...the Dems predictably overreacted with their TDS, hearing racism where there was actually none. This emboldened the previously coralled group a ignorant, radical children, and has put Pelosi behind the eight ball with them.
It is also no coincidence after this event that political animal Chuck Schumer announced that he will support reparation legislation by Shirly Jackson Lee. This is not mainstream, centrist stuff....this is radical, fringe legislation. But he feels the need to do so because he is an old white male democrat who has as much vulnerability as Biden does for his past work which these radicals get to call racist with automatice credence in the Dem party.
Thus, you have a Dem aprty whose presidential candidate and whose congressional leadership support reparation legislation that cannot be properly defined or limited much less afforded with our present debt and healthcare situation. You also now can clearly see that it is the Squad who is driving the agenda of the Dem party now.
Even liberal Dems on this board are privately uncomfortable with this situation. Is their hatred of Trump so great that they will support what they know to be a horrible mistake to this country? Some will, but some won't. Also, true moderates certainly won't.
Trump knew what he was doing with his tweets. personally, i prefer the crazy Squad to be coralled because i don't want any chance that their policies come to fruition. But, on the other hand, I suppose that exposing the growing cancer withing the Dem party is possibly better than letting it be covered up only to resurface in power in 2 years.
Look at the message that the newly empowered Squad has now fired off to Pelosi. "There is a new sheriff in town" "We are minority women so you must fear crossing us". "You can bring your isues TO us for our consideration from now on". These are the messages.
Link: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/the-squad-revives-their-feud-with-pelosi-be-aware-when-you-single-us-out-that-were-women-of-color
A more nuisance approach would be to highlight their hatred of America and their agenda to continue down that path with the support of their party. To say “Go back where you come from” is childish and kills his narrative. Right thought, poorly executed.
Next time you pass a bunch of construction workers imagine what language they might use when speaking about the “squad.”
I think he tried to be satirical. That's why he mentioned Pelosi would be happy to arrange their leave. Because they are now her trouble makers. But it's a failed satire on Trump side and I agreed it's not effective. But D and MSM only focused the phrase "go back", turned a blind eye on "come back".
(no message)
(no message)
We need to become woke, pay reparations for our ancestors’ sins and just shut up before we utter more microagressions,
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
You know full well that Pelosi and Schumer gave personal informal condemnations while they would not act formerly so that they could have their political cake and eat it too. They wouldn't condemn it where it mattered......period.
You know better, and I don't recall you blasting the Dems when they failed to do this also as you do now. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that you only care about racism when Republicans are accused and that your actual concern is "Get Trump" rather than racism. This is further supported by the stretch you make to claim racism in his remarks directed specifically at a target of America haters rather than a group. You should examine your true feelings because you would realize this to be true.
Link: https://ijr.com/crenshaw-knocks-dems-condemn-omar-9-11-remark/
Universal condemnation. Full stop.
And yet, he seems to survive things that a majority of people consider gaffes, or even "racism" (which apparently is a catchall term for "anything the Left doesn't like"). We shall see.
The GOP really missed an opportunity to legislate on things in the first two years. The first Dem in office after Trump will just reverse everything he did.
Trump knows it. he is much smarter than they are. He knows they call everyone a racist. They have already been calling him one regardless of what he does.
(no message)
Jordan was a dick, but very likable. Others don’t get away with it. I’m sure there are better examples.
As for Trump’s first two years, the Republicans (many of them) played scared. They blew it.
(no message)
(no message)
Reparations are not going to happen. As I said yesterday, there is something called "Congress."
And I have said many times that those four freshmen are idiots who should shut the fuck up.
But it should sadden all of us that the president saw a political opportunity here. He appeals to our worst nature, and his base rises to that appeal every single time.
....and only an idiot would put someone in office who supports this.
You look at Trump's style while I look at his substance. Oh, and what he said was NOT racist. you have to assume your own motivations for Trump to see that. Of course, you've been doing that so long, it's just natural now.
He is using rhetoric to expose the far left and tie them to the “mainstream” left. The majority of his supporters see that. There is no need for him to pander to some fringe minority on the right. It’s not like they aren’t going to vote Republican.
Nothing fires up the rubes like telling them they are under assault. This time, by anti-American, brown, Muslim women.
(no message)
for the Unites States Women’s National Team. It would be so delicious if they got equal pay with the Men’s (sic) team.
true agenda drivers.
(no message)
(no message)
Can one have disdain for those parts of our history without being "anti-American"?
Can one be for equal application of the laws to all races, without favoritism to any, and not be accused of not having enough disdain for already abolished systemic racism?
Can one oppose a new brand of systemic racism without being accused of being a racist?
(no message)
OK. Now you need to go back to work.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
as though there is some vast swath of the population that it appeals to. There isn’t. You are using the same inflammatory rhetoric that you accuse Trump of using. The left has learned nothing from 2016. Nothing. You really do deserve four more years of Trump.
I doubt you have even seen Trump's entire tweets unedited by your MSM.
That is the hateful America you support.
(no message)
It is important to stand up against her hate, as you say. Send her back to her district.
of the left. Trump called attention to it. His support was going to move one way or another slightly. Makes sense that it went up.
I know, Chris doesn't like whataboutism, because he wants only you to be able to use racism as a tool for power. But mischaracterizations like your stoke the flames of this fire. I guess you think you will be able to put out the fire in time, but I'm not so sure.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
And his instincts are always, always divisive.
How dishonest with yourself can you get?! You would NEVER come together with him no matter what he did. You even falsely accused him of Russian Collusion for 2 1/2 yrs with NO evidence.
It is YOU liberals that have divided, and Obama’s Deep State orchestrates it all which is why I calledObama The Great Divider long before you falsely co-opted the name.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
And note: I don't use whataboutism to justify his actions. I use it to get your side to question its actions. Unfortunately, your side don't seem to have any desire for self examination. And, in the absence of your side changing, then whataboutism does indeed justify his actions...but it is your party's actions which justify his, not my posts in this forum.
(no message)
(no message)
Whataboutism might be more defensible if you could name a person. Just pointing to the "Dems", knowing that collectively there must be enough shit out there to stick, isn't a good defense to the behavior to "the President" himself.
If you point to AOC, for example, then the person can respond with a) she's not as bad (and you can have that argument); b) she may be as bad, but I don't constantly defend her.
As for the general idea that Dems are tribal as well, I think that is a different animal and not insidious. I'm not a big fan of tribalism myself, but people of color have not used tribalism historically to keep white people from attaining positions of power and wealth in this country. The opposite is not true. That is why White Male tribalism is, in fact, worse than, say African American tribalism.
I'm not talking about individuals. I'm talking about party leadership here (Pelosi, Schumer, the Clintons, etc.) and the "4 horsewomen of the apocalypse" (and their allied socialist race mongers). The Democrat Party leadership has, in recent decades, almost always looked at effects of laws on specific groups, not the incentives they provide individuals. The party groups people by skin color, when laws should be drafted and interpreted in race neutral fashion, looking only at behavior of individuals, not the color of their skin. The party won't let us move beyond the sins of the past, and that has the effect of keeping people in their groups through fear and academic societal sculpting...preventing them from succeeding as individuals, and as families. The cries of racism are just their way to keep the darker races (the ones they selected to keep control of) under their thumb. You can't have them voting for a guy who gives them jobs, because the Dem party is buying their votes with gifts, and gifts keep them down and create a culture that is not based on rugged individualism but is instead is based on collective shelter. Jobs for minorities is a serious threat to Democrat Party power. Just sad to see people like conor denying the good that Trump is offering all individuals, regardless of race...by fabricating accusations of racism, which accusations solely have the effect of keeping people on the government plantation.
(no message)
(no message)