And What If The Democrat Ticket Is "Too White" For Blacks To Vote For In 2016?

[Pogo]

.

Leveraging Identity Politics is the bottom line for the Democrats, and Hillary has already been playing the war on women schtick.

So it'll be gender instead of race, and that can work too.

.

There is no such thing as 'identity politics,' it's another lie contrived by you and others on the right.

Indeed, seeking to pursue a policy of lies and misinformation is common to most conservatives, a consequence of rightist dogma being devoid of sound ideas and hostile to responsible governance.

The idiotic premise of this thread is further evidence of that.

Whatever-the-fuck "Identity Politics" is supposed to mean (and I don't know, not being a Rimjob listener), it seems to me it would mean something like this shit -- "Conservatives are more honest than Liberals"

 

[Mac1958]

.

Leveraging Identity Politics is the bottom line for the Democrats, and Hillary has already been playing the war on women schtick.

So it'll be gender instead of race, and that can work too.

.

There is no such thing as 'identity politics,' it's another lie contrived by you and others on the right.

Indeed, seeking to pursue a policy of lies and misinformation is common to most conservatives, a consequence of rightist dogma being devoid of sound ideas and hostile to responsible governance.

The idiotic premise of this thread is further evidence of that.

Whatever-the-fuck "Identity Politics" is supposed to mean (and I don't know, not being a Rimjob listener), it seems to me it would mean something like this shit -- "Conservatives are more honest than Liberals"

So you don't know what "Identity Politics" means. I see.

That's okay, some here claim not to know what Political Correctness is.

Adherence to a partisan ideology certainly does keep people in a vacuum.

Intellectual curiosity, not big with partisan ideologues.

.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Leveraging Identity Politics is the bottom line for the Democrats, and Hillary has already been playing the war on women schtick.

So it'll be gender instead of race, and that can work too.

.

There is no such thing as 'identity politics,' it's another lie contrived by you and others on the right.

Indeed, seeking to pursue a policy of lies and misinformation is common to most conservatives, a consequence of rightist dogma being devoid of sound ideas and hostile to responsible governance.

The idiotic premise of this thread is further evidence of that.

I like the way lefties like you and Jake try to paint me as a right winger, when you both know I'm not.

Partisan ideologues are so binary, either/or. Keeps it simple, I guess.

.

 

[Pogo]

.

Leveraging Identity Politics is the bottom line for the Democrats, and Hillary has already been playing the war on women schtick.

So it'll be gender instead of race, and that can work too.

.

There is no such thing as 'identity politics,' it's another lie contrived by you and others on the right.

Indeed, seeking to pursue a policy of lies and misinformation is common to most conservatives, a consequence of rightist dogma being devoid of sound ideas and hostile to responsible governance.

The idiotic premise of this thread is further evidence of that.

Whatever-the-fuck "Identity Politics" is supposed to mean (and I don't know, not being a Rimjob listener), it seems to me it would mean something like this shit -- "Conservatives are more honest than Liberals"

So you don't know what "Identity Politics" means. I see.

That's okay, some here claim not to know what Political Correctness is.

Adherence to a partisan ideology certainly does keep people in a vacuum.

Intellectual curiosity, not big with partisan ideologues.

Oh I've heard the term. Just have never heard it in a rational legitimate argument. Therefore I didn't bother to go look up a term I'm not even using in the first place. Why would I do that? It's not my idea.

People fling terms around like poo thinking they have some kind of barb on them, yet they can't demonstrate it. "Liberal" for instance, which few seem to comprehend, or another one that's commonly flung around here -- "Progressive". I've been asking for a definition of what that means as long as I've been on this site. I have yet to get one.

So no I don't take political demagogue words-of-the-week too seriously, especially when I'm not the one floating them out to the toilet bowl in the first place. But it does seem to me "identity" might have something to do with the whizbang idea that "philosophy begets personality", as I surmised above.

Am I close? Or is this another one of those wispy equivocations, floating free in rhetorical space, constructed to mean a Humpty-Dumptian "whatever I choose it to mean" for the moment? I have no evidence it's not exactly that. And that's bereft of value.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Leveraging Identity Politics is the bottom line for the Democrats, and Hillary has already been playing the war on women schtick.

So it'll be gender instead of race, and that can work too.

.

There is no such thing as 'identity politics,' it's another lie contrived by you and others on the right.

Indeed, seeking to pursue a policy of lies and misinformation is common to most conservatives, a consequence of rightist dogma being devoid of sound ideas and hostile to responsible governance.

The idiotic premise of this thread is further evidence of that.

Whatever-the-fuck "Identity Politics" is supposed to mean (and I don't know, not being a Rimjob listener), it seems to me it would mean something like this shit -- "Conservatives are more honest than Liberals"

So you don't know what "Identity Politics" means. I see.

That's okay, some here claim not to know what Political Correctness is.

Adherence to a partisan ideology certainly does keep people in a vacuum.

Intellectual curiosity, not big with partisan ideologues.

Oh I've heard the term. Just have never heard it in a rational legitimate argument. Therefore I didn't bother to go look up a term I'm not even using in the first place. Why would I do that? It's not my idea.

People fling terms around like poo thinking they have some kind of barb on them, yet they can't demonstrate it. "Liberal" for instance, or another one that's commonly flung around here -- "Progressive". I've been asking for a definition of what that means as long as I've been on this site. I have yet to get one.

So no I don't take political demagogue words-of-the-week too seriously, especially when I'm not the one floating them out to the toilet bowl in the first place. But it does seem to me "identity" might have something to do with the whizbang idea that philosophy begets personality, as I surmised above.

Am I far off?

This really doesn't need to be all that complicated.

The term "progressive", while having some historical roots, is essentially the term that hardcore liberals use now because they don't want to be called liberals. They have determined that the word "liberal" has bad connotations, and because they love to control the language, they want to call themselves something different.

Seems odd to me, since conservatives trip all over themselves calling themselves conservatives no matter how badly they screw things up.

"Identity Politics" and "Political Correctness" are simply terms used to describe groups and patterns of behaviors. If a reasonably curious person were to simply Google the phrases, I strongly suspect the results for each would number over a million, and before long, that person would know all about it. So, when people try to pretend those two groups of behaviors somehow don't exist, the stench from the clear intellectual dishonesty could reach from here to Mars.

It's also clear that those who protest the most about those phrases are the same people who practice the behaviors the most. Go figure.

The curious can begin here for help:

Identity politics - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Political correctness - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

.

 

[Pogo]

.

Leveraging Identity Politics is the bottom line for the Democrats, and Hillary has already been playing the war on women schtick.

So it'll be gender instead of race, and that can work too.

.

There is no such thing as 'identity politics,' it's another lie contrived by you and others on the right.

Indeed, seeking to pursue a policy of lies and misinformation is common to most conservatives, a consequence of rightist dogma being devoid of sound ideas and hostile to responsible governance.

The idiotic premise of this thread is further evidence of that.

Whatever-the-fuck "Identity Politics" is supposed to mean (and I don't know, not being a Rimjob listener), it seems to me it would mean something like this shit -- "Conservatives are more honest than Liberals"

So you don't know what "Identity Politics" means. I see.

That's okay, some here claim not to know what Political Correctness is.

Adherence to a partisan ideology certainly does keep people in a vacuum.

Intellectual curiosity, not big with partisan ideologues.

Oh I've heard the term. Just have never heard it in a rational legitimate argument. Therefore I didn't bother to go look up a term I'm not even using in the first place. Why would I do that? It's not my idea.

People fling terms around like poo thinking they have some kind of barb on them, yet they can't demonstrate it. "Liberal" for instance, or another one that's commonly flung around here -- "Progressive". I've been asking for a definition of what that means as long as I've been on this site. I have yet to get one.

So no I don't take political demagogue words-of-the-week too seriously, especially when I'm not the one floating them out to the toilet bowl in the first place. But it does seem to me "identity" might have something to do with the whizbang idea that philosophy begets personality, as I surmised above.

Am I far off?

This really doesn't need to be all that complicated.

The term "progressive", while having some historical roots, is essentially the term that hardcore liberals use now because they don't want to be called liberals. They have determined that the word "liberal" has bad connotations, and because they love to control the language, they want to call themselves something different.

See -- that's exactly what I mean. What you have here is in no way a definition. "What ____ s call themselves" is absolutely meaningless, nor is it the context I read on these pages. What I read is "Progressives do this" or "He is/you are a Progressive". That begs a definition, else it has no meaning. I already know it's a label. That's obvious. And it tells me absolutely nothing.

And I didn't say "progressive", which is an adjective; I said "Progressive" which is a noun. Which as far as I know belongs to several figures of both parties around a hundred years ago and briefly to Robert LaFollette. Doesn't answer my question about anyone living now. Are such "Progressives" being compared to McKinley? Wilson? LaFollette? Nobody knows.

"Racist" is another. Tossed out because it sounds good. Pinned up against a wall and challenged to define what they mean by that, too many can only go "humma humma humma". Now why are people using terms they can't define? I don't get that.

Seems odd to me, since conservatives trip all over themselves calling themselves conservatives no matter how badly they screw things up.

"Identity Politics" and "Political Correctness" are simply terms used to describe groups of behaviors. If a person were to simply Google the phrases, I strongly suspect the results for each would number over a million, and before long, that person would know all about it. So, when people try to pretend those two groups of behaviors somehow don't exist, the stench from the clear intellectual dishonesty could reach from here to Mars.

It's also clear that those who protest the most about those phrases are the same people who practice the behaviors the most. Go figure.

The curious can begin here for help:

Identity politics - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Political correctness - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

That would only tell me what Google or Wikipedia mean by a term. What I need is the definition meant by the entity actually making the argument. Once again, that's on the entity who invokes the phrase.

Plenty of morons misuse "Liberal" around here and I can refute them with those same sources, so what a term means and what its user thinks it means aren't always the same thing.

 

[Siete]

And What If The Democrat Ticket Is "Too White" For Blacks To Vote For In 2016?


what if the Republican ticket is too smart for Republicans to vote for in 2016?


oh wait ...

 

[Porker]

]

You think historical dates are "mathematics"?

.

No, asshole...but this is mathematics

2015
(1620) Pilgrams land in Massachusetts
395

So sometime between 1620 and now the first black people arrived in what is now the USA...I rounded it off to 350 years. Understand? You dense little prick.

 

[Pogo]

]

You think historical dates are "mathematics"?

.

No, asshole...but this is mathematics

2015
(1620) Pilgrams land in Massachusetts
395

So sometime between 1620 and now the first black people arrived in what is now the USA...I rounded it off to 350 years. Understand? You dense little prick.

No, that thar's time reckoning.

But diga me hombre...
Who was elected President in 1620?

 

[FJO]

]

You think historical dates are "mathematics"?

.

No, asshole...but this is mathematics

2015
(1620) Pilgrams land in Massachusetts
395

So sometime between 1620 and now the first black people arrived in what is now the USA...I rounded it off to 350 years. Understand? You dense little prick.

No, that thar's time reckoning.

But diga me hombre...
Who was elected President in 1620?

If you can't acknowledge that your country and/or its predecessor, the Eglisg colonies

 

[LeftofLeft]

Chance good we won't see another black candidate. I base that opinion on the fact that Joe Biden already told us that Barack Obama...

"I mean, you got the FIRST mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, I mean, that's a storybook, man."

So either the next one has got to be some other nationality or else the liberals have to run an inarticulate black street thug who is dull and dirty and ugly as sin. I mean crime-page stuff, man.

There have been many Black Americans who are nice looking, articulate, bright, and clean. Why the fuck did Biden believe that Obama was the first and this was so 'storybook'? Obama's election marked a lot of firsts; most notably, the Vice President was able to finally recognize, base on the criteria he sited, that Blacks can be articulate, nice looking, and clean.

 

[Pogo]

Chance good we won't see another black candidate. I base that opinion on the fact that Joe Biden already told us that Barack Obama...

"I mean, you got the FIRST mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, I mean, that's a storybook, man."

So either the next one has got to be some other nationality or else the liberals have to run an inarticulate black street thug who is dull and dirty and ugly as sin. I mean crime-page stuff, man.

There have been many Black Americans who are nice looking, articulate, bright, and clean. Why the fuck did Biden believe that Obama was the first and this was so 'storybook'? Obama's election marked a lot of firsts; most notably, the Vice President was able to finally recognize, base on the criteria he sited, that Blacks can be articulate, nice looking, and clean.

Because the conversation at the time was specifically about party candidates in a campaign and their marketability. It wasn't about black people or people in general. The poster left the context out to make a dishonest point.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

arent there a lot more hispanics voting? and what if we wind up with a Cruz/Rubio ticket? then Hillary goes into panic mode.

 

[Porker]

Because the conversation at the time was specifically about party candidates in a campaign and their marketability. It wasn't about black people or people in general. The poster left the context out to make a dishonest point.

Dishonest, you say?

A Dubious Compliment - Top 10 Joe Biden Gaffes - TIME

Jan. 31, 2007

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."

— Joe Biden, describing fellow candidate Barack Obama. The remark was made the same day Biden filed the official paperwork to launch his presidential campaign. Biden later apologized and said the remark was taken out of context.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

I really hope that Rubio starts campaigning asap! making commercials in spanish, airing in all the crucial purple states, then within two months polls start showing that he will be a threat to hillary whether he's President or VP.

 

[Pogo]

Because the conversation at the time was specifically about party candidates in a campaign and their marketability. It wasn't about black people or people in general. The poster left the context out to make a dishonest point.

Dishonest, you say?

A Dubious Compliment - Top 10 Joe Biden Gaffes - TIME

Jan. 31, 2007

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."

— Joe Biden, describing fellow candidate Barack Obama. The remark was made the same day Biden filed the official paperwork to launch his presidential campaign. Biden later apologized and said the remark was taken out of context.

Amazing. Biden knew eight years in advance you were going to take it out of context. The man must be an oracle.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

.

Leveraging Identity Politics is the bottom line for the Democrats, and Hillary has already been playing the war on women schtick.

So it'll be gender instead of race, and that can work too.

.

There is no such thing as 'identity politics,' it's another lie contrived by you and others on the right.

Indeed, seeking to pursue a policy of lies and misinformation is common to most conservatives, a consequence of rightist dogma being devoid of sound ideas and hostile to responsible governance.

The idiotic premise of this thread is further evidence of that.

Whatever-the-fuck "Identity Politics" is supposed to mean (and I don't know, not being a Rimjob listener), it seems to me it would mean something like this shit -- "Conservatives are more honest than Liberals"

It's meaningless, a fable, a myth, an inane contrivance of the right – like 'political correctness' or 'liberal media,' a straw man fallacy designed to demonize the political opposition by conservatives whose political dogma is devoid of merit or worth.

 

[Mac1958]

It's meaningless, a fable, a myth, an inane contrivance of the right – like 'political correctness' or 'liberal media,' a straw man fallacy designed to demonize the political opposition by conservatives whose political dogma is devoid of merit or worth.

I know this won't matter to a partisan ideologue whose mind is sealed shut, but just for the hell of it:

Political correctness - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Identity politics - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Nice, full descriptions there. Histories and all.

I don't know if I have ever seen denial this strong before. Fascinating to watch.



.

 

[Mac1958]

.

The Democrats are currently under the control of the PC Police and Identity Politics, so they're now forced to play that hand out.

Much like how the Republicans are controlled and distorted by the purist Tea Partiers, a group they cannot ignore because of its energy.

How similar the two parties are, at the mercy of their crazies.

.

 

[Pogo]

.

The Democrats are currently under the control of the PC Police and Identity Politics, so they're now forced to play that hand out.

Much like how the Republicans are controlled and distorted by the purist Tea Partiers, a group they cannot ignore because of its energy.

How similar the two parties are, at the mercy of their crazies.

And there it goes again....