Democracy’s Assassins Always Have Accomplices

B

BidenPresident

Verified User
Finally, with remarkably few exceptions, Republican leaders say they will still support Mr. Trump even if he is convicted of plotting to overturn an election. Alternatives exist. The Republican National Committee could declare that the party will not nominate an individual who poses a threat to democracy or has been indicted on serious criminal charges. Or Republican leaders could jointly declare that, for the sake of democracy, they will endorse Mr. Biden if Mr. Trump is the Republican nominee. Such a move would, of course, destroy the party’s chances in 2024. But by keeping Mr. Trump out of the White House, it would help protect our democracy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/opinion/trump-republicans-spain-brazil.html
 
"Democracy’s assassins always have accomplices among mainstream politicians in the halls of power. The greatest threat to our democracy comes not from demagogues like Mr. Trump or even from extremist followers like those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, but rather from the ordinary politicians, many of them inside the Capitol that day, who protect and enable him.
 
BidenPresident said:
Finally, with remarkably few exceptions, Republican leaders say they will still support Mr. Trump even if he is convicted of plotting to overturn an election. Alternatives exist. The Republican National Committee could declare that the party will not nominate an individual who poses a threat to democracy or has been indicted on serious criminal charges. Or Republican leaders could jointly declare that, for the sake of democracy, they will endorse Mr. Biden if Mr. Trump is the Republican nominee. Such a move would, of course, destroy the party’s chances in 2024. But by keeping Mr. Trump out of the White House, it would help protect our democracy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/opinion/trump-republicans-spain-brazil.html
Click to expand...

I agree. Damn to hell those fucking Democrats. Good dog
 
This argument might not go far with people who say in perfect ignorance, "The United States is not a democracy, it's a republic."
 
BidenPresident said:
Finally, with remarkably few exceptions, Republican leaders say they will still support Mr. Trump even if he is convicted of plotting to overturn an election. Alternatives exist. The Republican National Committee could declare that the party will not nominate an individual who poses a threat to democracy or has been indicted on serious criminal charges. Or Republican leaders could jointly declare that, for the sake of democracy, they will endorse Mr. Biden if Mr. Trump is the Republican nominee. Such a move would, of course, destroy the party’s chances in 2024. But by keeping Mr. Trump out of the White House, it would help protect our democracy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/opinion/trump-republicans-spain-brazil.html
Click to expand...
The NY Times is not a reliable source they lied about Russian collusion and Hunter's laptop.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Not to mention publishing the historical fiction The 1619 Project as accurate history...
Click to expand...

The 1619 Project is history mentally enslaved Right wingers don't like to hear, not inaccurate history. It basically is history that shows slavery is fundamental in American history. Only the sort of ignoramuses who mock The New York Times think otherwise.
 
martin said:
The 1619 Project is history mentally enslaved Right wingers don't like to hear, not inaccurate history. It basically is history that shows slavery is fundamental in American history. Only the sort of ignoramuses who mock The New York Times think otherwise.
Click to expand...

The NYT printed a retraction saying it was fiction...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/...istorians-who-critiqued-the-1619-project.html

They then printed further corrections and retractions on it

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/magazine/an-update-to-the-1619-project.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/09/magazine/1619-project-us-history.html

Historical fiction, not history.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The NYT printed a retraction saying it was fiction...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/...istorians-who-critiqued-the-1619-project.html

They then printed further corrections and retractions on it

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/magazine/an-update-to-the-1619-project.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/09/magazine/1619-project-us-history.html

Historical fiction, not history.
Click to expand...

Not quite a retraction. The Times said this:

"We applaud all efforts to address the enduring centrality of slavery and racism to our history. Some of us have devoted our entire professional lives to those efforts, and all of us have worked hard to advance them. Raising profound, unsettling questions about slavery and the nation’s past and present, as The 1619 Project does, is a praiseworthy and urgent public service. Nevertheless, we are dismayed at some of the factual errors in the project and the closed process behind it."
 
martin said:
Not quite a retraction. The Times said this:

"We applaud all efforts to address the enduring centrality of slavery and racism to our history. Some of us have devoted our entire professional lives to those efforts, and all of us have worked hard to advance them. Raising profound, unsettling questions about slavery and the nation’s past and present, as The 1619 Project does, is a praiseworthy and urgent public service. Nevertheless, we are dismayed at some of the factual errors in the project and the closed process behind it."
Click to expand...

Gardner has no idea what critical thinking is.
 
martin said:
Not quite a retraction. The Times said this:

"We applaud all efforts to address the enduring centrality of slavery and racism to our history. Some of us have devoted our entire professional lives to those efforts, and all of us have worked hard to advance them. Raising profound, unsettling questions about slavery and the nation’s past and present, as The 1619 Project does, is a praiseworthy and urgent public service. Nevertheless, we are dismayed at some of the factual errors in the project and the closed process behind it."
Click to expand...

It was in terms of it being history versus historical fiction. The Times simply tried to minimize the damage, as would be expected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top