Is it possible to maintain and respect cultural heritage and not be a racist

[Drich]

You should probably learn what a "euphemism" is before we converse any further, because while your cited definition is right, his usage of that word is not.

[quote=Drich]If I quote reference material to support what I have said. If I provide a link to something I said and you appose, it means you are wrong. If you somehow still feel your right then at that point you must find a more reputible source than the one I have provided to over turn what I am stating.

I've studied it at the college level, thanks.
What is the basis of your insight, outside of a television show?

Then get your money back. Because they should have taught you the same thing I just did. That you need reference material to support your assertions. That speaking on faith and having those whom you are speaking to to accept your words on faith is not an accidemic practice.

Yet look at the logical fallacy this whole post is based on 'appeal to authority' (your collage education verse a 'tv show.')
If the 'tv show can be supported with documentation then it becomes a viable source, and your collage 'education' becomes the unreliable joke.

speaking of jokes, What do you call a "collage educated man" who is caught in a accidemic delima, between what he thinks is true and what is historical fact, but refuses to acknoweledge or look up anything he is speaking on, and just assumes because he got a degree that anything he thinks is automatically true????

Yep, a douche bag.

Ohh, ohh hear comes the knock out blow/final nail in the coffin:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_Canyon

The above link was the last great battle between the pawnee and the Sue.
In truth the fought like cats and dogs till the "american Goverment backed Sue" in the Massacre canyon battle whooped them so bad them move out of the dakotas into the Ok terrotiry.

So are we done douche bag? can you admit my 'tv show' was right and you and all of your great collage educated guessing was wrong? If not know If you let this go I won't bring it up again. Just next time remember I do indeed carfully research EVERYTHING before I speak on it. If I reference a TV show or movie it is because I know it to be factual. Again I start with tertiary material and move backwards to secondary and then primary source material. (Something they teach in collage) even though I never went. Oh, the Irony i love it! (victory lap complete)

To just say 'nut-uh' and repeat yourself inspite of properly documented source material, makes you look stupid/diminished capasity. Plus I don't need to look any more arrogant or harsh by beating up on someone with a diminished capasity.

"Capacity" is the proper spelling, first of all, something which someone of your exalted intellect ought to know.

Secondly I'm not interested in providing you any sources, because thankfully, your education is not my business. Furthermore, even were I to go to the trouble, you'd spend five hundred more words why you're right despite some good primary source material such as Census data and whatnot.

Or you tried to google it and found out I was right, so you can't post any source material, and your pinning all your hopes on the idea that if you put enough red herring and appeal to your authority out there, that I won't know any better, or you can just simply bully me off topic...

Too bad I actually research what i talk about before I speak on it or you could have Bill Marr/Richard Dawkins' me into silence.

In short, I know better than to hope for intelligent discussion from you, and only raise the issues I did hoping that another member will present more interesting discussion than your misapprehensions can possibly provide.

Sure, as soon as you do the same. You will have to earn your resect and consideration with me, and let's face it, you've dug yourself a pretty deep hole as matters stand.

Until you redeem yourself of your copious cuntish shitposting, you merit nothing more than my abject contempt.