The fact of the matter is that I do disregard what a lot of leftwards have to say on the subject. They have proven to be unreliable and I have responded accordingly. It would, however, be the height of intellectual laziness to simultaneously outsource all of my judgment on racial issues to them and then reject their opinions. If you don’t have your own opinions on what constitutes racism, that’s on you. If you don’t have a center of racial equality that involves not telling people of color who annoy to you go back to where they came from, you’re saying more about yourself than you are about them.
But Trumpism will more or less die with Trump and whether that happens in 2020 or 2024 matters little in the big picture. The fight is, currently, between Trump and The Squad and given that I already know Trumpism has an end date, the question is whether I support The Squad being the ones who supplant him or Door #3. But that doesn’t mean the threat posed by the two behaviors are the same, and the fact is if you can’t even articulate what the threat is, well, you should expect people to be very skeptical of it.
The Courts have just said that ‘People who actively wish to overthrow the government should not be allowed to work for it’ meets whatever constitutional threshold is required to slightly restrict those rights. The US government cannot fire members of the communist party simply because they are members of the communist party. It can fire them if it proves they share the illegal intent of the communist party, specifically, the intent to overthrow of the United States government. So we outlawed communism, without a single vote of Democrat opposition in either house, and over the opposition of J Edgar Hoover. Contrary to what you may have been told, it is still US law, starting at 50 U.S.C. § 841 to § 844, under chapter 23, Internal Security, part IV, Communist Control.
If crying eyes motivate you then we can dig up a picture of a dying 3 year old with his parents begging for money. Bigger problem is if you cherry pick one person who had a bad result on a really bad day, then you can paint any story you want. It doesn’t mean you love the incumbent, it just means whatever he’s doing isn’t of sufficient harm to you that ousting him becomes a top priority. I can’t remember a time when so many members of a party went to such incredible lengths to denounce it while at the same time voting for it straight ticket.
If that’s a failing of democracy, so be it, but we are not obliged to try to excuse away what it means to support Trump. Nobody really cares about the deficit, it was always a fraud and not a worry. I put a value of “zero” on Twitter in general and Trump’s feed specifically. Trump’s performance has been far from perfect from that point of view so there’s vast room for improvement… but that assumes the Dems care. CJ – you have to work on that reading every word thing – pretend it’s billing for a wealthy client and you want to get all that sweet divorce money ….
Or if something is racist, should that matter more than . Each and every one of them has a different interpretation of what constitutes racism, how important it is, what should be done, etc. Pillsey and I come from a very similar background and yet we have rather intensely different ideas on all of this. Well, I think there are different modes by which a thing can be bad. Standing alone, an individual racist act seems fairly minor.
You can also check out my article Colombian Girl Names. So you took a shoe company and named it different. Every single name on this list is terrible.
Well we’ve had lots and lots of holier than thou groups in the past. The woke left don’t seem much different than the others except for the specific beliefs of course. Of course every bit of racist shite that comes out of trumps, or one of his followers mouths, will be defended and the woke left and the targeted POC’s will be blamed. There will be no actual racism or if there is it doesn’t matter because…blah divorce attorney hattiesburg ms blah blah…the woke left. @Sam Wilkerson is both correct and not in as much as those who supported Trump did so willingly, and were and are prepared to embrace him because he ticks a box for them that no other politicians ticks. Where Sam’s analysis fails (and Mike hints at this but isn’t bold enough to embrace it yet) is that Democrats COULD do something about those boxes if they took a different path.