Infidel Dog

I've heard both stories - the Christopher Columbus 'People of God' thing and the Columbus thought he'd discovered India thing. Unlike the rest of you genius's though I wasn't born knowing the true truth of everything so I looked it up. I don't know where the 'people of God' thing comes from. It was around pre-windows internet though. That's when I heard it. The etymology of Indian in it's present use goes back to what the late Romans called the land beyond the Indus River. (Starts in Tibet, I think.) The term started getting transferred into French, Spanish, English out of late latin in the 13th century. However, it didn't start being used to describe the peoples of America until the mid 15th century - post Columbus.

S Why are you calling that video evidence? You specifically said "video evidence." The video evidence shows Epps helping smash a billboard into a barricade. As to your link to a google search on Rhodes I already did that. What I'm waiting for is this evidence you say you saw that shows Rhodes is something more than a big mouth. Because if that's a crime there aren't enough jails to hold all the big mouths. So, I'm still waiting. Can't find it, eh?

WTF are you talking about. The video evidence I gave you is a video. There's nothing to quote. That video shows Ray Epps with the rioters smashing a billboard into a barricade. As far as Rhodes goes, I'll stand by my claim that started this mess. No non-Progressive can get a fair trial in Washington DC - neither with a judge nor with a jury. A conservative would have as good a chance of getting a fair trial in DC as you'd have of getting a fair election in Arizona. Still waiting to see all your evidence Rhodes was something more than a loud mouth.

I think the owner said he had no interest in other turtles.

So that's the trick, eh? Every time you post that opinionated apologetic for Epps and Samsel from the fishwrap of record you're going to want me go go through my bookmarks and show you all the clips you should have seen by now of Epps inciting the crowd to storm the capitol? Hoping to wear me down, are you? Very well, I'll give you one clip the propogandizers at NYT didn't show you at a time. And every time I do I'm going to demand you post at least one bit of all this "evidence" you say you have that Rhodes is more than just another loud mouth. Fair warning, I've got a lot. I even have one from Nancy Pelosi's office window where Epps is up on the scaffold in front of the building as the Scaffold Commander shouts demanding the crowd storm through. Here ya go then. Here's the first one your Progressive Socialist scandal sheet didn't tell you about. It's a quick one just for a taste: Your turn. Give us a bit of all this evidence you say you have that Rhodes is more than just another loud mouth, now.

Of course. Both times you or one of you 2 posted it. The last time it was pretty much destroyed with multiple clips showing multiple incidents of damning evidence the NY Times (a former newspaper), forgot or didn't want to mention. Why do you keep posting that rag apologizing for obvious liars anyway? I'm thinking it's a diversion here so nobody will call you out on the fact what you're calling "evidence" against Rhodes is pretty much just a big mouth saying stupid things when he thought nobody that mattered was listening. Nothing as bad as swamp agents, Ray Epps and the Scaffold Commander loudly inciting the crowd to storm the capitol building though.

There used to be this video on YouTube of this little turtle that was obsessed with screwing sandals. I called him squeaky - squeaky the turtle - because every time he gave the sandal a little turtle hip thrust he squeaked. Nature or nurture?

Like I said, "show me." You obviously can't or you would have just done it. More likely you won't because you know if you do I'll show you how some don't get charged or even investigated for doing worse. So is it a crime you think you have evidence of or isn't it? I say it isn't. You have evidence of a guy with a big mouth mouthing off. Nothing more. Rhodes is no Ray Epps or Scaffold Commander. They actually incited rioters to enter the Capitol building and riot. Something the apologetic in last spring's Times R&R posted above forgot to mention.

No. Finding a term and defining it to fit your purposes doesn't apply here as being meaningful. If there's one law for one group and a different one for a favored group that's wrong. That's not whataboutism. That says the law is meaningless because this "EVIDENCE" you claimed existed doesn't. Because it only applies to a law that is not actually a law. 2 tier justice is not justice. You can't minimalize that by thinking your clever just because you know a word and like to believe you can adjust it's meaning to suit your purpose. "Whataboutism" suggest that's all it is but in this case it isn't. The existence of contrary application of the law negates the usefulness of what you call your "EVIDENCE"

Yes and he is.

Show me how anything Rhodes did was worse than what Ray Epps or The Scaffold Commander did. Those two weren't charged. The Commander wasn't even sufficiently investigated. Why not?

A non-leftist's chances of getting a fair trial in Washington DC is about equivalent to a snowball's chance in Hell or for that matter getting a fair election in Arizona, Michigan or Pennsylvania.

Because, of course, you're the only person who's ever attended. And you can cut the crap anytime you'd like. You're no counter-puncher. You're the kind of puncher that rhymes with stucker. Sneak up and stucker-punch.

Hey, weren't you the sweetheart who was ragging on me for being insulting?

For crying out loud will you guys never use a term correctly? I just shake my head. I mean it doesn't even seem to matter to you and yours if the term is relevant or even correct. If it sounds like a pejorative that good enough for you. I'm not saying this (Obama) is like that (Trump.) I'm saying it's a little pathetic to try so hard to evolve your this out of the previous that.

I'm not saying you and yours can't get you little army of social scientists and the journals they control to flame anybody in anyway, peer reviewed or other. I'm saying that pathetic bunch of faux experts weren't concerned with the term "narcissist" until after Obama was getting identified as one.

Cool but when are you going to test MY hypothesis? Not yours. Mine. Mine said Obama was getting called 'narcissist' first. Not the most. First. Now it is true nobody likes to fire off insults like a Progressive. So if that's what turns your crank...yeah...congratulations on your guys being prolific, I guess. As to your contention the many social scientists of the progressive left add credibility - thanks for the laugh. I've seen those panels of "experts" everywhere from CBC to MSNBC. The only people dumber than those clowns are whoever's paying them. Oh, and the bonehead's watching them thinking they're learning something.

Blah, blah, blah. Now let me explain to you why your original comment was a false equivalency. Here it is: In order for African American slavery to be equivalent to Jeffrey Dahmer's cannibalism, modern America would have to have slavery equivalent in horror to the African American slavery of the days when there was such a thing. Get it? I don't see why not. It's pretty basic. And then that other guy was outraged that sometimes you guys need to be hit over the head with 'obvious-hammer." It's because you just refuse to get it.

Exactly. So why do you want to blame the American government for slavery? Blame the British for allowing mercenaries to purchase Africans from African slavers and bring them to what eventually became America. The American government is what ended slavery.

It's not does anybody here eat people either. It continues to baffle me how you think Jeffrey Dahmer fits anywhere in this conversation.

Slavery was used largely for agricultural purposes. And again only about 3% of Americans at the time owned slaves.

The Southern states pushed for slavery. It was convenient to ignore it at the time until it wasn't. Then the existing American government ended it. Maybe they should charge those who benefitted.

Yeah, but you already paid them so what's your point? They got their reparations. Again, you are the King master of the false equivalencies.

I'm going to save that one as the king master of all false equivalencies. Jeffrey Dahmer actually did eat people. Nobody here owns slaves.

Complaining about being confronted with known facts is gutless and desperate.