• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About FunkedUp

  • Rank
    The Waterboy

Profile Information

  • Redskins Fan Since
  • Favorite Redskin
    Brian Mitchell
  • Location
  • Occupation
    A/P of Economics

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That's as paranoid and delusional as suggesting the Woman's March was a front for anti-semitism. Oh. Nevermind. Let me get my pitchfork, milkshake and baclava.
  2. Because it was INCREDIBLE, in the Websters Dictionary definition sense.
  3. Disingenious. I cited two cases of similar levels of violent transgessions. The case of the far right activists attacked an individual with weapons like sticks and bats. They were prosecuted and sent to jail, justice served. These individuals did not brandish firearms from what I could read. The case of the far left activist brandishing a bike lock sereptituously strikes an individual, in a way that could have easliy caused death, who was only non-violently protesting. The criminal in this case gets a couple months of probation, not the same level of justice served. I support a society that dispenses justice on the behavior not the social aims of the victim or perpetrator. This seems to me to be the best path that leads to a safe and harmonious society. One which can accomodate a diverse set of cultures, scientific inquiry, and artistic expressions. One last bit to get back on topic. I have always voted either Democratic or Libertarian. When I grew up in the 1980's and 1990's the Republicans were the "Moral Party" that tried to impose their beliefs and cesure those of others. Strange enough, now I see the Republicans as more tolerant and the source of original good ideas. Trump was a wild card when elected in regards to his policies. It turns out he is rather center: wants to enforce our borders. address illegal immigration, reduce our military engagement overseas (not a fan of the irresponsible spending), protect freedom of speech, protect civil liberties, prison reform, cut taxes, and etc.. Most of these were Democratic positions of Clinton and Obama; Trump is actually further left than them on many of those issues. The Left's feverant position of opposing Trump on everything, regardless of the issue, has them taking absolute crazy positions. You are pushing me "RIGHT" into Trump's arms. It looks like I will be a first time Trump voter in 2020, probably just one of the drove of other voters doing the same. I am not Black, and want to ask fellow Gen X'ers who are, how much discrimination/racism do you experience now versus the 1980's and 1990's?
  4. In all of the cases Benning provided the assailant was arrested - or killed when attempting to apprehend the perputrator - and justice has either been served or is in process. Has any individual been arrested in the case of Andy Ngo's assault or the other assaults committed in that same event? 1) Here is one example of a CNN expose seemingly very favourable of Antifa in which the host glorifies Antifa weapons. A follow-up tweet asking the public to support the group. 2) Assault with a deadly (I am not sure that is accurate by legal definition) weapon by far left motivated violence results in probation. Assault with deadly weapons by far right motivated violence results in prison terms.
  5. Violence from the right is not accepted. It is condemmed by the vast majority of Americans. Those who commit right oriented political violence are treated as pariah, the media condemms them, the criminal justice system effectively seeks to arrest them, and the courts hold them accountable. The concern with the political violence from the extreme-Left is that a large swath of society condones it. Social media and MSM prop it up - some even encouraging it - and our civic institutions are not holding the perputrators accountable. If I understand your logic, Antifas victims are actually bad actors who deserve the violence inficted upon them? A violence that is an escalating response to non-violent political action. If that is so, can't you see how Antifa and other similar groups are also antagonists? Would society tacitly condone a larger violent response against Antifa? I certainly wouldn't, but your arguments give precedence to those who would. This is dangerous. Again milkshaking and mob assauliting a journalist is an escalation in violence. Violence that you and many other in key institutions are egging on. This will escalate, it already has. As most probably know, an Antifa terrorist attempted to blow up a federal detention center, without concern for whether illegal immigrants, government employees or public at large would have been killed. The energy inside your echo chamber is getting super-charged and threatening to explode. You will not win the hearts and minds of the vast majority who live outside that echo chamber when that does happen.
  6. Textbook victim blaming. You wouldn't be suggesting Andy's skirt was too short? I mean Eipstein's victims were just prostitutes looking to enrich themselves.
  7. Shame on you for that dirty smear. Ngo has constributed to the Wall Street Journal, the National Review, New York Post and is an editor at Quillette. These are more conservative news outlets, but still credible news organizations. He is also the gay son of Vietnamese immigrants. irrelevant unliess you care about an individual's place in the intersectional stack, and he is near the top. The political violence he suffered is bad no matter its orientation. And your smear to try and minimize that violence is harmful.
  8. If this Christian sect allowed nuns to perform these rituals they would rule the world. At the same time retaining a tax free nonprofit status.
  9. What you are promoting will lead to a horrific ratio of false positives. The vast majority of society lives outside the echo chambers you reside in and many would be unjustly harmed by the practices you preach. That's just not cool in my book.
  10. I do not. Freedom of expression, and its constitutional guarantee, is historically the most powerful and essential tool for social progression. And has helped us out of some of the worst civil violence in our country since the Civil War. A couple decades ago the Christian right was a major political force that looked to throttle freedom of expression with respect to gay culture and rights (Google Mapplethorpe for a prominent example), the war on drugs, and even anti-police/establishment lyrics in music. If the Christian right had been more successful repressing freedom of expression do you think we would gay marriage, a disintegrating war on drugs? I don't think we would have achieved this progress, or it would have achieved through more violent or destructive means.
  11. , you're number one and I agree with your point. Just to be clear, I am not signalling to Cooked Crack I am a member of Islamic State. I refuse to let those Jihadist co-opt the raised index finger gesture.
  12. , I will take what you say in good faith. But I think you are all virtue signalling Fascist. And do me a favour, keep the machetes away from Bang. I hate to lose my hand while supporting mental health awareness.
  13. I am partial to the Orwell Redenbacher, do you have any 1984 vintage to share? I promise not to hand gesture crime.
  14. Your complicit support for unequal rights to freedom of expression is what I find terrible. But continue to wrap yourself in that warm cloak of self-righteousness. Your fighting Nazis, and the ends justify the means, ?
  15. So what you are saying is, "Ok signs for me, but not for thee." Where thee are those who hold different opinions than you, aka White Supremacist. I would suggest that Fry's explanation wasn't silly but rather futile. He was pointing the finger at the totalitarianistic PC community's efforts to stifle free expression, not Neo-Nazis. He was on target, but the target perceived itself unassailable. My guess is that if you read a bit of Fry's work you would see that, or surmise he is a Gay Neo-Nazi.