Stickers and posters featuring a rainbow-colored version of the Gadsden flag and the hashtag #ShootBack were raising eyebrows in West Hollywood on Thursday morning in the wake of the massacre at a gay nightclub in Florida.
The signage was affixed to electric boxes, light poles, trash cans and other fixtures near West Hollywood City Hall, the Pacific Design Center and along Santa Monica Boulevard. Several were hung near the Abbey Food & Bar, a well-known gay lounge.
Since Islam has an open extermination policy of homosexuals in many countries, and our president allows those Islamic countries to export that Islamic policy to USA, this is only option the gay community has against Islamic terrorists!
Obama can’t even acknowledge the Islamic extermination policy of gays exists! Heck, Clinton Foundation takes money from Islamic countries with gay extermination policies.
Kevin,
Throughout history homosexual behavior was brutally dealt with by Christians also.
Pat,
Example?
The Spanish Inquisition. Anythinq Torqmada was involved with, etc…
Spanish inquisition?
That was Christians?
That was done by people that completely rejected their Christianity in practice.
The true Christians of the time, trying to restore true biblical doctrine to the lost Roman Catholic church, Protestants, were subject of the inquisition and suffered under it.
In the year 342, the Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans decreed the death penalty for any male who “marries [a man] as a woman… [a situation in which] gender has lost its place”.In the year 390, the Christian emperors Valentinian II, Theodosius I and Arcadius denounced males “acting the part of a woman”, condemning those who were guilty of such acts to be publicly burned.
“Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ”
So the Spanish (Roman Catholics ) were not “Christians” ?
Or an even better question .
Are they Christians today in Kev World ?
Mark,
We can’t judge the heart, but we can tell by outward action:
Here is a couple of about 100 passages on what Christian faith looks like in action:
Galatians 5:22-23
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
Matthew 3:8
Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.
Here is one of many passages warning against the things suggested above:
Ephesians 5:11
Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.
Before you all run off and say we should all just “love” in the corrupted modern day liberal context, Christians are told in Romans 12:9 that “Love must be sincere”. We are to cling to what is good and reject what is evil.
Sincere love does not simply say something is “just dandy”, when it is not.
Do the Roman Catholics you talk about look like this? Then I would say they could be sincere Christians, with true saving faith through Christ alone, by the outward demonstration/celebration of their faith in Christ.
If the Roman Catholic never goes to church, treats others harshly for no reason, beats his wife, embraces evolution, or otherwise rejects Christ as redeemer, or lacks any other visible fruit in keeping with repentance, etc, then I would say “no” they are not a Christian.
I’d say this about any member, in any Christian denomination.
Mark:
The only true christian in kev World is the namesake. He and only he is the true arbiter of the truth. christians have acted poorly to non-believers for over 2000 years. kev will argue otherwise, because in kev world you can be a christian right up until the time you aren’t. And then be forgiven and start all over again. I’m sure Torquemada and the various popes that lead the crusades believed in their hearts that they were acting a true christians, just a kev does today. Ditto in Northern Ireland, Serbia/Croatia, and the list goes on. And belief is all they have to hang their hats on, so they really have nothing.
And then kev bring sup evolution as a metric to keep you off the christian list. That boy truly is behind the times..
Baldy,
Unlike you universal moral relativism, I don’t believe I am arbiter of the truth. I simply do not reject and embrace absolute biblical truth.
“Protestants, were subject of the inquisition and suffered under it”.
History proves you wrong again. You insistence on the quick factless response proves to be your downfall again. Do some homework, learn about a subject, prove yourself rather than keep stepping in your own mistakes.
“I simply do not reject and embrace absolute biblical truth.”
Can you translate for us all? Is English your second language?
Baldy,
So you claim no Protestants were subject of Spanish Inquisition?
(Just want to be clear.)
You did catch me on grammar, “Christ” should have been after “reject”. I’d ask for your forgiveness, if you believed and practiced that sort of thing. :-)
The Inquisition was originally intended primarily to ensure the orthodoxy of those who converted from Judaism and Islam. The regulation of the faith of the newly converted was intensified after the royal decrees issued in 1492 and 1502 ordering Jews and Muslims to convert or leave Spain.
The Spanish Inquisition is often cited in popular literature and history as an example of Catholic intolerance and repression. Although records are incomplete, about 150,000 persons were charged with crimes by the Inquisition and about 3,000 were executed.
Henry Kamen, 1999
Nord,
If this is worst example, it is nothing next to what Muslims have done just this year or you average socialist in Venzuela, Cuba, China, or the killing fields in Cambodia.
So given the bible passages I listed above, were these so-called Catholics living their Christian faith?
Nord:
Today, on average:
324 Christians are killed each month because of their faith.
214 Christian churches are burned or vandelized.
772 Christians suffer an act of violence because of their faith.
Much of it is because of Muslim violence, but some of it is hate spread by godless liberals against Christians.
Weak shit. Examples from 500 to 1700 years ago.
If you think Christianity now is as violent as Islam, go to the mosque and have a goat fucker behead you. America doesn’t need trash like you.
Kev ,
No need to go back to the Inquisiton
Explain Bosnia or Northern Ireland and the great role religion played in the justifiable killings on both sides
I’m not blaming Christianity for these problems , I blame religion ( any religion )
Religion ruins everything
Mark,
The problem is: global warming, political correctness, and liberalism are the religions that are the major problems these days, besides Islam.
More deflection.
Pat,
Just exposing the fact the godless have their religions as well.
The term “Religion” is political correctness for “I don’t want to hear it”, or “shut-up”.
Kevin,
According to your Solipism Religion it probably is. The rest of society labels it as deflection.
Pat:
kev labels other “religions” as the enemy. So other opinions that he disagrees with are labeled as religions, “global warming, political correctness, and liberalism are the religions that are the major problems these days, besides Islam”, so now in his mind they are the enemy and he is the only true believer to protect society. Sorta like the crusaders, self appointed, self anointed defenders of all that is good.
OB,
Sad, but probably very true.
Pat, Baldy,
I see you don’t like the “shut-up” label applied to your speech.
See how dangerous political correctness is?
kev:
Can you translate? And while you are at it explain how global warming is a religion. Use facts.
Thnx
Kevin,
So your Wels Religion directs you to tell everyone who is not a Wels to shut up. That’s a very telling admission.
Pat,
No, but some things have to be explained simply to those caught in the act of using political correctness as a hammer.
The difference is: I’m not interested in telling anyone to “shut-up”. I’m merely showing you that screaming the word “religion” has that effect on speech.
Matthew 10:16
“I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.”
Kevin,
“I’m merely showing you that screaming the word “religion” has that effect on speech.”
Then why do you choose to speak in riddles? You say one thing, and then in an attempt to explain yourself, spin on your heals and say something else. Are you trying to imitate Trump or are you both somehow spiritually connected?
The religious are all atheists except for their religion of choice .
And that’s where the trouble begins
Mark,
The exact same is true for godless liberals who claim no religion.
Pat,
Example?
Kevin,
How about the statements you made about the the reaction to what the CIA director made. That’s Just to start things out. There’s plenty more.
kev:
How about the godless conservatives?
The Orlando shooter was a Democrat Hillary supporter.
You own this, libs. You will get your asses kicked in November.
john:
Proof. Haven’t seen any yet.
RSO:
Speak English, and do your own fucking research.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/06/20/i-reported-omar-mateen-to-the-fbi-trump-is-wrong-that-muslims-dont-do-our-part/
Don’t ever treat me with disrespect again.
You own this.
Pat,
Liberals dislike checked and regulated immigration. Those of us that suggest more scrutiny and background checks on immigrants because of the problem of Muslim terrorism are met with shouts of ” bigot”.
Do you want to try again to back up your statement?
Just because you do not like my statement does not make it untrue, or “spin”.
Baldy,
What about godless conservatives? Don’t think I ever used the term. I think they are out there, but more rare, like a “liberal against baby killing”, or “gun rights advocating liberal”, or a liberal acknowledging “Islamic evil exists”.
Kevin,
Here’s another example.
You said that liberals were calling conservatives bigots for saying “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”, but can’t point out when anyone has been called a bigot for saying that.
You said that Obama won’t call ISIS evil and should be destroyed, but he has.
See, you make things up, just like Trump. That’s called lying.
Kevin,
“Do you want to try again to back up your statement?”
Sure….
You said the liberal reaction to the CIA Directors statement was, “You are a bunch of hateful bigots for not wanting to accept radical Islamic terrorists as immigrants.” Point me to the any published article that said that that was the liberal reaction to the statement the CIA Director gave.
Also, please point me to any direct quote where anyone has been called a bigot for saying, “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”.
You also said, “The term “Religion” is political correctness for “I don’t want to hear it”, or “shut-up”. And then you spin on your heals, when called out that your Wels Religion must be telling everyone to shut up you once again rationalize and say,”No, but some things have to be explained simply to those caught in the act of using political correctness as a hammer.”
These are your words, you own them. Back them up without talking like Trump.
Your ilk just murdered 49 people. You have no business pulling rank on Kevin.
john:
What rank does kevin hold?
john:
Always the class act. And class clown. Own that.
john:
I read the article several time (did you even read it?). All it said was that Mateen said in a discussion with the author, a friend, that he liked Clinton, while the author said he liked Sanders. That really places blame on all Democrats, right? Jumping to conclusions like that and placing blame without fact really proves your point.
As far as the name calling and tough guy act, who cares. There are bigger things to worry about, like when are the bluegills going to bite, than being scared of the class clown.
Pat:
1.) I never said that. I have criticized liberals for not labeling ISIS as “evil” and tolerating and softening the evil of Islamic terrorism. I have never put the term “conservative bigots” together together with the phrases you strung in that context.
2.). Obama has called ISIS, Islamic terrorism, “evil”, and needs to be “destroyed”? Where? Point me to clip? Did Obama have a plan to destroy ISIS, besides ignoring ISIS and letting them shoot up a gay nightclub in Orlando?
Pat,
Start here for your education.
Not too often I agree wilth lib, Bill Mahr on some things:
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/21/bill-maher-blasts-liberals-defending-islam-muslims/
Kevin,
You can’t change what you said.
1)You said the liberal reaction to the CIA Directors statement was, and these are your exact word, “You are a bunch of hateful bigots for not wanting to accept radical Islamic terrorists as immigrants.” Show me where that was the reaction to the CIA Directors statement.
2) You also said people like you are called bigots for saying, “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”. You haven’t provided any evidence of anyone being called a bigot for saying “ISIS is evil an has to be destroyed”
3) You also make statements and then pivot with Trump-like answers. Example: “The term “Religion” is political correctness for “I don’t want to hear it”, or “shut-up”. And then you spin on your heals, when called out that your Wels Religion must be telling everyone to shut up you once again rationalize and say,”No, but some things have to be explained simply to those caught in the act of using political correctness as a hammer.”
Here are just a couple links for where Obama calls out ISIS for being evil and needs to be destroyed. More examples can be found.
2) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/24/obama-isis-brand-of-evil-uk-air-strikes-iraq
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yt_S6D7vr-0
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-calls-isis-beheading-pure-evil
Kevin,
1) You said the liberal reaction to the CIA Directors statement was, and I quote, “You are a bunch of hateful bigots for not wanting to accept radical Islamic terrorists as immigrants.” Show me where that was the reaction to what the CIA Director said.
You also said that people were called bigots for saying, and again I quote you, “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed.” Show me proof that people were called bigots for saying that.
2) Try Googling “Obama ISIS evil”, and Obama destroy ISIS. It’s not that difficult.
Pat,
Obama has not used “Islamic terrorism” or “Islamic evil”. He is willing to say “Christian evil” about crusades 500 years ago.
Kevin,
You say Obama hasn’t called ISIS evil, and hasn’t said they need to be destroyed. I showed you he has.
Now, how about addressing the hyperbolic lies you made about the reaction to the CIA Directors comments.
Oh, and Kevin, you still haven’t provided any evidence of anyone being called a bigot for saying “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”.
Pat,
Is Maxine Waters a big enough lib for you?
https://www.lyft.com/drive-for-lyft?loc_physical_ms=9021706&utm_campaign=Driver_CHI_City_In_Display_Image_Remarketing&adgroup=remarketing_7Day&var1=dfl_3&loc_interest_ms=&devicemodel=apple%2Biphone&utm_term=&gclid=CM3o0ev0vM0CFZSEaQodnxUIwQ&utm_content=signon_CHI_250_60_google&targetid=&utm_source=google&route_key=paid&ref=CHI250BONUSX&network=d&utm_medium=display&device=m&adposition=none&matchtype=&adname=driver_3step_300x250.png&placement=endingthefed.com&k_clickid=9fd5d3dd-6c6e-4460-9f6b-578770e6fff6
Kevin,
Maybe you should click on the link you provided. And then come back and attempt to answer for your lies.
Pat,
It copied an ad link. Actual link caught in moderation spam filter. Look up Maxine Waters calling people “bigots” for opposing Sharia Law. You know, the ISLAMIC Law that supports and carries out the execution of homosexuals.
Kevin,
You’re deflecting and not answering for your hyperbolic lies. Want to try again and explain what you said about the reaction to what the CIA Director said, and provide evidence of anyone being called a bigot for saying “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”.
Pat:
kev always has to have the last word. And he has to feel like he won. There comes a point of diminishing returns with him and his flaccid arguments. Best to stay on focus and provide facts.
Keep up the good work.
OB
OB,
When Kevin is cornered with his lies he isn’t Christian enough to admit his lies.
Pat,
I pointed out liberals calling people “bigots” for wanting to stop advancing Sharia Law. A concept that supports execution of homosexuals.
Sharia Law is also halted by regulating Islamic terorist immigration.
I have been truthful every step of the way.
The only lies around here is the cover-up over importing IslamIc terrorists, which CIA Director was warning about.
You have proved original point. If one is not being called a “bigot” for opposing Islamic terrorist immigration, you call them a “liar”.
Kevin,
More deflection?
Your original statements were that liberals were calling conservatives bigots for saying “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”. And, you said the liberal reaction to the CIA Directors statement was, “You are a bunch of hateful bigots for not wanting to accept radical Islamic terrorists as immigrants.”
No where in those original statements was anything about what you are now saying you said. More Trumpisms.
I’m saying that your original statements are not truthful unless you can back them up with facts.
Prove once and for all where the liberal reaction to the CIA Director’s statement was, “You are a bunch of hateful bigots for not wanting to accept radical Islamic terrorists as immigrants.”, and where anyone has been called a bigot for saying, “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”.
Again, these are quoting your words. And don’t deflect.
Pat:
How true. He must go to confession after every post. I wonder if his version of christianity has a “Three strikes and you are out” rule?
Pat and Baldy,
I can’t help that you ignore liberal statements calling people “bigots” for wanting to stop Islamic terrorist immigration and those opposed to Sharia Law executing homosexuals.
So you support Sharia Law and terrorist immigration?
All I was saying: liberals, like Maxine Waters, that support Sharia Law and terrorist immigration call those of us that oppose that evil, “bigots”.
I can’t help it if you guys deny the facts.
Kevin,
I’m not ignoring anything.
You said, the CIA Director’s statement was, “You are a bunch of hateful bigots for not wanting to accept radical Islamic terrorists as immigrants.” Yes or no, did this actually happen or did you make it up.
And you also said that people have been called a bigots for saying, “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”. Yes or no, did people actually get called bigots for saying “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed”, or were you making that up?
If you are being truthful before God, are those exact statements you made 100% truthful. And if you’re saying it is the 100% truth please provide where I can find any documented evidence.
And don’t deflect by talking about Sharia Law.
That was supposed to be the reaction to what the CIA Director said.
Crickets
Pat,
Re-read the original statement. I did not say the “CIA’s director statement was”.
I said “the liberal reaction” (to the statement) was….
Here is the exact copy, verbatim:
*************
“Liberal reaction to this:
You are a bunch of hateful bigots for not wanting to accept radical Islamic terrorists as immigrants.”
*************
I said nothing about CIA director saying this.
When accusing me of lying and falsehoods on something, try to get the quote correct.
Many thanks in advance. Appreciate your attention to actual truth.
Kevin
I did correct myself.
Your quote for that is:
Is that the liberal reaction to the CIA Directors statement was, “You are a bunch of hateful bigots for not wanting to accept radical Islamic terrorists as immigrants.”
And another quote you made was that people were called bigots for saying, and again I quote you, “ISIS is evil and has to be destroyed.”
You also said Obama never called ISIS evil and that they must be destroy. But I proved that statement to be a lie.
Your other statements are also lies as they never happened.
Try proving otherwise.
Kevin,
Did I get your lies correct that time?
Pat,
You still got wording wrong.
My ACTUAL quote is between the asterisks in post above.
Why are you all bent out of shape about this? Liberalism has been embracing and tolerating Sharia law a lot lately. Sharia Law calls for execution of homosexuals and women who commit adultery. ISIS and other Idlamic terrorists embrace Sharia Law. Those who oppose Sharia Law and have been called “bigots” by liberals like Maxine Waters.
Are prominent liberals now opposing Sharia Law andf Terrrorist Immmigration?
If so, I like that.
Kevin,
You’re deflecting again.
You’ve once again shifted to sharia law. We can discuss sharia law after we finish our original discussion.
I’m not bent out of shape, I’m attempting to hold you to what you said. A better question is, why can’t you back up your statements with fact, without deflecting. Why does your brand of conservatism prefer to make a point with hyperbolic lies versus being able to rely on facts?
Am I accusing you of lying? You’re darn right I am , and I 100% proved it.
I remember when Boots and Sabers was a well-known conservative blog. A litany of good commenters across all political stripes. Then the place closed in 2013. All things run their course, I guess.
Then I find this blog up again. The one conservative who comments is relentlessly bullied and harassed by some real garbage. No wonder the comment counts are a fraction of what they were four years ago.
Should have left this place shut down.
The one conservative who comments relentlessly has a tendency to inflect hyperbolic lies into his comments. He maybe wouldn’t be called out on his comments if he were more truthful with what he says. His type gives other thoughtful conservatives a bad name.
Who died and named you head of the conservative police?
I didn’t need anyone to die. But I will call out anyone who lies.
My question to you is, why do you choose to defend lies?
Nobody is defending lies.
However, your responding to my post just indicted yourself as a bully and human garbage.
Game. Set. Match.
In my previous post I should have said that all of the patriotic Americans who served and died to protect our freedom from those who preach lies, gives me the right to call out liers like Kevin.
Seriously, Pat? You came back with that?
The Leatherneck is right. You are garbage.
And a private site isn’t covered by the First Amendment.
And a private site isn’t covered by the First Amendment.
Yes, and so?
If saying the truth and proving Kevin to be a lier makes me garbage so be it. Curious what it makes individuls that defend liers?
Pat,
We still have not established what alleged lie is attributed to me.
I’ll accept your apology at anytime.
Kevin,
I’ve already pointed out your lies. You can go back and re-read them and then come back and try to explain them.
Pat,
The only thing I saw you spotlight was misquotes and quotes of mine, substantially taken out of context.
I can’t explain your rationale.
Is the truth that liberalism embraces Radical Islam and Sharia Law, and backs up policies to allow easy importation of both to USA, that upsetting?
I would have thought that to be common knowledge.
Kevin,
When a Democrat says something that is untrue it’s a lie.
When a Republican says something that is untrue it’s taken out of context.
Interesting.
Pat,
Sounds Like an excellent standard.
Replace “Democrat” with “Liberal”…and “Republican” with “Conservative”, then it’s perfect.
Donald Trump may have a “Republican” label, but I sure would not label him “conservative”, based on his past actions. So he gets a little more scrutiny if he is not solidly committed to the team.
Kevin,
My suggestion for you is that when you say something make sure your saying it in a manner that people can’t take “out of context”, because what you say can often be interpreted as mistruths.
What you said about what the liberal reaction to what the CIA Director said didn’t actually happen. It was hyperbole to emphasize what you think the liberal reaction should be based on your feelings. In the real world people could take that as fact.
In the future I won’t believe anything you say, as you probably are attempting it to mean something totally different from what you actually said.
Pat,
Give me an example of an opinion that someone CANNOT take out of context these days?
Opinions are always open for misinterpretation. Statements of fact shouldn’t be.
kev:
“Is the truth that liberalism embraces Radical Islam and Sharia Law, and backs up policies to allow easy importation of both to USA, that upsetting?”
No, because it isn’t true. You are making stuff up again.
Pat: Bingo, you hit the nail on the head.
OB,
According to Kevin, what he said was just his opinion and he wasn’t stating it as a matter of fact. If it was said as a fact, it would be true. It was Kevin’s opinion and, as an opinion, it’s open to a very broad interpretation by the reader, more than likely would be taken out of context, and shouldn’t be taken as necessarily true.
Did I get that right Kevin?
Pat and Baldy,
So you both are upset that my opinion of reality, looks, feels, and smells like fact? (Do you get upset at Obama for doing same thing?)
It’s a good thing you are policing that. You really want more liberal spin out of me when it comes the facts?
I could do that, but liberalism is a very hurtful world view….just look at abortion, Venezuela, and the tolerance for evil from Muslim immigrants when it comes to the defenseless women victims in Germany.
Next thing you know, liberals will want German Muslim rapists to be able to use the women’s bathroom because they feel feminine that day.
If my opinions smell like fact, its because they are. Describing reality with the correct terms helps to determine right and wrong.
I think both of you DON’T want to determine right from wrong unless you absolutely have to, or have a unhealthy avoidance at varying levels in dealing with evil/wrong.
Was that previous statement too much like fact? It is my opinion, but it is also fact. We could debate “extent” of the moral relativism, because I’m certain Baldy is far more unwilling to label evil than Pat just by how Baldy answered the child molester question, when I asked if they were “born that way”?
You cannot divorce fact from being in opinion anymore than you can divorce water from being in the ocean.
kev:
“So you both are upset that my opinion of reality, looks, feels, and smells like fact?” No, your opinions carry no weight with me. After all they are just your opinion. You keep using the word “smell” when describing your opinions. There is an old saying regarding opinds that also uses both words, but I am sure I’ll get banned if I type it all out.
The rest of your post is just made-up nonsense. Or is my opinion too much like fact to suit you?
Tip from HS English class: Make a statement of fact, or make a statement of opinion. Identify both as to what they are. Folks reading your posts will then have a clearer view of where you stand. They will then ignore your opinion, or disagree with the mis-information in your set of facts.
Kevin,
So just to be straight on what you just said. You’re now saying your opinions are fact and therefore are 100% true?
I like what I read recently;
“A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person’s feelings that cannot be proven. Opinions can be based on facts or emotions and sometimes they are meant to deliberately mislead others.”
Pat,
Here is a good test:
“Bill Clinton is a cheating husband.”
Or
“Bill Clinton has a challenge with marital fidelity”
Both statement ARE FACT. However, the word choice reflects the OPINION of those conveying the fact.
The first shows no sympathy for Bill Clinton. The second is designed to sympathize with Bill Clinton’s “challenge”.
Is the first a lie? The second a lie?
What if I said, “Bill Clinton is an accused rapist”.
Fact? Opinion?
It is fact, but the opinion of the writer determines the words used to describe the fact.
Most liberals would say “Bill Clinton is a victim of seductive harlets”, instead of using term “accused rapist”.
Kevin,
“Most liberals would say “Bill Clinton is a victim of seductive harlets”, instead of using term “accused rapist”.”
Is that statement your opinion or is that fact?
Pat,
Fact with my opinionated choice of terms to describe the fact.
Kevin,
Proof?
PAt,
Behavior observation.
Liberals, especially feminists, crucify other men, if they are conservative, for mere suggestion of sexual innuendo…like the liberal Democrat drumhead show trial of Clarence Thomes for approval to Supreme Court.
Those feminists were in top racist form shredding poor Clarence Thomas.
If same liberal standard applied to Bill Clinton as did to Clarence Thomas, it would mean Clinton would have been destroyed by feminists long ago and they would still be tarring his political corpse in the public square.
So feminists have been mute, or complacent with Hillary to label the victims of Bill Clinton as harlets, whores, or other unsavory female name. You see, liberals want Bill Clinton to be the victim of his criminal activities.
I hate to draw attention to the obvious.
Everything I just said above is FACT. Naturally, the words I use to describe the FACT, is filtered by my opinion…because I am completely unsympathetic to a cheating, womanizer, that abuses women. Liberals can be sympathetic, if they want to be, to someone as sleezy as Bill Clinton.
The words we use are largely determined by whether we are sympathetic, or not, to unacceptable behavior.
Kevin,
““Most liberals would say “Bill Clinton is a victim of seductive harlets”, instead of using term “accused rapist”.”
Ok, so the statement isn’t 100% fact as you can’t conclusively say that “most liberals” would say that. It’s a hyperbole assumption, given as an opinion, based on assumptions, with the intent to mislead readers into believing it as fact.
PAt,
So let’s take a survey:
Bill Clinton:
Accused rapist?
or
Victim of seductive harlets?
You are really going to show me proof liberals would actually say the first one (vs. second option) in any substantive number?
Liberals are sympathetic to Bill Clinton.
Kevin,
Go ahead and take that survey. I bet the majority would say he’s been accused of rape.
Oh, and Kevin, I don’t have to prove anything. It’s a fact that he’s been accused of rape. But It’s an opinion that most liberals would say “Bill Clinton is a victim of seductive harlets”. Remember, opinions can be based on facts or emotions and sometimes they are meant to deliberately mislead others.”
Pat,
Isn’t it an opinion for you to say that most liberals would rather answer “accused rapists” vs. “victim of seductive harlets”?
Prove it.
That is my opinion. But an opinion based on the fact that Clinton was accused of rape, versus your statement that most liberals would say “Bill Clinton is a victim of seductive harlets”, which that direct statement by you is more based on emotion than fact, unless you can prove that liberals have actually said those words.
Pat,
Was not aware opinions of reality required elaborate and notorized proof on this site.
Duly noted.
Kevin,
Of course you didn’t.