Why don't RINOs Admit This is Assault on Blacks is Real?
RINOs (today's Republican party) are in total denial and live in a fantasy world where massacres of Black, like what is depicted in Dreamland, never happened or wasn't as bad as people say. They also deny Trump lost the election. They also deny what happened on 1/6/21 was an insurrection. They also deny ....
Well, https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/05 … ca-racism/ is as real as it gets."RINOs (today's Republican party) are in total denial and live in a fantasy world where massacres of Black, like what is depicted in Dreamland, never happened or wasn't as bad as people say."
Why do you believe Republicans deny that this massacre did not occur? This statement seems odd at best. You are literally saying today's Republicans do not accept this massacre happened.
Your statements make no logical sense. You are blanketing a segment of our society. Perhaps you don't realize that is what you are doing with such a hyperbolic accusation. I will say, and this is just my view -- This massacre has not been talked about for decades. It would seem the Dems hoped to open a very old wound using this horrific tragedy as a cheap political ploy.
Maybe he should do something other than talk... Much needs doing, but Joe continues to pander in the worst way.Where did I say ALL?
Liz Cheney and at least 34 other Real Republicans in the House. Mitt Romney and a very few of his fellow Real Republicans do not either. That minority of Real Republicans who are never-Trumpers do not as well. But as we have seen with the insurrection, deny or minimize is the modus operandi of most of the rest who are RINOs.
I find it interesting that I get chastised for blanket blaming the Republicans, even though I did not, yet you are comfortable doing exactly what you accused me of with this false statement "It would seem the Dems hoped to open a very old wound using this horrific tragedy as a cheap political ploy."
One, this massacre has never been talked about before and two, by making that claim, you are whitewashing the tragedy that Blacks are just now, 100 years later, trying to put in front and center to America that not a whole lot has changed since then. Blacks are still being indiscriminately killed by Whites.
How did Biden "pander"? What actions should he have taken in the last 100 days he has been President? Why didn't Trump do anything in the last four years (other than make racists statements)?I did not use the word all. Your statement used the words "republican party". Not some of the Republican party or several of, or a handful or a few... You blanketed, you do that frequently.
What I said --- I will say, and this is just my VIEW -- This massacre has not been talked about for decades. It would seem the Dems hoped to open a very old wound using this horrific tragedy as a cheap political ploy.
Note the word view...
I in no way diminished the massacre.
"Blacks are still being indiscriminately killed by Whites." I must say you come out with some whoopers... Maybe you should consider the stats of black-on-black killings. Maybe just have a look at crime in Chicago.
Trump has a long list of accomplishments that made America a better place. he was a president for all the people. Now, Joe, he is president for a few people, some of the cronies in the Democratic party.
He has done nothing as I have well pointed out. He will do nothing he just is not suited for the job. That's just my opinion of Joe.Joe has done quite a bit. The news tonight reported that deaths in illegal alien border crossings is up, I believe, some 40%. That's totally on good ol' Joe as he made it clear illegal aliens would gain citizenship when he got into office, and he quit deporting them except at the border. So is the massive increase in unaccompanied children, for much the same reason. That businesses can't find jobs is directly attributable to Joe's huge giveaway, raising the income for tens of thousands of people willing to live off his charity and stay home rather than working for what they get. Joe is substantially responsible for the highest inflation rate in 13 years, again as a direct result of his giveaway programs.
He's done a lot.Oh let me count the ways this man is ruining America... I did not catch the report on deaths of illegals being up 40% at the border. This all is getting worse daily, and being totally ignored, and poorly reported on.
I lay this all at Biden's feet, he campaigned on the first 100 days no one would be deported, he gave hope to many to send their children with coyotes. One can only guess how many die-in on the journey.
One thing that may happen, many illegals that slipped in will start taking jobs that are going unfilled, working under the table type jobs. Joe has promoted people to settle for free. Problem --- we can't keep printing money. The s---t is about to hit the fan.
I knew we were in for trouble with Biden, but I will admit I never imagined it would come so fast, and be so bad... Got to almost laugh.
Did you watch Biden's speech in Tulsa? It was filled with hyperbolic racial innuendoes. Pure propaganda, pure pandering. I only watched part of it, I can't stomach this type of blatant pandering. I realize most politicians pander and push propaganda. But Biden goes overboard. Just can't stomach him at this point. And he claimed he was going to bring the country together. All I have witnessed is him stoking division --- be it left or right, white or black. This is uncalled for and dangerous to America as a society.
In my view, the CNN special Dreamland was coordinated with the
White House to be aired a day before Biden traveled to Tulsa..."illegals that slipped in will start taking jobs that are going unfilled, " - well, since Americans won't take them, I guess you are proposing they go unfilled. Businesses will love you for that.
"But Biden goes overboard." - PROOF please, since that is not true on the face of it.Yes, illegals will take them. While we continue Joe's giveaway with excessive unemployment benefits. It never did take a genius to understand how that one was going to play out - even I, a chemist and electrician by trade, could predict where it was going to go.
And adding to the problem is Joe's decision not to deport illegal aliens from the interior; without fear of ICE they are quite free to take any job they want. The only question here is just how Joe justifies his refusal to enforce the laws of the country after he swore to do so. Or maybe he just doesn't care - he doesn't appear to care about destroying the economy or creating massive inflation.Why would some take the jobs due to Big Bucks Biden tossing out free money? I can imagine sooner or later these deadbeats will be crying --- immigrants took my job... BOOHOO.
OVERBOARD --- One only needs to listen to his speeches to ascertain he dramatizes and goes overboard. Half the time making up crazy stories about his own life to suit the narrative... He is a pathological liar.
https://www.shorenewsnetwork.com/2021/0 … ords-show/
As I said, not sure how you find it possible to defend Biden. Thank God we have the internet, we can always pull up Biden's appearances, and have good proof of his lies.
In his speech yesterday he was very dramatic --- he talked about Chrarotsville claimed the white supremacist came over the hill eyes glaring, mussels bulging carrying torches. He asked the audience to "close your eyes and imagine"! In my book, that is pandering of the worse kind. Lying... Here is the truth. There were two sides, more on the left than white superminis. There is no doubt white supremacists were there, and there to make a point, and test they fought with the left protesters. Both sides were wrong, both sides broke the law. But Biden did not mention that did he? He race-baited in an overly, dramatic way.
I have yet to find any such proof of Biden's dramatic description. What I saw in videos was two sides fighting with many forms of weapons. It was clear a two-sided fight. Race-baiting is Biden's trump card. To me, this is a bad as out and out as his long history of belittling the black race.I only know a few of these "deadbeats" but the interesting thing is, they are all RINOs. I live in the heart of Red America so virtually all of those who won't get jobs are RINOs, lol.
"... he talked about Chrarotsville claimed the white supremacist came over the hill eyes glaring, mussels bulging carrying torches. He asked the audience to "close your eyes and imagine" - So in your book, telling the truth is "pandering"?
Charlottesville - You really need to get your facts correct rather than listening to the far-Right Fake News. "There is no doubt white supremacists were there" - boy is that an understatement, lol.
This WELL SOURCED article starts out with -
"The Unite the Right rally was a white supremacist[4][5][6][7] rally that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia, August 11–12, 2017.[8][9][10] Far-right groups participated, including self-identified members of the alt-right,[11] neo-Confederates,[12] neo-fascists,[13] white nationalists,[14] neo-Nazis,[15] Klansmen,[16] and various right-wing militias.[17] Some groups chanted racist and anti-Semitic slogans and carried weapons, Nazi and neo-Nazi symbols, the Valknut, Confederate battle flags, Deus Vult crosses, flags, and other symbols of various past and present anti-Islamic and anti-Semitic groups.[7][9][18][19][20][21][22] The organizers' stated goals included unifying the American white nationalist movement[11] and opposing the proposed removal of the statue of General Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville's former Lee Park.[21][23]"
These are the counter-protesters (one of whom the Right murdered) -
"A large number were ordinary residents of Charlottesville who wanted to show their disdain for white supremacist groups, particularly after the Ku Klux Klan held a rally in the city on July 8."[100] Ahead of the rally, an array of "faith-based groups, civil rights organizations, local businesses, and faculty and students at the University of Virginia" [/b] planned counter-protests.[48]
The Charlottesville House of Prayer also gathered at the site [u]to pray. Groups counter-protesting included representatives from the National Council of Churches,[102] Black Lives Matter,[103] Anti-Racist Action,[104]
and for the edification of the Right-Wing - the Democratic Socialists of America,[105] the Workers World Party,[106] the Revolutionary Communist Party,[107] Refuse Fascism,[108] Redneck Revolt,[109] the Industrial Workers of the World,[110][111] the Metropolitan Anarchist Coordinating Council,[112] and Showing Up for Racial Justice.[104][113][114] Members of the antifa movement (which FBI says are NOT terrorists or a threat to the US) were also in attendance.[23] Some counter-protesters came armed (to counter the armed right-wing).[115]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the … protesters (make sure your research all of the sources before ragging on WIkipedia)
It is sad you bought into Trump's there were good people on both sides BS.
""I only know a few of these "deadbeats" but the interesting thing is, they are all RINOs. I live in the heart of Red America so virtually all of those who won't get jobs are RINOs, lol."
.
Again blanketing. At any rate, Biden should have never offered $300.00 over and above unemployment benefits. Stupid move that backfired, most of the Democrats in Congress can't solve problems only add to them.
Charlotteville --- I certainly did not view Joe's vision. Looked like lots of people all mad all fighting. No bulging eyes and bulging muscles hate on their faces... OMG whatever
As Joe said " 'I don't want my children to grow up in a jungle, a racial jungle.'
"you're not black enough if you not going to vote for me"
In regard to Obama --- He's articulate and clean"...
In my view, Biden is an innate racist, he has been his entire life.
Got to say you seem like a broken record Trump TrumpmTrump --- not healthy at all.
Lot's of real current news we could be debating, maybe time to move on down the road.
Sharlee, it continues to annoy me to no end as to how "typical" white folks are qualified to know who and what belittles the Our Ethnic Group. When we, in resounding numbers, clearly state who and what that is.
This term "Black Race" is a bit anachronistic. Ethnic groups are more identified by cultural affinities over physical appearance. Barack Obama, the product of both Caucasian and African, clearly identified himself with the African American culture.If we are going to play the ‘what annoys me to no end game’ I’ll tell you a couple of things that annoy me.
Your claim of resounding numbers implies a belief of unity on the topic within what you consider to be ‘your ethnic group’. I see this so often with those who choose to be outspoken. As if your opinion Is truth. You don’t speak for the black community any more than Brandon Tatum does and since your following is considerably less than his, by the standards you appear to use to define resounding numbers his opinion is more in line with what you define as your ethnic group.
And the term white folk annoys me and amuses me. Whoever disagrees with the left is labeled white folk, or some derogatory term meant to imply subservience to this group. As if skin color magically transforms human beings into some ethnic group. By defining an ethnic group with nothing more than skin color, on both accounts you attempt to draw battle lines to suit your fancy. I realize stretching definitions to support an agenda is the new left’s favorite game however everyone has a right to an opinion, which brings me to the final annoyance.
People with strong opinions whining that others have no right to strong opinions.At least in my part of the rural South (including my extended White family), "skin color magically transforms human beings into some ethnic group." is an absolute truth. In their eyes, if your skin is black, then you are something to be made fun of, to blame for the ills of the world, and to
denigrated (while at the same time claiming they have black friends as if that makes up for being total racists).
Since I have lived my long life in many parts of the country where conservatives dominate, I have observed that belief system, which most of my wife's family holds, by white folks regarding people whose skin color is dark to be ubiquitous.I’m from the south. Since the democrats went out of their way to terrorize minorities and any portion of the majority who did not agree with their prejudice I’ve seen much. Maybe you still live among that democratic demographic. I thought we had educated them out of their evil ways
I live in Ruby Red North Florida. And yes, you are right " democrats went out of their way to terrorize minorities and any portion of the majority who did not agree with their prejudice " - of course the Democrats you speak of are conservative white Democrats of a by-gone era. Any that are surviving today moved to the RINO party back in the 1980s.
Back in the day it was Conservative Democrats who lynched blacks for fun - today it is Conservative Republicans who kneel on the neck of blacks (or more often simply shoot them) until dead.
Today, it is liberal protesters who object to whites killing blacks (while a few criminals riot at the same time and right-wing terrorists join to confuse things). Today, it is Conservative Trump supporting RINOs who storm the Capitol to attack and maim the police and try to kill modern Democratic congresspeople along with hanging the Republican Vice President.
Sure is a fine crowd you support with your words.
First of all, L to L, it is not a baseless claim. How did this demographic block vote in 2020? Eighty to 90 percent voted for the party that somehow exploits them?
Yes, I chose to be outspoken because of the overwhelming numbers of lies and misconceptions out there. Somebody has to do it.
And what is the truth for our group short of it being shown by the vast majority. What proof do you have to dispute this source of truth?
While I don't speak for the Black community, I am better qualified than you are to express its sentiments.
Whom the hell is Braden Tatum? The voices of a clear minority of our community cannot be accepted as truth over vastly larger numbers. I use numbers to show who is supporting who, do you have a more valid measure?
This "white folks" thing points to your own biases. Who ever said that all that disagree with the left are defined as "white folks"? There are still many of these people who "get it" and WE welcome them all into the fold.
What if I said that the White Race has been mesmerized and hypnotized by Trump and the Republican Party, what would you say to that? After all, it is just an opinion....
Opinions are fine until they are overwhelmed by facts and realities that indicate the contrary.
And once again, you miss it. Ethnicity is defined by both physical characteristics and assimilation into the cultural values associated with that group that one wishes to adhere to.
There are no lines of battle being proposed except those of your imagination.
All I see statistically is that only whites, caucasians, Anglos, vote overwhelmingly for Trump and Republicans, while the majority of those not so defined, do not. No smoke and mirrors this time, L to L, explain that? That is documented, how do you argue with it?
"Sharlee, it continues to annoy me to no end as to how "typical" white folks are qualified to know who and what belittles the Our Ethnic Group"
I was careful to add the words To me, to add the context that my sentiment was opinion-oriented.
You used the team "white folks" this could also be associated with the past.
I am very aware I offer options that at times very much my own assumptions, I do make every attempt to word my comments as views, opinions. I will not apologies for my opinions. As I do not expect anyone else to walk back their opinions.
And I certainly will admit you know much more about being black than I. However, maybe I know a bit more about Caucasians, and when one of them is seeking to race-bait, and carefully anger both sides.
And I can assure you his Tulsa speech angered me...And his Tulsa speech made me proud that an American president can finally own up to part of America's sordid past which Conservatives seem to want to keep hidden and pretend like it never happened or will happen again. Keep in mind, whites are STILL "lynching" blacks, just not using rope all of the time.
No other president ever visited Tulsa but pandering Joe. It would seem CNN and old Joe planed this race-baiting venture perfectly.
Of course everybody knows you are making that up.
I will stand corrected and restate that no other president visited Tulsa
to Mark 1921 Race Massacre:
Joe Biden --- "The events we speak of today took place 100 years ago. And yet, I’m the first President in 100 years ever to come to Tulsa — (applause) — I say that not as a compliment about me, but to think about it — a hundred years, and the first President to be here during that entire time, and in this place, in this ground, to acknowledge the truth of what took place here." Source https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo … -massacre/
In researching the Tulsa Massacre I could not find any documentary dating back from before 2021. Curious, I found many that were made this year. https://tulsaworld.com/entertainment/mo … 58995.html
It well appears this historic massacre has laid dormant for many years.
And no other president commemorates the sad aniversery.You corrected the wrong thing. It was "It would seem CNN and old Joe planed this race-baiting venture perfectly." that you created out of thin air or Right-Wing talking-heads. I should have included the part I was referring to, sorry.
Now you are getting it - America habitually covered up massacres like that. The point the Blacks are making is white America almost always sweeps such things under the rug. It is time somebody shined a light on how terribly white America has treated blacks from the time white Europeans came over here to today
And this isn't the only massacre that has laid dormant. Here is a partial list of such atrocities. https://www.zinnedproject.org/collection/massacres-us/Like America's Democratic party has tried to keep the fact that so many of the party belonged to the KKK? Or that it would seem to have short memories of Biben/Byrd's association? OR This...
POLITICO
"Forty years ago, a contentious battle over racial justice gripped Capitol Hill, pitting the nation’s lone African American senator against the man who would one day become Barack Obama’s vice president. The issue was school busing, a plan to transport white and black students out of their neighborhoods to better integrate schools—and at the time the most explosive issue on the national agenda.
Ed Brooke, a Massachusetts Republican, was the first black senator ever to be popularly elected; Joe Biden was a freshman Democratic senator from Delaware. By 1975, both had compiled liberal voting records. But that year, Biden sided with conservatives and sponsored a major anti-busing amendment. The fierce debate that followed not only fractured the Senate’s bloc of liberals, it also signified a more wide-ranging political phenomenon: As white voters around the country—especially in the North—objected to sweeping desegregation plans then coming into practice, liberal leaders retreated from robust integration policies.
Biden was at the forefront of this retreat: He had expressed support for integration and—more specifically—busing during his Senate campaign in 1972, but once elected, he discovered just how bitterly his white constituents opposed the method. In 1973 and 1974, Biden began voting for many of the Senate’s anti-busing bills, claiming that he favored school desegregation, but just objected to “forced busing.”
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story … ing-120968
Seems Biden has a very long racist history... So, yes many Americans do sweep things under the rug. That is never so apparent.You say "Like America's Democratic party has tried to keep the fact that so many of the party belonged to the KKK? " like it is news. It is not, everybody knows that the Republican and Democratic parties switched philosophies in the 1960s.
Prior to that, the Democratic party was dominated by conservatives, mainly from the South. Until recently, conservatives dominated the Republican party. Today, what used to be the Republican party has no philosophy other than what crazy Trump says it is.
Were Lincoln alive today, he would be a proud Democrat. If Andrew Jackson were alive today, he would be a proud Republican never-Trumper.
So trying to score points by saying today's Democrats are KKK sympathizers is simply showing a lack of understanding of political history.
Think of it this way - conservatives, regardless of party, want to limit civil/voting rights of minorities and liberals, regardless of party, want to expand civil/voting rights of minorities.
What you leave out of your false implications is that while Biden opposed federally mandated busing (I would guess you opposed federal busing mandates as well, but then since Biden opposed it you probably supported it), he DID NOT oppose busing in general.
And how, prey tell, do you get from Biden opposing federally mandated school busing to "Biden has a very long racist history"? Boy, that is quite a leap in logic.
How do explain the fact that almost all blacks voted for a man who has such "a very long racist history"? You can't, unless (like many conservatives) you think blacks are simply stupid and self-destructive. Since that is clearly not the case, that must mean your claim is false.
Ok, I missed the "to me" part. We all have a right to our opinions. But I am going to pay more attention to those that giving a point of view from the trenches over those that sit on the sidelines.
The sheer extent of amalgamation in America make the term "race" seem arcane. How should I define Caucasian, Anglo people? "White folks" is a term of convenience, how should I define your Ethnic block? Most of you certainly defin yourselves by your voting habits. Just as so many of you say that we do.
I don't like being pandered to, as I judge based on results. Are you working on the "agenda" and pulling all stops to get it through? That is my attitude regarding President Biden. The centennial of the savagery that took place in Tulsa just over 100 years ago will not be forgotten, regardless. But appealing to our group with speeches can never do as a substitute for "results"."But I am going to pay more attention to those that giving a point of view from the trenches over those that sit on the sidelines."
I don't understand who you are referring to?
I have no problem with terms like white, white people, or folks. When communicating online it is hard to please all, so I please myself by just going with the terms I have used for many years. Yes, always hoping I don't offend with a term. And I think your right many of us do tend to use party affiliations.
I objected to some of the content of Biden's speech, not his visit to pay tribute to that horrible day. I don't think in America today you would find many citizens that would object to Biden's visit and tribute.
I would have rather heard a speech of how far we have come, and how far we still need to venture. I did not appreciate him making mention of any other president who memorialized the massacre in Tulsa at the very beginning of the speech. But most presidents do pat themselves on the back at every given chance.
I would have loved to see something substantial offered up, a deed that offered something like a sculpture that would live on and remind the citizens of that --- no the massacre was not forgotten. Words as a rule don't move me, I like you would rather see results.
Proof --- pull up his hyperbolic speech from two days ago in Tulsa. Just my opinion but he certainly was dramatic, and most of what he said could be considered rade-baiting... He sure pissed me off.
IT has come to the point I will not be tuning into his appearances. I am ashamed to see such a man represent America.I listened to and read Bidens speech - no hyperbole at all
That is no surprise to me. You seem to have a very groupthink type of mindset. I would find it odder if you stood out of the crowd. Just in my view after many months of conversations with you, I feel I could predict your opinions in some respect. As you most likely can predict mine
To be honest my concerns with this administration have moved from race-baiting to the many problems that current, and are bound to affect America.
I consider all the race-baiting a smokescreen that the media and Dems dish up to keep the real problems well hidden.
I am making an attempt to post threads on all the brewing problems this administration is causing. problems I see as serious, just to have a reference for the future when these problems fester and truly affect Americans. A running history of Biden's failures. And I can assure you his problems are piling up quickly. The border crisis, the three pipelines, and Biden's clear hypocrisy in dealing with them. The hacking crisis --- will our grid be hacked?
All Joe's policies and what they really offer America. Let's not forget all the lies we were fed about the origin of the virus... Biden is in China's pocket.The only "race-baiting" is coming from your side - just ask any person of color.
BTW - "groupthink" is a major characteristic of Right-wing Authoritarian followers. You should study up on that sometime.
"the lies we were fed about the origin of the virus" - What lies? You made that up to. Any reasonable person knows it either escaped from a lab or was an animal to human transmission. With all that has come out now, I lean toward the "escape from a lab" scenario.
Of course you made this up as well - "A running history of Biden's failures. "
"Biden is in China's pocket." - No, you misspoke again. It was Trump who was, is in Russia's pocket.
I noticed you ignored the debunking of your Charlottesville claim as well as refusing the address the current day "lynching" of blacks by whites.
"deaths in illegal alien border crossings is up, " - actually you left out the part, as usual, about many of the deaths being in the Mexican interior. You also forgot to mention none of these deaths were because they were being detained like many of Trump's were. It is strange how you forget the important stuff and simply spin and twist a bit of news.
" Joe as he made it clear illegal aliens would gain citizenship when he got into office, " - is of course FALSE
"Joe is substantially responsible for the highest inflation rate in 13 years," - actually, he is not.
"again as a direct result of his giveaway programs. " - nor is that true.
"That businesses can't find jobs is directly attributable to Joe's huge giveaway," - as you so often ask, PROVE IT, since nobody really knows for sure (except you).Sorry, but not a single death of an illegal was caused by detaining them. Rather, detaining them, and providing health care, saved many lives. Never forget that all too many that enter are ill, either from disease, dehydration or starvation.
If you think he didn't promise to grant citizenship go back and review his campaign promises. It is certainly not FALSE as you claim.
Certainly he is; while we might have absorbed the first pandemic give out, we cannot simply keep doing it. In addition the extra unemployment has caused labor prices to go through the roof. And that is on Joe.
You're right - I know for sure. And so does anyone that understands people will stay home when paid more than working will get them. Do you understand that or do you think they will take a "pay" cut of hundreds per month in order to work?As a white male, I will have Todd speak for me, who is the white male muppet.
I'm SORRY.
The RINOs attack Blacks again. This time it was during a Memorial Day speech by a retired military officer who DARED to talk about Black history during his speech. The RINOs running the event in Ohio cut off his mic claiming talking about blacks has nothing to do with Memorial Day which includes (they hate to admit apparently) fallen black soldiers.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat … 526983002/Seems you are being hypocritical --- you supported Biden's cheap political ploy to visit Tulas and give that cray dramatic over-the-top speech about the 1921 massacre. And you now complain of a Republican talking about black history. This is America we have free speech, this military officer shared his opinion. Just like old Joe. Not sure why you don't realize opinions vary, and not all are palatable to all.
"But organizers of the ceremony in Hudson, Ohio, said that part of the speech was not relevant to the program's theme of honoring the city's veterans."
HOW DARE THEM! This kind of censorship has no place in America.Well given there isn't a shred of truth in "you supported Biden's cheap political ploy to visit Tulas and give that cray dramatic over-the-top speech about the 1921 massacre. " - it is clear I can't be hypocritical.
"And you now complain of a Republican talking about black history. " - guess it would be very helpful if you read what was written. It was the RINO's who censured (by turning off his mic) this military officer's opinion about Black history. Why don't you want this officer talking about Black history at the Memorial Day gathering? I don't understand you.
Even though their explanation was total BS, how did that give them the right to censor the officer talking about Black veterans from Hudson, Ohio. Are you in favor of them censoring that American military officer?Ok, not sure we are in agreement in regard to the article. First not sure how you came to the conclusion Retired Lt. Col. Barnard Kemter or that the organizers at the American Legion are all Republicans? The American Legion values its independence and maintained by neutrality in regards to political parties. The American Legion, by legal definition, is non-partisan and supports "or opposes as necessary" only issues which impact American soldiers. All American soldiers.
I noted no mention of anyone's political standing in the article.
I thought your statement -- "The RINOs attack Blacks again. This time it was during a Memorial Day speech by a retired military officer who DARED to talk about Black history during his speech."
Was in some respect claiming Lt. Col. Barnard Kemter was a Republican and he had no right to speak about blacks that fought in the Civil war. And that you felt that the organizer of the event was also a Republican cut off the mike so the speakers would not be heard when he spoke about the Black soldiers.
It would seem you appointed a political party to the speaker, as well as the person that cut the mike. Not sure why you needed to assume all were Republicans? So I will repeat my original comment.
This is America we have free speech, this military officer shared his opinion. Just like old Joe. Not sure why you don't realize opinions vary, and not all are palatable to all.
"But organizers of the ceremony in Hudson, Ohio, said that part of the speech was not relevant to the program's theme of honoring the city's veterans."
HOW DARE THEM! This kind of censorship has no place in America.
And add all soldiers should be honored on Memorial Day."Retired Lt. Col. Barnard Kemter or that the organizers at the American Legion are all Republicans? " - I didn't say one way or the other, did I, what political belief, if any, Kemter had?
But, 1) the American Legion (which strongly back Joe McCarthy in that era and Donald Trump in this era), and most other vet organizations like them are strongly Republican - one reason why I don't join one of them and 2) liberals would not have cut off a persons mic for talking about black history.
"This is America we have free speech, this military officer shared his opinion. " - If that is true, why did that American Legion post try to stop Kemter from speaking?You actually used the term RINO twice... So yes you referred to a political leaning.
NO, the American Legion prides itself on being non-political. Do you think all soldiers in our history as well as now are Republicans? Was JFK a republican? They support all soldiers.
https://www.legion.org/belovedveterans/ … -f-kennedy
ECO --
" liberals would not have cut off a persons mic for talking about black history."
Really, so you feel the person that cut the mike was a Republican LOL
I am not sure or have any idea of why part of his speech was silenced. If I were to guess, I would think it may be their policy not to point out any soldier by race, white or black... Perhaps not wanting to portray one race did more than the other. I believe they thought it sounded political. And they strive to be non-political.
https://people.com/human-interest/army- … k-history/
A little education on how whites in America have treated minority races and religions. From https://www.zinnedproject.org/collectio … us/page/2/
- May 26, 1637: Hundreds of Pequot villagers were massacred by the Puritans in Mystic, Connecticut.
- July 27, 1816: a fort on the Apalachicola River in Florida was fire bombed by the U.S. Army. The fort had provided home and safety to more than 300 African and Choctaw families.
- Aug 6, 1855: On election day, in Louisville, Kentucky, Protestant mobs attacked German and Irish Catholic neighborhoods.
- July 13, 1863: The NYC Draft Massacre ("Riots") were the largest civil insurrection in U.S. history besides the Civil War itself. White mobs attacked the African American community -- committing murder and burning homes and institutions (including an orphanage.)
Are you starting to see a pattern here? Notice, I won't be posting similar incidents were perpetrated by nonwhites and non-Protestants - because, if they EVER happened, they were extremely rare.My Gosh is all I can say... Please note the dates on all of the atrocities you have listed. Now two questions.
1. Can you point out more recent massacres? Keyword massacres) just to keep with the subject, and examples you have given.
We all know about police shootings and the Jan 6th protest, and in no respect do I put any of them in the same context as any of the massacres you have offered up.
I in no respect will answer or take the blame for what anyone did hundreds of years ago. I have no guilt over what any society did hundred years ago. I consider the atrocities you have offered inexcusable.
2. Do you believe the society we have become over these past hundreds of years could bring us to massacre a race or sector of citizens.
IMO race-baiting can only intensify the problem of systemic racism? This is a very cheap ploy that the Democrats use. Instead of working on the problem, intensify it.
This kind of politicking adds to division and hate. It is what leads to racial violence.As to the dates, I was just starting the list. It will finish with the current atrocities.
Until conservatives finally fess up to all of their past and current bad deeds, it needs to be kept before the public eye. Maybe, as a result, conservatives will change their stripes and stop hating those who aren't like them.
Since you asked, here are a few more to show this very long history of conservative killing:
- April 12, 1864: Confederate troops massacred over 500 surrendering Union soldiers, majority African American, at the Civil War Battle of Fort Pillow.
- November 29, 1864: A Colorado Cavalry unit, acting on orders from Colorado's governor and ignoring a white surrender flag flying just below a U.S. flag, brutally attacked Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes.
- December 9, 1864: Ebenezer Creek Massacre - People who had escaped from slavery and were following the Union Army, were blocked from crossing the Ebenezer Creek, leading to their death.
- May 1 - 3, 1866: White civilians and police killed 46 African-Americans and injured many more while burning houses, schools, and churches in Memphis, Tennessee."1. Can you point out more recent massacres? Keyword massacres) just to keep with the subject, and examples you have given."
Resent, I do not consider any of your examples resent. I am very aware of more historical race-related crimes, and the KKK's brutal treatment of black citizens. Which in my book is more pertinent than the horrific incidents you offer from the 1800s.
As I said I don't take responsibility for any race crimes or would I support any form of violence against my fellow man...
On the other hand, I have no solutions to solve systemic racism, and I am very much content with not trying to save the world.
In regard to the subject of the thread, it would seem the person that objected to the speech, was asked to resign from the American Legion, and they put out a statement. The American Legion has a good reputation of being non -political. I am pleased to see them quickly handle such a blatant offense against freedom of speech.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/legion-offic … day-speechI bet whoever at Fox posted that article got reprimanded or fired. And good for the leadership of the American Legion for recognizing racism.
As to "recent" - I am getting there. But, unfortunately there is so much history of white massacres of minorities and religions, it will take a while. The point is, of course, is conservatives have always been this way and still are. This is why I dislike conservatism so much. You are a nurse, I am surprised you don't either.
Let's carry on with a few more:
- July 30, 1866: The New Orleans Massacre occurred when white residents attacked Black marchers near the reconvened Louisiana Constitutional Convention.
- September 19, 1868: As African Americans marched peacefully in response to their expulsion from elected office, more than a dozen were massacred near Albany, Georgia.
- September 28, 1868: Opelousas Massacre - In response to the promotion of voter registration, a KKK like group massacred hundreds of people, most who were African American.
- October 25, 1868: The St. Bernard Parish (Louisiana) massacre of African Americans was carried out by white men to terrorize the recently emancipated voters. (Do you see the connection between these atrocities over voting and today's RINO attempt to suppress minority voting? Nothing changes, does it.)
There were race riots where whites attacked Blacks in Detroit in 1943, endless brutality from that time on consisting of murder, bombing of churches, etc. Much of it within my lifetime, so it is hardly ancient history as many of the perpetrators still live. These crimes over the passage of time more than made up of for what in the not so distant past took place in one day.
This is not being held responsible is ok and convenient. I guess that it is much like ones ancestors stealing millions of acres from indigenous people and the current generation, while denying their guilt remain in possession of "stolen property", as they still remain on the land.
With the current political climate and the dark undertones of republicans, conservatives and right wing philosophies, such a confrontation as it happened before cannot truly be ruled out as not possible again, under certain conditions of stress.
What are republicans doing to "work on the problem"? Most of US say that they do less than nothing. And if the problems are not to be properly addressed then the issues will intensify.
What adds to division and hate? There can be no peace without justice and FairPlay, and for me that applies to race relations, politics, what have you.
You asked what I meant by the view of those from within the trenches being different from those that sit on the side lines.
The opinion of those directly involved in anything has to be of more value than the opinion of a mere observer from outside the fray.II am going to be very honest, I have not noted Republicans or right-wing media bringing up the subject of the race unless they are reporting what they feel are Denacrats using race as a club to beat their followers over the head with. I do feel the recent race-baiting being so prevalent on leftwing media is truly hurting race relations.
"I think you may be right in regard to black and white confrontation being very possible in today's political climate. People are angry, and being bombarded with black man good -- white man bad..".
I am sick of this kind of rhetoric and see many around me that feel the same. And I am still after all our conversations not sure of what you feel the Dems have done or will do to help with systemic racism. All I see is growing discontent on both sides. Very dangerous, and uncalled for.
President Biden in a video released told the class of 2021 they are graduating at an "inflection point" in history and described systemic racism as one of "the great crises of our time."
"With the current political climate and the dark undertones of republicans, conservatives and right-wing philosophies, such a confrontation as it happened before cannot truly be ruled out as not possible again, under certain conditions of stress."
I ask you in all the years this man was in Congress did you see him in any respect work on systemic racism? In fact, he fought for many years against the integration of public schools?
And now he steps on the backs of blacks offering nothing IMO but false promises. He is politicking, as he did in the '70s when he pandered using the busing issue. He is a very transparent politician. His record in the Senate shows he goes whichever way the wind blows.https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna906646
An interesting article.
I mentioned to you before the advantages to our group of the Biden agenda, the question is whether he remains willing to follow through on the promises. He cannot allow himself to be taken off course by obstinate
Republicans. Stii, Trump and the Republicans offer less than nothing, I don't have any choice when presented with these alternatives. The introduction of changes are seen by whites as a personal assault on them?
Biden is talking about attacking housing discrimination, while Trump used it as a campaign ploy to frighten soccer moms regarding a threat of poor and minorities moving into their backyard. I call that the most blatant form of race baiting. That is today, not 50 years ago.
What do you think will happen if the white Right cannot successfully suppress minority votes politically? What will they resort to to maintain the advantages inherent within the status quo?
Systemic racism is a pillar of American society that peopl don't want to talk about. We have advanced only that the means and methods of its practice have been refined in modern times.
There were many on all sides that had problems with forced busing. I was caught up in it during my high school days."Still, Trump and the Republicans offer less than nothing,..." is a gross understatement. They are actively trying to return civil society to the pre-1960 level of oppression.
"Systemic racism is a pillar of American society that people don't want to talk about." - I do object to the term "pillar". Systemic racism isn't what our founders had in mind in the long run, they were liberal after all. That is not an American ideal.
Systemic racism is, however, a long-term fact of life in America fomented by a misapplication of conservative principles. Sadly, conservatives believe there is a god given natural social hierarchy and that hierarchy needs to be maintained (because it is natural). This belief leads to the perpetuation of systemic racism (and was used to justify slavery).
Liberal principles specifically refute this idea.Well, ME, first I am glad that you are here as I have missed " the Panther".
I cannot deny the substance of your first paragraph, the danger is that our opposition will creep it all in as opposed to more direct approaches used in an earlier era. I do think that they would "go back" to more direct approaches if the kid glove methods fail.
As for systemic racism as a pillar, perhaps I was premature. It had not been invented yet. But the Founding Fathers allowing the clear existence of a caste system (slavery), they themselves perhaps unwittingly laid forth the groundwork for what we see today. While the nation stopped the importation of slaves in 1808, these Founding Fathers lived with the contradiction of their lofty creeds and ideals in stark contrast to condemning people to lives of unrequited toil without any hope of relief. So, for the long run, they propose nothing. Liberal is a relative term, liberal relative to what or whom?
Conservatives belief that there is a place for everything and everything has its place, it is the foundation of the arrogance of wealth, the idea that maintains unjustied privilege and caste systems. They are the ones that resist change, why give up on any advantage be it fair or not? Some participants would say that conservatives want ordered change, but that is fine if you are not the ones suffering within a status quo. How long is anybody supposed to wait until THEY believe the time is right? Their ideas of God given social hierarchy is just so much rubbish. My God may well tell me something different.I absolutely do not disagree with your assessment of early America but had they gone a different route, there would have never been an America for Trump to destroy. With all of their flaws, what they gave us was hope for a better place and gave us a path to march along to try to achieve it and a goal to reach.
It took 70 years and a Civil War to stop the conservatives from enslaving people - on paper anyway. It took another 100 years to put teeth into the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments - all violently opposed by conservatives. Unlike the late 1800s. we actually had a Supreme Court that allowed things like the Civil Rights and Voting Rights act to actually mean something.
Of course, as they have since the founding of America, conservatives are fighting back hard trying to take away the civil liberties that were bought with the blood, sweat, and tears of first the Union Army and later America's minorities.
I have my fingers crossed that in spite of all the hot, anti-democratic rhetoric coming out of Trump and his fellow RINOs, that real Americans are sick of it and will brave all of the obstacles to voting put in front of them and give Trump and his allies a crushing defeat at the polls come November 2022 and establish a long-term working democracy for the first time since 2001.
Of course the Republican or right-wing media doesn't bring up news about race. Why should they? Their heads are in the sand about the systemic racism in America. They want to pretend it is not real.
You may be "sick of this kind of rhetoric" - but I am sick of having watched the systematic oppression of minorities in this country by mainly white Protestants for the last 73 years (ok, 63 years because I didn't take notice before I was 10).
I am sick of watching this conservative Supreme Court slowly take away the civil rights of Blacks like they did in the late 1800s when they returned the South to its former white supremist position before the Civil War.
I am sick of watching the RINO legislatures take away voting rights again just like they did during Jim Crow
Why are you only sick of the rhetoric that opposes such things?
And I am sick of this type of false statements "In fact, he fought for many years against the integration of public schools? " when you know perfectly well Biden actually supported integration of public schools and only opposed federal mandated school busing while supporting it at the state level. Isn't that what is called being disingenuous?I certainly look at Biden's fight to keep black children from being bused. His very words can not be misconstrued. He fought hard and long.
I certainly look at Biden's fight to keep black children from being bused. His very words can not be misconstrued. He fought hard and long. I found his objections clearly racist. We share opposite opinions on this subject. I have witnessed a long overt history of Biden's racial remarks. As I said he tends to go whichever way he thought would garner votes. Say anything kind of politician. I am not sure how you can deny his long history of racist comments, he never tried to hide his attitude in regard to people of color. Perhaps he was too dense to hide his feeling.
One only needs to look back on all the racist statements he has made, they can't be mistaken or bent out of context in my view. He has suggested blacks are not clean or
smart, snd used the ord jungle when stating his feelings about busing.
I find it so odd the black people would have support such a man, even though they hang with the Democrats ---baffles me how they could stomach Biden."I certainly look at Biden's fight to keep black children from being bused." - it is a shame you are totally misrepresenting what Biden said, but then I shouldn't expect anything different should I.
"One only needs to look back on all the racist statements he has made" - Why would you talk about Trump like that?
And I find it odd how any self-respecting woman, Black, or Latino would lie down with the RINOs who hate them so much (except for their vote).I have not ever heard or been able to find Trump making a racist statement. I have offered Biden's statements here time and time again. You don't address them.
If we are speaking truthfully as I see you are with your statement ----" And I find it odd how any self-respecting woman, Black, or Latino would lie down with the RINOs who hate them so much (except for their vote)."
Again in my opinion the Democrats have done nothing to better the lives of people of color. They promise them the moon and give them nothing.
Trump worked for all American's, he did not pander for votes with unrealistic promises.
Hey, just my opinion, I have watched the Dems take advantage of black people each and every election. And hey, go figure it works... LOL, You seem to love lists. Here are a few of Joe's statements that should offer you reasoning for how I came to my opinion that Biden is a racist. I follow facts, and I consider quotes to be factual. I have offered you information on Biden's senate record in regards to his fight to stop busing. Now, have a look at a few of his statements.
2012 -- "We've got to recognize that the kid wearing a hoodie may very well be the next poet laureate and not a gangbanger,"
--- August 2012 "He said in the first 100 days, he's going to let the big banks once again write their own rules," Biden said. "Unchain Wall Street! They're gonna put y'all back in chains."
-- “I was in a caucus with James O. Eastland,” Biden said as he briefly imitated the late senator’s southern drawl. “He never called me boy. He always called me son.”
--- August 2019: “Poor kids” just as bright as “white kids”
--- September 2020: "Some Black woman was able to stack the grocery shelf"
— “Well, I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”
— “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.” (That’s in reference to President Obama.)
— “Unlike the African-American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly diverse attitudes about different things.”
— “In Delaware, the largest growth in population is Indian-Americans moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.”
He is what's known as an innate racist. He clearly considers blacks to be "different", and has through his life developed a very negative preconceived or one might say a learned prejudice.
In my opinion, Trump never showed any form of prejudice against black people.
IMO the media are doing a fine job filling some heads with innuendoes in regard to Trump being a racist.
Now Joe as I said, his own blatantly racist comments through his life show him to be racists. His words are clear, no mistaking the context of his words.
Odd that you just can't provide any statements that Trump made that would reach the vitreal of what Biden has uttered.
Maybe you should start to consider, you have been lead along by the media to believe Trump is a racist. I dislike having to post Biden's racist statements over and over to make my point. However, his words prove his affinity to looking at blacks as "different...
Let me add, If blacks approve of old Joe, I look at it as their problem. But for me, I look at Joe as a pandering, not too bright politician. That is the moment will say or do what he is told to say or do...
It seems you dwell on race relations. I will bow out, I feel I have shared my thoughts on the subject. And to be honest I think we have many other political subjects to discuss. I am aware the media is beating race relations to death, but for me enough is enough."I have not ever heard or been able to find Trump making a racist statement. " - I have given you multiple examples - you chose not to believe the truth.
"Again in my opinion the Democrats have done nothing to better the lives of people of color. " -
So you consider the conservative-opposed Civil and Voting Rights bad for Blacks? Interesting.
And, you consider the conservative-opposed increases in minimum wage so many low-income Blacks as a bad thing for Blacks? Interesting.
Yet you consider the conservative campaign to eliminate Blacks' Civil and Voting Rights a good thing for Blacks? Interesting.
"Trump worked for all American's, he did not pander for votes with unrealistic promises. " - I must say, you are funny. Let's try this LIE - "The coronavirus would weaken “when we get into April, in the warmer weather—that has a very negative effect on that, and that type of a virus.”" - When he made this LIE, he already knew the virus was deadly (according to Trump's own words). Yet, somehow, you believe him and think it is ok for him to tell Americans. I just don't get it.
"2012 -- "We've got to recognize that the kid wearing a hoodie may very well be the next poet laureate and not a gangbanger,"" - please tell me how busting a conservative stereotype about Blacks is racist?
"August 2012 "He said in the first 100 days, he's going to let the big banks once again write their own rules," Biden said. "Unchain Wall Street! They're gonna put y'all back in chains." - I am sorry, and how is using a reference Blacks understand regarding what Whites did them racist?
"-- “I was in a caucus with James O. Eastland,” Biden said as he briefly imitated the late senator’s southern drawl. “He never called me boy. He always called me son.” - Not intentionally racist, as Trump often is, but probably so nevertheless.
"--- August 2019: “Poor kids” just as bright as “white kids”" - and are you claiming they are? He was just busting another conservative stereotype.
"--- September 2020: "Some Black woman was able to stack the grocery shelf"" - THAT, of course, was from a short conservative disinformation video. "However, longer video of Biden’s statement reveals he was acknowledging the hard work of people of color through the pandemic rather than voicing what he believed to be their proper role. How is that racist?
"— “Well, I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.” - While true, and said with good intention, it does lean to racist.
“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.” - One of Biden's most famous gaffes
— “Unlike the African-American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly diverse attitudes about different things.” - And how is noting that the Latino community is more diverse than the black community racist? HOWEVER, "If you look at the full video and transcript, it’s clear that Vice President Biden was referring to diversity of attitudes among Latinos from different Latin American countries," Symone Sanders, a senior Biden campaign adviser, said in a statement. "The video that is circulating is conveniently cut to make this about racial diversity but that’s not the case.”
"— “In Delaware, the largest growth in population is Indian-Americans moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent." - I am not joking.” is how it ended. And I heard him say that and knew it was a joke and ALSO knew he was complimenting the Indian-Americans. On the other hand, when Trump called Black nations shithole countries, one of the many racist things he says, he never jokes, he is just mean.
"IMO the media are doing a fine job filling some heads with innuendoes in regard to Trump being a racist." - the media doesn't need to make innuendoes, they just quote what Trump says
"Now Joe as I said, his own blatantly racist comments through his life show him to be racists." - I am still waiting for examples that are blatantly racist. All you have provided were not racist at all or one of Biden's gaffes.
"Maybe you should start to consider, you have been lead along by the media to believe Trump is a racist." - Unlike you with right-wing fake news. the normal media hasn't led me anywhere. All I have to do is listen to Trump.
"Odd that you just can't provide any statements that Trump made that would reach the vitreal of what Biden has uttered." - AGAIN, I provided you a ton of them, each one worse than the gaffes Biden has made.
" I look at Joe as a pandering, not too bright politician." - YET, this poor excuse of a politician beat the pants off of the inept, criminal Trump. What does that make Trump in your eyes other than a sore loser. You have said before that Biden won fair and square - based on your defense of Trump, I wonder if you have now bought into the Big Lie?
I dwell on race because I am a liberal who believes in justice for all, and until I see that Blacks are getting justice in America then I will continue to dwell on it. But you are conservative and it doesn't seem civil rights and justice mean much to conservatives. I really wish they did to you for you seem like a very nice person."So you consider the conservative-opposed Civil and Voting Rights bad for Blacks? Interesting.'"
The bill was passed with a higher percentage of Republicans. Bipartisan
" And, you consider the conservative-opposed increases in minimum wage so many low-income Blacks as a bad thing for Blacks? Interesting."
I consider the current minimum wage suitable at this point. The minimum wage s in my view a starter job. I can honestly say I would find it deplorable to have a country of low-wage workers. I prefer people that think beyond minimum wage jobs.
"Yet you consider the conservative campaign to eliminate Blacks' Civil and Voting Rights a good thing for Blacks? Interesting" In our history, the Dems fought tooth and nail to keep blacks from voting.
I made my point Biden's statements speak loudly, and the context in all I offered was clear as a bell.
I don't dwell on race problem in any respect. So I guess we have shared our feelings on dwelling on race... I don't, you do.
I have shared my feelings about the outcome of the election. I was disappointed but moved on. As I will after the next election and the one after.
As you may have noted I post threads on current events."The bill was passed with a higher percentage of Republicans. Bipartisan" - Once again you are confusion party labels with political philosophy. At the time of the vote, a much higher percentage of Democrats were conservative[/b[ and a much higher percentage of Republicans were social liberals Let me remind you that as a group, Republicans used to be good and supported civil rights - those were liberal Republicans - and Democrats used to be bad and opposed civil rights - those were conservatives. That was the way it was in 1864. In 2021, the Republicans are now the Democrats they hated 160 years ago.
"I don't dwell on race problem in any respect. " - Of course you don't, you are conservative and it doesn't fit in your philosophy - which is a shame.
"I don't dwell on race problem in any respect. " - Does that mean you don't learn from past mistakes?
"Yet you consider the conservative campaign to eliminate Blacks' Civil and Voting Rights a good thing for Blacks? Interesting" In our history, the conservativeDems fought tooth and nail to keep blacks from voting while liberal Republicans did not." - THAT is what a FAIR reading of history looks like.
"I made my point Biden's statements speak loudly, and the context in all I offered was clear as a bell." - 1) Biden actual speaks softly most of the time while Trump yells and 2) only conservatives with BDS see his remarks racist "as clear as a bell". [u]Everybody else does not.
"I have shared my feelings about the outcome of the election. " - True, you have and you previously agreed Biden won in a Free and Fair election. Yes, I understand you were not happy about it and would rather have left a criminal running the nation, but that is your choice.
I am guessing the first indictments against Trump will happen in less than six months, BTW.
NOW, let me offer a few more examples of the very long history of white's assault on minorities:
- October 24, 1871: A lynch mob of 500 Anglo and Latino Los Angelinos rioted and murdered at least 18 Chinese residents after a white civilian died in a shootout.
- December 28, 1872: The Yavapai people's shelter of Skeleton Cave in Arizona was attacked by the U.S. Army, trying to force them to reservations.
- April 13, 1873: Colfax Massacre - The KKK carried out the Colfax Massacre in response to a Republican victory in the 1872 elections.
- November 3, 1874: White League Attacks Black Voters - Deadly election "riots" took place in Barbour County, Alabama against African-American politicians and voters.
You must admit by now that conservative whites killing minorities just doesn't stop, does it - and that is just the first 100 years of American history.Once again you are confusion party labels with political philosophy. At the time of the vote, a much higher percentage of Democrats were conservative[/b[ and a much higher percentage of Republicans were social liberals Let me remind you that as a group, Republicans used to be good and supported civil rights - those were liberal Republicans - and Democrats used to be bad and opposed civil rights - those were conservatives. That was the way it was in 1864. In 2021, the Republicans are now the Democrats they hated 160 years ago."
My presence in your comment was just to remind you the Civil rights bill was bipartisan. You had given sole credit to Democrats... I reminded you that just was not true. In my view, Democrats have not benefited the black race, but hurt them, and continue to hurt their causes on all levels. I realize you don't agree on this.
"I don't dwell on race problem in any respect. " - Of course you don't, you are conservative and it doesn't fit in your philosophy - which is a shame.
"I don't dwell on race problem in any respect. " - Does that mean you don't learn from past mistakes?"
These statements are presumptive. I have not made any mistakes in regard to racism. I treat all human beings the same. This is my very simple philosophy. I hold not one bit of guilt for other's actions. I start with myself and treat people as I would hope to be treated. No, I am not a person that talks the talk. I live by my convictions.
Again, I would have liked to see Trump win, I felt he did a good job as president. I would feel much better if he had won with the many problems we are seeing at this point due to Biden's poor ability to solve problems.
Not to be rude --- But I have mentioned I do not feel in any fashion responsible for any of the sins of history. Not one of them."But I have mentioned I do not feel in any fashion responsible for any of the sins of history. " - And I am not expecting you to feel personally responsible. What I am asking you to do is to understand that the political philosophy you have have chosen IS responsible for a long and continuing history of violence toward minorities.
For example, while not violent, the conservative assault on minority voting rights is racist to its core. Do you support those coercive, anti-democratic laws states like GA, FL, and TX are passing (which are not based on any evidence of fraud since at least FL and TX Republicans have claimed their elections were the most honest in history)?
If you do, that means you support racism. If you don't, then I have a lot more respect for you for choosing the right side of history.
"due to Biden's poor ability to solve problems." - you keep saying things like that that have no basis in reality. You may wish to "feel" that way because of BDS, but it is like me wishing 1 + 1 = 3 and trying to convince you that is true.
"My presence in your comment was just to remind you the Civil rights bill was bipartisan." - Yes it was - through the filter of political party labels. But the fact remains it was not partisan when talking about the liberals who supported it and the conservatives, like they have throughout history and to this day, opposed it.
It is the political philosophy that drives people's actions, not their party labels.I am not sure why you have come to the conclusion that all the examples you listed lay at the feet of Republicans... They do not in fact the sad fact is Democrats have a very clear history of being a racist party.
Clearly, what is systemic about racism in America can be found in the Democrats’ DNA. They have a path strewn with racist ideologies.
On Nov. 3, 1874, deadly election “riots” took place in Barbour County, Alabama.
The White League, (a paramilitary group affiliated with the Democratic party) attacked African-American voters at the polls in Eufaula and Spring Hill. Seven African-Americans were killed and 70 others wounded.
More than 1,000 African-Americans were driven away from the polls due to the violence of the white supremacist group.
The Colfax Massacre occurred in Colfax, Louisiana on Easter Sunday, April 13, 1873. Republicans had narrowly won the 1872 election to retain control of the state, but Democrats contested the results and took their anger out on blacks
In 1857, the Supreme Court, with seven of the nine justices being Democrats, decided that Dred Scott, a black slave, was not a citizen but property.
After the Civil War, when Republicans enacted the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery in America, southern Democrats reacted by creating the vicious anti-black Jim Crow laws. Under Jim Crow, black people were treated as if not clean or considered true human beings.
In 1866, Republican Rep. Thaddeus Stevens introduced legislation to give former slaves “40 acres and a mule,” but Democrats opposed it.
This truly lopsided picture continued unabated through the 19th century and into the 20th century.
In 1953, Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower proposed “to use whatever authority exists in the office of the president to end segregation,” but Southern Democrat governors objected.
In 1964, Democrat senators held the longest filibuster in U.S. history––75 days––to try to prevent the Civil Rights Act from passing. Finally, Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson persuaded the leaders of his party to support a compromised bill, saying it would have blacks “voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”
In 1994, as Stephen Frank documents, then-Senator JOE BIDEN sponsored a Bill that put tens of thousands of black men in prison—and it took 15 years until President TRUMP was able to GET RID of that discriminatory law. (Why didn't Obama rid us of that Bill or Clinton?)
We all know that Democrats lionized their fellow Democrat, West Virginia’s Senator Robert Byrd, who personally filibustered the Civil Rights Bill for 14 hours and 13 minutes on June 10, 1964.
Just 10 years ago Byrd was the Senate’s president pro tempore. He was also a former Ku Klux Klan Exalted Cyclops and Kleagle, the guy who recruited 150 friends to start a KKK chapter, who used the N-word on live television in 2001 and who then-Senator JOE BIDEN praised lavishly in his eulogy on Byrd’s death in 2010, as did current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Not to omit that BIDEN also eulogized arch segregationist Strom Thurmond (D-SC), and had high praise for proud segregationists U.S. Sens. James Eastland (D-MS) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA), as well as for Gov. George Wallace––“segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever”––who blocked black students from entering the University of Alabama.
Democrats have inflicted their noxious anti-Americanism, anti-Semitism, and inherent racism throughout our history. And are still at it.
"What I am asking you to do is to understand that the political philosophy you have chosen IS responsible for a long and continuing history of violence toward minorities" REALLY?
The Majority of horrific treatment of blacks from your lists was perpetrated by the Democratic party.
How in the hell do you come up with it was the Republicans throughout history that committed atrocities against blacks? I actually could not any evidence where the Republican party planned or perpetrated violence against black people.
"It is the political philosophy that drives people's actions, not their party labels."
This takes the cake! If it were up to the Democrats blacks would still be living under Jim Crow... Crown jewel in the Democrats acts against blacks"I am not sure why you have come to the conclusion that all the examples you listed lay at the feet of Republicans..." - Where did I ever say that? What I did say is they lie at the feet conservatives. You forget, through the period I have listed so far Republicans, or what would have been Republicans before 1860, were liberals.
Again, you stated it wrong. Why didn't you say "If it were up to the Conservatives, blacks would still be living under Jim Crow... ", instead of what you did??? Even "If it were up to the yesterday's Democrats, blacks would still be living under Jim Crow... " would be appropriate. But what you implied is flat wrong.
Again, you twist things. I NEVER said "How in the hell do you come up with it was the Republicans throughout history that committed atrocities against blacks? " and you know it, why do you put words in my mouth that I never said - you are sounding way too much like Trump. What I DID say was "Conservatives throughout history that committed atrocities against blacks?"
Of course "Not to omit that BIDEN also eulogized arch segregationist Strom Thurmond (D-SC)," is a lie
Of course "had high praise for proud segregationists U.S. Sens. James Eastland (D-MS) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA), as well as for Gov. George Wallace" is a lie as well.
Your BDS is showing, lol.
As you SHOULD know, Senator Byrd changed his views later in life - or is he not allowed to do that so that your point holds?
https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/ta … -mind-race
"After the Civil War, when Republicans enacted the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery in America, southern Democrats reacted by creating the vicious anti-black Jim Crow laws. " - That is very true. Of course when you are speaking of southern Democrats you know as well as I do you are speaking of Conservatives which are Today's Republicans
I know you know the difference between today's liberal Democrats and yesterday's Conservative Democrats and that today's Republicans are no different than [u]yesterday's[u] Democrats. No wonder you support Trump, lol.
Bye.The point that Esoteric is making is that conservatives and right wingers have always been our nemesis regardless of what party label they happen to assume at any particular time or place.
Exactly, and now they have Jews in their sites as well.
Given Sharlee's list, sounds more like "IF you are racist and harm blacks, THEN you are "conservative". By definition if not in fact.
It may have slipped your mind --- Some are more comfortable with truth over facts, or you know the thing... One can only take that to mean the truth is whatever the hell they want to believe, and to hell with facts. Or in this case, they choose to ignore the years between 1053 and the 1990"s... And just consider that Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd, Sens. James Eastland, Herman Talmadge, as well as for Gov. George Wallace––“ Oh and last but not least Joe Biden.All conservatives...
I have not found any Republicans that have been openly racist as this bunch.
But as LBJ persuaded the leaders of his party to support and pass the Civil Rights Act saying it would have blacks “voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”
Appears he was right.No, Wilderness, that is not what I am saying at all and you know it Isn't that the definition of being obtuse?
What I AM saying is that conservatives have a very long history of harming minorities and non-Protestant religions. The examples I have provided so far prove that.
Here is a few more for you:
- December 7, 1874: Whites attacked and killed many Black citizens who had organized for a Black sheriff to remain in office during the Vicksburg Massacre.
- September 4, 1875: Nearly 50 African-Americans were killed by white mobs during the Clinton, Mississippi Riot.
- July 8, 1876: A Black militia was accused of blocking a road and punished with the Hamburg, South Carolina Massacre. This was Reconstruction era voter suppression.
- November 3, 1883: Danville, Virginia Riot - African Americans voters were threatened after the Danville Riot, leading to their loss of political power in this majority African American city in Virginia.
It is not a coincidence, Wilderness, that the whites behind every one of those I have listed so far are conservatives. I suspect that one day even you will be able to connect the dots and understand that this is a conservative war on America's minorities (including women).
That would be the Democrats such as those in the squad.
" Upon the measure’s introduction, McCarthy took a took the opportunity to criticize progressive Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rashida Talib (R-Mich.) and Cori Bush (D-Mo.), who have expressed support of Palestine amid the increased tension between Israel and Gaza, highlighting a shift from staunch support of Israel within the Democratic Party.
“Over the past several weeks a growing number of House Democrats wrongly blamed the violence in the Middle East on Israel. In fact, Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Cori Bush irresponsibly tried to delegitimize our closest ally in the region, calling it an ‘apartheid state. “Within days, this same sentiment of bigotry spilled into several major U.S. cities,” he said.
“Graphic videos showed pro-Hamas mobs intentionally target random Americans simply because they were Jewish. These hateful attacks contradict the very essence of our nation’s core principles. Yet socialist Democrats continue to endorse and promote repulsive anti-Semitic rhetoric, while Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer refuse to unambiguously condemn the unhinged statements from members of their own party.”
https://nypost.com/2021/05/25/mccarthy- … m-measure/
After reading the list I offered, as well as the list Eso offered it was Democrats that posed the threat to black people. Yes, it is convenient to say the Dem of old was more conservative... Note the dates on these examples. IT should be obvious that the Democrats have not been a friend to black citizens. And Biden, he supported some of the worst of the worst racist.
In 1953, Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower proposed “to use whatever authority exists in the office of the president to end segregation,” but Southern Democrat governors objected.
In 1964, Democrat senators held the longest filibuster in U.S. history––75 days––to try to prevent the Civil Rights Act from passing. Finally, Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson persuaded the leaders of his party to support a compromised bill, saying it would have blacks “voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”
In 1994, as Stephen Frank documents, then-Senator JOE BIDEN sponsored a Bill that put tens of thousands of black men in prison—and it took 15 years until President TRUMP was able to GET RID of that discriminatory law. (Why didn't Obama rid us of that Bill or Clinton?)
We all know that Democrats lionized their fellow Democrat, West Virginia’s Senator Robert Byrd, who personally filibustered the Civil Rights Bill for 14 hours and 13 minutes on June 10, 1964.
Just 10 years ago Byrd was the Senate’s president pro tempore. He was also a former Ku Klux Klan Exalted Cyclops and Kleagle, the guy who recruited 150 friends to start a KKK chapter, who used the N-word on live television in 2001 and who then-Senator JOE BIDEN praised lavishly in his eulogy on Byrd’s death in 2010, as did current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Not to omit that BIDEN also eulogized arch segregationist Strom Thurmond (D-SC), and had high praise for proud segregationists U.S. Sens. James Eastland (D-MS) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA), as well as for Gov. George Wallace––“segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever”––who blocked black students from entering the University of Alabama.
Democrats have inflicted their noxious anti-Americanism, anti-Semitism, and inherent racism throughout our history. And are still at it today.No, Sharlee, it is not convenient but factual. The Dems of old were not only more conservative but more racist as well.
I thought that I mentioned to you before that conservatism and racism too often go hand in hand.
I mentioned that the National party introduced Civil Rights planks as early as 1948. While the state and local governments dominated by Democrats in the South were comprised of the hillbilly racists well until the 1970's.
Eisenhower was not bad as a Republican, but was not active in civil rights matters, expressing dismay with Earl Warren and the Supreme court's ruling against separate but equal in public education facilities in 1954. Too much, too fast, was the rationale. The tiresome whine from the conservative side.
What is it with the past? We all know that the Democratic Party was the agrarian, conservative, racist party in the past. But that mantle has been passed to the Republicans today, and most of US know that.
We all know the story of Senator Byrd, but he was later lauded as one that grew and changed with the changing stance of the Democratic Party rather than join the Republicans like his colleagues did.
Well as a black person, I see the vast majority of contentious issues emanating from the Republican Party.
Most of your folks have "the problem" it is just a matter of degree. Do you really think that Trump his administration and his style, statements, history was less racist than Biden?Yes, I think that the Trump administration was working for all Americans. And as I have stated I never heard a racist word from Trump. How in the world can you ignore Biden's long past with racial slurs? Not to mention his past in his early days in the Senate.
I actually feel Trump did some good things for black people. And won't repeat the list. I don't want to appear repetitious.I can't ignore that Biden has issues, but compared with of Trump, he is an Angel.
Trump's issues are words, words the media much of the time twist and turn to come up with a narrative. His deeds were positive for the Country.
Biden ignores problems and hopes they will go away, his agenda IMO will very much hurt the country as well our citizens.
So, did you cut off your nose to spite your face, maybe?And people know this which is why Biden's job approval rating overwhelms anything Trump ever had. Further, the Republican party is shrinking, partly due to how much crazier and anti-democratic Trump has gotten (along with those elected officials shaking in their boots or high heels in fear of this megalomaniac) and the fact that RINO's only want Trump loyalists in the party.
Not shown in the polling is that the shrinking numbers also partly result from the fact that of the 500 deaths a day from Covid, almost all are Trump voters.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/04 … allup.html
Further, there is this - "No US President has ever left the nation's shores with democratic values under attack by one of its former presidents and political party as broadly and systemically at home as they are abroad."
In fact, this is the first year in a very, very long time where autocracies outnumber democracies around the world and Trump came (is coming) very close to making America one of those autocracies."Not shown in the polling is that the shrinking numbers also partly result from the fact that of the 500 deaths a day from Covid, almost all are Trump voters."
Where in the world did you find these stats? This is such a bizarre statement... No reallyIt is simple logic based on the the following set of facts:
1) Trump voters have made it very clear they largely reject getting vaccinated (or wearing masks or any other protective measures)
2) This is borne out by the fact that a) the 18 states with the lowest vaccinate rates are ALL but 1 voted for Trump, b) of the next 11 worst, 8 voted for Trump, c) of the 20 states with the best vaccination record, all 20 voted for Biden
3) no vaccinated people have died.
That must mean that the vast majority of people still Unvaccinated are Trump voters. Since vaccinated people don't die from Covid, that means the vast majority of those that do die from Covid, can't be anything else but Trump voters because most everyone else is already vaccinated.
Nothing bizarre about it, it is just a fact.Make it easy, just say it's my opinion. Then I would not have questioned the stat.
OK, let me rephrase "Not shown in the polling is that the shrinking numbers also partly result from the fact that of the 500 deaths a day from Covid, it is my opinion, based on simple logic and a lot of supporting facts, that almost all are Trump voters."
It is also my opinion, based on mathematical proof, that in Base 10, 1 + 1 = 2. Some things are obvious on the face of it.
How did you determine how those dying from COVID voted for Trump? Just say they did because you wish to believe it or did you dig them up and ask them?
It's also quite comical to see that those demanding fair elections are putting "democratic values under attack". Your difference of opinion (yes, it is opinion, not fact) that there was no fraud is not the same as Trump's, but that does not mean that you both are not on the same side of democracy."Your difference of opinion (yes, it is opinion, not fact) that there was no fraud " - Sorry, that is not an "opinion", there was no widespread fraud in the 2020 election - that is fact. Trump is simply lying.
The reasons "those demanding fair elections " are making those so-called demands, are lies themselves. Therefore, the ONLY possible reason the RINOs are doing what they are doing is to suppress the minority votes - which by definition is an attack on democratic values.
How do you square DeSantis, Kemp, Abbott, Duecy, etc exclamations about how wonderful and fraud-free their elections were with the reasons they give for suppressing the vote by saying their elections were full of fraud? It is so easy to see their undemocratic laws are for the simple purpose for trying to cheat to win.
Credence, she doesn't care It is not the character of the bad people that matters, only if they were labeled a Democrat or Republican at the time. Makes no sense, I know, but there you have it.
She simply does not get it that the RINOs of today are the same type of people as the Democrats of old that kept your ancestors enslaved. The only thing of importance is that they are called Democrats then (but would be called Republican today).Seems to be a pretty basic concept to me. I remember reading about the relatively mild Republican Jackie Robinson walking out of the 1964 GOP convention when Goldwater and attacks on what civil rights legislation was being offered under the National Dem. Kennedy/Johnson Administrations was on their platform. A little reading should be enough to make most of this clear.
I opposed Goldwater back in the day, but I seem to remember he was a supporter of civil rights (much to the chagrin of other conservatives). I am not sure why Robinson walked out, but I found this snippet on Wikipedia.
"Barry Goldwater was fundamentally a staunch supporter of racial equality. Goldwater integrated his family's business upon taking over control in the 1930s. A lifetime member of the NAACP, Goldwater helped found the group's Arizona chapter. Goldwater saw to it that the Arizona Air National Guard was racially integrated from its inception in 1946, two years before President Truman ordered the military as a whole be integrated (a process that was not completed until 1954). Goldwater worked with Phoenix civil rights leaders to successfully integrate public schools a year prior to Brown vs. Board of Education.[32][33]
Goldwater was an early member and largely unrecognized supporter of the National Urban League Phoenix chapter, going so far as to cover the group's early operating deficits with his personal funds.[34][35] Though the NAACP denounced Goldwater in the harshest of terms when he ran for president; the Urban League conferred on Goldwater the 1991 Humanitarian Award "for 50 years of loyal service to the Phoenix Urban League." In response to League members who objected, citing Goldwater's vote on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the League president pointed out that Goldwater had saved the League more than once and he preferred to judge a person "on the basis of his daily actions rather than on his voting record."[35]"
There are not very many conservatives who follow Goldwater's civil right's mold. I would guess Romney, Murkowski, Cassidy, Collins, and a few more conservative odd balls.
Also, in Goldwater's day, most of the conservatives who opposed civil rights were the southern Democrats (today's Republican RINOs). Many, many Republicans, even conservative ones, were social liberals. In fact, I was one up until Clinton, fiscal conservative, social liberal.
Goldwater, even though he was on the right side of civil rights, was on the wrong side of most everything else. While I don't think he was a white supremist, he was a nativist with all of its associated problems.
He also got tangled up, apparently unwittingly, with the bat-crazy, Qanon precursor, paranoid, anti-communist John Birch Society. But he frequently criticized these nut-jobs even though they backed him for president.
On a side note, John Dean (the guy that outed Nixon) wrote a book titled Conservatives Without Conscience which goes into the science of Right Wing Authoritarian followers (several who comment here) and describes why people blindly follow authoritarian leaders like Trump (the study actually began trying to figure out why so many otherwise intelligent Germans willingly followed Hitler). I wrote a couple of my more successful articles on the subject. Anyway, Dean used Goldwater as an example of a Conservative With a Conscience and contrasted him with many (like Nixon) who did not.This is true, Esoteric. Goldwater sort of leaned toward libertarianism on this issue. Yet, perhaps not, he was a dangerous militarist and interventionist.He reminds me much of the rhetoric and support for it that I hear from Senator Paul of Kentucky.
We would have called Jackie Robinson naive at the time, but even he could not stomach Goldwater policies. And while Goldwater was not really racist, the idea of "states' rights" and his complete disassociation with what that meant and how it was used reveals an insensitivity to a major issue of the day. The old solid south could have cared less about Goldwater's high minded philosophies as long as it gave them cover to continue racist policies.
It was established during the Civil War and beyond that states cannot nullify rights given to citizens under the Constitution. How could Goldwater be a member of the NAACP, yet could not see where "advancement" was being blatantly impeded?
There is a certain mindset of people who dismiss democratic principle and are attracted to the "strong man" persona.
Goldwater may have meant well, he just simply elevated the wrong principle at the wrong time over others. No wonder he got his "clocked cleaned" back in '64.I am in total agreement with what you say except one little part, which has me confused.
You wrote "Yet, perhaps not, he was a dangerous militarist and interventionist." (with which I agree very much) "He reminds me much of the rhetoric and support for it that I hear from Senator Paul of Kentucky." - I see Paul as just the opposite, an isolationist who wants to defund the military.Esoteric, you are right, the militarist stand is not found in Paul, as more of an isolationist. I guess they both have similar conservative ideas with the exception of this aspect.
How many Republicans are there like Paul willing to gore the GOP's sacred cow?It seems like most of them, Credence, they are called RINOs now.
Remember how they once claimed they supported the police? Well this report came out last night shortly after 21 RINOs voted to not give the police that saved some of their lives a Congressional Gold Metal. The asshole, Andrew Clyde, refused to shake Metropolitan Police hero Michael Fanone's hand - disgusting. (I bet Trump supporters will blame the scandal on Fanone.)
https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/16/politics … index.htmlThe House approved the measure on a 406-21 vote.
Factually there are 223 Democratic Representatives in the House and 213 Republicans. So, 192 republicans, a wide majority overwhelmingly voted for this bill. I noted the ones that did not felt the wording offened them, finding the word insurrection not suitable.
Not sure why the media felt this good feed to dish up. As a republican feel pretty good seeing the majority voted yes on the bill.
Negativity is an ugly friend that in the long run promotes hate.And I am grateful to those other Republicans who made the obvious call (but keep in mind most of those people voted to oust Cheney for telling the truth and many of those voted to overturn the election). Those other 21 are very dangerous and need to be called out. It is their words and rhetoric that is making another insurrection, according to the experts, even more likely.
They know this was an insurrection yet for obvious political reasons, they chose to hurt democracy by arguing that it wasn't. Hell, one them, Andrew Clyde, wouldn't even shake hands with Michael Fanone.It is true some of the same Representatives voted to oust Liz Cheney. Perhaps we could look at it as it was "her truth". Our freedoms provide us with freedom of speech, one should no be automatically ousted due to their opinion. This would be a very dangerous road to go down.
They chose to break the law at our Capital, many have been arrested. Will, there be another attack on our Government seat? There could be. It is apparent many Americans are willing to fight for their beliefs.
We may not agree with those beliefs, but I fear many do...
It is clear one would need to be living in a cave not to realize the country is divided, at a precipice.
Words are what many live by today, they look past deeds, and in many cases past truth.Isn't Truth simply Truth. There is no "her Truth" or "his Truth", there is just Truth.
She called out Trump for the terrible of things he is responsible for and the RINOs didn't like to hear the Truth.
She said "“Remaining silent and ignoring the lie emboldens the liar,” - speaking of Trump's Big Lie - That's the Truth
She says: “I will not sit back and watch in silence while others lead our party down a path that abandons the rule of law and joins the former president’s crusade to undermine our democracy.” - What is untrue about that? That is exactly what RINO leadership is doing
Neither of those statements were "her Truths", they are simply Truths.
As to the rest of what you wrote, I can't find fault. But, I must ask, what limitations, if any, do you put on "one should no be automatically ousted due to their opinion. " - is there any opinion they can hold for which they could be ousted?Many Americans are willing to fight for their beliefs... would you take that attitude in regards to Portland or Seattle, or is that option just available to Rightwingers and their grievances?
I can rephrase a sentiment from my previous comment to answer your question.
They chose to break the law in Portland and Seattle when some chose to burn, loot, and become violent with police. Many have been arrested. Will, there be more violent destructive protests in our cities? There could be. It is apparent many Americans are willing to fight for their beliefs.
On both sides... These people that protested at the Capital most likely thought they were promoting their cause. And they did it, in the same way, the protesters in Portland and Seattle. This is what is very concerning to me. We have so many in America willing to get violent for a cause. And being generally dissatisfied with the outcome of an election ignited violence. Very scary times.
And Biden is further angering many with his agenda --- can't be good for bringing the two sides together. Oil and water don't mix. He is hell-bent
on ignoring problems, and tearing down what Trump created, and angering so many with his poor Governing. Just my opinion, but Biden is failing on all counts so far. Just because the media does not report the negative in regards to Joe, it is evident, and piling up.But, Sharlee, the other half are not taking issue with Biden now, what about them?
At this point, the Democrats in Washington are disappointed with Biden and the polls are starting to reflect America's opinion of the man.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/16/us/p … ating.html
Give him a couple more months --- he just is not presidential material, and that is becoming more and more evident daily here in America. I think he is loved by Russia, France, Germany, and even the UK... But here, not so much. He clearly ignores problems hoping his half of the country just doesn't notice...
He's all talk, no action, and his words are scripted, even at press conferences, he is given a list with names of who he can call on. And when a reporter sneaks in a question -- Old Joe blows. Hard not to see he is sinking.I did not think that Trump was Presidential material, either. So, we have a "Mexican Standoff"?
"A Mexican standoff is a confrontation in which no strategy exists that allows any party to achieve victory. Any party initiating aggression might trigger its own demise. ... The Mexican standoff is a recurring trope in cinema, in which several armed characters hold each other at gunpoint."
copiedSo, we can compare Trump, and Biden's war stories, speak of battles won and lost nose to nose... And ultimately it would seem we will move on, and be truthful at least to ourselves about the guy we put our faith in. Plus, in four years, it will all start all over again.
"It is apparent many Americans are willing to fight for their beliefs." - are you saying those criminals who did those things you mention were largely previously peaceful protesters?
"These people that protested at the Capital most likely thought they were promoting their cause. " - I have no doubt, but so did those in America's insurrections.
Go back to the definition of an insurrection - "trying to stop the functioning of government" - which is exactly what they said they were trying to do. Added to that, the "thousands of well-equipped armed insurrectionists" [Sund testimony] made it violent insurrection.
"And they did it, in the same way, the protesters in Portland and Seattle." - Sorry, I that is a very false equivalency the Right-Wing is pushing trying to justify the insurrection.
First, neither Portland or Seattle are the Seat of Government. Yes, there were public buildings damaged but the rioters (not the peaceful protesters) were not trying to stop the gov't from functionions.
Second, to use Wilderness's term, only handful of protesters were arrested for turning violent (and I have no doubt some of those were false arrests) each night; while over 500 insurrectionists have been indicted for just two or three hours of invasion of the Capitol building.
Third, did the rioters in Portland and Seattle build a gallows to hang Mike Pence on (which is a crime in itself). Did those rioters threaten to kill elected leaders like the insurrectionists did (remember, after building the gallows they illegally threatened to hang Mike Pence, another felony)?
In my opinion, with the reasoning given, there is no equivalency between the two other than the use of violence.
"Just because the media does not report the negative in regards to Joe, it is evident, and piling up." - I don't about the others, but CNN and Politico certainly does. (and remember, about all that Trump did was negative, very little of what Biden does is negative. For example:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/16/media/bi … index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/16/europe/v … index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/17/politics … index.html
"He is hell-bent on ignoring problems (simply not true), and tearing down what Trump created which polls show most Americans want, and angering so many with his poor Governing (again, polls show most Americans like how he is running the government.)"are you saying those criminals who did those things you mention were largely previously peaceful protesters? "
I thought my statement was clear --- I made no judgment on either group
There could be. It is apparent many Americans are willing to fight for their beliefs.
My statement --- On both sides... These people that protested at the Capital most likely thought they were promoting their cause. And they did it, in the same way, the protesters in Portland and Seattle. This is what is very CONCERNING to me. We have so many in America willing to get violent for a cause.
I don't condone either group, simply pointing out we have two factions of people that committed violence due to what they believed was a CAUSE.
.
There could be. It is apparent many Americans are willing to fight for their beliefs.
Was it an insurrectionist? Maybe... Again I repeat --- We have so many in America willing to get violent for a cause. And being generally dissatisfied with the outcome of an election ignited violence. Very scary times.
The very fact that a group of American's attacking the Capitol should concern Americans more than defending a word, a label... Call the Jan 6th violence at the Capital whatever you please. I would worry more that we have many citizens mad, disgusted, and not willing to believe the election was fair, and willing to fight at our Capitol.
This Country is billing over, and it does appear some are willing to stand their ground over what they feel was an injustice.
I have never condoned any form of violence, and can't actually say one is excusable and one is not. I am realistic, and one only needs to look at the facts, we have people in the country that did attack the Capitol. This concerns me.
uh ... Trump's gun has been taken away.
Which man would be the quicker draw and the better aim if both faced each other with fully loaded guns?
and as the people experience Biden a little longer, who will be seen in a more favorable light? as time goes by?I would not count your chickens.... if I were you.
No question Biden will be, he already is. I suspect Trump's numbers will sink further below their already dismal results once the indictments start coming down and the evidence becomes public - only five months to go at the most.
Do you think Trump's CFO will flip on him?
Trump was our choice then, but surely someone new will take the baton!
Perhaps, but on the other hand, perhaps not...
If you saying that your side will win next time that is not a given by any stretch of the imagination.
I am not saying that. I am open to something/someone brand new. In fact it has been so peaceful without Trump. BHA! But he was good at running the country, which you will not admit to and I don't know why.
Oh, I think that you know why. The last four years have been the most contentious in r cent memory.
"which you will not admit to and I don't know why." - how about because he wasn't? Trump's last job approval rating Quinnipiac was only 34%, a record low. 20% of Republicans disapproved of Trump, 65% of the more important Independents (the majority who lean Right) disapproved of Trump, and an expected 94% of Democrats disapproved.
Do you know why now?Monmouth University poll published Wednesday.
President Biden's approval rating has dipped 6 points since April, according to a new poll, as Congress weighs his sprawling spending plans. Biden currently holds a job rating of 48% approve and 43% disapprove. This is down from his 54% approval and 41% disapproval rating in April. The president gets a positive rating from 86% of Democrats (down from 95%), 36% of independents (down from 47%), and 19% of Republicans (up from 11%). Prior Biden approval levels registered 51% in March and 54% in January.
.
The president's approval rating has dropped among Democrats the past few months, as negotiations drag on over an infrastructure package.
The latest survey found that 86 percent of Democrats approve of the job Biden is doing, down 9 points from April. Support among independents is also down, from 47 percent to 36 percent.
Still, the poll found that a whopping 71 percent of respondents are concerned that Biden's spending proposals could result in inflation.
Source --- https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-instit … US_061621/
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public … ack_june18
for Friday shows that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Biden’s job performance. Forty-eight percent (48%) disapprove.
The latest figures include 30% who Strongly Approve of the job Biden is doing and 39% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -9.
I think this week will show a further dive due to his lack to solve problems, and generally appearing to be in very much over his head. He has been ineffective at anything he has proposed. He is a dead duck in the water."Biden currently holds a job rating of 48% approve and 43% disapprove." - and Monmouth is known as a left-leaning poll although it has a "A" rating. Based on the other information in the quote it seems to me Democrats and independents who lean Left are pissed because Biden is trying to cut a bi-partisan infrastructure deal. That would also explain the large increase in Republican support.
"Biden's spending proposals [u[could[/u] result in inflation." - It is resulting in inflation. As we have discussed before, of course Biden's stimulus will result in inflation, especially since the pandemic had us in a very dangerous deflationary mode. Increased inflation is simply no surprise. I am not going to worry about unless 1) it goes quickly into hyperinflation or 2) it continues above 3% past January 2022. To economists, what is happening with inflation is not a negative right now, it is simply normal.
As to your other poll, I am very surprised it is that high (again, it may be because of the talk of bi-partisanship by Biden) - the demographics that Rasmussen (rated 'B') pulls from are highly skewed to the Right (1.5); the Monmouth is just the opposite, but even more so (2.1). If you are wondering where I get that data from it is https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/
And why do you think he is a "dead duck"? Is it because McConnell firmly opposes almost ANYTHING is opposes and like with Obama has promised to ruin Biden's presidency. But, as it turns out, right now there are 11 Republicans who support the bi-partisan infrastructure bill being developed in the Senate - a bill which it looks like Biden may go for. So much for not solving problems." Based on the other information in the quote it seems to me Democrats and independents who lean Left are pissed because Biden is trying to cut a bi-partisan infrastructure deal. That would also explain the large increase in Republican support." ---- I Agree
"Biden's spending proposals [u[could[/u] result in inflation." - It is resulting in inflation." --- Give it about a year or a bit less I feel we will see a recession. Hey, it's a wait-and-see, but the signs are forming.
Was it not predictable that Biden would have gridlock the day he stepped in the office, as most presidents have over a few decades at this point. So, would it not have been pandering when Biden campaigned on very ambitious promises? Promises that he well knew would meet gridlock due to being lofty, and largely expensive to Taxpayers, especially after a pandemic. Should he not be more honest, and realistic? As I said, he well knew his lofty promises would die in Congress like dead ducks.
I would hope if any of his bills pass it will be the infrastructure bill. It would appear earmarks are being slashed, and it most likely will pass.
It appears that the HR1 bill is just laying in the Senate, and will not see the light of day.
Then there is this --- https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57285970
This will do him in, his proposals have us printing money like never before. I myself think none of these promises will be kept. By the time this huge budget will be voted on, we will be in an economic downfall. Hey, just my opinion.
He needs to have better advisers if he wants to have a let's say pleasant presidency. I see at this point he is floundering. he does not address growing problems such as the border. And with Texas and Florida stepping up to make an effort to stop the flow of illegals, Biden looks like an ineffective leader. The new republican party is aggressive, and is taking a page out of Trump's book on how to solve problems --- Just do it! Don't gather committees and look for reports in 90 days. Just old school, an old ploy... It has cobwebs on it. People don't want to hear about committees, they want to hear about solutions.
Biden said it best --- "I hear all the folks on TV saying, 'Why doesn't Biden get this done?' Well, Biden only has a majority, effectively, of four votes in the House and a tie in the Senate, with two members of the Senate who vote more with my Republican friends," Biden said in Tulsa, Oklahoma"
He knew all of this when he was making all those lofty promises... I have no respect for overboard pandering. And Biden --- that's all he has ever done in his many long years in Washington. He tells an audience anything he knows they want to hear. He always has.
One big reason I did not even consider voting for him. Talk is cheap." Give it about a year or a bit less I feel we will see a recession. " - Technically, I think, we are still in one. I don't believe the NBER has made that decision yet. They are probably waiting for the 2nd quarter results.
Also, inflation, in and of itself, doesn't cause recessions.
"Was it not predictable that Biden would have gridlock the day he stepped in the office, as most presidents have over a few decades at this point. " - Yes, that is true
"So, would it not have been pandering when Biden campaigned on very ambitious promises? " - No, I don't think so. All presidents do that, even Trump did.
Some, like Obama, actually got most of his promises kept. According to Politifact, he kept 47% of his promises and compromised on another 27% for a total of 74% - that against a Congress of the other party for most of his term and a promise by Mitch McConnell to stop him cold.
The same source says that Trump kept 23% of his promises and compromised on another 22%, and this when he had overwhelming support in Congress for the first two years and only the House in opposition the 2nd two.
So far, according to Politifact, Biden has kept 12% of his promises and there was compromise on 1%. 2% are currently stalled and 35% are "in the works". There has been no movement on the rest yet. At the moment there seems to be a way forward on his infrastructure and voting initiatives.
"And with Texas and Florida stepping up to make an effort to stop the flow of illegals, " - while I, on the hand, don't see a problem with most of the illegals coming into America. Studies show they help, rather than hurt the economy.Of course illegals "help"...as long as others pay the costs of supporting them. For myself, the extra cost more than offsets any perceived "help" they provide.
And has I have shown you before, multiple studies show they add more to the economy than they take from it. You have yet to show me any comprehensive studies that show the opposite. All your side present are anecdotes.
The truth is the rich and powerful steal more from the taxpayer than any number of illegals do.
However, most recessions are caused by a combination of factors, including high-interest rates, (which we have at this point) low consumer confidence, (which seems to be developing at this point), and stagnant wages or reduced real income in the labor market. (Which is at this point evident. If Biden starts printing money, it will be the last nail in the coffin.
In my view, at the beginning of the pandemic until Biden took office I felt the Trump economy was laying below the surface ready to come back... Until all the extra cash from the Federal Government. That cash caused some not to return to work, others to relocate for better jobs, the Trump economy dissipated quickly.
I agree all politicians pander and tell fibs... But Biden seems to let his mouth get the better of him when he spoke of his very expensive agenda.
In regard to illegal immigrants. I feel our laws cover bringing in workers for jobs we can't or won't fill. We have Green cardholders who are formally known as lawful permanent residents (LPRs). As of 2019, there are an estimated 13.9 million green card holders of whom 9.1 million are eligible to become United States citizens.
At this point we have a problem with the record number of illegal immigrants coming in, many not apprehended, and blend into the country, and do weigh heavy on states \ that need to aid in their support. I am for having good immigration laws and following them. I also had hoped to see the wall completed to deter people or cut down on the people that cross illegally. Our immigration laws need to be addressed and enforced."However, most recessions are caused by a combination of factors," - That is true, but not the factors you list. This is exactly what my book is about as it pertains to recessions the size of the Great 2008 Recession.
Looking over the 25 or so major recessions, depressions, and panics that were financial in nature (meaning the pandemic recession wouldn't count as one), there were six common factors (and a kicker) in each:
1. Out of control greed
2. Easy Credit (e.g. low interest)
3. A valuable asset(s) people want at the time (not always real estate)
4. Heavy speculation in that asset(s)
5. An over-leveraged financial sector (bad loans)
6. Lack of government financial regulations
Finally, there needs to be a severe jolt to the economy (Lehman Bros in 2008 was that)
Missing any one of those factors and the likelihood of a major recession goes way down.
"At this point we have a problem with the record number of illegal immigrants coming in, " - What problems? Many studies show there is a net economic gain from illegals, I have offered those many times in other forums.
I absolutely agree our immigration laws need to be reformed. We had a good bipartisan deal under Obama but the House shot it down.You mentioned "low consumer confidence" which I forgot to address:
While most of these are above pre-pandemic levels yet, they are getting close.
- Manufacturing jobs are on the upswing
- Manufacturing Index is at its highest point ever (save for last month)
- Consumer Sentiment continues to increase
- Consumer Confidence continues to increase and is almost at pre-pandemic levels.Note the Consumer confidence during Trump's presidency. Up until Feb of 2020. When COVID hit it did plummet. In no respect is Consumer confidence even close to pre-pandemic levels. It will be interesting to watch these numbers over the next year. I have little confidence at this point to spend money under a president that hopes to spend trillions we will be printing. Scary times. I will keep my cash close, and drawback on spending. I also expect to see a fluctuating market under Biden, hard to have confidence with his Biden's overspending agenda. It very well MIGHT affect our dollar poorly.
https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_consu … ment_index"In no respect is Consumer confidence even close to pre-pandemic levels. " - Not True. CC at the end of 2019 was 100.4 and it is now 100.2. To me, anyway, that is pretty close. https://data.oecd.org/leadind/consumer- … ex-cci.htm
Your data is for Consumer Sentiment, a different measure. But even here, you show Consumer Sentiment way above pre-pandemic levels, which is what I am claiming. Thank you.
"I will keep my cash close," - Me, on the other hand, will be investing and betting the market keeps going up like it has been.The cost of housing is on the rise --- As housing markets become less and less affordable, the demand from buyers drops off. This can have a cooling effect on the market and again would appear consumer confidence is waning. Consumer confidence in the housing market hits an all-time low over the last three weeks. Due to the pandemic, who knows... I think in the Fall we will see real wobbling in the market.
.https://www.gobankingrates.com/money/economy/consumer-confidence-housing-market-all-time-low-last-two-weeks/"his can have a cooling effect on the market and again would appear consumer confidence is waning. " - accept as I have pointed out, both consumer confidence and consumer sentiment, as a broad measure are on the rise. It may be true, specific indexes may be different as they respond to particular market forces.
My wife and I were looking to buy a vacation home in North Carolina a couple of months ago. It was crazy. People were paying cash well above the appraised value and simply didn't care. Homes are way overvalued like they were in 2007 and should come crashing down, hopefully by Fall. Unlike 2007, banks and the secondary loan market are still following sound financial practices. Fortunately, the other ingredients for a major recession aren't there either so the only people who will be hurt are the idiots who paid way too much for the houses.
"the Trump economy dissipated quickly. " - I don't think the data backs you up on that even though there has only been a few months to establish a trend. But, we have these indicators as of May 31.
- Debt to GDP ratio is declining
- 1st Qtr GDP has almost gotten back to pre-recession levels. It will probably exceed it with the 2nd Qtr report
- Current annual GDP growth rate highest since 1984
- Federal Deficit to GDP ratio is declining
- Dow Jones is growing faster than it ever did under Trump
- Real Disposable Household Income has increased since the beginning of the year (but is very volatile because of the recession)
- Average Weekly Earnings (all employees) are the highest ever as of Apr 21
- Wage Grow has declined to 3% as of May but is already reversing as employers try to hire workers
- Inflation was in check through Mar 21, but is currently running at 5% annual growth. It remains to be seen if that holds
- Participation Rate has climbed back to 61.6, but still has a way to go
- UE continues to decline and is at 5.8% as of May 2021
- Job Openings are at an all time high
- Hires is at an all time high.
So tell me, what is not to like about Biden's economy? Besides inflation, how is he doing badly? Please be as specific as I have been.Your set of statistics would mean a whole lot more if they weren't all happening solely because the shutdowns from COVID are proceeding.
Look at them either next year, or compare them to before COVID and there is quite a different picture.Then you must be saying her claims that ""the Trump economy dissipated quickly. " doesn't mean much either. Correct?
That said, yes, I agree, to get a real picture one needs to wait but since the false claim was made it needed to be corrected with the facts available at the time.
And that said, I would point your attention to those stats that are already better than pre-Covid times.Then using claims that, although true, attempts to give a far better picture than is true are no better. It is, in fact, an effort to get the reader to believe something that is simply not true (that we are in great shape, and better than under Trump) and is thus a lie.
For example, the statement that GDP to debt is declining - while perhaps true it is still far higher than it was. Similarly, that GDP is growing so rapidly is due only to the masses of business that are re-opening and paint a very false picture when simply stated without the background. In truth we can expect GDP growth to level out at something well under what Trump produced when those business succeed in getting their employees back to work; when the "status quo" of conditions before COVID are restored. Of course that status quo is unlikely to be seen again for at least 4 years as the business friendly climate disappears under Democrat lead."attempts to give a far better picture than is true are no better." - And how do you know it isn't a "far better picture"?
"an effort to get the reader to believe something that is simply not true (that we are in great shape" - Whoever said that??? It wasn't me. Why do you read things into something that isn't there just to argue?
"he statement that GDP to debt is declining - while perhaps true it is still far higher than it was" - Did I say it was too high?? All I was pointing out is that it was getting better. Please stick to what was said, it would really help.
" that GDP is growing so rapidly is due ..." - Again, where did I say it wasn't growing rapidly??? Keep in mind that the implication is that Biden was doing very poorly - and the GDP growth helps prove that is a false claim.
In truth, if Biden does it right, GDP will level out to somewhere between 2.5 and 3.5% growth which is sustainable as Obama proved. (Trump was about 2.5% with a range of -3.5% to 2.9%, Obama about 2.4% with a range of -2.5% to 2.8%) So, you want to try again?
"Business Friendly Clime disappears under Democrats", LOL - You do know, don't you, that historically, the economy has done better in modern times under Democratic leadership than Republicans. I proved that with numbers in several my articles on the subject.
Tell me, which series of Annual GDP growths is better - by a lot?
Series A:
- 2.48%
- 2.70%
- 3.08%
- 1.74%
- 0.74%
OR Series B:
- 5.06%
- 3.15%
- 3.73%
- 1.81%
You tell me which series is the better series then I will tell you if conservative economic theory or liberal economic theory was responsible.
Esoteric, i hope that Manchin realizes that Republican resistance to his compromise proposal regarding the Voting Act is indication that the Republicans are not interested in the integrity of the voting process, but see this as a power grab toward a rule and control by a minority party. Manchin bent over backwards for them and what does he get? nada. If the GOP continues not to cooperate, then it will be hard ball.
The Republicans are no good and will continue to play him for a fool.I have the same fears that Manchin has about eliminating the filibuster, that it will lead to Tyranny of the Majority. But, because of the rules passed since 1970, the filibuster has become the Tyranny of the Minority. Both sides have abused the filibuster privilege, but so far, it used mostly when the Republican's are in the minority.
I am researching what kind of bills are filibustered and so far it seems most fall into the broad category of bettering the lives of ordinary Americans. That could change as I go back in time.
I sort of disagree with your statement that "but see this as a power grab toward a rule and control by a minority party." - I personally think it is a forgone conclusion that has happened already.
Manchin needs to find a path that takes the filibuster back to the 1969 rules, but even that has a problem today. The reasons few filibusters were brought forward is they stopped all Senate work until it was resolved. In 1970, they passed a two-track system which allows more than one bill on the floor at the same time, which has led to the present debacle.
My fear is that if they went back to the one-track system, the Republicans, the RINOs rather, would have no problem whatsoever bringing the function of government to its knees.
In fact, for President, it is well nigh an impossibility unless they nominate a real conservative and not another RINO who only knows how to lie.
For the other offices, you could be right given the National Democrats penchant of losing a winning hand.
Probably Trump's mini-me, Ron DeSantis - who I am working very hard to help Nikki Fried to defeat next year.
Because such an admission is an idictment on them personally. It takes a lot to own up to the fact that you have been so wrong about so much for so long.
Related Discussions
- 172
Never Have I Seen A President Seek So To Dived And Spread Hate
by Sharlee 6 days ago
Here once again Biden stands at a podium swings around his hands, and rants, seeking and appoint blame on American citizens, ultimately Republican citizens. Without cause, without proof of the motive of why or what possessed this nut job that attacked Paul Pelosi. Although in front of only a...
- 65
Keeping Up With The Presidential Race Polls Trump Verses Biden
by Sharlee 6 months ago
Disapproval ratings. Aug 16, 2023Trump holds a rating of 55.9https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/po … ald-trump/Biden holds a rating of 54.4 https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/bi … al-rating/Today (August 16th) I ask --- Do you think Trump's indictments will...
- 205
Why does Republican=White=Racist in so many people's minds?
by Peeples 11 years ago
While I am not a republic nor completly white, I am so tired of the constant assumption that Republicans are just white racist. Why do people assume this? It would be like saying Democrats are just poor black and hispanic people. See how ignorant that sounds! Why?
- 309
Trump is a Racist and the Republican Party is avoiding the truth
by Tiffany Payne 4 years ago
No matter what you say or how you say it Trump is 100% racist and os feeding off the attention. From the squad to Cummings he wants nothing but to divide us. Sadly it’s working this issue has nothing to do with party but right and wrong. Do you think silence from his party indicates they are too...
- 172
Has Donald Trump Killed the So-Called Republican Party?
by Scott Belford 6 weeks ago
In my opinion, yes - the Republican Party no-longer exists today even though Trump followers incorrectly refer to themselves as Republicans.Let me open this discussion with a short tutorial of the Republican Party (now keep in mind, the Party title has no bearing on the Party philosophy and any...
- 35
Why have Republicans Turned Against America's Military?
by Scott Belford 2 years ago
Why? I suggest because Donald Trump has. He started his administration surrounding himself by what he characterized as very strong men. Sooner or later he started realizing these generals cared more about America that they did about him. And what did Trump do? He went...