CNN Waives Marc Lamont Hill

[DMC]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/29/media/marc-lamont-hill-cnn/index.html

He should have followed Lemon's lead and stick to slamming white people, leave the Jews alone.

[Pavlov]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/29/media/marc-lamont-hill-cnn/index.html

He should have followed Lemon's lead and stick to slamming white people, leave the Jews alone.DMC cares about this for some reason.

[Spurtacular]

DMC cares about this for some reason.

Thanks, Sherlock.

[Pavlov]

Thanks, Sherlock.Derp cares about me, for reasons everyone knows.

[Spurtacular]

Derp cares about me, for reasons everyone knows.

Admit post #2 was totally needless, or tell us why it's necessary.

[Pavlov]

Admit post #2 was totally needless.Posts #1-5 were totally needless.

[Spurtacular]

Posts #1-5 were totally needless.

Admit post #2 was needless within the context of this thread, or tell us why it was necessary.

[Pavlov]

Admit post #2 was needless within the context of this thread, or tell us why it was necessary.I just said every post was needless, derp.

[Spurtacular]

I just said every post was needless, derp.

You could say that about every thread on this board.

:lmao Sociopath thinks he's being slick again.

[Pavlov]

You could say that about every thread on this board.

:lmao Sociopath thinks he's being slick again.You just agreed with me.

:lmao derp being derp again.

[Spurtacular]

You just agreed with me.

:lmao derp being derp again.

I was noting that you were being intentionally thick. Par.

Well, you admitted your post was needless in any event.

[Pavlov]

I was noting that you were being intentionally thick. Par.

Well, you admitted your post was needless in any event.And were yours needed, derp?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

And were yours needed, derp?

Yes or no.

Mine were not intentionally thick. Way to ask whatever is in front of your face, compulsive sociopath. Par.

[Pavlov]

Mine were not intentionally thick. Way to ask whatever is in front of your face, compulsive sociopath. Par.Were yours needed, derp?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Were yours needed, derp?

Yes or no.

As a matter of opinion, yes. I think there's a value in shaming you as a twerp.

[Pavlov]

As a matter of opinion, yes. I think there's a value in shaming you as a twerp.:lmao derp value posts

[Spurtacular]

:cry I admitted my post was needless :cry

[Pavlov]

:lol fake quote white value flag

[DMC]

Posts #1-5 were totally needless.


I just said every post was needless, derp.


You just agreed with me.

:lmao derp being derp again.


And were yours needed, derp?

Yes or no.


Were yours needed, derp?

Yes or no.


:lmao derp value posts

Look at all the care

:lol

[Spurtacular]

Tap out.

[Winehole23]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/29/media/marc-lamont-hill-cnn/index.html

He should have followed Lemon's lead and stick to slamming white people, leave the Jews alone.Criticizing Israel (qua political state) =/= bashing Jews (qua Jews), but in US political culture it is.

[DMC]

Criticizing Israel (qua political state) =/= bashing Jews (qua Jews), but in US political culture it is.

Yet banning flights from certain countries somehow equates to banning Muslims.

[koriwhat]

Yet banning flights from certain countries somehow equates to banning Muslims.

bam! lmao good one buddy. btw, fuck the muslims!

[Winehole23]

Yet banning flights from certain countries somehow equates to banning Muslims.Perhaps because Trump characterized it that way a dozen times on the campaign trail and shortly after his win.

https://www.cato.org/blog/dozen-times-trump-equated-travel-ban-muslim-ban

[Winehole23]

*crickets* from the usual critics of PC.

I guess it's not political correctness when it happens to someone you don't like.

[DMC]

Perhaps because Trump characterized it that way a dozen times on the campaign trail and shortly after his win.

https://www.cato.org/blog/dozen-times-trump-equated-travel-ban-muslim-ban

Was there ever a Muslim ban? Yes or no

[Winehole23]

There was a travel ban from seven Muslim majority countries that more than one court found was discriminatory in intent.

Was it a broad spectrum ban of Muslims per se?

No.

[Winehole23]

Another weak analogy, tbh.

You've been on a roll lately.

[Winehole23]

Seriously, DMC, do you find the NATSEC rationale compelling?

[Winehole23]

Trump described it as a Muslim ban during the campaign, asked his lawyers to tailor a policy that would pass constitutional muster, and it took them two tries.

[DMC]

There was a travel ban from seven Muslim majority countries that more than one court found was discriminatory in intent.

Was it a broad spectrum ban of Muslims per se?

No.
Israel is a Jewish majority country


You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

[Winehole23]

Weak, the thread isn't about me, ir's about Marc Lamont Hill and the so-called Muslim ban isn't pertinent

[Spurminator]

Come on, winehole, a journalist commenting about the policies of a foreign country is exactly the same as banning the travelers from a foreign country. Words are legislation. Government is citizens.

[Pavlov]

Looks like Hill really should have explained his remarks better about a Palestinian state IMO. His reaction to requests was too derpish to keep him on. What pundit refuses to talk about his views?

[Slob]

Looks like Hill really should have explained his remarks better about a Palestinian state IMO. His reaction to requests were too derpish to keep him on. What pundit refuses to talk about his views?

Agreed. Low-quality sycophant. He needed to go.

[Pavlov]

Agreed. Low-quality sycophant. He needed to go.What's your definition of sycophant?

[Spurtacular]

What's your definition of sycophant?

:lol Standard check for understanding play.
:lol Weeds

[Pavlov]

:lol Standard check for understanding play.Yes, because it appears you have no idea what it means.

[Spurtacular]

Yes, because it appears you have no idea what it means.

:lmao No

[Pavlov]

:lmao NoSo what's your definition of sycophant?

[DMC]

Come on, winehole, a journalist commenting about the policies of a foreign country is exactly the same as banning the travelers from a foreign country. Words are legislation. Government is citizens.

Strawman per the usual

A policy aimed at a region isn't aimed at the predominant religion per se, even if the predominant religion is the catalyst for the policy in the first place. Same with Israel. How can you go river to sea without going through Israel? Either Hill was being coy (thus the applause from the pro-Palestinian contingent) or he's fucking stupid. Either way he lost his job with CNN.

"Palestine – from the River to the Sea, from its north to its south – is our land, our right, and our homeland. There will be no relinquishing or forsaking even an inch or small part of it,"[10] and that "we shall not relinquish the Islamic waqf on the land of Palestine, and Jerusalem shall not be divided into Western and Eastern Jerusalem. Jerusalem is a single united [city], and Palestine stretches from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, and from Naqoura [Rosh Ha-Niqra] to Umm Al-Rashrash [Eilat] in the south." - Hamas

Shocking that a liberal professor sympathizes with terrorists.

[Spurtacular]

So what's your definition of sycophant?

Begging.

[Spurtacular]

Strawman per the usual

A policy aimed at a region isn't aimed at the predominant religion per se, even if the predominant religion is the catalyst for the policy in the first place. Same with Israel. How can you go river to sea without going through Israel? Either Hill was being coy (thus the applause from the pro-Palestinian contingent) or he's fucking stupid. Either way he lost his job with CNN.

"Palestine – from the River to the Sea, from its north to its south – is our land, our right, and our homeland. There will be no relinquishing or forsaking even an inch or small part of it,"[10] and that "we shall not relinquish the Islamic waqf on the land of Palestine, and Jerusalem shall not be divided into Western and Eastern Jerusalem. Jerusalem is a single united [city], and Palestine stretches from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, and from Naqoura [Rosh Ha-Niqra] to Umm Al-Rashrash [Eilat] in the south." - Hamas

Shocking that a liberal professor sympathizes with terrorists.

Run-of-the-mill leftists don't subscribe to or even understand such nuance.

[Pavlov]

Begging.lol shitting your pants again

[DMC]

Run-of-the-mill leftists don't subscribe to or even understand such nuance.

They understand it for Christianity only. All other religions are acceptable and they'll fight for those. They'll shit a bean if an American Christian does anything close to the "separation of church and state" violations predominately Muslim countries commit on a regular basis. Same is true for civil rights. Somehow being Muslim equates to a free pass on human rights and separation of church and state.

[Spurtacular]

They understand it for Christianity only. All other religions are acceptable and they'll fight for those. They'll shit a bean if an American Christian does anything close to the "separation of church and state" violations predominately Muslim countries commit on a regular basis. Same is true for civil rights. Somehow being Muslim equates to a free pass on human rights and separation of church and state.

Sure. There's no double standard too much for leftists.

[Spurtacular]

lol shitting your pants again

You do realize there will come a day that I may be to bored with this to even indulge your triteness whatsoever, right? (Pretty much the reason everyone stops talking to you, eventually) Sociopath or not, you need to start making your questions and points at least try to count for something.

[Pavlov]

You do realize there will come a day that I may be to bored with this to even indulge your triteness whatsoever, right?lol you'll never stop shitting your pants
Someone's always going to call you out.

[DMC]

There's always Fox News.

[Spurtacular]

lol you'll never stop shitting your pants
Someone's always going to call you out.

:lol That "someone" will certainly be you focusing on piddly or false stuff...

You'll spend hours on a nothing sandwich, which is why everyone who has ever been your 'nemesis' has eventually walked away. The history doesn't lie.

[Pavlov]

:lol That "someone" will certainly be you focusing on piddly or false stuff...

You'll spend hours on a nothing sandwich, which is why everyone who has ever been your 'nemesis' has eventually walked away. The history doesn't lie.Then all that's left for you is to walk away to fulfill your narrative.

That'll show me.

[Spurtacular]

Then all that's left for you is to walk away to fulfill your narrative.

That'll show me.

:lol You have to make up narratives.
:lol You can't help yourself.

[Pavlov]

:lol You have to make up narratives.
:lol You can't help yourself.:lol denying your own narrative.

Just walk away, derp. Isn't that what you're saying you're going to do?

[Spurtacular]

:lol denying your own narrative.

Just walk away, derp. Isn't that what you're saying you're going to do?

I'm not saying I am or not. I'm figure that's perhaps got to be the likely thing at some point given the history.

Why do you think everyone walks away from you?

[Pavlov]

I'm not saying I am or not. I'm figure that's perhaps got to be the likely thing at some point given the history.Then get on with it.

Or stay and ruin your own narrative.

lol

[Spurtacular]

Then get on with it.

Or stay and ruin your own narrative.

lol

Why do you think everyone walks away from you?

[Pavlov]

Why do you think everyone walks away from you?Define walk away and give examples.

Stick around and discuss me some more.

[ElNono]

That name sounds like somebody Dwight Howard would be dating, tbh...

[Spurtacular]

Define walk away and give examples.

Stick around and discuss me some more.

There are no examples of anyone that stuck around. Stop stalling and tell me why you think everyone walks away from you.

[Pavlov]

There are no examples of anyone that stuck around. Stop stalling and tell me why you think everyone walks away from you.I asked you for examples of those who walked away derp.

Who walked away?

[Spurtacular]

I asked you for examples of those who walked away derp.

Who walked away?

And I called out your stalling technique proper. Are you trying to argue that nobody has walked away from you?

[DMC]

That name sounds like somebody Dwight Howard would be dating, tbh...

Howard split him from river to sea.

[Pavlov]

And I called out your stalling technique proper. Are you trying to argue that nobody has walked away from you?If you can't name any examples, yes -- I am arguing that.

[Spurtacular]

If you can't name any examples, yes -- I am arguing that.

So, you're claiming that nobody has ever walked away from you? Or are you putting these :lol conditions on it.

[Pavlov]

So, you're claiming that nobody has ever walked away from you?Yes.

Give some examples.

[Spurtacular]

Yes.

Give some examples.

I think you may be looking to quibble over the term "walk away". The reality is you've had 'rivals' over the years that have come and gone; and yet, you're still here. Why do you think that is?

[Pavlov]

I think you may be looking to quibble over the term "walk away". The reality is you've had 'rivals' over the years that have come and gone; and yet, you're still here. Why do you think that is?Examples?

[Spurtacular]

Examples?

Are you arguing that these 'rivals' haven't existed? Why would I need to go digging for you?

:lol At how much you're willing to evade such simple questions.

[Pavlov]

Are you arguing that these 'rivals' haven't existed?Yes. Prove me wrong.


Why would I need to go digging for you?
It's your claim. Back it up.


:lol At how much you're willing to evade such simple questions.You're the one who says these "rivals" exist.

Give examples or shit yourself again.

[Spurtacular]

Yes. Prove me wrong.


It's your claim. Back it up.

You're the one who says these "rivals" exist.

Give examples or shit yourself again.

No surprises that you're quibbling over terms. There have many in your deep past who you consistently engaged in your back and forth exchanges. They pretty much all left you eventually. That is the standard outcome. Why do you think that is?

[Pavlov]

No surprises that you're quibbling over terms. There have many in your deep past who you consistently engaged in your back and forth exchanges.Who?

Who isn't a term.

[Spurtacular]

Who?

Who isn't a term.

I never said 'who' was a term you're quibbling over. Anyways, you're demonstrating part of my original point; that you're (extremely) trite.

[Pavlov]

I never said 'who' was a term you're quibbling over. Anyways, you're demonstrating part of my original point; that you're (extremely) trite.And you're demonstrating my point that you shit yourself whenever I ask you to explain yourself.

Just one name, derp.

[Spurtacular]

And you're demonstrating my point that you shit yourself whenever I ask you to explain yourself.

Just one name, derp.

What needs to explained? Your current truth is that there was nobody you consistently had long exchanges with before me. That's obviously false; the whole board knows it. You can't acknowledge simple realities; that's a character flaw even for a sociopath, tbh.

[Pavlov]

What needs to explained? Your current truth is that there was nobody you consistently had long exchanges with before me. That's obviously false; the whole board knows it. You can't acknowledge simple realities; that's a character flaw even for a sociopath, tbh.You can't name even one.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

You can't name even one.

lol derp

:lol No denial regarding the consistent long exchanges; just standard runaround.

[Pavlov]

:lol No denial regarding the consistent long exchanges; just standard runaround.I've had exchanges with lost of people.

Whom are you talking about specifically, derp?

Step up or shit yourself again.

[Spurtacular]

I've had exchanges with lost of people.

Whom are you talking about specifically, derp?

Step up or shit yourself again.

Why would I need to name them given that you surely know who they are? This is the triteness, bruh.

[Pavlov]

Why would I need to name them given that you surely know who they are? It's your claim.

This is you shitting yourself.

Just one name, derp.

[Spurtacular]

It's your claim.

This is you shitting yourself.

Just one name, derp.

It's your fucking life, dick hole.

[Pavlov]

It's your fucking life, dick hole.lol meltdown

[Spurtacular]

lol meltdown

It's your life; so, unless you're denying that there have not been people for whom you've had consistently had back-and-forths with in your past, then there's no need to prove the "claim." That would be trite.

[Pavlov]

It's your life; so, unless you're denying that there have not been people for whom you've had consistently had back-and-forths with in your past, then there's no need to prove the "claim." That would be trite.I already said I have had back and forths with many people.

So many you'll have to be more specific.

Now what?

[Spurtacular]

I already said I have had back and forths with many people.

So many you'll have to be more specific.

Now what?

You conveniently dropped the word consistently, sociopath. Who from your past that you had consistent (adversarial) back-and-forths with are you still having such exchanges with them? The answer is zero. Why did they all go?

[Pavlov]

You conveniently dropped the word consistently, sociopath. Who from your past that you had consistent (adversarial) back-and-forths with are you still having such exchanges with them? The answer is zero. Why did they all go?Name some of them. Perhaps I can help you solve this burning question you are caring so hard about.

[Spurtacular]

Name some of them. Perhaps I can help you solve this burning question you are caring so hard about.

BTW, the triteness does include (needlessly) steering arguments (away) only on your terms. Where did all the people I just spoke of go? Why did they all decide to no longer engage you?

[Pavlov]

BTW, the triteness does include (needlessly) steering arguments (away) only on your terms. Where did all the people I just spoke of go? Why did they all decide to no longer engage you?I know what happened to some posters, so name some and I might be able to help you.

[Spurtacular]

I know what happened to some posters, so name some and I might be able to help you.

How many of them stopped engaging you at least in part because you're trite?

[Pavlov]

How many of them stopped engaging you at least in part because you're trite?None that I can think of tbh.

If you have examples of one of them doing so for that reason, go ahead and post it.

It's your claim.

Step up.

[Spurtacular]

None that I can think of tbh.

If you have examples of one of them doing so for that reason, go ahead and post it.

It's your claim.

Step up.

Well, I would argue that eventually everyone who is looking to do something better with their time and/or just ready to move on will eventually walk away from the triteness. As for names, I just know that I've come across them while viewing older posts; I don't memorize the names. Though, I know that DMC is one who engages you on occasions but otherwise tempered his dealings with you because he realizes that you are compulsive and trite. He's the closest thing to someone who didn't walk away.

[Pavlov]

Well, I would argue that eventually everyone who is looking to do something better with their time and/or just ready to move on will eventually walk away from the triteness. As for names, I just know that I've come across them while viewing older posts; I don't memorize the names. Though, I know that DMC is one who engages you on occasions but otherwise tampered his dealings with you because he realizes that you are compulsive and trite. He's the closest thing to someone who didn't walk away.So, no names at all.

Good talk.

[Spurtacular]

So, no names at all.

Good talk.

:lmao Looking for an easy out.

It's okay, you demonstrated the triteness that people walked away. Absolutely no real introspection. And I did give you a name, btw; but back to that easy out thing n' all.

[Pavlov]

:lmao Looking for an easy out.

It's okay, you demonstrated the triteness that people walked away. Absolutely no real introspection. And I did give you a name, btw; but back to that easy out thing n' all.DMC didn't walk away.

You made the claim and shit yourself multiple times when called out.

Sorry. Apparently you'll walk away so don't get all worked up about it.

[Spurtacular]

DMC didn't walk away.

You made the claim and shit yourself multiple times when called out.

Sorry. Apparently you'll walk away so don't get all worked up about it.

I noted that it was a semi walk away.

Sociopath pretending to not get nuance again. :lmao

[Pavlov]

I noted that it was a semi walk away.

Sociopath pretending to not get nuance again. :lmaoI can't think of anyone who waled away for triteness.

Sorry.

I know you really, really have to be right about everything -- but you're not.

Like, a lot.

Again, sorry.

You should really be used to it by now.

lol "semi-nuance"

[Spurtacular]

I can't think of anyone who waled away for triteness.

Sorry.

I know you really, really have to be right about everything -- but you're not.

Like, a lot.

Again, sorry.

You should really be used to it by now.

lol "semi-nuance"

I never said semi-nuance. You don't even know the truth of what happens 30 seconds ago let alone years ago. I would say that people walk away from you because of your dishonesty and triteness; absolutely. I figured I'd tell you in case you thought a change might help; but I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you value compulsion and triteness above personal improvement.

[Pavlov]

I never said semi-nuance. You don't even know the truth of what happens 30 seconds ago let alone years ago. I would say that people walk away from you because of your dishonesty and triteness; absolutely. I figured I'd tell you in case you thought a change might help; but I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you value compulsion and triteness above personal improvement.So, you're walking away?

lol semi-nuanced message board improvement

[Spurtacular]

So, you're walking away?

This is about the fourth or fifth time you've suggested that I do. If I trigger you that badly, you could put me on ignore.

[Pavlov]

This is about the fourth or fifth time you've suggested that I do. If I trigger you that badly, you could put me on ignore.
I'm asking you.

Are you walking away?

Yes or no.

Answer or shit yourself again.

[Spurtacular]

I'm asking you.

Are you walking away?

Yes or no.

Answer or shit yourself again.

No.

[Pavlov]

No.So what's your point?

You claim people walk away but you can't quit me.

lol

[Spurtacular]

So what's your point?

You claim people walk away but you can't quit me.

lol

People have walked away. That point does not hinge on my decision. You verily suck at argumentation. Par.

[Pavlov]

People have walked away. That point does not hinge on my decision. You verily suck at argumentation. Par.And yet, you don't walk away.

Why not?

lol par semi-nuance

[Spurtacular]

And yet, you don't walk away.

Why not?

lol par semi-nuance

You really don't know why? I'm pretty sure I pretty much answered this just yesterday or the day before, too.

[Pavlov]

You really don't know why? I'm pretty sure I pretty much answered this just yesterday or the day before, too.
Nope.

You didn't.

You shit yourself.

[Spurtacular]

Nope.

You didn't.

You shit yourself.

To recap, it's fun enough bitch slapping you for now.

[Pavlov]

To recap, it's fun enough bitch slapping you for now.:lol imaginary Ws to mark on your wall

[Spurtacular]

:lol imaginary Ws to mark on your wall

How would you know? You don't keep score.

[Pavlov]

How would you know? You don't keep score.I know you do, derp.

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

I know you do, derp.

:lmao

A lot to a little; don't know why that's funny; I've said that many of times now. :lmao