV is that they filed incorrect paperwork. Any organization that was on the ball would be triple checking everything to make sure that their primary job (get the candidate on the ballot) was done right.

Shit like this is why I can never take the Green party seriously. How do you expect to win the presidency if the residents from a quarter of the states in the Union don’t even have an option to vote for you? And if the party can’t even get their primary job done correctly, how can they even expect to attract good candidates?

It could also be interpreted as a criticism of Libertarianism. The first two pigs didn’t go by any building codes, and instead decided that they wanted to build their shelters out of inferior materials with substandard protections against high winds. The third pig made sure that his dwelling met hurricane standards, and was saved. The story doesn’t go into the reasons why pigs #1 and #2 chose inferior building materials, so it could be interpreted in a number of different ways. It doesn’t HAVE to be about economics. It could just be that pigs #1 and #2 were big fans of Ayn Rand and reaped the whirlwind as a result.

It looks like we have an answer to the question “what happens when the FBI shuts off the Russian money pipeline to American right-wing grifters?”. Apparently, the answer is that they organize a griftcon.