ADVERTISEMENT

UVA Declines White House Invitation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, there are a lot of people on the right that are racist nationalists. It’s hard to deny that Trump being President has been a catalyst for a lot of these folks to come out of the shadow. Obviously, the majority of the right isn’t this way, but there are a decent chunk of them that are looking the other way.
There are an equal number of racists on the left, possibly more. It’s somehow ok to openly hate white people without consequence.
 
Well, there are a lot of people on the right that are racist nationalists. It’s hard to deny that Trump being President has been a catalyst for a lot of these folks to come out of the shadow. Obviously, the majority of the right isn’t this way, but there are a decent chunk of them that are looking the other way.
Racism and hate are not exclusive to the right. It just gets ignored when it can't be used to push a narrative.
 
At the same time, you are willing to vote for people who will support laws that impose conservative values on others.
There are a lot of different reasons to vote for a particular group. We will never have a candidate who we agree with on everything. That just doesn't exist on either side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SNU0821
Remember when people called us crazy for even suggesting that spying on the Trump team took place?

Remember when we were called crazy for not believing collusion took place?

Those days were fun.
Yea, I was watching morning Joe the morning after Trump said that Obama wire tapped Trump towers, and the panel on MJ were all laughing at him. Little Joe was saying no AMercian POTUS would ever do that, well now we know Obama did do it. I am telling you Obama either started this or at least knew about it and blessed it.

Joe is now Mika's cuck.

I do not watch Mika and her cuck any more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SNU0821
Datt....You know the left does the same thing.
Example?
Preventing other couples from marrying because you think their very nature demeans the institution of marriage would be an example from my side, albeit a moot point for now.
 
Example?
Preventing other couples from marrying because you think their very nature demeans the institution of marriage would be an example from my side, albeit a moot point for now.
Easy. The fallacy of transgender people and the whole gender fluidity nonsense.
 
There are a lot of different reasons to vote for a particular group. We will never have a candidate who we agree with on everything. That just doesn't exist on either side.
While that's fine as a general statement, in this context, in response to what I said, it's equivocation and deflection.
 
Easy. The fallacy of transgender people and the whole gender fluidity nonsense.
How is using someone's preferred pronouns an encroachment on your rights? Doesn't seem any more inconvenient than learning the correct pronunciation of their name.
 
Bert, there's still aspects of religion that would love to squash physics and in some cases medicine. The last 250 yrs is mere a drop in the bucket. About the thousands of yrs before that. Scientists were heretics and killed...

People can have their religion, as long as it doesn't affect my life. But don't make it a political cause. Unfortunately there are many that still do...

BTW slavery in the US was legal within the past 300 yrs.

I don't know why you put that in there? All religions accepted slavery or some form of forced work.

Religion affects your life every day. Our moral compass is based on Jewish and Christian religions. Our government's freedoms were based on those religious concepts aided by the "enlightenment" movement which were then expressed in the U.S. Constitution. So our government was shaped by religion and religion will always be part of a political cause.

The U.S. government separated church from state, formalized in the Bill of Rights; however, it also firms up the right to believe in a religion. The Bill of Rights does not outlaw religion it just keeps the government from picking one religion over others. So the religious may piss you off for expressing their beliefs but that ain’t nothing you can do about it.
 
I don't know if anything has come out verifying wiretapping specifically. But it is apparent that Obama used his power as president to spy on a political opponent. That should concern anyone.

An investigation into serious allegations was initiated, yes. The investigation had merit.

So potential crimes (tipped off by an ally's intelligence agency) shouldn't be investigated because a race for political office is underway?

Interesting take. I can only guess people are trying to draw a parallel to what Nixon did? Two different things.
 
Not deflection. Just a statement.
person A: I believe this.
me: That's inconsistent with this other thing you do.
you: Everybody is inconsistent.

I'm not telling you what your intention was. I'm telling you the effect of what you said. It was an equivocation b/c it implies it's all equal. It's a deflection b/c it clouds the focus on the example at hand.
 
An investigation into serious allegations was initiated, yes. The investigation had merit.

So potential crimes (tipped off by an ally's intelligence agency) shouldn't be investigated because a race for political office is underway?

Interesting take. I can only guess people are trying to draw a parallel to what Nixon did? Two different things.
Turns out it was not merited. The warrants were obtained due to deliberately false information that even the creator of the dossier said was bullshit. They all knew this and went forward anyways with only the intention of casting a cloud over Trump's presidency. I said from the beginning that I believed more Democrats were going to be in trouble over this than anyone involved with the Trump campaign. As of now, looks like I was right.
 
person A: I believe this.
me: That's inconsistent with this other thing you do.
you: Everybody is inconsistent.

I'm not telling you what your intention was. I'm telling you the effect of what you said. It was an equivocation b/c it implies it's all equal. It's a deflection b/c it clouds the focus on the example at hand.
Okay. My apologies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert Higginbotha
There are an equal number of racists on the left, possibly more. It’s somehow ok to openly hate white people without consequence.
The majority in a country with the history that we have crying about being hated is laughable. If white people haven’t been winning in this country, who is?

Edit: Also, the whatabout-ism here is laughable. The KKK and white nationalists are definitely pro-Trump and have been come out of the shadows in full force.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dattier
The majority in a country with the history that we have crying about being hated is laughable. If white people haven’t been winning in this country, who is?
You do realize that there are racist, white Democrats too? Also have Democrats who are antisemitic, openly at that. And yes, the hate for white people is relevant despite our country's history. Reversing the recipients of hate does not serve anyone well. It should be universally understood that hate in all shapes and colors is not a good thing. How will we ever move forward if we use our distant past to justify our present?
 
As in you understand my point, or as in "Bye, Felecia"?
B/c if it's the former, cool. Remember it.
If it's the latter, we're just going to end up talking about it again.
No Datt, I get your point. I don't fully agree with it, but enough to move on from it.
 
There are an equal number of racists on the left, possibly more. It’s somehow ok to openly hate white people without consequence.
Racism and hate are not exclusive to the right. It just gets ignored when it can't be used to push a narrative.
Without the leverage to use racial prejudice to oppress others, it's not racism. It's just racial prejudice.

To wit, there's no consequence to white people as a group for being so-called "openly hate[d]."

Now, if by racists-on-the-left you mean white liberals who think they're doing something good but who are actually contributing to harm done to people of color, yes, they exist, which supports my long-held and thoroughly explained stance that racism today is more the institutional and subconscious type than the Klan-march-in-streets type. You've both fought that definition at every opportunity.
 
No Datt, I get your point. I don't fully agree with it, but enough to move on from it.
Fair enough.

You do realize that there are racist, white Democrats too? Also have Democrats who are antisemitic, openly at that. And yes, the hate for white people is relevant despite our country's history. Reversing the recipients of hate does not serve anyone well. It should be universally understood that hate in all shapes and colors is not a good thing. How will we ever move forward if we use our distant past to justify our present?
It feels like terminology is getting muddled here, as alluded to in my last response to you and toonces. Hate is bad in all forms. It is not equal in all forms. Some hate is an unhealthy but understandable response to very real trauma. Some hate is arbitrary and used in conjunction with power to harm people for a shared demographic.
 
You do realize that there are racist, white Democrats too? Also have Democrats who are antisemitic, openly at that. And yes, the hate for white people is relevant despite our country's history. Reversing the recipients of hate does not serve anyone well. It should be universally understood that hate in all shapes and colors is not a good thing. How will we ever move forward if we use our distant past to justify our present?
Oh I agree that there are racists on both sides, but I was responding to the comment about white people being hated on. Ya’ll have it as good as possible.
 
Without the leverage to use racial prejudice to oppress others, it's not racism. It's just racial prejudice.

To wit, there's no consequence to white people as a group for being so-called "openly hate[d]."

Now, if by racists-on-the-left you mean white liberals who think they're doing something good but who are actually contributing to harm done to people of color, yes, they exist, which supports my long-held and thoroughly explained stance that racism today is more the institutional and subconscious type than the Klan-march-in-streets type. You've both fought that definition at every opportunity.
Racism isn’t always in a white hood and def isn’t a white people thing. In my experience minoriities are easily the most open and blatant about being racist....and usually to other minorities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SNU0821
Turns out it was not merited. The warrants were obtained due to deliberately false information that even the creator of the dossier said was bullshit. They all knew this and went forward anyways with only the intention of casting a cloud over Trump's presidency. I said from the beginning that I believed more Democrats were going to be in trouble over this than anyone involved with the Trump campaign. As of now, looks like I was right.

The assertion was that Obama ordered serveillance of Trump, with the implication that it was politically motivated. What we know now is that isn't true.

Russia interfered with the election to help one side win. Campaign members on that side were aware of the interference and okay with it. That side came up short of outright formally agreeing to work with the Russians to rig the election, though offers of information from Russian sources were made and attempts to acquire the information were made.

Those are some of the high level facts. They're not enough to warrant investigation?

If you have an issue with how the warrants were obtained, look at the FBI, not the politicians.
 
Last edited:
How is using someone's preferred pronouns an encroachment on your rights? Doesn't seem any more inconvenient than learning the correct pronunciation of their name.
Disagree. It’s trying to force me to adhere to their beliefs. I know you won’t ever agree. You will defend everything on the left regardless. We can go ahead and agree to disagree. Both the left and right do the same thing. Insisting it only happens on one side is just foolish.
 
Racism isn’t always in a white hood and def isn’t a white people thing. In my experience minoriities are easily the most open and blatant about being racist....and usually to other minorities.
In that sense, yes, everyone can be an agent of institutional racism b/c we've all grown up in a white supremacist society, but the victims are always people of color. White people can be victims of racial prejudice, but it's not systemic, so it's not racism.
 
If only Mueller or some high profile democrat would investgate that claim.
 
In that sense, yes, everyone can be an agent of institutional racism b/c we've all grown up in a white supremacist society, but the victims are always people of color. White people can be victims of racial prejudice, but it's not systemic, so it's not racism.
I read an article you posted, and I'm starting to believe your the author. Are you? Have you link your good work here?

You're a young guy aren't you?
Notshitting on you, you brought up a lot of great points, if that is you.
 
Disagree. It’s trying to force me to adhere to their beliefs. I know you won’t ever agree. You will defend everything on the left regardless. We can go ahead and agree to disagree. Both the left and right do the same thing. Insisting it only happens on one side is just foolish.
How is that forcing you to "adhere to their beliefs"? How is it any different from the dude you grew up with who used to go by "Billy" now going by "William" as an adult? Or if Billy starts going by his middle name, which is "Gaylord," is it forcing you to adhere to his beliefs if you think that's a way worse name? Do you call every person you meet a Christian b/c you'd otherwise be adhering to their beliefs?

Seriously, to put it as nicely as possible, I don't understand your logic on this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brooky03
I read an article you posted, and I'm starting to believe your the author. Are you? Have you link your good work here?

You're a young guy aren't you?
Notshitting on you, you brought up a lot of great points, if that is you.
No, that's not me. I'm 46. That guy is quite a bit younger. I know him, but not well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lurkeraspect84
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT