 
     |
| William Penn -- Cancelled (Page 10/22) |
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
JAN 18, 01:31 PM
|
|
| quote | | Originally posted by rinselberg:I think this is much ado about little, if not literally nothing. |
|
It is hitting home the "cop out" that Democrats always say to excuse their party's history... "They were really Republicans back then."
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 18, 02:35 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
It is hitting home the "cop out" that Democrats always say to excuse their party's history... "They were really Republicans back then." |
|
Why do you persist in talking about the history of the Democratic Party, and go as far back about it as you do? All the way back to roughly the midpoint of the 20th century, when Civil Rights legislation was finally enacted, and then the long era of Jim Crow, and before that, the founding of the KKK, and before that, the Civil War, and even before that, the "Trail of Tears" from about 1830 to 1850?
It's well to be aware of this history, but in my opinion, you are making a fetish of it. I see it as very much an effort to deflect from more relevant and more current aspects of everything that's going on—politically—instead of meeting the more relevant and current topics head-on.
Take abortion, for example. When Democrats object to what they say are Republican's extremist positions on abortion, the Democrat's current talking points should be met head-on, instead of dredging up the complex legacy of Margaret Sanger, involving the most long ago history of Planned Parenthood, and Margaret Sanger and other long-dead people's enthusiasm for eugenics and possibly, anti-black racisim. Even if some of these long-dead people were in fact, Democrats—others were not.
This constant harping on the long ago history of the Democratic Party doesn't pass "the smell test."
When a person of today decides to seek political office and affiliates with the Democratic Party, do you think that they do it that because they are steeped in the long past history of the Democratic Party? Because they're attracted to the anti-black racism and other racist aspects of the Democrats (and others) of previous eras in American history? Because they are attracted to the idea of eugenics?
When I see "Democrat" or "Democratic Party," I think of it, first and foremost, as just a brand name that has persisted for about 200 years—like the labeling on a product package—but the product itself has greatly evolved over the years.
These frequent "memes" about the Democrats as the party of slavery, or Jim Crow, or the Eugenics Movement, which are often interjected into discussions of contemporaneous issues, are saying something to me—but not the message that is intended. It's a revelatory message about the shortcomings of the people who are saying it.
There's one forum member in particular who stands out in my mind as the forum member who is most guilty of this nonsense. (It's not 82-T/A.)[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-18-2024).]
|
|
|
|
ray b
|
JAN 18, 02:52 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
It is hitting home the "cop out" that Democrats always say to excuse their party's history... "They were really Republicans back then." |
|
simple question
drop the party
were they conservative or not pre-1860
were they conservative or not pre- 1878
were they conservative or not pre-1964
are they conservative or not today
any other answer other then yes is incorrect
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 18, 03:43 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by olejoedad:
Who in their right freaking mind would have guilt about the actions of their ancestors? |
|
Ask the guy who keeps judging the Democrats based on what they did in past generations.
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
JAN 18, 04:20 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
Why do you persist in talking about the history of the Democratic Party, and go as far back about it as you do? All the way back to roughly the midpoint of the 20th century, when Civil Rights legislation was finally enacted, and then the long era of Jim Crow, and before that, the founding of the KKK, and before that, the Civil War, and even before that, the "Trail of Tears" from about 1830 to 1850?
It's well to be aware of this history, but in my opinion, you are making a fetish of it. I see it as very much an effort to deflect from more relevant and more current aspects of everything that's going on—politically—instead of meeting the more relevant and current topics head-on.
Take abortion, for example. When Democrats object to what they say are Republican's extremist positions on abortion, the Democrat's current talking points should be met head-on, instead of dredging up the complex legacy of Margaret Sanger, involving the most long ago history of Planned Parenthood, and Margaret Sanger and other long-dead people's enthusiasm for eugenics and possibly, anti-black racisim. Even if some of these long-dead people were in fact, Democrats—others were not.
This constant harping on the long ago history of the Democratic Party doesn't pass "the smell test."
When a person of today decides to seek political office and affiliates with the Democratic Party, do you think that they do it that because they are steeped in the long past history of the Democratic Party? Because they're attracted to the anti-black racism and other racist aspects of the Democrats (and others) of previous eras in American history? Because they are attracted to the idea of eugenics?
When I see "Democrat" or "Democratic Party," I think of it, first and foremost, as just a brand name that has persisted for about 200 years—like the labeling on a product package—but the product itself has greatly evolved over the years.
These frequent "memes" about the Democrats as the party of slavery, or Jim Crow, or the Eugenics Movement, which are often interjected into discussions of contemporaneous issues, are saying something to me—but not the message that is intended. It's a revelatory message about the shortcomings of the people who are saying it.
There's one forum member in particular who stands out in my mind as the forum member who is most guilty of this nonsense. (It's not 82-T/A.)
|
|
Maybe when the Left, the Democrats stop insisting that Americans are inherently racist and possess a unique propensity toward violence, we can see the party as evolved. Do you see the connection?
Stop demanding that we give you the benefit of doubt that you are unwilling to extend to us.
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
JAN 18, 04:41 PM
|
|
To Rinse and BingB, see Ray's post above.
It's the constant insistence that Republicans are racist. And to that... it's not even just that... even you Bing, you basically say... not every Republican is racist, but everyone racist is Republican. You've essentially said this multiple times. And this could not be further from the truth.
There is a **** ton of racism, the LEAST of which is some conceived white vs "everyone" racism. Black Americans hate Haitians (they think they're lesser). Lighter colored skin Asians hate darker colored skin Asians. Hispanics have a propensity of racism towards blacks. Blacks tend to have a racist propensity against Asians. These radicals among the races are all Democrats to a degree. Even a large number of white racists are socialist (those who support the NAZI ideology or the KKK... they are not free market capitalists).
Again... just look at MSNBC after Trump won the Iowa Caucus...
Sorry... I will continue to let everyone know that the Democrat party is the party of racism. I'm not going to take the high road and turn the cheek.
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
JAN 18, 05:51 PM
|
|
Conservatives taking the high road and trusting Liberals is what has done the damage to our nation.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 18, 05:52 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
To Rinse and BingB, see Ray's post above.
It's the constant insistence that Republicans are racist. And to that... it's not even just that... even you Bing, you basically say... not every Republican is racist, but everyone racist is Republican. You've essentially said this multiple times. And this could not be further from the truth.
There is a **** ton of racism, the LEAST of which is some conceived white vs "everyone" racism. Black Americans hate Haitians (they think they're lesser). Lighter colored skin Asians hate darker colored skin Asians. Hispanics have a propensity of racism towards blacks. Blacks tend to have a racist propensity against Asians. These radicals among the races are all Democrats to a degree. Even a large number of white racists are socialist (those who support the NAZI ideology or the KKK... they are not free market capitalists).
Again... just look at MSNBC after Trump won the Iowa Caucus...
Sorry... I will continue to let everyone know that the Democrat party is the party of racism. I'm not going to take the high road and turn the cheek. |
|
Where do you get off saying "These radicals among the races are all Democrats to a degree." You think that everyone that isn't white must be a Democrat—or even political in any kind of way?
As far as "Even a large number of white racists are socialist..." where does that thinking take anyone? If someone is a white racist, I don't particularly care whether they are socialists or free market capitalists in their thinking... until or unless they stop being white racists.
I did look at MSNBC after Trump came in first in the Iowa Caucus. There was a lot of talk about White Evangelicals gravitating strongly towards Trump, over Haley or DeSantis. I think that's factual. The people in Iowa that were being interviewed seemed to fit that bill.
I would call Trump something of a "nativist." Or perhaps more to the point, Trump tries to play to the prejudices of people who are nativists. That's why he's starting to "hit" on Nikki Haley's Southeast Asian or Indian heritage.
He's referring to her as "Nimarata" instead of as "Nikki." Nimarata Nikki Randhawa is her birth name, but she obviously prefers to be known as "Nikki Haley." Trump has misspelled Nimarata as "Nimrada" when he tweets or "truths." It's easy enough to imagine that he just isn't careful enough with the spelling, but it's also easy to infer that this is Trump's way of calling her a "nimrod," which is (idiomatically) synonymous with "stupid" or "dimwitted."
As far as "continuing to let everyone know that the Democratic Party is the party of racism"... you do you, but unless you are speaking to specific and current issues and making specific points and arguments, you're just "blowing smoke" as far as I'm concerned.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-18-2024).]
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
JAN 18, 05:57 PM
|
|
I believe it was A Winston Churchill that said something to the effect of .....
If you're twenty and not a Liberal, you don't have a heart; if You're over forty and aren't a Conservative you don't have a brain.
My comment to that is, I guess there are a lot of folks that just never grew up.
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
JAN 18, 06:18 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by olejoedad:
Conservatives taking the high road and trusting Liberals is what has done the damage to our nation.
|
|
Exactly... because the ideology for Democrats has always been, "the ends justify the means."
|
|
|
|