Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, August 09, 2017

A vacation rental service is cracking down on hate-group supporters who are planning to stay in Charlottesville this weekend for the "Unite the Right" rally. Airbnb confirms it is canceling accounts of users affiliated with the rally who booked properties around Charlottesville for large gatherings. A post on a neo-Nazi website claims one group has taken over all of the large Airbnb's. The group says it has booked seven houses for 80 to 90 people from various alt-right groups. ... NBC29 reached out to Jason Kessler, the organizer of the "Unite the Right" rally, but at this point, he didn't have a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

A statement from Airbnb from the Article.

"In 2016 we established the Airbnb Community Commitment reflecting our belief that to make good on our mission of belonging, those who are members of the Airbnb community accept people regardless of their race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or age."

But they will discriminate if they disagree with your politics. Or if you are black. Ironic right.

You cant make this up...

#1 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-09 09:23 PM | Reply

#1

Yes you can. STFU.

#2 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-08-09 09:27 PM | Reply

Are you black Rusty?

Did I hit a nerve?

#3 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-09 09:30 PM | Reply

All the local hotels are in for a fun weekend--lots of Harleys, Stars n' Bars do rags, fat tattooed women urinating in the pools, 5% tips at the restaurant, and Ted Nugent blasting from CD players...

#4 | Posted by catdog at 2017-08-09 09:35 PM | Reply

Black Irish. And yes, you did hit a nerve. That scenario is EASILY imaginable and therefore can be made up without much effort. Not that I subscribe to such a notion as it relates to this thread/topic (i.e., this is fake news), but this was definitely imaginable nonetheless.

#5 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-08-09 09:41 PM | Reply

Good on them!!!
Their business, right free market -------??????
Looks like an alt-right snowflake's feelings are already hurt in this thread.
Poor POSlix!!!!

#6 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2017-08-09 09:53 PM | Reply

But they will discriminate if they disagree with your politics. Or if you are black. Ironic right.

You cant make this up...

#1 | Posted by Prolix247

Why don't you sleep in the back of your truck?

#7 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-08-09 10:00 PM | Reply

You people are funny.

Discriminating is fine with you if you agree with the politics of the situation.

Glad this wasn't as trivial as making a cake.

#8 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-09 10:18 PM | Reply

F**K the hate groups, property owners have the right to refuse their premises to people who are likely violent, loud and hateful. I don't do AirBnB but I've thought about it, this convinces me that I never want to. The scum you might be subject to housing would just be too horrible. Couldn't do it.

#9 | Posted by danni at 2017-08-09 10:30 PM | Reply

"Discriminating is fine with you if you agree with the politics of the situation."

You can welcome the NeoNazi if you want but not in my building. Get a permit for that animal.

#10 | Posted by danni at 2017-08-09 10:31 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Crazy people everywhere,

Aye Danni?

Rights are not selective.

You remember that don't you?

#11 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-09 10:57 PM | Reply

Pro, discrimination is considered immoral/illegal in cases of race, religion, sex, or in some places orientation. Those criteria do not apply here. Case closed.

#12 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 08:28 AM | Reply

Being member of a hate group is not a protected class.

Too bad.

#13 | Posted by 726 at 2017-08-10 08:37 AM | Reply

Reservation for Adolf Hitler? Right this way sir, let me show you to your bedroom.

#14 | Posted by danni at 2017-08-10 09:33 AM | Reply

What's next?

No NRA members?

What are they going to do for the next CPAC convention? Well, Southern Poverty Law Center says CPAC is a 'hate group' so we must refuse service.

Catholic? Go sleep on the curb.

#15 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 09:45 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Well, Jeff, Catholic is a religion, so see above.

#16 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 09:56 AM | Reply

--Southern Poverty Law Center says CPAC is a 'hate group'

They say that about every group to the right of Lenin.

#17 | Posted by nullifidian at 2017-08-10 09:58 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Rev- You can't pick and choose what you consider Discrimination, we all have equal protection under the law. Not just your favored groups.

This group of people were singled out and denied service.

That my friend is discrimination no matter how you feel about the person.

Right Danni?

#18 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 10:33 AM | Reply

"What's next?
No NRA members?"

Are you equating NRA members with Neo-Nazis?

I know plenty of NRA members who I would welcome into my home minus their guns but a New-Nazi, sorry ain't happening. They are hateful scumbags who believe in a death cult that has already demonstrated that they would murder millions if they ever ascend to power again in any nation.

#19 | Posted by danni at 2017-08-10 10:50 AM | Reply

They say that about every group to the right of Lenin.

#17 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

I know. The MSM labels normal conservative groups as hate groups because that's how SPLC labels them.

It's absurd.

#20 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 11:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Discriminating is fine with you if you agree with the politics of the situation.

#8 | Posted by Prolix247

Would you say the same thing if they were cancelling neo-nazi reservations for a big nazi rally?

#21 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-08-10 11:06 AM | Reply

I know. The MSM labels normal conservative groups as hate groups because that's how SPLC labels them.

It's absurd.

#20 | Posted by JeffJ

Pretending white supremacists are just "conservative groups" is pretty absurd too.

#22 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-08-10 11:07 AM | Reply

"It's absurd."

Really? Which groups do you align with, which have been labeled a hate group by the SPLC?

#23 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 11:08 AM | Reply

Pro, I'm not choosing. The law is. Want that changed? Run for office.

#24 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 11:09 AM | Reply

"The MSM labels normal conservative groups as hate groups because that's how SPLC labels them."

Perhaps you should check your facts.

www.splcenter.org

#25 | Posted by danni at 2017-08-10 11:10 AM | Reply

"Perhaps you should check your facts."

Facts to Jeff are whatever he conveniently remembers, whether it's true or not.

#26 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 11:12 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Could they ban Raechel Doziel for choosing to be black?

#27 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2017-08-10 11:20 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Pretty funny. Link to the splc to defend the splc. That's persuasive.

#28 | Posted by nullifidian at 2017-08-10 11:23 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Rev- the 14 amendment says otherwise.

Speak- yes I would. That is how our Constitution works. Equal protection under the law.

Again, it's not situational.

#29 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 11:24 AM | Reply

"Speak- yes I would. That is how our Constitution works. Equal protection under the law."

So when an openly gay married couple shows up at your airbnb home and want to share a bedroom with the same 14th amendment still apply or will you fall back on "religious objections" and claim that their lifestyle deprives you of freedom of religion? As a Christian couldn't I claim that Neo-Nazis represent a true threat to freedom of religion because they support a death cult that murdered millions specifically on religious grounds.

#30 | Posted by danni at 2017-08-10 11:34 AM | Reply

Really? Which groups do you align with, which have been labeled a hate group by the SPLC?

#23 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Well, a maniac tried to shoot up the Family Research Center because they were listed as a hate group on the SPLC website.

I guess opposition to abortion makes one a member of a 'hate group'.

"Perhaps you should check your facts."
Facts to Jeff are whatever he conveniently remembers, whether it's true or not.

#26 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Says the guy who tries to argue that Al Gore has a small personal carbon footprint.

#31 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 11:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You're a member of the Family Research Center??

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 11:42 AM | Reply

No.

Doesn't make it a hate group though.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 11:43 AM | Reply

Pro, the 14th amendment speaks to the idea that the government must treat all people equally. Air BnB is not a government agency.

#34 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 11:44 AM | Reply

"It opposes and lobbies against equal rights for LGBT people."

You belong to that group JeffJ?
If so you are bigoted trash.

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 11:45 AM | Reply

"Well, a maniac tried to shoot up the Family Research Center because they were listed as a hate group on the SPLC website. "

The actions of an anarchist doesn't negate the FRC's hate group status.

"I guess opposition to abortion makes one a member of a 'hate group'."

If you really believe opposition to abortion is the ONLY thing the FRC does, you clearly need to educate yourself.
www.splcenter.org

"Says the guy who tries to argue that Al Gore has a small personal carbon footprint."

No, I pointed out how ludicrous the "34 times the average home" claim was. In the same Daily Caller article making that claim, the author admitted the real usage per sq ft was less than 15% more, NOT 3400% MORE. In addition, knowing a pool and an electric gate are charged to interior sq footage makes the claim all the more dumbass. It's math porn for idiots, and you fell for it.

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 11:45 AM | Reply

Sure it's a hate group.
When you oppose equal rights, you're a hate group.

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 11:46 AM | Reply

JeffJ claims to be a proponent of the First Amendment, yet he identifies with the Family Research Council, who opposes pornography.

Are you just dumb???

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 11:49 AM | Reply

Does JeffJ also believe in abstinence only sex education and intelligent design???

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 11:51 AM | Reply

This group is on the SLPC hate map:

www.freedomfront.org

#40 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 11:52 AM | Reply

You belong to that group JeffJ?

I already answered that I don't. Just because you disagree with their views doesn't mean they should all be executed.

No, I pointed out how ludicrous the "34 times the average home" claim was. In the same Daily Caller article making that claim, the author admitted the real usage per sq ft was less than 15% more, NOT 3400% MORE. In addition, knowing a pool and an electric gate are charged to interior sq footage makes the claim all the more dumbass. It's math porn for idiots, and you fell for it.

#36 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I didn't fall for anything. I didn't make the claim you challenged.

#41 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 11:54 AM | Reply

#30 Danni - nice strawman. If I rented a room to a couple, that is what they get. I dont force my beliefs on anyone, unlike you and the Democrats.

#42 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 11:54 AM | Reply

Rev- the 14th is the base of all anti-discrimination laws.

You know that, why deflect?

Feeling guilty now?

#43 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 11:56 AM | Reply

"Homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed."

That's hate.
It's also what JeffJ agrees with.

#44 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 11:57 AM | Reply

"I didn't make the claim you challenged."

No, you didn't. You challenged the claim I made.

Again, you fell for the partisan --------. Otherwise, why challenge clearly explained math?

#45 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 11:58 AM | Reply

#37- so do you agree Airbnb is a hate group, they also discriminate against blacks?

#46 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 11:59 AM | Reply

--No, I pointed out how ludicrous the "34 times the average home" claim was.

I already refuted that argument. See the other thread for details.

#47 | Posted by nullifidian at 2017-08-10 12:00 PM | Reply

"I dont force my beliefs on anyone, unlike you and the Democrats."

But are you going to pretend that there aren't right wing Christians who would use that argument to deny a room to that gay couple? And that they wouldn't take there case all the way to the SC on freedom of religion arguments just like Hobby Lobby?

#48 | Posted by danni at 2017-08-10 12:01 PM | Reply

"Just because you disagree with their views doesn't mean they should all be executed."

On the other hand, because you disagree with their sexuality, their right to marriage should be denied.

I guess you've conned yourself into believing since you don't advocate muder, you must not have those whose rights you'd like to take away.

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 12:01 PM | Reply

Danni- you mean like a cake?

I don't speak for other people or assume they would behave badly like you and the Democrats. There are millions of good Christians in this country.

#50 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 12:04 PM | Reply

I have been perusing the Family

No, you didn't. You challenged the claim I made.
Again, you fell for the partisan --------. Otherwise, why challenge clearly explained math?

#45 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

You were defending his carbon footprint based upon usage / square footage. Based upon how you were applying the math, if he simply built a massive expansion to his mansion - just a massive room attached to the mansion through a door in one of his garages that didn't have any utilities whatsoever, he'd increase his square-footage without increasing his energy use. According the the premise underlying your math, he could bring his "usage" below average thus making him an energy-consuming piker.

#51 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:05 PM | Reply

"I already refuted that argument."

With math, or your usual nonsense?

Please link to your refutation.

#52 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 12:05 PM | Reply

"Based upon how you were applying the math, if he simply built a massive expansion to his mansion - just a massive room attached to the mansion through a door in one of his garages that didn't have any utilities whatsoever, he'd increase his square-footage without increasing his energy use"

What's the point? Did Al Gore actually do this? If not why bring it up? And why do you hate gay people, as evinced by opposing their equal rights?

#53 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 12:08 PM | Reply

Fine. Throw out the Family Research Council and explain how this group is a hate group:

www.freedomfront.org

#54 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:08 PM | Reply

Pro. No, not feeling guilty at all. AirBnB is not taking away anyone's rights. They are exercising their own rights.

The 14th amendment may well be the basis for discrimination law, but it is not the ONLY law. There are laws in place that limit the ability of a private citizen (not covered under 14) to discriminate against people of any gender, race, religion (or lack of) and, in some areas, orientation.

Not a deflection. Statement of fact. As I said, don't like it? Run for office.

#55 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 12:08 PM | Reply

"I already refuted that argument."
With math, or your usual nonsense?
Please link to your refutation.

#52 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

All of those posts ended up deleted.

#56 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:09 PM | Reply

What's the point? Did Al Gore actually do this? If not why bring it up?
#53 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Danforth took a swipe at me, so I replied in kind by referencing a conversation that took place yesterday.

#57 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:11 PM | Reply

"Based upon how you were applying the math, if he simply built a massive expansion to his mansion - just a massive room attached to the mansion through a door in one of his garages that didn't have any utilities whatsoever, he'd increase his square-footage without increasing his energy use."

Well, that's how the authors were applying (part of) the math. They also conveniently left out the fact Gore's house isn't the same size as the average home, and when sq footage amounts were compared, the 3400% claim fell like a downed redwood. More like 15% above average, for a home that size. In addition--based on the math I applied--the pool and the electric gate are charged to the interior sq footage, making the "34 times" claim even more bogus.

"According the the premise underlying your math, he could bring his "usage" below average thus making him an energy-consuming piker."

I wasn't employing fantasy like you are now. Ultimately, if he built a large, utility-less room, the "3400%" author would've skipped the sq footage comparison entirely since it would undermine his -------- even more.

#58 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 12:14 PM | Reply

"All of those posts ended up deleted."

Why?

#59 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 12:15 PM | Reply

"I don't speak for other people or assume they would behave badly like you and the Democrats."

And the unintended irony of this statement is going to require me to self medicate more intensely this afternoon.

#60 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 12:15 PM | Reply

--Please link to your refutation.

Sure. It's right here. Just search for my name.

www.drudge.com

#61 | Posted by nullifidian at 2017-08-10 12:15 PM | Reply

"All of those posts ended up deleted."
Why?

#59 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I don't know.

#62 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#59 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Click your profile and scroll down.

You won't find any of those Al Gore posts.

#63 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:21 PM | Reply

Rev- everyone is covered under the 14th.

You cannot pick and choose.

That is what you are doing.

If these people sue they will win. Just like blacks did. That is why Holder is on the Airbnb Board now.

#64 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 12:22 PM | Reply

"Sure. It's right here. Just search for my name."

So it's gone.

Looks like you're going to have to "refute" again.

I'm all ears.

#65 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 12:23 PM | Reply

"You won't find any of those Al Gore posts."

When a post is deleted, doesn't the blog-god send an email explaining why?

#66 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 12:24 PM | Reply

Pro, yes, all people are covered by the 14th...

From discrimination by the government.

I will again state: Air BnB is NOT a government agency. Different discrimination laws apply.

Stop deflecting.

#67 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 12:27 PM | Reply

Rev-They are subject to federal discrimination laws. That is why baking a cake went to SCOTUS.

#68 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 12:29 PM | Reply

#66

Nope

#69 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:30 PM | Reply

"Nope"

So do folks have "strikes against them"?

#70 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 12:32 PM | Reply

Not for deleted posts.

#71 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:33 PM | Reply

Only posts deemed abusive or offensive count as strikes.

#72 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:33 PM | Reply

Only posts deemed abusive or offensive count as strikes.

#73 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 12:33 PM | Reply

Yes. Federal law. While related, and being derived from it, federal law is not entirely composed of what is written in the constitution.

If they sue and win, so be it, but current law appears to side with Air BnB.

#74 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 12:35 PM | Reply

Rev- Federal law holds supremacy over state laws, think Title IX as an example.

#75 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 12:38 PM | Reply

"Fine. Throw out the Family Research Council"

Not until you disavow them.

#76 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 12:45 PM | Reply

"Only posts deemed abusive or offensive count as strikes."

Back in the old days, those were the only ones deleted. But a debate on how the math was bollixed in the article?!? Are you fuggin' kidding me???

#77 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-08-10 12:45 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Never said it didn't, pro. I said other federal law applied

#78 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 12:50 PM | Reply

Rev- they all apply, that is how you get multiple charges for breaking the statutes.

#79 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2017-08-10 12:58 PM | Reply

The 14th only applies to government.

#80 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-08-10 01:06 PM | Reply

Not until you disavow them.

#76 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I never avowed them in the first place.

#81 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 01:34 PM | Reply

You didn't avow them?
What was this conversation about then?

"Really? Which groups do you align with, which have been labeled a hate group by the SPLC?

#23 | POSTED BY DANFORTH
Well, a maniac tried to shoot up the Family Research Center because they were listed as a hate group on the SPLC website."

Asked which groups you align with, you responded with FRC.

Just say the FRC is a hate group, and we can move on.

#82 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 01:38 PM | Reply

I said throw them out.

Let's move on.

#83 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 02:04 PM | Reply

I then cited a different group (twice) and asked how they get defined as a hate group. Still no answer.

#84 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 02:04 PM | Reply

Must be nice to be able to pick and chose among a group or person who you don't believe with on some topic.

fatso Moore and others refused to go to some states because they don't think the way he does....

baker gets ruined for the same EXACT thing.

and it's YOU PEOPLE who whine and cry about the 'end of democracy".....

"you'd all " be a joke, if not so dangerous.

#85 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2017-08-10 06:02 PM | Reply

baker gets ruined for the same EXACT thing.

Nope, the baker was sued for violating a state statute that prohibited private discrimination against sexual orientation.

I am not aware of any statute that prohibits private discrimination based on political viewpoint.

#86 | Posted by et_al at 2017-08-10 06:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Nope, the baker was sued for violating a state statute that prohibited private discrimination against sexual orientation.

As much as I disagreed with that based on principle, fact is, the baker did violate a duly passed law.

#87 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 06:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Nope, the baker was sued for violating a state statute that prohibited private discrimination against sexual orientation.

I am not aware of any statute that prohibits private discrimination based on political viewpoint.

#86 | Posted by et_al at 2017-08-10 06:18 P

while running the risk of being accused of having "hans envy"....here is my reply..

uh...yes it is the same..

thank you...

lol

#88 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2017-08-10 06:32 PM | Reply

lol usually means humor or lack of a serious nature...OR a 'pass go' pass.....

also known to "normal" people as 'sense of humor'..

#89 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2017-08-10 06:34 PM | Reply

#40 This group is on the SLPC hate map:
www.freedomfront.org
They seem to defend this group:
www.dailystormer.com
and other alt-right groups that preach hate.

They seem like the ALCU for Nazis.

#90 | Posted by bored at 2017-08-10 07:22 PM | Reply

"As much as I disagreed with that based on principle, fact is, the baker did violate a duly passed law."

Serious question:
Do you have any thoughts on the Gay Cake Act of 2013 or whatever, not based on principle, but based on practicality?

#91 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 07:27 PM | Reply

"This group is on the SLPC hate map:
www.freedomfront.org"

And what did you think about the reasons SPLC provided for putting them on the map?

#92 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-10 07:32 PM | Reply

And what did you think about the reasons SPLC provided for putting them on the map?

#92 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

The only thing I found is that they were supporting the right for an alt-right group to protest with police protection as violent leftists were threatening to shut down their protest in violent fashion.

It's something the ACLU would do, but because they were protecting an alt-right group's rights,,,SPLC views them as a hate group.

That's what I saw when I viewed their site.

#93 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 09:42 PM | Reply

#40 This group is on the SLPC hate map:
www.freedomfront.org
They seem to defend this group:
www.dailystormer.com
and other alt-right groups that preach hate.
They seem like the ALCU for Nazis.

#90 | POSTED BY BORED

Vociferously protecting the 1st Amendment does not constitute a hate-group.

It's kind of like soldiers - I hate your message but I will fight to the death to preserve your right to convey your message.

To label the group I linked as a 'hate organization' is absurd and it's why SPLC has taken a recent hit to its credibility.

#94 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-10 09:46 PM | Reply

To label the group I linked as a 'hate organization' is absurd and it's why SPLC has taken a recent hit to its credibility."

SPLC hasn't taken any hit to their credibility, they are the same as they have always been. An organization standing up for the rights of the powerless. Thank God for the SPLC! Amen. Any attack on them is personal, I stand 100% with them, to do otherwise is to accept discrimination and I just won't. I'm sorry Jeff, there are extremist groups you should not support but SPLC is not one of them.

#95 | Posted by danni at 2017-08-11 10:53 AM | Reply

The SPLC is far-left outfit masquerading as a "non-partisan research group". All you need to know about how "non-partisan" they are is to look at who always quotes and links to them.

#96 | Posted by nullifidian at 2017-08-11 11:14 AM | Reply

#96

Poor baby!

www.mediamatters.org

#97 | Posted by Corky at 2017-08-11 11:51 AM | Reply

"The only thing I found is that they were supporting the right for an alt-right group to protest with police protection as violent leftists were threatening to shut down their protest in violent fashion."

Link?

I couldn't find any mention of the group on the SPLC website.

So it's pretty tough to comment on how they ended up on the Big List O Hate Groups.

Which was my point to begin with. You don't know why the SPLC put them on the list, you're just regurgitating someone else's outrage.

#98 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-11 04:01 PM | Reply

"To label the group I linked as a 'hate organization' is absurd"

Freedom front dot org?

It's perfectly valid to call them a hate group. (I had to spell it out since RCade does not permit links to pornography.)

#99 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-11 04:04 PM | Reply

"Vociferously protecting the 1st Amendment does not constitute a hate-group."

It does when the vociferousness extends to hate speech.

#100 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-11 04:08 PM | Reply

"I hate your message but I will fight to the death to preserve your right to convey your message."

That's fine.

Surely you don't object to people deciding which messages are in fact hateful, and speaking out about it, because thats what SPLV is doing.

#101 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-11 04:12 PM | Reply

#94 defending the 1st like the ACLU is fine but if you only defend hate groups like storefront then you have become a hate group enabler.

#102 | Posted by bored at 2017-08-11 04:14 PM | Reply

Yeah JeffJ can't you see if the ACLU decided to only fight for the right of Neo-Nazis to march, they wouldn't really be a free speech group anymore?

#103 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-11 04:29 PM | Reply

Which was my point to begin with. You don't know why the SPLC put them on the list, you're just regurgitating someone else's outrage.

#98 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

What other groups have they defended?

Let's face it, progressives view anyone who doesn't share their political views as "haters".

#104 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-11 05:48 PM | Reply

"What other groups have they defended?"

You aren't hearing me.

You have no clue what FreedomFront did to get on the SPLC's hate group list.

Since you don't know that, you should find out before you start using that list as a cudgel.

#105 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-11 06:18 PM | Reply

I went through their website. The only thing I could find was that they were defending an alt-right's group's freedom to protest.

Should violent leftists be allowed to assault and attack them via a stand-down order to the police?

#106 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-11 07:28 PM | Reply

"Should violent leftists be allowed to assault and attack them via a stand-down order to the police?
#106 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

Is that some kind of snowflake analogy for having AirBnB refuse your business?

#107 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-11 07:33 PM | Reply

Is that some kind of snowflake analogy for having AirBnB refuse your business?

#107 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

It's amazing how often you are combative purely for the sake of being combative. Far too often it's impossible to carry a rational discussion with you. And that's a damn shame as you are a bright guy.

#108 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-08-11 09:00 PM | Reply

--And that's a damn shame as you are a bright guy.

Link?

#109 | Posted by nullifidian at 2017-08-11 09:02 PM | Reply

"It's amazing how often you are combative purely for the sake of being combative."

Is this what you meant by "violent leftists?"

Grow. Up.

#110 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-12 11:53 AM | Reply

" Far too often it's impossible to carry a rational discussion with you"

Sure, a rational discussion is one where one party asks "Should violent leftists be allowed to assault and attack them via a stand-down order to the police?"

Grow. Up. Please.

#111 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-08-12 11:53 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort