“My dry sense of humor that sounds literally exactly like factual statements is, for some bizarre reason, occasionally read as an attempt at an actual factual statement, especially in contexts where that’s what someone was seeking. Which has gotten me in trouble online before, but I have learned nothing except how to…

Dude, are you OK?

You could try being more direct when someone is seeking actual information, but OK.

Because it’s ridiculous to claim you regret something you profited off and still profit off it?

Uh...no, actually. He said that as a joke, to mock someone who asked him if he’d give it to charity.

Someone asked him why he’s only coming out against Allen *now* after making money off him, Krumholtz lost it, accused the guy of defending Allen which was obviously the opposite the intent of the question, and then made rude comments about the other guy’s mom when asked if he’d part with the money he made.

Helpful?

It was already explained. Let black women be human.

If we could stop with the IQ-based insults on someone who wants to dismantle safety nets for actual disabled people, that would be SWELL.

What made you think anyone was trying to debate? This isn’t a debate.

It is a product of his time but what’s concerning is the number of people who *still* think this way. It’s not negligable.

He didn’t say he didn’t remember it. He said it “simply did not occur,” and THEN emphasized that the “alleged events” (that didn’t happen?) were “almost 40 years ago.” That comes off as hedging. If you don’t remember, THAT’S what you’re supposed to say. It tends to be more believable to stick to one story, not “I…

100+? OK.

Dude, you aren’t making sense to ANYONE.

At least you finally figured out how to make an actual argument. Kudos on that. Of course, you’re also pretending that’s what you’vee been saying all along, but meh, I’ll take what I can get.

“You tell me what 99% of Muslims look like, what 99% of Jewish people look like, etc” Oh, honey. You have literally no idea.

I mean, obviously there are right and wrong things to teach children, and maybe you believe religion is wrong. That’s fine. You can just say that. You don’t have to create this nonsensical distinction where ACTUALLY, when it’s RELIGION it’s not the PARENTS teaching it. That’s nonsense. By that measure, sending kids to…

“Teaching kids something, and teaching them something I don’t agree with are two different things.” FTFY.

Oh, buddy...

Blaming religion for racism and then equating religion with race is a pretty bizarre combination. I mean, I’ve seen both before, but they sure stack weirdly.

If we followed your logic it would be wrong to teach kids anything, so why do we let them have parents who *gasp* teach them things?