D
Deleted member 42060
Guest
You need to see the video of this,dwalk31 ?
What, exactly, is your standard for racism?
You're taking this whole "Devil's Advocate" routine a bit too literally.
I don't believe anyone is saying that Joe Biden is "some perfect candidate" - and that includes Joe Biden.
I have a little trick I use when selecting between two imperfect options that apparently hasn't occurred to you: choose the better one.
You defended Roy Moore with far greater zeal than the simpering little sighs you squeak out when pressed on this.
Just not enough to vote against him.
Would you say that Obama/Biden had more or White Nationalists in more prominent positions?
"The DOJ is independent?" That's the best defense you're capable of crafting?
Presidents are able to nominate and terminate an AG.
If Sessions is an incompetent racist - and he is - fault him and the incompetent racist who appointed him.
Do you need a refresher on why Jefferson Beauregard Sessions was an especially galling choice on Trump's part? Did you not read Coretta Scott King's 1986 statement to the Senate, regarding Sessions' attempts to intimidate Black voters in Alabama?
Are you, champion of criminal justice reform, on board with re-electing a man whose first choice for Attorney General attempted to resume the War on Drugs, sought an increase in capital punishment, and, while Attorney General of Alabama, even went so far as to propose mandatory death penalties for those twice convicted of drug trafficking?
Is that in line with your values? That's how you voted.
If you're disgusted by the '94 crime bill - and you should be - I have terrible news for you about Bill Barr.
Barr has been described by the ACLU as "an ardent champion of mass incarceration." He literally wrote "the case for more incarceration" in 1992.
As an NAACP Legal Defense Fund report phrased it,
His actions in the wake of the Rodney King verdict are especially pertinent to recent events (emphasis mine):
That goon squad of unidentified, unaccountable storm troopers Barr set loose on protesters in Washington that you couldn't manage to comment on? It's not new for him.
And when you vote for Trump, you are voting for Attorney General William Barr. You are voting for this. OWN THAT.
So he's not throwing red meat to White Supremacists when he repeatedly defends Confederate symbols and posts dog whistles about "thugs" and "animals?"
Federal Document Proves Donald Trump Practiced Housing Discrimination in New York City
Federal Document Proves Donald Trump Practiced Housing Discrimination in New York Citywww.huffpost.com
I don't support mass deportations, but that's a pretty egregious deflection from child separation.
Nice talking point, though. I won't ask where you found it:
President Trump Falsely Claims Obama Began Migrant Family Separations
'This has been happening long before I got there,' Trump said of the policytime.com
Yes, you've been quite vocal about "due process" rights on NikeTalk.... beginning with Roy Moore. You did not mention it prior.
Every hero has an origin story.
Did the Obama Administration Select the Countries Affected by President Trump's Immigration Order?
President Trump's defenders maintained his January 2017 executive action on immigration and asylum targeted countries named by the Obama administration in 2015.www.snopes.com
From the jump? I'll have to take your word for it. You didn't show up in the Kaepernick thread until page 326 to co-sign something Charles Barkley said about Black students engaging in anti-intellectual bullying: https://niketalk.com/threads/colin-kaepernick-is-righter-than-you-know.652983/page-326#post-28840584
You spent more time defending Trump's criticism of Kaepernick than Kaepernick himself, and as of March, 2019 you ventured into the Kaepernick thread only twice: once to decry anti-intellectual bullying and once in response to an @ mention to call Kaepernick a sellout and announce that you'll no longer boycott the NFL.
Let's talk about "evolution" for a moment - something your ideological kin don't believe in, unless of the "social Darwinist" variety.
If Joe Biden finally acknowledged criticism of the '94 crime bill as valid and expressed an openness to support reparations, would you:
A) interpret that as a sign of genuine growth and progress
B) dismiss it as cynical pandering and continue to call him the architect of modern mass incarceration?
Or is that different?
On its own, perhaps, though we're not in court and you're obviously and admittedly not a trial attorney. As it stands, you're claiming that Trump's former casino manager, building manager, personal attorney, and Apprentice "mentees", are, along with countless others, all lying about Donald Trump's racism (under oath, in some cases), but the man who's currently told 19,128 lies (not including last night's speech) since taking office, who claimed that he sent private investigators to Hawaii who couldn't "believe what they’re finding" about the former President's past, windmills caused cancer, global warming is a hoax perpetrated by China, personally saw "thousands" of Muslim people in New Jersey were cheering on 9/11, that he didn't know (or barely met) Lev Parnas, Prince Andrew, Jeffrey Epstein, George Papadopoulos, and Stormy Daniels, rented almost exclusively to White tenants, assembled an overwhelmingly White administration, has inspired the loyalty of White Supremacists around the world, and cannot for the life of him utter the phrase "Black Lives Matter", is telling the truth about being "the least racist person there is anywhere in the world?"
Good luck selling that one.
Incidentally, in 2016 Trump boasted that, "At the end of four years, I guarantee you I will get over 95 percent of the African-American vote. I promise you."
How's that working out?
If only you'd clicked on the link I included, you could be. There's video of this, too - the one form of evidence you're willing to accept. If you still aren't familiar, it's by choice.
To paraphrase Malcolm X, it's not by coincidence that members of an orchestra all play the same song.
More "in your face?"
Why would anyone say that when the Black unemployment ra- oh... there goes that talking point. Don't worry, you still have three left.
Racism has been on these shores from the time of European invasion, but the absence of novelty does not diminish the scale or scope of the problem - nor the way that Trump has energized White supremacists.
I'm glad - truly - that you haven't been personally affected by the rise in hate crimes under Trump - or, as you're so fond of pointing out, the economic impact of COVID-19 that has disproportionately impacted Black Americans and Black-owned businesses.
I'm quite certain that you don't assume your own personal experiences in these respects to be monolithic.
A sea slug occupies higher moral ground than Donald Trump or his enablers - in my opinion.
So, to recap, you said - quite clearly - "Right there with the logic of people who got a smaller refund so they think that their tax liability increased. I would probably be a super progressive if that was the reality."
You didn't say "I wouldn't be very impressed with the tax cuts, either, if that was the reality." You said "I would probably be a super progressive if that was the reality."
I guess the lesson is we should just stop listening to you.
THIS is where we are because of voter suppression. THIS is where we are because of racism, sexism, heterosexism, and xenophobia. THIS is where we are because of bigots and those who support and enable them for personal gain, whether material or egotistical.
Joe Biden is part of that - and so is Donald Trump. I don't know of anyone in this thread who considered Joe Biden their first (or second) choice among potential Democratic nominees. That doesn't mean there are no meaningful differences between Biden and Trump administrations, however.
Don't kid yourself, you couldn't even commit to supporting Stacy Abrams over Brian Kemp in a hypothetical scenario.
No one here would be surprised if Joe Biden selects Susan Rice, Stacy Abrams, or Kamala Harris as his running mate and you still support Trump/Pence.
No one here would be surprised if the Donald Trump Apprentice mixtape comes out in October, complete with racial slurs, and you still support Trump/Pence.
In that regard, and perhaps only that regard, you are consistent.
This is a highly speculative premise at best. Compare consent decrees issued under the Obama administration vs. the Trump administration, look at the information I shared regarding Trump's AG picks, and tell me with a straight face that Donald "Bring Back Our Death Penalty, Bring Back Our Police" Trump is the last best hope for criminal justice reform, that Donald "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" Trump is the Great White Hope for police reform.
There is an alternative.
The Democrats are within striking distance of retaking the Senate - especially if current polling trends persist.
It is Republicans - not Democrats - who are currently standing in the way of basic police reforms like revising qualified immunity.
The Democrats' police reform bill, while inadequate, is objectively stronger. Read both bills.
What is your strategy here?
You oppose progressive candidates like Ilhan Omar who support the criminal justice reforms you claim to seek, and instead lend your support to conservative politicians who seek to roll back existing civil rights protections, like the Voting Rights Act of 1965, to promote minority voter suppression and all you have to show for it is their eventual and begrudging support of a watered down and deeply compromised criminal justice reform package that the previous administration would have signed if not for - wait for it - Republicans.
Your only defense appears to be that we should settle for the milkiest of milquetoast bills because that's the best we can do. With that attitude, perhaps.
If you have your way, you'll be in here four years from now lauding the candidacy of a mayonnaise popsicle over AOC because "Trump signed the Beat but Don't Kick Act of 2022."
.
