• Xenforo Cloud is upgrading us to version 2.3.8 on Monday February 16th, 2026 at 12:00 AM PST. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

CPAC 2014 Minority outreach panel

Does it make any difference if there's more white slaves on the welfare plantation than black ones?

Percentage of whites on welfare/total whites vs. blacks on welfare/total blacks or raw numbers, because there's more white people in the US than black people, so raw numbers would be skewed.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a "culture" has to be able to stand on it's own two feet, correct?

I don't think people are going around in Africa impregnating women without getting married, the societies would collapse. The only countries where people have children illegitimately are the wealthy industrialized countries that typically promote this sort of behavior through welfare.

Again, I'm not aware of people in the Congo running around impregnating people and then just leaving cold turkey. That sort of stuff doesn't fly there (incredibly Christian country). I could be wrong, but someone who is a sociologist could explain this concept of "culture" to me. I really don't think illegitimate children born out of wedlock is something that is part of any previous culture. I think marriage has typically been an institution that has been used because of labor necessity and economic situations (living together is cheaper than living apart).
 
I don't think you are going to find many conservatives interested in a "minority outreach". Most conservatives feel people should be treated as individuals and that skin color shouldn't be a factor. They also feel as tho they are not the racists people paint them as and therefore is no need to reach out.

And the beautiful thing about that is the conservative minorities have that same attitude and have risen above that skin color factor. It isn't white politicians that are going to convince minorities either way.. So Rand can make all the speeches he wants at black universities. Its the conservative minorities that are going to have to make the difference.

The only way a white politician is going to make a difference at the polls is they are going to have to come right out and directly support an issue, like Bush did with immigration, and own it.
 
Has anyone else noticed how IDL has gone from disaffected nutball who eschews politics altogether to GOP apologist?

Maybe it's time to stop feeding him then.

Although, that actually makes some sense to me. The democrats have a shitty agenda (redistribution and codependency), whereas the GOP has no agenda. Someone like him would pick the party with no agenda than the one with a dogshit agenda.
 
Maybe it's time to stop feeding him then.

Although, that actually makes some sense to me. The democrats have a shitty agenda (redistribution and codependency), whereas the GOP has no agenda. Someone like him would pick the party with no agenda than the one with a dogshit agenda.

No offense, but that's pretty stupid. Of course the GOP had an agenda, and the Democrats' agenda isn't redistribution and codependency. You can disagree or agree with either party's agenda without that kind of thing.

I think at a very high level what we have is different strategies for growing the income of the rich and different levels of optimism with regard to the economy: Cost-cutting for Republicans (meaning wages and taxes on the rich--generally increased inequality) and enhanced top-line growth for Democrats.
 
Hard for slaves to escape the current welfare state plantation which grants minorities privileges over white people, because they aren't as good enough obviously which is why the are there in the first place, for the several things they get accommodated for just being a minority. Hooray affirmative action- another welfare policy for minorities.

Are you trolling or did you just become twice as stupid as when the last time I was on here? If it's the latter I didn't think that was possible.
 
Are you trolling or did you just become twice as stupid as when the last time I was on here? If it's the latter I didn't think that was possible.

I think you're looking at the past with rose-tinted glasses.
 
I think you're looking at the past with rose-tinted glasses.

I think he's a racist communist twat who approves of affirmative action.

Not to mention, college professors are the modern slave drivers making sure the youth are put into debt for worthless degrees. He makes money off of ideological imaginary problems for an astronomical price and the false promise that going to college for debt slavery will be rewarded. He claims to be against the capitalistic system, but he's the very cog in the most corrupt market that plagues the youth to date- which actually makes him a perfect cookie-cutter communist as history always shows. Fuck him.
 
Since he was born maybe?

For as long as I can remember, he's claimed to be black. I guess you weren't paying attention.

Oh I really believe him..
jennifer-lawrence_zpsab35f454.gif
 
Has anyone else noticed how IDL has gone from disaffected nutball who eschews politics altogether to GOP apologist?

Weak. There is only one government Jack.

GOP and Democrats are two sides of the same coin. This means both sides have some truth to them and some BS to them. Keeps people divided and blaming each other. It's just a game.
 
I think he's a racist communist twat who approves of affirmative action.

Not to mention, college professors are the modern slave drivers making sure the youth are put into debt for worthless degrees. He makes money off of ideological imaginary problems for an astronomical price and the false promise that going to college for debt slavery will be rewarded. He claims to be against the capitalistic system, but he's the very cog in the most corrupt market that plagues the youth to date- which actually makes him a perfect cookie-cutter communist as history always shows. Fuck him.

So you just hate all college professors? And obviously going to college does confer rewards, both tangible and intangible. You could reasonably argue that they aren't worth the cost (I don't agree, but it's a legit argument), but not that there are no benefits.

Also, I'm not sure what you think that slavery means, but paying back the money you borrowed to pay for college doesn't fit any common definition of it.

Oh I really believe him..
jennifer-lawrence_zpsab35f454.gif

She's great. Great gif.

Weak. There is only one government Jack.

GOP and Democrats are two sides of the same coin. This means both sides have some truth to them and some BS to them.

You are pushing your labeling game again.

Nah, you've become a total GOP apologist. It's funny because a lot of the rhetoric you use makes you sound like a socialist, but it turns out that you're just a supporter of top-down class warfare.
 
This is extremely embarrassing and nearly as embarrassing as the GOP's total parading around of Ben Carson like a circus act.
 
Nah, you've become a total GOP apologist. It's funny because a lot of the rhetoric you use makes you sound like a socialist, but it turns out that you're just a supporter of top-down class warfare.

lol you are such a weasel
 
lol you are such a weasel

Nah, you're just mad because you're more transparent than you think you are.

Or if I'm wrong, can you list any policy you support that doesn't have (at least) a first-order effect of giving more money to the rich and taking more away from the poor and middle class?
 
Nah, you're just mad because you're more transparent than you think you are.

Or if I'm wrong, can you list any policy you support that doesn't have (at least) a first-order effect of giving more money to the rich and taking more away from the poor and middle class?

Well, I do like the anti war policy pushed by the likes of Ron Paul, and i'm also for putting a massive magnifying glass on the private bankers who control the money supply.

Although, i'm sure you will just spin that into somehow helping the rich in order to label me with something.
 
Well, I do like the anti war policy pushed by the likes of Ron Paul, and i'm also for putting a massive magnifying glass on the private bankers who control the money supply.

Anti-war sentiment has generally come from the left. Very interesting that you'd associate it with one of the most hard-right, pro-establishment politicians in recent years. And the right's policy of "putting a massive magnifying glass" on the Fed is specifically about forcing hard-money, which is about putting more money in the hands of rich bankers and hurting the bargaining position of labor.

Although, i'm sure you will just spin that into somehow helping the rich in order to label me with something.

No spin necessary. You're just repeating hard-right talking points. Just like I said.
 
I suppose if I told you I was in favor of GMO labeling you would spin that into a hard core right wing thing too.

Your games are bizarre. You love labeling and stereotyping, like you get off on it.
 
Anti-war sentiment has generally come from the left. Very interesting that you'd associate it with one of the most hard-right, pro-establishment politicians in recent years. And the right's policy of "putting a massive magnifying glass" on the Fed is specifically about forcing hard-money, which is about putting more money in the hands of rich bankers and hurting the bargaining position of labor.



No spin necessary. You're just repeating hard-right talking points. Just like I said.

If you only go back to Vietnam, sure.
 
Back
Top