• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The official phony concern Republicans try to show for minorities

HomerJS

Lifer
I saw a thread that just made me start this one. Often Republicans try to deflect from their shortcomings to avoid dealing with their own issues. They deflect from their own racism by linking the Democratic Party before civil rights to today. How many times have you heard "Democrats are the party of segregation and the Klan" This recent thread is a perfect example...


Here one I thought of this week. With all the BLM protests going on the defense used by right wingers is, "what about black on black crime in Chicago?". That's their goto. Question, what killed more people in Chicago in 2020, homicides or COVID-19?


Deaths by homicide - 385
As of July12 Chicago police reported 385 murders this year,

Deaths by COVID-19 - 2736
Per the Illinois Department of Public Health, as of July 22, there have been a total 165,301 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 7,347 deaths in IL, including: 100,124 cases and 4,801 deaths in Cook County. This includes 42,430 cases and 2,065 deaths in suburban Cook County, and 57,694 cases and 2,736 deaths in Chicago.

Yet these same Republicans will not hold Trump responsible for his lack of fighting COVID, ignoring science, trying to open schools without help in mitigating spread along with Trump trying to cut funds for testing. COVID kills blacks at an almost 4x rate of white people. Yet Republicans when the issue of racism and police abuse come up they want to pivot to their phony concern for black people in Chicago.
 
Last edited:
They should consider reviewing all the policy positions taken by the republican party since its inception under Lincoln and ask whether they agree with all of them today. Political parties change constituencies and change policies accordingly. Going back 60+ years to before the GOP's southern strategy to argue that the democrats are the party opposing civil rights is asinine. We judge parties based on the positions they hold now, not in 1950. It's the same reason the GOP gets no quarter now for its racism because Lincoln freed the slaves 160 years ago.

Pro-tip: even a cursory review of US history indicates that whichever party represents the American south is the party who opposes civil rights. At the time of the Civil War and for decades prior, they viewed this as a sectional issue more than a party issue. They were right, and it remains true today.
 
They should consider reviewing all the policy positions taken by the republican party since its inception under Lincoln and ask whether they agree with all of them today. Political parties change constituencies and change policies accordingly. Going back 60+ years to before the GOP's southern strategy to argue that the democrats are the party opposing civil rights is asinine. We judge parties based on the positions they hold now, not in 1950. It's the same reason the GOP gets no quarter now for its racism because Lincoln freed the slaves 160 years ago.

Pro-tip: even a cursory review of US history indicates that whichever party represents the American south is the party who opposes civil rights. At the time of the Civil War and for decades prior, they viewed this as a sectional issue more than a party issue. They were right, and it remains true today.
We judge parties based on the positions they hold now, not in 1950.

Are you applying that to people in general or just political party's. If it's not both, why not? I agree with your point, I'm just wondering what the limits are.
 
We judge parties based on the positions they hold now, not in 1950.

Are you applying that to people in general or just political party's. If it's not both, why not? I agree with your point, I'm just wondering what the limits are.

It certainly applies to political parties, because political parties are not people and they have no agency outside the conduct of their individual members. For the same reason, I wouldn't judge a corporate entity now for being a polluter in the 1970's if the corporation had cleaned up its act since. Because the people responsible probably don't run the company anymore, and its people, not entities, who are morally responsible for their behavior.

So far as applying it to people, it's largely case by case. If someone was racist in 1955 but repented for their racism and spent the next several decades fighting against it, I'd be inclined to forgive. As was the case with Robert Byrd.

If someone say, is seen in a photo wearing black face in 1987, it really depends on their explanation. But then, I'm not that sympathetic to the extreme end of "woke" culture these days.
 
It certainly applies to political parties, because political parties are not people and they have no agency outside the conduct of their individual members. For the same reason, I wouldn't judge a corporate entity now for being a polluter in the 1970's if the corporation had cleaned up its act since. Because the people responsible probably don't run the company anymore, and its people, not entities, who are morally responsible for their behavior.

So far as applying it to people, it's largely case by case. If someone was racist in 1955 but repented for their racism and spent the next several decades fighting against it, I'd be inclined to forgive. As was the case with Robert Byrd.

If someone say, is seen in a photo wearing black face in 1987, it really depends on their explanation. But then, I'm not that sympathetic to the extreme end of "woke" culture these days.
Excellent explanation, thank you.
 
lol this silly guy still thinks one party cares about the poor and/or "minorities". How cute and blissful.

One day you will learn that none of them give a shit /pats HomerJS on the head.


By the way - where are there the most homeless people that have a population so large that the homeless population could account for entire city populations? Don't worry though! I'm sure the progressive agenda will fix it.... one of these days.... surely this year.... maybe next? Oh well, just keep saying "maybe next year"
 
lol this silly guy still thinks one party cares about the poor and/or "minorities". How cute and blissful.

One day you will learn that none of them give a shit /pats HomerJS on the head.


By the way - where are there the most homeless people that have a population so large that the homeless population could account for entire city populations? Don't worry though! I'm sure the progressive agenda will fix it.... one of these days.... surely this year.... maybe next? Oh well, just keep saying "maybe next year"

You really are a little condescending shit of a person, but you already know that and and seem to revel in that fact. Just as you are wallowing around in it right now like a pig in shit-filled mid.
 
lol this silly guy still thinks one party cares about the poor and/or "minorities". How cute and blissful.

One day you will learn that none of them give a shit /pats HomerJS on the head.


By the way - where are there the most homeless people that have a population so large that the homeless population could account for entire city populations? Don't worry though! I'm sure the progressive agenda will fix it.... one of these days.... surely this year.... maybe next? Oh well, just keep saying "maybe next year"

You might take a look at which party has been responsible for any government policies which have benefited people of color, and which has not. Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security/Welfare all benefit people of low income disproportionately. Then there are the major pieces of civil rights legislation of the 60's, and every piece of civil rights legislation since.

Including the ones which couldn't get out of committee because of republican opposition. You can't use dem failures to pass legislation due to determined republican opposition to claim "both parties are the same." Sorry, nice try.
 
lol this silly guy still thinks one party cares about the poor and/or "minorities". How cute and blissful.

One day you will learn that none of them give a shit /pats HomerJS on the head.


By the way - where are there the most homeless people that have a population so large that the homeless population could account for entire city populations? Don't worry though! I'm sure the progressive agenda will fix it.... one of these days.... surely this year.... maybe next? Oh well, just keep saying "maybe next year"
Different topic genius. While Democrats do take black people for granted, Republicans have an open hostility towards not only blacks but people of color. For now I'll take my chances with Democrats. I'm not about to support a party that for example took an axe to the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
 
You might take a look at which party has been responsible for any government policies which have benefited people of color, and which has not. Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security/Welfare all benefit people of low income disproportionately. Then there are the major pieces of civil rights legislation of the 60's, and every piece of civil rights legislation since.

Including the ones which couldn't get out of committee because of republican opposition. You can't use dem failures to pass legislation due to determined republican opposition to claim "both parties are the same." Sorry, nice try.

Are you fucking high? Last I checked people were complaining that SS and Medicare are racist because they benefit white people more.

Basically their arguments were generally that white people proportionately are more likely to live longer - thus programs like SS and Medicare that are dependent upon your age benefit them more.

I'm not the one making that argument - just showing how yours is entirely false.
 
lol this silly guy still thinks one party cares about the poor and/or "minorities". How cute and blissful.

I wouldn’t be so sure about this in one sense. For sure, a lot of them don’t actually really care and just follow whatever they think benefits them the most, but the increasing rhetoric on "racism" has an obvious endgame to something bigger. The Latino population is young and significant and there is also a bigger proportion of blacks getting to voting age. Latinos want to give reparations to blacks. Increasingly blacks want reparations – it’s like what? 90%? I wouldn’t be surprised in the coming decades if the Democrats attempt to give them privileged status for their skin color e.g. monthly checks, unreasonable quotas for jobs, etc. I’ve seen some crazy estimates (like $300K lump sum). The sad part is I bet the disadvantage would still remain if the UK is any indication or how our young black students are doing academically (read: still bad).


FT_18.09.13_Latino_Hispanicsare.png


You might take a look at which party has been responsible for any government policies which have benefited people of color, and which has not. Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security/Welfare all benefit people of low income disproportionately. Then there are the major pieces of civil rights legislation of the 60's, and every piece of civil rights legislation since.

Republicans would need buy-in from Democrats to effectively tackle SS and Medicare, which they actually almost got with Obama. All their proposals involve grandfathering, which could easily be reversed before it actually had consequence.

Yes, welfare should have benefited blacks for decades, yet we're still being told we've done nothing for them. It's also ironic who ended welfare as we know it.

Are you fucking high? Last I checked people were complaining that SS and Medicare are racist because they benefit white people more.

Haha, I've seen that. It’s funny how everything that comes to a different outcome ends up being “racist”. I can think of a lot of policies that Democrats do that could be argued as “racist”. For example, Wolfe cites Medicaid, yet like many welfare programs, they require that you have to spend your money to a retarded extent. Or how about what a lot of liberal states do with their online sales taxes, haha (i.e. squandering it on cops). Or how it’s claimed blacks can't get higher education because they’re in shit areas, yet Democrats have a lot of responsibility in maintaining the obsolete campus system and tying them down with public/subsidized housing.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn’t be so sure about this in one sense. For sure, a lot of them don’t actually really care and just follow whatever they think benefits them the most, but the increasing rhetoric on "racism" has an obvious endgame to something bigger. The Latino population is young and significant and there is also a bigger proportion of blacks getting to voting age. Latinos want to give reparations to blacks. Increasingly blacks want reparations – it’s like what? 90%? I wouldn’t be surprised in the coming decades if the Democrats attempt to give them privileged status for their skin color e.g. monthly checks, unreasonable quotas for jobs, etc. I’ve seen some crazy estimates (like $300K lump sum). The sad part is I bet the disadvantage would still remain if the UK is any indication or how our young black students are doing academically (read: still bad).


FT_18.09.13_Latino_Hispanicsare.png




Republicans would need buy-in from Democrats to effectively tackle SS and Medicare, which they actually almost got with Obama. All their proposals involve grandfathering, which could easily be reversed before it actually had consequence.

Yes, welfare should have benefited blacks for decades, yet we're still being told we've done nothing for them. It's also ironic who ended welfare as we know it.



Haha, I've seen that. It’s funny how everything that comes to a different outcome ends up being “racist”. I can think of a lot of policies that Democrats do that could be argued as “racist”. For example, Wolfe cites Medicaid, yet like many welfare programs, they require that you have to spend your money to a retarded extent. Or how about what a lot of liberal states do with their online sales taxes, haha (i.e. squandering it on cops). Or how it’s claimed blacks can't get higher education because they’re in shit areas, yet Democrats have a lot of responsibility in maintaining the obsolete campus system and tying them down with public/subsidized housing.

The Democrats are trying and failing & the Republicans are trying and succeeding.
Based on what I've seen the last two hundred years, I prefer stupid and honest over evil and successful.
 
I saw a thread that just made me start this one. Often Republicans try to deflect from their shortcomings to avoid dealing with their own issues. They deflect from their own racism by linking the Democratic Party before civil rights to today. How many times have you heard "Democrats are the party of segregation and the Klan" This recent thread is a perfect example...


Here one I thought of this week. With all the BLM protests going on the defense used by right wingers is, "what about black on black crime in Chicago?". That's their goto. Question, what killed more people in Chicago in 2020, homicides or COVID-19?


Deaths by homicide - 385


Deaths by COVID-19 - 2736


Yet these same Republicans will not hold Trump responsible for his lack of fighting COVID, ignoring science, trying to open schools without help in mitigating spread along with Trump trying to cut funds for testing. COVID kills blacks at an almost 4x rate of white people. Yet Republicans when the issue of racism and police abuse come up they want to pivot to their phony concern for black people in Chicago.

Ima just gonna drop this here
or trends
 
I love how democrats, if they aren’t perfect and solve all the problems then they are just as bad as republicans who actively try to make the problems worse.

We’ve got some really fucking stupid people on this forum who have horrible logic. My guess is it’s those same types of people who stand in the way of progress instead of trying to help it.
 
You really are a little condescending shit of a person, but you already know that and and seem to revel in that fact. Just as you are wallowing around in it right now like a pig in shit-filled mid.
You are being way to nice....douche bag of a person is more like it!!
 
I love the Progressheviks and their self-anointed superiority when dealing with minorities.

As usual you didn`t read the whole article....
No where doers the article talk about suppressing the Hispanic vote -- except in the first paragraph and even then those are allegations and bear no basis for the rest of the article!!
Not one word! What it does talk about is how the Biden camp is treating it`s workers by moving them to places where there are hardly any Hispanics!
Nice try....you and Starbuck must be sleeping together,,,Biords of a lying feather...
The seven-page internal letter, obtained by the Miami Herald, contains eight allegations from field organizers about what they say is a lack of a “fully actionable field plan” from the Biden campaign as it transitions into the Florida party to coordinate voter outreach efforts.
 
Are you fucking high? Last I checked people were complaining that SS and Medicare are racist because they benefit white people more.

Basically their arguments were generally that white people proportionately are more likely to live longer - thus programs like SS and Medicare that are dependent upon your age benefit them more.

I'm not the one making that argument - just showing how yours is entirely false.
You are so freaking crazy!1 That is so absurd but it shouldn`t surprise any of us that you would make empty accusations and say last i checked...hahaha that is funny! Link please.,......
 
Are you fucking high? Last I checked people were complaining that SS and Medicare are racist because they benefit white people more.

Basically their arguments were generally that white people proportionately are more likely to live longer - thus programs like SS and Medicare that are dependent upon your age benefit them more.

I'm not the one making that argument - just showing how yours is entirely false.

Not high. Yet.

I have never heard the argument you describe. Yet I will assume, for the sake of argument, that someone has made that argument some time.

It's irrelevant. Your original contention was that neither party is better for people of color. I listed a number of things the democrats have done for people of color, and also pointed out that they've attempted to do other things which have been thwarted by the opposing party.

And your answer is to describe some other alleged person's bad argument that whatever democrats have given isn't good enough? It isn't even your argument, so I fail to see how it supports your original contention at all.

So are you modifying your argument now to "some people of color do not perceive a difference between the two parties"? Because your original argument was that there was, in fact, no difference. I see the distinction between those two arguments, which is why your attempted goal post shift is a fail.
 
Last edited:
I love the Progressheviks and their self-anointed superiority when dealing with minorities.

We already know Republicans are hostile to minorities, that's why they took an axe to the 1965 Voting Rights Act in court.
 
We already know Republicans are hostile to minorities, that's why they took an axe to the 1965 Voting Rights Act in court.

Hey now, it hadn't really been needed since way back in, like 2010. Ancient history!

Gotta keep things up to date, except you know, the Electoral College or other antiquities that also disenfranchise.

Poor bullshit. Posted that weak sauce just hoping by some chance the reader hasn't done even a cursory review of what's been done in black, immigrant and native communities wrt to voting access and registration. Someone who loves Putin's cockholster then attempts to make a Russo flavored insult during his act of projection. That is just delicious.
 
Last edited:
lol this silly guy still thinks one party cares about the poor and/or "minorities". How cute and blissful.

One day you will learn that none of them give a shit /pats HomerJS on the head.


By the way - where are there the most homeless people that have a population so large that the homeless population could account for entire city populations? Don't worry though! I'm sure the progressive agenda will fix it.... one of these days.... surely this year.... maybe next? Oh well, just keep saying "maybe next year"

You sound very emotional. Why is that?
 
Back
Top