patrick.net

marcus says

richwicks says

The intelligence agencies, department of justice, and democratic establishment fabricated evidence, repeatedly lied to the FISA courts, lied to the news media for 3 fucking years, and when that didn't work, started rioting and looting across several cities, are calling for the abolition of the police and are destroying historical monuments.

No ignorant or dishonest bias there. Sheesh, wtf. I'm vicariously embarrassed for you

Just becaSue?

Before Antifa arrived at her residence:

After Antifa visited her residence:

marcus says

richwicks says

MUST be a "woman of color", competence has nothing to do with the choice

It takes a right wingers to think if it's a woman of color it would be impossible to find someone anywhere close to competant enough.

It's a math problem!

Say you have 10 marbles. 5 of them are red, 3 are green, 2 are blue. They are randomly labelled 1-10 regardless of color.

If you only select from blue marbles, what's the chance you get the highest number out of all of them? What about if you select only green? What if you select only red?

What if you ignore color, and chose the largest number directly?

The democrats are now choosing based on color, instead of number. Selecting based on a color preference lowers the chances. In all cases when color discrimination is made, of selecting the highest number, it lowers the chances of selecting the highest number. This isn't even college level statistics - this is something you should have learned in grammar school.

How did the left become so ignorant of simple mathematics? If you discriminate based on color - AT ALL, in ALL CASES, the likelihood of choosing the largest number is decreased. Red is the most common so it gives you the BEST chance of choosing the highest number when you discriminate based on color but in all cases, discriminating based on color lowers the chance of picking the largest number.

Competence is no longer a factor for the democrats. Only color is and that is just blatant stupidity.

richwicks says

How did the left become so ignorant of simple mathematics?

And why do they think that choosing a woman of color to be president is not racist?

Onvacation says

richwicks says

How did the left become so ignorant of simple mathematics?

And why do they think that choosing a woman of color to be president is not racist?

I didn't say choosing a woman "of color" isn't racist.

Choosing a person based on a superficial attribute, regardless of the attribute is discriminatory when the attribute has nothing to do with the fitness for a function - which is normally in this case - competence. The type of discrimination is irrelevant.

I think I explained pretty clearly how discrimination works against fitness for a function 3 posts above. It's just democrats have returned to their racist, discriminatory, roots - and I cannot respect that at all.

richwicks says

Onvacation says

richwicks says

How did the left become so ignorant of simple mathematics?

And why do they think that choosing a woman of color to be president is not racist?

I didn't say choosing a woman "of color" isn't racist.

I didn't say you. I said they, the leftists.

marcus says

richwicks says

Competence is no longer a factor for the democrats. Only color is and that is just blatant stupidity.

Wow you actually said it again. "only color is"

Yes, and I will say it again.

There is no possible reason to chose a person based on a superficial attribute unless it's discriminatory.

The ONLY possible reason to chose from a field of people for a job, and limit it to a woman, a black person, an Asian, or a white heterosexual male is based on bigotry alone.

Exclusively that. Nothing else at all. Biden is a bigot. He may as well have said he will be only selecting from white, heterosexual, male, protestants to me. Jesus, I explained the math to you, I don't think it's even possible you don't understand it.

marcus says

richwicks says

Competence is no longer a factor for the democrats

Is beyond stupid.

Really?

So, a corrupt, overly friendly creepy old man, who apparently is senile, who is choosing his running mate based exclusively on gender and race is the most competent person in all the democratic party to run for president?

I think it's because he can easily be controlled and he's entirely incompetent.

marcus says

What's implied actually is that he believes there are some very competant women of color to choose from otherwise he wouldn't have said it.

No, what is implied is that the country is so freaking racist that that provided a minority is selected to run as VP, that alone will cause bigoted people to vote for Joe Biden.

You know, like if you didn't vote for Clinton, it was because you hated women. Not because you viewed her as as monster that brought back slavery to Libya and voted for the Iraq War over non existent weapons of mass destruction. That's how fucking superficial the democrats have become, and how little they respect their voting base.

marcus says

What's implied actually is that he believes there are some very competant women of color to choose from otherwise he wouldn't have said it. I'll grant you that it's political. And that I don't love it. But I don't know how someone can think it takes competence out of the decision.

Marcus. Every single white male, regardless of qualifications, was excluded from consideration for VP position exclusively because of his race/gender. I don't know how someone can think that this is not bigotry.

marcus says

richwicks says

brought back slavery to Libya and voted for the Iraq War over non existent weapons of mass destruction.

You forgot about her having the audacity to want to work on healthcare policy proposals when her husband was President.

You mean the thing she worked on with Richard Nixon?

I really don't care what she FAILED to do.

marcus says

All the republicans in congress voted for the Iraq war too. It probably means she bought the weapons of mass destruction talk.

Nearly all. They ought to be fired. Anybody that voted for the Iraq War is either grossly incompetent, or deeply immoral.

marcus says

richwicks says

that alone will cause bigoted people to vote for Joe Biden.

It is political yes. Although if it help bring out the vote from people that like seeing a woman on the ticket, or a black woman that's a far stretch from bigotry.

Yeah, they are appealing to bigots.

marcus says

But since you brought it up. In my opinion, with out race hatred among many on the right, Trump couldn't possibly have been elected.

Trump wsa elected because there isn't a penny's worth of difference between Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, John McCain, George W. Bush, John Kerry, Al Gore, William Clinton, Bob Dole, or George H. Bush.

And people are fucking fed up with the goddamned establishment which has done nothing but destroy this nation for 30 years. Kept us in war for 30 years. Sold the blue collar working class out to the Chinese for 30 years. Our establishment is utter garbage.

mostly reader says

Marcus. Every single white male, regardless of qualifications, was excluded from consideration for VP position exclusively because of his race/gender. I don't know how someone can think that this is not bigotry.

Marcus can't either - that won't prevent him from continuing to lie about it. Marcus is a fundamentally dishonest person.

marcus says

So all the years and decades that women were excluded from consideration, was that bigotry ?

YES.

It was.

Obviously.

marcus says

So all the years and decades that women were excluded from consideration, was that bigotry ? Or was it just trying to give the voters what they thought would be a winning candidate.

Shifting the blame from politicians to voters doesn't help your case. You are essentially calling current Dem voters bigots.

With which we may agree. Women may have been excluded in the past, but not quite in these clear terms. In the past (few decades), no major party candidate would get away with this. Bigotry was there, but it was never so strong as to allow a candidate say publicly and openly that he's picking a male candidate because of his gender. ANY major party would've been SLAUGHTERER right there one the spot, and likely by their own voters. You'd probably have to go back more than 50 years to find something remotely close to that.

Scroll forward to today. It IS happening, and voters CHEER. Bigotry is making a comeback.

richwicks says

spent 3 years trying to impeach a man they didn't like merely because he wasn't an establishment whore. The intelligence agencies, department of justice, and democratic establishment fabricated evidence, repeatedly lied to the FISA courts, lied to the news media for 3 fucking years, and when that didn't work, started rioting and looting across several cities, are calling for the abolition of the police and are destroying historical monuments.

After the attempted coup but before the looting and monument destroying, you left out a few things. Let me try:
After the coup didn't work, they tried impeachment based on no evidence crimes. When impeachment didn't work, it was management of COVID-19 for maximum economic fail (sick old folks must be returned to nursing homes to infect others). Now, it seems, we'll have looting, rioting, and desecration/destruction of historical monuments.

And now, they are trying to resurrect the "Russia" nonsense with the "bounties on soldiers."

marcus says

mostly reader says

Bigotry is making a comeback.

RIght. "And all lives matter," amiright ?

LOL. "Not all lives matter", amiright?

Only non-majority lives matter. Whiteness infects the system to the core and only by admitting White Privilege and the fundamental Racism of the USA, and redistributing the wealth of White Non-Allies, can we move forward to the End of History with a Socially Just State.

marcus says

richwicks says

marcus says

So all the years and decades that women were excluded from consideration, was that bigotry ?

YES.

So if in 1962 a candidate selects a male (or limits his selection to men) as a running mate, because he believes that if he chooses a woman, he won't win, it's bigotry. Fine, I'm done with this stupid conversation.

The irony here is you don't understand you're a bigot. Was the country bigoted in 1962? The civil rights act was passed in 1964. Of course there were limited opportunities for women and non white men in 1962. When Kennedy was elected 1/2 the country was in a tizzy because he was, gasp - Catholic.

In 1962, marcus says

But I will say again, that it doesn't compare to the evil cynicism involved in using racist dog whistles to appeal to the deplorables of the country.

They are called dog whistles because only you are able to hear them. You're the bigot.

I have pointed out, repeatedly, that I think exactly the same of Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, John McCain, George W. Bush, John Kerry, William Clinton, Bob Dole, and George H. Bush. Doesn't matter they were black, female, or white. They were terrible, awful, evil, warmongering, scum that have been betraying this nation for 30 years and don't think 1/2 the country isn't FULLY aware of this as well.

Now at worst, Trump is no different. That's the worst thing that could happen by electing him in 2016. The worst thing that could have happened, is we'd end up with the same goddamn fucking type of asshole that the nation has had to deal with for the past 28 years.

It was scum versus unknown - before that it was scum versus scum dating back to 1994, maybe 1988 although I don't remember Dukakis well. Known warmongering scumbag versus unknown was the 2016 election, and it's the 2020 election. Joe Biden, fanatical supporter of the Iraq War, VP as the US started wars in Syria and Libya versus man that tried to shut down the Syrian war (and largely has), and hasn't begun a new war. You're the fuck that wants to elect a senile fuck who is just another establishment puppet. You get that dickhead elected, we'll be back in Syria, and maybe even Iran and that wonderful Cold War 2.0 will be on. Who doesn't want to be mortal enemies with a nuclear super power like Russia? Wasn't the first fucking cold war so much goddamned fun? Who doesn't love spending fully 1/3rd of all tax revenue on the military for wars that serve no national purpose?

But here's the trick of it all, the US is run by nutcases now. Not Russia and they were run by nutcases in the 1980s. The US is all over the world blowing shit up, not Russia. The United States has been an out of control, rogue nation since the early 1990's and I'm fucking sick of it. You want to go back to that.

This is it. This is the reason for the Covid-19 overreaction.
marcus says

This tweet was aged to perfection:

marcus says

richwicks says

They are called dog whistles because only you are able to hear them. You're the bigot.

Yeah, well I'm honest and can see both side on all of this stuff, unlike most people around here, that choose to lie their asses off.

Maybe you can explain why David Duke and the KKK supported Trump, or why Trump was so torn about whether to disavow that support in this awkward interview.

The KKK is mostly FBI plants and a few useful idiots that don't know.

Why would the KKK, if they wanted to help Trump win, endorse him?

They've been doing this for decades. They did it to Pat Buchanan, they did it to Ron Paul fuck they did it to Ross Perot. How can you continue to fall for the same trick? Here, try to find a KKK member, anywhere. They are a defunct organization and have been since the 1970s.

The KKK were white anglo-saxon protestants. Why are they endorsing a man that has a son in law, who is Jewish, whose daughter converted to Judaism, and whose been friends with Netanyahu since before he even entered politics? If they are really racist bigots, why would they endorse Trump? How many KKK members have you met in your life? Point me to the a chapter of the KKK anywhere in the United States. Name a KKK function that happens anywhere. Why do you believe there are any significant number of KKK members?

I'm always amazed at how easy it is to trick people.

richwicks says

How many KKK members have you met in your life?

None. Though I bet david duke, Richard Sherman, and the other deep state shills will be invited on CNN to tell their audience how they supp Trump again in 2020.

Amazing how leftist media makes them famous every 4 years

richwicks says

The KKK were white anglo-saxon protestant

democrats.

jazz_music says

They are, shhh don’t tell nobody, it’s Trump’s big-ass secret very fine people

C'mon jazz_music the truth is becoming so painfully obvious.

Drop the hateful losers and join the side of truth. You're not a bad guy. We'd be happy to have you.

jazz_music says

Onvacation says

They are, shhh don’t tell nobody, it’s Trump’s big-ass secret very fine people

It's not about rights, or oppression, or injustice.

It's about dominance. Minorities dominating the Majority, aka Oligarchy. Except, most historical Oligarchies have to pander at least a little bit to the majority to stay in power.

This one uses psychological guilt warfare to stay in power, and insures this guilt only ends up with True Believers in positions of power, either minorities or their guilty White allies, to perpetuate their power base.

That explains why nobody is interested in Black Crimes, Single Mothers, and Anti-White Quotas.

NoCoupForYou says

It's about dominance. Minorities dominating the Majority, aka Oligarchy. Except, most historical Oligarchies have to pander at least a little bit to the majority to stay in power.

This one uses psychological guilt warfare to stay in power, and insures this guilt only ends up with True Believers in positions of power, either minorities or their guilty White allies, to perpetuate their power base.

That explains why nobody is interested in Black Crimes, Single Mothers, and Anti-White Quotas.

Great insight. It really is psychological guilt warfare.