Bad mgoblog Twitter post is bad
August 16th, 2017 at 5:52 AM ^
I studied poli sci and mom was a librarian. I understand sourcing and attribution – neither of which you’ve done whatsoever. I’m not going to footnote a blog post.
Regarding Sirhan, your statement contradicts itself. RFK was a leftie who acted against his political viewpoint to support Israel, but Sirhan must have been a leftie in every way because of his opposition to support of Israel. Did I get that right?
Sirhan was born in then-Palestine, was a Jordanian citizen, and moved to the US when he was 12.
It’s not surprising that someone born in Palestine would be opposed to US support of Israel in the 6-day War. In itself, it offers absolutely no indication of his overall political viewpoint.
Many sources say he was born, raised, and devoutly Christian – he didn’t “allegedly explore” Christianity. You’re right, his religious affiliation doesn’t indicate his political leanings any more than does his opposition to the US support for Israel in the 6-Day War. If you have reliable sources that affirm his “leftie” beliefs, I'll accept it.
“doesn’t make him a repub.” – as Reagan said, “There you go again”. I responded to your argument about “lefties”, and mentioned nothing about political parties.
Re: Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”
Kevin Phillips was a Nixon strategist, widely acknowledged as the primary architect of his “southern strategy”. From a NYT profile:
“Kevin Phillips plots the emerging Republican majority, its common denominator is hostility to blacks and browns among slipping Democrats and abandonment of the Democratic party because of its identification with the colored minorities.”
“Phillips had one conspicuous campaign success—the urging of an Outer South Strategy aimed at capturing Florida, Tennessee, North Carolina and Virginia, as opposed to the Deep South Strategy that had carried Wallace territory for Goldwater in 1964, but at the cost of frightening away millions of potential voters elsewhere.”
Phillips' own words:
“Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
“My argument was this: Your outer Southerners who live in the Ozark and Appalachian mountain ranges and in the Piedmont upcountry—and now in urban‐suburban Florida and Texas—have always had different interests than the Negrophobe plantation owners of the Black Belt. This is a less extreme conservative group. It adheres with other Republican constituencies across the country and can be appealed to without fragmenting the coalition. When you are after political converts, start with the less extreme and wait for the extremists to come into line when their alternatives collapse.”
Ken Mehlman – GOP Chairman in 2005
"Some Republicans gave up on winning the African American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization. I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong."
Finally, Giffords' shooter. Yes, he did drugs. No, his political affiliation isn’t clear.
“He’s an independent who didn’t vote in the 2010 election.”
I already provided one attributed quote; here are more:
“Democrats paint him as "an anti-government, Tea Party conservative; "Republicans say his reading list suggests he's a "left-wing wacko." “
“Though the evidence seems to indicate Loughner lacks a fixed ideology (outside of anti-government sentiment) and may be mentally unstable, many have drawn conclusions about his political leanings. Some have cast him as a conservative and blamed Sarah Palin and Tea Party influences for his actions, while others have cast him as a "lunatic liberal."”
I’m done with this.
August 15th, 2017 at 10:23 PM ^
You're a clown.
August 15th, 2017 at 11:57 PM ^
August 16th, 2017 at 4:54 AM ^
but finding a handful of wingnuts who now say they are 'right wing' isn't much proof. even the southern law poverty center called environmental extremists (always left) the greatest domestic terrorist threat and that the SLPC is no friend of the right. also, 'terror' includes riots and violence which again, is owned by the left world-wide.
as to abortion, when they are cutting up the babies' body parts and selling them i'm sorry, that isn't 'medical procedure' any more than lethal injection is. it is left driven genocide - it is an absolute requirement of the democrat party who now say they won't support any pro-life candidates. it was founded by margaret sanger (admired by hitler) who hated blacks and people with special needs. she was a leftie and her plan kills black children at a rate that is shocking: more black children are killed in some places than are allowed to be born. roll that around in your head for a minute. more killed than birthed. that is indeed genocide.
August 16th, 2017 at 7:38 AM ^
I have passionate feelings and deep-seated feelings about a lot of these issues. They're well thought-out and quite interesting to me. And I'm even capable of arguing in a civil discourse about them at the right time and place, provided I'm not met with bumper-sticker arguments from whoever I'm chatting with.
Another passionate feeling I have is that this is not the forum to try to sway folks on the abortion topic or most of these other politically-charged topics.
(I will say that calling Nazis "left-wing" is a bit out there - love you, XM, but that's just not tenable.)
August 16th, 2017 at 7:26 PM ^
There is really only one thing that I've drawn from all of your posts.
We are fucked.
I've been coming to the realization that we are far more divided as a country and "culture" than I used to think. It will get far worse before it gets better. I believe I will be on the "right" side (not your context of right) of history. I'm sure you believe the same. One of us is very, very wrong.
I won't even try to debunk any of the things you have posted here today, because "facts" can be twisted and manipulated to say what any given person wants them to say, if you have the wit. You clearly have that, at the least.
August 15th, 2017 at 3:04 PM ^
I met her a couple years ago during the NAACP march from Selma, AL to DC. She's a sharp girl, but she did make sure everyone knew about that picture.
August 15th, 2017 at 3:04 PM ^
Vice news had a reporter embedded with the alt-right group. Letting them speak allows their nonsense to be heard and rejected. There's no normalizing their ideas. You don't have to filter their message through the left or right media. Let them convict themselves through their own words and actions.
August 15th, 2017 at 3:06 PM ^
August 15th, 2017 at 2:40 PM ^
Agreed. I would not give them the satisfaction. Not to equivocate the two, but I remember watching coverage of one of those BLM protests last summer and there were more media members than protesters.
August 15th, 2017 at 2:56 PM ^
The best thing we can do is turn our backs on them. They WANT to stir things up, to create a media splash. How much media will really cover them if there isn't violence and hateful shouting over the top of a police barricade? It is absurd to think that showing up to a hate speech event and shouting slogans would make them have less hate in their hearts.
The point of a "March for ____" is to generate attention. Don't give them what they want.
August 15th, 2017 at 3:01 PM ^
I don't know. It is getting to the point in this country that silence in the face of this kind of thought and behavior would not be seen as silent rejection but instead tacit acceptance or approval.
August 15th, 2017 at 6:38 PM ^
absolutely teach your kids acceptance, absolutely talk about and recognize real issues as much as possible. There are enough (too many) cases of actual, real-life racism and bigotry about which you can be very loud. Be aware of and denounce these rallys and anyone who believes in this flawed ideology.
But there is nothing productive about being there shouting at these guys in person. Someone else mentioned it above. It will only fuel them. It will only keep them in the news. It will only give them the recruiting footage they want.
August 15th, 2017 at 8:18 PM ^
August 15th, 2017 at 3:08 PM ^
Unfortunatley we as a society lack the compassion and empathy to see that we're much stronger united than divided. Not to mention all the propaganda and social engineering going on these days.
Stay vigilant and mindful of the fuckery my friends, no matter what colors you align yourself with.
And on that note, fuck Sparty, to hell with Notre Dame. Beat OSU fergodsake!
August 15th, 2017 at 6:24 PM ^
On point, Stephen.
August 15th, 2017 at 6:34 PM ^
August 15th, 2017 at 10:06 PM ^
Which is exactly what the little twats should be: ignored.
They are sad, small people who live on the edges of society and turn to hate to feel included in something. They should be ignored and ostracized.
August 15th, 2017 at 11:38 PM ^
August 16th, 2017 at 7:22 AM ^
Who would have thought that XtraMelanin would fall into the fanatical zealot category?
August 15th, 2017 at 2:31 PM ^
I'm guessing you're joking, but on the off chance you're not, I'd re-consider. I wouldn't want to risk being the next 6pm news story about getting run over by someone's car. Not at all saying you shouldn't go out and voice your opinion, but for the love of god stay back and keep your hands to yourself.
It's like trying to pick a fight at a bar. You never know who's had one too many drinks or who decided they were bringing a knife with them in case anyone got in their face.
August 15th, 2017 at 2:34 PM ^
I'm seeing it scheduled for 9/2. I'm going to that to counter-protest. Are you seeing a different one?
August 15th, 2017 at 2:43 PM ^
Yes. Nazis deserve to be punched.
August 15th, 2017 at 8:16 PM ^
August 16th, 2017 at 8:07 AM ^
just look at their fists. Frank Clark is black if my memory serves me. So it must have been a couple of Sparties looking for a couch. Or a couple of OSU fans looking for Frank Clarke.
August 15th, 2017 at 2:45 PM ^
Follow your heart. The only good Nazi is the Nazi who's afraid to be one in public.
August 15th, 2017 at 3:16 PM ^
Do worse: point and laugh.
"Hey guys, thanks for bringing tiki torches, but the luau's the other side of town."
"What, Walmart's out of pitchforks?"
"Really? REALLY? It's brown COATS, not brown PANTS. Fascism 101, here."
"Wait, YOU'RE the Master Race? I'd ask for a refund."
"Being a Nazi may make you look edgy, but look buddy, you still won't get laid."
I got a million of em.
August 17th, 2017 at 1:08 PM ^
That's exactly why he wrote 'The Producers' and some of his other stuff mocking the Nazis.
These idiots are nothing but a sick joke, might as well get a few laughs out of them.
August 15th, 2017 at 3:56 PM ^
August 15th, 2017 at 8:26 PM ^
August 15th, 2017 at 4:47 PM ^
the best way to marginalize these people is exposing them on social media for who they are. Extracting social costs did as much to keep this sort of thing down for decades as any physical confrontation or even legislation.
As a card-carrying member of the ACLU, defending the right of Nazis to march is in my DNA. The right to oppose and disgrace them is, too.
August 15th, 2017 at 7:02 PM ^
Would you defend the Westboro Baptist Assholes right to protest at a serviceman's funeral? When their family is at their lowest? Decency should be a consideration...
I think legislation is in place now that the WBA must be about a mile away to protest. It was long overdue.
August 15th, 2017 at 7:26 PM ^
I've actually seen those lunatics at a funeral I attended. It's hard to imagine such people exist, but there they were in the flesh.
The 2012 restrictions kept them 300 ft. (which isn't THAT far, really) from any family members and I believe there were time restrictions about how long before/after the services they could show up. I don't recall a1st Am. challenge in the courts on that particular law but it's likely treated the same way as abortion protest restrictions and those imposed on political protests at the party national conventions ("safe zones") where courts tend to defer to public safety concerns.
But to answer the question... I do support their right to protest short of deliberately inciting violence. Not because of a "slippery slope" argument, which is a great way to score a D in a constitutional law class. Rather, because if the state can show a balance of harms between reasonable restrictions on free speech (which happens all the time) in exchange for public safety, that's something we as a society can live with, even if the preference of 99.9% of us is that these people would crawl into the world's deepest hole and stay there.
August 16th, 2017 at 3:00 AM ^
They stand at the street corner in front of my church cursing everyone out and holding up their dirty little signs. I feel like going over and breaking their signs and shoving it up their ass. But the best thing to do is to ignore them. They spread their hate by trying to confront you plus they have a bunch of lawyers in their racist little klan that go around suing people or municipalities that attack them or will not let them protests. They made some $ in the last 20 years suing cities that refused to let them protest. Ignoring them seems to be working in the last 5 years. Their little group is dwindling and they are not traveling around the country like they use to 10 years ago. The one mile restriction may have worked making them invisible to most and reducing the attention they seek at fallen veteran's funerals.
August 15th, 2017 at 9:34 PM ^
For protesting or being Nazis?