You're viewing part of a thread.
Right, well, you saying people who advocate for treating children's heart defects and cancer is "bootlicking" has as much meaning as me calling you a nazi scumsucker. We've long since devolved into nonsense insults, bootlicker.
Bla bla childish strawman bla bla
You couldn't reason your "nazi scumsucker" if you tried.
That's the difference between us. My insults have a reason. Yours are arbitrary. You don't seem to possess the capacity to reason or to recognize you're fallible.
That's why you're trying to avoid answering my question so desperately. Because it proves your "point" just... so wrong.
What is this "reason" we speak of?
I genuinely pity people like you. Can't stand behind your own words but still egoistic enough to feel an obsession to make statements like:
And whether you support him or not makes no difference. He isn’t a senator or a city mayor.
Clearly that's utterly wrong. But like I said, you're incapable of reasoning anything, clearly, so I'm just gonna keep repeating it until you actually answer it or fuck off.
So I'm a boot licker for refusing to lick the boots of your icon...?
Who's asking you to agree with Rosa Parks? If you're for segregation, I can't help it. You seem like the type though, low intelligence, no courage, can't stand behind his own words.
You can't answer my question because Rosa Parks was neither a senator or a city mayor and still made a massive difference, because your implication was "if they're not this arbitrary title I wrote down they can never matter at all", like the dipshit you are.
Right right, Rosa Parks, the guy who you think shot Brian Thompson. OK.
More pathetic avoidance?
Wow, colour me shocked. Almost as if a person of low intelligence, no courage and an inability to stand behind his own rhetoric would like to not answer a question which proves what a dipshit he is.
Let's see how many times you come back to reply without answering, shall we?