Elon Musk offers to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share.

Exactly. Waiting for people to admit they're Nazis, or TERFs, or whatever is a fool's game. Most of them know how to cloak their language in ways that send a dogwhistle to their followers, and sound innocent to anyone outside the group who might be listening. It's an old tactic, so anyone who says "prove it" when someone like David Duke, or Matt Walsh in this case, is accused of bigotry, they know. They know exactly what they're doing, except maybe for the naive ones who haven't yet figured out their favorite podcaster wants certain people to die for the crime of existing.

Therefore, the rulings issued by fucknuts like you two must be accepted at face value without question. The fuck outta here.

Case in point. UA relies on "prove it" because a lot of things don't have enough of a paper trail to make a 100% determination, something that everyone can agree is 100% true no matter the perspective, which is what people like him demand. It's a very effective tool at shutting down dissent because it requires no effort. You just say "prove it" and the other person gets instantly "buried in paperwork" on something that a lot of people can easily see, but have difficulty quantifying. It's like if someone said "slavery is bad" and UA said "prove it." You do not win if you engage, because you've already legitimized his position by giving it credence. It's much easier, and more satisfying, to just say "go fuck yourself on a road cone" and move on, because people who are smart enough to be aware know there's no point, and the people who are dumb enough to believe it's a legitimate debate won't change their mind anyway.

Yeah, okay, fella.

He doesn't demand the paper trail for "pink hairs are out to symbolically cut off your pee-pee by putting more black girls on TV" though.
He gulps that sandwich down without opening or sniffing it.

Nothing screams "credibility " like dealing exclusively in strawmen.

Of course, because it confirms his biases, and while we all do that to some degree, people like UA build their entire personality around not being easily fooled, or chained down to societal mores, despite being exactly that.

Tell me more about the purple haired gender enthusiasts.

Doesn't work both ways, sweet cheeks. Not everyone substitutes "identify(tm) " for personality.

He says, whilst propping his latest creation "Jack McCrowbane" up on a pole and adjusting his jaunty hat.

They exist outside, in the real world. You wouldn't be interested.

Not really. I mean. .., how do you know that someone you know personally is .. say ... a liar? Do you wait for that person to admit they are a liar or do you just note in your own mind that that person is a liar?

If it looks like a duck ....

Youtube told you so.

Because "angry white guy who claims to see through all the bullshit" hasn't been around for centuries, and is totally brand spanking new.

It’s a tactic they got from Nancy Pelosi who said that all you have to is put the accusation out there and the news media will pick it up and put it out there, it doesn’t matter if it’s true or that you have to prove it.

An actual historian would know that the phrase "a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth can put its shoes on" did not originate with Pelosi.

And no, I'm not telling you who did say it, because 1) you can prove you're capable of doing your own research and 2) unlike you, I'm not going to pretend that obvious statements like "don't believe everything you hear" mean the person who said them was or was not trustworthy.

"Everything I told you was true, from a certain point of view" doesn't make Obi-Wan a Sith Lord.

Pointing out how propaganda works doesn't make Goebbels less of a genocidal Nazi cunt.

Like calling trans people groomers, right?

Not once have I called trans people groomers.

Perhaps not. I'm not going to comb through all of your posts. But, you do agree with and post links to people who have called trans people groomers. So, by proxy, yes, you fucking have.

You might THINK there's wiggle room here, but we can all see it, just like you claim you can see something in those parents mentioned in this post:

http://wordforge.net/index.php?posts/3444698/

What Walsh said about certain people shouldn't be allowed to vote is no different than what certain posters like WAB have said. As for what he said about Andrew Jackson, I'm sorry that not everyone shares your opinion on Jackson. Like it or not, he was one our presidents and is largely responsible for bringing democracy to the common people. He also was a war hero. I don't see him elevating Jackson so much just asking for him to remain on the $20. I don't see anything Nazi about that.

And you say I'm predictable.

That's not me calling trans people groomers, that's me calling the parents groomers.

He's technically right.
Calling them groomers would give them too much dignity; he says trans allies are groomers, therefore by implication, trans people are their sub-human Frankenstein creations.

So you got nothin'. Yep, pretty predictable

You think I really have to dig deep to answer keyboard diarrhea that boils down to "leave Matt Walsh and Andrew Jackson alone!! "?
Yeah, no.

Including Hitler.
He admired the Trail Of Tears.

Shocking.

Oh look, Hitler at least put them in cattle cars instead of making them walk to the camps. How humane!

Y'know, the groomer narrative is really interesting.
Trans kids are poor little innocent victims of brainwash manipulation....right up until bottom surgery happens, then they're second class sub-humans that need to be barred from participation in society.
Weird how that works.
Anyone good with equations who can break that down?

Is it similar to how babies are sacred until they're old enough to mow down at school, then the guns become more sacred?

Yes, dictators often attempt to justify their actions by pointing to past precedent as if that makes it okay. That doesn't really address what I said though.