08-12-2020, 02:04 PM
(08-12-2020, 01:28 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, Trump is typically the one saying objectionable things or actively embracing the ones that do. I think that is more the problem than him not countering it.
Not relevant to the point I made.
Quote:White supremacist patriarchy? Never. I've heard about white privilege and the patriarchy, both of them being real things and not about hating on straight white men.
I honestly wonder how that's possible. They literally had a Congressional hearing on the topic;
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/09/21/candace-owens-clashes-with-fellow-witness-congressional-hearing-white-supremacy/
How you haven't heard the term "white supremacy" from a politician ever, is mind boggling to me.
Quote:Frequently.
Well, we agree on this at least.
Quote:I truthfully am unaware of this incident. Could you provide more information?
My apologies. While I can find examples of this they are not by members of Congress. I misremembered AOC's comparison of ICE to fascists running "concentration camps". I was certain she had compared them to terrorists as well, but I can't find it, so point retracted.
Quote:I mean, I've seen commentary from top Democrats shutting down the "defund the police" movement, meaning they aren't catering to it. And is their lack of addressing attacks on police from individuals, even including other elected officials, any worse (or as bad, really?) than top Republicans refusing or hesitating to call out blatant and explicit bigotry by individuals or members of their party? I understand that this hits closer for you, but the same criticisms you level at Democrats can be leveled in the other direction but instead of cops it is people of color, GSMs, etc.
Any worse is subjective, but using your example how many black people vote Republican and can you understand why that number is what that number is? When you answer that question you understand my position.
Quote:I know that in both cases it is a matter of the people in positions of power being concerned with losing it by alienating their constituency, but policy is where it really matters. Other than a few moronic examples, the party has not gotten behind policy that indicates any catering to these groups and their platform waters down a lot of it to make it more palatable.
And yet it continues to shift in that direction. You keep seeing what happens on the west coast as isolated to that region. It isn't, it only starts there. If you don't condemn it you are at least tacitly approving of it. I haven't seen much, if anything, in the way of condemnation.
