Columbus statue covered up in LA, Columbus Day removed and replaced by Indiginous Peoples Day

Should Columbus Day be removed and replaced with Indigenous Peoples Day?


  • Total voters
    153
Dude, you're easily the worst liar in these threads. It's pathetic.

Huh?

I conceded that I'm sure we broached this topic before and that I deferred to the knowledge of my friend who is more of an expert on the topic. I said that I however doubt I told you I would go ask him so that I could iron out the internet conversation. Because I would never do that. Because wtf kind of loser would. Furthermore, I conceded that my "rape" remark in this thread was actually attributed to Michel de Cuneo.

Like, I realize that this is a huge deal to you, particularly since this is a topic on which you seem to actually have a bit of knowledge on what you're talking, but get some perspective. Whatever your point is meant to be about Columbus having journals in another language (I literally have no idea about this), consider it made. Now go crack open a Mike's Hard and celebrate your intellectual triumph.
 
Huh?

I conceded that I'm sure we broached this topic before and that I deferred to the knowledge of my friend who is more of an expert on the topic. I said that I however doubt I told you I would go ask him so that I could iron out the internet conversation. Because I would never do that. Because wtf kind of loser would. Furthermore, I conceded that my "rape" remark in this thread was actually attributed to Michel de Cuneo.

Like, I realize that this is a huge deal to you, particularly since this is a topic on which you seem to actually have a bit of knowledge on what you're talking, but get some perspective. Whatever your point is meant to be about Columbus having journals in another language (I literally have no idea about this), consider it made. Now go crack open a Mike's Hard and celebrate your intellectual triumph.

So how would we have talked about your friend before? Or do you just bring that up to try to shut people up whose opinions you don't actually want to hear? I brought up that almost all of Zinn's work had to do with the Journal, yet it's written in two languages that Columbus was incabable of speaking. Stop pretending you don't know what I'm talking about. You're just being dishonest again. Columbus' supposed diary was written in gramatically perfect Greek and Latin. Columbus could barely read and write in Spanish and Italian. And once again, I'm pretty well informed on almost everything. (This is where you run away from our conversation like normal after throwing out your little 3rd grade level insults, then accuse me later of running like you have from the last 3 or 4 conversations we've had).
 
That's the real problem with history, regardless of which side of the isle it comes from. We've lost any ability to look at these people as just that, people. They're people who lived a long time ago who didn't look at the world the way we did and didn't have the same benifit of the knowledge of the world that we have now. Yes, history is filled with barbarism, but that just is what it is in my opinon.

Tell me more about your thoughts on the prophet Muhammad.
 
So how would we have talked about your friend before? Or do you just bring that up to try to shut people up whose opinions you don't actually want to hear? I brought up that almost all of Zinn's work had to do with the Journal, yet it's written in two languages that Columbus was incabable of speaking. Stop pretending you don't know what I'm talking about. You're just being dishonest again. Columbus' supposed diary was written in gramatically perfect Greek and Latin. Columbus could barely read and write in Spanish and Italian. And once again, I'm pretty well informed on almost everything. (This is where you run away from our conversation like normal after throwing out your little 3rd grade level insults, then accuse me later of running like you have from the last 3 or 4 conversations we've had).

What in the hell are you talking about? I ALREADY CONCEDED (do you know what that word means?) that I probably deferred to his judgment, but that I would certainly rather take your word for it than bother someone IRL. This is not an area of my personal expertise, and I have no qualms or issues of pride in conceding a point that I cannot competently engage.

Seriously, I know you don't get many wins here, but I'm giving you one on a silver platter. I have no idea about the language of Columbus' journals, and frankly have no interest in the matter since (as I said twice now) the excerpt I was citing was written by another person.

Learn to take "yes" for an answer.

EDIT: Also, as far as your allusions to our past run-ins, yes, you have dodged being proven patently wrong regarding the economics of the ACA in at least two different threads. In fact, I have no idea why you would even want to bring that up, since it will just end (for a third...fourth time?) with you disappearing looking foolish.
 
What in the hell are you talking about? I ALREADY CONCEDED (do you know what that word means?) that I probably deferred to his judgment, but that I would certainly rather take your word for it than bother someone IRL. This is not an area of my personal expertise, and I have no qualms or issues of pride in conceding a point that I cannot competently engage.

Seriously, I know you don't get many wins here, but I'm giving you one here on a silver platter. I have no idea about the language of Columbus' journals, and frankly have no interest in the matter since (as I said twice now) the excerpt I was citing was written by another person.

Learn to take "yes" for an answer.

EDIT: Also, as far as your allusions to our past run-ins, yes, you have dodged being proven patently wrong regarding the economics of the ACA in at least two different threads. In fact, I have no idea why you would even want to bring that up, since it will just end (for a third...fourth time?) with you disappearing looking foolish.

You conceded, and then said that you didn't, right after that. Secondly, I get tons of wins. For instance, every conversation you run away from. As for your edit, you've AGAIN ran away from my last comments. Nice try though.
 
You conceded, and then said that you didn't, right after that. Secondly, I get tons of wins. For instance, every conversation you run away from. As for your edit, you've AGAIN ran away from my last comments. Nice try though.

What? What comments am I running away from? I have no fucking clue about the language of the journals. You're probably right. Since they have nothing to do with what I said, which was a mis-attribution of a quote by another Spanish explorer, I have literally no reason or desire to dispute what you are saying.

Either you have me confused with someone else, or you're just being weird and combative because you want someone to engage you on a topic you know about. But stroking your ego isn't my game and the historicity of accounts of Columbus is not something I know, or particularly care to learn, about.
 
Without Colombus, the United States would have never been discovered and no one would have ever given the natives blankets. They would have died from the cold. Celebrate him, damnt!
 
Tell me more about your thoughts on the prophet Muhammad.
X0UnxwW.gif
 
What? What comments am I running away from? I have no fucking clue about the language of the journals. You're probably right. Since they have nothing to do with what I said, which was a mis-attribution of a quote by another Spanish explorer, I have literally no reason or desire to dispute what you are saying.

Either you have me confused with someone else, or you're just being weird and combative because you want someone to engage you on a topic you know about. But stroking your ego isn't my game and the historicity of accounts of Columbus is not something I know, or particularly care to learn, about.

I was talking about your comments about your friend. First you said you would have no reason to speak to him about this topic, then claimed that you're conceding that our conversation happened. So which one is it?

Obviously I'm just a wierdo and you can't keep your own arguments straight or remember what you just said. And of course you don't want to actually learn anything. You'd just like to continue on repeating incorrect information. And no, I'm not disputing that journal entry.
 
I was talking about your comments about your friend. First you said you would have no reason to speak to him about this topic, then claimed that you're conceding that our conversation happened. So which one is it?

Jesus, you are dense.

I concede that I probably cited to his knowledge (like I did in this fucking thread) because I'm not versed on this topic, and he is.

I did not ask him about it, nor would I promise to, because I don't care enough about your internet argument (about an exceptionally unimportant and non-pressing historical topic) to call up a busy adult. Because I'm not a loser like you.

Obviously I'm just a wierdo and you can't keep your own arguments straight or remember what you just said. And of course you don't want to actually learn anything. You'd just like to continue on repeating incorrect information. And no, I'm not disputing that journal entry.

Cool, you're super smart. Stop whining and bickering at me like an annoying little bitch. I already let you blow your load about being qualified to argue at the adult table on a topic.

Actually, I take back exasperatedly conceding that you're probably right with whatever you were saying, that I wasn't arguing and don't care about. There is no way I can seriously trust someone as cringingly immature as you to represent to me believable info. So I will go back to being agnostic on this topic.
 
Jesus, you are dense.

I concede that I probably cited to his knowledge (like I did in this fucking thread) because I'm not versed on this topic, and he is.

I did not ask him about it, nor would I promise to, because I don't care enough about your internet argument (about an exceptionally unimportant and non-pressing historical topic) to call up a busy adult. Because I'm not a loser like you.

For someone who doesn't care, you're still going on and on and on about it. That seems a bit odd.



Cool, you're super smart. Stop whining and bickering at me like an annoying little bitch. I already let you blow your load about being qualified to argue at the adult table on a topic.

Actually, I take back exasperatedly conceding that you're probably right with whatever you were saying, that I wasn't arguing and don't care about. There is no way I can seriously trust someone as cringingly immature as you to represent to me believable info. So I will go back to being agnostic on this topic.

Translation: I'm consistently getting owned, as usual, and instead of coming back with any sort of coherent or even relevant arguments I am instead choosing to sling 3rd grade level insults and go to my base position of "nuh uh" when hit with actual facts that I don't like, all while somehow managing in my own mind to still maintain some percieved moral and intellectual high ground.

Did I get all that right?
 
For someone who doesn't care, you're still going on and on and on about it. That seems a bit odd.





Translation: I'm consistently getting owned, as usual, and instead of coming back with any sort of coherent or even relevant arguments I am instead choosing to sling 3rd grade level insults and go to my base position of "nuh uh" when hit with actual facts that I don't like, all while somehow managing in my own mind to still maintain some percieved moral and intellectual high ground.

Did I get all that right?

Hahahahaha, you are literally so used to being embarrassed in arguments that you actually argue your way out of someone telling you that you're right because you're that petty and defeatist. You still have not articulated, through his whole weird PMS-fest, what your argument is, and what purported argument I should be defending.

Your loser complex is pathological. You may be the only poster here whose overall knowledge is so much less than the sum of its individual parts.

Thanks for brightening my day with your "owning." You are definitively the most pathetic person I have met on here.
 
Last edited:
Hahahahaha, you are literally so used to being embarrassed in arguments that you actually argue your way out of someone telling you that you're right because you're that petty and defeatist. You still have not articulated, through his whole weird PMS-fest, what your argument is, and what purported argument I should be defending.

Your loser complex is pathological. You may be the only poster here whose overall knowledge is so much less than the sum of its individual parts.

Thanks for brightening my day with your "owning." You are definitively the most pathetic person I have met on here.

Bro. I don't need you to tell me I'm right. I knew I was right when I made the argument, that's sort of why I made it in the first place.

Your loser complex is pathological. You may be the only poster here whose overall knowledge is so much less than the sum of its individual parts.

Then why do I so easily trash you so consistently?
 
Then why do I so easily trash you so consistently?

Well, you don't. As we've discussed, the only interactions I can recall ever having with you are those concerning the economics of the ACA, in which you consistently bring up the same silly non-facts (durr hurr, it favored the rich and was paid for by the middle class!) and then disappear when obvious evidence to the contrary is shown, instead of owning your stupidity like a man. I think I may have hurt your feelings once when you were bitching about how you and your trailer trash wife can't afford healthcare like productive citizens, but other than that, idk.

As far as you "trashing" me in this thread, you've been fighting yourself. I told you that I was citing to a Michel de Cuneo quote, that I don't know anything about Columbus journals, and that I accordingly had no desire or ability to dispute your comments on them. Then you kept quoting me, calling me names, for reasons that are still unbeknownst to me. And I have kept engaging just because you're insanely annoying and allowing you to punctuate our exchange with comments about your own delusions of grandeur would frankly be irresponsible to you on a civic level.

But, to answer your question: Dunning-Kruger. You think that you swing a big dick around here because you're too unintelligent, and probably have too fragile an ego, to know differently. And I think you know this, and that is why you have for some reason tried to elongate this exchange, when I deferred to your judgment pages ago. You're at your senior prom, trying to stop to music from shutting off.
 
As someone with Native heritage (Pueblo and Cheyenne), I voted no.

History should not be scrubbed to ease the anxieties of those determined to be offended.

I would have no problem with indigenous day having its own day. I would celebrate it by grilling up some venison and baking some corn bread.

It's not really scrubbing history. In fact, isn't celebrating Christopher Columbus scrubbing real history? He didn't discover America. So if he didn't accomplish anything amazing for the United States and he was a pretty shitty human on top of that, what good are we serving our youth and nation as a whole that scrubbed history? Why does some stupid little statue make something have to be the official story despite actual facts and history? Isn't it more propaganda than history? You want that why?
 
Its all about revisionism and white-washing history.

Cristoforo Colombo, who if alive today would be a member of ISIS, based on his actions, was really a hero, because he re-discovered Murka for Europeans(after it was discovered by Vikings but we like his discovery better because instead of leaving he stayed and set up a mini-dictatoship where kicked the Natives and Spanish colonists arse!!) and kicked off an age of exploration and exploitation which led to Murka being a country.

Oh and those black people we brought over form Africa to rub our feet were workers not slaves too.
 
The whole story of Columbus was a hoax hero for Italian Americans so ya who cares if we get rid of it. He was a Moran who as so bad at math that looking for India he stumbled into some islands that were close to but not on American soil. And then he murdered lots of natives looking for gold that was not there.
 
He was a Moran who as so bad at math that looking for India he stumbled into some islands that were close to but not on American soil.

Based on that sentence, maybe you're the "Moran".
 
Well, you don't.

Other than constantly. At least you haven't run from this one yet.

As we've discussed, the only interactions I can recall ever having with you are those concerning the economics of the ACA, in which you consistently bring up the same silly non-facts (durr hurr, it favored the rich and was paid for by the middle class!) and then disappear when obvious evidence to the contrary is shown, instead of owning your stupidity like a man.

1.) That's because it does affect the Middle Class far more than anyone.

2.) I said it massively benefits corporations. I didn't say it benefits the Rich. Maybe your inability to even understand what I said is the reason you keep losing that argument.

3.) Every single time we've had this discussion you've accused me of "running" after being once again presented with an argument that you can't refute, then disappear from the thread all together. I get that's it's your schtick, but at least be honest.

4.) As for "silly non-facts" that are actual facts that you can't refute, the only real position in regards to the ACA that I've seen you take is that it raised taxes on the rich.

I think I may have hurt your feelings once when you were bitching about how you and your trailer trash wife can't afford healthcare like productive citizens, but other than that, idk.

1.) By reading through this conversation and everyone we've ever had, who looks like thier feelings are hurt?

2.) Do most Middle Class people live in trailers? All you had to do was tell me that destroying your meaningless, empty attempts at virtue signaling on the internet bothered you so badly. I'd not have so completely destroyed every argument you've ever made.

As far as you "trashing" me in this thread, you've been fighting yourself. I told you that I was citing to a Michel de Cuneo quote, that I don't know anything about Columbus journals, and that I accordingly had no desire or ability to dispute your comments on them.

I'm aware of that. You realize you can be having two different conversations about two different things at the same time, right? Or is your massive intellect not capable of handling all that?

Then you kept quoting me, calling me names, for reasons that are still unbeknownst to me. And I have kept engaging just because you're insanely annoying and allowing you to punctuate our exchange with comments about your own delusions of grandeur would frankly be irresponsible to you on a civic level.

But, to answer your question: Dunning-Kruger. You think that you swing a big dick around here because you're too unintelligent, and probably have too fragile an ego, to know differently. And I think you know this, and that is why you have for some reason tried to elongate this exchange, when I deferred to your judgment pages ago. You're at your senior prom, trying to stop to music from shutting off.

Good to see you projecting again. Fall back on that old assumed intellectual superiority thing you've got going for you.
 
Back
Top