All Things POLITICS 3.0

[BBALLER4FR]

Robert Byrd is in bounds as he was associated to Hillary Clinton. His "repentance" came up because her supporters saw no way to rebut it and resorted to the "he said my bad" logic. If Presidential candidates and their ties to the KKK is on the docket, then Byrd/Hillary is fair game.

[Jeffrey]

Having an opinion on Byrd's past is not what was happening though.

Somehow it became Byrd = Hitler and thus Clinton's campaign is just as racist as Trump's which is absurd. I was very patient in trying to deconstruct such illogic and dealing with that kind of specious reasoning really has nothing to do with each person's personal feelings about Byrd or the Klan or Hitler. Challenging the logic of throwing them all into a blender and preaching vacuous moral relativism is not the same thing as denying anybody's personal feelings which no one has done.

Perhaps it was a bit of an extreme argument but if we're arguing degrees of racism when it comes to presidential candidates then we're all in trouble. What I got from the argument was basically how much racism is acceptable in one's past and whether or not people can atone for their actions/assosciations.

There are two subjects here.

The campaigns is one. Robert Byrd was another.

Nobody forgave Byrd. He had to atone for his sins and that is on him. So if anybody wants to claim sympathies with the Klan because their Hitler analogies are shot down then that is not my problem.

Ostensibly this thread has been discussing the campaign. If someone wants to discuss Byrd that is swell. Nobody suggested anything is off limits. Then discuss that. But it has nothing to do with how the campaigns are conducting themselves.

So if the topic is how much forgiveness one has for another's past actions, then that is the topic.

But the thread goes off the rails when the discussion is whether or not Trump is running a campaign to court white supremacists and it morphs into Byrd = Hitler + Byrd knew Clinton, therefore criticicism of the Trump campaign is nullified. That's illogical and identifying it as such does not = selective acceptance of racism or genocide.

It is real simple. Is Clinton actively courting white supremacists? I say she is not and Trump is. And Robert Byrd has NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.

Being clear about what the topic actually is seems like a struggle for some.

I don't want to defend him but didn't NAACP honored him for his changed views? Didn't he become a defender of Black Americans after he realize the mistakes he has made?

[Oscirus]

Sorry this is going to be all over the place.

but saying Hilary saying something nice about him when he died makes her a racist is a leap

blaming Hilary for a southern senators Klan affiliation in the 40s is as silly as blaming her for the war on drugs

If we use that argument then we can't really blame Trump for the fact that the KKK supports him or even blame him for refusing to disavow David Duke. This is politics your associations and your words represent you.

but saying Hilary saying something nice about him when he died makes her a racist is a leap I don't accept
just like people who try to pin Bill's policy of tough crime persecution and sentencing on her 20 years later

You're right, his policies aren't on her. But super predator was definitely something that was hers.

Basically, neither side should be calling the other side a bigot given both side's questionable actions.

David Duke remains an avowed racist. Byrd was not. How is that even comparable?

And the Trump rallies are a magnet for white supremacists. Some of them have been allowed to work as volunteers even when sporting openly visible Nazi tattoos. They are stalking reporters at Trump rallies and building dossiers by taking notes and photos of them as they stare them down. People are chanting White Power at Trump rallies. Trump has merged with Breitbart, a known purveyor of hate rhetoric. And this is not even going into the many statements and implicit threats issued by Trump himself.

If you allow all of this to continue to happen then you condone it. This is not randomly assigning guilt by association. This is how the Trump campaign conducts itself.

The Clinton campaign is not even comparable so suggesting criticism of either is unjustified is indefensible.

Let me ask you, if there were people audibly chanting White Power at a Clinton rally do you think she would tacitly overlook that because she wants their votes? I don't think so. She would call them out and deny that as acceptable behavior.

We're still arguing degrees of racism. If you want to say that Trump is way more racist, fine, I agree with you. If you want to argue that he should have more control over his supporters and vet his volunteers better, I agree with that too. But I still stand by the statement that she shouldn't be calling out anybody on their racism given her actions/ statements in the past.

[BKlutch]

Sorry this is going to be all over the place.

but saying Hilary saying something nice about him when he died makes her a racist is a leap

blaming Hilary for a southern senators Klan affiliation in the 40s is as silly as blaming her for the war on drugs

If we use that argument then we can't really blame Trump for the fact that the KKK supports him or even blame him for refusing to disavow David Duke. This is politics your associations and your words represent you.

but saying Hilary saying something nice about him when he died makes her a racist is a leap I don't accept
just like people who try to pin Bill's policy of tough crime persecution and sentencing on her 20 years later

You're right, his policies aren't on her. But super predator was definitely something that was hers.

Basically, neither side should be calling the other side a bigot given both side's questionable actions.

David Duke remains an avowed racist. Byrd was not. How is that even comparable?

And the Trump rallies are a magnet for white supremacists. Some of them have been allowed to work as volunteers even when sporting openly visible Nazi tattoos. They are stalking reporters at Trump rallies and building dossiers by taking notes and photos of them as they stare them down. People are chanting White Power at Trump rallies. Trump has merged with Breitbart, a known purveyor of hate rhetoric. And this is not even going into the many statements and implicit threats issued by Trump himself.

If you allow all of this to continue to happen then you condone it. This is not randomly assigning guilt by association. This is how the Trump campaign conducts itself.

The Clinton campaign is not even comparable so suggesting criticism of either is unjustified is indefensible.

Let me ask you, if there were people audibly chanting White Power at a Clinton rally do you think she would tacitly overlook that because she wants their votes? I don't think so. She would call them out and deny that as acceptable behavior.

This is what I think captures it.

[CJackson]

Sorry this is going to be all over the place.





If we use that argument then we can't really blame Trump for the fact that the KKK supports him or even blame him for refusing to disavow David Duke. This is politics your associations and your words represent you.


You're right, his policies aren't on her. But super predator was definitely something that was hers.

Basically, neither side should be calling the other side a bigot given both side's questionable actions.

David Duke remains an avowed racist. Byrd was not. How is that even comparable?

And the Trump rallies are a magnet for white supremacists. Some of them have been allowed to work as volunteers even when sporting openly visible Nazi tattoos. They are stalking reporters at Trump rallies and building dossiers by taking notes and photos of them as they stare them down. People are chanting White Power at Trump rallies. Trump has merged with Breitbart, a known purveyor of hate rhetoric. And this is not even going into the many statements and implicit threats issued by Trump himself.

If you allow all of this to continue to happen then you condone it. This is not randomly assigning guilt by association. This is how the Trump campaign conducts itself.

The Clinton campaign is not even comparable so suggesting criticism of either is unjustified is indefensible.

Let me ask you, if there were people audibly chanting White Power at a Clinton rally do you think she would tacitly overlook that because she wants their votes? I don't think so. She would call them out and deny that as acceptable behavior.

We're still arguing degrees of racism. If you want to say that Trump is way more racist, fine, I agree with you. If you want to argue that he should have more control over his supporters and vet his volunteers better, I agree with that too. But I still stand by the statement that she shouldn't be calling out anybody on their racism given her actions/ statements in the past.

Robert Byrd died 6 years ago. What does he have to do with how the campaigns are being run?

[Oscirus]

David Duke remains an avowed racist. Byrd was not. How is that even comparable?

And the Trump rallies are a magnet for white supremacists. Some of them have been allowed to work as volunteers even when sporting openly visible Nazi tattoos. They are stalking reporters at Trump rallies and building dossiers by taking notes and photos of them as they stare them down. People are chanting White Power at Trump rallies. Trump has merged with Breitbart, a known purveyor of hate rhetoric. And this is not even going into the many statements and implicit threats issued by Trump himself.

If you allow all of this to continue to happen then you condone it. This is not randomly assigning guilt by association. This is how the Trump campaign conducts itself.

The Clinton campaign is not even comparable so suggesting criticism of either is unjustified is indefensible.

Let me ask you, if there were people audibly chanting White Power at a Clinton rally do you think she would tacitly overlook that because she wants their votes? I don't think so. She would call them out and deny that as acceptable behavior.

We're still arguing degrees of racism. If you want to say that Trump is way more racist, fine, I agree with you. If you want to argue that he should have more control over his supporters and vet his volunteers better, I agree with that too. But I still stand by the statement that she shouldn't be calling out anybody on their racism given her actions/ statements in the past.

Robert Byrd died 6 years ago. What does he have to do with how the campaigns are being run?

As of now, it's just an attack to use against Hillary.

[CJackson]

We're still arguing degrees of racism. If you want to say that Trump is way more racist, fine, I agree with you. If you want to argue that he should have more control over his supporters and vet his volunteers better, I agree with that too. But I still stand by the statement that she shouldn't be calling out anybody on their racism given her actions/ statements in the past.

Robert Byrd died 6 years ago. What does he have to do with how the campaigns are being run?

As of now, it's just an attack to use against Hillary.

Yes. And whatever conclusions one may want to draw from her association with him has no equivalence to how the campaigns are currently conducting themselves.

[duetta]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062803119.html

[duetta]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pastor-caused-outrage-orlando-arrested-molestation-article-1.2767578

[BKlutch]

Sorry this is going to be all over the place.





If we use that argument then we can't really blame Trump for the fact that the KKK supports him or even blame him for refusing to disavow David Duke. This is politics your associations and your words represent you.


You're right, his policies aren't on her. But super predator was definitely something that was hers.

Basically, neither side should be calling the other side a bigot given both side's questionable actions.

David Duke remains an avowed racist. Byrd was not. How is that even comparable?

And the Trump rallies are a magnet for white supremacists. Some of them have been allowed to work as volunteers even when sporting openly visible Nazi tattoos. They are stalking reporters at Trump rallies and building dossiers by taking notes and photos of them as they stare them down. People are chanting White Power at Trump rallies. Trump has merged with Breitbart, a known purveyor of hate rhetoric. And this is not even going into the many statements and implicit threats issued by Trump himself.

If you allow all of this to continue to happen then you condone it. This is not randomly assigning guilt by association. This is how the Trump campaign conducts itself.

The Clinton campaign is not even comparable so suggesting criticism of either is unjustified is indefensible.

Let me ask you, if there were people audibly chanting White Power at a Clinton rally do you think she would tacitly overlook that because she wants their votes? I don't think so. She would call them out and deny that as acceptable behavior.

We're still arguing degrees of racism. If you want to say that Trump is way more racist, fine, I agree with you. If you want to argue that he should have more control over his supporters and vet his volunteers better, I agree with that too. But I still stand by the statement that she shouldn't be calling out anybody on their racism given her actions/ statements in the past.

I think that any good person should call out others for racism. Let me give you analogy:

Let's say, for argument's sake, that I'm a murderer who was in a gang and killed an innocent victim when I was 23. I went to jail and did my best to get an education and then teach and help other prisoners. After 20 years, I was let out for good behavior. I continued to work to help the community. I devoted my life to helping others. Then, I saw a boy in a gang who I thought was going down the path that had ruined my life. I condemned the gang activities and and tried to help him, before he also committed a horrible crime.

Any ethicist would say that it was not wrong for me, hypothetically a murderer, to condemn his behavior and try to help him. In fact, to make up for what I did, I probably had a stronger obligation than others to intercede. To be a murderer does not make it wrong to oppose other murders. I believe what Byrd did, at 23, was a horrible thing. But he then devoted his life to public service and was a friend to the Black community.

As of now, Trump is inciting and fostering racism, but either denies it or tries to hide behind Hillary's mistakes. Hillary was never a KKK member, and to vote for her is NOT to vote for a KKK member. She acknowledged Byrd's life of public service and the real contributions he made to society. That is different than to ally oneself today with racist or hate groups, as Trump is so frequently doing. There is no equivalence between Hillary and Trump.

Logically, you could say he shyts and she shyts, so they have something in common. That doesn't prove either is a racist or not. For Hillary to have done one thing that some racists do, in a life of community service, caring, and alignment with the with the African American community, is not any basis to call her a racist. Trump has no idea what true racism is, because he is unable to look in the mirror and see his own image.

[BKlutch]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pastor-caused-outrage-orlando-arrested-molestation-article-1.2767578

He's one of a whole slew of Republicans who preached anti-gay rhetoric and has been caught molesting a boy or approaching somebody in a men's room. It seems to be a particular mental illness to every condemn in others the things that one feels inside oneself. It seems to be brought out most by issues of sexual orientation. This was a very enlightening article.

[BKlutch]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062803119.html

This is a great article that expresses much better than I did, in an earlier post, how human redemption is one of the great stories of our species. At the same time, this does not mean that anybody who believes in redemption ever condones the original act. Rather, I abhor the KKK more than most, but welcome even converts to opposing hate and racism in all their forms.

[CJackson]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062803119.html

This is a great article that expresses much better than I did, in an earlier post, how human redemption is one of the great stories of our species. At the same time, this does not mean that anybody who believes in redemption ever condones the original act. Rather, I abhor the KKK more than most, but welcome even converts to opposing hate and racism in all their forms.

Duetta mentioned Malcolm. That's a great book and a perfect example. From Red the Hustler to Malcom X, he evolved many times. And in the end he came to the realization he was fostering racism himself and he was probably killed by the brotherhood for watering down their more hateful rhetoric.

[BKlutch]

I never understood before why they killed him. It's like why they killed Jesus and MLK and so many others. Some people can't stand goodness

[duetta]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/27/world/middleeast/syria-civil-war-why-get-worse.html

[Oscirus]

David Duke remains an avowed racist. Byrd was not. How is that even comparable?

And the Trump rallies are a magnet for white supremacists. Some of them have been allowed to work as volunteers even when sporting openly visible Nazi tattoos. They are stalking reporters at Trump rallies and building dossiers by taking notes and photos of them as they stare them down. People are chanting White Power at Trump rallies. Trump has merged with Breitbart, a known purveyor of hate rhetoric. And this is not even going into the many statements and implicit threats issued by Trump himself.

If you allow all of this to continue to happen then you condone it. This is not randomly assigning guilt by association. This is how the Trump campaign conducts itself.

The Clinton campaign is not even comparable so suggesting criticism of either is unjustified is indefensible.

Let me ask you, if there were people audibly chanting White Power at a Clinton rally do you think she would tacitly overlook that because she wants their votes? I don't think so. She would call them out and deny that as acceptable behavior.

We're still arguing degrees of racism. If you want to say that Trump is way more racist, fine, I agree with you. If you want to argue that he should have more control over his supporters and vet his volunteers better, I agree with that too. But I still stand by the statement that she shouldn't be calling out anybody on their racism given her actions/ statements in the past.

I think that any good person should call out others for racism. Let me give you analogy:

Let's say, for argument's sake, that I'm a murderer who was in a gang and killed an innocent victim when I was 23. I went to jail and did my best to get an education and then teach and help other prisoners. After 20 years, I was let out for good behavior. I continued to work to help the community. I devoted my life to helping others. Then, I saw a boy in a gang who I thought was going down the path that had ruined my life. I condemned the gang activities and and tried to help him, before he also committed a horrible crime.

Any ethicist would say that it was not wrong for me, hypothetically a murderer, to condemn his behavior and try to help him. In fact, to make up for what I did, I probably had a stronger obligation than others to intercede. To be a murderer does not make it wrong to oppose other murders. I believe what Byrd did, at 23, was a horrible thing. But he then devoted his life to public service and was a friend to the Black community.

As of now, Trump is inciting and fostering racism, but either denies it or tries to hide behind Hillary's mistakes. Hillary was never a KKK member, and to vote for her is NOT to vote for a KKK member. She acknowledged Byrd's life of public service and the real contributions he made to society. That is different than to ally oneself today with racist or hate groups, as Trump is so frequently doing. There is no equivalence between Hillary and Trump.

Logically, you could say he shyts and she shyts, so they have something in common. That doesn't prove either is a racist or not. For Hillary to have done one thing that some racists do, in a life of community service, caring, and alignment with the with the African American community, is not any basis to call her a racist. Trump has no idea what true racism is, because he is unable to look in the mirror and see his own image.

In your example, you have no ulterior motive you're not going into public service. That's a huge difference. Even if I agree with the fact that Hillary shouln't be condemned for her association with Byrd, there's still the 2004 democratic primary where she said stuff which at best would be called questionable.
The defense that she's not as bad as Trump isn't really a good defense. That's like a parent saying that they're not as bad of a parent as Casey Anthony.

That being said, this isn't really my argument so I'm going to move on unless anybody has any questions.

[Oscirus]

Positive trump time

http://townhall.com/columnists/johncgoodman/2016/08/27/in-defense-of-trump-n2210756

Don't know if this should be a positive or negative article, but I'm putting it here

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/26/donald-trump-has-now-given-more-to-charity-in-the-last-four-months-than-in-the-previous-10-years-combined/

Read on Twitter

Can we get a better name for those people then Trumpocrats?

[BKlutch]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/27/world/middleeast/syria-civil-war-why-get-worse.html

I just read this before coming over here. Just when you think that war can't get any worse, it does.

[Greenie]

I see we are still in her giving passes to motherfuqers that lynched blacks because they reformed themselves and died six years ago.

[Greenie]

Howard won't ban me. So I guess I have to keep posting with racists mofo's that don't even know they are racist until either this fuqed up thread is locked for good or I get a ban.