or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Mitt Romney is Going to Win
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mitt Romney is Going to Win - Page 26

post #1001 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

But you admit that neither him or Ron Paul (who I know for sure you know just a wee bit about) could ever become POTUS without the GOP?

 

Probably not in this day and age. But it's clear even the GOP didn't want Ron Paul. So I'm not quite sure what your point here is.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1002 of 1062
So does Ron Paul think that the goodness of rich peoples' hearts will be sufficient to take care of poor people, or not?
post #1003 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

So does Ron Paul think that the goodness of rich peoples' hearts will be sufficient to take care of poor people, or not?

 

I can't say for sure what Ron Paul thinks. You can ask him. But I would assume that he does believe, and most likely correctly, that the goodness of all people's hearts (rich included but not exclusively) would be sufficient to take care of people when they are in need and unable to care for themselves.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1004 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

So does Ron Paul think that the goodness of rich peoples' hearts will be sufficient to take care of poor people, or not?

I can't say for sure what Ron Paul thinks. You can ask him. But I would assume that he does believe, and most likely correctly, that the goodness of all people's hearts (rich included but not exclusively) would be sufficient to take care of people when they are in need and unable to care for themselves.
Yeah, that philosophy worked so well throughout history. Even excluding government, an environment of self sustenance never left anyone to suffer. Or conversely, an environment excluding government was never attempted. Right. /s
post #1005 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

Probably not in this day and age. But it's clear even the GOP didn't want Ron Paul. So I'm not quite sure what your point here is.

Well Rand Paul clearly thinks he has a shot. But like you rightly say, he'll become just like them. He'll promote himself as the Libertarian with morals and integrity, but will sell out for power and even more if he actually gets it. It matters in relation to how well the Republicans do in elections. If you truly know so little about Rand Paul, that you have no interest in him becoming POTUS, then fair enough, you won't have to worry about the effects of having no Republican blacks in D.C.

"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1006 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yeah, that philosophy worked so well throughout history.

 

Actually it has...assuming you're not just ignoring the stuff that refutes your dystopian visions, which I'm sure you are.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Even excluding government, an environment of self sustenance never left anyone to suffer.

 

Who said anything about self sustenance? Wow. That's a huge leap. You have a truly limited understanding of what a world absent state-driven coercion might look like.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1007 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Well Rand Paul clearly thinks he has a shot.

 

He might think that and he might have a shot. Who knows. 2016 is a long way away.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

But like you rightly say, he'll become just like them. He'll promote himself as the Libertarian with morals and integrity, but will sell out for power and even more if he actually gets it.

 

Some argue that he already has.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

It matters in relation to how well the Republicans do in elections.

 

Okay. 1rolleyes.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

If you truly know so little about Rand Paul, that you have no interest in him becoming POTUS, then fair enough, you won't have to worry about the effects of having no Republican blacks in D.C.

 

What makes you think I am "worried" about such a think?! Good God!

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1008 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

I haven't checked, but I'd be curious to know how many black candidates the GOP fields. It's possible that in the locations where that would be likely to happen (a large percentage of black voters for example), that there are black GOP candidates but that they consistently lose to the Democrat candidates, since those would also be quite likely to be Democrat strongholds, and so never make it to the house or senate.

In the 2012 election they had 11 black candidates. None of them won office. Mia Love ran in Utah, which is about 1% or so black. She very narrowly lost. She had a huge amount of endorsements from the GOP, but voters thought she was actually a bit stupid, and she knew very little about political positions. I don't know about the rest. Be interesting to find out though. 


Edited by Hands Sandon - 3/27/13 at 2:03pm
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1009 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

In the 2012 election they had 11 black candidates. None of them won office. Mia Love ran in Utah, which is about 1% or so black. She very narrowly lost. She had a huge amount of endorsements from the GOP, but voters thought she was actually a bit stupid, and she knew very little about political positions. I don't know about the rest. Be interesting to find out though. 

 

So are you now offering evidence against your hypothesis? I'm confused.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1010 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

So are you now offering evidence against your hypothesis? I'm confused.

I never said that the Repubs have never attempted to get blacks elected. 11 candidates out of 548 candidates, in the house and senate combined, is hardly that many though. Not all the seats where up for election though, but the total number is still very high. The exact number of Republican candidates was 468. 435 in the house and 33 in the senate.


Edited by Hands Sandon - 3/27/13 at 1:55pm
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1011 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I never said that the Repubs have never attempted to get blacks elected. 11 candidates out of 548 candidates, in the house and senate combined, is hardly that many though. Not all the seats where up for election though, but the total number is still very high. The exact number of Republican candidates was 468. 435 in the house and 33 in the senate.

 

And yet, despite your claims of obvious (unarguable) racism, they put up 11 candidates with "huge amount of endorsements from the GOP" and they all lost (one, perhaps, because voters thought she was dumb.) So, what's the explanation for this? Are they racists and don't put up racial minorities as candidates? Or not enough to meet your criteria (whatever that may be)? Or they don't because they lose? Or do they lose because they are Republicans? Or do they lose because they are black? Or do they lose because they are black Republicans?!

 

What's the story here?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1012 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

And yet, despite your claims of obvious (unarguable) racism, they put up 11 candidates with "huge amount of endorsements from the GOP" and they all lost (one, perhaps, because voters thought she was dumb.) So, what's the explanation for this? Are they racists and don't put up racial minorities as candidates? Or not enough to meet your criteria (whatever that may be)? Or they don't because they lose? Or do they lose because they are Republicans? Or do they lose because they are black? Or do they lose because they are black Republicans?!

 

What's the story here?

I've read that Mia Love had a big lead before she opened her mouth and lost. A bit like Sarah Palin. The voters aren't completely stupid, and if you read that Mother jones article I linked to earlier you'd see she's an outrageous hypocrite too.

 

11 candidates really isn't that many, especially considering there's only one (there were two at the time of the election, Allen West lost his seat) black Repub lawmaker in D.C. I'd say that would be good reason to put forward at least 65, which would be the same ratio as candidates to blacks in the overall population. But even that is insufficient given the fact there's currently only one black Repub lawmaker. To try and speedily correct this I'd say put up as many as possible until the numbers reflect the population better. I'd be very surprised if they couldn't have come up the 90% or so of their candidates being black. Minorities would have seen that and gone WOW! they really do care about us, maybe I'll vote for them.

 

I don't know the answers to your other questions. I suspect white voters would happily get behind black Repub candidates if it meant they would increase their seats, otherwise probably not.

 

The Democrats haven't done enough either. There is only one black in the senate and he's the appointed Repub, Tim Scott. They argue that blacks don't put themselves forward enough outside of heavily black areas. Well maybe if they were heavily financed and supported by the parties, they would more often. Too many whites are probably happy with the status quo who are in positions of power to go any further than they think is necessary.

"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1013 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I've read that Mia Love had a big lead before she opened her mouth and lost. A bit like Sarah Palin.

 

I see.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The voters aren't completely stupid

 

Of course not.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

see she's an outrageous hypocrite too.

 

Okay. I find that to be an incredibly surprising revelation about a political figure.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

11 candidates really isn't that many, especially considering there's only one (there were two at the time of the election, Allen West lost his seat) black Repub lawmaker in D.C. I'd say that would be good reason to put forward at least 65, which would be the same ratio as candidates to blacks in the overall population.

 

So it is about quotas for you. Got it. That issue aside, you're ignoring a number of fairly obvious issues. First, you assume that the population is evenly distributed everywhere and that candidates would be also. You also assume that the people interested and qualified for political office is also equal within the population.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

But even that is insufficient given the fact there's currently only one black Repub lawmaker.

 

Okay. But I can't seem to find this list for Democrats.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

To try and speedily correct this I'd say put up as many as possible until the numbers reflect the population better. I'd be very surprised if they couldn't have come up the 90% or so of their candidates being black. Minorities would have seen that and gone WOW! they really do care about us, maybe I'll vote for them.

 

Uh huh. 1rolleyes.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The Democrats haven't done enough either. There is only one black in the senate and he's the appointed Repub, Tim Scott. They argue that blacks don't put themselves forward enough outside of heavily black areas. Well maybe if they were heavily financed and supported by the parties, they would more often.

 

Yet you've focused entirely on alleged Republican racism. 1hmm.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Too many whites are probably happy with the status quo who are in positions of power to go any further than they think is necessary.

 

And more implications of widespread racism.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1014 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

I haven't checked, but I'd be curious to know how many black candidates the GOP fields. It's possible that in the locations where that would be likely to happen (a large percentage of black voters for example), that there are black GOP candidates but that they consistently lose to the Democrat candidates, since those would also be quite likely to be Democrat strongholds, and so never make it to the house or senate.

In the 2012 election they had 11 black candidates. None of them won office. Mia Love ran in Utah, which is about 1% or so black. She very narrowly lost. She had a huge amount of endorsements from the GOP, but voters thought she was actually a bit stupid, and she knew very little about political positions. I don't know about the rest. Be interesting to find out though. 

 

OK - well that shoots down my suggestion quite conclusively. 11 candidates is clearly way out of proportion both to the number of black voters and to the number of black Democrat candidates. It may not prove racism but certainly proves inequality.

post #1015 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

I see.

 

 

 

Of course not.

 

 

 

Okay. I find that to be an incredibly surprising revelation about a political figure.

 

 

 

So it is about quotas for you. Got it. That issue aside, you're ignoring a number of fairly obvious issues. First, you assume that the population is evenly distributed everywhere and that candidates would be also. You also assume that the people interested and qualified for political office is also equal within the population.

 

 

 

Okay. But I can't seem to find this list for Democrats.

 

 

 

Uh huh. 1rolleyes.gif

 

 

 

Yet you've focused entirely on alleged Republican racism. 1hmm.gif

 

 

 

And more implications of widespread racism.

Senate blacks- 1 Repub, 0 Dems

House blacks- 36 Dems, 0 Repub.

 

You can find the list here- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_United_States_Congress

 

The Democrats have 36 times more the number of lawmakers in D.C. who are black, than Republicans. They deserve some credit for that. Given that their voters come from minorities at a higher rate than repubs, and their share of the white vote is only 40% compared to 60% for Repubs, one would expect the higher numbers. The fact that there aren't any black Dem senators, I think is appalling though. One would expect the greatest country on earth, a shining light of hope to the rest of the world, the greatest democracy of all time, to have more blacks.

 

I'd like to see roughly an equal share per race. I don't see any reason why that wouldn't be good for the American people, especially minorities. People need to choose themselves who they vote for, so some sort of enforced quota number isn't right. it needs to be through a concerted effort by those with and without power to make it happen.

 

Mia Love came from New York.

 

There are blacks all over America who could run despite being in a minority. Nobodies been stopping whites running in heavily black areas have they? No, there are whites governing blacks in America, and no one goes on about...oh there are other factors...they're a minority in that area....and on and on. 

"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1016 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

OK - well that shoots down my suggestion quite conclusively. 11 candidates is clearly way out of proportion both to the number of black voters and to the number of black Democrat candidates. It may not prove racism but certainly proves inequality.

I'd argue that it's a direct result of racism. They had just two lawmakers in D.C. and they put forward six times less black candidates than would be the case if their number of candidates reflected their numbers as a percentage of the population. There's no legitimate excuse for that.

"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1017 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

OK - well that shoots down my suggestion quite conclusively. 11 candidates is clearly way out of proportion both to the number of black voters and to the number of black Democrat candidates. It may not prove racism but certainly proves inequality.

 

Maybe. There's still the question of distribution of people by race into congressional districts. I'm not even claiming there isn't some amount of inequality. I doubt there's a huge amount of racism. I suspect that, when all factors are considered, the differences may not be statistically significant. I doubt we'll get the data necessary for such a robust analysis though.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1018 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Senate blacks- 1 Repub, 0 Dems

House blacks- 36 Dems, 0 Repub.

 

You can find the list here- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_United_States_Congress

 

The list I provided was a historical one, and not limited to the current US congress which you seem to be fixated on for some reason.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The Democrats have 36 times more the number of lawmakers in D.C. who are black, than Republicans.

 

So? What does this tell you?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

They deserve some credit for that.

 

Credit for what exactly?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Given that their voters come from minorities at a higher rate than repubs, and their share of the white vote is only 40% compared to 60% for Repubs, one would expect the higher numbers.

 

You appear to consistently be operating under the base assumption that people vote their own race primarily. Maybe this is true. But if it is, it might be a better explanation than some systematic racism exclusive to the GOP.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The fact that there aren't any black Dem senators, I think is appalling though. One would expect the greatest country on earth, a shining light of hope to the rest of the world, the greatest democracy of all time, to have more blacks.

 

Okay. Perhaps. Perhaps they are less inclined to be involved in politics? Perhaps, as a race, they have better character than that?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I'd like to see roughly an equal share per race. I don't see any reason why that wouldn't be good for the American people, especially minorities. People need to choose themselves who they vote for, so some sort of enforced quota number isn't right. it needs to be through a concerted effort by those with and without power to make it happen.

 

Interesting. Quotas but not quotas. Okay. 1rolleyes.gif

 

 

I guess my thinking is more in line with this statement: ...one day we'll live in a nation where people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

 

You seem to be fixated on the color of people's skin quite a lot.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1019 of 1062

I should have suspected from the get go this was just more race-baiting. 1frown.gif

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1020 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

The list I provided was a historical one, and not limited to the current US congress which you seem to be fixated on for some reason.

 

 

 

So? What does this tell you?

 

 

 

Credit for what exactly?

 

 

 

You appear to consistently be operating under the base assumption that people vote their own race primarily. Maybe this is true. But if it is, it might be a better explanation than some systematic racism exclusive to the GOP.

 

 

 

Okay. Perhaps. Perhaps they are less inclined to be involved in politics? Perhaps, as a race, they have better character than that?

 

 

 

Interesting. Quotas but not quotas. Okay. 1rolleyes.gif

 

 

I guess my thinking is more in line with this statement: ...one day we'll live in a nation where people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

 

You seem to be fixated on the color of people's skin quite a lot.

The list I linked to gave the historical records too. Of particular note at the moment though are the current numbers as that's the time we're living in, or at least some of us are.

 

1rolleyes.gif

 

1rolleyes.gif

 

1rolleyes.gif

 

1rolleyes.gif

 

1rolleyes.gif

 

36 times more black Dem lawmakers than the Repub...hmmm, what does that tell me? Could it be that the party is more open to blacks in it's ranks? Yes, it could.

 

They deserve credit for not shutting out black lawmakers. Wake up, please. 1rolleyes.gif

 

Quote- "...one day we'll live in a nation where people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Yeah, quite right that's why today black lawmakers make up roughly 0.3% of Repub lawmakers. That's from a party who knows that making things about race, just makes you a racist! Just like you've been saying about me! 

"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1021 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

OK - well that shoots down my suggestion quite conclusively. 11 candidates is clearly way out of proportion both to the number of black voters and to the number of black Democrat candidates. It may not prove racism but certainly proves inequality.

 

Maybe. There's still the question of distribution of people by race into congressional districts. I'm not even claiming there isn't some amount of inequality. I doubt there's a huge amount of racism. I suspect that, when all factors are considered, the differences may not be statistically significant. I doubt we'll get the data necessary for such a robust analysis though.

 

While the distribution in districts might have accounted for the disparity in sitting members, I cannot see how it can reasonably account for the disparity in candidates. To argue, apparently without any evidence, that a happenstance of districting across the nation reduced a major demographic group to a factor of 36 less representation and a factor of 6 fewer candidates, seems rather far fetched.

post #1022 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

36 times more black Dem lawmakers than the Repub...hmmm, what does that tell me? Could it be that the party is more open to blacks in it's ranks? Yes, it could.

 

Or that blacks more frequently align, politically, with Democratic positions than Republican ones?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

They deserve credit for not shutting out black lawmakers. Wake up, please. 1rolleyes.gif

 

Oh, I see...I'm to "wake up" to your unproven claims. 1rolleyes.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Quote- "...one day we'll live in a nation where people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Yeah, quite right that's why today black lawmakers make up roughly 0.3% of Repub lawmakers. That's from a party who knows that making things about race, just makes you a racist! Just like you've been saying about me! 

 

You're the one focused on skin color here. I've heard precious little about anyone's character or qualifications or desires or inclinations toward elected office, etc.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1023 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

While the distribution in districts might have accounted for the disparity in sitting members, I cannot see how it can reasonably account for the disparity in candidates.

 

Why not?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1024 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

While the distribution in districts might have accounted for the disparity in sitting members, I cannot see how it can reasonably account for the disparity in candidates.

 

Why not?

 

Because if such a distribution by district existed then why would it not have a similar effect on the Democrat candidates - as the part of my post that you didn't quote was intended to indicate.

post #1025 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

Because if such a distribution by district existed then why would it not have a similar effect on the Democrat candidates - as the part of my post that you didn't quote was intended to indicate.

 

Then perhaps it is about issue affiliation?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1026 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

Because if such a distribution by district existed then why would it not have a similar effect on the Democrat candidates - as the part of my post that you didn't quote was intended to indicate.

 

Then perhaps it is about issue affiliation?

 

One could posit all kinds of constructs that might account for it - but for it to hold true almost universally across the multiple voting districts that comprise the US electorate requires a significant deviation from the nominal statistical norm that one would expect if there were no race factors. Democrat numbers are approximately consistent with demographic distribution, Republican numbers are approximately zero.

 

I'd also point out that it seems inconsistent for you to argue that districting might account for it when you argued strongly a few posts back that it is unreasonable to assume that voters might significantly vote according to race.  

If you were correct then, in the absence of race factors in candidate selection, one would expect even more strongly correlated demographic representation in the house and senate.

post #1027 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post


I've heard precious little about anyone's character or qualifications or desires or inclinations toward elected office, etc.

So that's what you put it down to, interesting.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1028 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post


So that's what you put it down to, interesting.

 

What's interesting about it to you?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1029 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

What's interesting about it to you?

That you think those qualities would be so lacking in blacks compared to whites.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1030 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post


That you think those qualities would be so lacking in blacks compared to whites.

 

Woooaaa! Slow down there sport! I didn't say any such thing. I merely pointed out that all you appear to focused on is skin color and I've heard nothing of those other factors from you at all. In other words, you appear to be doing the very opposite of what Martin Luther King, Jr. dreamed of.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1031 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Woooaaa! Slow down there sport! I didn't say any such thing. I merely pointed out that all you appear to focused on is skin color and I've heard nothing of those other factors from you at all. In other words, you appear to be doing the very opposite of what Martin Luther King, Jr. dreamed of.

If you don't think it's due to skin colour, but consider factors such as the ones you just mentioned to be the real likely causes then it would seem to me you think blacks lack those qualities relative to whites.

I can't imagine MLK being impressed by anyone quoting him to argue that having 1 black politician out of nearly 300 whites is not a great injustice caused by racism.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1032 of 1062

That's not at all what I mean, but you're free to misinterpret what I said as you wish. I guess we're done.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1033 of 1062
Th
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

That's not at all what I mean, but you're free to misinterpret what I said as you wish. I guess we're done.

Then what did you mean?
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #1034 of 1062
Of course that's not what he means, because what he means is to obfuscate.
post #1035 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

That's not at all what I mean, but you're free to misinterpret what I said as you wish. I guess we're done.

 

Well you did raise them as "other factors". Either you think they are factors, in which case his point stands, or you don't, in which case what relevance do they have to the issue?

post #1036 of 1062

**** off tonton. You're a cowardly liar who insists on demonizing those you disagree with by claiming they wish for terrible things to happen to people.

 

As for what I mean, I said clearly what I meant in a couple of posts. You, Hands, are singularly focused on the color of skin in your analysis of the situation to the exclusion of all other factors. In other words you are judging people by the color of their skin not the content of their character. The latter is quite impossible in this case because you are speaking in terms of broad generalities and aggregate groupings (which is common with liberals.) rather than individuals. You have ignored issue affiliation or political inclination as any factor in the alignment of individuals to political parties (and candidacies) and have simply called for Rs to go out and find more black people to run for office.

 

I'm trying to figure out how this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this fit into this hypothesis of widespread Republican racism (and also sexism and "homophobia.")

 

And these are just a few examples.

 

If there was widespread and deeply ingrained racism, sexism and "homophobia" it seems rather doubtful that Condi Rice would have held one of the most powerful positions in a Republican administration. Shoot, the Rs were the first to put a black person in as SoS.

 

You're seeing bogeymen here where there are none.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #1037 of 1062

MJ is getting quite testy of late.  I suppose Supply-Side Jesus doesn't tell him to turn the other cheek.  

 

Regardless, MJ & Jazz really have been completely distorting tonton's argument while being completely obtuse in their denial of doing so.  False equivalence or not, removing half of the sentence completely changes the meaning.

 

For instance, I might say that creationists are gullible or willfully ignorant.  It would be false to accuse me of calling creationists gullible.  It would false to accuse me of calling creationists willfully ignorant.  I gave two options and didn't discuss how I divided up the probabilities.  It is possible that creationists are gullible.  It is possible that they are willfully ignorant.  I'm only saying that one of those two options is true.  Ignoring the fact that I listed two options, regardless of whether you agree that those are the only two optionsCOMPLETELY DISTORTS MY ASSERTION.  

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #1038 of 1062
Thank you. It's ironic that MJ and Jazzy did that so blatantly, yet have the chutzpah to call me the liar.

MJ killed a kitten last night, or he didn't.

The above statement is fact.

Now if you were to quote me by saying, "tonton said MJ killed a kitten", you would be a liar.
post #1039 of 1062

Exactly.  Tonton, you are a scholar and a gentleman.  MJ, because I used "and" you may now snip out either portion of my statement regarding tonton.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #1040 of 1062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

**** off tonton. You're a cowardly liar who insists on demonizing those you disagree with by claiming they wish for terrible things to happen to people.

 

As for what I mean, I said clearly what I meant in a couple of posts. You, Hands, are singularly focused on the color of skin in your analysis of the situation to the exclusion of all other factors. In other words you are judging people by the color of their skin not the content of their character. The latter is quite impossible in this case because you are speaking in terms of broad generalities and aggregate groupings (which is common with liberals.) rather than individuals. You have ignored issue affiliation or political inclination as any factor in the alignment of individuals to political parties (and candidacies) and have simply called for Rs to go out and find more black people to run for office.

 

I'm trying to figure out how this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this fit into this hypothesis of widespread Republican racism (and also sexism and "homophobia.")

 

And these are just a few examples.

 

If there was widespread and deeply ingrained racism, sexism and "homophobia" it seems rather doubtful that Condi Rice would have held one of the most powerful positions in a Republican administration. Shoot, the Rs were the first to put a black person in as SoS.

 

You're seeing bogeymen here where there are none.

 

It is interesting to note that from your 13 examples, I only see 2 black Republicans elected to political office. The rest are mostly appointees, a couple of unsuccessful candidates and one of Asian descent.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Mitt Romney is Going to Win