Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
How much longer are these shitty sources gonna be allowed around here?
Nowhere in the article is your quote present.
Correct. It is a quote from the site owner, Ann Coulter.
Stop, you're confusing them. If Ctrl+f can't find it, it doesn't exist.
Thanks for contributing nothing to the discussion about the article.
This comment chain wasn't intended to discuss the article. It is to discuss the pervasive shittyness of the sources around here. My other comment in this thread was for the article itself.
Can the same logic be applied to you. You've said shitty things so should everything you say be dismissed?
Please show me where I said we should be racially profiling people at airports, invading foreign countries, forcibly converting people to christianity, and killing civilians.
What does making a specific statement have to do with whether you've said shitty things?