PM to Creepy Bart Kewg

creepycoug said:

My kind also has the problem of dragging around with us all of the problems of the shithole countries from whence we came.

creepycoug said:

YellowSnow said:

creepycoug said:

YellowSnow said:

creepycoug said:

My kind also has the problem of dragging around with us all of the problems of the shithole countries from whence we came.

Your rum sucks. English speaking Jamaicans make way better rum. Rule Britannia pendejo.

We are no longer friends.

Trader Vic said you have to use Jamaican rum for Mai Tai's . It's more funky with notes of banana and butter. Cuban style rum goes better with coke and lime juice, of course, but that's lazy man's cocktail.

We're done for reelz now.

UW_Doog_Bot said:

creepycoug said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

YellowSnow said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

BTW, I never really had any animosity toward your friend until he started becoming a slanderer and a purveyor of false information like Damone, twisting peoples' words and meanings to suit whatever narrative he's peddling. He's always been that way, but he's been that way more so of late. Always calling people racists when he himself has shown a penchant toward racism directed at whites. When someone uses terms like 'white trash,' (it doesn't offend me, I just hate the hypocrisy of people using terms like that then throwing a fit when they're called a beaner, a gook, or something else in return), then using these other terms to describe a person is fair game imo.

Alright @oregonblitzkrieg , let's keep it real....hunret percent.

Look, you and I have had a lock of good banter here over the years and I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. As I said in one of the other threads, no one should be accusing someone of racism for holding any of the following views:

1 - The Euro zone has created some significant problems for themselves because of high levels of immigration from N. African and the Middle East. They aren't very good at running a melting pot in comparison the USA.

2- Allowing illegal immigration is bad policy and the border should be secure.

3- Immigration policy should be based on economic benefit to the broadest swath of the US population as possible.

4- Lastly, we do do have a refugee crisis on our hands because of failed states in Latin America, and it simply not possible to let in every single person who wants to get asylum status in the US.

But where you are going to veer into the the racism lane and run afoul of @creepycoug @MikeDamone - and pretty much every poster here - is if you argue immigration policy should be geared toward keeping the US a white ancestry, majority nation. We were never set up to be a nation state based on tribe (sorry @Swaye ), but rather adherence to a creed- i.e., We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happinesss.

Demographic change has been a constant in the country since it's founding and folks have been bitching (they were racist AF) about foreign hordes invading America ever since.



First, my English ancestors who got here on the Mayflower BTW, complained about the Germans and the Irish. Then it was the Polacks (I married one; so did Creep) , Jews and Italians. Now it's Creep's swarthy people. But through every demographic shift the melting pot has done it's thing and we are still by far the most successful and richest large nation on Earth and this isn't changing anytime soon. Yes, something like 30% of the US will have some Hispanic ancestry by 2050, but most will be muts and I'm sure their Engrish will be skrong.

Classy poast from a classy poaster.

I'm going to attempt to make a coherent point from OBK's mangled reasoning purely to expand the discussion.

Even during all of the waves of immigration and "give us your tired, your poor" America has ALWAYS engaged in selective immigration through quotas, fees, IQ tests, etc.

Are there origin countries that are more or less likely to produce immigrants which are MOAR likely to accept the creeds upon which our nation is founded?

Are the values you point to inherently Western and the product of a European age of reason? So is euro-centric immigration likely to produce immigrants more likely to accept inherently "European" ideals?

Are non-western peoples just as likely to accept western ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or do they have their own sets of ideals which may be counter to those?

You know I tend towards the concept of a "Roman citizenship" concept of the USA. To me peoples like @creepycoug's who come here inherently because they yearn for the values of freedom and liberty are often better than ignorant millenials who don't remember what socialismo actually looks like. That said, in a new multipolar global world with competing idealogies, increased mobility, and the very real reality of inequality, I have to question some of these things.

The reality is that Islam, philosophically, is different from "Western" religions in that it doesn't see a separation of religion and law or "church and state". Religion IS the LAW.

What about authoritarian regimes and their globe trotting elite who wish to stash their wealth in a country that has property rights and the rule of law while oppressing their countrymen at home out of practicality who don't share those values(Russia & China)?

What about the very real idea that some people want to establish an even larger welfare state and that that really will attract the global poor that simply want to feast at the biggest tit available?

All very fair points. Most of these are resolved with your reminder about selective immigration. As I've maintained from the beginning, who could be for anything but legal immigration?

Your point about Islam is also very fair, and I don't have a clean answer for you. People who come here have to respect that separation. But the challenge there is that we have homegrown people who don't respect it. Many, in fact. So there's that.

I myself do not believe for one minute that the ideal of pursuing liberty and freedom to make your own way in the American tradition is anything to do with Europe. I think it's inherent in all human beings to year to be free from overlords.

Don't forget that the last standing monarchy of any real significance stands in our closest European ally, and that the concepts of socialism and communism were cooked up in that most trouble making of European countries, Germania. Don't forget those two points. To date, the largest experiments in communism have taken place on the Asian continent.

The greatest expression of liberty is journey to, and arrival at, HERE, of people running away from all that shit. It's not just limited to the English.

In the end, it is folly to think that a bunch of people are going to come here with some sneaky idea and flip the country. It's harder to do that than it sounds on HCH. It takes a lot of time and focus, and what tends to happen in real life is that people get here, they get used to it, they get used to the standard of living and they lose their allegiance and love for where they came from. And their kids assimilate even faster and in one generation, BOOM! You have Americans.

If they change anything, it will be over time with the full participation of the people already here, including OBK's relatives in the trailer park if they want to get up and vote.

No "wave" of immigrants is going to come here and flip this country into something it doesn't want to be as part of some orchestrated scheme.

There's a very real argument to be made that waves of immigrants are what made our government more centralized and federal in nature. "Irish politics".

The old school answer is that liberty and freedom are "universal" but this post modern multipolar world doesn't necessarily confirm that. Why are peoples of the world not clamoring for free markets and democracy with the rise of the information age?

It's not that crazy to trade votes for "open borders" policy and handouts. I tend to agree that "American" culture is fairly massive in its inertia and won't simply be replaced in a generation though.

I completely agree with you how can anyone be for anything but legal immigration? Yet, we have a large part of the Democratic Party who run that policy even if they hide it with double speak.

creepycoug said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

creepycoug said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

YellowSnow said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

BTW, I never really had any animosity toward your friend until he started becoming a slanderer and a purveyor of false information like Damone, twisting peoples' words and meanings to suit whatever narrative he's peddling. He's always been that way, but he's been that way more so of late. Always calling people racists when he himself has shown a penchant toward racism directed at whites. When someone uses terms like 'white trash,' (it doesn't offend me, I just hate the hypocrisy of people using terms like that then throwing a fit when they're called a beaner, a gook, or something else in return), then using these other terms to describe a person is fair game imo.

Alright @oregonblitzkrieg , let's keep it real....hunret percent.

Look, you and I have had a lock of good banter here over the years and I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. As I said in one of the other threads, no one should be accusing someone of racism for holding any of the following views:

1 - The Euro zone has created some significant problems for themselves because of high levels of immigration from N. African and the Middle East. They aren't very good at running a melting pot in comparison the USA.

2- Allowing illegal immigration is bad policy and the border should be secure.

3- Immigration policy should be based on economic benefit to the broadest swath of the US population as possible.

4- Lastly, we do do have a refugee crisis on our hands because of failed states in Latin America, and it simply not possible to let in every single person who wants to get asylum status in the US.

But where you are going to veer into the the racism lane and run afoul of @creepycoug @MikeDamone - and pretty much every poster here - is if you argue immigration policy should be geared toward keeping the US a white ancestry, majority nation. We were never set up to be a nation state based on tribe (sorry @Swaye ), but rather adherence to a creed- i.e., We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happinesss.

Demographic change has been a constant in the country since it's founding and folks have been bitching (they were racist AF) about foreign hordes invading America ever since.



First, my English ancestors who got here on the Mayflower BTW, complained about the Germans and the Irish. Then it was the Polacks (I married one; so did Creep) , Jews and Italians. Now it's Creep's swarthy people. But through every demographic shift the melting pot has done it's thing and we are still by far the most successful and richest large nation on Earth and this isn't changing anytime soon. Yes, something like 30% of the US will have some Hispanic ancestry by 2050, but most will be muts and I'm sure their Engrish will be skrong.

Classy poast from a classy poaster.

I'm going to attempt to make a coherent point from OBK's mangled reasoning purely to expand the discussion.

Even during all of the waves of immigration and "give us your tired, your poor" America has ALWAYS engaged in selective immigration through quotas, fees, IQ tests, etc.

Are there origin countries that are more or less likely to produce immigrants which are MOAR likely to accept the creeds upon which our nation is founded?

Are the values you point to inherently Western and the product of a European age of reason? So is euro-centric immigration likely to produce immigrants more likely to accept inherently "European" ideals?

Are non-western peoples just as likely to accept western ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or do they have their own sets of ideals which may be counter to those?

You know I tend towards the concept of a "Roman citizenship" concept of the USA. To me peoples like @creepycoug's who come here inherently because they yearn for the values of freedom and liberty are often better than ignorant millenials who don't remember what socialismo actually looks like. That said, in a new multipolar global world with competing idealogies, increased mobility, and the very real reality of inequality, I have to question some of these things.

The reality is that Islam, philosophically, is different from "Western" religions in that it doesn't see a separation of religion and law or "church and state". Religion IS the LAW.

What about authoritarian regimes and their globe trotting elite who wish to stash their wealth in a country that has property rights and the rule of law while oppressing their countrymen at home out of practicality who don't share those values(Russia & China)?

What about the very real idea that some people want to establish an even larger welfare state and that that really will attract the global poor that simply want to feast at the biggest tit available?

All very fair points. Most of these are resolved with your reminder about selective immigration. As I've maintained from the beginning, who could be for anything but legal immigration?

Your point about Islam is also very fair, and I don't have a clean answer for you. People who come here have to respect that separation. But the challenge there is that we have homegrown people who don't respect it. Many, in fact. So there's that.

I myself do not believe for one minute that the ideal of pursuing liberty and freedom to make your own way in the American tradition is anything to do with Europe. I think it's inherent in all human beings to year to be free from overlords.

Don't forget that the last standing monarchy of any real significance stands in our closest European ally, and that the concepts of socialism and communism were cooked up in that most trouble making of European countries, Germania. Don't forget those two points. To date, the largest experiments in communism have taken place on the Asian continent.

The greatest expression of liberty is journey to, and arrival at, HERE, of people running away from all that shit. It's not just limited to the English.

In the end, it is folly to think that a bunch of people are going to come here with some sneaky idea and flip the country. It's harder to do that than it sounds on HCH. It takes a lot of time and focus, and what tends to happen in real life is that people get here, they get used to it, they get used to the standard of living and they lose their allegiance and love for where they came from. And their kids assimilate even faster and in one generation, BOOM! You have Americans.

If they change anything, it will be over time with the full participation of the people already here, including OBK's relatives in the trailer park if they want to get up and vote.

No "wave" of immigrants is going to come here and flip this country into something it doesn't want to be as part of some orchestrated scheme.

There's a very real argument to be made that waves of immigrants are what made our government more centralized and federal in nature. "Irish politics".

The old school answer is that liberty and freedom are "universal" but this post modern multipolar world doesn't necessarily confirm that. Why are peoples of the world not clamoring for free markets and democracy with the rise of the information age?

It's not that crazy to trade votes for "open borders" policy and handouts. I tend to agree that "American" culture is fairly massive in its inertia and won't simply be replaced in a generation though.

I completely agree with you how can anyone be for anything but legal immigration? Yet, we have a large part of the Democratic Party who run that policy even if they hide it with double speak.

Maybe. But the increasing complexities of the world, massively increased connectedness and competing interests that could no longer be kept isolated contributed more IMO.

Look, in 1776, living in Viriginia made you a Virginian, which was as or more important to the individual as the Union. The vast majority of people there never left the state and were creatures of a very, very local economy and way of life. I doubt the word "provincial" even existed; because everyone was provincial.

That was going to change with or without giant waves of immigrants. English colonialists were never going to keep this landmass for themselves. We all know that.

I can't tell you why people in disparate political, economic and social situations do and don't clamor for democracy and markets. The latter is probably still an abstraction to many of them. But those who want to come here definitely tend to have an opinion, and I doubt that it's to secretly flip us to big state socialism or communism. I think the main things on their minds are finding work, buying food and finding a place to live. It will be a generation before they have someone idle enough to join us in the Tug.

We just need to enforce the laws already on the books and regulate immigration. I'm fine with that. You already know where I take issue on this topic.

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

BTW, I never really had any animosity toward your friend until he started becoming a slanderer and a purveyor of false information like Damone, twisting peoples' words and meanings to suit whatever narrative he's peddling. He's always been that way, but he's been that way more so of late. Always calling people racists when he himself has shown a penchant toward racism directed at whites. When someone uses terms like 'white trash,' (it doesn't offend me, I just hate the hypocrisy of people using terms like that then throwing a fit when they're called a beaner, a gook, or something else in return), then using these other terms to describe a person is fair game imo.

More incoherent ramblings and logical fallacies from a racist crackpot. Every is laughing at you.

Really? No one is upvoted or chinning any of your posts except for your racist, beaner sidekick.

But how is OBK a racist? Anyone?

@DerekJohnson what do you think?

oregonblitzkrieg said:

And, sorry folks, but if terms like white trash and cracker are on the table, lets not be hypocrites and throw temper tantrums when the terms like beaner, gook, dego, guido, chink, jap, heeb, raghead, etc. are tossed around as well.

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

YellowSnow said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

BTW, I never really had any animosity toward your friend until he started becoming a slanderer and a purveyor of false information like Damone, twisting peoples' words and meanings to suit whatever narrative he's peddling. He's always been that way, but he's been that way more so of late. Always calling people racists when he himself has shown a penchant toward racism directed at whites. When someone uses terms like 'white trash,' (it doesn't offend me, I just hate the hypocrisy of people using terms like that then throwing a fit when they're called a beaner, a gook, or something else in return), then using these other terms to describe a person is fair game imo.

Alright @oregonblitzkrieg , let's keep it real....hunret percent.

Look, you and I have had a lock of good banter here over the years and I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. As I said in one of the other threads, no one should be accusing someone of racism for holding any of the following views:

1 - The Euro zone has created some significant problems for themselves because of high levels of immigration from N. African and the Middle East. They aren't very good at running a melting pot in comparison the USA.

2- Allowing illegal immigration is bad policy and the border should be secure.

3- Immigration policy should be based on economic benefit to the broadest swath of the US population as possible.

4- Lastly, we do do have a refugee crisis on our hands because of failed states in Latin America, and it simply not possible to let in every single person who wants to get asylum status in the US.

But where you are going to veer into the the racism lane and run afoul of @creepycoug @MikeDamone - and pretty much every poster here - is if you argue immigration policy should be geared toward keeping the US a white ancestry, majority nation. We were never set up to be a nation state based on tribe (sorry @Swaye ), but rather adherence to a creed- i.e., We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happinesss.

Demographic change has been a constant in the country since it's founding and folks have been bitching (they were racist AF) about foreign hordes invading America ever since.



First, my English ancestors who got here on the Mayflower BTW, complained about the Germans and the Irish. Then it was the Polacks (I married one; so did Creep) , Jews and Italians. Now it's Creep's swarthy people. But through every demographic shift the melting pot has done it's thing and we are still by far the most successful and richest large nation on Earth and this isn't changing anytime soon. Yes, something like 30% of the US will have some Hispanic ancestry by 2050, but most will be muts and I'm sure their Engrish will be skrong.

I can appreciate your position. Lets keep it 100 percent honest.

America is more tribal than most want to believe. It's why leftist identity politics has been so successful. Consider the following if you will:

Lets say we take 4,000 people: 1000 blacks, 1000 whites, 1000 hispanics, 1000 asians. Now separate each person and ask them to privately, anonymously select which racial group they would prefer be the majority in their country. They can only select one, because the reality is that there can ever only be one majority in a particular country at a particular time.

Now If you think you can honestly tell me that 9/10 people won't select their own race, and prefer their own race to be in the majority, then I'll admit I'm a racist for holding that position. But I don't think you can honestly tell me that. Self interest, self preservation, tribalism, will boil up to the surface when people are allowed to express their viewpoints free from mob rule. The black person isn't going to vote for a white majority. The white person won't vote for an Asian majority. The Asian won't vote for a Hispanic majority, and so on and so on. When everyone is a 'racist,' no one is.

As for running afoul of shitstains like Mike Damone and his sidekick, I couldn't care less about offending a latino racist and a smear peddling liar. Look at Mike Damone's posting history, he routinely lies, uses the same "HondoBro" smear tactics he pretends to oppose.

I’m not offended. I like calling out racist pieces of shit like you. You seem upset your getting accurately labeled. Your own words implicate you. You want a white majority nation because you think whites are superior and that is what it is “meant” to be, You think it’s in Latinos DNA to be socialist. I guess you think their race prevents Thomas Jefferson words from being accepted by them. Then, as it turns out, Latin America is rejecting socialism. LOL. What an ignorant racist asshole.

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

YellowSnow said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

BTW, I never really had any animosity toward your friend until he started becoming a slanderer and a purveyor of false information like Damone, twisting peoples' words and meanings to suit whatever narrative he's peddling. He's always been that way, but he's been that way more so of late. Always calling people racists when he himself has shown a penchant toward racism directed at whites. When someone uses terms like 'white trash,' (it doesn't offend me, I just hate the hypocrisy of people using terms like that then throwing a fit when they're called a beaner, a gook, or something else in return), then using these other terms to describe a person is fair game imo.

Alright @oregonblitzkrieg , let's keep it real....hunret percent.

Look, you and I have had a lock of good banter here over the years and I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. As I said in one of the other threads, no one should be accusing someone of racism for holding any of the following views:

1 - The Euro zone has created some significant problems for themselves because of high levels of immigration from N. African and the Middle East. They aren't very good at running a melting pot in comparison the USA.

2- Allowing illegal immigration is bad policy and the border should be secure.

3- Immigration policy should be based on economic benefit to the broadest swath of the US population as possible.

4- Lastly, we do do have a refugee crisis on our hands because of failed states in Latin America, and it simply not possible to let in every single person who wants to get asylum status in the US.

But where you are going to veer into the the racism lane and run afoul of @creepycoug @MikeDamone - and pretty much every poster here - is if you argue immigration policy should be geared toward keeping the US a white ancestry, majority nation. We were never set up to be a nation state based on tribe (sorry @Swaye ), but rather adherence to a creed- i.e., We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happinesss.

Demographic change has been a constant in the country since it's founding and folks have been bitching (they were racist AF) about foreign hordes invading America ever since.



First, my English ancestors who got here on the Mayflower BTW, complained about the Germans and the Irish. Then it was the Polacks (I married one; so did Creep) , Jews and Italians. Now it's Creep's swarthy people. But through every demographic shift the melting pot has done it's thing and we are still by far the most successful and richest large nation on Earth and this isn't changing anytime soon. Yes, something like 30% of the US will have some Hispanic ancestry by 2050, but most will be muts and I'm sure their Engrish will be skrong.

I can appreciate your position. Lets keep it 100 percent honest.

America is more tribal than most want to believe. It's why leftist identity politics has been so successful. Consider the following if you will:

Lets say we take 4,000 people: 1000 blacks, 1000 whites, 1000 hispanics, 1000 asians. Now separate each person and ask them to privately, anonymously select which racial group they would prefer be the majority in their country. They can only select one, because the reality is that there can ever only be one majority in a particular country at a particular time.

Now If you think you can honestly tell me that 9/10 people won't select their own race, and prefer their own race to be in the majority, then I'll admit I'm a racist for holding that position. But I don't think you can honestly tell me that. Self interest, self preservation, tribalism, will boil up to the surface when people are allowed to express their viewpoints free from mob rule. The black person isn't going to vote for a white majority. The white person won't vote for an Asian majority. The Asian won't vote for a Hispanic majority, and so on and so on. When everyone is a 'racist,' no one is.

As for running afoul of shitstains like Mike Damone and his sidekick, I couldn't care less about offending a latino racist and a smear peddling liar. Look at Mike Damone's posting history, he routinely lies, uses the same "HondoBro" smear tactics he pretends to oppose.

I’m not offended. I like calling out racist pieces of shit like you. You seem upset your getting accurately labeled. Your own words implicate you. You want a white majority nation because you think whites are superior and that is what it is “meant” to be, You think it’s in Latinos DNA to be socialist. I guess you think their race prevents Thomas Jefferson words from being accepted by them. Then, as it turns out, Latin America is rejecting socialism. LOL. What an ignorant racist asshole.

You keep regurgitating the same line, but fail to provide a quote where I ever said that.

HondoBro going to HondoBro.

As your credibility continues to tank.

Of course you believe that. Why would you want a majority white nation? Because you think others are inferior. Why was it “meant to be a majority white nation”. Because you believe yo are superior.

Clear it up right now. Tell us in your words if you think your race is superior to others. You won’t, because you believe you are. You’re too much of a pussy to answer the question. Racist.

oregonblitzkrieg said:

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

MikeDamone said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

YellowSnow said:

oregonblitzkrieg said:

BTW, I never really had any animosity toward your friend until he started becoming a slanderer and a purveyor of false information like Damone, twisting peoples' words and meanings to suit whatever narrative he's peddling. He's always been that way, but he's been that way more so of late. Always calling people racists when he himself has shown a penchant toward racism directed at whites. When someone uses terms like 'white trash,' (it doesn't offend me, I just hate the hypocrisy of people using terms like that then throwing a fit when they're called a beaner, a gook, or something else in return), then using these other terms to describe a person is fair game imo.

Alright @oregonblitzkrieg , let's keep it real....hunret percent.

Look, you and I have had a lock of good banter here over the years and I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. As I said in one of the other threads, no one should be accusing someone of racism for holding any of the following views:

1 - The Euro zone has created some significant problems for themselves because of high levels of immigration from N. African and the Middle East. They aren't very good at running a melting pot in comparison the USA.

2- Allowing illegal immigration is bad policy and the border should be secure.

3- Immigration policy should be based on economic benefit to the broadest swath of the US population as possible.

4- Lastly, we do do have a refugee crisis on our hands because of failed states in Latin America, and it simply not possible to let in every single person who wants to get asylum status in the US.

But where you are going to veer into the the racism lane and run afoul of @creepycoug @MikeDamone - and pretty much every poster here - is if you argue immigration policy should be geared toward keeping the US a white ancestry, majority nation. We were never set up to be a nation state based on tribe (sorry @Swaye ), but rather adherence to a creed- i.e., We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happinesss.

Demographic change has been a constant in the country since it's founding and folks have been bitching (they were racist AF) about foreign hordes invading America ever since.



First, my English ancestors who got here on the Mayflower BTW, complained about the Germans and the Irish. Then it was the Polacks (I married one; so did Creep) , Jews and Italians. Now it's Creep's swarthy people. But through every demographic shift the melting pot has done it's thing and we are still by far the most successful and richest large nation on Earth and this isn't changing anytime soon. Yes, something like 30% of the US will have some Hispanic ancestry by 2050, but most will be muts and I'm sure their Engrish will be skrong.

I can appreciate your position. Lets keep it 100 percent honest.

America is more tribal than most want to believe. It's why leftist identity politics has been so successful. Consider the following if you will:

Lets say we take 4,000 people: 1000 blacks, 1000 whites, 1000 hispanics, 1000 asians. Now separate each person and ask them to privately, anonymously select which racial group they would prefer be the majority in their country. They can only select one, because the reality is that there can ever only be one majority in a particular country at a particular time.

Now If you think you can honestly tell me that 9/10 people won't select their own race, and prefer their own race to be in the majority, then I'll admit I'm a racist for holding that position. But I don't think you can honestly tell me that. Self interest, self preservation, tribalism, will boil up to the surface when people are allowed to express their viewpoints free from mob rule. The black person isn't going to vote for a white majority. The white person won't vote for an Asian majority. The Asian won't vote for a Hispanic majority, and so on and so on. When everyone is a 'racist,' no one is.

As for running afoul of shitstains like Mike Damone and his sidekick, I couldn't care less about offending a latino racist and a smear peddling liar. Look at Mike Damone's posting history, he routinely lies, uses the same "HondoBro" smear tactics he pretends to oppose.

I’m not offended. I like calling out racist pieces of shit like you. You seem upset your getting accurately labeled. Your own words implicate you. You want a white majority nation because you think whites are superior and that is what it is “meant” to be, You think it’s in Latinos DNA to be socialist. I guess you think their race prevents Thomas Jefferson words from being accepted by them. Then, as it turns out, Latin America is rejecting socialism. LOL. What an ignorant racist asshole.

You keep regurgitating the same line, but fail to provide a quote where I ever said that.

HondoBro going to HondoBro.

As your credibility continues to tank.

Of course you believe that. Why would you want a majority white nation? Because you think others are inferior. Why was it “meant to be a majority white nation”. Because you believe yo are superior.

Clear it up right now. Tell us in your words if you think your race is superior to others. You won’t, because you believe you are. You’re too much of a pussy to answer the question. Racist.

You've stated several times that I said white people are superior. I never have. Provide the quote where I said that or just admit what you are: a smear peddling liar. Mob mentality. Hondo Bro.

I said you think other races are inferior to whites. I stand by that statement.

Do you think white people are superior. Clear it up for us. Or we can just take your words where you want a white majority as indented at face value. Racist.

You aren't owed an answer to that question or any other. I don't have any respect for smear peddling Hondo Bros like yourself. A pile of horse shit has more credibility than you. I explained my position multiple times already, including in this thread. If you misread, misinterpreted or just can't understand it, that's your own problem. I think you understand it perfectly fine though, you're just a lying piece of shit who likes to go on smear campaigns in general because you get off on it. That's pretty obvious from your posting history. Reference your campaign against PLSS.

The only reason you keep demanding an answer to this question you keep repeating is because I backed you into a corner and you can't get out. You can't provide a quote of me ever saying such a thing, so you can't do that. And you won't admit you're a shit eating liar either, who twists my words and viewpoints into something they are not. Those are your only two options, and one of them is impossible, so that leaves only one.

Admit you're a smear peddling liar and I'll answer your question.

TurdBomber said:

I, for one, would rather guys like OBK go ahead and spill their thoughts in public like this than grind away in a dark basement plotting a mass shooting or building a bomb to blow up a federal building. First Amendment Win, right there. I think it's fine to attack his racism and xenophobia, but call it out for what it is and what's at the root of it, which is usually just plain old fear.
I really don't care if anyone calls me a racist piece of shit, because at this point I'm like "Racism? ZZZZZZZZZ. How about a less generic insult, son?" Call me a squirrel-fucker or something that at least gets my attention, because racism allegations are so over-used and abused, I just walk by them like I do a bigger on the street. Sorry, got shit to do, whether you like it or not. Adios!