All You Bundy Lovers....Your New Hero Speaks....Shoots Self in Foot

[theDoctorisIn]

Just because they are "conservative" doesn't not make them Democrats. You own them.

1. I don't think he claimed that they weren't Democrats - in fact he pretty clearly named them as Democrats.

2. Why does anyone "own" them? I don't understand. Are current Democrats responsible for the positions of their party a hundred years ago, or 50 years ago?

Of course, he wouldn't have inserted the word "conservative" in there unless he wanted to paint all of us southern conservatives as racist. Yea, I can see subtlety of his remark. I've seen many liberals on this board do it.

No, I don't think that's what he was doing at all. I think he was using the term "conservative" as it's defined in the dictionary, not as a pejorative.

 

[TemplarKormac]

No.

12.1%, as of Feb 2014:


Unemployment rates are higher for young people, minorities | PBS NewsHour

ThedocisIn nailed it.

Apparently he wasn't reading this.

"Age 16 to 19, both sexes" The number is 36%.

Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age

And I misread. That's 21% of all teenagers in America who are unemployed. So the black teen rate is substantially higher than the average.

Yeah! Lets make that 36% of the 16 to 19 year old Black represent the condition of all of "the Blacks"! That'll show 'em (and make you feel better too) but the fact is that you are most likely no more employed than that 36%. Yet you stand on your soap box and want to down them, while probably making all sorts of excuses for your own possible lack of employment and productivity. That's pretty hypocritical and comical at the same time. It's akin to the anti-government handout jerks offs complaining about "entitlements" while they are receiving entitlements themselves. What a bunch of bigoted clowns!

No. Even when I was wrong, I delineated the two. Or can you not read? Doc was wrong. There's a big difference between "16 and 19" and "16 and up."

Yet you stand on your soap box and want to down them, while probably making all sorts of excuses for your own possible lack of employment and productivity.

And it is wholly arrogant of you to down me, and make up your own judgements about my unemployment situation. Believe me, I speak from experience. Unemployment is not fun. I can only imagine what it's like for someone who isn't working and taking on a government subsidy. These genetic arguments must cease, at once.

That's pretty hypocritical and comical at the same time. It's akin to the anti-government handout jerks offs complaining about "entitlements" while they are receiving entitlements themselves. What a bunch of bigoted clowns!

Well for one thing, I rejected taking unemployment benefits when I was fired from my first job. When someone suggested I apply for welfare, I said no. When someone suggested I get food stamps. I said no. I did not believe in dependence on my government. Not one iota. That still is true. I was taught to depend on myself.

 

[Steinlight]

Lol. The SYSTEM is keeping the black man down.

 

[Pheonixops]

Just because they are "conservative" doesn't not make them Democrats. You own them.

1. I don't think he claimed that they weren't Democrats - in fact he pretty clearly named them as Democrats.

2. Why does anyone "own" them? I don't understand. Are current Democrats responsible for the positions of their party a hundred years ago, or 50 years ago?

Of course, he wouldn't have inserted the word "conservative" in there unless he wanted to paint all of us southern conservatives as racist. Yea, I can see subtlety of his remark. I've seen many liberals on this board do it.

Are you afraid of history? When I inserted the word "conservative" in there, I was being ACCURATE. I'll leave the inaccurate ,blanket generalizations to you and your cronies to do. It's actually once again both funny and hypocritical of you to show disdain regarding your allegation that I am trying to "paint all of us southern conservatives as racist.", when you have had NO problem ACTUALLY doing the same thing to "the Blacks" in this VERY thread!

Thanks for making me laugh again at the absurdity of it all Templar!

 

[Chris]

Bundy is the perfect spokesman for the Republican Party.

Complaining about welfare while he steal millions from the taxpayer.

Reminds me of Romney.

 

[Plasmaball]

Okay, let me set some things straight here.

1)What Bundy said was racist. Nor do I condone it. I have never been a racist in my life. In fact, I agreed with Rand Paul when he first condemned him.

2)To people who think I advocate slavery, I will never in my life condone the act of slavery. My grandmother's family gave room and board to black sharecroppers in the 1930's and 40's, they understood that all black men and women were just as human as they were. Slavery itself turns my stomach. But to me, the slavery of one era would have been preferable to the slavery of government subsidies. Even for me.

l.

jesus christ you are ******* retarded. You wouldnt last one day as an actual slave. If you would like to test this theory you are more than welcome to come live here and i will work you like an actual slave.

You people are a waste, a pure waste of life.

 

[Pheonixops]

Just because they are "conservative" doesn't not make them Democrats. You own them.

They were conservatives and they were Democrats. I don't "own" them, George Wallace and Strom Thurmond, as well as Byrd are not my people. George Wallace was a conservative democrat. I am a Liberal who will vote for any candidate I agree with, regardless of party.

Oh no, I get it. From what I've seen and read over the year and month I've been here, that 'conservative' is synonymous with republican. I have seen some leftist liberals use that term as a pejorative to refer to republicans. So really, was the "conservative" tag really necessary?

Of course it was necessary to be accurate, especially when not a few republicans and conservatives sometimes like to try to equate the Democrat Party of today with the one that had a more Southern Conservative power base during the antebellum and post bellum period. It's pretty much as silly as equating today's Republican Party to the Republican Party of Lincoln or the Republican Party of the Reconstruction era.

 

[Steinlight]

Bundy is the perfect spokesman for the Republican Party.

Complaining about welfare while he steal millions from the taxpayer.

Reminds me of Romney.

What millions? You mean the extortion fees from the Feds. Hey ******, why don't you complain about Obama supporting trillion dollar bailouts for Wall Street Banks instead of support the Feds bringing down the police state on a Mormon rancher?

 

[Steinlight]

Bundy is 100% wrong here, blacks have never had it easier anywhere at anytime in history than in the modern day US.

 

[mudwhistle]

Lol. The SYSTEM is keeping the black man down.

Who's running the system now?

A Black Man.

 

[Pheonixops]

Apparently he wasn't reading this.

"Age 16 to 19, both sexes" The number is 36%.

Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age

And I misread. That's 21% of all teenagers in America who are unemployed. So the black teen rate is substantially higher than the average.

Yeah! Lets make that 36% of the 16 to 19 year old Black represent the condition of all of "the Blacks"! That'll show 'em (and make you feel better too) but the fact is that you are most likely no more employed than that 36%. Yet you stand on your soap box and want to down them, while probably making all sorts of excuses for your own possible lack of employment and productivity. That's pretty hypocritical and comical at the same time. It's akin to the anti-government handout jerks offs complaining about "entitlements" while they are receiving entitlements themselves. What a bunch of bigoted clowns!

No. Even when I was wrong, I delineated the two. Or can you not read? Doc was wrong. There's a big difference between "16 and 19" and "16 and up."

Yet you stand on your soap box and want to down them, while probably making all sorts of excuses for your own possible lack of employment and productivity.

And it is wholly arrogant of you to down me, and make up your own judgements about my unemployment situation. Believe me, I speak from experience. Unemployment is not fun. I can only imagine what it's like for someone who isn't working and taking on a government subsidy. These genetic arguments must cease, at once.

That's pretty hypocritical and comical at the same time. It's akin to the anti-government handout jerks offs complaining about "entitlements" while they are receiving entitlements themselves. What a bunch of bigoted clowns!

Well for one thing, I rejected taking unemployment benefits when I was fired from my first job. When someone suggested I apply for welfare, I said no. When someone suggested I get food stamps. I said no. I did not believe in dependence on my government. Not one iota. That still is true. I was taught to depend on myself.

I didn't "down" you about your employment situation or lack thereof. Note that I said "possible" , I don't know you and your own situation. But I will say that if you are not employed and are trying to down a race of people for not being employed (especially when it represents the minority of that race) , I think it's pretty hypocritical of you to do so.
What "genetic arguments" are you referring to?


How did you "reject" unemployment, when I would think that one has to apply for unemployment? How were you eligible for unemployment if you were "fired" from your job?

 

[mudwhistle]

Bundy is 100% wrong here, blacks have never had it easier anywhere at anytime in history than in the modern day US.

So why do liberals keep saying they've got it rough?

This is really blowing your "Equality" and "Social Justice" nonsense all the hell right now.


I always said if your enemies are intent on eating themselves, pass them the salt.

 

[TemplarKormac]

1. I don't think he claimed that they weren't Democrats - in fact he pretty clearly named them as Democrats.

2. Why does anyone "own" them? I don't understand. Are current Democrats responsible for the positions of their party a hundred years ago, or 50 years ago?

Of course, he wouldn't have inserted the word "conservative" in there unless he wanted to paint all of us southern conservatives as racist. Yea, I can see subtlety of his remark. I've seen many liberals on this board do it.

Are you afraid of history? When I inserted the word "conservative" in there, I was being ACCURATE. I'll leave the inaccurate ,blanket generalizations to you and your cronies to do. It's actually once again both funny and hypocritical of you to show disdain regarding your allegation that I am trying to "paint all of us southern conservatives as racist.", when you have had NO problem ACTUALLY doing the same thing to "the Blacks" in this VERY thread!

Thanks for making me laugh again at the absurdity of it all Templar!

Are you afraid of history?

No. I am a fan of history, in it's most raw form.

When I inserted the word "conservative" in there, I was being ACCURATE.

Of course you were, but you don't speak for all the others who weren't. They used compound phrases such as "Conservative Southern Democrats" in a very snide way. Their hatred of Southerners is clearly evident. Besides, I don't see you calling any of them down for it.

It's actually once again both funny and hypocritical of you to show disdain regarding your allegation that I am trying to "paint all of us southern conservatives as racist.", when you have had NO problem ACTUALLY doing the same thing to "the Blacks" in this VERY thread!

What? Obama is racist. So is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. So is Sheila Jackson Lee. A whole host of other blacks are too. Do you deny history? Or are YOU afraid of it?

 

[Steinlight]

Lol. The SYSTEM is keeping the black man down.

Who's running the system now?

A Black Man.

Some wrongly thought Obama's election would settle the issue on America being an inherently racist country that keeps non-whites "down".

Why would the left give up their most potent political weapon of race?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Yeah! Lets make that 36% of the 16 to 19 year old Black represent the condition of all of "the Blacks"! That'll show 'em (and make you feel better too) but the fact is that you are most likely no more employed than that 36%. Yet you stand on your soap box and want to down them, while probably making all sorts of excuses for your own possible lack of employment and productivity. That's pretty hypocritical and comical at the same time. It's akin to the anti-government handout jerks offs complaining about "entitlements" while they are receiving entitlements themselves. What a bunch of bigoted clowns!

No. Even when I was wrong, I delineated the two. Or can you not read? Doc was wrong. There's a big difference between "16 and 19" and "16 and up."



And it is wholly arrogant of you to down me, and make up your own judgements about my unemployment situation. Believe me, I speak from experience. Unemployment is not fun. I can only imagine what it's like for someone who isn't working and taking on a government subsidy. These genetic arguments must cease, at once.

That's pretty hypocritical and comical at the same time. It's akin to the anti-government handout jerks offs complaining about "entitlements" while they are receiving entitlements themselves. What a bunch of bigoted clowns!

Well for one thing, I rejected taking unemployment benefits when I was fired from my first job. When someone suggested I apply for welfare, I said no. When someone suggested I get food stamps. I said no. I did not believe in dependence on my government. Not one iota. That still is true. I was taught to depend on myself.

I didn't "down" you about your employment situation or lack thereof. Note that I said "possible" , I don't know you and your own situation. But I will say that if you are not employed and are trying to down a race of people for not being employed (especially when it represents the minority of that race) , I think it's pretty hypocritical of you to do so.
What "genetic arguments" are you referring to?


How did you "reject" unemployment, when I would think that one has to apply for unemployment? How were you eligible for unemployment if you were "fired" from your job?

I should have said I was unfairly fired. My employer thought it was okay to infract me for the actions of my cohorts, on my day off. We were on a three strikes policy, one I incurred myself, the second was docked unfairly, the other was a result of me trying to do my job. I rejected unemployment for two reasons, one, because I knew I would lose the fight with my employer, and two because I didn't want government money.

Genetic arguments are arguments attacking where the argument comes from rather than attacking the argument itself. When you wail on me about my unemployment, you are committing an ad hominem fallacy, and making a genetic argument.

 

[mudwhistle]

Lol. The SYSTEM is keeping the black man down.

Who's running the system now?

A Black Man.

Some wrongly thought Obama's election would settle the issue on America being an inherently racist country that keeps non-whites "down".

Why would the left give up their most potent political weapon of race?

Pretty pathetic. Despicable really. All of the denials fall by the wayside when they think they have an issue that bails them out of trouble.


But in retrospect, it was people who voted for Obama that thought this ended it.

We who didn't knew it would only make it worse. We've been telling them so all along.

 

[TemplarKormac]

As I watched the discussion Randall had with Doc, I gleaned that the opinion of a black man no longer means as much to a liberal, when it comes from the other end of the spectrum. Dare I say it, whoever thinks such a thing is a hypocrite. I recall Doc telling me that Pheonixops as a black man knew whether slavery is preferable to government subsidy or not, but apparently, Randall didn't. Isn't that racist? To imply that one black man's opinion is worth more than another's?

When liberals get a contradictory opinion on the subject from another black man, a Republican conservative black man, his opinion no longer holds any weight. This is the inherent flaw of the liberal argument about racism. One black man's opinion should hold just as much weight as the other.

 

[Steinlight]

Who's running the system now?

A Black Man.

Some wrongly thought Obama's election would settle the issue on America being an inherently racist country that keeps non-whites "down".

Why would the left give up their most potent political weapon of race?

Pretty pathetic. Despicable really. All of the denials fall by the wayside when they think they have an issue that bails them out of trouble.


But in retrospect, it was people who voted for Obama that thought this ended it.

We who didn't knew it would only make it worse. We've been telling them so all along.

Liberal Republican leadership needs to stop pandering(on issues like Amnesty) and insisting they are "color blind" individualists, it is contradictory, wrongheaded and counterproductive. Instead of giving the leftist media the gratification of responding to their baseless attacks and distracting from the issues, they should ignore the attacks and frame the political conversation themselves on real issues.

 

[Pheonixops]

No. Even when I was wrong, I delineated the two. Or can you not read? Doc was wrong. There's a big difference between "16 and 19" and "16 and up."



And it is wholly arrogant of you to down me, and make up your own judgements about my unemployment situation. Believe me, I speak from experience. Unemployment is not fun. I can only imagine what it's like for someone who isn't working and taking on a government subsidy. These genetic arguments must cease, at once.

Well for one thing, I rejected taking unemployment benefits when I was fired from my first job. When someone suggested I apply for welfare, I said no. When someone suggested I get food stamps. I said no. I did not believe in dependence on my government. Not one iota. That still is true. I was taught to depend on myself.

I didn't "down" you about your employment situation or lack thereof. Note that I said "possible" , I don't know you and your own situation. But I will say that if you are not employed and are trying to down a race of people for not being employed (especially when it represents the minority of that race) , I think it's pretty hypocritical of you to do so.
What "genetic arguments" are you referring to?


How did you "reject" unemployment, when I would think that one has to apply for unemployment? How were you eligible for unemployment if you were "fired" from your job?

I should have said I was unfairly fired. My employer thought it was okay to infract me for the actions of my cohorts, on my day off. We were on a three strikes policy, one I incurred myself, the second was docked unfairly, the other was a result of me trying to do my job. I rejected unemployment for two reasons, one, because I knew I would lose the fight with my employer, and two because I didn't want government money.

Genetic arguments are arguments attacking where the argument comes from rather than attacking the argument itself. When you wail on me about my unemployment, you are committing an ad hominem fallacy, and making a genetic argument.

I actually did BOTH; I attacked your argument and portrayal of "the Blacks" and I called you on your hypocrisy about not working and downing other people for not working, especially when you made an inaccurate portrayal of Black people by trying to make the minority of Black people represent the majority of Black people who are in fact EMPLOYED.

You can call it "ad hominem fallacy and genetic argument"; where I am from we call it "calling you on your shit". It's akin to being an alcoholic and downing other people as being alcoholics while acting like you are not an alcoholic.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

As I watched the discussion Randall had with Doc, I gleaned that the opinion of a black man no longer means as much to a liberal, when it comes from the other end of the spectrum. Dare I say it, whoever thinks such a thing is a hypocrite. I recall Doc telling me that Pheonixops as a black man knew whether slavery is preferable to government subsidy or not, but apparently, Randall didn't. Isn't that racist? To imply that one black man's opinion is worth more than another's?

When liberals get a contradictory opinion on the subject from another black man, a Republican conservative black man, his opinion no longer holds any weight. This is the inherent flaw of the liberal argument about racism. One black man's opinion should hold just as much weight as the other.

Actually, my conversation with Randall consisted of him ranting nonsensical claims about what I was doing, and then ignoring my responses.

I don't see where he agreed with you that black people would be happier as slaves, though.