An Olawakandi Center for Burn Victims

[Zaybay]

Why were my posts deleted? Is it out of place to point out the flaws inherent with this woman's candidacy. Or are we not allowed to do that? I guess not.

Because of what you were implying. I had a post deleted for referencing the line of attack that some people are planning to use against Harris, because it was deemed inappropriate. It is clearly an inappropriate line of attack.

Is it really? Given what was said about both Clintons (and justly so), and given Trump's controversies, it's not far-fetched, But I guess that such criticisms can't be levied against the favorite candidate of the moment.

No, it's not legitimate to imply that in any way because you have 0 proof. There's a reason libel is illegal.

But there's no use discussing this with you, because it's clear- the only reason to imply that about a candidate soley because she's a woman (just like Trump, who implied the same about Kirsten Gillibrand) is being a mysoginistic a trash of a human being, and as Invisible Obama correctly said- that's putting it mildly.

Many times, I laugh at the nonsense posted on the Internet, but especially some of the nonsense that gets posted on this forum. I saw your rant against Fuzzy Bear the other day, effectively calling him a "bad man" because of his sincere religious beliefs on issues such as gay rights and abortion. It's not surprising that you would do that again here. I've no respect for people who take advantage of others and give themselves up to advance their own political careers. And that holds true regardless of gender or of status. Harris and Gillibrand are both opportunists, and neither has a substantive policy agenda that would address the issues we are facing. A more serious candidate such as Klobuchar would be the best one for Democrats to nominate.

the most ludicrous thing I've read so far is the insinuation that you have ever posted anything of value to this forum – it's always either ridiculously meaningless hand-wringing about "decorum" or some sort of elementary-level political "analysis" that's actually just parroting basic observations about an election instead of actually providing any meaningful insights. At least now you've moved on to something interesting, attempting to defame political candidates with insinuations of exchanging sexual favors for political gain, but, once again, this is probably something most people don't really care to read. The most hilarious thing, however, is now that you so fully believe these unsubstantiated rumors that you claim that both Harris and Gillibrand are inadequate candidates because they slept their way to the top, proving once again that you may actually have the worst political instincts of anyone on this forum.

I don't believe attacking Parrotguy is going to be very fruitful for you, either, since he's actually made an attempt at making friends around here. Apparently you're supposed to be 100% alright when people invalidate your existence as long as their beliefs in doing so are sincere and religious. So, from the core of my sincere, religious beliefs: you are the densest person to have ever had the misfortune of stumbling onto this website.

[Zaybay]

You know, I’ve actually tried to give you the benefit of the doubt as a poster for quite a long while. I also am not always the biggest fan of how echo-Chambery Atlas can be. But, as time has gone on, you’ve only shown yourself to be more and more of a complete garbage poster. At this point, the following things are clear:

1. You contribute absolutely nothing of value to this forum.
2. You are a top cause of flame wars etc. on the forum.
3. Basically 90% of your posts on this forum are complaints about other posters, many of whom contribute more to the forum in a day than you have in your entire posting history, simply because you disagree with them. Let’s face it, there is not a single person you disagree with who you can get along with. And a lot of that is because, for all of your complaints about ad hominem attacks, you...tend to resort to them quite a bit.

Let’s take this thread, for example. You took a post that was basically said, “I will pick a candidate who criticizes Israel in ways sometimes bordering on antisemitic tropes over a candidate who has also made questionable statements about Jews, plus has also made similar statements about racial minorities and Muslims, and who has openly admitted to unwanted sexual touching of women and may be in legal trouble” and responded by basically trying to insinuate that the poster was anti-Semitic.  And you do this sort of thing all the damn time whenever someone disagrees with you instead of actually addressing their arguments. It’s actually rather similar to what the right always accuses the “politically correct left” of doing.

So yeah. There are many right wing posters (of all flavors: moderate, Trumpist, neocon, libertarian, Red Tory, etc.) who are amazing contributors to this forum. But you aren’t close to being one of them.