+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0)
+--- Thread: It's Kamala! (/Thread-It-s-Kamala)
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 10:28 AM)GMDino Wrote: Please don't run to the cops sir! I'll be a good boy.
The irony of you saying this aside, it's not hard to simply not tell falsehoods.
Quote:Back to the topic you have used your opinion to imply that "both sides" do what I showed the right wing noise machine does do.
No, I didn't.
Quote:So in that respect you are correct (and I'll expect the usual platitudes that of course you were correct) that it was not "disputed" but rather an attempt to downplay it being a way that the right wings attacks black candidates by diluting it into "both sides". Only you have done so with just your view.
No, it wasn't
Quote:So, I deeply and humbly apologize for using a word that did not fully display what I meant about your "argument" however it is still silly. Provide actual proof of move along. Arguing for the sake of arguing does nothing.
Since you apparently don't even know what my argument was I'm going to have to take a pass at that.
RE: It's Kamala! - GMDino - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 10:47 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The irony of you saying this aside, it's not hard to simply not tell falsehoods.
No, I didn't.
No, it wasn't
Since you apparently don't even know what my argument was I'm going to have to take a pass at that.
SSF if you EVER just said what your "argument" was versus playing the "I didn't say that card" we could have a discussion.
When you say I said something wrong I clarify. When I say what you say you say "nuh uh" (<-- that's not a direct quote of you simply how I read it when you refuse to explain yourself) while saying no one is smart enough to get what you are saying.
So dumb it down for me and Dill (since we are the only two you will do it to...and we know why) and explain yourself or, as an alternative, provide something positive to the thread with information or sources.
I maintain the right wing noise machine (and Trump and his supporters) try to decide who is "really" black and provided proof of it.
Whatever your argument is hasn't changed that.
Carry on sir.
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 11:04 AM)GMDino Wrote: SSF if you EVER just said what your "argument" was versus playing the "I didn't say that card" we could have a discussion.
I did, in my very first post on the subject.
Quote:When you say I said something wrong I clarify. When I say what you say you say "nuh uh" (<-- that's not a direct quote of you simply how I read it when you refuse to explain yourself) while saying no one is smart enough to get what you are saying.
So dumb it down for me and Dill (since we are the only two you will do it to...and we know why) and explain yourself or, as an alternative, provide something positive to the thread with information or sources.
I said that the modern left decides who is black in much the same way as the "one drop rule". It's an odd position to have considering their stated goals of equality and inclusivity.
Quote:I maintain the right wing noise machine (and Trump and his supporters) try to decide who is "really" black and provided proof of it.
In the case of Harris, I'd agree.
Quote:Whatever your argument is hasn't changed that.
Never said it didn't.
Quote:Carry on sir.
Copy that.
RE: It's Kamala! - Dill - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 10:23 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You are advancing that I am advocating that "the left" currently uses the "one drop" rule to advance legal discrimination. I am not, and have never, made that argument. We are discussing two different things.
No.
To be sure, it is not clear what you are "advocating," as your points don't rest on clear definitions and examples, especially of "the left." That forces people acting in good faith to guess what you mean. Guesses often lead to error and more confusion, and opportunity for ad hoc charges that I and "the left" are guilty of some "disservice" or "perpetuation." More confusion. You could fix that by following my practice of defining terms and stating as clearly as possible what you ARE advocating with clarifying examples. But it looks like you have decided not to do that, but to continue with ad hoc reaction.
The one-drop rule was a legal definition of blackness developed to enforce strict segregation and peculiar to the US.
In response to my comment about a "reverse one drop rule," you claimed "both the Klan and the far left use the same rules to decide who is, and is not, black." That implies "the left" also uses the one-drop rule to decide who is and who is not black. If "the left" does that, then they are relying on a legal concept developed to enforce discrimination. That is entailed by your linkage of Klan and "far left." To point that out is not to "misread" you as saying "the left" is advancing legal discrimination.
Every instance of someone in the US calling someone "Black," including people who self identify as such, is not an application of the one-drop rule. E.g., as I say above, 340 million Americans consider Obama Black, without "disservice" to his white mother or "using the same rule as the Klan" etc. But you assert I and "the left" are somehow specifically guilty of such, not those millions. But you are not because, what, you see some people as "mixed race"? As if "the left" doesn't?
Absent any examples of an actual "far leftist" who "uses the same rules as the Klan," it appears that you are just asserting that anyone who "labels" a black person "Black" is then following the same rules as the Klan, and then calling that a practice of "the far left." That's why I reminded you of the legal provenance of the one drop rule, which limits its application. You nevertheless tried to build a link between "leftists" an the Klan on that basis, in part by expanding it to cover most any recognition of physical differences coded racial, however innocuous.
RE: It's Kamala! - PhilHos - 08-25-2020
(08-24-2020, 07:59 PM)Dill Wrote: Leftists-without-quotation-marks have, since the 19th century, excluded race as a criterion of political exclusion.
So Jim Crow laws WEREN'T enacted by Democrats?
Also, didn't Biden specifically state he was going to exclude the white race from his pool of VP candidates? Yes, he did. So, this is complete bullshit, isn't it? Yes, it is.
It is the left and Democrats that care what one's race or gender or sexual orientation is.
RE: It's Kamala! - Belsnickel - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 01:40 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So Jim Crow laws WEREN'T enacted by Democrats?
Also, didn't Biden specifically state he was going to exclude the white race from his pool of VP candidates? Yes, he did. So, this is complete bullshit, isn't it? Yes, it is.
It is the left and Democrats that care what one's race or gender or sexual orientation is.
The Democrats are not a party of leftists, and have not always been the liberal party. Now, I'm not a big fan of the whole concept of the parties switching, because that isn't really true. But both parties up until the implementation of the Southern Strategy contained both liberal and conservative elements. More liberal folks pushed for things like racial equality while the conservatives implemented Jim Crow laws. This is why there was a subset of the Democrats referred to as the Dixiecrats, because they were for many of the same things as Democrats but were not happy with some of the progressive positions being taken by the northern contingent. Following LBJ's "betrayal" of them by signing the CRA, the Dixiecrats were courted heavily by the GOP utilizing the Southern Strategy that catered to their racist ideals and this is why the Republicans are now strong in the southern states.
Thus endeth the lesson on why trotting out the ol' "the Democrats are the racist party! They founded the KKK and enacted the Jim Crow laws!" is horse shit and just highlights ignorance regarding our political history.
RE: It's Kamala! - PhilHos - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 01:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The Democrats are not a party of leftists, and have not always been the liberal party. Now, I'm not a big fan of the whole concept of the parties switching, because that isn't really true. But both parties up until the implementation of the Southern Strategy contained both liberal and conservative elements. More liberal folks pushed for things like racial equality while the conservatives implemented Jim Crow laws. This is why there was a subset of the Democrats referred to as the Dixiecrats, because they were for many of the same things as Democrats but were not happy with some of the progressive positions being taken by the northern contingent. Following LBJ's "betrayal" of them by signing the CRA, the Dixiecrats were courted heavily by the GOP utilizing the Southern Strategy that catered to their racist ideals and this is why the Republicans are now strong in the southern states.
Thus endeth the lesson on why trotting out the ol' "the Democrats are the racist party! They founded the KKK and enacted the Jim Crow laws!" is horse shit and just highlights ignorance regarding our political history.
Whatever makes you feel better about being associated with a party with a history of racism and still continues to let race and gender affect the things it says and does.
RE: It's Kamala! - Belsnickel - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 03:03 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Whatever makes you feel better about being associated with a party with a history of racism and still continues to let race and gender affect the things it says and does.
Whatever makes you feel better about being associated with a party that actively courted the racist element of the other party causing them to switch parties and continues to seek the perpetual disenfranchisement and systemic oppression of people of color.
RE: It's Kamala! - PhilHos - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 03:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Whatever makes you feel better about being associated with a party that actively courted the racist element of the other party causing them to switch parties and continues to seek the perpetual disenfranchisement and systemic oppression of people of color.
I don't deny the past of the Republican party. I do know that the Republican party today, despite its many flaws, is nowhere near as racist or sexist as the Democrat party has become.
RE: It's Kamala! - Belsnickel - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 03:50 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I don't deny the past of the Republican party. I do know that the Republican party today, despite its many flaws, is nowhere near as racist or sexist as the Democrat party has become.
I laughed too hard at this. The level of naivete you have is too high for me to bother with this pointless back and forth.
RE: It's Kamala! - BmorePat87 - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 01:40 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So Jim Crow laws WEREN'T enacted by Democrats?
Also, didn't Biden specifically state he was going to exclude the white race from his pool of VP candidates? Yes, he did. So, this is complete bullshit, isn't it? Yes, it is.
It is the left and Democrats that care what one's race or gender or sexual orientation is.
You seem really confused. Dill was responding to your attacks on "the left", which is an ideology not a party. Matt then further explained that to you in the next post, pointing out that the Democratic party isn't a "leftist" party nor has it always been a liberal one.
"the Left" and the Democratic Party circa 1800's-1950's are not synonymous.
Also, Biden never said he'd exclude white people.
RE: It's Kamala! - PhilHos - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 03:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I laughed too hard at this. The level of naivete you have is too high for me to bother with this pointless back and forth.
Call it what you will, but deep down, you know I'm right.
RE: It's Kamala! - PhilHos - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 04:30 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You seem really confused. Dill was responding to your attacks on "the left", which is an ideology not a party. Matt then further explained that to you in the next post, pointing out that the Democratic party isn't a "leftist" party nor has it always been a liberal one.
Sucks when someone takes people and the beliefs from the extremes and applies it to the rest of the group, don't it?
(08-25-2020, 04:30 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Also, Biden never said he'd exclude white people.
This is correct. He said he'd "prefer" a woman of color, but as far as I can tell he never explicitly claimed he'd ONLY look at women of color. My mistake.
RE: It's Kamala! - BmorePat87 - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 04:57 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Sucks when someone takes people and the beliefs from the extremes and applies it to the rest of the group, don't it?
That's not what happened. You incorrectly used the conservative Democratic Party of the 19th century as an example of "leftists".
I guess that "sucks" for the person making the incorrect statement.
RE: It's Kamala! - PhilHos - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 05:02 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: That's not what happened. You incorrectly used the conservative Democratic Party of the 19th century as an example of "leftists".
I guess that "sucks" for the person making the incorrect statement.
Nooooooooooooooooooo, I called the Democrats of today AND Democrats of the past as examples of leftists.
RE: It's Kamala! - GMDino - 08-25-2020
This is how a campaign and a candidate responds when a racist wants to give them support.
https://hillreporter.com/biden-team-rejects-support-of-absolutely-repugnant-white-supremacist-richard-spencer-76989
Quote:Biden Team Rejects Support Of “Absolutely Repugnant” White Supremacist Richard Spencer
BY STEPH BAZZLE August 24, 2020
Neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, of the deadly Unite The Right rally in Charlottesville Virginia, appears to be attempting to create an image of his ilk as linked to Democrats, leftists, and specifically, Joe Biden. The Biden team isn’t standing for it.
[Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images]
Spencer has tweeted a series of jeering posts, boasting that he defies the norm of white supremacists and neo-Nazis being associated with right-wing politics. He’s shared images clearly meant to associate him with Biden, such as a created ‘Ridin’ with Biden’ image and an endorsement photo. However, Biden’s Rapid Response director immediately responded to fully reject this support.
In his statement about his vote, Spencer makes it clear he’s not supporting progressive policies or Biden himself — it’s just that “the liberals are clearly more competent.”
Biden’s campaign immediately responded, describing Spencer and people like him as “vile forces of hate who have come crawling out from under rocks,” and said Spencer’s support is “10,000% unwelcome.”
Spencer’s recent posts also indicate that he’s not voting for anti-racist, pro-immigrant, or otherwise progressive policies. Instead, he’s expressed annoyance at Trump for failing to follow through with policies like the border wall (in one post he says that Steve Bannon’s project, in which he siphoned money from donors, is no more of a scam than Trump’s own wall promises) as well as a certainty that the left isn’t going to successfully do anything progressive either. (He retweeted this assertion as seen below from Rose McGowan.)
He also retweeted the sentiment that those voting for Trump found him to be a gun with an “empty chamber” — suggesting he didn’t follow through on what they expected from him.
Despite Spencer’s clear presentation that he supported the policies he expected Trump to enact, and is unhappy that the president did not do so, there appears to be a clear effort to falsify a link between neo-Nazis and the left. Spencer retweeted a post from Dinesh D’Souza asserting that this somehow proved that white supremacists, in general, are not Trump supporters.
He also retweeted a ‘Ridin with Biden’ image, and shared a photo of himself with a quote supporting Biden.
There’s no indication Spencer actually supports any policy associated with Joe Biden or Democrats. Instead, he suggests he’s disappointed with Trump, and he appears to be amused at the idea of associating white supremacy with Democrats. However, whatever associations Richard Spencer and Dinesh D’Souza might promote, Biden’s team is clear: they don’t want his support or association.
Or you can pretend you don't know who they are (after talking about him as far back as 1991) and then blaming a "bad ear piece".
Now, eventually DJT rejected the support of Duke so give him credit I guess for doing the right thing eventually.
Would be nice if he did the right thing initially instead of after all the excuses and explanations.
RE: It's Kamala! - PhilHos - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 05:26 PM)GMDino Wrote: This is how a campaign and a candidate responds when a racist wants to give them support.
https://hillreporter.com/biden-team-rejects-support-of-absolutely-repugnant-white-supremacist-richard-spencer-76989
Or you can pretend you don't know who they are (after talking about him as far back as 1991) and then blaming a "bad ear piece".
Now, eventually DJT rejected the support of Duke so give him credit I guess for doing the right thing eventually.
Would be nice if he did the right thing initially instead of after all the excuses and explanations.
Or, you know, you could just not automatically equate someone with all the beliefs/thoughts of their followers. Just a thought.
RE: It's Kamala! - BmorePat87 - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 05:16 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Nooooooooooooooooooo, I called the Democrats of today AND Democrats of the past as examples of leftists.
Jim Crow Era Democrats were not left/liberal.
RE: It's Kamala! - GMDino - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 05:37 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Or, you know, you could just not automatically equate someone with all the beliefs/thoughts of their followers. Just a thought.
Eh, Trump told me there are some "very fine people" on both sides.
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-25-2020
(08-25-2020, 07:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: Eh, Trump told me there are some "very fine people" on both sides.
Find that quote and then tell me why he didn't say what you're claiming he did. Trump is an idiot and says dumb crap all the time, but he didn't say what you're insinuating he said.