blackjack21 wrote:That's a fairly big leap in logic there. Most people did not own slaves.
Yes they did, they also had Irish slaves (which were consider more numerous and were treated worse than Blacks were) as the white racists would say. I guess they don't count racist. What do you consider most? Most people did not want trump, but I guess democracy doesn't matter.
You have a Marxist understanding of the 3/5ths Compromise.
Saying ad Hominon isn't an argument and I'm not a marxist.
The proponents of treating blacks as 3/5ths of a person for the purposes of census were abolitionists; that is, they were anti-slavery and didn't want slave states to have representation for people who weren't allowed to vote.
That's irrelevant to the neo-confederates like Roy Moore, who is illiterate to history. His beliefs and most racists beliefs today consider Blacks as second class citizens and so use 3/5 as an insult. Regardless of the context, which in your attempt to slander abolitionist movement(your cypto-racism again) by derailing the topic in order to gaslight me; White supremacists and confederates use it as an insult to Blacks.
They were for not counting black slaves at all, but had to settle for treating them as 3/5ths of a person. You should educate yourself on this issue so you don't sound like an idiot.
Except you're trying to use a history lesson in attempt to fool me. Again another one of your gaslighting tactics is derail the discussion. You did it the las vegas shooter, you did it with some rant about Ted Turner and his marriage which has no relevance; now you're doing it with this. I know full well of the 3/5 and you know damn well of the context of what I say. The same context as anti-racism=anti-white or white supremacist republicans trying to sway Blacks to vote against their own interest by saying "democratic" plantation. I also wonder were Irish slaves consider 1/5 due to them being treated "worse"?
Also considering the anti-voting policies against Blacks by republicans, it wouldn't surprise me to see Blacks being consider 3/5 in order to make their vote count less.
The Fourteenth Amendment has nothing to do with slavery.
It has everything to do with slavery "The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws and was proposed in response to issues related to
former slaves following the American Civil War.".
And it's a Reconstruction Amendment relating to Slaves, this was necessary to incorporate Blacks and "Irish" slaves as full fled citizens with equal rights.
It has to do with citizenship, the status of a person, and the incorporation of the bill of rights into corporate persons. That is why corporations have the same free speech rights as natural persons, and can contribute unlimited amounts of money to political causes. The 14th Amendment is severely abused by SCOTUS.
Which you support, on basis of free association. All republicans control by corporations support this basis of free association. What's the issue, if Citizens United which trump took hired the CEO as deputy campaign manager and trump supported the case from 2010; I can't see why anyone can't. I'm against it but, by logic a Black Supremacist organization can support Black causes and whites on their racist causes.
The purpose of many laws, rape for example, had nothing to do with how women felt about anything.
False, there's plenty of consent and no means no laws, now you're just in the different reality.
They had a purpose that has nothing to do with modern conceptions of anything.Treating women and men as absolute equals is a horrible travesty of the obsessive-compulsive fascination with the notion of equality.
So you're supporting a Saudi style society for women. It doesn't matter about your feelings, what matters is they have the same equal rights as men. But the fact that you'll deny and do some socialist tactic of force against women rights. You're no better than the feminazis in fact you only embolden their point that we white men are evil and oppressive by nature. I can see why white women are leaving us.
There isn't universal suffrage for white males. If you are a felon, under a certain age, or not a citizen, you cannot vote.
Another one of the party of Black people laws. Straw manning tactics, is also another one of your gaslighting. That had literally nothing to do with what I said. It made just as sense as saying " Not anyone can drink alcohol, if you're a certain religion have health issues or pregnant you can not drink.
And your wrong in all accounts in the next sentence. Maine and Vermont,
both overwhelmingly white, are the only two states without any felon voting restrictions; even inmates can vote. Surely no racism there.
Felon voting rights are only restored through a governor’s executive action or a court order. Similar rules apply in Alabama, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi and Virginia.
Felons can vote in Alabama
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/1 ... e_pus.htmlBut notice the correlation between Black heavy areas and voting rights: These state prohibitions disproportionately affect African-Americans, particularly black men: one of every 13 African-Americans of voting age — more than 7 percent nationally — is disenfranchised, according to Sentencing Project’s analysis. In some of the strictest states, more than 20 percent of the African American population is disenfranchised, the report found.
As for the illegal age right wing/Russian memes on the media told 17 year olds to vote:http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/midwest/ct-illegal-voting-wisconsin-20170313-story.html
This is the attempt by Alt-right trolls to commit voter fraud and blame the democrats for it.
I think we should extend that to if you are incapable of logic, literacy, or paying a minimum poll tax, you should not be able to vote either.
You would want that, no republican will ever be elected again if we gone by your rules.
Here it is white people being our own enemies. Even if you take away all the Blacks(since you think they stupid) The smartest people will vote Blue.
ISIS does not believe in a Republican form of government, property rights, or due process of law.
Reagan and America believe so....
And considering you and republican whites neither believe it, your argument is mute...
He signed it into law. He could have vetoed it.
And would have been override, so mute point.
So he was for it, and that is relevant.
It's call compromised.
You seem to think that there are material differences between the Democrat and Republican establishments on matters like this, and there isn't.
I don't for obvious reasons, but for those who prefer american style freedom and government, you can't be more wrong.
https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/commen ... p/dornc4n/Now read the comments, and you and I know that's bullshit.
It's good to see you supporting president Trump.
It's good to see you support white genocide:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/more-than- ... mp-states/ The difference between Trump and Obama here is that Trump got it done, and Obama didn't.
He got nothing done, did you not see what I say?
I've said that blacks, as a group, have a higher violent crime rate than whites.
You said Blacks are naturally violent. Now show me you saying EXACTLY that.
That is true. I never said all blacks are violent, as that would not be true at all.
There also less likely to commit hate crimes against us, compare to us.
If white people in the US lost their jobs to Chinese laborers, it doesn't stand to reason that they had all their goods and services furnished by blacks in the past or that they would have them furnished by blacks in the future.
Except you're wrong 13th states end of slavery except under criminals, therefore goods and services have been and continue to be furnished by Blacks.
I can be for nationalism and subordinate capitalism to the interests of the state.
Fascism, but we all know you deny it.
Being a capitalist doesn't mean that I have no country or any other interests.
There's a reason white pride world wide exist.
In that sense, I'm no more a capitalist than a communist. Capitalism, without a state to enforce contracts and defend property rights, is meaningless. Consequently, capitalism must be subordinate to the rule of law.
Except the state will due none of that in the interest of corporate monopoly
Schumer isn't simply in the tank for the middle and working classes. He's the senior senator from New York. He represents Wall Street.
And trump isn't?
Protesters occupy Sen. Chuck Schumer’s office, blast Wall Street tiesProves nothing BLM also occupy Sanders presidential run, and he allow them to speak. Unlike the "least racist" president.
Well, if Jeb Bush wanted to commit political suicide, that was his choice.
I guess Reagan should have also committed political suicide with his ammesty.
Trump didn't make Bush do that to himself anymore than Trump made Hillary call half the country deplorable.
Trump had a moral choice to not be an asshole and he failed. Hillary was right half trump supporters didn't want a woman as president that's why alt-right wanted to abolish women from voting with the twitter trend #abolishthe19th.
Donald Trump likes minorities.
He likes them the same way Hilary did in the 90s. So not much, also he had Haitians had aids and Nigerians live in huts. Now you would defend his racist statements, yet you consider Obama racist towards cops. I remember lurking in the summer you tried to find some bullshit against Obama towards Tewodros III and one of them was some drunk ad from 2007. The time when Republicans funded it and had a president. That's some cuckold there.
Also I would say he's benefiting Blacks alright:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/age ... rs-n758211I don't completely disagree with you here.
My point is that it is minorities today who are campaigning for racial segregation.
See now you're projecting and replacing whites who did self- segregate(white flight, schooling etc) to Blacks who actually supported integration.
Why do you lie? Can you at least admit you want dead Blacks?
I'm not assuming that she stole anything. I'm saying that she did not bring any case of age discrimination or sexual harassment before she was fired for stealing.
How would you know, did you study the case and not just some tabloid that doesn't disclose the case.
I'm not gay.
That's irrelevant and homophobic. Gay people can do women and straight people do males. You just disregard women the same way a Muslim disregard Christian.
Except for the Vanilla Ice types like Eminem, who among white men make songs constantly denigrating women?
But you support republicans and trump who constantly denigrate women by both words and deeds. So set the standard to yourself.
It's pretty common in rap culture.
And our culture considering whites buy rap music mostly.
Kanye West and Donald Trump are friends.
The same way a slave are friends to his slave owner. Set the democrat standard towards republicans.
I can see why Obama invited him to the White House.
He knew the bullshit and trump act well.
You are missing the point. Women and men are different.
The same way Slav different from Irish.
Do you think Melania would be with Trump if he weren't a billionaire?
Do you think she was with trump because of money. Then again she was trophy wife, she would take anyone. She came from country destroyed by the west, so I can't blame her. Plus she doesn't look like the gold digger type, she has money and yet unhappy with the marriage. She even liked a tweet about separating herself:
https://nypost.com/2017/05/02/melanias- ... nd-donald/Besides she has a son, the baggage alone would kill her. But I can say the male equivalent would only be with women for sex and money. They called players or gigglos. They even go out to pretend to be something they're not like Kevin Federline taking Brittney Spears money from the divorce. It goes both ways, yet you believe only women does it more.
Darwinian sexual selection prevails, not Marxist horseshit.
Ad Hominon attacks in nod of "cultural marxism" bullshit. Everything you hate could be consider Marxist, the same way a white man consider a Black man being successful and not white worshiping, a racist.
She also said you have to have a public position and a private position. We know from WikiLeaks what she says to Goldman Sachs, but won't say to the general public.
And we know what trump says to Goldman Sachs, FCC and wall street. At least with Goldman Sachs, I assume from wikileaks(Putin arm) that she supporters Net Neutrally.
I don't defend white supremacy, because I think the notion is absurd.
You defended Neo-Nazis.
A Jewish mayor who doesn't like neo-Nazis (who are notorious for their antipathy for Jews) decided to work with political actors to stoke opposition to the peaceful assembly of neo-Nazis.
Well considering cops wanted to oppose Blacks right to bear arms:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... ments.htmlAnd considering the only time a republican wanted gun control was to take Black guns away:
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/ex- ... ns-7744886Considering the party of Lincoln try to stop Blacks who bought property from tearing down two democrat statues in Tennessee:
http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/po ... 973168001/ And consider all the opposition to BLM by republicans to the point they can't even allowed to get permits to peaceful protest; I say what you said: "What comes around goes around." But at least the Mayor gave the killers permits who kindly came to Jewish temples and harass them which is illegal. So I say the Mayor was in legal right to do what he did.
He got one assembly that ended in Antifa/BLM types getting arrested while the neo-Nazis remained peaceful.
Considering they had permits and didn't commit violence unless attacked. Also Neo-Nazis killed a person and shot at people. You know this but you're a white supremacist.
So they went for a second bite of the apple and got the protesters to be more violent and the police to stand down.
No, Neo-Nazis are in nature violent, they wanted to kill all Blacks and minorities. Their goal was to plan violence, how many BLM/Lefties had guns?
They ended up getting someone killed, because of their horrible ethics.
No the Neo-Nazis killed a woman, and planned it. You're doing the socialist tactic of blame others for your own responsibility.
They weren't attacked.
They shoot at a Black person while the cops w
They didn't have a permit to confront the neo-Nazis, but they did so unlawfully anyway.
Except they did.
Bwahahahaha...
Not an argument.
Trayvon got on top of someone and punched him. That's not a portrait of self defense.
James Fields came to Virginia to kill a woman and neo-nazis threaten the mom and her funeral to the point she has to bury her daughter in undisclosed location. That's not a portrait of peaceful.
I didn't call Leann Tweeden a gold digger.
You imply she did it for money or assuming she was sexual deviant.
She didn't sue Franken at all. She just pointed out that Franken was a hypocrite.
Which most trump voters like you are.
As far as I know, Franken hasn't been sued for sexual harassment.
But trump has.
So do you presume the black men in question are innocent until proven guilty?
As any man who follows the law. Unlike you who won't condemn an illegal act.
Should they be suspended from their jobs without pay just because someone accused them?
I can't decide corporate discussions.
Is that your idea of "fairness"?
Repeat earlier.
Lee Boyd Malvo wasn't diagnosed before killing those people.
Well because he wasn't admitted to a doctor before the killings, doesn't make doctor word any less credible.
He plead not guilty by reason of insanity.
Which is true.
I didn't say that the man in the Charlottesville case wasn't guilty of any criminal act.
He's charged first degree.
I'm pointing out that his state of mind remains in question.
He drove all the way out of state to kill, his mind is clear. Premeditated.
We haven't heard the case against him yet.
We have:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/201 ... 954321001/We did hear the case against Lee Boyd Malvo.
Right, judge ruled out life
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow ... story.htmlBLM wants dead cops. They chant this at protests.
Cops want dead Blacks. Actually have Black pics as target practice. I can see BLM argument. Cops kill more whites and Neo-Nazis actually joined the police which in turn killed by Neo-Nazis
The gal that died in Charlottesville was white.
Neo-Nazis killed more whites.
It doesn't constitute harassment either.
It does if the women don't consent.
Most of the LGBTQ crowd votes Democrat, not Republican. Currently, Nancy Pelosi is trying to prevent the releases of which members of Congress settled sexual harassment claims at taxpayers expense, because they are overwhelmingly Democrats.
Well considering the right and you support sexual harassment with your vote you're in no position.
For insisting on a presumption of innocence? We shall see...
Yea, like you on James Fields except I'm not a racist.
That's correct. They generally don't refuse anyone.
Again, I'm not a Nazi.
I never said it, I said you supported them.
The NSDAP were working class socialists
.
They're about as socialists as Republicans are Black people party.
I'm an upper middle class capitalist with nationalist sentiments.
Racist sentiments and most likely a parasite.
Heather Heyer was white.
The cops Neo-nazis killed were white, ironic.
Radical Muslims want to kill non-Muslims and tolerant Muslims.
Evangelicals want to kill non-whites and tolerant Christians.
I have no problem with this sort of thing, because my views aren't predicated on non maleficence to another person's feelings.
Well it's not by my feelings, it's what God will send you to when you die.
However, why don't you quote what I said?
Repeat.
Anyway, getting back to the topic at hand, it seems as if the #metoo movement is dying out a bit, as it is taking down a lot more liberals than conservatives.
No it's taking down more conservatives than liberals. See I can say a statement.
I wonder if the media is trying to put the genie back in the bottle.
No trump is willingly to work with liberals to stop it, considering he worked with hollywood.