Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Did he embody all that is good with the Human Race?

If he came back to life, I imagine he would shame Sharpton and Jackson.

Would he shame the parties for what they have become, and shame the parties for using race to divide the nation?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Did he embody all that is good with the Human Race?

If he came back to life, I imagine he would shame Sharpton and Jackson.

Would he shame the parties for what they have become, and shame the parties for using race to divide the nation?


What are your views on Sharpton and Jackson? Also how can two people divide an entire nation? You were either divided beforehand or you weren't.

Sharpton is a clown, Jackson is an assbag.

Originally posted by Stoic
What are your views on Sharpton and Jackson?
Not a fan.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Sharpton is a clown, Jackson is an assbag.

That's not really an answer. Why do you feel that they are those things, and how can these two be responsible to dividing an entire nation? Anyone leaning heavily to one side or the other had to have already been divided within themselves with little to no help from another person's opinion on things.

Originally posted by long pig
Not a fan.

Why?

Originally posted by Stoic
That's not really an answer. Why do you feel that they are those things, and how can these two be responsible to diving an entire nation? Anyone leaning heavily to one side or the other had to have already been divided within themselves with little to no help from another person's opinion on things.



Why?

For one, they a pawns and followers, King was a leader. King set the tone and the movement, Jackson and Al just try and appease the mob.

King was a King.

I don't think he did embody everything that was good in the human race. Not to say he wasn't a great man, but he had his faults.

Also Al Sharpton is a piece of shit, if you look up the way he handled the rape case that turned out to be a false rape accusation you will see why.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
If he came back to life


M5FR1LGsT7E

Sharpton, and Jackson are civil rights activists though. Do you have to show your ass to get things done from time to time? When is it okay to freak the hell out when you see inequality at work? Let's not kid ourselves, no one is devoid of negative intentions 100% of time, but to paint them in a purely evil light is wrong. Should we focus on any one particular thing about them? How about statistics that show that minorities are often paid far less for doing the same job? If all lives matter, why was it that 50%-60% of the people being stopped and frisked black? Would so many people commit so many crimes if they were paid enough to even wipe their asses after working a full time job? How many messed up things have to happen before someone actually jumps the gun and flies off of the handle? Or, perhaps you have a particular subject, or reason for thinking that they are truly messed up individuals with the sole purpose of dividing the nation? I don't know what your views are, which is why I asked.

I actually see what King did as honorable. Sharpton is a sell out, a tax fraud and not even a pastor, nor does he act like one. But anyways I don't want to talk about him. I want to talk about King.

The thing is a true civil rights activist wouldn't of behaved in the manner Sharpton has. You can talk about stats, but then we have to bring crime stats into this. You act like giving them higher paying jobs would solve things, but I don't think that is the issue here.

The issue is blacks commit more crimes against blacks then anyone else. Latino's commit more crimes against Latino's then anyone else. Yet in some situations if you aren't a certain race you can't talk about these issues without someone thinking you have some sort of racist agenda. This is why I think the solution needs to come from within the communities.

When a black person stands up and talks about the problems in the black community..it holds more weight. The good news is more and more people from the community are beginning to speak up. We had that video from that woman a few weeks ago that went viral. I also heard another guy on the radio who was a black pastor talking about the problems from within the community. This man was wondering out loud why black lives don't matter when taken by blacks.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I actually see what King did as honorable. Sharpton is a sell out, a tax fraud and not even a pastor, nor does he act like one. But anyways I don't want to talk about him. I want to talk about King.

It's impossible to tell, as we live in a much different climate than it was during his time. That was a time when blacks had to sit in the back of the bus, and give up their seats so that a white person could sit down. Blacks could not eat in the same restaurants, go to the same social events, or even drink from the same water fountains. Interracial relationships were out of the question, and same sex couples were treated like abominations. It's an impossible question to answer.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I actually see what King did as honorable. Sharpton is a sell out, a tax fraud and not even a pastor, nor does he act like one. But anyways I don't want to talk about him. I want to talk about King.

I don't like adulterers, but King was great when it came to civil rights. I respect him more then someone like Malcolm X(who actually had meetings with the KKK).

Originally posted by Stoic
That's not really an answer. Why do you feel that they are those things, and how can these two be responsible to dividing an entire nation? Anyone leaning heavily to one side or the other had to have already been divided within themselves with little to no help from another person's opinion on things.



Why?
They are race baiting extortionists. They lie, steal, manipulate and intimidate to make money.
They use poor blacks to get rich while simultaneously keeping them poor by enabling their flawed culture.

Basically, they are pimps.

Originally posted by Surtur
The thing is a true civil rights activist wouldn't of behaved in the manner Sharpton has. You can talk about stats, but then we have to bring crime stats into this. You act like giving them higher paying jobs would solve things, but I don't think that is the issue here.

The issue is blacks commit more crimes against blacks then anyone else. Latino's commit more crimes against Latino's then anyone else. Yet in some situations if you aren't a certain race you can't talk about these issues without someone thinking you have some sort of racist agenda. This is why I think the solution needs to come from within the communities.

When a black person stands up and talks about the problems in the black community..it holds more weight. The good news is more and more people from the community are beginning to speak up. We had that video from that woman a few weeks ago that went viral. I also heard another guy on the radio who was a black pastor talking about the problems from within the community. This man was wondering out loud why black lives don't matter when taken by blacks.


Then try to remember that we are all from the same race, and the stigma that you might feel may disappear. Who are you kidding man? Money is often behind the problems that cause people to struggle. Are you telling me that the disgruntled homeless person would still be as angry as they are if they were making enough to take care of the things that they need? I'm talking about basic effing needs here, and not luxuries. I spoke to an intelligent man once, and he told me that he worked full time, and even over time, and after paying his bills, he could not eat. he told me that he had to occasionally steal toilet paper to wipe his ass from time to time. What then is he supposed to do in order to get by? Whites go through the same struggles when impoverished and trying to put their best foot forward. Are you saying that the statistics are incorrect? Women are also paid less.

I used to work for a Jewish man, and he asked me a question. He asked what I thought was the poorest people living legally in America was? I couldn't answer him, because I didn't know the answer. So he says, there is nothing poorer than a black women with children on welfare.

What you fail to see, is that minorities weren't in control of America for an instant in the past. Are they supposed to be in positions that were handed down from those that were. I'm not talking about all of the time, but I'm talking about a lot of the time. You have to realize something, There was a time that minorities had to go to the fence in order to get a decent paying job, while a white person did not have to go through such harsh scrutiny. This remains true to this day in many cases.

Originally posted by Surtur

When a black person stands up and talks about the problems in the black community..it holds more weight.

And usually when they do this they are called derogatory names like tolken and uncle tom.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are not Civil Rights Activist. They are HATE Activist. They are in it for the Fame and MONEY! They don't give a DAMN about their fellow Blacks.

I will note that during his lifetime, plenty of people criticized him for 'making' the divide between white and black larger and 'creating' problems that didn't exist.

It's the same type of thing as always, it's quite easy to praise a civil rights leader who fought for things we no longer consider at issue, but also quite common to do so at the same time one is speaking ill of current civil rights matters.

Originally posted by Q99
I will note that during his lifetime, plenty of people criticized him for 'making' the divide between white and black larger and 'creating' problems that didn't exist.

It's the same type of thing as always, it's quite easy to praise a civil rights leader who fought for things we no longer consider at issue, but also quite common to do so at the same time one is speaking ill of current civil rights matters.

No one will ever look back on Sharp and say he was an honorable man.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Did he embody all that is good with the Human Race?

If he came back to life, I imagine he would shame Sharpton and Jackson.

Would he shame the parties for what they have become, and shame the parties for using race to divide the nation? nah i heard he was actually kind of a dick

he cheated on his wife notoriously in dsegenerate white woman orgies and reports have indicated that when he was driving with his family he would roll up all the windows and then pass gas, effectively hotboxing his wife and children.

So he's not the man people think he is/was?

no. surprisingly enough, like nearly every other case where the majority of mainstream humans agree on something, they just so happen to be wrong.

Originally posted by red g jacks
no. surprisingly enough, like nearly every other case where the majority of mainstream humans agree on something, they just so happen to be wrong.

It's because of our methodology to encompass information though, not for some uneducated mass theory.

red g jacks's description is.... exaggerated, but yea, it turns out you don't have to be a saint to do some really, really, really important good stuff.

All I know for sure, if Martin Luther King Jr was alive....he'd be on TI's side.

The fact that he kept company with frauds makes him suspect. Then you have all the hypocrisy, the lies he told, his stealing other people's work and claiming it for himself....he wasn't a good guy. But he was right.

Originally posted by Bardock42
All I know for sure, if Martin Luther King Jr was alive....he'd be on TI's side.
Yup, definitely the takeaway of this thread

Originally posted by Bardock42
All I know for sure, if Martin Luther King Jr was alive....he'd be on TI's side.

...in all things.



ice cream man: strawberry, vanilla, or chocolate?

TI: ....vanilla....did i make the right choice martin?

MLK: you always make the right choice, TI. vanilla was my favorite as well.

TI: i'm sick of these darkies running our country into the ground, martin

MLK: me too, TI. me too.

Originally posted by Stoic
Then try to remember that we are all from the same race, and the stigma that you might feel may disappear. Who are you kidding man? Money is often behind the problems that cause people to struggle. Are you telling me that the disgruntled homeless person would still be as angry as they are if they were making enough to take care of the things that they need? I'm talking about basic effing needs here, and not luxuries.

The problem is it is not disgruntled homeless people that are usually out shooting at people in drive by's and such things.




We are talking about apples and oranges here man. You are talking about people stealing toilet paper because they can't afford it. I'm talking about real crimes..like murder. I'm not saying a person has a right to steal, but those aren't the type of people to worry about. They are not the people who go out and kill others.

The people going out and shooting and killing other blacks aren't doing it because they need toilet paper.



I will never say that minorities don't have to deal with hardships that whites do not have to deal with. There is still discrimination out there in this country. But that doesn't erase the other things brought up though. There is too much violence committed by minorities against their own kind.

There is too much violence committed by minorities, period.

In America, the greatest threat to your safety is a white/Caucasian male age 16-67, no matter who you are.

That is non-sense. White men are 100% trustworthy. Especially if they have candy and a big white, windowless van.

Originally posted by Robtard
In America, the greatest threat to your safety is a white/Caucasian male age 16-67, no matter who you are.
They are 80% of the population and only commit 50% of violent crime.

Originally posted by long pig
They are 80% of the population and only commit 50% of violent crime.

They only get convicted for 50% of the violent crimes...big difference

Originally posted by long pig
They are 80% of the population and only commit 50% of violent crime.

Which makes what I said true. Thanks

Well the devil is in the White City.

Originally posted by Robtard
Which makes what I said true. Thanks Its only true because there are more of them.

I wonder who commits an absolute disproportionate amount of violent crime compared to their population percentage?

Originally posted by Bardock42
They only get convicted for 50% of the violent crimes...big difference
Derp.

Originally posted by long pig
Its only true because there are more of them.

I wonder who commits an absolute disproportionate amount of violent crime compared to their population percentage?

Regardless, you agree, the person you have most to fear from in America is a white/Caucasian male

Originally posted by Robtard
Regardless, you agree, the person you have most to fear from in America is a white/Caucasian male
Depends on where you are. And who you are.

Overall, black on black and black on white violence is higher than white on black.

So, you're actually pretty wrong.

According to your math 'you' have a 50% change of it being a white/Caucasian male that causes you harm in some fashion. So what I said is true

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
...in all things.



ice cream man: strawberry, vanilla, or chocolate?

TI: ....vanilla....did i make the right choice martin?

MLK: you always make the right choice, TI. vanilla was my favorite as well.

TI: i'm sick of these darkies running our country into the ground, martin

MLK: me too, TI. me too.

Also, has anyone noticed how crime ridden every street named after mlk turns out to be?
There's one in my city and God knows you ll be robbed if you go down it.

Intellectually dishonest as always. I expect nothing less from you.Originally posted by Robtard
According to your math 'you' have a 50% change of it being a white/Caucasian male that causes you harm in some fashion. So what I said is true

Originally posted by long pig
Also, has anyone noticed how crime ridden every street named after mlk turns out to be?
There's one in my city and God knows you ll be robbed if you go down it.

This is true, every city has an MLK street and its always the worst street in town.

You're the one that posted the figures, gumo.

Originally posted by Robtard
In America, the greatest threat to your safety is a white/Caucasian male age 16-67, no matter who you are. not if you live in the hood

America as a whole

Originally posted by Robtard
America as a whole
But not if you're in the hood or anywhere else where minorities are prevalent.

Originally posted by red g jacks
not if you live in the hood

Crime statistics prove otherwise.

The idiot above you is race baiting and trolling.

Blacks commit more crimes then anyone else based on size of their population to the amount of crimes committed.

Originally posted by Robtard
America as a whole you really believe that?

you really think if you live in lets say detroit that you are more likely to get killed by a white male 16-67 than any other demographic?

cause that sounds pretty delusional to me.

He's a troll. I finally figured that out.

Originally posted by red g jacks
not if you live in the hood What a meaningless statement. If you live in a red-neck trailer park the percentage of crime committed by whites rises astronomically.

"If you're surrounded by X race the chances of that race committing the majority of crime in that area rises". News at 11.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
What a meaningless statement. If you live in a red-neck trailer park the percentage of crime committed by whites rises astronomically.

"If you're surrounded by X race the chances of that race committing the majority of crime in that area rises". News at 11.
Hoods aren't in America?

Do you know what a red herring fallacy is?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Crime statistics prove otherwise.

The idiot above you is race baiting and trolling.

Blacks commit more crimes then anyone else based on size of their population to the amount of crimes committed. Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
He's a troll. I finally figured that out.


My comment had to do with overall percentage and you're more likely to get killed by a male Caucasian than anyone else in America, not getting into specific geography of city/states.

No need for insults. Though you say "idiot" and "troll" to anyone who disagrees with you and proves you wrong.

Originally posted by red g jacks
you really believe that?

you really think if you live in lets say detroit that you are more likely to get killed by a white male 16-67 than any other demographic?

cause that sounds pretty delusional to me.

Again, American as a whole.

Obviously as pointed out by Tzeen, if you pick a very specific location where it's 80%+ Asian, Black or whatever, the number changes.

then "no matter who you are" is inaccurate

because if you are somebody who lives in the hood, the statement doesn't apply

and since america "as a whole" is majority white.... the statement in general is more or less meaningless

Originally posted by red g jacks
then "no matter who you are" is inaccurate

because if you are somebody who lives in the hood, the statement doesn't apply

and since america "as a whole" is majority white.... the statement in general is more or less meaningless

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that "hood people" didn't travel and I wasn't referring to "killed in your neighborhood". Again, obviously if we talk about very specific locations the number will change depending on the ethnicity of said location.

The statement is factually correct, so how is it meaningless?

Originally posted by Robtard
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that "hood people" didn't travel and I wasn't referring to "killed in your neighborhood". i didn't say either one of those statements.

i'm too lazy to hunt down the stats so i'll just ask you... do you think someone who lives in the hood is more likely to be killed in the hood or to be killed while travelling outside that hood (presumably by a white guy 16-67)?


using the same logic: "obviously if we talk about a country which is 70% white, the number will reflect that fact"

why is that excuse valid when discussing the ethnic make-up of single neighborhoods but not when discussing the ethnic make-up of the country as a whole?

it's basically disingenuous because it's selectively dealing with stats in order to push some ideologically driven message. it's not a genuine assessment of which ethnic groups are more likely to pose a threat to your safety.

Originally posted by red g jacks

it's basically disingenuous because it's selectively dealing with stats in order to push some ideologically driven message. it's not a genuine assessment of which ethnic groups are more likely to pose a threat to your safety.

or you're just trying to fudge figures which concentrate underclass black people together while taking an overall average for white people regardless of class. yeah that's not dripping with ulterior motive.

Originally posted by red g jacks
i didn't say either one of those statements.

i'm too lazy to hunt down the stats so i'll just ask you... do you think someone who lives in the hood is more likely to be killed in the hood or to be killed while travelling outside that hood (presumably by a white guy 16-67)?


using the same logic: "obviously if we talk about a country which is 70% white, the number will reflect that fact"

why is that excuse valid when discussing the ethnic make-up of single neighborhoods but not when discussing the ethnic make-up of the country as a whole?

it's basically disingenuous because it's selectively dealing with stats in order to push some ideologically driven message. it's not a genuine assessment of which ethnic groups are more likely to pose a threat to your safety.

I never said the stat wasn't because of America being largely Caucasian. Caucasian males still kill more overall, as a group.

It's funny, there's countless post of people talking about how violent black people/ brown people are, it's seemingly alright.

I point out that you're more likely to get killed by a male Caucasian in America as a whole(not just in one poor section of Detroit), statistically speaking, and suddenly the tears start flowing. "You can't say that!" -Whitey

Originally posted by Robtard
-Whitey

no, you don't get to say that word. that's OUR WORD.

Just don't kill me, American Caucasian male.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
or you're just trying to fudge figures which concentrate underclass black people together while taking an overall average for white people regardless of class. yeah that's not dripping with ulterior motive.
Originally posted by Robtard
I never said the stat wasn't because of America being largely Caucasian. Caucasian males still kill more overall, as a group.

It's funny, there's countless post of people talking about how violent black people/ brown people are, it's seemingly alright.

I point out that you're more likely to get killed by a male Caucasian in America as a whole(not just in one poor section of Detroit), statistically speaking, and suddenly the tears start flowing. "You can't say that!" -Whitey lol, please.

i'm just pointing out the obvious. you are more likely to be killed in a majority white country by a white person... shocking. you are more likely to be killed in a majority black neighborhood by a black person.... also shocking. in other news, water is still wet.

funny thing is, if we really want to talk about race and crime statistics, black people are more likely to be killed by other black people than white people are to be killed by ANY race. by a pretty wide margin. regardless of their socio-economic status.

reminds me of how someone posted a thread a while back saying that black americans are much more likely to be murdered than white americans.... and then proceeded to suggest they were largely being murdered by white police, while the reality is they are mostly killed by black criminals.

if it was so obvious you probably wouldn't need to fudge the figures to prove your point.

Despite his previous fudging, it now seems like he's agreeing that the greatest threat to someone in America is a male Caucasian. So good enough for me

what figures did i fudge?

did you guys know that you're much more likely to be killed by a woman if you live in a female prison? why these bitches so violent man?

Comparing Caucasian males as a whole to improvised Black people, when we all know that poverty increases crime rates, generally speaking

"living in a female prison" is once again a very specific geography and doesn't represent America as a whole

all i did was point out why your statement was disingenous

i'll give you this: it's not completely meaningless. it literally means that overall more murders are committed by white men.

this does not, however, mean that white men 16-67 are the most dangerous demographic to you no matter who you are

that's what you said, and it's incorrect. that stat doesn't back up that statement. it only demonstrates that you have a hazy understanding of statistics. because if you are black man in a certain age demographic, statistically you are much more likely to be killed by another black man in said age demographic. so your statement only applies to the vast majority of whites and a minority of non-whites who live in mostly white areas. it doesn't apply to a good chunk of the population, which you choose to dismiss or ignore because you're a condescending white racist who doesn't care about black deaths. see... i can spin shit too. whitey.

also, to fudge the stats means to fake or falsify them. so again, specifically which stats did i fudge? if you answer with anything other than a false statistic that i posted, then you are not answering the question and are just making baseless accusations.

Glad you agree it's not a meaningless statement.

'to fudge something' can mean a few thing, not just "fake or falsify".

I love to see Rob get creamed in a debate and then his racism comes out against caucasians.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I love to see Rob get creamed in a debate and then his racism comes out against caucasians.

Creamed? Red Jacks just agreed that my statement wasn't meaningless in the point that it was meant

Originally posted by red g jacks

i'll give you this: it's not completely meaningless. it literally means that overall more murders are committed by white men.


How am I racist by stating an observed statistic? BTW, I'm also Caucasian

your original statement was actually incorrect.. specifically the "no matter who you are" part

your general point that whites commit the most murders overall is factually correct and thus not meaningless... though what you can extrapolate from that is another question... as well as what larger point you were trying to make

but sure, if that's all you need for a technical victory to satisfy you, then do your thing, mayweather. as for me i come on here to talk shit and discuss actual ideas...

Originally posted by Robtard

How am I racist by stating an observed statistic? BTW, I'm also Caucasian i know you are, whitey. i was saying you're ignoring the black murder rates cause black deaths don't mean as much to you. racist.

Originally posted by red g jacks
your original statement was actually incorrect.. specifically the "no matter who you are" part

your general point that whites commit the most murders overall is factually correct and thus not meaningless... though what you can extrapolate from that is another question... as well as what larger point you were trying to make

but sure, if that's all you need for a technical victory to satisfy you, then do your thing, mayweather. as for me i come on here to talk shit and discuss actual ideas... It was factually correct, as I wasn't specifically referring to "murders in the hood", "murders in Aspen during winter break" etc.

Good. That's all it was, I didn't imply that Caucasian males are all a bunch of murderous savages, that was other people's kneejerks. Really, I have no idea why so many whiteboys flipped out, when it's a statistic that can be looked up.

Lol, you're literally agreeing that what I said is correct, but still sour about it. Weird.

Originally posted by red g jacks
i know you are, whitey. i was saying you're ignoring the black murder rates cause black deaths don't mean as much to you. racist.

That comment was to TI, who apparently thinks I'm a non-Caucasian racist who hates Caucasians. He knows nothing.

Originally posted by red g jacks

but sure, if that's all you need for a technical victory to satisfy you, then do your thing, mayweather. as for me i come on here to talk shit and discuss actual ideas...

You actually figured Rob out, I finally figured this out last week and blocked him. He only comes here for an ewin, and to punch holes in arguments rather then actually discuss the issues as a whole, and he just loves do it, also he isn't white.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
You actually figured Rob out, I finally figured this out last week and blocked him. He only comes here for an ewin, and to punch holes in arguments rather then actually discuss the issues as a whole, and he just loves do it, also he isn't white.

LoL, what a troll.

Reported.

Originally posted by Robtard
It was factually correct, as I wasn't specifically referring to "murders in the hood", "murders in Aspen during winter break" etc.

Good. That's all it was, I didn't imply that Caucasian males are all a bunch of murderous savages, that was other people's kneejerks. Really, I have no idea why so many whiteboys flipped out, when it's a statistic that can be looked up.

Lol, you're literally agreeing that what I said is correct, but still sour about it. Weird. it wasn't factually correct, because you said "no matter who you are"

so it should apply to all demographics, regardless of age, race, class, etc.

it does not, thus it was a factually incorrect statement. it's really that simple.

the factually correct statement is that whites commit the majority of murders in the US. which isn't what you said, it was the stat you used to try to back up your factually incorrect statement that white males age 16-67 pose the greatest threat to your life no matter who you are. which, once again, just demonstrates a poor understanding of statistics.

i'm not flipping out, whitey. just disagreed with you. and if your stance is that whites commit the most murders in the US, then i agree. but once again... do you have a point? or are you just randomly citing stats for no reason?

Originally posted by red g jacks
i didn't say either one of those statements.

i'm too lazy to hunt down the stats so i'll just ask you... do you think someone who lives in the hood is more likely to be killed in the hood or to be killed while travelling outside that hood (presumably by a white guy 16-67)?


using the same logic: "obviously if we talk about a country which is 70% white, the number will reflect that fact"

why is that excuse valid when discussing the ethnic make-up of single neighborhoods but not when discussing the ethnic make-up of the country as a whole?

it's basically disingenuous because it's selectively dealing with stats in order to push some ideologically driven message. it's not a genuine assessment of which ethnic groups are more likely to pose a threat to your safety.

He got caught fudging numbers, whats new.

Originally posted by red g jacks
it wasn't factually correct, because you said "no matter who you are"

so it should apply to all demographics, regardless of age, race, class, etc.

it does not, thus it was a factually incorrect statement. it's really that simple.

the factually correct statement is that whites commit the majority of murders in the US. which isn't what you said, it was the stat you used to try to back up your factually incorrect statement that white males age 16-67 pose the greatest threat to your life no matter who you are. which, once again, just demonstrates a poor understanding of statistics.

i'm not flipping out, whitey. just disagreed with you. and if your stance is that whites commit the most murders in the US, then i agree. but once again... do you have a point? or are you just randomly citing stats for no reason?

You agree, don't agree and then agree again. Seems like you are flipping out.

BTW, my initial "flipping out" comment wasn't to you. So good job flipping out.

edit: As a Caucasian male in America, you better watch it,guy. Don't know what I might do.

The ultimate "save me post."

"I was not talking to you, but him!"

Originally posted by Robtard
You agree, don't agree and then agree again. Seems like you are flipping out.i'm sorry to hear about your reading problems. maybe try a tutor or something.

lol, alright pal

Originally posted by red g jacks
i'm sorry to hear about your reading problems. maybe try a tutor or something.

lol, alright pal

He gets caught again.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I finally figured this out last week and blocked him.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The ultimate "save me post."

"I was not talking to you, but him!"

I thought you had me on ignore, dude?

Originally posted by Robtard
I thought you had me on ignore, dude?

People who use ignore are weak and have no confidence in their argument and are unable to counter other people's.

Originally posted by jaden101
People who use ignore are weak and have no confidence in their argument and are unable to counter other people's.

I legit laughed.

Originally posted by jaden101
People who use ignore are weak and have no confidence in their argument and are unable to counter other people's. agreed

Originally posted by jaden101
People who use ignore are weak and have no confidence in their argument and are unable to counter other people's.

Its fun to make Rob do flips.

Rob is a tard after all. Truth in advertising.

Originally posted by long pig
Rob is a tard after all. Truth in advertising.

Yet you couldn't prove me wrong

The old "prove me wrong on the Internet."

Racist