"George Bush doesn't care about black people."

[Correll]

Did you predict the supportive response from the Right? I'd have thought you would have been more negative about us.

The Right is only supportive because Trump is doing it.

Whenever I bring this kind of thing up to right wingers, I'm told the Right is doing nothing wrong and that nothing else can be done.

But if Trump does it, well...
.

What, does Trump inviting West to the White House, admit that we were doing "wrong"?

Oh no, the Right has done nothing wrong on race. They are completely blameless and very pure.
.

Are you happy that Trump is trying? And that the Right Wing, as you can see, is supporting him in this?

Of course I am. I was very hopeful when he invited Kanye and Kaepernick to the White House for meeting. As goofy as that potentially could have been, at least it was something. I'll take pretty much anything at this point.

And again, the only reason the Trumpsters are supporting him in this is that they blindly and obediently support him in pretty much anything. If he hadn't done this, or even refused to do this, they would have supported him in that, too.
.

1. Good. Me too.

2. Well it's a judgement call on his part. I could certainly understand why he would NOT invite West to the White House. If someone else said he should do it, I could see reasons why he would refuse to do it. If he thinks he can do something with this, and is wiling to go out on a limb, I hope him the best, him and the country the best as a result.


So, yes, I guess you could say that I would have supported all three options. But really, what part of my read on it, don't you agree with? And/or what part of that, is "blind obedience"?

 

[Mac1958]

The Right is only supportive because Trump is doing it.

Whenever I bring this kind of thing up to right wingers, I'm told the Right is doing nothing wrong and that nothing else can be done.

But if Trump does it, well...
.

What, does Trump inviting West to the White House, admit that we were doing "wrong"?

Oh no, the Right has done nothing wrong on race. They are completely blameless and very pure.
.

Are you happy that Trump is trying? And that the Right Wing, as you can see, is supporting him in this?

Of course I am. I was very hopeful when he invited Kanye and Kaepernick to the White House for meeting. As goofy as that potentially could have been, at least it was something. I'll take pretty much anything at this point.

And again, the only reason the Trumpsters are supporting him in this is that they blindly and obediently support him in pretty much anything. If he hadn't done this, or even refused to do this, they would have supported him in that, too.
.

1. Good. Me too.

2. Well it's a judgement call on his part. I could certainly understand why he would NOT invite West to the White House. If someone else said he should do it, I could see reasons why he would refuse to do it. If he thinks he can do something with this, and is wiling to go out on a limb, I hope him the best, him and the country the best as a result.


So, yes, I guess you could say that I would have supported all three options. But really, what part of my read on it, don't you agree with? And/or what part of that, is "blind obedience"?

I think you're going to support pretty much anything he says or does. Even if it changes day by day.
.

 

[Correll]

What, does Trump inviting West to the White House, admit that we were doing "wrong"?

Oh no, the Right has done nothing wrong on race. They are completely blameless and very pure.
.

Are you happy that Trump is trying? And that the Right Wing, as you can see, is supporting him in this?

Of course I am. I was very hopeful when he invited Kanye and Kaepernick to the White House for meeting. As goofy as that potentially could have been, at least it was something. I'll take pretty much anything at this point.

And again, the only reason the Trumpsters are supporting him in this is that they blindly and obediently support him in pretty much anything. If he hadn't done this, or even refused to do this, they would have supported him in that, too.
.

1. Good. Me too.

2. Well it's a judgement call on his part. I could certainly understand why he would NOT invite West to the White House. If someone else said he should do it, I could see reasons why he would refuse to do it. If he thinks he can do something with this, and is wiling to go out on a limb, I hope him the best, him and the country the best as a result.


So, yes, I guess you could say that I would have supported all three options. But really, what part of my read on it, don't you agree with? And/or what part of that, is "blind obedience"?

I think you're going to support pretty much anything he says or does. Even if it changes day by day.
.

I'm furious that he has not built the Wall, nor even pushed Congress hard on it. And have often commented on it.

I was very much against his focus on Syria, Russia and even North Korea, earlier because he ran on less intervention. And said so very much here during the time. And I wanted him to focus on domestics.

I'm lukewarm on the Tax Cuts. I think the low hanging fruit there has already been taken, and we are fighting the last war on that front.


You are way too quick to lump people into groups and dismiss them.


I made a serious reply to your previous post above. I really want(ed) to hear your response. For some reason, instead of answering, you made a negative comment directed at me.


Are you ready to answer them now?


(I'm including the point we agreed, on, because I think it is important to keep in mind that we agree on this issue. That Trump was right to do it, and we both hope it helps.




1. Good. Me too.

2. Well it's a judgement call on his part. I could certainly understand why he would NOT invite West to the White House. If someone else said he should do it, I could see reasons why he would refuse to do it. If he thinks he can do something with this, and is wiling to go out on a limb, I hope him the best, him and the country the best as a result.

 

[Mac1958]

Oh no, the Right has done nothing wrong on race. They are completely blameless and very pure.
.

Are you happy that Trump is trying? And that the Right Wing, as you can see, is supporting him in this?

Of course I am. I was very hopeful when he invited Kanye and Kaepernick to the White House for meeting. As goofy as that potentially could have been, at least it was something. I'll take pretty much anything at this point.

And again, the only reason the Trumpsters are supporting him in this is that they blindly and obediently support him in pretty much anything. If he hadn't done this, or even refused to do this, they would have supported him in that, too.
.

1. Good. Me too.

2. Well it's a judgement call on his part. I could certainly understand why he would NOT invite West to the White House. If someone else said he should do it, I could see reasons why he would refuse to do it. If he thinks he can do something with this, and is wiling to go out on a limb, I hope him the best, him and the country the best as a result.


So, yes, I guess you could say that I would have supported all three options. But really, what part of my read on it, don't you agree with? And/or what part of that, is "blind obedience"?

I think you're going to support pretty much anything he says or does. Even if it changes day by day.
.

I'm furious that he has not built the Wall, nor even pushed Congress hard on it. And have often commented on it.

I was very much against his focus on Syria, Russia and even North Korea, earlier because he ran on less intervention. And said so very much here during the time. And I wanted him to focus on domestics.

I'm lukewarm on the Tax Cuts. I think the low hanging fruit there has already been taken, and we are fighting the last war on that front.


You are way too quick to lump people into groups and dismiss them.


I made a serious reply to your previous post above. I really want(ed) to hear your response. For some reason, instead of answering, you made a negative comment directed at me.


Are you ready to answer them now?


(I'm including the point we agreed, on, because I think it is important to keep in mind that we agree on this issue. That Trump was right to do it, and we both hope it helps.




1. Good. Me too.

2. Well it's a judgement call on his part. I could certainly understand why he would NOT invite West to the White House. If someone else said he should do it, I could see reasons why he would refuse to do it. If he thinks he can do something with this, and is wiling to go out on a limb, I hope him the best, him and the country the best as a result.

Oy. Okay.

It looks like you asked two questions. Here you go:

But really, what part of my read on it, don't you agree with?
You appear support the meeting, no strings attached, hopeful. I agree. I don't know of anything I disagree with on that, unless you have something in mind.

And/or what part of that, is "blind obedience"?
If you really do support the meeting, no strings attached, hopeful, then none of it is blind obedience. If you support it simply and only because it's Trump, that would qualify as blind obedience to me. There is simply no way for me to know for sure.

Anything else?
.

 

[Correll]

Are you happy that Trump is trying? And that the Right Wing, as you can see, is supporting him in this?

Of course I am. I was very hopeful when he invited Kanye and Kaepernick to the White House for meeting. As goofy as that potentially could have been, at least it was something. I'll take pretty much anything at this point.

And again, the only reason the Trumpsters are supporting him in this is that they blindly and obediently support him in pretty much anything. If he hadn't done this, or even refused to do this, they would have supported him in that, too.
.

1. Good. Me too.

2. Well it's a judgement call on his part. I could certainly understand why he would NOT invite West to the White House. If someone else said he should do it, I could see reasons why he would refuse to do it. If he thinks he can do something with this, and is wiling to go out on a limb, I hope him the best, him and the country the best as a result.


So, yes, I guess you could say that I would have supported all three options. But really, what part of my read on it, don't you agree with? And/or what part of that, is "blind obedience"?

I think you're going to support pretty much anything he says or does. Even if it changes day by day.
.

I'm furious that he has not built the Wall, nor even pushed Congress hard on it. And have often commented on it.

I was very much against his focus on Syria, Russia and even North Korea, earlier because he ran on less intervention. And said so very much here during the time. And I wanted him to focus on domestics.

I'm lukewarm on the Tax Cuts. I think the low hanging fruit there has already been taken, and we are fighting the last war on that front.


You are way too quick to lump people into groups and dismiss them.


I made a serious reply to your previous post above. I really want(ed) to hear your response. For some reason, instead of answering, you made a negative comment directed at me.


Are you ready to answer them now?


(I'm including the point we agreed, on, because I think it is important to keep in mind that we agree on this issue. That Trump was right to do it, and we both hope it helps.




1. Good. Me too.

2. Well it's a judgement call on his part. I could certainly understand why he would NOT invite West to the White House. If someone else said he should do it, I could see reasons why he would refuse to do it. If he thinks he can do something with this, and is wiling to go out on a limb, I hope him the best, him and the country the best as a result.

Oy. Okay.

It looks like you asked two questions. Here you go:

But really, what part of my read on it, don't you agree with?
You appear support the meeting, no strings attached, hopeful. I agree. I don't know of anything I disagree with on that, unless you have something in mind.

And/or what part of that, is "blind obedience"?
If you really do support the meeting, no strings attached, hopeful, then none of it is blind obedience. If you support it simply and only because it's Trump, that would qualify as blind obedience to me. There is simply no way for me to know for sure.

Anything else?
.

Try to be a little less quick on the "dismiss" trigger in the future.


Thanks.


Now, the question is, is this going to have any impact.


The President's numbers have been trending upwards with black support.


It will be interesting to see if there is any differences in mid term voting.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

To his current "supporters", was Kanye West telling the truth THEN, or is he only telling the truth NOW?

More importantly, can any of you cite ONE cogent political argument from your new hero?

Hey, Al Jolson, Bush is not running and Michael, I mean Michelle Obama loves him

Obama is not running for president either -- but continue with you point about Bush not running...

 

[Mac1958]

Try to be a little less quick on the "dismiss" trigger in the future. Thanks.

Please try to remember that suggestion the next time you're about to "dismiss" someone who dares to disagree with you as being fooled by the media.

It will be interesting to see if there is any differences in mid term voting.

Agreed.
.

 

[Correll]

Try to be a little less quick on the "dismiss" trigger in the future. Thanks.

Please try to remember that suggestion the next time you're about to "dismiss" someone who dares to disagree with you as being fooled by the media.

It will be interesting to see if there is any differences in mid term voting.

Agreed.
.

1. I almost never just dismiss someone. I will address their point, if they make one at all, and mention that they are being fooled by the media.


2. If there is any change. The reaction will be enormous. I do not expect anything in the mid terms. I am hopefully for 2020.
But it would be very good, if we see something 2018.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

To his current "supporters", was Kanye West telling the truth THEN, or is he only telling the truth NOW?

More importantly, can any of you cite ONE cogent political argument from your new hero?

Hey, Al Jolson, Bush is not running and Michael, I mean Michelle Obama loves him

Obama is not running for president either -- but continue with you point about Bush not running...

Michael said the he/she loves Bush "to death"

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

To his current "supporters", was Kanye West telling the truth THEN, or is he only telling the truth NOW?

More importantly, can any of you cite ONE cogent political argument from your new hero?

Hey, Al Jolson, Bush is not running and Michael, I mean Michelle Obama loves him

Obama is not running for president either -- but continue with you point about Bush not running...

Michael said the he/she loves Bush "to death"

I don't know Michael, I know Michelle

The woman who married a man who didn't cheat on her with porn stars months after her giving birth, a man who doesn't have 2 ex wives and 4 other kids -- but to an idiot like you, a black two-parent family is offensive to you, so you gotta disrespect her --- so fuck you

 

[Darkwind]

To his current "supporters", was Kanye West telling the truth THEN, or is he only telling the truth NOW?

More importantly, can any of you cite ONE cogent political argument from your new hero?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

To his current "supporters", was Kanye West telling the truth THEN, or is he only telling the truth NOW?

More importantly, can any of you cite ONE cogent political argument from your new hero?

Hey, Al Jolson, Bush is not running and Michael, I mean Michelle Obama loves him

Obama is not running for president either -- but continue with you point about Bush not running...

Michael said the he/she loves Bush "to death"

I don't know Michael, I know Michelle

The woman who married a man who didn't cheat on her with porn stars months after her giving birth, a man who doesn't have 2 ex wives and 4 other kids -- but to an idiot like you, a black two-parent family is offensive to you, so you gotta disrespect her --- so fuck you

Maybe you and Mark can put on da black face and sing "Mammy"

Trump is peeling away traditional democrat voters. For now, you have every nonliving and the illegals. Going forward, you're going to have to make multiple voters out of those groups to stay competitive

 

[JWBooth]

Black people don't care about Black people

I agree. They are killing each other in Chicago as we speak.

70% of our murder rate is mostly Blacks killing Blacks

The NRA is to blame


[/sarcasm]

 

[JWBooth]

To his current "supporters", was Kanye West telling the truth THEN, or is he only telling the truth NOW?

More importantly, can any of you cite ONE cogent political argument from your new hero?

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

To his current "supporters", was Kanye West telling the truth THEN, or is he only telling the truth NOW?

More importantly, can any of you cite ONE cogent political argument from your new hero?

Hey, Al Jolson, Bush is not running and Michael, I mean Michelle Obama loves him

Obama is not running for president either -- but continue with you point about Bush not running...

Michael said the he/she loves Bush "to death"

I don't know Michael, I know Michelle

The woman who married a man who didn't cheat on her with porn stars months after her giving birth, a man who doesn't have 2 ex wives and 4 other kids -- but to an idiot like you, a black two-parent family is offensive to you, so you gotta disrespect her --- so fuck you

Maybe you and Mark can put on da black face and sing "Mammy"

Trump is peeling away traditional democrat voters. For now, you have every nonliving and the illegals. Going forward, you're going to have to make multiple voters out of those groups to stay competitive

Yea, you tell yourself that...

Meanwhile in places like Waller County, republicans are still trying to disenfranchise black voters -- only the party of racists feel they need to suppress minority votes in order to win..and what is even more telling is that you racists have no problem with it



https://www.chron.com/news/houston-...nd-Waller-County-fix-PVAMU-voter-13300986.php

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

1. Broken down and dilapidated and unsafe housing.
2. Broken families.
3. A high degree of violence required in order to hold the place together.
4. Everybody gets a basic provision, but nobody gets ahead.
5. Nihilism and despair. This is an intergenerational, ongoing, lasting way of life.

What am I describing?

The black community with Democratic leadership....hmmm...or are you describing what Democrats want for the whole nation?

Actually that was life on a southern plantation for a slave.....eerily similar to Democrat controlled inner cities....interesting right?

Are you so afraid that you rejected the minority vote, mainly black vote, that now you Republicans have to suppress them from voting?? The maj of them are not unlearned crazies like you think, yes some are poor, but then again a lot more white folks are poor.

LOL. What? Are you drunk?

 

[Bush92]

1. Broken down and dilapidated and unsafe housing.
2. Broken families.
3. A high degree of violence required in order to hold the place together.
4. Everybody gets a basic provision, but nobody gets ahead.
5. Nihilism and despair. This is an intergenerational, ongoing, lasting way of life.

What am I describing?

The black community with Democratic leadership....hmmm...or are you describing what Democrats want for the whole nation?

Actually that was life on a southern plantation for a slave.....eerily similar to Democrat controlled inner cities....interesting right?

Are you so afraid that you rejected the minority vote, mainly black vote, that now you Republicans have to suppress them from voting?? The maj of them are not unlearned crazies like you think, yes some are poor, but then again a lot more white folks are poor.

Voter suppression...OMFG...

 

[Bush92]

Hey, Al Jolson, Bush is not running and Michael, I mean Michelle Obama loves him

Obama is not running for president either -- but continue with you point about Bush not running...

Michael said the he/she loves Bush "to death"

I don't know Michael, I know Michelle

The woman who married a man who didn't cheat on her with porn stars months after her giving birth, a man who doesn't have 2 ex wives and 4 other kids -- but to an idiot like you, a black two-parent family is offensive to you, so you gotta disrespect her --- so fuck you

Maybe you and Mark can put on da black face and sing "Mammy"

Trump is peeling away traditional democrat voters. For now, you have every nonliving and the illegals. Going forward, you're going to have to make multiple voters out of those groups to stay competitive

Yea, you tell yourself that...

Meanwhile in places like Waller County, republicans are still trying to disenfranchise black voters -- only the party of racists feel they need to suppress minority votes in order to win..and what is even more telling is that you racists have no problem with it



https://www.chron.com/news/houston-...nd-Waller-County-fix-PVAMU-voter-13300986.php

Suppression of black voters OMFG...hey..the 1960’s called and they want you to move on.

 

[Bush92]

Hey, Al Jolson, Bush is not running and Michael, I mean Michelle Obama loves him

Obama is not running for president either -- but continue with you point about Bush not running...

Michael said the he/she loves Bush "to death"

I don't know Michael, I know Michelle

The woman who married a man who didn't cheat on her with porn stars months after her giving birth, a man who doesn't have 2 ex wives and 4 other kids -- but to an idiot like you, a black two-parent family is offensive to you, so you gotta disrespect her --- so fuck you

Maybe you and Mark can put on da black face and sing "Mammy"

Trump is peeling away traditional democrat voters. For now, you have every nonliving and the illegals. Going forward, you're going to have to make multiple voters out of those groups to stay competitive

Yea, you tell yourself that...

Meanwhile in places like Waller County, republicans are still trying to disenfranchise black voters -- only the party of racists feel they need to suppress minority votes in order to win..and what is even more telling is that you racists have no problem with it



https://www.chron.com/news/houston-...nd-Waller-County-fix-PVAMU-voter-13300986.php

Supreme Court has ruled that times have changed. Time to move on.
{{meta.pageTitle}}

 

[Papageorgio]

I didn’t pay attention to West back then, I don’t know what he said yesterday however you people are sure getting excited about him. He seems to have changed his mind about politics. Not sure why people are so upset, aren’t people allowed to form and change their views during their life?

Black people can't, they are supposed to be rabid Democrats for the next 140 years or so. That's what Johnson promised.

If republicans stopped being assholes they could start winning black votes in 2020. If the gop doesn’t change for 140 years then they won’t get their votes for 140 years.

If that’s not true why do republicans lie to them every 2 years? Republicans always try to pretend to be a big tent party but their rhetoric is always in favor of the status quo

Didn’t gw bush think republicans would stay on top for 40 years? Can’t look that far ahead and be shortsighted

The only time the Democrats pay attention to blacks are every two years to get the votes, the rest of the time it’s lip service.

Didn’t the Democrats think they were a lock for decades after Obama was in office. It is the same both parties are shortsighted.