His point was that oppression didn't end with slavery several hundred years ago. It only formally left the books fifty odd years ago. Less than a lifetime. Your nitpick about 200 vs 300 is totally irrelevant to the content of the post.


Also, we've been over this before with about a dozen users on my side, what you call nipping everybody else calls you getting your ass spanked.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 2 2018 01:51pm

His criticism of me saying 300 years ago (and applying to slavery not to the conflict with the natives who i actually meant the 300 for) was referring to, that often times some conservatives minimize the impact/lingering effect of slavery by saying it happened much longer ago in history than it really did. Hence Skinned crying "revisionism"

That was his point you, but you're so ignorant, and so cocky in your ignorance, it's laughable.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Jun 2 2018 01:55pm

Nah, it's pretty clear that his point was oppression didn't end at slavery.

You're really bad at reading other peoples posts though. I understand though, English is your second language, and English is a bitch.

Okay little guy whatever you say. Interactions with you are truly a bore, maybe one day you can formulate well thought out arguments instead of coming in with one sentence platitudes arguing semantics, criticizing spelling or calling people stupid.

It's really not semantics. You fundamentally misunderstood the point of his post.

Semantics bruh. Words are just things dude. You don't need things when you have reached intellectual nirvana!

fake news NYT/WaPo

And Here's Why Obama Should Actually Get The Credit

The numbers are phony anyway.

Source: Donald Trump

This is correct, in case anyone was wondering..
I mean its not exactly called the civil rights act 1964 because it happened in 1818..

This post was edited by Plaguefear on Jun 2 2018 03:37pm