Democrats Displaying Their Racism & Un-Americanism

[jknowgood]

You think the same about people who attend BLM rallies?

Again not the topic here. But I'll answer anyways for your distraction if you can answer mine... I've asked you for two pages if you think very nice people join KKK and Nazi rallies. Not if they have a legal right. But do good people join their events?

I'm sure there are, their views are screwed up. So you answer me this, are there any good people that attend BLM rallies.

I guess I'm tougher on that. Unless Hellen Keller was there with no idea, or someone mentally incapable of understanding, no. I don't think good people willingly choose to lend their voice to Nazi and Klan Rally's.

As for BLM as soon as they started the "fry pigs like bacon" crap and didn't immediately ban those with that and supported actual criminals yes. I don't think good people lend their voice and support to that cause.

I guess I am a little bit more conservative on the excuses of that's how I was raised, or Daddy spanked me so that's why I do this, or just ignorance.

I'm glad you answered that, because Obama supports black lives matter and black panthers. He had them at the white house, and you voted him president. Lol

Actually I voted for Romney and McCain. Why do you need to continually lie here? It doesn't help your cause when you need to lie to make your point.

Just cause someone doesn't like the Klan or Nazis and those who support them doesn't mean they must be a Democrat.

I'm not defending anyone, but when government has the power to tell you how to think. We are screwed, if you ignore them they will go away, but you keep them in the limelight.

Yeah because ignoring Nazis and the Klan worked out so well in the past. Your choice, you are the one defending them

Nazi's are gone. The KKK is irrelevant, and the term "white nationalist" is nothing more than democrat code speak for PATRIOTIC WHITE AMERICANS. That is who you people are attempting to DEMONIZE, and it ain't workin' skippy. We see right through it.

It's actually what they call themselves. I've given you their own words of what they who coined that term said it means to them.

You trying to lie in order to defend those horrible things doesn't change those facts bud. If you think PATRIOTIC WHITE AMERICANS believe in ethnic cleansing, that is what you believe. No need to lie.

Did you support Obama?

I took an oath to, so yes. Did I like all that he did? No. Would I have liked a different president instead. Yes.

And none of that has to do with the Charlottesville rally. It is just your attempt to distract from that topic.

Likewise I completely disagree that good people go to Nazi and KKK rallies.


Do you think good people go to Nazi and Klan rallies?[/QUOTE
That's not what you said there.

 

[Pogo]

Again, The term "white nationalism" did not exist until just a few years ago. A ridiculous misuse of English words to villainize, and propagandize.

Again, BULLSHIT.

>> The Turner Diaries first made headlines when a violent white nationalist gang appropriated the name of The Order, following the tactical blueprint for terrorism in the book. Turner catapulted to national prominence when it was revealed to be a key inspiration for Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people using a truck bomb strikingly similar to one described in detail in the book. Since then, The Turner Diaries has inspired hate crimes and terrorism across the United States and in Europe in more than a dozen separate plots through the present day.

But beyond the violence committed by its readers, The Turner Diaries was also the seed of significant shift in white-nationalist ideology and recruitment, the effects of which are increasingly relevant today. In “The Turner Legacy,” a new paper for ICCT – The Hague, I examine the complicated history of racist dystopian propaganda and the reasons for Turner’s enduring impact.

White nationalism was the law of the land in the United States through most of the country’s history. In the wake of the Civil War, institutionalized white supremacy began to erode, a process that accelerated into the 20th Century. Against the backdrop of the civil rights movement, white nationalism began to develop complex ideologies, with a number of different strains emerging.

Pedestrian racism—simply disliking or discriminating against people based on race—still played a significant role in society, but as mainstream white nationalism became increasingly stigmatized, these ideological variants became subcultures in which violent extremism could fester.

The most important movements to emerge from this dynamic were neo-Nazism and Christian Identity. Neo-Nazism is heavily focused on Holocaust denial and symbolic identity markers, while Christian Identity is based on an elaborate religious justification that evolved out of a 19th century religious conspiracy theory called British Israelism, which claimed Anglo-Saxons were the lost tribe of Israel. Both movements trafficked heavily in anti-Semitism, but their animus was directed to all non-white people.

[We'll note here that white nationalist David Duke, before he decided to play dress-up and declare himself the local Ku Klux Klan, was an American Nazi]

These movements, along with the Ku Klux Klan, became the face of white nationalism, resulting in further marginalization due to their flamboyant racism and increasing scrutiny from law enforcement, as their views and rhetoric became increasingly extreme.

It was within this context that William Luther Pierce split from the American Nazi Party and founded the National Alliance. Pierce, an atheist and scientist, was attuned to the fact that these ostentatious forms of white nationalism were deeply alienating to “normal people,” attracting recruits he described as “defective” and “crippled.” The National Alliance downplayed swastikas and goose-stepping, and instead focused on creating propaganda capable of sidestepping mainstream media gatekeepers appealing to broader audiences.

The Turner Diaries was one of his earliest efforts, and undoubtedly the most successful. Serialized in a National Alliance newsletter, and later published in collected form, The Turner Diaries is a dystopian novel about a United States where non-white minorities have disarmed and oppressed white Americans, leading to an armed white nationalist revolution. In sparse, simplistic prose, the apocalyptic plot follows a white supremacist guerrilla resistance movement known as The Order as it launches a series of terrorist attacks, eventually blossoming into a full-blown insurgency. The Order wins in the end, and embarks on a campaign of global genocides against non-whites. << --- How the Turner Diaries Changed White Nationalism
​

I touched on some of these wackos in a "this day in" thread a week and a half ago on April 19.


You can sit here and go all you like, it's history and it ain't going away.

You can also buy all the dictionaries in your local bookstore and cross out every term you don't like but that doesn't make it go away either.

 

[SandSquid]

Again not the topic here. But I'll answer anyways for your distraction if you can answer mine... I've asked you for two pages if you think very nice people join KKK and Nazi rallies. Not if they have a legal right. But do good people join their events?

I'm sure there are, their views are screwed up. So you answer me this, are there any good people that attend BLM rallies.

I guess I'm tougher on that. Unless Hellen Keller was there with no idea, or someone mentally incapable of understanding, no. I don't think good people willingly choose to lend their voice to Nazi and Klan Rally's.

As for BLM as soon as they started the "fry pigs like bacon" crap and didn't immediately ban those with that and supported actual criminals yes. I don't think good people lend their voice and support to that cause.

I guess I am a little bit more conservative on the excuses of that's how I was raised, or Daddy spanked me so that's why I do this, or just ignorance.

I'm glad you answered that, because Obama supports black lives matter and black panthers. He had them at the white house, and you voted him president. Lol

Actually I voted for Romney and McCain. Why do you need to continually lie here? It doesn't help your cause when you need to lie to make your point.

Just cause someone doesn't like the Klan or Nazis and those who support them doesn't mean they must be a Democrat.

Yeah because ignoring Nazis and the Klan worked out so well in the past. Your choice, you are the one defending them

Nazi's are gone. The KKK is irrelevant, and the term "white nationalist" is nothing more than democrat code speak for PATRIOTIC WHITE AMERICANS. That is who you people are attempting to DEMONIZE, and it ain't workin' skippy. We see right through it.

It's actually what they call themselves. I've given you their own words of what they who coined that term said it means to them.

You trying to lie in order to defend those horrible things doesn't change those facts bud. If you think PATRIOTIC WHITE AMERICANS believe in ethnic cleansing, that is what you believe. No need to lie.

Did you support Obama?

I took an oath to, so yes. Did I like all that he did? No. Would I have liked a different president instead. Yes.

And none of that has to do with the Charlottesville rally. It is just your attempt to distract from that topic.

Likewise I completely disagree that good people go to Nazi and KKK rallies.


Do you think good people go to Nazi and Klan rallies?[/QUOTE
That's not what you said there.

NOWHERE did I say I voted for Obama. I said I took an oath. And I did to obey orders of the president and officers appointed over me. No I did NOT ever say I voted for him. That was your lie. Please don't use another lie to back up your first.

I guess that's where you and I will differ. I look to the government to determine what is legal in what is not. I don't let the government or parties determine what my own morality is. The government isn't going to tell me what I think is morally acceptable to do, just what is legal to do.

If you're looking to Washington politicians and New York billionaires to determine what your moral code is... Well... You do you. I'll determine my own.

Anyways at this point you're just adding lies upon lies. Have a good day.

 

[forkup]

Websters dictionary disagrees with you. As I said before, find me one example were the definition of the term substantially varies from this one.Definition of WHITE NATIONALIST
Again it's amazing you want to appropiate the term if you are not racist.

There IS NO "term". What has been appropriated (STOLEN) are the words "white" and "nationalist"

I don't need to "find" anything. I don't give a rat's ass what Websters dictionary says, any more than give a hoot what about 90% of liberal, propagandist, college professors say, or 90% of liberal media blabbermouths say.

The words white nationalist are a deliberate attack on whites and nationalists, linking their name with racist lunatics. Simple as that. One of liberals' favorite tactics is to change the language wherever they can, to demonize whomever they don't like. Problem they have is all this is soooo obvious. Only the dumbest Americans could fall for it.

So you are simply giving opinions without feeling any obligation to substantiate those opinions? Starting with your assertion that it was Democrats who started using those terms? You know what one calls something that isn't substantiated in any way? Faith, and faith protectionist is not something I'm willing to argue in this context, because if you use faith as a tactic in an argument there is no point for the other side because that would make your position unfalsifiable.

 

[forkup]

-I've been called an idiot, moron, motherfucker, asshole, Communist and all kinds of other things on this board. Doesn't mean it's true. At no point did I feel the need to try to make any of these terms of "endearment" as something I need to appropriate as something somehow laudable. The person who started this OP is trying to make the case that the term white nationalist has nothing to do with racism but is rather a description of patriotic white people. It's a definition of that term that not a single dictionary would accept.
-If you feel the term is used on you inappropriately I completely understand, there are people who have a genuine problem distinguishing between those who support Trump because of his views on race or other reasons, whatever they might be.
-My only question is, if you don't feel that not being able to distinguish between those that are openly racist and those protesting those that are openly racist disqualifies a person from receiving your support, what does? In my opinion that in itself poses serious questions of you. If not about your views on race than for sure on your view of morality.

How is YOUR view of morality ? > with respect to the largest and most aggrievist racial discrimination in America, victimizing (by far) the largest number of people (whites)
ie. Affirmative Action.

Are you able to distinguish between those that are openly racist (generally Democrats) and those (Conservatives) protesting those openly racist Democrat supporters of AA ?

Yes, the words white nationalist (it's not a "term') are a description of patriotic white people, just as the words black nationalist can describe patriotic black people. I would say that Pat Buchanan, Donald Trump, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and Lou Dobbs are all white nationalists (patriotic white people).

Likewise, Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain, Larry Elder, and Thomas Sowell are all black nationalists (patriotic black people) - nationalists who happen to be black.

Furthermore, I refuse to allow anyone to steal our American English words, to attempt to scam Americans into following their deranged, racist, unAmerican pathology.

Lastly, were you inferring that President Trump is a racist ? If so, upon what would you base that ?

-I see are you suggesting that Chancellorsville or for that matter any recent protest by the GOP was about Affirmative action?
-As to my view on it. I wish it wasn't necessary but it is. Prejudices not just against racial minorities, but also woman, gay people and people with disabilities do make it necessary. As to it being discriminatory. I suggest you look at the percentages of white males in high profile positions in business, politics, etc. You will find they are disproportionately represented in those positions. Unless you are willing to go out on a limb and claim white males are inherently more qualified I think the discriminatory nature of AA is insignificant.
- No I was inferring Trump is either deliberately unclear about his view on race to the point that racist thinks he speaks for them. Is a bad communicator, or is a racist. As to how I come to this conclusion. The KKK and David Duke endorsed him during the campaign. When asked if he wanted that endorsement as a yes or no question, Trump refused do disavow them. When asked after the Chancellorsville incident to condemn the white nationalist, he first wouldn't distinguish between the counter protesters and the white nationalists, something he only corrected after he was put under huge political pressure days later. He literally was the most adamant proponent of the previous president being not an American but rather African. There are several direct quotes of Trump that are openly racist or bigoted. He was sued for racial discriminatory practices as a realtor. Information doesn't exist in a vacuum, no matter how much you would like it to.

 

[protectionist]

1. It's a colloquial term. Fairly common phrase in the English language. Books written with the title, used in media quite often. Takes about two seconds to google and find the term, but if that is beyond your comprehension skill, well so be it.

2. Then why do white supremacists literally change their titles to White Nationalists?

Lets see what White Nationalists say it is... in their own words. The ones who founded and popularized that two word term:

It's what Mr Spencer calls "ethnic cleansing" and drives his belief that “Martin Luther King Jr., a fraud and degenerate in his life, has become the symbol and cynosure of White Dispossession and the deconstruction of Occidental civilization. We must overcome!”

Brimelow calls it the belief that "blacks are a retrograde species of humanity."

It's what the American Freedom Party calls themselves when they say “Jews are hostile toward American Christian culture”

The Council of Conservative Citizens defines it as by saying "God is the author of racism. God is the One who divided mankind into different types. ... Mixing the races is rebelliousness against God."

It's what Identity Evropa identifies themselves as when they say “America was founded as a white country — as a country for people of European heritage:"

It's what Stormfront members identify themselves as when they say "Pure ****** or mixed ******, is that really matters?? ******. Period."

It's what Vdare defines themselves as when they say "America was defined — almost explicitly, sometimes very explicitly — as a white nation, for white people, and what that means is that there is virtually no figure, no law, no policy, no event in the history of the old, white America that can survive the transition to the new and non-white version. Whether we will want to call the new updated version ‘America’ at all is another question entirely."

It's what Wesearchr calls themselves when they deny the holocaust saying "I do not and never have believed the six million figure. I think the Red Cross numbers of 250,000 dead in the camps from typhus are more realistic."

It's what the right Stuff says it identifies with on their antisemitic and racist podcasts and blogs.

It's what the Patriot Front defines itself as when it says "An African, for example, may have lived, worked, and even been classed as a citizen in America for centuries, yet he is not American."


If that's what you identify with... Well that's your choice to raise your voice and say you are part of that movement.

Too much blabbering here. I don't bother with posts that long. You're not saying anything much anyway .

Nothing to refute this >> "It's just an attempt to smear whites and nationalists, by putting the names of them in the same box with violent racist activists, whom they have nothing whatsoever to do with."

Blabber on all you want about this group or that, or some other group, but nothing changes the fact that for most of my life (I'm 73), there was never any mention of white nationalist. It's a relatively new term devised by the left, to smear. And none of the groups you mention have ever done anything that is even 1% as racist as Democrats creation and support of Affirmative Action - by far, the worst racism of the past 54 years.

And now here YOU are trying to smear me, by talking about me identifying with racist groups. HA HA. You leftists are a clown act.

And I've never heard of anybody changing any title to white nationalist. You seem to be a consequence of leftist media, propaganda programming. And all these groups that you think are so bad, all combined, have never actually done anything as maliciously racist, as the Affirmative Action that Democrats have created and supported for 54 years, and continue to do now in 42 states, where amazingly, that abomination is still legal.

 

[protectionist]

So you are simply giving opinions without feeling any obligation to substantiate those opinions? Starting with your assertion that it was Democrats who started using those terms? You know what one calls something that isn't substantiated in any way? Faith, and faith protectionist is not something I'm willing to argue in this context, because if you use faith as a tactic in an argument there is no point for the other side because that would make your position unfalsifiable.

Here's another opinion for you. Your use of the word "substantiate" is itself an OPINION OF YOURS. Many Americans, if not most, do not regard your definition of "substantiate" to, in fact, be that. I covered that already in Post # 73. What's the matter ? You have reading comprehension trouble ?

Liberals are always referring to liberal sources, and then expecting everyone to adhere to them. What a laugh.

 

[SandSquid]

1. It's a colloquial term. Fairly common phrase in the English language. Books written with the title, used in media quite often. Takes about two seconds to google and find the term, but if that is beyond your comprehension skill, well so be it.

2. Then why do white supremacists literally change their titles to White Nationalists?

Lets see what White Nationalists say it is... in their own words. The ones who founded and popularized that two word term:

It's what Mr Spencer calls "ethnic cleansing" and drives his belief that “Martin Luther King Jr., a fraud and degenerate in his life, has become the symbol and cynosure of White Dispossession and the deconstruction of Occidental civilization. We must overcome!”

Brimelow calls it the belief that "blacks are a retrograde species of humanity."

It's what the American Freedom Party calls themselves when they say “Jews are hostile toward American Christian culture”

The Council of Conservative Citizens defines it as by saying "God is the author of racism. God is the One who divided mankind into different types. ... Mixing the races is rebelliousness against God."

It's what Identity Evropa identifies themselves as when they say “America was founded as a white country — as a country for people of European heritage:"

It's what Stormfront members identify themselves as when they say "Pure ****** or mixed ******, is that really matters?? ******. Period."

It's what Vdare defines themselves as when they say "America was defined — almost explicitly, sometimes very explicitly — as a white nation, for white people, and what that means is that there is virtually no figure, no law, no policy, no event in the history of the old, white America that can survive the transition to the new and non-white version. Whether we will want to call the new updated version ‘America’ at all is another question entirely."

It's what Wesearchr calls themselves when they deny the holocaust saying "I do not and never have believed the six million figure. I think the Red Cross numbers of 250,000 dead in the camps from typhus are more realistic."

It's what the right Stuff says it identifies with on their antisemitic and racist podcasts and blogs.

It's what the Patriot Front defines itself as when it says "An African, for example, may have lived, worked, and even been classed as a citizen in America for centuries, yet he is not American."


If that's what you identify with... Well that's your choice to raise your voice and say you are part of that movement.

Too much blabbering here. I don't bother with posts that long. You're not saying anything much anyway .

Nothing to refute this >> "It's just an attempt to smear whites and nationalists, by putting the names of them in the same box with violent racist activists, whom they have nothing whatsoever to do with."

Blabber on all you want about this group or that, or some other group, but nothing changes the fact that for most of my life (I'm 73), there was never any mention of white nationalist. It's a relatively new term devised by the left, to smear. And none of the groups you mention have ever done anything that is even 1% as racist as Democrats creation and support of Affirmative Action - by far, the worst racism of the past 54 years.

And now here YOU are trying to smear me, by talking about me identifying with racist groups. HA HA. You leftists are a clown act.

And I've never heard of anybody changing any title to white nationalist. You seem to be a consequence of leftist media, propaganda programming. And all these groups that you think are so bad, all combined, have never actually done anything as maliciously racist, as the Affirmative Action that Democrats have created and supported for 54 years, and continue to do now in 42 states, where amazingly, that abomination is still legal.

I get it. You need simple thoughts. Information scares you. And facts... Well we won't even give them the time of day. And if you stick your head in the ground and say "that 200 words is too much" you can remain ignorant and keep your beliefs separate from ant facts. Your excuse is a willing desire for ignorance... Wow.

You literally are saying it's a term to smear those groups WHEN THOSE GROUPS CALL THEMSELVES IT AND COINED IT.

All of a sudden there's no more white supremacists... Just white nationalists... Who say the same tired BS.

And yeah Nazis and the Klan have never done anything as racist as civil rights. Ok I've had enough of your intentional ignorance, your lies, and your racist rants. Kindly fuck off. If I get bored and want to listen to idiocy maybe I'll unblock you later to get a laugh at your ignorance but you bore me with your drivel.

The best was you wanting to rewrite the English language... That took some balls to even put out. And I don't think you even have a clue how batshit fucking insane you sounded.

I get it. Opposing Nazis and the Klan and their friends really triggers you and you HAVE to step in and defend them with lies (Since there's not much of a good defense for them without it). But you can't go too far or you come off as a Nazi and not just sympathetic to them. You tried walking that tightrope with your mealy mouth distractions and lies and I called them out with facts which really upset you. Oh well.

 

[ptbw forever]

Every time you hear the Democrats using the words "White Nationalism", you wonder do they have something against Whites ? Or something against nationalism ? (patriotic devotion to one's nation).

It sure looks like they are racist against the white race, as well as disliking America (its national anthem, its flag, its military, etc)

I am half white, and am fine with my race. I am an American citizen, and 100% cool with that too. Democrats don't seem to share this perspective.

Black/White/Hispanic/Asian "Nationalist" = racist. Skin color is irrelevant. Racists are pathetic pukes. Non starter.

Without the non-white nationalists voting Democrat the Republicans will easily win everything.

 

[forkup]

So you are simply giving opinions without feeling any obligation to substantiate those opinions? Starting with your assertion that it was Democrats who started using those terms? You know what one calls something that isn't substantiated in any way? Faith, and faith protectionist is not something I'm willing to argue in this context, because if you use faith as a tactic in an argument there is no point for the other side because that would make your position unfalsifiable.

Here's another opinion for you. Your use of the word "substantiate" is itself an OPINION OF YOURS. Many Americans, if not most, do not regard your definition of "substantiate" to, in fact, be that. I covered that already in Post # 73. What's the matter ? You have reading comprehension trouble ?

Liberals are always referring to liberal sources, and then expecting everyone to adhere to them. What a laugh.

A dictionary is a liberal source? Well here's the liberal view on substantiate than.SUBSTANTIATE | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary
You have not met that definition, when it comes to your assertion that Democrats were the ones that started using the term White nationalists. Nor have you met it when it comes to your claim that the term white nationalist doesn't exist. Like I said, if you aren't even willing to accept the dictionary definition of words and terms I don't see a point talking to you. Unlike you I can source everything I say, but if you aren't willing to accept even the most basic of facts I can not help you.

 

[22lcidw]

Did you support Obama?

I took an oath to, so yes. Did I like all that he did? No. Would I have liked a different president instead. Yes.

And none of that has to do with the Charlottesville rally. It is just your attempt to distract from that topic.

Likewise I completely disagree that good people go to Nazi and KKK rallies.


Do you think good people go to Nazi and Klan rallies?

They had a permit and whether you like them or not. They had every right to have a rally. Tell me, why don't you go this crazy when they have BLM rallies. They are promoting black power, the same as KKK promoting white power. I see no difference from the two.

You keep trying to use one of the most basic logical fallacies here making this an either/or when it isn't.

Just because someone says they hate the Ford mustang doesn't automatically mean that they love the Camaro since most Camaro owners don't like mustangs. It's a diversion because you can't say people attending Nazi and Klan rallies are not good people in your view.

My point here is simple. I don't think good people attend Nazi and Klan rallies.

You think the same about people who attend BLM rallies?

Again not the topic here. But I'll answer anyways for your distraction if you can answer mine... I've asked you for two pages if you think very nice people join KKK and Nazi rallies. Not if they have a legal right. But do good people join their events?

When the WH Correspondent dinner is held, it will be filled with mostly Prog Socialist Nazi/Fascists who are supposed to be professional spewing vicious insults at Repubs and venom much worse for Trump. You do not think this hate because you have been conditioned by the propaganda for many decades or your whole life.

 

[francoHFW]

Every time you hear the Democrats using the words "White Nationalism", you wonder do they have something against Whites ? Or something against nationalism ? (patriotic devotion to one's nation).

It sure looks like they are racist against the white race, as well as disliking America (its national anthem, its flag, its military, etc)

I am half white, and am fine with my race. I am an American citizen, and 100% cool with that too. Democrats don't seem to share this perspective.

It's all they have. Communism is based on "a" struggle. They have to corral people into groups and set them to fighting against each other in an imaginary struggle of their own devise in order to hoist their nonsense upon the unsuspecting.

Thank goodness Trump is such a uniter.

 

[protectionist]

-I see are you suggesting that Chancellorsville or for that matter any recent protest by the GOP was about Affirmative action?
-As to my view on it. I wish it wasn't necessary but it is. Prejudices not just against racial minorities, but also woman, gay people and people with disabilities do make it necessary. As to it being discriminatory. I suggest you look at the percentages of white males in high profile positions in business, politics, etc. You will find they are disproportionately represented in those positions. Unless you are willing to go out on a limb and claim white males are inherently more qualified I think the discriminatory nature of AA is insignificant.
- No I was inferring Trump is either deliberately unclear about his view on race to the point that racist thinks he speaks for them. Is a bad communicator, or is a racist. As to how I come to this conclusion. The KKK and David Duke endorsed him during the campaign. When asked if he wanted that endorsement as a yes or no question, Trump refused do disavow them. When asked after the Chancellorsville incident to condemn the white nationalist, he first wouldn't distinguish between the counter protesters and the white nationalists, something he only corrected after he was put under huge political pressure days later. He literally was the most adamant proponent of the previous president being not an American but rather African. There are several direct quotes of Trump that are openly racist or bigoted. He was sued for racial discriminatory practices as a realtor. Information doesn't exist in a vacuum, no matter how much you would like it to.

I feel strange answering strange questions, but NO, I don't suggest that Chancellorsville or for that matter any recent protest by the GOP was about Affirmative action. And I wonder how you even come up with a weird question like that.

To say that the "discriminatory nature of AA is insignificant" is one of the most imbecile things I've ever heard, but this is what happens when people watch CNN, MSNBC, read the New York Times , etc

And even IF it were true, that "high profile positions in business, politics, etc have highrer %s of white males, so what ? There are millions of jobs, job promotions, college seats, college financial aid, business loans, etc on all ALL levels, going to less deserving blacks, and discrimination against males, whites, and other non-blacks, which, by far, numerically surpass that of "high profile positions" (whatever that means). So regarding your use of high profile positions, > it's not a valid yardstick to measure the significance of AA. Not even close.

You are talking poppycock about the KKK and DD. I have heard many Trump comments in opposition to, and voicing no connection to them. Looks like you might be watching too much CNN or MSNBC.

As for Trump's comments about the Chancellorsville protests, you are wrong. Trump has never backpedaled one inch, or walked back anything he said about that. In fact, he has recently (yesterday) commented that he supports his previous words 100%, and so do I.

Trump defends Charlottesville comments, praises Confederate Gen. Lee

As for Obama being African or American, that is a question that still remains, and if anyone questions it, they are in plenty of company (CNN won't tell you that, nor will other liberal OMISSION media)

I'm not worried about 1 or 2 things that somebody did 40 years ago. Not hardly. And if someone did something racist that long ago, it has little or no bearing on him/her as a person now in 2019.

As for your claim that there are "several direct quotes of Trump that are openly racist or bigoted", well, is this information that "exists in a vacuum" ? Perhaps you'd care to tell us upon what you "substantiate" this claim. Isn't that what I asked for already ?

As for "information" I have proven multiple times in this forum, that it is liberals who are the most information-deprived of all Americans, being unknowing victims of liberal OMISSION media, and liberal OMISSION college "teaching".

 

[imawhosure]

Every time you hear the Democrats using the words "White Nationalism", you wonder do they have something against Whites ? Or something against nationalism ? (patriotic devotion to one's nation).

It sure looks like they are racist against the white race, as well as disliking America (its national anthem, its flag, its military, etc)

I am half white, and am fine with my race. I am an American citizen, and 100% cool with that too. Democrats don't seem to share this perspective.

It’s a term used to describe white racists who want to purge all others from the country . By their very definition, the white nationalists hate America.

Listen to what TIMMY the TOOL says-)

If we said that about black, or any other kind of people, we would be RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST!

That is why Timmy is known as a TOOL! He is a mouthpiece for REAL RACISTS, and he pretends he is just a cool dude/dudette/transgender/or maybe something else.

He is a PHONY-E-BALONEY, and all he has is propaganda.

May I suggest that we all------------->just block him, since he is a TOOL-)

 

[forkup]

-I see are you suggesting that Chancellorsville or for that matter any recent protest by the GOP was about Affirmative action?
-As to my view on it. I wish it wasn't necessary but it is. Prejudices not just against racial minorities, but also woman, gay people and people with disabilities do make it necessary. As to it being discriminatory. I suggest you look at the percentages of white males in high profile positions in business, politics, etc. You will find they are disproportionately represented in those positions. Unless you are willing to go out on a limb and claim white males are inherently more qualified I think the discriminatory nature of AA is insignificant.
- No I was inferring Trump is either deliberately unclear about his view on race to the point that racist thinks he speaks for them. Is a bad communicator, or is a racist. As to how I come to this conclusion. The KKK and David Duke endorsed him during the campaign. When asked if he wanted that endorsement as a yes or no question, Trump refused do disavow them. When asked after the Chancellorsville incident to condemn the white nationalist, he first wouldn't distinguish between the counter protesters and the white nationalists, something he only corrected after he was put under huge political pressure days later. He literally was the most adamant proponent of the previous president being not an American but rather African. There are several direct quotes of Trump that are openly racist or bigoted. He was sued for racial discriminatory practices as a realtor. Information doesn't exist in a vacuum, no matter how much you would like it to.

I feel strange answering strange questions, but NO, I don't suggest that Chancellorsville or for that matter any recent protest by the GOP was about Affirmative action. And I wonder how you even come up with a weird question like that.

To say that the "discriminatory nature of AA is insignificant" is one of the most imbecile things I've ever heard, but this is what happens when people watch CNN, MSNBC, read the New York Times , etc

And even IF it were true, that "high profile positions in business, politics, etc have highrer %s of white males, so what ? There are millions of jobs, job promotions, college seats, college financial aid, business loans, etc on

all ALL levels, going to ​

less deserving blacks, and discrimination against males, whites, and other non-blacks, which, by far, numerically surpass that of "high profile positions" (whatever that means). So regarding your use of high profile positions, > it's not a valid yardstick to measure the significance of AA. Not even close.

You are talking poppycock about the KKK and DD. I have heard many Trump comments in opposition to, and voicing no connection to them. Looks like you might be watching too much CNN or MSNBC.

As for Trump's comments about the Chancellorsville protests, you are wrong. Trump has never backpedaled one inch, or walked back anything he said about that. In fact, he has recently (yesterday) commented that he supports his previous words 100%, and so do I.

Trump defends Charlottesville comments, praises Confederate Gen. Lee

Are you able to distinguish between those that are openly racist (generally Democrats) and those (Conservatives) protesting those openly racist Democrat supporters of AA ?

-This weird question stems from this weird part of your post.
-There is no if about it. White Men Account for 72% of Corporate Leadership at 16 of the Fortune 500 Companies
White males including Hispanics constitutes 35 percent of the populous. They constitute 72 percent of the executives, in fortune 500 companies, those companies that are willing to provide that information,9 in 10 house GOP members are. As to the rest you just made another blanket statement without sourcing it. You know millions of blacks are less deserving how exactly?
-
Simple yes or no question. Trump simple refused to give that simple yes.

 

[protectionist]

Thank goodness Trump is such a uniter.

No reason to not unite behind a 3.2% GDP growth. That Democrats don't unite with the President, and his successful policies, beneficial to all Americans, merely shows again, their un-Americanism.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Every time you hear the Democrats using the words "White Nationalism", you wonder do they have something against Whites ? Or something against nationalism ? (patriotic devotion to one's nation).

It sure looks like they are racist against the white race, as well as disliking America (its national anthem, its flag, its military, etc)

I am half white, and am fine with my race. I am an American citizen, and 100% cool with that too. Democrats don't seem to share this perspective.

It's all they have. Communism is based on "a" struggle. They have to corral people into groups and set them to fighting against each other in an imaginary struggle of their own devise in order to hoist their nonsense upon the unsuspecting.

Thank goodness Trump is such a uniter.

Why would he want to unite with you people?

 

[protectionist]

-This weird question stems from this weird part of your post.
-There is no if about it. White Men Account for 72% of Corporate Leadership at 16 of the Fortune 500 Companies
White males including Hispanics constitutes 35 percent of the populous. They constitute 72 percent of the executives, in fortune 500 companies, those companies that are willing to provide that information,9 in 10 house GOP members are. As to the rest you just made another blanket statement without sourcing it. You know millions of blacks are less deserving how exactly?
-
Simple yes or no question. Trump simple refused to give that simple yes.

Interesting how you persist in talking about a yardstick that I just thoroughly invalidated a few minutes ago. Maybe you DO have a reading comprehension issue, or maybe it's that you are so glued to the talking points you've been fed, that you can't move from them, even when a reasonable argument obliterates them.

The mere fact that blacks are chosen by AA, based on race (rather than achievement) is all the proof that's necessary, that those who receive that AA are less deserving. Maybe a few will coincidentally also be of high achievement, but it would be laughable to assert that there are not many (millions) of less deserving blacks jumping ahead of more deserving whites (and other non-blacks), just due to their skin color. Sorry to hit you with the item of common sense (when you've been programmed to access only liberal sourcing), but this is the truth.

In my own personal life, I have seen it all in a major way, The City University of New York's "Open Admissions" program, being the poster child for it. Thousands of blacks admitted with no academic requirement whatsoever, and then being pushed though in laughable watered-down courses with "open-book" exams (unheard of before this). and classes reduced to the level of 5th grade content. (and they still complained that the "exams" were too hard)

 

[protectionist]

A dictionary is a liberal source? Well here's the liberal view on substantiate than.SUBSTANTIATE | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary
You have not met that definition, when it comes to your assertion that Democrats were the ones that started using the term White nationalists. Nor have you met it when it comes to your claim that the term white nationalist doesn't exist. Like I said, if you aren't even willing to accept the dictionary definition of words and terms I don't see a point talking to you. Unlike you I can source everything I say, but if you aren't willing to accept even the most basic of facts I can not help you.

I told you before that IT IS. Wow. You have a reading comprehension problem. You also have a problem of regarding heavily biased things like universities, think tanks, media (TV, newspapers, etc) as being objective, valid sources.

As for me saying that Democrats were the ones that started using the term white nationalists, yes they were, but that is relatively insignificant compared to the fact that it is they who recklessly use the term NOW in 2019, especially as weaponized language to work toward electing a Democrat in 2020.

As for accepting dictionary definitions of words, of course I don't necessarily accept them, as they are written and produced by liberals, just like the US MISeducation system, and the overwhelming majority of the laughingstock US mass media.

And YES, there is a point in talking to me. That is the more you talk to me, the more you will learn to access common sense and self-evident truths as sources of information, rather than go running to some liberal dictionary, college professor, or heavily lefitist media "source".

Would you need to go to a "source" (ie refer to liberal sources) to determine if fish can swim ? Or that Canada has cold winters ? Or that cats and dogs have tails ?

Liberals are programmed to avoid common sense and simple deduction of obvious things, in order to keep them in the liberal fold, by requiring liberal sourcing for everything. Ho hum. Yawn****

 

[protectionist]

I get it. You need simple thoughts. Information scares you. And facts... Well we won't even give them the time of day. And if you stick your head in the ground and say "that 200 words is too much" you can remain ignorant and keep your beliefs separate from ant facts. Your excuse is a willing desire for ignorance... Wow.

You literally are saying it's a term to smear those groups WHEN THOSE GROUPS CALL THEMSELVES IT AND COINED IT.

All of a sudden there's no more white supremacists... Just white nationalists... Who say the same tired BS.

And yeah Nazis and the Klan have never done anything as racist as civil rights. Ok I've had enough of your intentional ignorance, your lies, and your racist rants. Kindly fuck off. If I get bored and want to listen to idiocy maybe I'll unblock you later to get a laugh at your ignorance but you bore me with your drivel.

The best was you wanting to rewrite the English language... That took some balls to even put out. And I don't think you even have a clue how batshit fucking insane you sounded.

I get it. Opposing Nazis and the Klan and their friends really triggers you and you HAVE to step in and defend them with lies (Since there's not much of a good defense for them without it). But you can't go too far or you come off as a Nazi and not just sympathetic to them. You tried walking that tightrope with your mealy mouth distractions and lies and I called them out with facts which really upset you. Oh well.

1. Liberals are the epitome of ignorance in America, and I repeat my previous post to say that I have proven that multiple times in this forum. Would you like to take my Islamization and Race/Crime quizzes, to find out how much you don't know ? (as a ramification of liberal OMISSION media)

2. I didn't say anything about white supremacists, you did,

3. Wow.You have an even worse reading comprehension problem than forklift. I didn't say WN is a term to smear racist groups. I said it's to smear white people and nationalists. Can you read ?

4. I'm not rewriting anything. It is Democrats who are doing that by taking the words white and nationalist, and weaponizing them into smears of white people and nationalists, neither of whom have any racism in them at all (unlike Democrats who support America's worst racism > Affirmative Action.

5. If I sound insane to a programmed, liberal, looney tune like you, that means I'm talking the TRUTH.

6. I have no connection to Nazis or Klan whatsoever, much less defend them other than to say that they are overrated, mostly impotent groups whose time is long past, but liberals (like the Southern Poverty Laughingstock Center) ressurect them to scare paranoid liberals, and drum up unfounded support for Democrats.

7. You didn't upset me one iota. You are just another Brain, information-deprived, liberal OMISSION media victim, babbling like a clown. That has no reason to upset me. Not my problem.