I've read his books. Yes, it's about race, and you needn't even read between the lines to see it.
If Americans were ever offered a real choice between LW and RW . . .
- Thread starter KingOrfeo
- Start date
I've read his books. Yes, it's about race, and you needn't even read between the lines to see it.
U
unregistered
Guest
U
unregistered
Guest
NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
gotta love KingofAssRetards as he's wanting free hand outs and is unwilling to do any kind of work. all KingofRetards wants is to blame others for his failures and accept more welfare
It's not that so much as in his world, whites are "us" and nonwhites are "them." You'll find that attitude running throughout his quotes.
rosco rathbone
1. f3e5 2. g4??
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Posts
- 42,431
Anyone? Bueller?
Ulaven_Demorte
Non-Prophet Organization
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2006
- Posts
- 30,016
Tell that to the morons who supports "The Patriot Act".
U
unregistered
Guest
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Posts
- 5,907
Using approval ratings is one way to judge. Interestingly, Bush II has both the highest and lowest approval rating. If you look closely at the data you can see that it was sky high only briefly and dropped pretty substantially after that.
Most Presidents, D or R, had some spikes here and there but mostly stayed between the 40 to 60% approval range. The only one to have a fall off the cliff moment, other than Bush II, was Nixon.
Most Presidents, D or R, had some spikes here and there but mostly stayed between the 40 to 60% approval range. The only one to have a fall off the cliff moment, other than Bush II, was Nixon.
If tradeoffs have to be made, I would emphasize economic populism and downplay social liberalism. Same-sex marriage and pot will be legal in every state sooner or later; real gun control won't happen this generation no matter what we do; tackling economic inequality is a much higher priority.
rosco rathbone
1. f3e5 2. g4??
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Posts
- 42,431
So since it's a done deal, would you vote for a strongly anti-gay marriage, anti-drug, pro-gun politician that was also an "economic populist"?
No, I wouldn't go that far, I would not want to risk further empowering that faction, which Pat Buchanan represents. They're only useful to America if they get behind progressives, not the other way around.
So it's all in your interpretation, like it is here. When somebody has an honest discussion about race with no apparent racism, it's racist anyway because the statements were politically incorrect, not truly racist. Liberals have some convenient rules.
No, the "us" vs. "them" attitude is truly racist, it just doesn't fit the definition of racism you assumed.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Says Mr.Impeach POTUS he's not running my War on Drugz hard enough against the will of the people......
Look at the world's actually existing social democracies. No, don't dismiss, look this time. They have been social democracies for decades, and not one, not any time, has proven to be on a slippery slope to totalitarianism or whatever you are describing. And a President Warren/Sanders/Kucinich/Nader, even one solidly supported by both houses of Congress and all state legislatures, would present no danger of that either; they would only make America into a social democracy. That prospect ain't scary. If it is scary to you, you must scare more easily than most people.
Last edited:
PoppingTom
TEH BRAIN
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Posts
- 7,922
OK, vette, as you're no racist, you can tell us all how a "honest discussion about race" can lead to anything else but racism. I'm absolutely clueless when it comes to this.
Easy. An "honest discussion about race" would begin with admitting and noting all the various ways racism still exists in American society, and how it affects people's lives, and proceed to discussing why it exists, and what can or cannot be done to put an end those various ways. (A dishonest discussion about race would begin with blaming minorities' behavior for all their problems, and end with absolving larger society of any responsibility or obligations in that regard.)
Last edited:
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2003
- Posts
- 33,665
I think you have to include Harry Truman too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2003
- Posts
- 33,665
If an "us vs. them" attitude is racist, that would mean there are tens of millions of black racists. A substantial number of them were demonstrating in Ferguson.
That's in addition to those who were there for the looting and other fun things.
PoppingTom
TEH BRAIN
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Posts
- 7,922
If an "us vs. them" attitude is racist, that would mean there are tens of millions of black racists. A substantial number of them were demonstrating in Ferguson.
What were they demonstrating for? Annihilation of the white race?
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2003
- Posts
- 33,665
Some of them were. At least that is their announced goal.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party
Last edited:
mark_j
It's a mad mad world
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2008
- Posts
- 5,737
I rest my case.. since you just said they are a minor player in the sceme of things it is probably a good bet that nothing will change..
Oh bullshit... they (liberal/progressives) take payoffs and "donations" from rich benefactors just like every other political shill.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Yes but who they take their money from and what they give in exchange are where you start getting some divergence.
LW: We need to un Fuck the VA.
RW: Defund that shit and get rid of it because I shouldn't have to pay for other peoples shit...fuck vets.
LW: Education needs help, we need to do something.
RW: Defund that shit and get rid of it because I shouldn't have to pay for your kids education....fuck skool maor church!
LW: We are paying on average 2.7x per person for HC they aren't even getting than countries with UHC, preventative medicine is cheaper and irrefutably leads to healthier, longer lived and thus happier populations.
RW: Evil Socialism TAWLK! YOUZ A COMMIE BOY??!?!? US had the best HC till Obamacare started the Grandma holocaust cuz MAO n STALLIN n' shit!
Fuck you and your being repugnant to the cawnstetewshun and my opinion on the founding principles of unrelated bullshit.
http://static.fjcdn.com/large/pictures/45/e8/45e88a_790486.jpg
LW: Ok I'll just fill this out....get them to sign off on it and badda bing like candy from a fuckin' baby, enjoy Kansas n' Bama ya bunch of broke ass bitches.
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2003
- Posts
- 33,665
Yanno, most right wingers solidly support military veterans, especially those who were injured. In fact, a lot of them are veterans themselves. It's the left wing types who spit on returning veterans, and this is common knowledge.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
It's been the left pushing for and always voting to defund veterans programs/benefits/pay?
Oh no that's been a solid republican activity for the past 10 years.
In fact, a lot of them are not....vets make up a pretty small % (like about 6%) of the population even collectively across all living generations.
MMmmmmmnooooooooot exactly.....
http://americansfortruth.com/uploads/2010/04/fred_phelps.bmp
and this is common knowledge.
This is your common opinion based upon some incidents 50 years ago....because it makes you feel better about voting to cut veterans care off from them every chance you can. Because you're a hyperpartisan RW'er.
Vote Republican!! Because fuck vets you shouldn't have to pay for that shit....socialism is EVIL! Riiiiiight?
Last edited:
Similar threads
