When has Biden ever been a "racist"?
This oughta be good.
Lots of comments that if uttered by a Republican, would have Dems howling for their removal from office..
I know of about 5 but I'll give you 2...
1) His "hinky" endorsement of Obama as a "clean and articulate black man"... This is on par with "binders full of women...
No idea what a "hinky" is (do you mean hickey? because I know all about them) but HOW is that racist?
Remember that if you can't spell out a logical explanation, then you don't have one. You have baseless implication.
2) His comment about the requirement to have an Indian accent to work at a 7 -11...
once AGAIN ---
how is LANGUAGE a 'race'? Same as above.
Do we actually need to review --- AGAIN --- the definition of racism? In THIS country?
Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another.
Neither applies above. Doesn't even
begin to apply. The constant yammering of an illogical conclusion that on its face makes no sense ---
cannot impart sense to it that it never had. If it makes no sense, it still makes no sense regardless how many echobabblers echo it.
Case in point: O'bama telling Russian President Medvedev that he'd "have more flexibility" after he (O'bama) was elected. That gets trotted out here continually as an example of ------ I don't even know what.
Well no shit. When has any head of state NOT had more flexibility after he was elected? That's the whole
point of getting re-elected, so you can do things. This is the kind of stuff that makes me want to bash a hole in my wall.
Just his championing of the 94 Crime bill which LED to additional legislation creating DISPARATE sentencing for people of color is enough to be wary of...
He's PRAISED some strong segrationists as well.. THOSE are probably the most hurtful ones...
In what way? FOR their segregationism? By all means show us. I'm not aware of such kowtowing to segregationsim.
You'll notice of course that I say segregationis
m and not segregationis
ts, which is what you said. The latter is meaningless without its context. So give us the context. If you can find any. Because so far all you have here is Association Fallacy.
Again, example:
Robert Byrd was for a while a segregationist. Even a Klanner in his yute. He was also a competent fiddle player of Appalachian/oldtime music. If I sit in on a jam session with Robert Byrd, does that somehow make me a "segregationist" by some bizzaro osmosis?
Bottom line in ALL of these is that simply repeating a baseless claim over and over and over and over and over DOES NOT give it any veracity. Your job here is to show that such a basis EXISTS. You have to give us a road map of how you got TO that conclusion, otherwise there's no
there there. All you have is ipse dixit, which, in combination with four dollars and fifty two cents will get you an overpriced coffee at Starbucks.
You CANNOT ACT like there "is nothing there"... It would defending the indefensible.. You're favorite past-time apparently...
Just PRETENDING he's mentally capable to LEAD ANYTHING is actually "defending the indefensible" at this point....
Oh please. See the post I just wrote elsewhere about Rump, and he's actually IN the office.
Meanwhile, address these non sequiturs above, because you have yet to make the point. Thangyew.
