C.Steven just posted this on Twitter:
Your tolerance for the Left’s abject ignorance is remarkable.
So THAT is the impetus behind your remarkable tolerance! Makes total sense now.
Here’s the story as nutshelled as I can make it, and it’s all going to be paraphrased because I’m not unblocking these imbeciles in order to document the actual tweets.
After the Laura Loomer incident where she walked on stage to denounce the ritual bloodletting of our president, calling it a normalization of violence against the right, particularly in the wake of Steve Scalise being picked off by a socialist sniper with a hit list of conservatives in his pocket, leftists swarmed Twitter to denounce the act as an attack on free speech.
After much back and forth that (which I will admit now) was simply foreplay in order to box one idiot into a gotcha moment, I asked one imbecile
if they would publicly denounce #BLM in the same manner that they were denouncing Laura Loomer, because there was absolutely nothing she did that #BLM didn’t do. In fact, her act paled in comparison to #BLMs acts – blocking of traffic, storming of restaurants, libraries, hijacking the mic of political candidates, the disruption of political rallies, unfurling signs that obscured the view of patrons at sporting events, the destruction of cities and, oh, the SHOOTING OF POLICE OFFICERS!
The idiot refused to denounce #BLM saying that I had a high opinion of myself if I thought they would do my bidding, and they don’t get ordered around by people on Twitter, and I was indignant, etc.
Besides, they continued, people have to be supportive of #BLM because they are oppressed.
Now, keep in mind, during the give and take of the debate you always have these stupid peanut gallery observers that weigh in simply to cheer on their comrade. It’s usually mindless ass slapping, and you get the sense that they really aren’t following along. They are the Ed McMahon, the hockey goon.
Enter, this imbecile:
This person actually said in a few tweets that my arguments were confusing him and he honestly couldn’t follow what I was saying, bless his heart. (His bio says he’s a film maker in California.)
Sensing that there was nowhere to go with the discussion with Dale, a jerk who pulled the “blacks are oppressed” card, I blocked them.
Niels became the the spokesphincter for Dale and was trying to pass messages to me. I told Niels I wasn’t interested in debating with someone that couldn’t/wouldn’t see their double standard.
That’s when Niels dropped a beaut, thinking they were taking up the battle flag for Dale, he said, “the difference with what Loomer did and what #Blm does is that ‘Trump is not oppressed.”
I actually winced a bit and chuckled that this was the guy who said he couldn’t follow my arguments.
I responded –
WTF are you taking about? What does Trump being oppressed have to do with anything? If you’re trying to draw a proper analogy you’d be saying that “Loomer isn’t oppressed.”
I went on to say that Loomer’s point is that she is feeling oppressed because there seems to be a climate forming where the left tolerates, and in many cases encourages, violence against the right. That is the very definition of oppression, and it’s largely the point #BLM is making about themselves.
That’s when the blocking had to take place. After chewing gum for awhile and looking at my tweet, and finally answering, Niels said, “This oppression goes to eleven.” -Niels Tufnel, Nigel’s brother.
I’m sorry that’s a scene from This is Spinal Tap 2.
Niels actually said,
“I can’t follow what you’re saying. Please explain.”
Blocked… like his head.
This is why I don’t Twitter that often.
Thanks for allowing me to vent.