UK condemns Trump’s racist tweets in unprecedented attack against US congresswomen - Page 21 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15020993
noemon wrote:It seems that denial is your modus operandi.

You called Corbyn "a Marxist-Leninist infiltrator" and then said for all those advocating Marxism: "Marxism is about carrying out acts of terrorism. It is literally inciting violence." in this very thread, so our resident marxists are apparently inciting violence against you in your view, but the people chanting "send her back" or the police officers making actual threats is not inciting violence. The word is being abused to refer to actual threats of violence in your view but it is not being abused by yourself to refer to imaginary violence. :lol:

Fine so maybe he isn't a marxist and I spoke hastily. What should I apologise to him?

If the marxists get their revolution then of course there will be terrorism and on a vast scale. I would not necessarily be a victim of it though because I can play infiltrator too. Perhaps I will become a commissar and round up all the champagne socialists with more money than me (all of them) and have them shot for hoarding. :excited:

Image
Last edited by SolarCross on 24 Jul 2019 16:28, edited 1 time in total.
#15020994
SolarCross wrote:Fine so maybe he isn't a marxist and I spoke hastily. What should I apologise to him?

If the marxists get their revolution then of course there will be terrorism and on a vast scale. I would not necessarily be a victim of it though because I can play infiltrator too. Perhaps I will become a commissar and round up all the champagne socialists with more money than me (all of them) and have them shot for hoarding. :excited:


Are you saying that you insist on your claim that our resident marxists in this forum are inciting violence against you and should rightly be called terrorists while the mob chanting "send her back", Trump telling ethnic minorities to go back where they came from, and police officers making explicit threats to life is not inciting violence? :roll:
#15020996
noemon wrote:Are you saying that you insist on your claim that our resident marxists in this forum are inciting violence against you and should rightly be called terrorists while the mob chanting "send her back", Trump telling ethnic minorities to go back where they came from, and police officers making explicit threats to life is not inciting violence? :roll:

Dude I am more working class than any of you ponces. Come the revolution it will be me terrorising you. That isn't what I want to happen but if it is what you want then I will oblige.
#15020999
noemon wrote:It has led to a police officer threatening AOC with a round.

Rispoli quoted a satirical article about AOC. He was not replying to a Trump tweet. Consequently, there is no evidence that anything he said was in response to Trump's comments.

noemon wrote:And one can only imagine how many death threats these ladies have received since then.

They have had plenty of death threats before hand. So have many other members of Congress.
‘I’m Coming After You’: Matt Gaetz Shares A Horrible Death Threat With Tucker Carlson

Matt Gaetz received a threat were a person told Gaetz over the phone (FCC jurisdiction and a federal felony) that he could blow his head off from over a mile away (requires a .50 cal rifle to do that). This is close to an actual crime, but prosecutors decided not to prosecute since they didn't suspect an imminent threat, because the suspect was in California when he said it.
Do you know that I could blow your fucking head clean off your shoulders from over a mile away. Watch your back bitch. You pathetic little piece of shit. You got your head so far up Trump’s ass, Haha, I could still take it off your shoulders. Fuck you, Gaetz. I’m coming after you, bitch.

No charges. So if that doesn't get charged, your idea of terrorism won't even get put before prosecutors.

noemon wrote:evident terrorism

Terrorism is a crime. There isn't a crime committed here. So you are obviously using "terrorism" in a self-serving manner.

noemon wrote:Hypocrisy levels have crossed the red line. These very same people having been quoted in this community having made same or worse statements regarding the influence of pro-Israeli lobbies in the US.

I'm not sure how hypocrisy crosses a red line. You are obviously again misconstruing my statements. At the time (2013), I was generally arguing that left-wing Jews were generally against the Tea Party movement and also against Christians and pro-Israel groups in the United States. The point was that right wing Jews and left wing Jews were fighting each other with respect to Israel among other things. I was not criticizing pro-Israel groups as I was pro-Israel then and I am pro-Israel now. Recently, I was also fine with Trump moving the US Embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. I do not consider Jews a racial group, but rather a religion and ethnicity.

noemon wrote:At least blackjack21 openly admits that all he has left is to attempt to poorly misconstrue what people say.

I'm just illustrating your tactics for others to see. Since your charges of "racism" have failed, now you are on to "terrorism." Admin Edit: Rule 2 Violation
Last edited by blackjack21 on 24 Jul 2019 16:37, edited 1 time in total.
#15021012
noemon wrote:If you agree with me in this thread, then what's your issue in this topic exactly?


You are welcome to review my posts for comprehension otherwise I'm not sure I am allowed to answer your question more specifcally. Am I unaware of a rule that respondents to this topic must only reply in disagreement? If so please point me to that information so I can comply.

thank you.
#15021014
Pants-of-dog wrote:@SolarCross

You are doing that thing where you dodge the argument by discussing your ideas about Marxism instead.

You and Noemon brought up marxism first. I merely responded. You in fact are dodging the argument by bringing up odious murder cults like marxism back from the carnal pits of history.

The argument today is that a bunch of politicians in the US are calling each other names as they are free to do as protected by the 1st amendment. That is all there is to it.
#15021015
SolarCross wrote:Dude I am more working class than any of you ponces. Come the revolution it will be me terrorising you. That isn't what I want to happen but if it is what you want then I will oblige.


Dude, are you saying that you were indeed abusing the term "terrorism" when you referred to our resident marxists terrorising you and then started whining that the term terrorism is being abused to refer to the mob chanting "send her back", Trump telling ethnic minorities to go back where they came from, and police officers making explicit threats to life?

blackjack21 wrote:Rispoli quoted a satirical article about AOC. He was not replying to a Trump tweet. Consequently, there is no evidence that anything he said was in response to Trump's comments. Terrorism is a crime. There isn't a crime committed here. So you are obviously using "terrorism" in a self-serving manner.


I'm sure it was just a coincidence. The police officer actions are within the scope of terrorism and I used the term terrorisation rather than terrorism. A mob chanting "send her back" has the explicit intent to terrorise that person just like Trump's tweet had the explicit intent to terrorise these congresswomen.

blackjack21 wrote:They have had plenty of death threats before hand. So have many other members of Congress.
‘I’m Coming After You’: Matt Gaetz Shares A Horrible Death Threat With Tucker Carlson


This is still an attempt to terrorise this person and it's bad, are you saying that you condemn such obvious acts to intimidate political opponents? Because I do condemn such acts, how about you? Your arguments here point to the opposite direction.

noemon wrote:You are obviously again misconstruing my statements. At the time (2013), I was generally arguing that left-wing Jews were generally against the Tea Party movement and also against Christians and pro-Israel groups in the United States. The point was that right wing Jews and left wing Jews were fighting each other with respect to Israel among other things. I was not criticizing pro-Israel groups as I was pro-Israel then and I am pro-Israel now. Recently, I was also fine with Trump moving the US Embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. I do not consider Jews a racial group, but rather a religion and ethnicity.


I am not misconstruing anything and nor did I make a statement for your earlier posts as well. You accused Ilhan Omar of antisemitism because she inferred that certain American politicians have been paid by pro-Israeli Jewish groups to support them as she said "it's all about the Benjamins", you still insist that what she said is antisemitic and thus racist against Jewish people. At the same time you have made this thread:

'A Jewish Fight' by blackjack21 wrote:One of the things that really stands out with this IRS scandal is that the complaints, oppressive acts, (oppressed parties in a few cases) and excuses seem to be disproportionately by people with Jewish names. That's kind of odd, considering that Jews are a fairly small minority. If you ran a probability distribution on this, I'm guessing the random coincidence that such a scandal would return such a high number of Jewish surnames would be miniscule--unless this were in some way a Jewish fight.

Group Seeks I.R.S. Inquiry of Two Ohio Churches
Stephanie Strom reports that Rabbi Berman along with a number of more liberal Christians complained to the IRS about World Harvest and Fairfield Christian. This article was written by someone with a Jewish surname, the complaint includes Rabbis as well as Christians. Who eventually gets the complaint? Lois Lerner. She has a Jewish surname. An interesting twist: Lerner is also accused of targeting pro-Israel groups. Who was running the IRS? Steven Miller. Also Jewish. And who is running the Treasury Department? Jack Lew. Also Jewish. Then we get articles like this Former NPR CEO Ken Stern: The IRS Had the Right Idea Ken Stern is obviously Jewish as well, and he's very approving of the targeting of Christian groups.

The targeting of James Rosen can thus be seen in a different light in that he's Jewish too. The naming of a journalist as an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal complaint is unprecedented considering what he's accused of is essentially journalism.

Interesting twist on Lew: he was apparently offered a bonus conditioned upon taking a government job. Jack Lew: Treasury Secretary and Oblivious Bank Shill


Good luck in trying to un-dig yourself out of this one. Apparently for you, Ilhan Omar is racist for saying that pro-Israeli lobbies influence US foreign policy, but Trump making these racist remarks is at the same time "not racist", his supporters chanting "send her back" are not racist either and the police officer threatening the life of a congresswoman is not racist either. :lol: You are also not a racist at all for having made the thread above. I truly wonder with what kind of face you carry on here.

blackjack21 wrote:I'm just illustrating your tactics for others to see. Since your charges of "racism" have failed, now you are on to "terrorism."


You have not illustrated anything. You have not managed to articulate an actual argument as to how Trump's tweet is not racist or why as you claim is allegedly taken out of context by my bolding. The argument that just because I bolded the relevant words in Trump's statement that I have taken the statement out of context is quite ridiculous even for you. You actually have to demonstrate why is it out of context as you claim and what is the correct context, if you want to be taken seriously.

Finfinder wrote:You are welcome to review my posts for comprehension otherwise I'm not sure I am allowed to answer your question more specifcally. Am I unaware of a rule that respondents to this topic must only reply in disagreement? If so please point me to that information so I can comply.

thank you.


I am not following you here, you came into this thread to whine that racism is being misapplied, then you agreed with me that these actions(the tweets, threats, chants) are indeed racist. So once again, which position are you actually standing by? That racism is being misapplied or that these actions are racist indeed? Try to state it clearly without whining or victimising yourself. You are not a victim, you are just being asked a simple question.
#15021021
noemon wrote:Dude, are you saying that you were indeed abusing the term "terrorism" when you referred to our resident marxists terrorising you and then started whining that the term terrorism is being abused to refer to the mob chanting "send her back", Trump telling ethnic minorities to go back where they came from, and police officers making explicit threats to life?

No, try again.

noemon wrote:I'm sure it was just a coincidence. The police officer actions are within the scope of terrorism and I used the term terrorisation rather than terrorism. A mob chanting "send her her back" has the explicit intent to terrorise that person just like Trump's tweet had the explicit intent to terrorise these congresswomen.

Words are not violence. People use all kinds of violent metaphors in language and figures of speech. But words are not violence. Quit with the lip trembling. It is pathetic.
#15021022
SolarCross wrote:No, try again.
Words are not violence. People use all kinds of violent metaphors in language and figures of speech. But words are not violence. Quit with the lip trembling. It is pathetic.


Not as pathetic as you trembling by the words of marxists in this forum. You were the first poster in this thread to use the word terrorism to refer to our marxist posters, yet here you are whining and crying that people should not use this word(actually terrorisation rather than terrorism) to refer to the very explicit terrorisation these Congresswomen are facing as a result of Trump's racist tweets. Their lives have been threatened by police officers and mobs are chanting at them to be kicked out of their own country. The President of the US is telling them to go back where they came from. If this was happening to you you would be crying of being terrorised, in fact you already have cried of being terrorised by the words of our resident marxists. :lol:
#15021024
noemon wrote:I am not following you here, you came into this thread to whine that racism is being misapplied, then you agreed with me that these actions(the tweets, threats, chants) are indeed racist. So once again, which position are you actually standing by? That racism is being misapplied or that these actions are racist indeed? Try to state it clearly without whining or victimising yourself. You are not a victim, you are just being asked a simple question.


thanks for replying .........I have previously replied to you that my posts stand Admin Edit: Rule 16-Fair Warning Provided
#15021025
noemon wrote:Not as pathetic as you trembling by the words of marxists in this forum. You were the first poster in this thread to use the word terrorism to refer to our marxist posters, yet here you are whining and crying that people should not use this word(actually terrorisation rather than terrorism) to refer to the very explicit terrorisation these Congresswomen are facing as a result of Trump's racist tweets. Their lives have been threatened by police officers and mobs are chanting at them to be kicked out of their own country. The President of the US is telling them to go back where they came from. If this was happening to you you would be crying of being terrorised, in fact you already have cried of being terrorised by the words of our resident marxists. :lol:


Read some history, terrorism is exactly what happened.
#15021027
Clearly this simple question was too much for Finfinder and could not either reply to the question or do it without pretending to be a victim.

If you ever decide to here it is again:

noemon wrote:You came into this thread to whine that racism is being misapplied, then you agreed with me that these actions(the tweets, threats, chants) are indeed racist. So once again, which position are you actually standing by? That racism is being misapplied or that these actions are racist indeed? Try to state it clearly without whining or victimising yourself. You are not a victim, you are just being asked a simple question.


SolarCross wrote:Read some history, terrorism is exactly what happened.


If you feel terrorised by the words of our marxist posters, let me know.
#15021028
noemon wrote:If you feel terrorised by the words of our marxist posters, let me know.


They are all a bunch of ponces so no fear of that. But they do self-identify with the terrorists of the past (present in the case of the DPRK and PRC) same as the tiki torch bearers self-identify with anti-Semitic mass murderers. After we are done punching the nazis we shall have to shoot all the commies in the back of the head and dump their bodies in mass graves. Fair is fair.

----------

You should go to a football match some time, "send her back" is mild.
#15021029
Rispoli quoted a satirical article about AOC. He was not replying to a Trump tweet. Consequently, there is no evidence that anything he said was in response to Trump's comments.


Satirical? If we are referring to the police officer who recommended that she get a round then you are in disagreement with the Chief of Police who fired this 14 year veteran and a fellow officer who liked his post. And rightly so. Even IF this was an attempt at satire there is no excuse for a police officer engaging in it. (For the record he had attended training that taught him not to do exactly what he did.)
#15021038
noemon wrote:This is still an attempt to terrorise this person and it's bad, are you saying that you condemn such obvious acts to intimidate political opponents? Because I do condemn such acts, how about you? Your arguments here point to the opposite direction.

I think it is bad, but the prosecutors in the Northern District of California have decided not to prosecute. So that seems to be setting the standard these days.

noemon wrote:you still insist that what she said is antisemitic and thus racist against Jewish people.

She is anti-Israel and has said as much, and has used antisemitic tropes and deleted and apologized for them.

noemon wrote:Good luck in trying to un-dig yourself out of this one.

You have a problem with questioning whether there is a political civil war within the American Jewish electorate? Sometimes they are in solidarity; sometimes they are at each other's throats.

noemon wrote:Apparently for you, Ilhan Omar is racist for saying that pro-Israeli lobbies influence US foreign policy, but Trump making these racist remarks is at the same time "not racist"

I support the squad making outlandish comments. It serves my political interest. Ilhan Omar said that American Jews who support Israel have dual loyalty and more or less questioned their patriotism. One of Obama's deputies--Rahm Emmanuel--called Omar out for that.
I’ve Faced the Charge of Dual Loyalty.

Rahm Emmanuel wrote:I’m talking about Representative Ilhan Omar, one of the newly elected Democrats who populate the 116th Congress. Omar has attracted much news coverage, and the condemnation of most of her fellow Democrats, for promoting some ugly tropes about Jews.

This is coming from Obama's chief of staff and former mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emmanuel.

noemon wrote:You are also not a racist at all for having made the thread above.

Most of my thread could be construed as having a religious connotation, since it was Jews calling out evangelical Christians. However, it's also pointed out that liberal Christians were part of it. I very clearly noted at the time that left-of-center Jews as opposed to right-of-center Jews were attacking the Tea Party, Christian groups AND pro-Israel groups who happen to be both Christian and Jewish. Do you understand the difference between left wing and right wing, and the difference between Christians and Jews? That's not a racial question at all.

noemon wrote:You have not managed to articulate an actual argument as to how Trump's tweet is not racist or why as you claim is allegedly taken out of context by my bolding.

I have rebutted the assertion that it was racist multiple times. If Trump wanted to focus on a race, he would have included many more people. Instead, he focused on "progressive" leftist Democrats who have been called out by their own constituency as I have just illustrated above. Trump's whole point was to get the Democrats who were trying to silence Ilhan Omar to embrace her, while attacking Trump. Trump was successful at this.

noemon wrote:You actually have to demonstrate why is it out of context as you claim and what is the correct context, if you want to be taken seriously.

It has already been done. Trump told them to come back and show us how it was done. He also said Nancy Pelosi would supply free travel arrangements--implying a Congressional junket, not banishment from the US.

noemon wrote:Their lives have been threatened by police officers and mobs are chanting at them to be kicked out of their own country.

That's just politics these days. Madonna was screaming that she had thoughts of blowing up the White House to a crowd of crazies. Now she complains, because she can't sell any albums. People say outlandish things all the time. There is nothing new under the sun in this department, other than in Europe you can be prosecuted for what you say even if you aren't inciting riot or directly encouraging the commission of crimes. In the United States, that's not the case.

Drlee wrote:Satirical? If we are referring to the police officer who recommended that she get a round then you are in disagreement with the Chief of Police who fired this 14 year veteran and a fellow officer who liked his post.

The post the officer was replying to was a satirical article that had said AOC thought soldiers were overpaid. I said nothing about the guy getting fired. Since they had both taken social media training, at least a reprimand was in order. Police should just stay off social media. It's in their own best interest.
#15021045
blackjack21 wrote:I think it is bad, but the prosecutors in the Northern District of California have decided not to prosecute. So that seems to be setting the standard these days.


No mate, US prosecutors do not set any standards in this community. Trump's buddy Acosta letting Epstein off for confirmed pedophilia does not mean that should be the new normal for us in here. If you are going to condemn these intimidation tactics against political opponents, then I expect your condemnation for all the racist intimidation brought upon these 4 Congresswomen.


blackjack21 wrote:She is anti-Israel and has said as much, and has used antisemitic tropes and deleted and apologized for them.
You have a problem with questioning whether there is a political civil war within the American Jewish electorate? Sometimes they are in solidarity; sometimes they are at each other's throats.
I support the squad making outlandish comments. It serves my political interest. Ilhan Omar said that American Jews who support Israel have dual loyalty and more or less questioned their patriotism. One of Obama's deputies--Rahm Emmanuel--called Omar out for that.
I’ve Faced the Charge of Dual Loyalty. This is coming from Obama's chief of staff and former mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emmanuel.


There are many issues here:

a) I read the article you provided and did not read Omar's comments doing what you accuse her of doing. Rahm Emmanuel(not Ilhan Omar) writes: questioning the “allegiance” of supporters of Israel. The first observation here is where did she question that allegiance? He does not say. Second, "supporters of Israel" may or not be Jews and if US politicians have placed Israeli interests above US interests then certainly American politicians should be able to say that without fear or prejudice. Are you arguing that if American politicians say that someone(in the US) is putting Islam(.ie Saudi) above the US, then that someone is being racist?
b) The issue here is that you are arguing/propagating that she is being racist for far less than what Trump said while at the same time arguing that what Trump said is not racist at all. To make matters worse you have made far worse statements about Jews.

blackjack21 wrote:One of the things that really stands out with this IRS scandal is that the complaints, oppressive acts, (oppressed parties in a few cases) and excuses seem to be disproportionately by people with Jewish names. That's kind of odd, considering that Jews are a fairly small minority.


This is the kind of antisemitic tropes that Rahm is referring to.

c) You are talking to me as if it matters to me whether that guy served under Obama. You should know already that I do not care at all about Democrats and Republicans.

blackjack21 wrote:I have rebutted the assertion that it was racist multiple times. If Trump wanted to focus on a race, he would have included many more people. Instead, he focused on "progressive" leftist Democrats who have been called out by their own constituency as I have just illustrated above.


This is called false equivocation. One does not need to attack all Black people to be a racist, attacking a few of them on the basis of race, descent, ethnic origin still makes that person racist. He attacked those that disagree with him and he did on the basis of their ethnic-origins, that makes his attack racist.

blackjack21 wrote:That's just politics these days. Madonna was screaming that she had thoughts of blowing up the White House to a crowd of crazies. Now she complains, because she can't sell any albums. People say outlandish things all the time.


And when people do outlandish things, intelligent people are supposed to rein on them. You and yours seem particularly vocal when some liberals or sjw says something outlandish but at the same time very fragile and defensive if some republican says something racist.
#15021087
noemon wrote:No mate, US prosecutors do not set any standards in this community.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. This community is just a PHP bulletin board. It has no legal authority like the US Department of Justice. So if someone says they can blow a Congressman's head off from a mile away and the DoJ does nothing about it, I frankly don't know what it is that you think you can do about it.

noemon wrote:Trump's buddy Acosta letting Epstein off for confirmed pedophilia does not mean that should be the new normal for us in here.


noemon wrote:If you are going to condemn these intimidation tactics against political opponents, then I expect your condemnation for all the racist intimidation brought upon these 4 Congresswomen.

I don't consider Trump's tweet the slightest bit intimidating. Intimating that you could shoot someone's head off their shoulders from a mile away and that you are coming to get them is a little different than saying before trying to tell the US how it is to be run to go back to your place of origin an fix things, and then come and show us how it is done. The DoJ isn't treating either of them as criminal. I suppose you could get yourself on a plane and come over hear and try to do something yourself. I wouldn't get your hopes up though.

noemon wrote:a) I read the article you provided and did not read Omar's comments doing what you accuse her of doing. Rahm Emmanuel(not Ilhan Omar) writes: questioning the “allegiance” of supporters of Israel. The first observation here is where did she question that allegiance? He does not say. Second, "supporters of Israel" may or not be Jews and if US politicians have placed Israeli interests above US interests then certainly American politicians should be able to say that without fear or prejudice.

Right. American politicians are free to criticize anything they like, and to be criticized by others for doing it as well.

noemon wrote:Are you arguing that if American politicians say that someone(in the US) is putting Islam(.ie Saudi) above the US, then that someone is being racist?

I don't understand the question. Islam is not a race.

noemon wrote:b) The issue here is that you are arguing/propagating that she is being racist for far less than what Trump said while at the same time arguing that what Trump said is not racist at all.

I'm pointing out that many condemned her for her statements, and Trump was just bringing that to light.

noemon wrote:To make matters worse you have made far worse statements about Jews.

I've routinely criticized left-of-center Jews in American politics. I would happily say the same again, for example, with respect to the attack on Brett Kavanaugh. I would not, however, say that this is behavior emblematic of all American Jews, all Jews, etc. because it is not. Scenarios like the Kavanaugh situation does involve a noticeable number of left-of-center Jewish-American politicos, however. I have also noted before that it not exclusively left-of-center Jews, but rather that it does appear to be significant. For example, the attack on Brett Kavanaugh involved people like Dianne Feinstein, Paige Herwig (who was also involved in the talking points in the tarmac meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch days before Comey in an [u]ultra vires[/i] act effectively exonerated Hillary Clinton), Michael Bromwich, Debra Katz, Richard Blumenthal, Julie Swetnick, etc. That is just an observation. I also find it interesting that you are digging up my posts from 4 years ago.

noemon wrote:c) You are talking to me as if it matters to me whether that guy served under Obama. You should know already that I do not care at all about Democrats and Republicans.

You do seem to cue in on the background of who is making a statement.

noemon wrote:One does not need to attack all Black people to be a racist, attacking a few of them on the basis of race, descent, ethnic origin still makes that person racist.

Perhaps. However, Trump was commenting on their critique of the United States, not on the color of their skin.

noemon wrote:He attacked those that disagree with him and he did on the basis of their ethnic-origins, that makes his attack racist.

He didn't say that their views were of no value, because they came from somewhere else.

noemon wrote:And when people do outlandish things, intelligent people are supposed to rein on them.

Why is that? What does intelligence have to do with it? Intelligent people do outlandish things too.

noemon wrote:You and yours seem particularly vocal when some liberals or sjw says something outlandish but at the same time very fragile and defensive if some republican says something racist.

I don't think Trump's comment was racist. In view of what the "squad" has been saying about people, I think it was pretty tame. My interpretation of it was it was intended to trigger people like you, and Trump met his mark. I also think both the "squad" and Trump should be able to say what they want, and the rest of us should be able to offer our own critiques of what they said and why we think they said it. I don't think we all have to agree. That's the whole point of debate.
  • 1
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 25

Yea, that makes sense. Where I grew up in Miami […]

I see a lot of things as a game, esp. this. Yo[…]

along with disincentive to invest, incentive to d[…]

"If I had a dollar for every woman that ha[…]