- Joined
- Jan 2, 2018
- Messages
- 277
- Reaction score
- 0
Pitty he wasn't carrying and could have rid the world of a few more cockroaches.
On both, yes. But certainly more so for Clinton.
You can find a lot lot lot of posts by me "bashing" Clinton, as I find her much more loathsome than Obama. But you can also find posts by me criticizing Obama on issues like Libya, inaction on Honduras, his extremely timid response to race issues, and his being a little too trusting of the GOP during his first term.
As far as there not being 4 Trump supporters here who support intervention, like I said, I don't care if you think that's inaccurate, as I think your disbelief is kind of hilarious and silly. You are just as capable of going and looking for yourself in the Syria thread or elsewhere.
What would you have liked him to do about the race issue?
Not be a pussy and keep sugar coating and stepping away from advocating for the black community in an effort to bring "unity" and appeal to conservative/reactionary white folks who were never under any circumstance going to budge an inch on race issues or on him as a leader in that arena.
He spent years trying to pander to white folks who, no matter what he said, were going to say he was race baiting, divisive, anti-white, etc.
I don't mean to be overly critical of him personally, undermine the legitimate good that he did do in some areas for POC, or imply any resentment toward white people generally (as opposed to the "Obama is raaaaacist" crowd in particular), but it really did strike a nerve and it continues to.
Lol. 1 postOn both, yes. But certainly more so for Clinton.
You can find a lot lot lot of posts by me "bashing" Clinton, as I find her much more loathsome than Obama. But you can also find posts by me criticizing Obama on issues like Libya, inaction on Honduras, his extremely timid response to race issues, and his being a little too trusting of the GOP during his first term.
As far as there not being 4 Trump supporters here who support intervention, like I said, I don't care if you think that's inaccurate, as I think your disbelief is kind of hilarious and silly. You are just as capable of going and looking for yourself in the Syria thread or elsewhere.
EDIT: Also, about your "you're always mean to Trump! I'm the rational bipartisan one!" shtick, here's my response earlier this week to the thread asking "are Trump supporters 100% to blame for Syria:"
back in the 80s and early 90s when it wasnt cool to be conservative/republican/right wing.
people would wear red boot laces and red suspenders signifying their far right leanings.
it was really just a punk and skinhead thing.
Well, yes, it stands because no one is challenging it....at least not in this conversation.
If that hat was associated with sentiment to marginalize and scapegoat foreign nationals and immigrants, then he might well be attacked. I don't know.
Because, as I've stated, you're attacking a straw man. MAGA, Britain First, and National Front are not merely expressions of patriotism. They are symbols of ethno-nationalism that serve to imply (at least explicitly with the latter two, maybe not so much with MAGA) that certain citizens of non-European descent are lesser citizens or not citizens at all and that they need to be deported or barred from entry.
People are generally fine here doing that too. This is an isolated incident, which is why it made the news.
However, I am sure that plenty of people in those countries don't like it either. For instance, there are Shia minorities in Saudi Arabia and Korean minorities in Japan who would probably not like political expressions saying "we ethnic Japanese/Saudis are the real countrymen and all you other guys need to stop coming in here and making our country less great!"
Reads like in many ways you respect Richard Spencer's argument about race being a foundational part of how people identify, don't you think? (No Socratic line here, just a straight up question).
That's kind of a loaded and multifarious question. I would say it can be, sure, but I don't think I would use the term "foundational."
For instance, race in Caribbean countries/territories like Cuba and Puerto Rico isn't really an issue at all, at least relative to us. Black people, Mestizos, white(r) people of European descent - they get along fine despite there being some (again, relatively low) economic division along those lines.
Similarly, you can go to just about any American city and it will be racially mixed and generally harmonious. Hell, St. Louis is one of if not the most segregated cities in the US and there is really only racial division at all when there is a police shooting. And, even then, the "division" is really between city whites/blacks and county/suburbs/rural area whites that kind of inject themselves into the conversation.
Hope that addressed your question. I wasn't meaning to punt, but you know. It's not really a one-post topic.
I agree its not. I'm also not going to derail your thread bro.
That would not be prudent friend.
Hey put your hands on my and try to physically harm me and take my own rightful property....fuck you.
Just implying there are other means along the escalation spectrum you can use before giving someone lead poisoning brah.
Like trying to have a reasonable conversation with the type of scum that would attack you and try to grab your hat for having a different opinion than them??? Yeah, there’s no taking sense to this new breed of liberal scum.
Well sure, but does he need to die because just because he's an asshole?
Well sure, but does he need to die because just because he's an asshole?