Are these two for real?

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: Are these two for real?

I mean if you are into racial stereotypes Cyril, then yeah I guess there are worse ways to do it and worse foods to mention I suppose. ��

Who would have thought that the term snowflake used to be reserved for the wokerati? I reiterate my second point that Bob made more succinctly. Walz was self deprocating that he prefers his food on the bland rather than spicy side using a well recognised term in the USA that trigger very few people. You may have been ignorant of that but given that you are carrying on in the same vein now you are aware of it, as Bob said, says more about you than Walz.

For what it is worth, the schmaltzy video is there to endear him to middle America but pardon their shit for trying to win an election!

[Elwood Blues]

Re: Are these two for real?

It's interesting you ask that kind of question because in the thread about winter fuel allowance you were quite happy to insinuate that you felt that others in the thread were hypocritical bastards but didn't name who you were talking about, giving them no chance to respond directly.

I am struggling to see how you link my question to Bob with what I said on the winter fuel allowance thread, but may I respectfully suggest that if you want to question or criticize anything I said on that thread to do it as a response on there rather than sidetrack this one.

Oh and I thought it would have been self evident which posters I was referring to, but for the avoidance of doubt, yes you were one of them.

[JamesWales]

Re: Are these two for real?

Who would have thought that the term snowflake used to be reserved for the wokerati? I reiterate my second point that Bob made more succinctly. Walz was self deprocating that he prefers his food on the bland rather than spicy side using a well recognised term in the USA that trigger very few people. You may have been ignorant of that but given that you are carrying on in the same vein now you are aware of it, as Bob said, says more about you than Walz.

For what it is worth, the schmaltzy video is there to endear him to middle America but pardon their shit for trying to win an election!

I'm not sure that endearment has worked has it..

Why are you talking about snowflakes and the wokerati? Weird.

[Citizen's Nephew]

Re: Are these two for real?

I didn't see that article Cyril, but yes, I do tire of this desire to separate ourselves by racial origin at every opportunity. Im sure you understand why if you think hard enough.

Here we go again. Your statement is inherently racist because it dismisses the importance of acknowledging racial origin and the systemic inequalities that come with it. By expressing frustration with discussions about race, it implies that addressing racial issues is unnecessary or divisive, which ignores the lived experiences of marginalised communities.

Suggesting that this focus on race is something to "tire of" perpetuates the idea that concerns about racial and social justice are trivial or overblown. This mindset effectively silences important conversations about race, reinforcing the status quo and contributing to the ongoing marginalisation of those who face racial discrimination.

And round and round we go.

We've been over and over and over this and we'll continue to do it until you understand that you're 'being racist' without actually realising it or meaning to be.

I'm sure you'll understand why if you think hard enough.

[JamesWales]

Re: Are these two for real?

Here we go again. Your statement is inherently racist because it dismisses the importance of acknowledging racial origin and the systemic inequalities that come with it. By expressing frustration with discussions about race, it implies that addressing racial issues is unnecessary or divisive, which ignores the lived experiences of marginalised communities.

Suggesting that this focus on race is something to "tire of" perpetuates the idea that concerns about racial and social justice are trivial or overblown. This mindset effectively silences important conversations about race, reinforcing the status quo and contributing to the ongoing marginalisation of those who face racial discrimination.

And round and round we go.

We've been over and over and over this and we'll continue to do it until you understand that you're 'being racist' without actually realising it or meaning to be.

I'm sure you'll understand why if you think hard enough.

This reads like an AI response.

I. Don't. Think. It's. Good. To. Keep. Dividing. Us. Up. By.Our.Racial.Characteristics.

It's divisive. And it's a mistake to do it.

[Eric Cartman]

Re: Are these two for real?

I am struggling to see how you link my question to Bob with what I said on the winter fuel allowance thread, but may I respectfully suggest that if you want to question or criticize anything I said on that thread to do it as a response on there rather than sidetrack this one.

Oh and I thought it would have been self evident which posters I was referring to, but for the avoidance of doubt, yes you were one of them.

It's not self-evident, because its your opinion and therefore unless you actually say it, nobody will know.

The link is that you are calling people out for not being specific and being specific in another thread

[Wales-Bales]

Re: Are these two for real?

I could but then I don't have 25k posts. Mirror available anyone?

It's a joke, so need to get all defensive. I actually like feisty people!

[Citizen's Nephew]

Re: Are these two for real?

This reads like an AI response.

I. Don't. Think. It's. Good. To. Keep. Dividing. Us. Up. By.Our.Racial.Characteristics.

It's divisive. And it's a mistake to do it.

You are such a condescending, belittling individual James. Arrogant. For what it's worth, the reason it probably reads like an ai response is because it's how I write. I pretty much dumb it down the rest of the time in order to 'fit in' but in your case I thought I'd offer you the courtesy of giving you both academic and journalistic barrels you sniffling little, pompous ****.

Now **** off and go and wank over a picture of Suella Braverman. I'm done with you. You are nothing to me and I would suggest that the best way to deal with you is to deny you the oxygen you crave.

[Dorcus]

Re: Are these two for real?

You are such a condescending, belittling individual James. Arrogant. For what it's worth, the reason it probably reads like an ai response is because it's how I write. I pretty much dumb it down the rest of the time in order to 'fit in' but in your case I thought I'd offer you the courtesy of giving you both academic and journalistic barrels you sniffling little, pompous ****.

Now **** off and go and wank over a picture of Suella Braverman. I'm done with you. You are nothing to me and I would suggest that the best way to deal with you is to deny you the oxygen you crave.

Great summing up! You got it spot on! Please don't disappoint by apologizing to him tomorrow morning. You dont need to: he needs our help in bringing him into the real world.

[Elwood Blues]

Re: Are these two for real?

I actually think they are real and genuine.

Their message is forward-looking, progressive and hopeful.

The other guy is a ranty, loopy, hate-filled, venal narcissist.

I fully agree with your third sentence.

I hope your second proves correct,but I have not seen enough about what they will do

Sadly I think they are as real and genuine as the tooth fairy

[Elwood Blues]

Re: Are these two for real?

It's not self-evident, because its your opinion and therefore unless you actually say it, nobody will know.

The link is that you are calling people out for not being specific and being specific in another thread

It was those who would have castigated the Tories for doing what Reeves did but happily defend Labour.

I thought that would have been fairly clear.

But why didn't you ask me to clarify on the actual thread???

I still think it is a bit of a tortuous link incidentally

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Are these two for real?

This reads like an AI response.

I. Don't. Think. It's. Good. To. Keep. Dividing. Us. Up. By.Our.Racial.Characteristics.

It's divisive. And it's a mistake to do it.

And yet you’re the one who brought it up in this thread.

[Elwood Blues]

Re: Are these two for real?

And yet you’re the one who brought it up in this thread.

The problem I have with this Bob is that .I am sure every word of this script was probably very carefully thought out.

Therefore those words are presumably there for a reason.

I don't think he just happened to say them.

I must admit to not having seem much else apart from the bit where they are laughing about how he missed her first call to him (which was also I believe carefully thought out and planned. I cannot believe that such a call was not previously set up by their staff,and I do not believe he did not know who was calling him!)

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Are these two for real?

The problem I have with this Bob is that .I am sure every word of this script was probably very carefully thought out.

Therefore those words are presumably there for a reason.

I don't think he just happened to say them.

I must admit to not having seem much else apart from the bit where they are laughing about how he missed her first call to him (which was also I believe carefully thought out and planned. I cannot believe that such a call was not previously set up by their staff,and I do not believe he did not know who was calling him!)

And even if all that is true, Walz’s “white guy” remarks were still a case of him laughing at himself - it’s very strange that they should be remarked upon in the manner they were in James Wales’ first post in this thread.

[Citizen's Nephew]

Re: Are these two for real?

And yet you’re the one who brought it up in this thread.

Quite! Then he gets all condescending when he’s confronted by someone who’s able to counter his insidious underlying prejudices just by being able to use a semicolon correctly.