patrick.net

Racist! Bigot! Homophobe!

Dude some people are just stupid. I was standing in line to buy groceries. Two women in front of me. They see a guy with some rifle picture on it. They call him exact words “racist, homophobic mysogenist”. The guy was just random dude with his kid getting groceries.

Words have no meaning, Democrats let emotionally unstable retards define everything.

@Fortwaynemobile I think it's possible to understand leftist hatred and counter it.

Their motives are pretty clearly laid out here:

https://patrick.net/post/1326187/2019-08-01-unabomber-s-stunningly-accurate-description-of-leftist-psychology

Words like “self-confidence,” “self-reliance,” “initiative,” “enterprise,” “optimism,” etc., play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone’s problems for them, satisfy everyone’s needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

So the right answer to leftists is maybe not a counter-attack, but encouragement to become self-reliant, to develop their own abilities and strengths, to give them a sense of optimism that their own hard work can improve their lives. And to welcome them into a community of like-minded people who also are working on improving themselves.

Another thought I just had: OJ's exoneration from an air-tight double murder charge proves that rich people of ALL races can escape justice in America.

I don’t think you can’t change people Patrick. They won’t go from losers to winners, from low iq to high.

It’s just leftist propaganda here, it does crazy things to those people.

Money talks.

Epstein client list isn’t going public, too many rich pedos out there.

Patrick says

Another thought I just had: OJ's exoneration from an air-tight double murder charge proves that rich people of ALL races can escape justice in America.

Racist Accusation Screening Assessment and Inventory:

Is accusation a con?

Is accusation a guilt trip?

Is accusation an attempt at extortion?

Is accusation levied to sidestep a consistent, clear, repetitive, directly obvious pattern of behavior?

Is accusation an attempt to gain an unwarranted advantage compared to a situation where no allegation of racism exists.

Is the accusation an attempt to shift the ground away from an obvious defect in the accuser’s argument, attitude or behavior?

Is the accusation a straw man?

Is accusation an attempt to side step responsibility or avoid guilt?

Is accusation an effort to drag down and justify a lower moral/ethical/legal standard?

Is allegation relying on some nebulous historical generalization or myth?

Is the accuser acting or behaving in a racist manner him/herself?

Has the accuser actually suffered any clear and present harm beyond allegation?

If the accuser DID suffer harm, what was the contribution of his/her own actions?

Has the accuser habitually inflicted harm on others?

Is accuser behaving in an immoral, unethical, irresponsible or illegal way or does the accuser display a pattern of immoral, unethical, irresponsible or illegal behavior?

Is the accuser threatening physical violence or violence to property if demands aren’t met?

Is there ANY factual or circumstantial evidence or fact to support accuser’s position?


Apply inventory and see how many accusations of racism survive beyond the accuser simply being an ASSHOLE.

The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone’s problems for them, satisfy everyone’s needs for them, take care of them.

No, they want to rule. Think of the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt, who owned all property. people and produce in the land. The Pharaoh controled all the grain, and doled it out according to his "generosity." All socialist systems are just a variation on this model - the State owns all, and people are provided with "needs" as the leaders see fit. A more modern example is Saddam Hussein, who did not permit autonomous Kurdish villages. Any self supporting Kurd town would see Saddam's troops come in, bulldoze the fields and fill in the wells. Saddam had to be sure the Kurds were dependent on his "generosity" for their survival, so self reliance was not tolerated.

Leftists are neither "liberal" nor "progressive. "Liberal" means pro freedom and "progressive" means moving positively ahead. Leftist are actually Statists who wish to restrict individual freedom to the will of the government, and Collectivists who wish to regress to failed policies of 19th and early 20th century Socialism.

HeadSet says

Saddam had to be sure the Kurds were dependent on his "generosity" for their survival, so self reliance was not tolerated.

I agree that this is a good analogy for how leftists maintain power.

:

Just out of curiosity.


Do you guys think these people were racist ?






Was Reagan's recently discovered comment to Nixon racist ?

"Last night, I tell you, to watch that thing on television, as I did, to see those, those monkeys from those African countries — damn them — they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” Reagan said on the call."

Is it really that racism is losing it's meaning ? OR is it that a significant part of the country is getting in touch with their racism and what they like about Trump is that he lets them feel okay about it.

Am I asking for too much honesty here ?

Although in fairness, the Dems seldom talk about class anymore. Too many 6 figure Teachers, Admins, Gov Workers, etc. - Town Socialists concerned with Social Justice.

marcus says

:

Just out of curiosity.


Do you guys think these people were racist ?






Was Reagan's recently discovered comment to Nixon racist ?

"Last night, I tell you, to watch that thing on television, as I did, to see those, those monkeys from those African countries — damn them — they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” Reagan said on the call."

Is it really that racism is losing it's meaning ? OR is it that a significant part of the country is getting in touch with their racism and what they like about Trump is that he lets them feel okay about it.

Am I asking for too much honesty here ?

You had to go back nearly 40 years to the Reagan error to find material to say Trump supporters are racist today. How on earth did Obama get elected?

Photo is too convenient. Looks staged.

HeadSet says

you had to go back nearly 40 years to the Reagan error to find material to say Trump supporters are racist today

That's not what I did at all. I'm asking a question based specifically on what I see in this thread, about how racism is losing it's meaning and I'm asking a question. Does that photo (if it's real), depict racism ?

Does the Reagan quote reflect racism ?

I feel like these are really simple questions. I'm just curious to hear your answer. Are those questions just too damn difficult ?

yeah, its getting to the point where you can't even say "niggers are worthless animals, and I don't want to rent to them, or hire them, and I'm happy when police shoot spooks" without someone playing the race card, and calling you a racist!

Patrick says

Photo is too convenient.

IT's an historical fact that the KKK publicly supported Reagan. Reagan had to publicly say that he didn't want their support.

That's what I call convenient. I wonder how much KKK support Reagan lost for saying that he didn't want their support.

marcus says

IT's an historical fact that the KKK publicly supported Reagan. Reagan had to publicly say that he didn't want their support.

It's also an historical fact that the KKK was associated with the Democratic party in it's heyday. Back when membership was high, in the millions.

In fact, multiple KKK members were Democratic Congressmen and Senators within the lives of people still around today.

:
HonkpilledMaster says

It's also an historical fact that the KKK was associated with the Democratic party in it's heyday. Back when membership was high, in the millions.

Correct. And if you were the slightest bit honest, you would admit that those people would virtually ALL be Trump voters today. I suppose to you "the southern strategy" is some kind of myth ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

I don't think Reagan was racist in that quote. It was an accurate statement for the time, even as an expression of anger. His career shows that he was a great president and not racist.

If marcus looked back 40 years when called someone a "faggot" or some other word, doesn't make Marcus a "homophobic racist bigot"... words left likes to overuse for everything.

marcus says

Correct. And if you were the slightest bit honest, you would admit that those people would virtually ALL be Trump voters today.

Hitler liked drinking water, so is water racist now?

All racists watch youtube, is youtube racist?

I can keep going with the same logic you just posted...

marcus says

Correct. And if you were the slightest bit honest, you would admit that those people would virtually ALL be Trump voters today. I suppose to you "the southern strategy" is some kind of myth ?

The Southern Strategy happened AFTER the Democrats gave up racism and the Republicans have always been opposed to Racist Measures.

The Democrats are in favor racist measures today, except against Whites, and especially Males. The entire term "POC" is to separate, exclude, and isolate Whites and justify racist treatment of them.

marcus says

I suppose to you "the southern strategy" is some kind of myth ?

The way you think about it is indeed a myth.

Obama is a dirty Rotten Racist Mother Fucker. Who happens to be married to a dude that takes it up the Ass.

marcus says

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/08/whoa-video-of-april-ryans-bodyguard-assaulting-local-reporter-after-stealing-his-camera/

marcus says

Am I asking for too much honesty here ?

No, you're just asking stupid questions.

marcus says

Does the Reagan quote reflect racism ?

Yep, but who cares? He was from another era where casually racist remarks were excused and even laughed at by both Republicans and Democrats. He’s not in power, he’s dead, and he’s beyond caring what you think. In short, it doesn’t matter. If you think it matters, then explain why, so we can correct your flawed thinking.

We know that meathead thought Archie was a racist but did George Jefferson think so too? Did meathead think george was a racist? George's views were easily as ingrained as Archie's but diametrically opposed...lol

Is it a HATE CRIME when the one you hate most is yourself?

HonkpilledMaster says

The Southern Strategy happened AFTER the Democrats gave up racism and the Republicans have always been opposed to Racist Measures.

Also worth pointing out that the South became less racist when they started voting for Republicans.

HonkpilledMaster says

The Southern Strategy happened AFTER the Democrats gave up racism and the Republicans have always been opposed to Racist Measures.

CBOEtrader says

The way you think about it is indeed a myth.

You guys are so far gone, and stroking each other so much. I wish I could laugh.

Everyone else must be wrong about the southern strategy too, including the people that coined the term and implemented it with dog whistles.

In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3] As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party. It also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right.[4]

The "Southern Strategy" refers primarily to "top down" narratives of the political realignment of the South which suggest that Republican leaders consciously appealed to many white Southerners' racial grievances in order to gain their support.[5] This top-down narrative of the Southern Strategy is generally believed to be the primary force that transformed Southern politics following the civil rights era.[6][7] This view has been questioned by historians such as Matthew Lassiter, Kevin M. Kruse and Joseph Crespino, who have presented an alternative, "bottom up" narrative, which Lassiter has called the "suburban strategy". This narrative recognizes the centrality of racial backlash to the political realignment of the South,[8] but suggests that this backlash took the form of a defense of de facto segregation in the suburbs rather than overt resistance to racial integration and that the story of this backlash is a national rather than a strictly Southern one.[9][10][11][12]

The perception that the Republican Party had served as the "vehicle of white supremacy in the South", particularly during the Goldwater campaign and the presidential elections of 1968 and 1972, made it difficult for the Republican Party to win back the support of black voters in the South in later years.[4] In 2005, Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman formally apologized to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), a national civil rights organization, for exploiting racial polarization to win elections and ignoring the black vote.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Marcus, yet again hiding behind words of strangers.

Tell us how the Republican party appealed to racism, then show us your evidence to suggest all the racists switched parties.

You can start by defining racism and perhaps explain how hyperfixating on those darn white men isn't racist as fuck.

I just tuned into CNN for the first time in months.

Don Lemon had guests on who took turns talking about how the president and his supporters are racist.

That’s how the left will lose another election...

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html

Well researched professors in 2005? (Thank God it's not from 2019 or they would've been fired.) Or Wikipedia? Which argument do you find more compelling?