- Jun 18, 2009
- 34,347
- 18,633
- 1,915
Yes, I do.
What can I expand that would not bring on Me a cry of, "Racist" from the left?
I do want to see an improvement. That will have to suffice.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
POLL: Do you want to see race relations improve?
- Thread starter Mac1958
- Start date
What can I expand that would not bring on Me a cry of, "Racist" from the left?
I do want to see an improvement. That will have to suffice.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 77,671
- 36,093
- 2,330
“I do have issues with Obama, his Reverend Wrights Church back in 2009 was a concern about his hatred for America, and Reverends Wrights sermons were very racist, let's be fair and call it what it is.”
This is an example of one of the greatest false equivalences and double standards ever pulled by the white racist segment of American society. It is based on a sermon Rev. Jeremiah Wright preached long before Obama ran for president. This “controversy” was based on words cherry picked from 2 sermons: "The Day of Jerusalem's Fall", from September 2001, also "Confusing God and Government", delivered in April of 2003. Barak Obama was not really known on the national scene until he spoke at the 2004 Democratic Convention. These sermons were preached while Obama was either a representative in the Illinois senate or working as a community organizer in Chicago.
The words these racists complained about were not racist or spoken by Obama. Based upon documented history, what Wright said in his sermons were 100 percent accurate. But white racists wanted to make it racism because Wright is a black man who dared speak out against the wrongs of government as seen by blacks. White racists can complain all they want about how bad the government is all day and night but let a black person or anyone else not white do so, then they hate America and are racists while white racists call themselves patriots.
So while we must make Obama denounce a preacher for words Obama did not speak because he attended a church, Donald Trump can get away with making racist comments about blacks, Mexicans, and individuals from the Middle East such as the Khans. He gets to make sexist comments about women. He can make xenophobic comments and religious bigoted statements about Muslims. No one made him denounce his history of Department of Justice LAWSUITS for racial discrimination in housing long before he ran for president which is documented in the legal record. Instead Trump gets protected and elected to run this country. Excuse my language here, but what the hell kind of shit is that? Racism. White racism. The false equivalence is one of the main weapons used by white racists and if you aren’t paying attention you will think they are making sense.
This is an example of one of the greatest false equivalences and double standards ever pulled by the white racist segment of American society. It is based on a sermon Rev. Jeremiah Wright preached long before Obama ran for president. This “controversy” was based on words cherry picked from 2 sermons: "The Day of Jerusalem's Fall", from September 2001, also "Confusing God and Government", delivered in April of 2003. Barak Obama was not really known on the national scene until he spoke at the 2004 Democratic Convention. These sermons were preached while Obama was either a representative in the Illinois senate or working as a community organizer in Chicago.
The words these racists complained about were not racist or spoken by Obama. Based upon documented history, what Wright said in his sermons were 100 percent accurate. But white racists wanted to make it racism because Wright is a black man who dared speak out against the wrongs of government as seen by blacks. White racists can complain all they want about how bad the government is all day and night but let a black person or anyone else not white do so, then they hate America and are racists while white racists call themselves patriots.
So while we must make Obama denounce a preacher for words Obama did not speak because he attended a church, Donald Trump can get away with making racist comments about blacks, Mexicans, and individuals from the Middle East such as the Khans. He gets to make sexist comments about women. He can make xenophobic comments and religious bigoted statements about Muslims. No one made him denounce his history of Department of Justice LAWSUITS for racial discrimination in housing long before he ran for president which is documented in the legal record. Instead Trump gets protected and elected to run this country. Excuse my language here, but what the hell kind of shit is that? Racism. White racism. The false equivalence is one of the main weapons used by white racists and if you aren’t paying attention you will think they are making sense.
- Thread starter
- #83
There's nothing wrong with holding either "side" of this issue accountable for things they have done and keep doing. That's precisely what we need.There are no division pimps on both ends. I'd like to know what is divisive about holding whites accountable for things they have done and keep doing?
The problem is that people like you can only "see" your side. You have only one eye open. And people like you exist on both sides.
That's the problem here. And I know you don't "see" that.
.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 77,671
- 36,093
- 2,330
The OP doesn't get it. These right wing republicans do not want see race relations improve. They are the problem.
“There is another class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. ... Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs ... There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well.”
Booker T. Washington
Now understand the ignorance of this thinking. These were comments made in the Jim Crow south by a black man telling whites there are blacks who enjoy being treated as second class citizens.
Some say that Booker T. Washington is the father of black conservatism. I’m not all that sure we can say that; however his ideas and what black conservatives say are close. Washington wanted blacks to learn trades and not fight whites and that by our learning these trades and working hard blacks would gain the respect of whites and things would change. Washington’s philosophy created more craftsmen and tradesmen which is a positive. But did it work?
No. We did not get the right to vote, equal rights or equal opportunities because of the Booker T Washington plan. We had more machinists and bricklayers who could not even become members of trade unions. We did not get civil rights by doing what Booker T wanted done. This is what black conservatives need to understand. Appeasing and going along with the whites who are racists hoping that changes them DOES NOT WORK! There are decades of examples to prove this. I say this in the 21st century long after the days of Washington. I want to be fair to this man, because unlike todays conservatives he wasn’t ignoring racism, nor was he denigrating blacks at every instance he could in front of white audiences. Actually, for his day, and for him living in the south, his idea may very well have been the most pragmatic. Unfortunately it did not work. Perhaps no plan by anyone black in any effort to stop whites from what they were doing at that time would have.
Washington’s plan did not work for one major reason. Ta-Nehisi Coates points this out in his 2009 article, “The Tragedy And Betrayal Of Booker T. Washington.”
“The dominant logic of the post-Reconstruction era held that the real problem wasn't white racists, but carpetbaggers and meddlers from up North who'd elevated illiterate blacks above their station. The white Southerner, presumably, had no existential objection to blacks, they just didn't want to live next door to them or have an illiterate and morally degenerate population electing their politicians. To this Washington, and much of black America, said Fine. Cease fire. You let us be, we'll let you be.”
His idea or plan did not work out because he dismissed one essential truth. Southern Whites hated blacks. They did not want blacks near them, close to them, within any proximity of them. They did not want blacks succeeding, all they wanted was for blacks to get out of the way and return to slavery. He paid no attention to how much southern whites did not like the fact blacks were free. Like todays black conservative, Washington looked past the rhetoric whites kept on speaking, the laws and polices they passed and thought that perhaps if we accept things that eventually we will gain our respect. Eventually if we do it this way, the racism will end. That if we just leave them alone and do what we do, if we just ignore the racism they won’t bother us and we won’t bother them.
This is the logic being used by the OP as he talks about how both sides need to do something.
So what happened to Washington? He made the Atlanta Compromise.
"The Atlanta compromise was an agreement struck in 1895 between Booker T. Washington, president of the Tuskegee Institute, other African-American leaders, and Southern white leaders.[1][2] It was first supported, and later opposed by W. E. B. Du Bois and other African-American leaders.
The agreement was that Southern blacks would work and submit to white political rule, while Southern whites guaranteed that blacks would receive basic education and due process in law.[3][4] Blacks would not focus their demands on equality, integration, or justice, and Northern whites would fund black educational charities."
Atlanta compromise - Wikipedia
There ya go, an agreement that accepts both sides have a problem so we agree to terms.
"Essential elements of the agreement were that blacks would not ask for the right to vote, they would not retaliate against racist behavior, they would tolerate segregation and discrimination, that they would receive free basic education, education would be limited to vocational or industrial training (for instance as teachers or nurses), liberal arts education would be prohibited (for instance, college education in the classics, humanities, art, or literature."
And the result?
"In retrospect, this was a grievous error. In point of fact, whites actually did have an existential objection to black people. Their beef wasn’t that illiterates and moral degenerates might get too much power. Quite the opposite. Their beef was that blacks would prove to not be illiterates and moral degenerates, and thus fully able to compete with them. To see this point illustrated, one need only look at the history of race riots in the South. When white mobs set upon black communities they didn’t simply burn down the “morally degenerate” portions—they attacked the South’s burgeoning black middle and working class and its institutions. They went for the churches, the schools and the businesses."
"You must understand the chilling effect this had to have on black people. To actually concede to all the racist propaganda out there, and then to be rewarded by hooligans burning down your community must have been psychologically devastating."
The Tragedy And Betrayal Of Booker T. Washington
But hey if we just fix both sides...….. Don't pretend this can't happen now and don't listen to bunch of white people with an 1800's mindset on race tell you how this is not the past.
“There is another class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. ... Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs ... There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well.”
Booker T. Washington
Now understand the ignorance of this thinking. These were comments made in the Jim Crow south by a black man telling whites there are blacks who enjoy being treated as second class citizens.
Some say that Booker T. Washington is the father of black conservatism. I’m not all that sure we can say that; however his ideas and what black conservatives say are close. Washington wanted blacks to learn trades and not fight whites and that by our learning these trades and working hard blacks would gain the respect of whites and things would change. Washington’s philosophy created more craftsmen and tradesmen which is a positive. But did it work?
No. We did not get the right to vote, equal rights or equal opportunities because of the Booker T Washington plan. We had more machinists and bricklayers who could not even become members of trade unions. We did not get civil rights by doing what Booker T wanted done. This is what black conservatives need to understand. Appeasing and going along with the whites who are racists hoping that changes them DOES NOT WORK! There are decades of examples to prove this. I say this in the 21st century long after the days of Washington. I want to be fair to this man, because unlike todays conservatives he wasn’t ignoring racism, nor was he denigrating blacks at every instance he could in front of white audiences. Actually, for his day, and for him living in the south, his idea may very well have been the most pragmatic. Unfortunately it did not work. Perhaps no plan by anyone black in any effort to stop whites from what they were doing at that time would have.
Washington’s plan did not work for one major reason. Ta-Nehisi Coates points this out in his 2009 article, “The Tragedy And Betrayal Of Booker T. Washington.”
“The dominant logic of the post-Reconstruction era held that the real problem wasn't white racists, but carpetbaggers and meddlers from up North who'd elevated illiterate blacks above their station. The white Southerner, presumably, had no existential objection to blacks, they just didn't want to live next door to them or have an illiterate and morally degenerate population electing their politicians. To this Washington, and much of black America, said Fine. Cease fire. You let us be, we'll let you be.”
His idea or plan did not work out because he dismissed one essential truth. Southern Whites hated blacks. They did not want blacks near them, close to them, within any proximity of them. They did not want blacks succeeding, all they wanted was for blacks to get out of the way and return to slavery. He paid no attention to how much southern whites did not like the fact blacks were free. Like todays black conservative, Washington looked past the rhetoric whites kept on speaking, the laws and polices they passed and thought that perhaps if we accept things that eventually we will gain our respect. Eventually if we do it this way, the racism will end. That if we just leave them alone and do what we do, if we just ignore the racism they won’t bother us and we won’t bother them.
This is the logic being used by the OP as he talks about how both sides need to do something.
So what happened to Washington? He made the Atlanta Compromise.
"The Atlanta compromise was an agreement struck in 1895 between Booker T. Washington, president of the Tuskegee Institute, other African-American leaders, and Southern white leaders.[1][2] It was first supported, and later opposed by W. E. B. Du Bois and other African-American leaders.
The agreement was that Southern blacks would work and submit to white political rule, while Southern whites guaranteed that blacks would receive basic education and due process in law.[3][4] Blacks would not focus their demands on equality, integration, or justice, and Northern whites would fund black educational charities."
Atlanta compromise - Wikipedia
There ya go, an agreement that accepts both sides have a problem so we agree to terms.
"Essential elements of the agreement were that blacks would not ask for the right to vote, they would not retaliate against racist behavior, they would tolerate segregation and discrimination, that they would receive free basic education, education would be limited to vocational or industrial training (for instance as teachers or nurses), liberal arts education would be prohibited (for instance, college education in the classics, humanities, art, or literature."
And the result?
"In retrospect, this was a grievous error. In point of fact, whites actually did have an existential objection to black people. Their beef wasn’t that illiterates and moral degenerates might get too much power. Quite the opposite. Their beef was that blacks would prove to not be illiterates and moral degenerates, and thus fully able to compete with them. To see this point illustrated, one need only look at the history of race riots in the South. When white mobs set upon black communities they didn’t simply burn down the “morally degenerate” portions—they attacked the South’s burgeoning black middle and working class and its institutions. They went for the churches, the schools and the businesses."
"You must understand the chilling effect this had to have on black people. To actually concede to all the racist propaganda out there, and then to be rewarded by hooligans burning down your community must have been psychologically devastating."
The Tragedy And Betrayal Of Booker T. Washington
But hey if we just fix both sides...….. Don't pretend this can't happen now and don't listen to bunch of white people with an 1800's mindset on race tell you how this is not the past.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 77,671
- 36,093
- 2,330
There's nothing wrong with holding either "side" of this issue accountable for things they have done and keep doing. That's precisely what we need.There are no division pimps on both ends. I'd like to know what is divisive about holding whites accountable for things they have done and keep doing?
The problem is that people like you can only "see" your side. You have only one eye open. And people like you exist on both sides.
That's the problem here. And I know you don't "see" that.
.
I see both sides fool, and that's why I say what I do. There are no division pimps on both ends. That's a fact. And if you think so you have both eyes shut. You start naming the laws and policies enacted by blacks that have denied whites of any opportunity ever, then let's talk about both fucking sides.
- Thread starter
- #86
Got it, thanks.There's nothing wrong with holding either "side" of this issue accountable for things they have done and keep doing. That's precisely what we need.There are no division pimps on both ends. I'd like to know what is divisive about holding whites accountable for things they have done and keep doing?
The problem is that people like you can only "see" your side. You have only one eye open. And people like you exist on both sides.
That's the problem here. And I know you don't "see" that.
.
I see both sides fool, and that's why I say what I do. There are no division pimps on both ends. That's a fact. And if you think so you have both eyes shut. You start naming the laws and policies enacted by blacks that have denied whites of any opportunity ever, then let's talk about both fucking sides.
.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 77,671
- 36,093
- 2,330
No, actually, it really doesn't because Obama ruled as a pretty moderate guy.
If you really believe that, you're about as racist as they get.
Again, we just had 8 years of a BLACK PRESIDENT.......how quickly you deem that insignificant.
Maduro believes he's moderate. Xi believes he's moderate. Stalin believed he was moderate.
It's called perspective, and yours is seriously out of focus.
Here's the thing. Blacks don't have the institutional power to act on their racism. Whites do. Blacks can hate me for being white all day, but that has little effect on my life. But a white bigot with the power to hire and fire and make arrests on petty charges... um, yeah, he can make life pretty miserable if you have the wrong skin tone.
You're so fucked up in the head.
Blacks are in Congress.
Blacks all over the nation are multi millionaires.
Blacks run local governments.
Blacks own movie companies and significant enterprises all across the country.
Just because you have no clue how to get off your ass and conquer doesn't mean the entire race is as lazy and welfare minded as you apparently are.
All you're saying (even if you don;t realize it) is that human nature is racist. Doesn't matter who's in charge.
SO if and when blacks run the nation, they will no doubt be just as bad or more likely, worse.
So do you have a valid point to make this evening (that puts down the race baiting card for a moment)?
LOL! How much some will deny.
- Mar 11, 2015
- 77,671
- 36,093
- 2,330
Got it, thanks.There's nothing wrong with holding either "side" of this issue accountable for things they have done and keep doing. That's precisely what we need.There are no division pimps on both ends. I'd like to know what is divisive about holding whites accountable for things they have done and keep doing?
The problem is that people like you can only "see" your side. You have only one eye open. And people like you exist on both sides.
That's the problem here. And I know you don't "see" that.
.
I see both sides fool, and that's why I say what I do. There are no division pimps on both ends. That's a fact. And if you think so you have both eyes shut. You start naming the laws and policies enacted by blacks that have denied whites of any opportunity ever, then let's talk about both fucking sides.
.
No you don't. You really don't.
- Thread starter
- #89
As with any issue, there will be people who simply won't be a part of the solution.Got it, thanks.There's nothing wrong with holding either "side" of this issue accountable for things they have done and keep doing. That's precisely what we need.There are no division pimps on both ends. I'd like to know what is divisive about holding whites accountable for things they have done and keep doing?
The problem is that people like you can only "see" your side. You have only one eye open. And people like you exist on both sides.
That's the problem here. And I know you don't "see" that.
.
I see both sides fool, and that's why I say what I do. There are no division pimps on both ends. That's a fact. And if you think so you have both eyes shut. You start naming the laws and policies enacted by blacks that have denied whites of any opportunity ever, then let's talk about both fucking sides.
.
No you don't. You really don't.
They are simply unable, unequipped, or unwilling to be part of the difficult process of honest collaboration.
They'll have to somehow be marginalized, overcome, before real progress can be made.
That's where you are, and there are too many of you on both ends. And we're in trouble because of it.
.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #90
I don't know that we have the capacity for this type of communication any more. It's been so long since we communicated like adults that I think we've literally lost the skillset. Use it or lose it, like a muscle.Yes. But they won’t improve until people start to listen to each other instead of speak at each other and it won’t change as long as we just view the other as labels.I'm truly, seriously beginning to have my doubts. I think the division pimps on both ends of this are winning.
I voted yes, for what I used to think were obvious reasons.
Please respond and expand, thanks.
.
Labels can be ignored, or overcome, or they can fade away. Honest communication is the key, it's the starting point, and it's simply no longer there. Poof, it's gone. The only question to me is whether it's dead or dormant.
.
Last edited:
If you really believe that, you're about as racist as they get.
Again, we just had 8 years of a BLACK PRESIDENT.......how quickly you deem that insignificant.
Maduro believes he's moderate. Xi believes he's moderate. Stalin believed he was moderate.
It's called perspective, and yours is seriously out of focus.
um, yeah, it shouldn't have mattered that he was black. What does that have to do with moderation.
So Obama was so radical, that he... wait for it.... continued the GOP policy of bailing out the banks and embraced the GOP health care plan championed by Mitt Romney. Oh, yeah, and he complained when white cops shot black kids in the back. Sometimes.
You're so fucked up in the head.
Blacks are in Congress.
Blacks all over the nation are multi millionaires.
Blacks run local governments.
Blacks own movie companies and significant enterprises all across the country.
Just because you have no clue how to get off your ass and conquer doesn't mean the entire race is as lazy and welfare minded as you apparently are.
Obviously, you don't understand what institutional power means, and I get the feeling if I explain it to you, you still wouldn't understand.
I don't have a desire to "conquer" anything. What would be the point?
All you're saying (even if you don;t realize it) is that human nature is racist. Doesn't matter who's in charge.
SO if and when blacks run the nation, they will no doubt be just as bad or more likely, worse.
And that's your fear, isn't it... that if Blacks ever get in charge, they'll act like you do.
I don't know that we have the capacity for this type of communication any more. It's been so long since we communicated like adults that I think we've literally lost the skillset. Use it or lose it, like a muscle.
Labels can be ignored, or overcome, or they can fade away. Honest communication is the key, it's the starting point, and it's simply no longer there. Poof, it's gone. The only question is whether it's dead or dormant.
Stormy Mac, you complaining about "adult communication" is the funniest thing I have read this morning. It's funnier than Poodle babbling his hate radio talking points like they are original ideas.
Here's what your real problem is, buddy. You'd be happier of the Democrats were more like the Republicans. You know, if they didn't go on about racism and wealth redistribution and hate on Muslims like you do.
You'd probably be happier in the GOP, but frankly, even I don't dislike them enough to wish you upon them.
This is an example of one of the greatest false equivalences and double standards ever pulled by the white racist segment of American society. It is based on a sermon Rev. Jeremiah Wright preached long before Obama ran for president. This “controversy” was based on words cherry picked from 2 sermons: "The Day of Jerusalem's Fall", from September 2001, also "Confusing God and Government", delivered in April of 2003. Barak Obama was not really known on the national scene until he spoke at the 2004 Democratic Convention. These sermons were preached while Obama was either a representative in the Illinois senate or working as a community organizer in Chicago.
You got a valid point here.... Nobody batted an eye when Pat Robertson said 9/11 was the result of abortion and homosexuality, because we had fallen out of God's grace, but people lost their shit when Wright said that 9/11 was the result of our policies. You know, the policies of arming dangerous madmen to kill Russians for us.
- Oct 23, 2013
- 22,062
- 12,230
- 1,435
...
yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away.
...
What behaviors are those?
.
- Thread starter
- #95
Hmm. Okay, tell you what: Answer a quick question, and then I'll be happy to answer yours:What behaviors are those?yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away.
Are you serious? You really can't think of a thing? Or are you being obtuse?
Thanks.
.
- Oct 23, 2013
- 22,062
- 12,230
- 1,435
Hmm. Okay, tell you what: Answer a quick question, and then I'll be happy to answer yours:What behaviors are those?yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away.
Are you serious? You really can't think of a thing? Or are you being obtuse?
Thanks.
.
Actually ... I asked you if you have a fucking clue what you are talking about ... Or are just talking shit.
What behaviors of the right do you think keep minorities away?
What do you think people on the right should be doing to deal with them?
.
There are no actionable race relations issues besides pocket/outlier things, which in 320-million people there are outliers of literally everything.....and turning off the slanted media sources and going the fuck outside is a good step in realizing that.
- Thread starter
- #98
What behaviors are those?.yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away....
Please try to calm down. I guess your response means that your question was serious.Hmm. Okay, tell you what: Answer a quick question, and then I'll be happy to answer yours:What behaviors are those?yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away.
Are you serious? You really can't think of a thing? Or are you being obtuse?
Thanks.
.
Actually ... I asked you if you have a fucking clue what you are talking about ... Or are just talking shit.
What behaviors of the right do you think keep minorities away?
What do you think people on the right should be doing to deal with them?
.
Okay, a few examples that will evidently come as news to you:
- Claiming that racism no longer exists, or downplaying it whenever it shows itself
- An abject refusal to hold other conservatives accountable for their words, such as when Trump pretended to not know who David Duke is
- All the white supremacist groups actively and openly back Trump - why do you suppose that is?
- Constantly calling minorities "lazy freeloaders" or something similar
.
- Oct 23, 2013
- 22,062
- 12,230
- 1,435
What behaviors are those?.yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away....Please try to calm down. I guess your response means that your question was serious.Hmm. Okay, tell you what: Answer a quick question, and then I'll be happy to answer yours:What behaviors are those?yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away.
Are you serious? You really can't think of a thing? Or are you being obtuse?
Thanks.
.
Actually ... I asked you if you have a fucking clue what you are talking about ... Or are just talking shit.
What behaviors of the right do you think keep minorities away?
What do you think people on the right should be doing to deal with them?
.
Okay, a few examples that will evidently come as news to you:
My guess is that you "don't see" any of that out there. I am not surprised. You asked, I answered.
- Claiming that racism no longer exists, or downplaying it whenever it shows itself
- An abject refusal to hold other conservatives accountable for their words, such as when Trump pretended to not know who David Duke is
- All the white supremacist groups actively and openly back Trump - why do you suppose that is?
- Constantly calling minorities "lazy freeloaders" or something similar
.
I should jump on the racism bandwagon and upstage racism.
So you want me to write President Trump a letter and tell him to apologize to you because you think he actually knows who David Duke is.
We should stop people we have no control over from supporting the candidate of their choice for whatever fucked up reason they may have.
And stop some nit-wit racist from being a nit-wit racist.
You want me to try and establish the foundation of a political party on that worthless pile of crap?
.
- Thread starter
- #100
I think you should do whatever you want.What behaviors are those?.yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away....Please try to calm down. I guess your response means that your question was serious.Hmm. Okay, tell you what: Answer a quick question, and then I'll be happy to answer yours:What behaviors are those?yet it absolutely refuses to deal with the very behaviors that keep minorities away.
Are you serious? You really can't think of a thing? Or are you being obtuse?
Thanks.
.
Actually ... I asked you if you have a fucking clue what you are talking about ... Or are just talking shit.
What behaviors of the right do you think keep minorities away?
What do you think people on the right should be doing to deal with them?
.
Okay, a few examples that will evidently come as news to you:
My guess is that you "don't see" any of that out there. I am not surprised. You asked, I answered.
- Claiming that racism no longer exists, or downplaying it whenever it shows itself
- An abject refusal to hold other conservatives accountable for their words, such as when Trump pretended to not know who David Duke is
- All the white supremacist groups actively and openly back Trump - why do you suppose that is?
- Constantly calling minorities "lazy freeloaders" or something similar
.
I should jump on the racism bandwagon and upstage racism.
So you want me to write President Trump a letter and tell him to apologize to you because you think he actually knows who David Duke is.
We should stop people we have no control over from supporting the candidate of their choice for whatever fucked up reason they may have.
And stop some nit-wit racist from being a nit-wit racist.
You want me to try and establish the foundation of a political party on that worthless pile of crap?
You asked, I answered.
.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 37
- Views
- 457
- Replies
- 648
- Views
- 7K
- Replies
- 387
- Views
- 5K
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 761
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 51
- Views
- 254
- Replies
- 141
- Views
- 731
- Replies
- 226
- Views
- 1K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8087
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-