Only one? Yet, how many Republicans voted for her? 486,000 Republicans said they were OK with her public lynching comments.
What liberals want Conservative white people to die? Do you have to go "both sides" so you don't have to admit one side is utter trash and doing so would mean the facade of "both siderism" would be shattered if you did admit it?
So how is this whole debate not ultimately about you and your ego?
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
How so?
Are we going to get into this again where you pretend people protesting is the same thing as silencing speech?
"Why won't the college allow Nazis to speak freely" has got to be the dumbest fake concern trolling ever.
Who was it who told the Dixie Chicks to "shut up and sing"?Liberals are more likely to want to prohibit offensive, racist, or hate speech of anybody (liberal or conservative).
Who was it who told Lebron James to "shut up and dribble"?
Who was it who told NFL players to "shut up and stand for the anthem"?
Seriously...go fuck yourself.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
What a racist you are to think "poor white trash" is any worse than poor black trash or poor brown trash; or, to make bigoted generalizations about any people because they are low income. I guess you only like rich people.
However, you are missing the point. Higher income voters were more likely to vote Trump than Clinton and Clinton got a larger share of the vote from lower income. Lower income is lower income, regardless of their race. You are the one who thinks they are trash--I don't look down my nose at those with lower incomes.
Not me, I didn't tell anybody to shut up. You always attribute views to me I do not hold. Forget Nazis (who have the same free speech rights as anyone else), but look at colleges who had to cancel speakers or were shouted down because of the anti-free speech fascists--Condoleeza Rice, Henry Kissinger, Nicholas Dirks, John Brennan, Janet Mock, etc, etc, etc.
https://www.thefire.org/resources/di...tion-database/
https://www.businessinsider.com/list...olleges-2016-7
It's way worse, and here's why:
Unlike black or brown people, poor white trash has been given every institutional advantage possible in order to succeed.
So while black and brown people start from a societal disadvantage, poor white trash does not yet it squanders those advantages.
Poor white trash does not have to struggle against redlining, or profiling, or any of the institutional and discriminatory policies and practices that set a much higher bar for success for minorities. They've been given every institutional advantage to succeed and they are still failures.
Rather than blame themselves or the people who lied to them and told them they could coast by on privilege, poor white trash seeks to blame every minority/ethnic group possible for why they have been unable to achieve the American Dream the Conservatives they voted for promised them. And when that isn't accommodated, they then spew forth racist resentment while whining about how no one accommodates them even though the system does precisely that.
Nah bruh...not feeling your argument.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
Really?
What's the racial breakdown?
Because you keep trying to argue in broad terms when the subjects we are discussing are not broad at all.
Do you think that because Clinton won a plurality of votes for incomes under $30K means she won the white votes in that group? <--- That's not a rhetorical question, either.
Because you're making a lie-by-omission, bad faith argument. You're deliberately obfuscating the racial breakdown of incomes because it will reveal that poor white trash, and really only poor white trash in that <$30K group, voted for Trump.
So you leave out exculpatory information because that way, you can make your shitty "both sides" argument.
Isn't that the truth?
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
So in that lower-income group, what was the breakdown by race?
You're trying to lump all lower-income people together because that way, you don't have to account that the reason Clinton won only a plurality and not a majority of those votes was because poor white trash voted for Trump.
So now the quesiton becomes, why are you leaving that key piece of information out of your argument?
The only reason is because you don't want to admit to me that it was poor white trash who voted for Trump, and it is poor white trash drinking themselves to death out of despair like a bunch of whiny fucking snowflakey losers. And not wanting to admit it to me makes you a fucking loser and a coward.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
“If we have to have a choice between being dead and pitied, and being alive with a bad image, we’d rather be alive and have the bad image.”
— Golda Meir
Zionism is the movement for the self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland, the land of Israel.
ברוך השם
LV426 (12-18-2018)
Poor white trash and poor black trash do not vote. Obviously, many people in each income category voted for both Clinton and Trump, so I am not trying to hide anything. The point you are refusing to acknowledge is that calling Trump voters "poor" is true of many, but not as many as voted for Clinton. You do not to admit that Hillary voters were the lowest income and least educated. I do not think that makes them "lesser" humans like you do.
You are so simple minded. I did not defend anybody--especially those who want to restrict free speech (although Dixie Chicks and Kapernick do not involve constitutional free speech since there was no governmental restrictions involved).
To think I am defending anybody is silly just because I prove that those claims about Trump voters being poor (with the implication that they are poorer than Clinton voters) is just made-up BS aimed at denigrating 46% of American voters.
Many of those whose candidate lost the election feel better if they can berate, denigrate, and stir up hatred toward the winners. My candidate did not win, either, but I think it is immoral and detrimental to society to hate others because of it.
cawacko (12-18-2018)
They are views you hold. You're arguing them. You're defending them. So fucking own them already.
Do they, though? Free speech doesn't cover incitement, and fascism and Nazism are strictly about incitement.
What speakers were cancelled?
And you're widening the parameters to include protests.
Who was "shouted down"?
Important distinction to make: NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WERE DENIED THEIR SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT.Condoleeza Rice, Henry Kissinger, Nicholas Dirks, John Brennan, Janet Mock
You're pretending that people protesting them is somehow liberals being against free speech.
You scolding people for protesting would actually make you the one who is opposed to free speech, here.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
Bookmarks