you are doing it again. astute readers might note i was describing your rhetorical strategy. nothing to do with your emotions. please pay attention. its rude to speak for the emotions of others. you want to make people defensive by denying they are triggered. its a silly way to argue. you do it constantly.
I haven't quoted any of those sources. No, you look like an ass because you cant recognize your own liberal bias yet say everyone else is alt-right and because you belittle people with whom you disagree. Oh and I am a sista, not a brother.
upsetting you again? because that is about all you've talked about for the past 3-4 pages...how upset my debate style has made you. It's ridiculous because you employed the same exact debate strategy when you joined this thread. I even pointed out that you were being rhetorical. So you can dish it out but you can't take it, huh? That's weak brother. is it? Are you going to cry about it? Because I could care less about your emotions or anyone else's on this board for that matter. If all it takes to get you this triggered is for me to be a bit rhetorical then you need to evaluate your own emotions. do I? You claim to know a lot about me when in fact we don't know one another at all. You have persistently insisted that I debate you by your made up rules but I refuse. By the way, isn't triggered a word that conservatives use for liberals? But now you are defending those who are triggered? Be more clear...
my apologies. I used those specific sources because they are the only three sources that any of you have cited in this thread with the exception of a few. More specifically I was attacking @LSUpride123 who never cites anything but these sources. Madam, I've been called much worse than an ass and it has never bothered me. I belittle opinions that are rooted in conspiracy theory. Speaking of belittling....I get nothing but belittled on this board but do you ever see me crying about it? No. Because I am a big boy and I don't get my feelings hurt by anonymous posters on a message board.
LOL...you started this thread based on an article from Breitbart dude. You cited saracarter on #14 and you cited judicial watch on #'s 132, 133 and 142.
Do you understand that the words you use have actual meaning? "More specifically I was attacking @LSUpride123 who never cites anything but these sources." This statement is false. In this very thread I have quoted: NY POST NY TIMES USA TODAY This does not include the MANY other threads I have used links from your "favorite" sources.... It is not my fault you are wrong.
Further, Sara-carter and judicial watch are not "right wing" nor are they "alt right". Breitbart link provided links and cited their work. Sure, they have a slant, as do they all. Try making a valid counter argument rather than attacking the source. You would benefit from that.
