Political Candidates

[Socrates]

Socrates:

The point is - people thought that Powell was a Republican "not in name only" during those years. But nobody called him a sellout even though he was perceived as a solid Republican.

Yes blacks kill more blacks than the police do. Whites also kill whites more than the police do. That is rather obvious and no one has denied it. Everyone agrees that reducing crime is a good thing.

The point is that black on black crime and police misconduct are BOTH issues that can, should, and are being addressed. What Giuliani (and others) essentially said was "let's not talk about police misconduct because black on black crime is a problem." It is an attempt to deflect away attention from one issue by raising another. Giuliani is not raising the issue of black on black crime because he cares about black people. He is raising the issue so that people will stop talking about police misconduct. It would be the same, for example, as someone who raises the issue of abortion in a thread where the discussion is focused on the Confederate Flag.

As for the protests about police shootings taking attention away from the issue of black on black crime - I doubt it. You rarely hear whites voice any concern over black on black crime except where it is being used to distract attention away from another issue. It is not as though black on black crime is something that whites would give major attention to if police misconduct were not in the news.

As for blacks, we do in fact already spend plenty of time speaking (and demonstrating) against crime in our neighborhoods.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/04/why-dont-black-people-protest-black-on-black-violence/255329/

Do things like that decrease when attention is given to police misconduct? I do not see any evidence to support that. Black people care about both issues. A desire to address the issue of police misconduct does not lessen the desire to reduce crime (just as a desire to address the issue of the Confederate Flag does not lessen the desire to reduce abortion).

And do r the record - I took offense at your attempt attempt to tell black people what their biggest problems are, when as a non African American you should be asking us what our biggest problems are. You tell a child what it's problems are. You ask an adult what his problems are. So by your assertions that XYZ issues are the biggest problem facing blacks you equated us to children. And I took offense at what appeared to be an attempt to distract attention away from the issue being discussed. I have no problem with someone raising the issue of abortion among blacks or any other group. Please start a thread on it if you desire.

And again - your assertion that black people who speak out on problems such as black on black crime or problems in the black community are called sellouts is false. I already gave you one example of a well known political figure. And there are plenty of black people in black communities speaking out on those issues and trying to improve the lives of black youth every day. They aren't being called sellouts because they actually care about black people. They are not raising the issues to further their political careers or deflect attention away from other legitimate issues that deserve attention.

As for Ben Carson - you asked for an example. I gave you one. You can Google the quote if you want.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2013/10/11/ben-carson-obamacare-worst-thing-since-slavery/

Do you understand why blacks would take offense to that? If you don't - then you don't have a good understanding of black Americans. And if you don't have a good understanding of a people, I think you can imagine why they would take offense at your attempt to lecture them.

I've read plenty of articles and such by conservatives, both white and black, addressing the issues of crime in minority neighborhoods long before the cop shootings became a major political hot topic, so your assertion that "white people" only bring it up to distract from other issues isn't really accurate.  I think sometimes the shootings need to be put in a larger perspective, though.  (Though that gets into another debate.)

And the targeting of minority children for murder by abortionists is objectively a much more serious problem than Confederate flags or whatever.  Sorry, if people pointing that out offends you, too bad.

And shame on that dirty sell-out Ben Carson, who obviously hates black people, or else has no clue what it's like to be black.  The greedy SOB made his career healing people and saving lives, unlike such noble souls as Al Sharpton and Barack Obama, who've profited handsomely from their race-baiting and demagoguery.  But I'm sure Dear Leader really cares very deeply about poor black people as he jets between Martha's Vineyard, golfing at Palm Springs, and Hollywood fundraisers.  Nope, no sell-out he!

Perhaps you can explain why Dr. Carson's comment is so racist and offensive while Joe Biden saying Republicans "gonna put y'all back in chains" is applause-worthy.

Looks to me like a massive double standard.  

(And it's not just some lovable quirk of Crazy Grampa Joe.  I've seen whole books written by "liberals" on the thesis that modern conservative economic policies are really a return to antebellum slavery.)

[Socrates]

 

For what it's worth, I think that some black conservatives (such as Clarence Thomas, for example) have been unfairly branded with that label. . . .

The treatment of Clarence Thomas (called a "clown in blackface" among other things) is a prime example of what I was referring to.  But this contradicts your earlier statement that only blacks who are in fact "Uncle Toms" are called that.

[Peace]

I've read plenty of articles and such by conservatives, both white and black, addressing the issues of crime in minority neighborhoods long before the cop shootings became a major political hot topic, so your assertion that "white people" only bring it up to distract from other issues isn't really accurate.  I think sometimes the shootings need to be put in a larger perspective, though.  (Though that gets into another debate.)

OK. If you say so.

And the targeting of minority children for murder by abortionists is objectively a much more serious problem than Confederate flags or whatever.  Sorry, if people pointing that out offends you, too bad.

I am not sure why I would be offended by that - since I agree with the statement. I told you why I was offended. If you cannot comprehend English, too bad.

And shame on that dirty sell-out Ben Carson, who obviously hates black people, or else has no clue what it's like to be black.  The greedy SOB made his career healing people and saving lives, unlike such noble souls as Al Sharpton and Barack Obama, who've profited handsomely from their race-baiting and demagoguery.  But I'm sure Dear Leader really cares very deeply about poor black people as he jets between Martha's Vineyard, golfing at Palm Springs, and Hollywood fundraisers.  Nope, no sell-out he!

I realize that you are exaggerating but this is just silly. I do not know whether he is sold out. Carson said something that most African Americans would find offensive. Again - do you even understand why?

And I find it quite amusing that you deem yourself qualified to pontificate on who is and who is not a sellout. You are not African American and you have no idea what it is to be black. But yet you feel that you are qualified to give your opinion concerning who has betrayed a community of which you are not a part of and which you do not understand. It's rather audacious.

Perhaps you can explain why Dr. Carson's comment is so racist and offensive while Joe Biden saying Republicans "gonna put y'all back in chains" is applause-worthy.

I can explain why Carson's comments are offensive but I choose not to. Some things a man needs to figure out for himself. As for whatever Joe Biden said - I made no statement concerning whether those statements are racist or not. Feel free to start a thread on it if you desire.

The treatment of Clarence Thomas (called a "clown in blackface" among other things) is a prime example of what I was referring to.  But this contradicts your earlier statement that only blacks who are in fact "Uncle Toms" are called that.

By and large. But there are exceptions.

[veritasluxmea]

 I don't know anything about Donald Trump except that's he's associated with racism and no one likes him. Honestly he seems like a distraction played up by the internet from the bigger issues. My high school sisters can name five Trump memes off the top of their head, but maybe two candidates (Hilary and Trump. From the memes, of course). Instead of focusing on, I don't know, how 4,000 westerners have fled to Syria to help ISIS and how Planned Parenthood is backstabbing women in their care, let's compare Trump's hair to an ear of corn. Really? It's all bread and circuses at this point. 

Bernie Sanders

Are you joking? I'd like to fight Bernie Sanders in a pit with nothing but a first year economics textbook. Also, the irony of liberals promoting an old white male is killing me. 

It's like choosing between typhus and cholera...

Tru. 

[Winchester]

You left off "nobody".

 

I won't be consenting to the next figurehead presiding over the mass murder of non-combatants in the name of Empire.

 

And Rubio is a disgusting chickenhawk. So is Santorum. Good God, I can at least respect a soldier who bangs war drums, but those two?

[HopefulHeart]

Also, the irony of liberals promoting an old white male is killing me. 

 

Ikr? Basically all of my liberal millennial friends support Sanders. I think the only way a Republican can win the election is if Sanders runs as an independent and splits the liberal vote.

At this point, I don't support any of the candidates.

[Winchester]

Ikr? Basically all of my liberal millennial friends support Sanders. I think the only way a Republican can win the election is if Sanders runs as an independent and splits the liberal vote.

At this point, I don't support any of the candidates.

What's funny is to see people who otherwise understand the inhumanity of the central planning of immigration still support Sanders after he's shown himself to be as stupid on the issue as Trump (or any other big government Republican (which is all of them)).

 

[veritasluxmea]

Trump and Sanders are extreme stupid on opposite sides of the coin. I'd even vote for Santorum (don't like him) over them, at least he can play career politician enough to keep the country limping along. 

[veritasluxmea]

Well now this is happening. 

[CrossCuT]

Are you joking? I'd like to fight Bernie Sanders in a pit with nothing but a first year economics textbook. Also, the irony of liberals promoting an old white male is killing me. 

Oh I definitely see the irony,however as it stands we have few choices and if I want to vote for someone with whom I honestly and completely agree with, it would be Bernie. PS. Id love to see you guys duke it out!

 

Also, I found out Bernie refuses to have a Super PAC; mad respect. That dude is pure class.

[CrossCuT]

The amount of spending that occurs during campaigns is just utterly numbing. I wish the US would wake up, overturn Citizens United and do away with this insanity. Too bad corporations arent as willing to donate such HUGE sums to worthy things like charities. 

 

The 2016 election is already providing a lot of eye-popping statistics about the ballooning spending candidates will do in the 2016 election. Among them:

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush's superPAC has already raised more — in the first half of a non-election year — than Obama's main superPAC did in all of the 2012 cycle.
The latest big TV ad buy in the 2016 presidential election — on Ohio Gov. John Kasich's behalf, totaling $375,000 — is worth more than seven times the annual median U.S. household income.
There have already been seven times more political ads in the 2016 election than at this point in the 2012 election, according to Elizabeth Wilner, senior vice president at Kantar's Campaign Media and Analysis Group.

Or just try to digest the aggregate numbers. For instance, political TV ad spending will top $4.4 billion for federal races this year, up from $3.8 billion in 2012, Wilner estimated.

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/19/432759311/2016-campaign-tv-ad-spending?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150819

[Winchester]

Right, because before the Citizens United, lobbyists weren't crafting legislation that legislators didn't read before voting on, and congressthings weren't getting all manner of benefits from powerful corporations.

Fact is, if there hadn't been an attempt at censorship, Citizens United would not have filed its lawsuit. But hey, let's give politicians the power to restrict speech during campaigns. That totally would be a good thing.

 

 

[PhuturePriest]

You left off "nobody".

 

I won't be consenting to the next figurehead presiding over the mass murder of non-combatants in the name of Empire.

 

And Rubio is a disgusting chickenhawk. So is Santorum. Good God, I can at least respect a soldier who bangs war drums, but those two?

The catechism says voting is a civil duty and that it's a sin not to.

Write-ins are a thing.

[Ice_nine]

The catechism says voting is a civil duty and that it's a sin not to.

Write-ins are a thing.

Erm, it doesn't say that exactly . . . Am I sinning by not voting for school-board committee leader? Changes in local waste management? Really?

And am I really sinning by not voting for a president when I live in a blue, always always blue state? My vote for president literally has no effect on anything ever and yet I would be sinning by not voting? That seems silly. Even though local elections are where your vote might actually mean something. But you know with the breakdown of the community and the family, screw that! I'll just vote in national elections and think I'm doing a beaver dam thing! And then I can walk around with a sense of smug satisfaction! There's nothing I love more than that

It seems to me that most meaningful change OR maintaining the status quo, comes from people (i.e. corporations, because they are people who should be given all the rights of people obviously /sarcasm) who can throw oodles and oodles of money to lobby congress and protect their interests. And people want to preach to me about how voting is a meaningful exercise of "civic duty."  I just don't buy it. I usually vote in state and national elections, for the record, but I don't buy that it does much of anything. Especially in national elections.

I just don't get how church leaders can fully embrace the idea of voting as a civic duty and basic human right when the church comes from a tradition of monarchy and has historically been opposed to democracy. It seems almost like a backwards bizarro-world thing to me.

[Nihil Obstat]

Democracy is one acceptable choice among many. For now we seem stuck with it, but I happen to think it is one of the worst available options.