The Real timschochet

Your are bigots because of your hateful rhetoric about transsexuals in general. (Many of you, not all.)

1. No opinion on the religious discussion. 2. No one should be allowed to be married under the age of 18. 3. Minors under the age of 18 should be allowed to have gender affirming care, including the use of hormones, with parental and medical consent, without the involvement of the state. 4. I am undecided about surgery, but some of the information that @jerryskids has provided me in this forum is causing me to rethink my position- out of caution, I now lean towards prohibiting surgery before the age of 18. That’s how I lean but I am not 100% sure either way. 5. I strongly disagree with the two assertions of @EternalShinyAndChrome: that there are any contradictions to these beliefs (IMO, there aren’t) and that my vote for any particular candidate or political party means that I must support all views of that candidate or party.

I am not defending the phrasing. Most times I condemn it. But I also don’t believe that always means “death to all Jews”. And I certainly don’t believe that most of the college students who have been chanting it recently believe that it means “death to all Jews”.

Thats my recollection too.

I don’t support it when people chant “from the river to the sea.” I think it’s MOSTLY used as a statement meaning the eradication of all Jews from greater Palestine. At best anyone who shouts this is being an absolutist and I don’t generally approve of absolutism. But it also doesn’t always mean that and I strongly doubt that most college kids who have chanted this recently are any more aware of the history than you are, or any real concept of what it has meant or has come to mean.

I don’t believe in any of these things except the part about Kamala Harris. HTH

First off Maher has never been “always right” with me. I enjoy the guy, he’s funny, thoughtful, and I often agree with him. Not always. I don’t think he’s right on this issue. All Wiki is doing in this instance is compiling facts that can easily be verified, for instance the context of the Palestinians believing that Likud has always believed in the eradication of the Palestinian people.

I don’t know that. And I don’t believe it’s true for most Trump supporters.

So Maher is right and Wiki and decades of historical context are wrong? Sorry but no.

Is it your contention that this frat guy was not making a racist joke?

Stop. It literally isn’t. Here’s a good history of the term: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea Please educate yourself on this. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is extremely complicated with lots of history. It’s not the black and white struggle you’re representing here, falsely.

“From the river to the sea” does not always have the same meaning you describe here. I have heard it explained as Palestinians need to be liberated from the river to the sea. And it’s important to note that the Likud Party (Netanyahu’s political party) now believes in a “Greater Israel on both sides of the Jordan River” which many Palestinians believe means the eradication of the Palestinian people. So these phrases go both ways and we need to be careful interpreting them. Which you’re not. Obviously “Death to America” isn’t as open to interpretation. But how many protestors have chanted that?

Some of the protesters have shouted anti-Semitic tirades. Thats bad. Some of them are pro-Hamas. That’s awful. Some of them have been violent. That’s even worse. Some of the kids involved are simply critical of Israel’s actions in this war and want the bloodshed to stop. Nothing wrong with that. The overwhelming majority of college students, even in the universities in question, are uninvolved in these protests, though many are sympathetic. This frat guy from Mississippi was part of a peaceful counter protest. Nothing wrong with that either. But then he made a stupid, racist move. Not illegal but he rightfully should be called out for it, and not defended.

Damn I haven’t heard a Saul Alinsky quote since Hillary’s heyday. You are old school, sir.

Yes. He was referring to you Jon.

Not going to look it up but I recall reading this too.

I don’t know about that. Plenty of these protestors have already been arrested. If they cause violence, trespass, they should be. And punished to the fullest extent of the law. There you see how easy that was? I just condemned violent protestors. I didn’t bring up any other group. I didn’t bring up Trump. I didn’t label it “Brown Boy Summer!” or some other stupidity.

Don’t you have some trannies to get obsessed about?

What so damning about threads like these is not the incident related in the OP, but how so many of you react to it. Why can’t you just condemn it and be done with it? Why look for ways to defend it? Why the need to bring up Joe Biden? Why the urge to attack liberals? This was a stupid, dumb racist act by a couple of frat boys. It doesn’t implicate all white people, or all young people, or all southerners or conservatives. Yet you guys can’t seem to condemn it without pointing the finger at other people.

Trump has already labelled the jury as part of the conspiracy and Hardcore obviously buys into that.

Have you read his posts? Trump isn’t simply a victim. He is the equivalent of a Holocaust victim about to be gassed. All conservatives are on their way to Auschwitz, according to jon.

Imagine you have a very talented football team, but with a terrible head coach (Donald Trump). Due to this coach’s awful decision making, the football team loses its first 6 games. Midway through the season, the coach is fired and replaced by a new coach (Joe Biden). The team rebounds and wins its next 6 games. The final record is 6-6. If a fan argued, “we need to fire Biden because the team ended up 6-6 and we deserve a better record”, we would all think that fan was an idiot, right? But suppose the fan said “not only do we need to fire Biden, we need to rehire Trump” we would all think that fan belonged in a loony bin.

Yes Trump can’t testify, much as he wants to, because the gag order prevents it. Bwahahahahaha

Here’s the key to her testimony, IMO: Despite what your Fox opinion writer wants to believe, Hicks clearly stated that the payment was about the election and not Melania. And that Trump orchestrated it, not Cohen. This destroys Trump’s two defenses. Either Pecker and Hicks are both lying or Trump is. Now there is always the possibility that a sole juror or two will not see it this way, will believe that it COULD have been about Melania, or that Trump MIGHT not have known about it, or buy into the argument made by conservatives daily that this whole trial is a farce designed to keep Trump from returning to the White House. If that happens we will get a hung jury. And many legal experts are actually predicting this outcome, like Dan Abrams. But I believe that the evidence is pretty overwhelming now for a conviction, even without Cohen’s upcoming testimony. So we’ll see.