What Jordan Peterson says

Originally posted by The Lost
Like when he was worried about C-16? Explain to me why you can see how "Peterson is worried." About anything. We can go point-by-point or issue-by-issue.

Based on this post and others I've seen by you and other members on this board, I want to make something clear...

The left isn't more dangerous and I hate this shitty perspective SO much. Also, don't tell me about "radicalized" students shutting people down. They're students. Students have been radicals since the beginning of goddamn time. Do you know anything about the 1960's in America?

"Moderates" like Dave Rubin and "slightly less moderates" such as Shapiro? Like, this is all a big troll, right?

Is it because Rubin told you a bunch of times he's really a "liberal" or "left-leaning" but gives consistent platforms to right-leaning extremists and softballs them for the whole interview? Ah yes, Rubin the "enlightened centrist."

Like, some of the most watched conservative media is Fox News, Breitbart, the Daily Caller, The Daily Wire, fucking InfoWars. Fucking InfoWars! We are talking about a growing political ideology that supports ethnostates, considers race realism scientifically valid, thinks there's two genders, thinks that watching YouTube videos of riots or anecdotes is "data", thinks Tommy Robinson is unfairly jailed, think Islam is a threat to the west (even more than Christianity), and more.

The right, in North America and Europe, is BAR-NONE the most dangerous, worrisome, threatening, and poisonous partisan affiliation you could ever hope to side with, agree with, or support. Centrists enable them (and often share many anti-science, irrational, hateful, and non-factual perspectives) and useful idiots propagate their horrendously asinine platforms and perspectives.

As a centrist, you have the same loss of focus as every other "enlightened centrists" in that you'll yammer on about how civil discourse is dead and perhaps complain about the left's "name-calling" which distracts from all sorts of genuine threats to free speech, the economy, forward movement, and more. Trump running one of the most influential, powerful, and far-reaching governments on this planet has implications. I know you guys hate to fucking hear it but it doesn't get any less true the more you ignore it.

The Trump administration is trying to drive the world economy into the toilet, which is bad for everyone (Wanna talk about how Trump is trying to move away from economic globalism or his veritable fucking collection of trade wars?)

This is a guy who also very likely invited a foreign government to influence the election of one of the most powerful governments on Earth, is inconsistent, lies almost daily to his supporters and critics, has been accused of sexual harassment by twenty woman, tried to ban trans people from serving in the military, wouldn't allow an AMERICAN judge to rule on a case because he thought he had Mexican parents (remember, only "some of them" are "good people" anyway), and much more.

Charlottesville? Kentucky? Planned Parenthood shootings? Elliot Rodger? Dylann Storm Roof? Alenxandre Bissonnette? I mean, the 2012 Kentucky riots? They made the Berkeley riots look like nothing and that was a goddamn sporting event riot. (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-latest-kentucky-riot-is-part-of-a-long-destructive-sports-tradition/) Keep in mind that, in terms of terrorism, right-wing violence is in second place behind Islamist terror attacks (there's been roughly 3000 deaths since the early 90's when it comes to terror attacks. Islamists are responsible for about 90% I believe and Right Wing terrorists are about 7%. I can bring up these numbers, if you'd like to see specifics but my approximations aren't off.) Is the left denying Russian interference in the 2016 election when it's a matter of fact? Are the Russian trolls able to easily infiltrate the left as they rampantly have been with the right? (See: The_Donald)

We can talk about the "softer" shit, like GamerGate and how figures like Anita Sarkeesian, as much as you may disagree with her positions, was threatened and bullied by a toxic culture often defended and advocated for by the right. Just kidding, "gamer bros" are super sharp dudes!

NO ONE who is reasonable can tell me the left is more dangerous because of Peterson's GARBAGE slippery slope fallacy laden positions about C-16, tumblr posts, phony/cowardly "moderates/centrists", or extremist college/university students (we know they're never extreme lol nbd). If you want to criticize the left? Go ahead. Do it all day long. I don't give a shit. I have a TON of issues with the far left and any extreme partisan worship. Hell, I honestly really don't like Clinton (mostly because she's immensely backed by corporate money and some of us REALLY do want to see a swamp-draining at least start before we die) but if was in a position to choose one over the other? Clinton. Every goddamn time.

Why? As much as I have ACTUAL issues with both left-wing ideologies and right-wing ideologies (as opposed to labeling myself a centrist and coddling the right wing whilst irrationally and obsessively slamming the left wing), the right wing are at best problematic pseudo-intellectual dog-whistlers and at worst? Violent, racist, sexist, xenophobic, anti-science, anti-progress, absolutely fucking braindead, etc.

The worst offenders are social conservatives (I still take issue with economic conservatives but not as much) and the alt-right in general.

I'm on no high-horse but like anyone else with a shred of self-awareness, I'm pissed off that ignorant individuals are focusing on non-problems so forgive me if I'm not readily extending olive branches. [/B]

^ An Ultra Combo Bingo

Originally posted by Silent Master
Lol!!!

Not only do I love seeing how unhinged this person is, I love that some posters are championing her.

LMFAO!

These same people would accuse us of felating a poster for this behavior.

I'm a man, Surtur. Does this mean you'll hate me less now?

Originally posted by The Lost
I'm a man, Surtur. Does this mean you'll hate me less now?

I don't hate you at all. I feel like you are unhinged though. Or a troll.

Originally posted by Surtur
I don't hate you at all. I feel like you are unhinged though. Or a troll.

I was being rhetorical.

Dude. Please stop. You're killing me.

Originally posted by The Lost
I was being rhetorical.

Dude. Please stop. You're killing me.

Yep...you're not triggered at all.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yep...you're not triggered at all.

You got me. I'm triggered. Idiocy that's contributing to fucking society super hard triggers me. Spot on, Surtur. A broken clock is right twice a day, the sun rises, etc.

We done or you have anything else?

Originally posted by The Lost
You got me. I'm triggered. Idiocy that's contributing to fucking society super hard triggers me. Spot on, Surtur. A broken clock is right twice a day, the sun rises, etc.

We done or you have anything else?

You're becoming nonsensical now lol. And trotting out cliches. Okay. Just calm yourself.

Originally posted by The Lost
Again, you don't want to address a goddamn thing.

"You're an ideologue."
"I haven't said anything to suggest this. How am I an ideologue?"
"You're an ideologue."

Nice!

"Because you haven't approached me on any common ground, or tried to find any; this is a battleground, not a conversation. You see me as a collection of political beliefs, as opposed to a person. You believe you know who I am purely through analysis of these supposed beliefs, as if we've ever even spoken before. You prize personal attacks and attempts to undermine over any sense of respect within a debate. You would rather 'defeat your enemy' rather than even bother attempting to understand them."

Seems like you missed that somehow?

I read the rest of your post and most of it was angry nonsense that clearly wasn't influenced by anything I said, and instead was directed at the version of me that you believe exists (i.e. some hard-right Breitbart reader or something), rather than the actual version of me (who probably actually shares quite a few of your views).

Yep, I've still yet to speak about any of the stuff you posted. The reason is because you are not a particularly worthy person to speak to, by anyone's standards. I said I'd be willing to chat civilly if you wanted to, and asked you to offer me a few subjects to start off with, aside from that huge first post (I don't see why I should be expected to sift through all of that). If you can't manage that, and still are focusing purely on trying to create conflict, then I don't see why you should consider yourself worthy of anybody's time.

Anyway, back to Peterson (which is the topic fyi): I consider him to possibly be one of the greatest enemies of the alt-right and the rising interest in far-right ideologies amongst young people in the West, especially in terms of actually doing something about them. He's laid out empirically why their pitiful misogynistic and racist ideologies are puerile without attacking them, and instead has given those willing to listen a method of actually improving as people and becoming less susceptible to being entranced by the dangerous ideas peddled by sites such as InfoWars.

Instead of seeing them as 'enemies', he sees them for what they really are: lost and confused young people who are grabbing out for a sense of meaning. By empathising with them instead of dehumanising them, he is actually helping them to turn away from those wanting to control their minds and use them for extremist purposes, and impressing upon them an individualist ethos that, if embraced by all people in the West, would be a much more useful solution to identity intolerance.

When the Left starts taking this approach instead of forcing further negative identity politics and social division upon people (and making them believe to be more helpless than they actually are), then we'll start seeing some real change. Many on the Left are getting sick of it, and it (hopefully) won't be long before this corrupting intersectional approach finally consumes itself. Then we can get back to actually solving the world's problems, instead of fueling the ones we have / creating new ones.

Originally posted by Surtur
Also kinda weird, I usually don't check Cracked often. Last few days I have looked at it. Today I see this:

How Jordan Peterson Repackages Alt-Right Ideas As Self-Help

lol

Due to the recent meltdown you just witnessed another person have you might have missed this.

Another roundabout attempt for them to paint him as alt right. Thankfully if you read the comments you can see not everyone was buying that bullshit, but it's another example of how the media treats JP.

Originally posted by Scribble
Actually, you're an ideologue for the following reasons:

"Because you haven't approached me on any common ground, or tried to find any; this is a battleground, not a conversation. You see me as a collection of political beliefs, as opposed to a person. You believe you know who I am purely through analysis of these supposed beliefs, as if we've ever even spoken before. You prize personal attacks and attempts to undermine over any sense of respect within a debate. You would rather 'defeat your enemy' rather than even bother attempting to understand them."

Seems like you missed that somehow?

No, I didn't miss it. It just fails to explain how I am an ideologue. "You didn't approach me on common ground, this is a battlefield, here's how you see me" doesn't explain how I'm strongly advocating a particular ideology because I think a some really suck right now.

My big post explains that I also share dissatisfaction with the left but vehemently disagree with them being anywhere near as dangerous or as negatively influential like a lot of right wing ideologies and partisan affiliations are.

Me describing certain things you've agreed with and including you in a post that wasn't designed just for you doesn't mean I'm presuming to know you so you can just go ahead and throw that ridiculous notion away if you're ever ready to have a legit back-and-forth about this.

See, check it:

Based on this post and others I've seen by you and other members on this board, I want to make something clear...

While I addressed you at most points in that post, it wasn't exclusively tailored just for you. It's in... it's in the opening fucking statement.

I read the rest of your post and most of it was angry nonsense that clearly wasn't influenced by anything I said, and instead was directed at the version of me that you believe exists (i.e. some hard-right Breitbart reader or something), rather than the actual version of me (who probably actually shares quite a few of your views).

Nice, looks like you definitely read and understood my post.

Like come on, um, you.

Yep, I've still yet to speak about any of the stuff you posted. The reason is because you are not a particularly worthy person to speak to, by anyone's standards. I said I'd be willing to chat civilly if you wanted to, and asked you to offer me a few subjects to start off with, aside from that huge first post (I don't see why I should be expected to sift through all of that). If you can't manage that, and still are focusing purely on trying to create conflict, then I don't see why you should consider yourself worthy of anybody's time.

You abandoned civil discourse when you, throughout this entire thread, made false claims and reinforced bad information. You want everyone to step to you on good faith grounds but have already made recent posts here in bad faith, have contradicted yourself, and have failed to address anything with any specific response.

You've tried to make it look like I've made this somewhat personal (by using your username and saying I'm attacking, like, a ghost of you or some shit?) because you seemingly don't have the political know-how or self-awareness to recognize how you could be damaging and/or (super trigger snowflake SJW term incoming) problematic. The "damaging/problematic" and "ignorant" part work hand in glove with each other.

You've heard JP use "ideologue" a lot and tried to toss it out here to discredit someone who is deeply opposed to a good deal of your perspective concerning which end of the political spectrum is the most threatening. You said it yourself in your first response that implied I should know who you are before throwing "all of this information" at you (it realistically wasn't that much. If you've read a book recently, you'd know a few paragraphs aren't much to peruse) but people don't need to know each other to engage each other in discussion, yeah?

You don't get to sit here and moralize after some of the comments you've made. Is this how you convince yourself that you've won? Set up a very specific set of guidelines to how people can approach and talk to you before you'll supposedly whip out all of these bombshell responses to specific claims I've made?

Although I would not consider myself 'right-wing' (I'm still firmly a centrist in practice, leaning slightly left or slightly right depending on the specific issue), I can easily say that the Right and Centre are the ones genuinely discussing issues at the moment, whilst the Left screeches into a mirror vacuum of itself.

You remember two days ago, back when you were a centrist? You said this and it's wholly inaccurate. How are the center and right the "ones genuinely discussing issues" while you wholly dismiss the left? Legitimately the opposite is true. The vast majority of the pseudo-science, bigotry, and divisive tactics is pouring out of the right wing today. Again, name equivalent left-wing news outlets to the ones I've named dropped. Is Trump left wing? Is Putin left wing? Is left wing terrorism more prevalent in the United States? I know, I know. University students protesting is the apex of all of this shit so the left wins the award for most shit! Yay!

I would describe myself as left-leaning and I am trying to talk to you right now and you're the one genuinely not discussing what I've brought up. Not that this anecdote would necessarily disprove your point but it sure is ironic as all hell, considering you said someone like me doesn't discuss shit genuinely and someone like you (at least a few days ago) does.

This is why I asked you some of those questions in that big post you've yet to address. You've made some serious implications in this thread in a public setting. You've opened yourself so don't cry foul when you're confronted. It's a fucked up thing to do.

Originally posted by Surtur
Due to the recent meltdown you just witnessed another person have you might have missed this.

Another roundabout attempt for them to paint him as alt right. Thankfully if you read the comments you can see not everyone was buying that bullshit, but it's another example of how the media treats JP.

Originally posted by The Lost

No, I didn't miss it. It just fails to explain how I am an ideologue. "You didn't approach me on common ground, this is a battlefield, here's how you see me" doesn't explain how I'm strongly advocating a particular ideology because I think a some really suck right now.

My big post explains that I also share dissatisfaction with the left but vehemently disagree with them being anywhere near as dangerous or as negatively influential like a lot of right wing ideologies and partisan affiliations are.

Me describing certain things you've agreed with and including you in a post that wasn't designed just for you doesn't mean I'm presuming to know you so you can just go ahead and throw that ridiculous notion away if you're ever ready to have a legit back-and-forth about this.

See, check it:

[/b]

While I addressed you at most points in that post, it wasn't exclusively tailored just for you. It's in... it's in the opening fucking statement.

[/b]

Nice, looks like you definitely read and understood my post.

Like come on, um, you.

You abandoned civil discourse when you, throughout this entire thread, made false claims and reinforced bad information. You want everyone to step to you on good faith grounds but have already made recent posts here in bad faith, have contradicted yourself, and have failed to address anything with any specific response.

You've tried to make it look like I've made this somewhat personal (by using your username and saying I'm attacking, like, a ghost of you or some shit?) because you seemingly don't have the political know-how or self-awareness to recognize how you could be damaging and/or (super trigger snowflake SJW term incoming) problematic. The "damaging/problematic" and "ignorant" part work hand in glove with each other.

You've heard JP use "ideologue" a lot and tried to toss it out here to discredit someone who is deeply opposed to a good deal of your perspective concerning which end of the political spectrum is the most threatening. You said it yourself in your first response that implied I should know who you are before throwing "all of this information" at you (it realistically wasn't that much. If you've read a book recently, you'd know a few paragraphs aren't much to peruse) but people don't need to know each other to engage each other in discussion, yeah?

You don't get to sit here and moralize after some of the comments you've made. Is this how you convince yourself that you've won? Set up a very specific set of guidelines to how people can approach and talk to you before you'll supposedly whip out all of these bombshell responses to specific claims I've made?

[/b]

You remember two days ago, back when you were a centrist? You said this and it's wholly inaccurate. How are the center and right the "ones genuinely discussing issues" while you wholly dismiss the left? Legitimately the opposite is true. The vast majority of the pseudo-science, bigotry, and divisive tactics is pouring out of the right wing today. Again, name equivalent left-wing news outlets to the ones I've named dropped. Is Trump left wing? Is Putin left wing? Is left wing terrorism more prevalent in the United States? I know, I know. University students protesting is the apex of all of this shit so the left wins the award for most shit! Yay!

I would describe myself as left-leaning and I am trying to talk to you right now and you're the one genuinely not discussing what I've brought up. Not that this anecdote would necessarily disprove your point but it sure is ironic as all hell, considering you said someone like me doesn't discuss shit genuinely and someone like you (at least a few days ago) does.

This is why I asked you some of those questions in that big post you've yet to address. You've made some serious implications in this thread in a public setting. You've opened yourself so don't cry foul when you're confronted. It's a fucked up thing to do. [/B]

I wish I could read just one takedown of Peterson written by someone who knows what the hell they're talking about. All of the criticisms of Peterson seem legit or at least reasonable... unless you've actually listened to him talking about the topics at hand and know that he's nothing like what he's painted as.

Yeah, yeah. Great meme. Everyone who criticizes Peterson just hasn't listened to him, he's always being taken out of context or misunderstood one hundred percent of the time just because he's been misunderstood before, etc. etc.

When the Left starts taking this approach instead of forcing further negative identity politics and social division upon people (and making them believe to be more helpless than they actually are), then we'll start seeing some real change. Many on the Left are getting sick of it, and it (hopefully) won't be long before this corrupting intersectional approach finally consumes itself. Then we can get back to actually solving the world's problems, instead of fueling the ones we have / creating new ones.

How are the left forcing negative identity politics?

What you mean they make people "believe" they're more helpless than they actually are?

What new problems have we created?

Damn, the Lost is destroying DMB!!

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
Damn, the Lost is destroying DMB!!

The fuck? We barely talked to each other.

PART I: Okay apologies in advance for if the formatting gets ****ed up, there's a lot to sift through here, and I'm going to try to go through all of it.

Originally posted by The Lost
Like when he was worried about C-16? Explain to me why you can see how "Peterson is worried." About anything. We can go point-by-point or issue-by-issue.

I'm worried because a law was passed with the intention to compel speech, something I stand against on moral grounds. Even if it were done for a 'positive' reason, it's something I disagree with. There's a lunatic in the White House and there's a different kind of lunatic in the... Canadian White House, too.

Originally posted by The Lost
Based on this post and others I've seen by you and other members on this board, I want to make something clear...

The left isn't more dangerous and I hate this shitty perspective SO much. Also, don't tell me about "radicalized" students shutting people down. They're students. Students have been radicals since the beginning of goddamn time. Do you know anything about the 1960's in America?

If the Left isn't just as dangerous as the Right (I consider them to be equal in terms of how they can be used negatively), then explain the USSR and Maoist China. Explain the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. Yeah, the Left is really ****ing dangerous.

The students in 1960s America had something to fight for. These students have some things to fight for, but they're doing it in all the wrong ways. Their shutting down of 'hate speech' is nothing but them shutting down people they don't want to listen to. Shutting down Richard Spencer: yes, shut the ****er down. He's a racist ideologue and he has no place in society. Shutting down Shaprio? Yeah, no. Which leads me to...

Originally posted by The Lost
"Moderates" like Dave Rubin and "slightly less moderates" such as Shapiro? Like, this is all a big troll, right?

Is it because Rubin told you a bunch of times he's really a "liberal" or "left-leaning" but gives consistent platforms to right-leaning extremists and softballs them for the whole interview? Ah yes, Rubin the "enlightened centrist."

Originally posted by The Lost
Like, some of the most watched conservative media is Fox News, Breitbart, the Daily Caller, The Daily Wire, fucking InfoWars. Fucking InfoWars! We are talking about a growing political ideology that supports ethnostates, considers race realism scientifically valid, thinks there's two genders, thinks that watching YouTube videos of riots or anecdotes is "data", thinks Tommy Robinson is unfairly jailed, think Islam is a threat to the west (even more than Christianity), and more.

Also, there are, scientifically, only two genders. I believe there to be a lot of undiscovered interplay, mentally, between the two poles, but that doesn't stop the basic science from being true. You claim to be against the anti-science stuff... but clearly only when it suits your social agenda.

Btw, I could be considered Trans: I have never identified, mentally, with either gender, although my biological sex is clearly that of a male. At one point I wanted to transition, because of an extreme dysphoria that I believed to stem from a clash between my mental 'gender' and by body. This passed, luckily; it likely just stemmed from mental illness (I have BPD and general depression). So thank god I didn't transition, right? It wouldn't have lessened my chance of suicide, either. Trans issues are super complicated and the Left approach is not helping matters. It's reductive and asinine and unfounded in science. Many on the Right are disgustingly reductive about it too, and I stand against them, too. But it doesn't change the fact that the Left's attempts at 'caring' and 'understanding' are basically just muddying the waters and making things worse.

Originally posted by The Lost
The right, in North America and Europe, is BAR-NONE the most dangerous, worrisome, threatening, and poisonous partisan affiliation you could ever hope to side with, agree with, or support. Centrists enable them (and often share many anti-science, irrational, hateful, and non-factual perspectives) and useful idiots propagate their horrendously asinine platforms and perspectives.

Originally posted by The Lost
As a centrist, you have the same loss of focus as every other "enlightened centrists" in that you'll yammer on about how civil discourse is dead and perhaps complain about the left's "name-calling" which distracts from all sorts of genuine threats to free speech, the economy, forward movement, and more. Trump running one of the most influential, powerful, and far-reaching governments on this planet has implications. I know you guys hate to fucking hear it but it doesn't get any less true the more you ignore it.

Originally posted by The Lost
The Trump administration is trying to drive the world economy into the toilet, which is bad for everyone (Wanna talk about how Trump is trying to move away from economic globalism or his veritable fucking collection of trade wars?)

This is a guy who also very likely invited a foreign government to influence the election of one of the most powerful governments on Earth, is inconsistent, lies almost daily to his supporters and critics, has been accused of sexual harassment by twenty woman, tried to ban trans people from serving in the military, wouldn't allow an AMERICAN judge to rule on a case because he thought he had Mexican parents (remember, only "some of them" are "good people" anyway), and much more.

PART II:

Originally posted by The Lost
Charlottesville? Kentucky? Planned Parenthood shootings? Elliot Rodger? Dylann Storm Roof? Alenxandre Bissonnette? I mean, the 2012 Kentucky riots? They made the Berkeley riots look like nothing and that was a goddamn sporting event riot. (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-latest-kentucky-riot-is-part-of-a-long-destructive-sports-tradition/) Keep in mind that, in terms of terrorism, right-wing violence is in second place behind Islamist terror attacks (there's been roughly 3000 deaths since the early 90's when it comes to terror attacks. Islamists are responsible for about 90% I believe and Right Wing terrorists are about 7%. I can bring up these numbers, if you'd like to see specifics but my approximations aren't off.) Is the left denying Russian interference in the 2016 election when it's a matter of fact? Are the Russian trolls able to easily infiltrate the left as they rampantly have been with the right? (See: The_Donald)[/B]

Also, funny how you say how bad the Right are for critiquing Islam and then give some great statistics about Islam in the West. That's a whole lot of terror coming in. Should we discuss that? Or is it racist, somehow, to critique Islam and it's many dark articles of faith?

Originally posted by The Lost
We can talk about the "softer" shit, like GamerGate and how figures like Anita Sarkeesian, as much as you may disagree with her positions, was threatened and bullied by a toxic culture often defended and advocated for by the right. Just kidding, "gamer bros" are super sharp dudes![/B]

Originally posted by The Lost
NO ONE who is reasonable can tell me the left is more dangerous because of Peterson's GARBAGE slippery slope fallacy laden positions about C-16, tumblr posts, phony/cowardly "moderates/centrists", or extremist college/university students (we know they're never extreme lol nbd). If you want to criticize the left? Go ahead. Do it all day long. I don't give a shit. I have a TON of issues with the far left and any extreme partisan worship. Hell, I honestly really don't like Clinton (mostly because she's immensely backed by corporate money and some of us REALLY do want to see a swamp-draining at least start before we die) but if was in a position to choose one over the other? Clinton. Every goddamn time.[/B]

Personally, I think Trump was always going to happen. I think he might have been the better choice, because if we survive a Trump presidency, maybe everyone will see why Big Government is such a flawed system. It encourages celebrity politics and removes people from issues, instead allowing them to focus on the most obvious element: this one big powerful person who is charge of everything. Nobody should have that much power.

Originally posted by The Lost
Why? As much as I have ACTUAL issues with both left-wing ideologies and right-wing ideologies (as opposed to labeling myself a centrist and coddling the right wing whilst irrationally and obsessively slamming the left wing), the right wing are at best problematic pseudo-intellectual dog-whistlers and at worst? Violent, racist, sexist, xenophobic, anti-science, anti-progress, absolutely fucking braindead, etc.

The worst offenders are social conservatives (I still take issue with economic conservatives but not as much) and the alt-right in general.[/B]

Originally posted by The Lost
I'm on no high-horse but like anyone else with a shred of self-awareness, I'm pissed off that ignorant individuals are focusing on non-problems so forgive me if I'm not readily extending olive branches. [/B]

Originally posted by The Lost

You remember two days ago, back when you were a centrist? [/B]

Originally posted by The Lost
The fuck? We barely talked to each other.

And?