The First Black Republican Presidential Nominee Will Be.....

[Correll]

Can you name ONE White interest that you would side with the whites vs any conflicting minority interests?

Logically, a minority's interests could only conflict with those of whites given that minority was:
A. Not itself vastly identifiable as "white."
B. Economically (and therefore politically) more powerful than whites in general.

A conflict in interests does not require that.


American indian tribes have an interest in having their treaties respected so they can benefit from having casinos.

They have less economic and political power then whites, yet they have an interest and generally have it advanced and represented in policy.


Your attempt to pretend that such conflicts do not happen, is not realistic.

So you're saying the interests of white people still conflict with those of Native Americans? White people can't have casinos? White people don't want to respect the treaties they once agreed to any more?

I'm saying that sometimes some indians have an interest in casinos, and that conflicts with the interests of whites in the area.

This was in regard to your position that minorities could not have interests because they have less power than whites.



YOu made a point. I addressed it, seriously and honestly.


Please do not pretend to not understand how my answer related to your point.

"I'm saying that sometimes some indians have an interest in casinos, and that conflicts with the interests of whites in the area."

Until recently, I've been to the Hard Rock Casino and Guitar hotel in Hollywood -- it's mostly white people there. Seems it's just as much an interest to them as the blacks, hispanics, and others who partake.

Sure, there are many whites who it's not an interest of; but there are also many blacks who it's not an interest of and there are many hispanics and others who it's not an interest of.

Point being, it's not against whites. You only think it is because you're a fucking raging racist.

That some individual whites go there, does not change the fact that the other whites (whites as a group) in the area have the interest and instituted policy of NOT having a casino in the area, or they would have legalized gambling.


And, there is a difference conflict of interests, and "against whites". You do realize that, right?


If you have groups of people living in the same area, you will have conflicts of interests.


THat is not racism, you fucking moron. Discussing it is no racism, you fucking moron. Advocating for one or the other, is not racism, you fucking moron.


AND, could you please use the term Evul Wacism? I think it is reasonable for you to be the one to distinguish between real accusations of actual racism, and what you libs do.

Moron, again.... some whites want them, some don't. Some blacks want them, some don't. Some Hispanics want them, some don't. Some Asians want them, some don't.

It's not a white interest to not have them. Having them is not against whites. They're not a conflict of interest for whites. You only think they are because you're a fucking racist who sees everything through racist lens.

You look at the world and all you see is black & white.

When you have groups, they have group interests, and they will conflict, especially if they live in the same area.


Whites in the area, as a group, don't want casinos. That is why there is not legalized gambling. THat is their perceived interest, advocated by them, into law and policy.

The local indians have the interest of having the casino, and having that money flow into their community. That is their perceived interest, pushed by them, into law, and policy and an actual working business and cash flowing into their community.


So, you fucking race baiting asshole, what part of any of that, is Evul Wacism?

"Whites in the area, as a group, don't want casinos."

Fuck you, ya fucking racist.

Fuan, I've pointed this out to you before. Please use, "Wacist" when you talk like that, to distinguish, your accusations from REAL accusations.

You don't speak for all whites. Not all whites in the area are against the Casinos.....

The laws are passed by the local population. The whites in the area might not be formally organized into a white group, but as a group, they have passed laws against gambling. I'm not speaking for anyone, just pointing out their actions.

Which is "Wacism", not actual racism. So, please use the correct terminology.

And again, you only claim this is a white interest because whites as a group are against them because you're a fucking racist who sees the world through a racist lens.

"WACIST "lens. Dude, Seriously, wtf is wrong with you? How hard is this? ALL I'M ASKING is that when you make points like retarded child, to write it out, so it looks like a retarded child talking.

And here's something else that's above your G-d given comprehension level -- your racist attitude is far more prevalent among conservatives than it is with Liberals. It's why the racist groups like the KKK, neonazis, white supremacists and other assorted alt-rightards lean right. And blacks, in general, are smarter than you. They recognize this character flaw where you cannot. That's a big reason why some 90% of blacks vote Democrat.

Except that nothing what I said is actually "racist". BUT, you are using actually racist standards in attacking any whites that dare even speak of white interests, while defending and celebrating minorities doing the same.

And that is why, blacks are drawn to the dems. Because you are willing to serve and advance their interests, even, if not especially at the expense of whites.

That's why this thread is spot on -- you'll never live long enough to see a black get nominated for president by the GOP.

If you want more blacks to start voting Republican, you (collectively) need to stop being racist. Personally, I don't think ya can.

1. Nothing I 've said here is actually racist of course, you are just a piece of shit asshole motherfucker.

2. And any blacks that don't want that type of anti-white racism in policy is welcome in the GOP and/or to be Presidential candidate. It is only a matter of time and you can go fuck yourself, you faggot.

As always, there is no such "white interest." You only think there is because you're a fucking racist.

I challenge you to back up your accusations of Evul Wacism,


and you do so by calling me an Evul Wacist?


Literally, you just demonstrated that you think that calling someone a name, is a supporting argument.


DO you understand now, why I want you to write out your words, like you are a retarded child?


Please start doing that. It will help people understand who and what you are.

I already pointed out you have no argument. Making one up out of whole cloth is not an argument. Being against Indian casinos is not a white interest.

A little late in the game to start whining about the example being vague and ill defined.

It was good enough to reveal that you libs are just hostile to the idea of groups and group interest when it is whites.


YOu have different standards for different races, based on race and you are hostile to whites.


We all knew this, you libs just lie and try to hide it.

 

[Grumblenuts]

But, it is still different rules for people, based on race. Which is actual racism.


Let us move on to the next, obvious step.

Sorry, no. The definition of racism is not simply having different rules for different people.
Consider sexism for example..

Grumble has admitted to having different standards for different races when it comes to advancing group interests.


His pretense of not understand, was just him trying to not admit that.


Evasion. Like I said.

Yeah, bullshit. The only "different standard" I've not only acknowledged but advocated has been where the majority vs a minority. Not simply race vs. race which is what you have been arguing for. Because you're the lone flaming racist still standing.. and flaming..

 

[Grumblenuts]

Moving to other examples would just lead to more of the same.

Evasion. Like I said.

Got irony?

 

[Grumblenuts]

It was good enough to reveal that you libs are just hostile to the idea of groups and group interest when it is whites.

Hostile to some flaming racist who's yet to provide a single coherent example illustrating wtf he keeps babbling about? Color me guilty.

 

[Correll]

But, it is still different rules for people, based on race. Which is actual racism.


Let us move on to the next, obvious step.

Sorry, no. The definition of racism is not simply having different rules for different people.
Consider sexism for example..

Grumble has admitted to having different standards for different races when it comes to advancing group interests.


His pretense of not understand, was just him trying to not admit that.


Evasion. Like I said.

Yeah, bullshit. The only "different standard" I've not only acknowledged but advocated has been where the majority vs a minority. Not simply race vs. race which is what you have been arguing for. Because you're the lone flaming racist still standing.. and flaming..

"rac·ism
/ˈrāˌsizəm/
noun

• 1.prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized:"

1. Your behavior is demonstrating both discrimination and antagonism against whites. That fits the definition of racism. You are being racist, really racist, not the pretend game you libs like to play.


2. Being in the majority does not mean that you do not have the right to have your interests in any specific conflict of interests, considered with fairness, and not just "deferred" to the black guy or whatever minority is in question. That is just you being racist again.

 

[Correll]

Moving to other examples would just lead to more of the same.

Evasion. Like I said.

Got irony?

Nope. You were trying to avoid admitting your racist position.


That was something you were doing, and the complete opposite of what I was doing.


No irony at all.

 

[Correll]

It was good enough to reveal that you libs are just hostile to the idea of groups and group interest when it is whites.

Hostile to some flaming racist who's yet to provide a single coherent example illustrating wtf he keeps babbling about? Color me guilty.

We are past the example portion of the debate. THe example was good enough for both of us to reveal our positions on the issue of Group interests.


I support them and the right of all groups to organize and advocate for them.


You support them and the right of all groups to organize and advocate for them, except for whites.


And to you, that means I am "wacist".


LOL!!!!!!!

 

[Grumblenuts]

Yes, your nothing example and complete lack of evidence supporting your idea that white people, other than overt racists, are gathering together in groups, saying "Hey, we white people are really being targeted and getting screwed here! We need to get even more of us together and fight back!"

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Funny how the whites who talk about democratic plantations can't seem to tell us when they will nominate a black presidential candidate.

Why is color the only thing to you? Black, black, black black black black black

 

[Correll]

Yes, your nothing example and complete lack of evidence supporting your idea that white people, other than overt racists, are gathering together in groups, saying "Hey, we white people are really being targeted and getting screwed here! We need to get even more of us together and fight back!"

1. Your strawman of what I meant by "white interests" is noted and dismissed as a meaningless strawman.


2. Would you like to give the next example for discussion purposes? ONe that shows what you mean by it being ok for minorities to advocate for their interests and/or how it is not ok for whites to do the same.


3. ANd I promise not to play any of the silly evasive games you played.


4. THough, if you cry "wacism" I will request that you spell out the words, as though speaking like a retarded child. That is completely fair.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Funny how the whites who talk about democratic plantations can't seem to tell us when they will nominate a black presidential candidate.

Why is color the only thing to you? Black, black, black black black black black

You've never seen a Stormfronter going White, white, white white white white white?
Correll's been busy doing a bang up job of mimicking a lame one right here..

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Funny how the whites who talk about democratic plantations can't seem to tell us when they will nominate a black presidential candidate.

Why is color the only thing to you? Black, black, black black black black black

You've never seen a Stormfronter going White, white, white white white white white?
Correll's been busy doing a bang up job of mimicking a lame one right here..

I'm not on stormfront. I'm here.

 

[Grumblenuts]

And?

 

[Correll]

Funny how the whites who talk about democratic plantations can't seem to tell us when they will nominate a black presidential candidate.

Why is color the only thing to you? Black, black, black black black black black

You've never seen a Stormfronter going White, white, white white white white white?
Correll's been busy doing a bang up job of mimicking a lame one right here..

You're the one with different standards based on race.

If not for that, we would be in agreement on this issue and would have moved on.

 

[Correll]

And?

You should do the next example, one to demonstrate your position, that shows a minority group, advocating for some group interest and them some whites to show why it is bad when whites do it.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You should try to make some sense.

 

[Correll]

You should try to make some sense.

Perfect sense. I came up with a limited example for discussion purposes and we discussed it, and it was very informative about the issues at hand and the gap in positions between us.


My example showed MY take on the issue, though your response was very revealing.


I think it could be helpful if you do the next one. Show us what you envision when you imagine a black or other minority group advocating for a group interest and what you envision when whites do the same and why it is different.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You have so far only publicly "envisioned" some whites doing the same. A group self-identifying as "white" representing "white interests" opposing some obvious minority. I envision only overt racists doing the same, as you should know full well by now.

 

[Jitss617]

I think She is amazing!

 

[Correll]

.... A group self-identifying as "white" representing "white interests" opposing some obvious minority. I envision only overt racists doing the same, as you should damn well know full well by now.

So, show it, in an example so we can see how it would play out.