Palin-Trump Link Vindicated
Every so often, I feel moved to write a column that is no more, really, than spiking a metaphorical football in the endzone. To put it a different way, sometimes I write my opinion about something political only to then be almost immediately vindicated by someone much further in-the-know than I ever could be. Today is one of those days, so if you're not interested in me indulging in a little gratuitous back-patting, then I'd suggest you stop reading this now.
The reason for the most recent of these "See? I told you so!" moments was an extraordinary column just written by Nicolle Wallace, who was (in her own words) "a senior adviser to the McCain-Palin campaign in 2008." This New York Times opinion piece absolutely agrees with what I wrote last week in my "Blame John McCain For Donald Trump" article. Again, this vindication comes from a Republican senior advisor to McCain's campaign, and not from some random Lefty agreeing with me.
Wallace starts off the article by clearly drawing this link: "Mr. Trump has now usurped and vastly expanded upon Ms. Palin's constituency, but the connection between the two movements is undeniable." She goes on to identify the anger of voters drawn to Palin on the campaign trail, noting: "Her legacy lies in her innate ability to wrap herself in the anger that those voters felt. While Senator McCain seemed slightly unnerved by the intensity of their discontent, Ms. Palin basked in it." After recounting the story of McCain contradicting a woman at a rally who stated that Barack Obama was "an Arab," Wallace takes a deeper dive into what was going on (and how both the media and the Republican Party conveniently ignored it).
To some in the news media, voter anger seems like a new phenomenon. But they attended the same Palin rallies I did -- we all should have seen this coming. The Alaska governor whipped the crowds into a frenzy with her fiery attacks on the media and the establishment politicians that she had gleefully upended in the Alaska statehouse. When her rallygoers shouted crude comments from the stands, as the woman at the Minnesota rally had done, there was no confrontation between Ms. Palin and the offender. When the press started to report on the angry rhetoric coming from those Palin crowds, I remember Senator McCain's concern. The growing furor in the Republican Party was something that we, as a campaign, failed to address, but to the crowds, Sarah Palin proved the more satisfying politician on the ticket because of it.
In other words, McCain couldn't publicly denounce what Palin was doing, because she was generating more excitement for his campaign then he ever had. This was a political calculation, plain and simple, and it has led to exactly where the Republican Party now finds itself, in relation to Donald Trump.
This leads Wallace to her rather extraordinary conclusion. It's rare to see this level of honesty from such political insiders, especially in the midst of an election season. Perhaps it is meant as a warning to all the establishment Republican types who are now trying to convince themselves that Trump would be more malleable than Ted Cruz if he actually won the White House.
The party bears some responsibility for her success. Our base has grown increasingly exasperated with Washington Republicans who, despite historic victories in the midterm elections of 2010 and 2014, seem incapable of reversing President Obama's legislative agenda or asserting themselves in the country's foreign policy debates.
Mr. Trump improves upon Ms. Palin's jagged attempts at a post-2008 message with a vision for reclaiming American greatness by promising better trade deals, improved care for veterans, a more successful foreign policy based on his personal strength and immigration reform that is based mostly on building a wall. His proposals are, at best, vague and of questionable legal soundness, but they've propelled his candidacy by inflaming voter concern that America has lost ground.
That he would refine and recalibrate his proclamations in a general election or as president is a widely held assumption among the Republican establishment. It's possible that this is the kind of false comfort that people on a sinking ship murmur to one another about how death by drowning really isn't a bad way to go.
Hoo boy. That's pretty grim. Style points need to be awarded for not using the same old Titanic metaphor, and indeed for giving it a new twist.
Seriously, though, all of that's pretty close to what I had to say last week:
The party flocked to Palin's defense against that nasty "lamestream media" (as she so colorfully put it), and declared her to be even more qualified than Barack Obama (this was before she quit her governorship, halfway through her first term). They doubled down on Palin, because the Republican establishment really had no other choice. By doing so, they elevated the idea that someone like Sarah Palin was qualified to be president. Which is precisely why I blame McCain for Donald Trump's rise.
. . .
By elevating Sarah Palin to a candidate for vice president, John McCain lowered the bar for entry into presidential contests for his party. Anyone could plausibly run, if Sarah could conceivably be leader of the nation. No experience was necessary, and no quip was too outrageous to utter on stage. Fringe candidates, instead of being ignored by almost everyone, suddenly were given the party's official seal of approval.
The Republican Party talked itself into believing that Sarah Palin was qualified to be president. I applaud Nicolle Wallace for not only realizing this, but for publicly stating it in a desperate attempt to avoid a looming disaster for the Republican Party. My guess, however, is that most Republicans won't have that degree of introspection. Whether they choose to see it or not, though, the real blame for Donald Trump's rise can be seen by any of these Palin defenders, just by looking in the mirror.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Fox Noise can be really entertaining when it's not nauseating. Meghan Kelly just said "Trump doesn't get to control the media." She said that with a straight face as if she didn't know better.
Trump has Cruz down and he only needs to dominate the news cycle for another week. A fake fight with the fake news channel should be good for a couple of days, maybe three if he calls her a c**t. Christie may have self-destructed with his mop comment, so Trump should pick up a percent or two from fans of loud, bullying insult comedians.
Nicolle Wallace? You mean that MSNBC RINO chick? She gets paid to tell the truth.
Nicolle Wallace still doesn't get what she helped create and probably never will.
Vindication?
Right.
I think we may have read completely different articles. No, I'm sure of it.
Chris,
What you had to say last week was spot on and not at all like what this former McCain campaign aide will ever understand.
She wrote: "The party bears some responsibility for her success. Our base has grown increasingly exasperated with Washington Republicans who, despite historic victories in the midterm elections of 2010 and 2014, seem incapable of reversing President Obama’s legislative agenda or asserting themselves in the country’s foreign policy debates."
That about sums up what Nicolle Wallace knows about Palinism. Which is to say, nothing.
President Trump has hinted that he'll hire the Quitter from Wasilla. He needs somebody who can speak in tongues to the faithers because he doesn't like to display his weaknesses. He doesn't cry BTW. Maybe the Trumpwave will retire MacThuselah this year and Trump can hire him too!
It was easy enough to whip those crowds "into a frenzy" because the anger these people felt has been fostered for years. Palin herself was then - and remains - a product of that propaganda herself. She was speaking their language because she is one of them.
Wallace acknowledges this in saying:
They didn't see it coming because they'd failed to realize the effect their rhetoric and propaganda was really having on their base, particularly those with narrow views and a minimum of education.
But after the McCain loss, the movers and shakers and policy-makers in the Republican Party realized they could make use of this heightened anger. They'd discovered how incredibly easy it was to whip their base into a frenzy of either anger or fear or a mixture of both.
That knowledge gave them a massive advantage. Opinions formed emotionally cannot be changed by reason or any amount of logic. In fact, trying to reason with them only increased their anger. It also meant that talking points didn't have to have any factual basis either. It was a WIN-WIN-WIN all the way for Republican PR specialists.
The most perfect example of this was the Great Ebola Scare of the 2014 Midterms. Even some Democrats fell for that one, much to their shame when it was revealed as a scam the day after the election, a scam in which all corporate media were happily complicit because the drama factor drew in the readers and listeners. They weren't going to upset their audiences by insisting on facts.
So while Palin was a product of Republican policies and Frank Luntz talking points, Trump is the result of the Republican Party's movers and shakers capitalizing on The Palin Effect rather than redressing it. They chose to go with Palin's "whip the crowd into a frenzy approach" rather than McCain's honest correcting-Minnesota-woman approach.
What Trump is doing is dispensing with the Republican "political correctness" of dog whistles because he sees no need for them. Instead he's taken out the bullhorn and been utterly honest about the Republican platform.
For example: while the establishment Republicans (including the Chamber of Commerce) favored a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, the base responded only to complete elimination of all undocumented immigrants as well as their American-born children. The latter is contrary to The U.S. Constitution which these same base voters claim to revere but ignore when it suits them.
So that's what Trump gave them. Unfettered, unveiled, upfront racism and his fans lapped it up. It's been rather a nasty shock for those in the RNC and their major donors to hear their ideas expressed in plain language. It's made it impossible for them to contradict anything Trump says because all of it is founded on Republican policy established pre-Trump.
Like The Palin Effect, The Trump Effect can be traced straight back to the Republican Party. Therefore, while The Palin Effect certainly contributed to the creation of The Trump Effect, Palin herself is not to blame.
Therefore, while The Palin Effect certainly contributed to the creation of The Trump Effect, Palin herself is not to blame.
Huh?
I also called this one months ago because the same people were turning up at Trump rallies as Palin's rallies in '08. I think Maddow nailed the George Wallace comparison pretty well too. But my favorite point of reference comes from Trevor Noah, who compares Trump to every African dictator ever.
Elizabeth [8]:
I think Mopshell means that Trump and Palin are symptoms of an underlying disease, not the disease itself.
Is that what you think, Neil?
Yes - I think that they both tapped into the same anger - Palin showed that recognizing the anger on a national stage worked, and Trump watched and repeated. I think the people who create the anger, Limbaugh, Fox News, etc. are responsible for it.
I've come round to the thinking of Chris Ladd as to the cause of the anger, so I'll let him explain it:
http://goplifer.com/2015/12/27/sympathy-for-the-blue-eyed-devil/
Sorry - I should have said that Limbaugh, Fox News etc. fuel the fire - not create it.
The explanation is not that complicated.
Fill me in then Elizabeth.
You can't be serious.
Ya'all go on and on about 'voter anger' as if it's a bad and horrible thing..
It's funny..
When an unknown and no-experience black senator from Illinois tapped into that voter anger at Bush, ya'all loved it..
Funny, iddn't it. :D
Michale
Nicolle Wallace? You mean that MSNBC RINO chick?
Chick???
Wow...
Misogynist much???
:D
Michale
I also called this one months ago because the same people were turning up at Trump rallies as Palin's rallies in '08.
And the same people were turning up at Sanders rallies as Obama's rallies in '08.
Wow!!
What are the odds!?? heh
Michale
Neil,
I've come round to the thinking of Chris Ladd as to the cause of the anger, so I'll let him explain it:
It's all a scam to make money...
I am somewhat surprised to see you fall for it..
Students nation-wide to attend four-day, university funded white privilege bash
Major universities across the country are offering course credit, and in some cases even paying the cost, for students to attend an annual national event known as “The White Privilege Conference.”
The 2016 conference will feature a variety of speakers and numerous breakout sessions, all of which come at an additional charge.
http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=7209
There is no white supremacy... There is no white privilege
Anyone who claims otherwise is simply pushing an unpopular, unnecessary and intentionally divisive agenda...
Am I wrong??
Fine.. PROVE IT...
Michale
There is no white supremacy... There is no white privilege
Anyone who claims otherwise is simply pushing an unpopular, unnecessary and intentionally divisive agenda...
Take the recent Oscars train wreck...
The black community is FINE with the Oscar committee when they get black actors and black movies nominated.. 12 YEARS A SLAVE comes to mind...
But when the voting committee doesn't find any black actors/movies worthy of a nomination, all of the sudden, the entirety of the Oscars is racist... And the black community advocates just getting rid of the Oscars...
Yet, we have an organization and awards show completely and utterly DEVOTED to black entertainment and black actors and BLACK only...
And THAT is NOT racist???
Are ya frakin' KIDDING me!???
The Left Wingery either wants race equality or it does not..
If it does... Then get rid of affirmative action, black history month, BET, the NAACP and every black dominated sports team in the country...
If the Left Wingery doesn't WANT to get rid of these things...
Then shut the frak up about racism!!!
It's really THAT simple...
Michale
Michale:
To get back to the point, why do people support Trump in such numbers, and why do they vote for people like Matt Bevin who enact policies against their economic interest? In Chris Ladd's view, it is driven by nostalgia for a time when white privilege was strong and part of the culture. As this privilege is removed, the people it protected are angry, and thus are easy prey for demagogues like Trump (probably unintentional - he isn't that clever) and Palin (who was definitely not that clever).
Elizabeth: please answer the question instead of telling me I should already know - what is driving the anger behind Trumpism?
Note Michale: I'm not interested in distractions such as your views on college and NBA teams, etc. If you think white privilege doesn't exist you are just not getting the advantages of it. I do. It is great. I miss it when I travel to Europe (it also exists in S.E. Asia to a large extent as well). Maybe this is why thin skinned dweebs rail against the French - the French really don't give a f***.
To get back to the point,
It's all the same point.. You just don't like to hear this aspect of it because there is simply no excuse for it..
why do people support Trump in such numbers,
And THERE it is!!
"THAT, detective... Is that right question."
-Dr. Alfred Lanning, I, ROBOT
Kudos.... :D
In Chris Ladd's view, it is driven by nostalgia for a time when white privilege was strong and part of the culture. As this privilege is removed, the people it protected are angry, and thus are easy prey for demagogues like Trump (probably unintentional - he isn't that clever) and Palin (who was definitely not that clever).
Wrong... Wrong... Wrong..
As wrong as can possibly be while still having two brain cells to rub together...
Note Michale: I'm not interested in distractions such as your views on college and NBA teams, etc.
But it's all part and parcel to the same racism and false accusations of racism that the Left Wingery wallows in..
In other words, they are not "distractions".. They are symptoms of the same problem..
If you think white privilege doesn't exist you are just not getting the advantages of it.
Oh I am getting the advantage of it..
The Left Wingery can wallow in playing the race card time and time and time again...
There is a HUGE advantage to it for the Left Wingery...
Believe me... I get it..
Michale
Grrrr!! I hate when I screw a quote..
"THAT, detective... Is the right question."
-Dr. Alfred Lanning, I, ROBOT
My bust
Michale
"What is driving the anger behind Trumpism?"
Black man in White House.
Michale:
Oh I am getting the advantage of it..
The Left Wingery can wallow in playing the race card time and time and time again...
There is a HUGE advantage to it for the Left Wingery...
Believe me... I get it..
JFC:
Black man in White House.
'nuff said....
Thanx, JFC... I can always count on you.. :D
Michale
I'm surprised that nobody seems to be giving Bill Maher any credit for the Trump Menace. The Donald learned a very valuable lesson from Bill and has applied it skillfully to the other contestants.
You can't win a war with an insult comic (or an insult troll in Trump's case).
Michale:
You can provide no real reason for the anger fueling Trumpism, but are sure racism doesn't exist.
OK, explain this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge7i60GuNRg
I never claimed racism doesn't exist..
Denying that racism doesn't exist is as ridiculous as denying hate or love doesn't exist..
But thank you for proving my point..
The Left CAN'T make an argument without CHANGING the argument to something they CAN argue... Like Immigrants vs Legal Immigrants...
Between you and JFC, I don't even have to lift a finger.. :D
Michale
When you have unequivocal and irrefutable proof that institutionalized racism exists...
Then....
And ONLY then... Will you have a valid argument...
Come talk to me when you have such proof..
Michale
When ya'all hear that a white cop has shot and killed a black person, what's your IMMEDIATE thought..
We ALL know that ya'all's IMMEDIATE thought is...
RACISM!!!
WHITE cop... BLACK subject... Yep... That's racism...
Am I wrong???
Of course I am not wrong.. Because ya'all proved it time and time again..
In Sanford, FL.. In Ferguson, MI... In Staten Island, NY....
Facts don't matter... Reality doesn't matter...
All that matters is the color of the person's skin...
Dr MLK's very DEFINITION of racism...
Michale
Neil,
Elizabeth: please answer the question instead of telling me I should already know - what is driving the anger behind Trumpism?
Why, know-nothingism, of course. Which itself has been spawned and perpetuated by an increasingly dysfunctional media and political culture, particularly of the right-wing Republican variety.
Know-nothingism and the great march toward an anti-Enlightenment has successfully set the stage for Trump and Palin and their ilk. The dysfunctional media and political culture has created the space for Trumpism and Palinism.
Donald Trump and Sarah Palin are both, at once, a product of all of that AND willing catalysts that keep the ill-informed and largely misguided anger ready at the boil.
In other words, Trump and Palin are up to their eyeballs in responsibility for the sad state of affairs that is the American political process.
The antidote to all of this: enlightened political leadership that is able to channel the anger into real progressive change that uplifts a nation and improves the lives of all Americans. Perhaps, come convention time, this kind of leadership may become apparent, in a surprise twist or two within both parties.
BTW, Neil ...
I did not tell you that you should already know.
Don't put words in my mouth!
WHITE cop... BLACK subject
[snip]
In Sanford, FL.
not a cop... not a grown-up. zimmerman has shown in his subsequent brushes with law enforcement that he's trigger happy and abusive, not fit to be an agent of the law, which he never was. trayvon martin was a teen, hormonal and impulsive. this was not a conflict between equals, it was a wannabe non-LEO playing cat and mouse with an unarmed teenager, and pulling his piece when the game turned on him.
In Ferguson, MI
that's missouri (MO), not michigan (MI). cop got scared and unloaded on a guy who probably did deserve a fine and a few days in jail, but certainly not a death sentence. didn't stop shooting when the guy tried to run, didn't stop shooting when the guy fell down, didn't call an ambulance after the guy was face-down on the pavement.
In Staten Island, NY....
officer pantaleo had a history of being abusive to suspects, who all happened to be black. circumstantial? sure. eric garner had no history of violence and took no aggressive action.
the real travesty is that these events are not the exception, they're the rule. every black person i've ever met has at one time or another experienced a scary event with law enforcement that among white people is extremely rare, and didn't behave any differently than you or i would in the same situation.
JL
Elizabeth:
I was not trying to put words in your mouth. Sorry.
I disagree that Palin or Trump can actually generate the anger by themselves - they are feeding on anger that has already been fueled by Limbaugh, Fox News, etc. However Limbaugh et al are also just fueling an existing fire.
They don't take people who are happy and make them angry, they vocalize and amplify the anger that is already there.
What is the root cause of the anger that we see around us - for example Michale is a good example - his anger is such that he lives in a fact free world where there is no racism and he has very bizarre ideas about what other people are thinking (e.g. if we hear a black man has been shot by a cop we immediately assume it is due to racism - asinine of course, but a lot of other people think like him).
Anti-intellectualism doesn't cut it either. The pinnacle of anti-intellectualism today are the evangelicals (it was written in a bronze age book and it is all true, even the bits that contradict each other, so there!). However frequent studies show that evangelicals are very happy people, and the ones I personally know, while definitely not Democrats, are very nice, caring people. Most evangelicals are not Trumpeters (he has 37%, but when you dig in, these are the 'occasional churchgoers who self label as evangelicals').
Anybody who takes the time to look at the numbers knows that from both income and wealth perspectives, whites and Asians are richer than blacks and Hispanics. That does not mean that all whites are richer than all blacks ... any longer. But there was a day when, for the most part, the poorest white was still higher socially than the more elevated black. And that is what the 'Make America Great Again' people want to bring back. For the most part they don't hate blacks, Hispanics, etc., they just want 'them' to know their place.
Part 1:
Palin was a symptom, as is Trump. The are not the cause, they are the response.
I think a group of stars had to align -- and they did. You had a reactionary right-wing class that objected to the New Deal and started working to dismantle it back in the 1950's. There were those who hated the New Deal on "philosophical" grounds, and those who hated it because it cut into their profit-making abilities. They began funding the right-wing machine: think tanks, academic posts, etc. to begin refining their arguments.
Meanwhile we had the rise of the technocratic/business-centric culture -- the 1980's began the era of the MBA -- including at the Ivy Leagues where America's "leadership class" is educated. By Bill Clinton you had a generation of leaders who bought into a whole lot of free-market mythology as well as the notion that "running things like a business" was the answer to every problem.
Checks and balances were reduced, reduced, reduced. Our relentless moves toward monopolies everywhere, especially in Media. Corporate takeover of media. End of Fairness Doctrine in late 80's and the rise of Rush Limbaugh and all his imitators. All while the Right wing think tanks are pumping out their ideas, seeding their adherents in positions of influence, and no one on the left was countering them. FOX News arrives and begins explicit propaganda, with no pushback from Democrats.
Behind it all: money, money, money. Koch Brothers and others of their ilk, working quietly and persistently.
Part 2:
Meanwhile, the world is changing, technology advancing, and America's employment landscape is inexorably slowing down. Unions are being undercut. The Free Market ideology is strong enough to keep a clamp on wages and America has 40 years and counting of wage stagnation. At the same time their safety nets are being turned over to Wall Street -- another star. Wall Street convinces the people that count that they can make everyone rich! We start the transition from defined-benefit pensions to other instruments that make financiers money but reduce safety for pensioners.
Average Americans are encouraged to spend, spend, spend! When crashes come it's all their fault for spending instead of saving! Irresponsible Americans! But please go out and spend some more, asap coz the economy is slowing down! Americans should save but, while expenses are going up, wages aren't! Work two jobs! Work three! Be of good cheer, average Americans: the stock market is doing great! CEO's are making fabulous salaries -- must mean things are going well!
Part 3:
Hmm, seems a lot of Americans are misinformed about a lot of things. How did that happen? Well, media outlets, once considered to exist for the benefit of the public, are now owned by for-profit corporations and are expected to make a profit. Trim the fat! Close down, let go, consolidate! Also, the big cheeses upstairs don't want stories about labor, or poverty, or corporate lobbying or anything else that threatens corporate power. OTOH, if it bleeds it leads -- great! FOX peddles lies -- all to the good. The last thing we need is an educated populace.
Citizen's United. It's all about the dough now. But it's BEEN about the dough. Just took awhile to become very, very clear.
Cut government! Bad government! Can't perform oversight! Lower taxes! Give rich people more money and cut services for everyone else! The "job-creators" will save us all!
2008 crash. Foreclosures for regular folks and bailouts for the perps. Too big to fail, too big to jail. The rightwing machine keeps chugging. CNBC blames the little guys -- poor AND brown. Hate them! It's THEIR fault. Don't blame us! We're sooooo smart and therefore deserve our outsize salaries and bonuses and golden parachutes. But no one could have seen it coming! But it's still all the fault of the poor schmucks on the bottom. They should have know what WE couldn't foresee. Funny how money protects people from consequences. And lack of it makes them vulnerable and stressed.
Gee more than half of all Americans have less than $1000 in savings. They live paycheck to paycheck. Well, it's only half. Lots of folks are doing ok. Pretty well. Some really well. We don't mix much. Our leadership class, our major media class, are in the upper 50%, not lower. Life looks different there.
Part 4:
We don't know how to create jobs. We don't know how to increase incomes for average Americans. Things don't work like they used to but we don't know how to go forward. We in the beltway are only now noticing that folks out in the hinterlands are struggling - and have been - for years now. Gee, when did that happen? Oh, it's been going on for awhile? Really? Wow! Who'd a thunk it? The crowd we hang with has been doing very well, doncha know.
We have noticed some of you are saying some really nasty things. Well, yeah, FOX and Limbaugh and all those guys have been saying that shit for years, but no one was supposed to take it seriously! WE didn't! Who would think America can't take a joke! But then those lefties -- Occupy Wall Street -- 1%? Income inequality? Black Lives Matter? Seems some of our citizens are unhappy with police brutality. Which has gone on, unchecked, for years, but especially since 9/11 when we started militarizing police departments and looking for terrorists everywhere. And cutting budgets. Gee, now that we're hearing about the details -- Black sites in Chicago no less -- well, maybe they have a point.
Some strange birds start running for office? A fascist on the right and a socialist on the left and they're getting traction!
Republican chickens are most definitely coming home to roost, but Democrat chickens are right behind them. The Republicans were definitely the aggressors but the Democrats were lousy defenders. The 1% powers bought the beltway. They used the left-right divide to divert attention, but didn't know when to stop. They got complacent. They got cocky. They've created people who don't trust them anymore, don't like them.
On the right, people have been spoon-fed hate for years. As P.G. Wodehouse once said: "the appetite grows by what it feeds on." We have a large group of people who are hate-addicts now. They gotta hate someone -- they've got a bunch of neural connections built in their brains that light up at the slightest stimuli. They NEED something to hate. Donald is channeling that very well. Palin did too. But the conditions had to be ripe for them to flourish.
Part 4 got eaten!
That's too bad.
We don't know how to create jobs. We don't know how to increase incomes for average Americans. Things don't work like they used to but we don't know how to go forward. We in the beltway are only now noticing that folks out in the hinterlands are struggling - and have been - for years now. Gee, when did that happen? Oh, it's been going on for awhile? Really? Wow! Who'd a thunk it? The crowd we hang with has been doing very well, doncha know.
We have noticed some of you are saying some really nasty things. Well, yeah, FOX and Limbaugh and all those guys have been saying that shit for years, but no one was supposed to take it seriously! WE didn't! Who would think America can't take a joke! But then those lefties -- Occupy Wall Street -- 1%? Income inequality? Black Lives Matter? Seems some of our citizens are unhappy with police brutality. Which has gone on, unchecked, for years, but especially since 9/11 when we started militarizing police departments and looking for terrorists everywhere. And cutting budgets. Gee, now that we're hearing about the details -- Black sites in Chicago no less -- well, maybe they have a point.
Some strange birds start running for office? A fascist on the right and a socialist on the left and they're getting traction!
Republican chickens are most definitely coming home to roost, but Democrat chickens are right behind them. The Republicans were definitely the aggressors but the Democrats were lousy defenders. The 1% powers bought the beltway. They used the left-right divide to divert attention, but didn't know when to stop. They got complacent. They got cocky. They've created people who don't trust them anymore, don't like them. On the right, people have been spoon-fed hate for years. As P.G. Wodehouse once said: "the appetite grows by what it feeds on." We have a large group of people who are hate-addicts now. They gotta hate someone -- they've got a bunch of neural connections built in their brains that light up at the slightest stimuli. They NEED something to hate. Donald is channeling that very well. Palin did too. But the conditions had to be ripe for them to flourish.
not a cop... not a grown-up. zimmerman has shown in his subsequent brushes with law enforcement that he's trigger happy and abusive, not fit to be an agent of the law, which he never was. trayvon martin was a teen, hormonal and impulsive. this was not a conflict between equals, it was a wannabe non-LEO playing cat and mouse with an unarmed teenager, and pulling his piece when the game turned on him.
With the exception of the NOT A COP part, you have no facts to support ANYTHING of what you said.. Matter of fact, the FACTS clearly show that you are wrong in everything you said..
But even if everything you said was dead on ballz accurate..
Guess what??
There was NO RACISM...
that's missouri (MO), not michigan (MI). cop got scared and unloaded on a guy who probably did deserve a fine and a few days in jail, but certainly not a death sentence. didn't stop shooting when the guy tried to run, didn't stop shooting when the guy fell down, didn't call an ambulance after the guy was face-down on the pavement.
Once again, with the exception of that first part, there are NO FACTS to support ANYTHING you said. Matter of fact, the facts clearly show that you are WRONG in everything you said..
But, once again.. NO RACISM...
officer pantaleo had a history of being abusive to suspects, who all happened to be black. circumstantial? sure. eric garner had no history of violence and took no aggressive action.
And again, NO FACTS.. Garner resisted arrest. THAT is an aggressive action..
And ONCE AGAIN... NO RACISM...
In each incident, the Left Wingery (and virtually every Weigantian who commented) screamed, "RACISM!!!!!" and there was absolutely NO RACISM involved in ANY of the incidents. This, despite an EXHAUSTIVE search by an agency that had EVERY MOTIVATION possible to FIND racism.. This motivated agency could not find a SMIDGEN, an INGOT of racism involved with these incidents...
You prove my point.. The Left Wingery screams RACISM SIMPLY because a black person was involved and was on the losing side of the equation... Here in Weigantia, a Weigantian explicitly STATED as such...
"The ONLY proof of racism needed is that a person is black"
Or words to that effect...
Racism is bad..
False accusations of racism just to further a partisan agenda??
That's much worse..
Michale
"I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
-Dr Martin Luther King Jr
Dr MLK would be VERY disappointed with the Left Wingery in the here and now...
Virtually no one on the Left judges black people by the content of their character..
The Left Wingery always judges by the color of the skin... :^/
Michale
Behind it all: money, money, money. Koch Brothers and others of their ilk, working quietly and persistently.
And SOROS and others of their ilk..
You always seem to forget that, when it comes to money in politics, the Left is as guilty as the Right...
As for Part 3...
You DO realize that, for the last 7 years, it's been a Democrat in control, right???
How do you reconcile that???
Oh wait, never mind. I know.. It's ALWAYS the Republicans fault..
If the GOP is in control, it's ALWAYS the Republicans who are to blame..
When the Democrats are in control, it's ALWAYS the Republicans who are to blame...
Gotcha... {{wink, wink}} :D
Michale
Elizabeth: please answer the question instead of telling me I should already know - what is driving the anger behind Trumpism?
Why is anger driving Trumpism a bad thing??
But anger driving Obamaism a good thing??
Anyone?? Anyone?? Beuhler??
Michale
zimmerman has shown in his subsequent brushes with law enforcement that he's trigger happy and abusive, not fit to be an agent of the law, which he never was.
Postulate a scenario whereas you are in a large group of people and 40% of that group hate you and want you dead. And that 40% largely controls the media apparatus that reports your every move 24/7...
Tell me.. How would you fare under such conditions?? How would ANY of us fare under such conditions??
Not very well, I am sure you would agree...
trayvon martin was a teen, hormonal and impulsive.
Martin was a thug, pure and simple... He thought he would have fun kicking the shit out of some "cracka" and bragging about it to his thug buddies afterwards....
That's the totality of Trayvon Martin...
it was a wannabe non-LEO
That's bias talking.. The facts clearly show that Zimmerman had absolutely NO DESIRE to be a cop...
Michale
didn't stop shooting when the guy tried to run, didn't stop shooting when the guy fell down,
Cops are trained to continue to fire until the threat is eliminated.. Apparently, Officer Wilson felt that there was still a threat. Considering the beat down Wilson had just endured, no one here (sans anyone who has been there and done that) is in a position to second-guess his actions...
didn't call an ambulance after the guy was face-down on the pavement.
Wilson reported to dispatch SUBJECT DOWN which tells dispatch to notify Med Units to respond..
It's not Wilson's job to stop what he is doing, pull out his cell phone, dial 911 and request an ambulance be sent...
If an ambulance was not dispatched in a timely manner, that is not on Officer Wilson or any other on-scene LEO..
Michale
Paula [38]
I look forward to part 4 being released because everything you wrote in parts 1-3 were dead-on accurate.
It would be interesting too to look at William Buckley's part in all this. He realized that, since FDR and his successor Truman could win their arguments on facts, then the Republicans' only recourse was to discredit the value of facts. He therefore argued that facts limited argument and thought because they didn't allow for speculation and innovation.
It was all nonsense of course but Buckley was erudite and clever. He made the ludicrous sound sophisticated. It completely bamboozled Democrats to be told that facts were intrinsic weaknesses in an argument -- how could they offer proof if they weren't allowed to use facts?
Buckley's strategy worked. In fact it succeeded so well, it was not only repeated over and over but expanded. Fox News epitomizes this expansion in their use of distortion, disinformation and outright lies to persuade their audiences to accept GOP policies -- supported by corporate media -- that not only hurt them financially but also physically.
When William Buckley Jr declared conservative war on facts, I wonder if he ever stopped for a moment to think of the damage it might do to America's future?
It would be interesting too to look at William Buckley's part in all this. He realized that, since FDR and his successor Truman could win their arguments on facts, then the Republicans' only recourse was to discredit the value of facts. He therefore argued that facts limited argument and thought because they didn't allow for speculation and innovation.
It was all nonsense of course but Buckley was erudite and clever.
"I don't care about FACTS!!! I want you to feel my pain!!!"
-Left Winger College Protestor
And the Left is different than the Right on the issue of facts exactly how???
Michale
{Buckley} therefore argued that facts limited argument and thought because they didn't allow for speculation and innovation.
It was all nonsense of course but Buckley was erudite and clever.
"I don't care about FACTS!!! I want you to feel my pain!!!"
-Left Winger College Protestor
And the Left is different than the Right on the issue of facts exactly how???
Michale
Part 4:
We don't know how to create jobs. We don't know how to increase incomes for average Americans. Things don't work like they used to but we don't know how to go forward. We in the beltway are only now noticing that folks out in the hinterlands are struggling - and have been - for years now. Gee, when did that happen? Oh, it's been going on for awhile? Really? Wow! Who'd a thunk it? The crowd we hang with has been doing very well, doncha know.
We have noticed some of you are saying some really nasty things. Well, yeah, FOX and Limbaugh and all those guys have been saying that shit for years, but no one was supposed to take it seriously! WE didn't! Who would think America can't take a joke! But then those lefties -- Occupy Wall Street -- 1%? Income inequality? Black Lives Matter? Seems some of our citizens are unhappy with police brutality. Which has gone on, unchecked, for years, but especially since 9/11 when we started militarizing police departments and looking for terrorists everywhere. And cutting budgets. Gee, now that we're hearing about the details -- Black sites in Chicago no less -- well, maybe they have a point.
Some strange birds start running for office? A fascist on the right and a socialist on the left and they're getting traction!
Republican chickens are most definitely coming home to roost, but Democrat chickens are right behind them. The Republicans were definitely the aggressors but the Democrats were lousy defenders. The 1% powers bought the beltway. They used the left-right divide to divert attention, but didn't know when to stop. They got complacent. They got cocky. They've created people who don't trust them anymore, don't like them. On the right, people have been spoon-fed hate for years. As P.G. Wodehouse once said: "the appetite grows by what it feeds on." We have a large group of people who are hate-addicts now. They gotta hate someone -- they've got a bunch of neural connections built in their brains that light up at the slightest stimuli. They NEED something to hate. Donald is channeling that very well. Palin did too. But the conditions had to be ripe for them to flourish.
Mopshell (46) Thanks! I must have some word in it the filter doesn't like coz it just won't go through!
When William Buckley Jr declared conservative war on facts, I wonder if he ever stopped for a moment to think of the damage it might do to America's future?
Yep. The war on facts. That is the nutshell. To me, that is the ultimate sin in this context. Once "facts" become malleable we lose our foundation -- everything becomes slippery. That's another reason, I think, Trump's fans are his fans. They don't really know (or in some cases seem to care) what is real, or true -- they've been burned too many times. They've moved from caring about what people say to focusing on who says it. We're down to: "we like Trump because he expresses our rage and directs it at people we've been trained not to like" -- "We feel oppressed -- he will beat up on our oppressors." The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Destroying the sanctity of honesty leads to a place where you can't even begin to seek solutions -- there's no common ground for discussion.
Yep. The war on facts. That is the nutshell. To me, that is the ultimate sin in this context.
Yep, in THIS context.
But, of course, NOT in the context of the DEMOCRAT's war on facts..
Destroying the sanctity of honesty leads to a place where you can't even begin to seek solutions -
Says the.....
Naw, that's just TOO easy... :D
Michale
Speaking of facts.....
Why Hillary’s EmailGate Matters
In casually disregarding basic security, Secretary Clinton harmed our country and helped our adversaries
http://observer.com/2016/01/why-hillarys-emailgate-matters/
Michale
And THAT ^^^^ is why Trump is so popular with every day Americans, including over 20% of Democrats..
Because Hillary Clinton represents the EPITOME of the corrupt greedy politician who is only out for themselves and no one else...
The mere fact that Hillary had to..., "evolve".... her attitudes on various issues important to Democrats (conveniently enough JUST IN TIME for her last chance Presidential run) should be a REALLY big clue for ya'all...
Trump is the anti-Hillary.. The Anti-Establishment....
How ironic, eh?? :D
Michale
In short, Trump makes us feel good about America...
Hillary just makes us feel slimy and dirty...
Michale
It's professional wrestling's fault.
michale [40],
everything i wrote in [34] was supported by factual evidence. now it's possible that you're right, and none of those three events was motivated by racism. the details of any individual event can be impeached. however, the overall pattern in our nation is unequivocal; qualitative and quantitative sources of data line up, and no counterclaims have arisen that stand up to even casual scrutiny, much less scientific rigor.
you claim to put some stock in evaluating all the facts, but you're pretty deep in denial about the proven fact that racism in the US is real. the sting that white folks like us occasionally feel today, when an institution like the media occasionally discriminates in the other direction, is not even a shadow of the subtle (and not so subtle) differences in how normal, sane, educated, professional people of color are treated every day.
JL
Paula [49]
The filter doesn't always like me either. I just wish it hadn't eaten your part 4 but at least it gives me something to look forward to reading when it's released.
It's the reason educational standards in the U.S. have tobogganned downwards on every international list. Even some third world countries do better than Republican-governed states, mainly because those countries value genuine education over ignorance and myth.
That's one of many catastrophes visited on the U.S. by Buckley's arrogant and selfish decision to manipulate reality; one of the slippery slopes to which you referred. And it includes such calamities as replacing science with denial in order to advantage greedy corporatists; replacing genuine economics with creative accounting to advantage plutocrats; replacing historical facts with white-[privilege]-washed fantasies, and on and on.
It provided fertile ground -- fertilized with plenty of bullshit -- for know-nothingism to germinate and thrive.
This modern anti-enlightenment has a staggering resemblance to the Middle Ages. Religious law coexisting (and sometimes superseding) civil law; dogmatic brainwashing in place of education resulting in widespread ignorance, society's leaders emanating from the wealthy elite and religious authorities; chronic wealth inequality; demonizing of the poor.
To hold the whole scam together, words have been weaponized and definitions changed. "Facts" to the average reality-challenged Republican thinker means anything that supports their personal view; "proof" is any source they read that supports their personal view and "racism" becomes a label applied to those with the bad taste to point out the gaping social and economic inequities between peoples of different skin colors.
The Republican plutocratic big picture is a whole new world alright and there's nothing good or honest about it.
Paula [49]
I just wrote a response to you which has also been eaten. Must be GOP gremlins in the system. :-))
... or something. :)
everything i wrote in [34] was supported by factual evidence.
No, everything you wrote was an opinion based on your biased assessments of the incidents in question..
" trayvon martin was a teen, hormonal and impulsive."
That's an opinion unsupported by any facts.. There are facts that disprove this as well..
"it was a wannabe"
That is also an opinion unsupported by any facts. There are facts that disprove this opinion as well..
" cop got scared"
That is also an opinion unsupported by any facts. There are facts that disprove this opinion as well..
There are many more examples..
Having said that, you DO have some facts in there..
"non-LEO" and "that's missouri (MO), not michigan (MI)." etc etc...
But the overall comment is nothing but opinion based on bias...
now it's possible that you're right, and none of those three events was motivated by racism.
It's POSSIBLE???
Obama's DOJ went thru each incident with a fine-tooth comb and HUNDREDS of investigators..
Obama's DOJ was very VERY motivated to find even a HINT of racism..
They couldn't fine ANYTHING at all...
Saying I am possibly right about that smacks of sour grapes, my friend..
If there was even a SMIDGEN of racism, it would have been found..
There wasn't..
None of these incidents were motivated by racism.
This is FACT supported by overwhelming facts...
however, the overall pattern in our nation is unequivocal; qualitative and quantitative sources of data line up, and no counterclaims have arisen that stand up to even casual scrutiny, much less scientific rigor.
As is the case of Global Warming, that's because no other claims are even entertained or considered...
The Left Wingery's obsession with finding racism where none exists is proof of that..
ANY facts that PROVE racism is not a factor is ignored.. Just as you ignore the FACT that there was no racism in Staten Island, in Sanford and in Ferguson..
It HAS to be racism.. Democrats say it, Democrats believe it and that settles it...
you claim to put some stock in evaluating all the facts, but you're pretty deep in denial about the proven fact that racism in the US is real.
Once again, just like NeilM, you change the argument...
I have NEVER, EVER once said that racism doesn't exist in the US..
Not once...
Michale
The Left Wingery's obsession with finding racism where none exists is proof of that..
I mean, think about it Joshua..
The Hysterical Left Wingery is finding RACISM in the BASTION of Liberal/Progressive utopias..
Our nation's universities...
How utterly WHACKED is it to claim racism and non-diversity in frakin' BERKELEY fer chreest's sake!!??
That's like going to a chinese restaurant and bitching and moaning that there is no chinese food...
It borders on the insane...
If THAT doesn't prove how utterly WHACKED the Left Wingery is over accusing everything and everyone of racism, nothing will..
Michale
@m[58],
you and i both know you're bright enough to look this stuff up. ok, [facts]
teen, hormonal, impulsive: trayvon martin was less than a month over seventeen. mountains of anatomical evidence exist to prove conclusively that teens have unstable hormonal levels and impulsive behavior owing to incomplete brain development. (michael brown was 18 - while technically an adult, still a few years from biological maturity.)
zimmerman wannabe police officer: applied to be a police officer in virginia, took courses in criminal justice, led his neighborhood watch, followed suspects carrying a firearm, even when police asked him not to, phoned the police 46 times in 14 months. definition of wannabe - a person who tries to be like someone else or to fit in with a particular group of people.
cop got scared: according to the police officer's attorney's main argument and the officer's own testimony in front of the grand jury in the brown case, he was scared. if his statement is untrue, then it follows logically that the officer was lying about being scared. michael brown's attorney argued that was the case - unsuccessfully.[/facts]
Saying I am possibly right about that smacks of sour grapes, my friend..
If there was even a SMIDGEN of racism, it would have been found..
saying it's possible that you're right is giving you a lot more credit than you've earned on this issue.
[fact] the DOJ's statement in the martin case was, "a comprehensive investigation found that the high standard for a federal hate crime prosecution cannot be met." [/fact]
that doesn't necessarily mean they did not find a smidgen of racism, and kind-of implies that they did. officer wilson, on the other hand, i do believe. the racism i believe to be evident in that case is less about the incident itself than the handling of the situation after the fact. same with eric garner's death - it's about a fundamental lack of a functional relationship between law enforcement and the community they serve.
JL
teen, hormonal, impulsive:
Lots of teens are hormonal and impulsive.. Very VERY few try to brutally murder someone...
Martin was a thug, pure and simple.. Anything else is simply trying to excuse that thuggish behavior..
zimmerman wannabe police officer:
So, applying for a cop job means someone is a 'wannabe'?? Not even close.
Zimmerman was offered a PSA position whereas he would have a real police uniform, a shiny badge and a marked patrol unit complete with lights and sirens..
Zimmerman turned it down...
That is not the mark of a "wannabe"...
Now, if you are saying that Zimmerman wanted to be a police officer at one time, then you would be factually accurate.. But at the time of the incident, Zimmerman was pursuing a legal profession with the goal of attaining a judgeship..
These are the facts..
saying it's possible that you're right is giving you a lot more credit than you've earned on this issue.
Let me put it another way..
Saying that I might possibly be right that there was no racism in these incidents is like me saying that you MIGHT be right that Obama wasn't born in Zimbabwe...
:D
The facts CLEARLY PROVE beyond ANY doubt that Obama was NOT born in Zimbabwe...
Just as the facts CLEARLY PROVE that there was no racial motivation on the part of Zimmerman, Wilson or Pantaleo...
The ONLY fact you have on your side is that Martin, Brown and Garner was black..
I realize that, for the vast majority of the Left Wingery, that is all that is needed...
But, fortunately, the rule of law doesn't acquiesce to partisan fantasy..
that doesn't necessarily mean they did not find a smidgen of racism, and kind-of implies that they did.
Then where is it? Point out the racism they did find as it pertains to this specific incident..
Get it out in the open so we can examine it and see if it passes the smell test..
it's about a fundamental lack of a functional relationship between law enforcement and the community they serve.
OK, now we're getting somewhere..
I can get on board with this..
NOW... Do you agree that the community shares SOME of the blame for this lack of functional relationship??
Michale
The facts CLEARLY PROVE beyond ANY doubt that Obama was NOT born in Zimbabwe...
He was born in KENYA.. Everyone knows that! :D heh
Michale
The ONLY fact you have on your side is that Martin, Brown and Garner was black..
and, y'know, also the fact that they're all dead.
to be honest, these three cases demonstrate more in their contrast to one another than in any similarities.
zimmerman's case seems to me as much about mental illness and gun control as racism. [fact]he was arrested in 2005 for being violent toward a police officer. one of his own relatives accused him of molesting her when she was a child. [/fact] no way should someone with that history be permitted to carry a firearm. you can label trayvon martin with whatever pejorative you like, but [fact] he was a teenager, while zimmerman was an adult[/fact]. in the history of the universe teenagers have always done stupid things like getting into fights, while adults are currently expected to know better and avoid physical confrontations.
Now, if you are saying that Zimmerman wanted to be a police officer at one time, then you would be factually accurate.. But at the time of the incident, Zimmerman was pursuing a legal profession with the goal of attaining a judgeship..
These are the facts..
as if the other facts i presented didn't exist? imagine any random, nameless neighborhood watch person. said person regularly follows people he thinks are suspects while carrying a firearm, even when police ask him not to, phones 911 46 times in 14 months at a place with a relatively low crime rate. that's more than "wannabe cop" it's venturing into the realm of "thinks he already is a cop." if zimmerman had carried a badge or flashing lights of some sort, that might have been an indication to martin that he had the right to behave that way, rather than being some random guy following him.
garner's case is less clear-cut because at least pantaleo was an actual police officer, conducting an actual arrest that was lawful. however there's video evidence that garner felt discriminated against, and evidence in pantaleo's service file that he had previously engaged in non-sanctioned procedures with black suspects. [fact] the department was sued twice, settled twice, and all charges against the suspects were dropped [/fact] - presumably for lack of due process. this case i can see from both sides, because no matter what garner felt, he should know better than to refuse instructions from police. like the other two cases, he should have gone along with the arrest, then filed his lawsuit later.
the michael brown case, in contrast to the other two cases, is one where the police officer had no history of inappropriate force, was clearly in the right when the incident began, and any possible overreaction on his part could be explained by the heat of the moment. but brown's body was left on the street for hours, and no attempt was made to explain the situation to relatives or community members. a racism narrative grew in spite of the facts of the incident, not because of them.
why? not because of a vast left wing conspiracy to find non-existent racism in every corner. precisely because racism now is softer and less extreme, it's also significantly harder to identify and prove, which leaves many people feeling frustrated when its presence is denied.
this is one of the reasons your own definition-3 racism is so difficult for people here to stomach, and most folks here either resort to name-calling or don't even bother trying to engage you on the subject. from the perspective of most folks here, you're talking like an arch-racist.
"there is only one correct answer to the discussion about racism. And that is: There is no racism in American anymore. Except reverse-racism against whites. That sh*t is real. You know, like the rapture?"
~bill maher
NOW... Do you agree that the community shares SOME of the blame for this lack of functional relationship??
yes, in the same way that students share SOME of the blame for a poor relationship with their teachers. it's a 2-way relationship, but it's not an equal relationship. on one side is a group of trained professionals, and on the other is people who need care and attention to build trust with those professionals. while it's unfair to blame the authority for every incident on their watch, the very worst incidents probably could be prevented by a system that allows people to feel safe and able to support the authorities, not like the authorities are out to get them.
JL
There is no racism in America
nanymore.i should grammar check before i borrow quotes
and, y'know, also the fact that they're all dead.
Touche' :D
Michale
and, y'know, also the fact that they're all dead.
But they are all dead SOLELY, COMPLETELY and UNEQUIVOCALLY based on their own actions...
This is also factual...
Michale
But they are all dead SOLELY, COMPLETELY and UNEQUIVOCALLY based on their own actions...
now that's demonstrably false. every conflict has two sides, regardless of who's in the right. i have the least sympathy for zimmerman, who [fact]had a prior history of aggression against both his family and the police, and gave chase when the police asked him not to[/fact]. pantaleo and garner both made poor decisions, and [fact]both had a history of making poor decisions[/fact]. brown was the only death of the three that was mostly of his own doing. racism-3 (third definition of racism) was part of the backdrop in all the cases. the outrage is not so much that the deaths were inspired by hatred or conscious discrimination as by unconscious, unequal treatment.
JL
and gave chase when the police asked him not to
No, that is NOT a fact...
A police DISPATCHER advised Zimmerman he did not have to pursue subject. It was advice that Zimmerman had absolutely NO OBLIGATION or responsibility to follow.
Yet, Zimmerman DID follow the advice, broke off pursuit and headed back towards his vehicle. It was at THAT point that Martin attacked Zimmerman.
THESE are the facts as proven in the trial..
Insofar as these ARE the facts, Martin's actions were identical to Brown's...
racism-3 (third definition of racism) was part of the backdrop in all the cases.
Yea, you keep saying that. Yet there are no FACTS to support that claim..
On the other hand, there was an EXHAUSTIVE investigation by the DOJ that PROVED there was no racism associated with ANY of those incidents..
You claim that there was, but just not enough to prosecute?? Fine..
SHOW ME...
the outrage is not so much that the deaths were inspired by hatred or conscious discrimination as by unconscious, unequal treatment.
Ahhhh.. So it was a THOUGHT crime...
Why didn't ya say so!!?? :^/
So, now we're persecuting people for thought crimes???
Michale
the outrage is not so much that the deaths were inspired by hatred or conscious discrimination as by unconscious, unequal treatment.
Do you have ANY evidence to support the claim that the specific incident would have turned out any different if Zimmerman/Wilson/Pantaleo had been black and Martin/Brown/Garner would have been white??
Any evidence at all??
No, you don't...
That's the whole problem with your position.. It's based on NOTHING but ideology...
Not a relevant fact to be found..
The fact that Martin was a teen or hormonal is not relevant to the incident.
The fact that Wilson may or may not have been "scared" is not relevant to the incident.
Give me a relevant FACT that I can hold in my hand and examine....
Until you can do that, you just have a position based solely on ideology and partisan biased statistics..
Is there racism in America?? Of course there is..
Is there racism amongst some police officers?? Of course there is...
Is there a grand nationwide conspiracy amongst white Americans to keep the black man down??? Yes there is... But THAT comes exclusively from the Democrat Party...
Was racism involved in ANY of the incidents in Sanford, FL, Staten Island, NY or Ferguson MO???
No there was not...
No matter HOW you try and spin it and cheery pick your facts, this is the one undeniable fact..
Michale
The idea that there was racism on the part of Zimmerman is easy to disprove..
At the time of the initial contact and in the immediate aftermath. Zimmerman didn't even KNOW that Martin was black. It was only after Martin attacked Zimmerman did Zimmerman realize that the subject was black...
On the other hand, it's clear that racism from Martin was first and foremost... This is documented fact..
So, yes.. Racism was a factor in the Martin shooting. But it was Martin that was the racist, not Zimmerman...
Michale
Was racism involved in ANY of the incidents in Sanford, FL, Staten Island, NY or Ferguson MO???
it depends on how racism is defined. since i know you only accept those definitions of racism that you agree with, i don't expect you to accept that racism was present. but you're not the sole arbiter of how terms are defined. ironic that you refer to it as a "thought crime" - racism-3 is not only NOT a crime of thought, but a pattern of learned behavior that is frequently allowed to occur precisely because it is engaged in WITHOUT thought.
JL
it depends on how racism is defined.
Yes.. If someone makes up a definition to fit a specific incident then, yes.. It depends on how racism is defined...
But if one takes the dictionary definition of racism, the commonly accepted definition of racism and not a partisan and biased definition twisted to fit a specific ideology, then there was NO racism in those incidents..
- racism-3 is not only NOT a crime of thought, but a pattern of learned behavior that is frequently allowed to occur precisely because it is engaged in WITHOUT thought.
And completely UNPROVABLE except in the metaphysical sense where one has to define what the definition of 'is' is...
Michale
I mean, honestly, Joshua.. Think about it objectively..
Basically, you want to accuse 3 people, two of the LEOs, of a crime with absolutely NO relevant facts to support such an accusation..
You want to apply some meta-physical unconscious thought-based method with a new definition designed and created SOLELY to support a specific ideology.
Is that logical? Is that rational??
OK, OK.. Let's say it is.. Not only is it logical and rational, let's even go so far as to say it's ACCEPTABLE...
Let's further say that you get everything you want.
Zimmerman, Wilson, and Pantaleo are charged with Murder with the Special Circumstance of Racism-based murder, for which the penalty is death..
Based on this newly created definition of racism, Zimmerman, Wilson and Pantaleo are arrested, tried, convicted and put to death...
And the Left Wingery rejoices..
But what if YOU ARE WRONG!??
Isn't it more logical and rational to have accepted FACTS to go on, rather than a nebulous definition solely created to fit the circumstance??
Michale
The definition isn't nebulous, and the circumstance it describes is real, tangible, provable and requires all sorts of mental gymnastics for you to deny. Further, it's only one of many factors in each case, and much more evident in group behavior than the actions of any one individual. It's like when a kid gets bullied, there isn't always a single person you can point to and say that's the bully. Social exclusion is no less real for being tougher to pin on one person. In the case of Brown/Wilson it was more about treatment of the body and the community after the fact, not the incident itself.
Mopshell (56): Thanks for trying!
The definition isn't nebulous, and the circumstance it describes is real, tangible, provable and requires all sorts of mental gymnastics for you to deny.
Not at all...
All I have to do is ask you to point to me that definition as accepted in ANY place but some Left Wingery rag...
In the case of Brown/Wilson it was more about treatment of the body and the community after the fact, not the incident itself.
On THIS I completely agree with you..
The community after Brown, Garner and Martin was NOTHING BUT racist...
Michale
Basically what you are saying Joshua, is that a white person that assaults a black person BECAUSE they are a black person is racist..
But a black person that assaults a white person BECAUSE they are a white person is NOT being racist because black people simply CANNOT be racist..
What a strange and fanciful world you live in...
But it sure ain't reality...
To be fair, I completely agree that there are black people who subscribe to that bullshit..
It allows them to be utterly and completely racist without any of the responsibility or consequences of BEING racist...
Yea, a really strange world..
Michale
anyone can be racist in the sense of hating others or believing that race imparts genetic superiority, but racism in the sense of having a system of privilege only exists in one direction. discrimination by a person with less privilege against a person with more privilege may not be fair or nice, but doesn't qualify as racist because it lacks the component of power.
discrimination by a person with less privilege against a person with more privilege may not be fair or nice, but doesn't qualify as racist because it lacks the component of power.
All right... All right....
So, if some trailer-park white trash attacks Judge Clarence Thomas because Thomas is black, then it's NOT racism because said white trash has no power and said black Clarence Thomas has all the power...
You see, that's the problem when definitions are made up to fit specific ideologies..
You switch things around and the definition still "works" even when it's glaringly obvious that there is absolutely NO VALIDITY to the definition whatsoever...
Basically, what you want to do is create an entire new form of "racism" to fit the Black Lives Matter racist ideology..
Good luck with that. When it becomes as accepted and mainstream as the REAL and ACCEPTED definition of racism, then you will have a point..
But not until then...
Michale
Good luck with that. When it becomes as accepted and mainstream as the REAL and ACCEPTED definition of racism, then you will have a point..
But IF that definition becomes the standard, this country will be a cesspool of Political Correctness with the solidness of Fluidic Space..
And you can count me out...
Michale
Basically, what you want to do is create an entire new form of "racism" to fit the Black Lives Matter racist ideology..
Or, more accurately, the Left Wingery wants a specific definition of racism to apply to white people and a DIFFERENT definition of racism to apply to black people...
In short, one standard for white people, one standard for black people...
Hmmmmmm I dunno... sounds kind of.. yunno... racist.....
Michale
michale, i have no idea why you're stuck on the idea that racism must be proven on an individual basis in order for it to exist. as soon as one black person becomes rich, he or she ceases to experience social exclusion? As soon as a white person becomes poor, he or she ceases to experience an advantage?
in spite of the existence of rich black people and poor white people, there is still collective power exercised simply by being white, and collective disadvantage that is experienced simply by being black. those are proven, and have been part and parcel of racism for as long as the word has been used. you can't create an equal standard when there's no de facto equality to begin with.
JL
michale, i have no idea why you're stuck on the idea that racism must be proven on an individual basis in order for it to exist.
"There you go again...."
-Ronald Reagan...
NO ONE is denying that racism exists..
NO....
ONE....
But if you are going to say that an incident is based on racism, then I would THINK you would want to...um... yunno... FACTS to support the claim.. Not some metaphysical, make up on the spot definition that didn't exist the day before...
in spite of the existence of rich black people and poor white people, there is still collective power exercised simply by being white, and collective disadvantage that is experienced simply by being black.
Yea.. That's yer claim...
PROVE IT...
Give me some real tangible FACTS that have absolutely NO OTHER interpretation and then we can talk...
those are proven, and have been part and parcel of racism for as long as the word has been used.
Yea???
Then give me some documentation that proves that, that is mainstream and that is more than 50 years old...
You can't because this new definition is nothing more than a weak justification for racism on the part of black people who would rather destroy black people's businesses and black people's lives than take a look in the mirror and admit that it is THEIR actions that are a bigger part of this problem...
Michale
Is it white people's fault that over 96% of black deaths are caused by other blacks??
Michale
If you say yes, then I know this conversation is beyond all hope of sanity...
Michale
The College Where Martin Luther King Is Problematic
Students at the University of Oregon debate whether the civil-rights icon was inclusive enough in his speeches.
Welcome to American colleges in 2016.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/02/the-college-where-martin-luther-king-is-problematic.html
If THAT doesn't prove to you how utterly and contemptibly moronic the Left Wingery is these days..
NOTHING will...
Michale
emanuel lusca at anthropology.net discusses race as a social construct. lusca says,
"Race, although it does not exist in the world in any ontologically objective way, it still is real in society (as opposed to nature). Race is a social construction that has real consequences and effects. These effects, consequences and the notion that race is ontologically subjective is epistemologically objective. "
in other words, you're demanding proof on a level where it can never possibly exist. very convenient for you, but inconvenient for anyone who has ever experienced the consequences of racism. it's socially determined, and if you don't like how society decides the parameters of racism, feel free to choose a new society, because you'll find no takers here in the united states.
Joshua,
I don't know how many times I can say it until you will understand..
NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT RACISM DOES NOT EXIST...
and if you don't like how society decides the parameters of racism,
But society is not defining racism in that way..
Only racist black people are defining racism that way..
Michale
rac·ism
?r??siz?m/Submit
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
With the exception of Left Wing Politically Correct Battiness Black Power publications, you will not find any other definition of racism beyond what is posted above..
Michale
UConn building 'black-only' living space to promote scholarship
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/02/uconn-building-black-only-living-space-to-promote-scholarship.html
Oh yea...
The Democrats are, once again, supporting and promoting segregation...
The more things change, the more they stay the same...
Michale
But society is not defining racism in that way..
Only racist black people are defining racism that way..
so... you're saying black people are all racist and aren't part of society?
institutional racism - "racial discrimination that has become established as normal behaviour within a society or organization"
~oxford english dictionary
white privilege: (noun) “[T]he benefits people receive simply by being part of the dominant group”
~sociologydictionary.org
Andy Dufresne: How can you be so obtuse?
Warden Samuel Norton: What? What did you call me?
Andy Dufresne: Obtuse. Is it deliberate?
~the shawshank redemption
so... you're saying black people are all racist
No, I am saying that any black people who subscribe to the racist definition that allows them to be racist with impunity and without consequences...
Yea.. those people are racist...
and aren't part of society?
Roof was part of society..
He was also a racist..
Once is not exclusive of the other..
~the shawshank redemption
Never saw it...
Michale
~the shawshank redemption
Never saw it...
now that's criminal.
heh :D
Michale
What can I say...
I am culturally depraved...
er... I mean deprived.. :D
Michale
There's talk about bringing back the Black Oscars
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-black-oscars-20160204-story.html
Many MANY black artists have won Oscars..
Ask yourself one question, JL...
How many white artists have won a BET award??
So, who are the racists???
Michale
How many white artists have won a BET award??
in 2015, 4 were nominated, as opposed to two people of color who were nominated for oscars.
So, who are the racists???
on this particular topic? um, that would be you.
in 2015, 4 were nominated, as opposed to two people of color who were nominated for oscars.
So, in other words, not a SINGLE white person has ever won a BET award..
How racist...
How many white people have ever won an NAACP Entertainment Award??? 0
How racist...
You see how it works both ways??
A white group celebrating white achievement is racist..
A black group celebrating black achievement is not...
Are you truly blinded by the blatant double standard??
on this particular topic? um, that would be you.
In what way?? The only "reason" I am "racist" is that I am completely color blind...
You, on the other hand, support segregation.. Blacks with their own black-only awards show..
Michale
So, in other words, not a SINGLE white person has ever won a BET award..
incorrect. of the four white nominees last year, one of them won the award. as i recall, he's far from the first. you obviously didn't check your facts on this.
How many white people have ever won an NAACP Entertainment Award???
quite a few. just off the top of my head, angelina jolie, sandra bullock and justin timberlake. how many facts is it going to take before you admit you're dead wrong about this?
In what way??
because you assumed facts based on race that were untrue.
grr. close italics. close italics. but yeah. even by your own limited and fungible definition of racism, you've been quite racist on this.