FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Vivek nails race-baiter
Vivek nails race-baiter
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Cracking, he really spoke a lot of sense and we need more people like him."
If you want more people like Vivek you really didn’t watch the last republican primary debate… the man went “bat shit conspiracy crazy”
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 46 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"Cracking, he really spoke a lot of sense and we need more people like him.
If you want more people like Vivek you really didn’t watch the last republican primary debate… the man went “bat shit conspiracy crazy”
"
Did you watch the video mentioned here? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Cracking, he really spoke a lot of sense and we need more people like him.
If you want more people like Vivek you really didn’t watch the last republican primary debate… the man went “bat shit conspiracy crazy”
Did you watch the video mentioned here?"
Nope.. but for an overall view, the 4th republican primary debate is still up on YouTube via the newsnation pages (newsnation are a right wing broadcaster) 1hr 42 minutes worth……
One subject does not make a good candidate….
In fact if trump was mad enough to choose Vivek as his VP, that VP debate would be a train wreck
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 46 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"Cracking, he really spoke a lot of sense and we need more people like him.
If you want more people like Vivek you really didn’t watch the last republican primary debate… the man went “bat shit conspiracy crazy”
Did you watch the video mentioned here?
Nope.. but for an overall view, the 4th republican primary debate is still up on YouTube via the newsnation pages (newsnation are a right wing broadcaster) 1hr 42 minutes worth……
One subject does not make a good candidate….
In fact if trump was mad enough to choose Vivek as his VP, that VP debate would be a train wreck
"
I'm not going to argue on the above, not followed. I can only comment on the video mentioned here and I thought his response was excellent. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cracking, he really spoke a lot of sense and we need more people like him.
If you want more people like Vivek you really didn’t watch the last republican primary debate… the man went “bat shit conspiracy crazy”
"
In which sense did he go 'bat shit conspiracy crazy'? I don't think I have 2 hours to watch this debate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics. "
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake."
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake."
Is that quote verbatim?
Or have you 'paraphrased' ie. twisted his words? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric."
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows. "
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows.
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
"
Exactly. And Ramaswamy is being coy about denouncing him and refusing his endorsement because he knows he's got a strong base with the "Proud Boy" types.
Basket cases, the lot of them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows.
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
"
He wasn't defending King, he said he will take the word of someone he has personally met over media that has been proven to lie time and time again.
You still haven't answered my last question. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows.
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
He wasn't defending King, he said he will take the word of someone he has personally met over media that has been proven to lie time and time again.
You still haven't answered my last question. "
I’ll answer your question at the end of this post, and then I’ll ask you one!… fair?
The context above is that a person above said that he was defending was steve king, if that was what sparked the response because he had “personally met him”… then that is an issue
I have watched 2 clips of this… one shorter clip where it’s just the answer about white supremacy
The 2nd is a longer clip where you hear the Washington post reporting asking the entire question….which was about the endorsement of Vivek by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement because of king’s previous statements regarding white supremacy and white nationalism….
You are now being disingenuous… if we are saying the statement matters… then the context to the statement also matters…
So yes I have watched the clip… in isolation I can see where you might think he “owns the lib reporter!”
So have you done any reading up on the previous statements of steve king? Since the WaPo reported specifically mentioned steve king… unless Vivek is lying about not ever meeting him , then the last bit about taking the word of someone he has met over the media reporting any day doesn’t make sense…
Especially because said person was vilified by his own party for those comments!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows.
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
He wasn't defending King, he said he will take the word of someone he has personally met over media that has been proven to lie time and time again.
You still haven't answered my last question.
I’ll answer your question at the end of this post, and then I’ll ask you one!… fair?
The context above is that a person above said that he was defending was steve king, if that was what sparked the response because he had “personally met him”… then that is an issue
I have watched 2 clips of this… one shorter clip where it’s just the answer about white supremacy
The 2nd is a longer clip where you hear the Washington post reporting asking the entire question….which was about the endorsement of Vivek by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement because of king’s previous statements regarding white supremacy and white nationalism….
You are now being disingenuous… if we are saying the statement matters… then the context to the statement also matters…
So yes I have watched the clip… in isolation I can see where you might think he “owns the lib reporter!”
So have you done any reading up on the previous statements of steve king? Since the WaPo reported specifically mentioned steve king… unless Vivek is lying about not ever meeting him , then the last bit about taking the word of someone he has met over the media reporting any day doesn’t make sense…
Especially because said person was vilified by his own party for those comments!
"
Is that your answer to my question? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows.
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
He wasn't defending King, he said he will take the word of someone he has personally met over media that has been proven to lie time and time again.
You still haven't answered my last question.
I’ll answer your question at the end of this post, and then I’ll ask you one!… fair?
The context above is that a person above said that he was defending was steve king, if that was what sparked the response because he had “personally met him”… then that is an issue
I have watched 2 clips of this… one shorter clip where it’s just the answer about white supremacy
The 2nd is a longer clip where you hear the Washington post reporting asking the entire question….which was about the endorsement of Vivek by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement because of king’s previous statements regarding white supremacy and white nationalism….
You are now being disingenuous… if we are saying the statement matters… then the context to the statement also matters…
So yes I have watched the clip… in isolation I can see where you might think he “owns the lib reporter!”
So have you done any reading up on the previous statements of steve king? Since the WaPo reported specifically mentioned steve king… unless Vivek is lying about not ever meeting him , then the last bit about taking the word of someone he has met over the media reporting any day doesn’t make sense…
Especially because said person was vilified by his own party for those comments!
Is that your answer to my question?"
Yes… you’re opening post is about the 2nd half of the entire interaction between Vivek and the WaPo reporter
The first half of the entire interaction was the question from the WaPo reporter about the endorsement by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement
So yes I have watched the entire interaction…. I think that answers the question again… did you?
Have you gone back and seen a lot of the past comments that got steve king in trouble in the first place… in which case I have a question for you!
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows.
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
He wasn't defending King, he said he will take the word of someone he has personally met over media that has been proven to lie time and time again.
You still haven't answered my last question.
I’ll answer your question at the end of this post, and then I’ll ask you one!… fair?
The context above is that a person above said that he was defending was steve king, if that was what sparked the response because he had “personally met him”… then that is an issue
I have watched 2 clips of this… one shorter clip where it’s just the answer about white supremacy
The 2nd is a longer clip where you hear the Washington post reporting asking the entire question….which was about the endorsement of Vivek by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement because of king’s previous statements regarding white supremacy and white nationalism….
You are now being disingenuous… if we are saying the statement matters… then the context to the statement also matters…
So yes I have watched the clip… in isolation I can see where you might think he “owns the lib reporter!”
So have you done any reading up on the previous statements of steve king? Since the WaPo reported specifically mentioned steve king… unless Vivek is lying about not ever meeting him , then the last bit about taking the word of someone he has met over the media reporting any day doesn’t make sense…
Especially because said person was vilified by his own party for those comments!
Is that your answer to my question?
Yes… you’re opening post is about the 2nd half of the entire interaction between Vivek and the WaPo reporter
The first half of the entire interaction was the question from the WaPo reporter about the endorsement by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement
So yes I have watched the entire interaction…. I think that answers the question again… did you?
Have you gone back and seen a lot of the past comments that got steve king in trouble in the first place… in which case I have a question for you!
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements? "
That wa sent my question but thanks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows.
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
He wasn't defending King, he said he will take the word of someone he has personally met over media that has been proven to lie time and time again.
You still haven't answered my last question.
I’ll answer your question at the end of this post, and then I’ll ask you one!… fair?
The context above is that a person above said that he was defending was steve king, if that was what sparked the response because he had “personally met him”… then that is an issue
I have watched 2 clips of this… one shorter clip where it’s just the answer about white supremacy
The 2nd is a longer clip where you hear the Washington post reporting asking the entire question….which was about the endorsement of Vivek by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement because of king’s previous statements regarding white supremacy and white nationalism….
You are now being disingenuous… if we are saying the statement matters… then the context to the statement also matters…
So yes I have watched the clip… in isolation I can see where you might think he “owns the lib reporter!”
So have you done any reading up on the previous statements of steve king? Since the WaPo reported specifically mentioned steve king… unless Vivek is lying about not ever meeting him , then the last bit about taking the word of someone he has met over the media reporting any day doesn’t make sense…
Especially because said person was vilified by his own party for those comments!
Is that your answer to my question?
Yes… you’re opening post is about the 2nd half of the entire interaction between Vivek and the WaPo reporter
The first half of the entire interaction was the question from the WaPo reporter about the endorsement by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement
So yes I have watched the entire interaction…. I think that answers the question again… did you?
Have you gone back and seen a lot of the past comments that got steve king in trouble in the first place… in which case I have a question for you!
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements?
That wa sent my question but thanks. "
He was defending king in the 2nd half of the question otherwise the final bit , the “taking the word over someone he has met over the media reports” doesn’t make sense since the 1st half of the question, which was specifically about the steve king endorsement, doesn’t then make sense…..
If you just clip the 2nd half of the interaction which you have done, then it looks like one thing…. When you play the entire interaction then the context of all the statements matter
In uk terms… it’s a bit like making that statement, which in itself you think is perfectly fine, and then you find out the person who was being defended in the process of making that statement was nick griffin
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric.
Actually he asked any reporter in there with proof to show it. He attacked the media for lying over the years and said he would not take the word of the media over someone he personally knows.
In which case if he is defending steve king the former congressman person, it’s worth your while looking into him…. Just to say that some of his comments in the past were so unpalatable that even the Republican Party in the house stripped him of all his committee assignments, shunned him from the house and the party, and finally supported a challenger to his house congress seat
Some of the on the record stuff he has said is gruesome…..
He wasn't defending King, he said he will take the word of someone he has personally met over media that has been proven to lie time and time again.
You still haven't answered my last question.
I’ll answer your question at the end of this post, and then I’ll ask you one!… fair?
The context above is that a person above said that he was defending was steve king, if that was what sparked the response because he had “personally met him”… then that is an issue
I have watched 2 clips of this… one shorter clip where it’s just the answer about white supremacy
The 2nd is a longer clip where you hear the Washington post reporting asking the entire question….which was about the endorsement of Vivek by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement because of king’s previous statements regarding white supremacy and white nationalism….
You are now being disingenuous… if we are saying the statement matters… then the context to the statement also matters…
So yes I have watched the clip… in isolation I can see where you might think he “owns the lib reporter!”
So have you done any reading up on the previous statements of steve king? Since the WaPo reported specifically mentioned steve king… unless Vivek is lying about not ever meeting him , then the last bit about taking the word of someone he has met over the media reporting any day doesn’t make sense…
Especially because said person was vilified by his own party for those comments!
Is that your answer to my question?
Yes… you’re opening post is about the 2nd half of the entire interaction between Vivek and the WaPo reporter
The first half of the entire interaction was the question from the WaPo reporter about the endorsement by steve king and whether he would accept the endorsement
So yes I have watched the entire interaction…. I think that answers the question again… did you?
Have you gone back and seen a lot of the past comments that got steve king in trouble in the first place… in which case I have a question for you!
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements?
That wa sent my question but thanks.
He was defending king in the 2nd half of the question otherwise the final bit , the “taking the word over someone he has met over the media reports” doesn’t make sense since the 1st half of the question, which was specifically about the steve king endorsement, doesn’t then make sense…..
If you just clip the 2nd half of the interaction which you have done, then it looks like one thing…. When you play the entire interaction then the context of all the statements matter
In uk terms… it’s a bit like making that statement, which in itself you think is perfectly fine, and then you find out the person who was being defended in the process of making that statement was nick griffin
"
You must've missed it 
I specifically asked about Vivek 'going crazy bat shit conspiracy' in the 4th debate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements? "
I think this is really what matters here, since this thread was created to celebrate the tone and content of Ramaswamy's refusal to disown King's endorsement. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements?
I think this is really what matters here, since this thread was created to celebrate the tone and content of Ramaswamy's refusal to disown King's endorsement."
I haven't done any research into King. Why should I when I can't get a simple question answered. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements?
I think this is really what matters here, since this thread was created to celebrate the tone and content of Ramaswamy's refusal to disown King's endorsement.
I haven't done any research into King. Why should I when I can't get a simple question answered."
Probably because I reckon about 90 seconds into your research on steve king… you are probably going to utter the words “oh shit!” And then wonder what Vivek was doing!
There aren’t many republicans that would disown their own… but the curious part of you must at least be wondering why? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements?
I think this is really what matters here, since this thread was created to celebrate the tone and content of Ramaswamy's refusal to disown King's endorsement.
I haven't done any research into King. Why should I when I can't get a simple question answered."
And yet you participate in the debate. Now there's the intellectual rigour I've come to admire. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements?
I think this is really what matters here, since this thread was created to celebrate the tone and content of Ramaswamy's refusal to disown King's endorsement.
I haven't done any research into King. Why should I when I can't get a simple question answered.
And yet you participate in the debate. Now there's the intellectual rigour I've come to admire."
If were gonna speak about intelligence, you're clearly quite intelligent, so you should know I asked about the conspiracy before any of this bollocks but as usual yourself and _abio have continued to try to steer the debate in the way you want it to go.
We can't have a debate if it isn't 2 way. Surely you're more intelligent to ask race baiting questions like 'do you agree with Steve King'.
You've spoken about debating in good faith yet show none, do me a favour  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the context here. CBA to research as it seems US politics.
Paraphrasing Vivek (GOP primary candidate):
"The only institutional racism is affirmative action."
In other words, black people should pipe down and be a bit more grateful they're not picking cotton for free anymore.
It's the same weak sauce, boilerplate, dog-whistle crap that every right-wing dickhead says to court the votes of uneducated potatoes who have been convinced by Rupert Murdoch that the white man isn't getting a fair shake.
The broader context is, he has been endorsed by former Iowa Republican Steve King who has made numerous statements in favour of white supremacy and e.g. retweeted neo-Nazis. A Washington Post reporter was asking Vivek Ramaswamy if he condemned King's comments and white supremacy in general. Ramaswamy called the reporter's question "stupid", declined to distance himself from King and heavily implied that although racial discrimination does exist in the USA, it's now white people who suffer most from it.
I guess you can decide for yourself what to think of people who are impressed by that kind of rhetoric."
--------------------
Excellent!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements?
I think this is really what matters here, since this thread was created to celebrate the tone and content of Ramaswamy's refusal to disown King's endorsement.
I haven't done any research into King. Why should I when I can't get a simple question answered.
And yet you participate in the debate. Now there's the intellectual rigour I've come to admire.
If were gonna speak about intelligence, you're clearly quite intelligent, so you should know I asked about the conspiracy before any of this bollocks but as usual yourself and _abio have continued to try to steer the debate in the way you want it to go.
We can't have a debate if it isn't 2 way. Surely you're more intelligent to ask race baiting questions like 'do you agree with Steve King'.
You've spoken about debating in good faith yet show none, do me a favour "
Yeah, the conspiracy stuff Fabio was referring to was just the hysterical nonsense Ramaswamy was dribbling during the debate. Nothing to do with Steve King.
But let's just remind ourselves, you started this thread specifically to celebrate the manner in which Ramaswamy refused to decline the endorsement of Steve King, a man whose racial politics are broadly aligned with those of Leonardo DiCaprio's character in Django Unchained.
I accept you may not have known who Steve King was at the time of first posting, but persisting in defending Ramaswamy's alleged "mic drop" while basically refusing to even look Steve King up is... Well, it's not clever, is it.
To be fair to you, I do find it difficult to argue with you in good faith when you keep going to bat for these laughable rent-a-bigots. Have you considered not doing that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Do you agree with steve king’s previous statements?
I think this is really what matters here, since this thread was created to celebrate the tone and content of Ramaswamy's refusal to disown King's endorsement.
I haven't done any research into King. Why should I when I can't get a simple question answered.
And yet you participate in the debate. Now there's the intellectual rigour I've come to admire.
If were gonna speak about intelligence, you're clearly quite intelligent, so you should know I asked about the conspiracy before any of this bollocks but as usual yourself and _abio have continued to try to steer the debate in the way you want it to go.
We can't have a debate if it isn't 2 way. Surely you're more intelligent to ask race baiting questions like 'do you agree with Steve King'.
You've spoken about debating in good faith yet show none, do me a favour
Yeah, the conspiracy stuff Fabio was referring to was just the hysterical nonsense Ramaswamy was dribbling during the debate. Nothing to do with Steve King.
But let's just remind ourselves, you started this thread specifically to celebrate the manner in which Ramaswamy refused to decline the endorsement of Steve King, a man whose racial politics are broadly aligned with those of Leonardo DiCaprio's character in Django Unchained.
I accept you may not have known who Steve King was at the time of first posting, but persisting in defending Ramaswamy's alleged "mic drop" while basically refusing to even look Steve King up is... Well, it's not clever, is it.
To be fair to you, I do find it difficult to argue with you in good faith when you keep going to bat for these laughable rent-a-bigots. Have you considered not doing that?"
I'm interested in the 'conspiracy stuff' that Vivek 'dribbled', you seem to know about it, fancy helping me out?
As I've said, conversations kinda need to be 2 way to be genuine.
Steve King is a 'Farage' character I assume? Has anyone produced the evidence asked for?
Maybe I'm just not clever enough. I should probably 'paraphrase' (lie) some more and I'll be seen as more clever  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I'm interested in the 'conspiracy stuff' that Vivek 'dribbled', you seem to know about it, fancy helping me out?"
You've been told like five times that the GOP primary debate is widely available in video form if not also in transcript. I'm sure there are also summaries.
"As I've said, conversations kinda need to be 2 way to be genuine.
Steve King is a 'Farage' character I assume? Has anyone produced the evidence asked for?"
Again, yes. As Fabio pointed out, his own party, not exactly a bunch of progressives, booted him for being too much of a racist even for them. And again, details are widely available - maybe you should have had a quick look before you started the thread?
"Maybe I'm just not clever enough. I should probably 'paraphrase' (lie) some more and I'll be seen as more clever "
Yeah, maybe you're not. What you should probably do is stop talking about stuff you don't have any background on, and then demanding that people supply you with it before you'll consider you might have cocked up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 46 weeks ago
Brighton |
Flagging I am doing a pile on!!!
Feisty I see you have used the word “lie”. Oh dear that is something I keep seeing being used and it comes direct from the right wing playbook.
You are supposedly a centrist so I expect better of you my friend |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I'm interested in the 'conspiracy stuff' that Vivek 'dribbled', you seem to know about it, fancy helping me out?
You've been told like five times that the GOP primary debate is widely available in video form if not also in transcript. I'm sure there are also summaries.
As I've said, conversations kinda need to be 2 way to be genuine.
Steve King is a 'Farage' character I assume? Has anyone produced the evidence asked for?
Again, yes. As Fabio pointed out, his own party, not exactly a bunch of progressives, booted him for being too much of a racist even for them. And again, details are widely available - maybe you should have had a quick look before you started the thread?
Maybe I'm just not clever enough. I should probably 'paraphrase' (lie) some more and I'll be seen as more clever
Yeah, maybe you're not. What you should probably do is stop talking about stuff you don't have any background on, and then demanding that people supply you with it before you'll consider you might have cocked up."
There you go exaggerating again 
There you go using racist again
There you go thinking I don't know what I'm talking about again
For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response.
You can continue to 'paraphrase' (lie and reduse to answer when asked if the quote was verbatim) and ill continue speaking about things I know nothing about |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Flagging I am doing a pile on!!!
Feisty I see you have used the word “lie”. Oh dear that is something I keep seeing being used and it comes direct from the right wing playbook.
You are supposedly a centrist so I expect better of you my friend "
'Paraphrasing' something which isn't true is in fact a lie. I expect all of us on the spectrum to do better than that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response."
In which he, quite angrily, refused to decline, disown or even question the endorsement of a disgraced white supremacist.
Your applause was deafening.
You know, maybe you didn't know who Steve King is. Or maybe you did. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response.
In which he, quite angrily, refused to decline, disown or even question the endorsement of a disgraced white supremacist.
Your applause was deafening.
You know, maybe you didn't know who Steve King is. Or maybe you did."
The question in full was 'do you condemn white supremacy and white nationalism?'
That's what the thread is about. You can hate my 'far right' views, I won't lose sleep over it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response.
In which he, quite angrily, refused to decline, disown or even question the endorsement of a disgraced white supremacist.
Your applause was deafening.
You know, maybe you didn't know who Steve King is. Or maybe you did.
The question in full was 'do you condemn white supremacy and white nationalism?'
That's what the thread is about. You can hate my 'far right' views, I won't lose sleep over it. "
I wouldn't describe it as "hate". But it's nice to see you admit to what your views are. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response.
In which he, quite angrily, refused to decline, disown or even question the endorsement of a disgraced white supremacist.
Your applause was deafening.
You know, maybe you didn't know who Steve King is. Or maybe you did.
The question in full was 'do you condemn white supremacy and white nationalism?'
That's what the thread is about. You can hate my 'far right' views, I won't lose sleep over it.
I wouldn't describe it as "hate". But it's nice to see you admit to what your views are."
You sure spend a lot of time telling me 'I show my colours'. Tbh, I quite like the attention  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You sure spend a lot of time telling me 'I show my colours'. Tbh, I quite like the attention "
I know you do. Most of the time you do a sort-of okay job at skirting around it without incriminating yourself.
Sometimes though, you just gotta pull that hood right off and show your face, eh? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You sure spend a lot of time telling me 'I show my colours'. Tbh, I quite like the attention
I know you do. Most of the time you do a sort-of okay job at skirting around it without incriminating yourself.
Sometimes though, you just gotta pull that hood right off and show your face, eh?"
I don't hide who I am. You defintely have me wrong, but I'll let you think you know me.
Take the win |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You sure spend a lot of time telling me 'I show my colours'. Tbh, I quite like the attention
I know you do. Most of the time you do a sort-of okay job at skirting around it without incriminating yourself.
Sometimes though, you just gotta pull that hood right off and show your face, eh?
I don't hide who I am. You defintely have me wrong, but I'll let you think you know me.
Take the win "
You see, the thing is that either you are who I think you are, or you're just pretending, but it's all the same to me. You seem to think you're playing some shrewd game in concealing your real motives, but the only one it entertains is you. Nobody else cares. We just take it at face value when you defend Farage or refuse to believe Steve King is basically a Klansman or get angry that people won't renegotiate the definition of racism. I don't have any reason to think you don't genuinely admire and sympathise with these people and their beliefs, because you consistently behave as if you do.
I mean, you're allowed to think like that if you want. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 46 weeks ago
|
"For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response.
In which he, quite angrily, refused to decline, disown or even question the endorsement of a disgraced white supremacist.
Your applause was deafening.
You know, maybe you didn't know who Steve King is. Or maybe you did.
The question in full was 'do you condemn white supremacy and white nationalism?'
That's what the thread is about. You can hate my 'far right' views, I won't lose sleep over it. "
I've listened to his wordy answer and I'm not smart enough to work out how real point. It had too many buzz words.
But the obvious answer is "I condemn it" so what was the gotcha.
(As also people wouldn't ask this question out the blue!)
We see it in the middle east threads all the time, and normally means some is trying to create fake polarity. So I'm guessing he condemns white suoremency and also .... Something else. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response.
"
I have clipped out this part of feistys post…. And actually for the purposes of the thread I will give feisty latitude.. I don’t know if you were aware of the original entirety
So let’s ask a couple of questions
1) were you aware that the original bit was part of a much longer exchange?
2) were you aware that the question that prompted the exchange to begin with the WaPo reporter was “do you accept the endorsement of Steve king, a man known for his views on white nationalism and white supremacy….”
3) do you think he should have defended king by saying “I take the word of someone I have met over the media” (a quote you introduced to the thread)
When discribing Steve king I deliberately didn’t use farage as the example and used nick griffin because of the way people look at farage as acceptable…..
So have you now as people are suggesting you do, gone back and look at the comments of Steve king?
You say me and Preston have hijacked the thread and pushed it in a different direction… I would say you can’t just talk about the 2nd of a comment without looking at the 1st half which brought it to where you started… it would be like talking about the context without knowing the entire context…. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"I have not seen the said clip, but is the reporter an American ie white."
The reporter worked for the Washington post and yes is white… but I am not sure why that has anything to do with it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have not seen the said clip, but is the reporter an American ie white.
Are you talking about native Americans?
"
I'm just querying if the reporter had a label in front of his patriotic americanism. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You sure spend a lot of time telling me 'I show my colours'. Tbh, I quite like the attention
I know you do. Most of the time you do a sort-of okay job at skirting around it without incriminating yourself.
Sometimes though, you just gotta pull that hood right off and show your face, eh?
I don't hide who I am. You defintely have me wrong, but I'll let you think you know me.
Take the win
You see, the thing is that either you are who I think you are, or you're just pretending, but it's all the same to me. You seem to think you're playing some shrewd game in concealing your real motives, but the only one it entertains is you. Nobody else cares. We just take it at face value when you defend Farage or refuse to believe Steve King is basically a Klansman or get angry that people won't renegotiate the definition of racism. I don't have any reason to think you don't genuinely admire and sympathise with these people and their beliefs, because you consistently behave as if you do.
I mean, you're allowed to think like that if you want."
The definition of racism is: Racism is discrimination and prejudice against people based on their race or ethnicity.
I have never tried to redefine that, it's you and your friends who want to.
Anyway, if you're giving it out, I'll wear the badge with honour.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response.
I have clipped out this part of feistys post…. And actually for the purposes of the thread I will give feisty latitude.. I don’t know if you were aware of the original entirety
So let’s ask a couple of questions
1) were you aware that the original bit was part of a much longer exchange?
2) were you aware that the question that prompted the exchange to begin with the WaPo reporter was “do you accept the endorsement of Steve king, a man known for his views on white nationalism and white supremacy….”
3) do you think he should have defended king by saying “I take the word of someone I have met over the media” (a quote you introduced to the thread)
When discribing Steve king I deliberately didn’t use farage as the example and used nick griffin because of the way people look at farage as acceptable…..
So have you now as people are suggesting you do, gone back and look at the comments of Steve king?
You say me and Preston have hijacked the thread and pushed it in a different direction… I would say you can’t just talk about the 2nd of a comment without looking at the 1st half which brought it to where you started… it would be like talking about the context without knowing the entire context…."
1) I told people to go look for themselves.
2) I've tried to find the whole town hall video to refresh myself, no joy. But yes I initially watch it all.
3) Do you believe we should accept the media's word without asking for citations?
As far as Steve King is concerned, this morning I've seen a NYT 'rundown' of everything he's done or said over the years. Things like saying English should be the only language on ballot papers, cuddling up to Wilders etc.
If you want to give more specific examples, I'm all ears. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 46 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
For your benefit, the thread that I started concentrated on Viveks response.
I have clipped out this part of feistys post…. And actually for the purposes of the thread I will give feisty latitude.. I don’t know if you were aware of the original entirety
So let’s ask a couple of questions
1) were you aware that the original bit was part of a much longer exchange?
2) were you aware that the question that prompted the exchange to begin with the WaPo reporter was “do you accept the endorsement of Steve king, a man known for his views on white nationalism and white supremacy….”
3) do you think he should have defended king by saying “I take the word of someone I have met over the media” (a quote you introduced to the thread)
When discribing Steve king I deliberately didn’t use farage as the example and used nick griffin because of the way people look at farage as acceptable…..
So have you now as people are suggesting you do, gone back and look at the comments of Steve king?
You say me and Preston have hijacked the thread and pushed it in a different direction… I would say you can’t just talk about the 2nd of a comment without looking at the 1st half which brought it to where you started… it would be like talking about the context without knowing the entire context….
1) I told people to go look for themselves.
2) I've tried to find the whole town hall video to refresh myself, no joy. But yes I initially watch it all.
3) Do you believe we should accept the media's word without asking for citations?
As far as Steve King is concerned, this morning I've seen a NYT 'rundown' of everything he's done or said over the years. Things like saying English should be the only language on ballot papers, cuddling up to Wilders etc.
If you want to give more specific examples, I'm all ears. "
Which ones would you like…
This one is a classic… it comes from a speech where he was opposed to a pathway for citizenship for dreamers (kids who grew up in the us but were brought illegally)
“For everyone who’s a valedictorian, there’s another 100 out there that weighs 130 pounds and they have calves the size of cantaloupes because they’re hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert “ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You sure spend a lot of time telling me 'I show my colours'. Tbh, I quite like the attention
I know you do. Most of the time you do a sort-of okay job at skirting around it without incriminating yourself.
Sometimes though, you just gotta pull that hood right off and show your face, eh?
I don't hide who I am. You defintely have me wrong, but I'll let you think you know me.
Take the win
You see, the thing is that either you are who I think you are, or you're just pretending, but it's all the same to me. You seem to think you're playing some shrewd game in concealing your real motives, but the only one it entertains is you. Nobody else cares. We just take it at face value when you defend Farage or refuse to believe Steve King is basically a Klansman or get angry that people won't renegotiate the definition of racism. I don't have any reason to think you don't genuinely admire and sympathise with these people and their beliefs, because you consistently behave as if you do.
I mean, you're allowed to think like that if you want.
The definition of racism is: Racism is discrimination and prejudice against people based on their race or ethnicity.
I have never tried to redefine that, it's you and your friends who want to.
Anyway, if you're giving it out, I'll wear the badge with honour.
"
"Let them call you racist. Let them call you xenophobes. Let them call you nativists. Wear it as a badge of honor. Because every day, we get stronger and they get weaker.”
- Steve Bannon |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Or in 2017 when he claimed white civilisation was being wiped out as a result of the migrant crisis in Europe…. "
I'm not gonna quote all 3 separately so here...
1) He opposes citizenship for illegals. I don't agree with the adjectives used but what is racist?
2) I don't know the data for that statement to be true or false but again what is racist?
3) Many people believe that to be true. Again, what is racist about it?
Let me ask you, if Steve King is about white supremacy, and racist as you say, why would he endorse an Asian candidate?
It would probably be better if you could provide his actual words than some paraphrase. Possibly provide some context too. You do like context dont you?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Let me ask you, if Steve King is about white supremacy, and racist as you say, why would he endorse an Asian candidate?
"
Oh, excellent. "I can't be racist, I've got a black friend!" You really do know all the classics.
Do you know why he'd do that? Because racism isn't a logical process. Racism is a conspiracy theory espoused by liars and hypocrites, who, while they do feel deep and genuine xenophobia, are also entirely prepared to bend their own principles to suit whatever they believe will further their agenda.
It might explain why you're prepared to go to such lengths to defend someone even his fellow racists think is a bit too racist, from accusations of racism. Is it because you sincerely believe Steve King is not a racist, or is it that you think there is some kind of benefit to you in raising the standard of proof so high that it's basically impossible to accuse anyone at all of racism?
That's a rhetorical question, by the way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Let me ask you, if Steve King is about white supremacy, and racist as you say, why would he endorse an Asian candidate?
Oh, excellent. "I can't be racist, I've got a black friend!" You really do know all the classics.
Do you know why he'd do that? Because racism isn't a logical process. Racism is a conspiracy theory espoused by liars and hypocrites, who, while they do feel deep and genuine xenophobia, are also entirely prepared to bend their own principles to suit whatever they believe will further their agenda.
It might explain why you're prepared to go to such lengths to defend someone even his fellow racists think is a bit too racist, from accusations of racism. Is it because you sincerely believe Steve King is not a racist, or is it that you think there is some kind of benefit to you in raising the standard of proof so high that it's basically impossible to accuse anyone at all of racism?
That's a rhetorical question, by the way."
You speak an awful lot about a conspiracy theory that isn't logical.
Racism isn't real. You heard it hear from the far left activist who likes to call people racists. You couldn't make this shit up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You speak an awful lot about a conspiracy theory that isn't logical.
Racism isn't real. You heard it hear from the far left activist who likes to call people racists. You couldn't make this shit up "
Do you actually think that's what I meant, or are you just wasting time because you've run out of answers to everything else? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You speak an awful lot about a conspiracy theory that isn't logical.
Racism isn't real. You heard it hear from the far left activist who likes to call people racists. You couldn't make this shit up
Do you actually think that's what I meant, or are you just wasting time because you've run out of answers to everything else?"
I just read your words, that's all. I mean, I'm under no obligation to answer everything, just as you choose to pick and choose parts of what I reply with.
Or is it that you get to judge me by what I write but the opposite isn't allowed.
That's giving me typical lefties vibes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 46 weeks ago
Brighton |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?"
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools?"
It seems you only call it when it's against certain people. Maybe because you feel they need backing up or they'll cry.
Why are you bothered by being called a hypocrite? Pretty sure you called me one this morning |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 46 weeks ago
Brighton |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools?
It seems you only call it when it's against certain people. Maybe because you feel they need backing up or they'll cry.
Why are you bothered by being called a hypocrite? Pretty sure you called me one this morning "
I’m not bothered you called me a hypocrite because that would be hypocritical! Call me what you want. Hide of a Rhino me!
You told me a conversation with multiple people is not a pile on so I have made no comment. Confused now! Remind me of our agreed definition of a pile on?
Anyone need wellies as well? Pretty muddy down there! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools?
It seems you only call it when it's against certain people. Maybe because you feel they need backing up or they'll cry.
Why are you bothered by being called a hypocrite? Pretty sure you called me one this morning
I’m not bothered you called me a hypocrite because that would be hypocritical! Call me what you want. Hide of a Rhino me!
You told me a conversation with multiple people is not a pile on so I have made no comment. Confused now! Remind me of our agreed definition of a pile on?
Anyone need wellies as well? Pretty muddy down there!"
People jumping into responses toward other posters. Not that I'm arsed, my first post on 'pile on' was tongue in cheek.
What's all the digging references? Am I just not clever enough to understand? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 46 weeks ago
Brighton |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools?
It seems you only call it when it's against certain people. Maybe because you feel they need backing up or they'll cry.
Why are you bothered by being called a hypocrite? Pretty sure you called me one this morning
I’m not bothered you called me a hypocrite because that would be hypocritical! Call me what you want. Hide of a Rhino me!
You told me a conversation with multiple people is not a pile on so I have made no comment. Confused now! Remind me of our agreed definition of a pile on?
Anyone need wellies as well? Pretty muddy down there!
People jumping into responses toward other posters. Not that I'm arsed, my first post on 'pile on' was tongue in cheek.
What's all the digging references? Am I just not clever enough to understand?"
Don’t put yourself down Feisty you are plenty clever enough. I have a wheelbarrow too! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools?
It seems you only call it when it's against certain people. Maybe because you feel they need backing up or they'll cry.
Why are you bothered by being called a hypocrite? Pretty sure you called me one this morning
I’m not bothered you called me a hypocrite because that would be hypocritical! Call me what you want. Hide of a Rhino me!
You told me a conversation with multiple people is not a pile on so I have made no comment. Confused now! Remind me of our agreed definition of a pile on?
Anyone need wellies as well? Pretty muddy down there!
People jumping into responses toward other posters. Not that I'm arsed, my first post on 'pile on' was tongue in cheek.
What's all the digging references? Am I just not clever enough to understand?
Don’t put yourself down Feisty you are plenty clever enough. I have a wheelbarrow too! "
No I keep getting told by the new undisputed 'I'm never wrong' world title holder that I'm not very clever |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 46 weeks ago
Brighton |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools?
It seems you only call it when it's against certain people. Maybe because you feel they need backing up or they'll cry.
Why are you bothered by being called a hypocrite? Pretty sure you called me one this morning
I’m not bothered you called me a hypocrite because that would be hypocritical! Call me what you want. Hide of a Rhino me!
You told me a conversation with multiple people is not a pile on so I have made no comment. Confused now! Remind me of our agreed definition of a pile on?
Anyone need wellies as well? Pretty muddy down there!
People jumping into responses toward other posters. Not that I'm arsed, my first post on 'pile on' was tongue in cheek.
What's all the digging references? Am I just not clever enough to understand?
Don’t put yourself down Feisty you are plenty clever enough. I have a wheelbarrow too!
No I keep getting told by the new undisputed 'I'm never wrong' world title holder that I'm not very clever "
Well that can’t be right because I am never wrong and I said you are clever. Glad thst is settled. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools?
It seems you only call it when it's against certain people. Maybe because you feel they need backing up or they'll cry.
Why are you bothered by being called a hypocrite? Pretty sure you called me one this morning
I’m not bothered you called me a hypocrite because that would be hypocritical! Call me what you want. Hide of a Rhino me!
You told me a conversation with multiple people is not a pile on so I have made no comment. Confused now! Remind me of our agreed definition of a pile on?
Anyone need wellies as well? Pretty muddy down there!
People jumping into responses toward other posters. Not that I'm arsed, my first post on 'pile on' was tongue in cheek.
What's all the digging references? Am I just not clever enough to understand?
Don’t put yourself down Feisty you are plenty clever enough. I have a wheelbarrow too!
No I keep getting told by the new undisputed 'I'm never wrong' world title holder that I'm not very clever
Well that can’t be right because I am never wrong and I said you are clever. Glad thst is settled. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk "
This is why I like you. We disagree on plenty but at least you have a bit of a laugh.
Same time, next time  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 46 weeks ago
Brighton |
"I’ve got a spade, shovel, and pick axe in my garden shed if anyone needs one
Haven't you got a pile on to call out?
According to you I am a hypocrite so just going to play true to form.
Oh and according to you I am always right so whatever I decide is fine
So who needs my garden tools?
It seems you only call it when it's against certain people. Maybe because you feel they need backing up or they'll cry.
Why are you bothered by being called a hypocrite? Pretty sure you called me one this morning
I’m not bothered you called me a hypocrite because that would be hypocritical! Call me what you want. Hide of a Rhino me!
You told me a conversation with multiple people is not a pile on so I have made no comment. Confused now! Remind me of our agreed definition of a pile on?
Anyone need wellies as well? Pretty muddy down there!
People jumping into responses toward other posters. Not that I'm arsed, my first post on 'pile on' was tongue in cheek.
What's all the digging references? Am I just not clever enough to understand?
Don’t put yourself down Feisty you are plenty clever enough. I have a wheelbarrow too!
No I keep getting told by the new undisputed 'I'm never wrong' world title holder that I'm not very clever
Well that can’t be right because I am never wrong and I said you are clever. Glad thst is settled. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk
This is why I like you. We disagree on plenty but at least you have a bit of a laugh.
Same time, next time "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Taking your point in isolation OP and without needing obfuscation or the tedious insinuations you have had. Vivek did a great job of appealing to the eager audience when he took that reported to task.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 46 weeks ago
|
You can hold the opinion that taking a persons race or sexuality into account when it comes to opportunities is abhorrent without thinking the white man is being held back. 'Positive discrimination', or 'affirmative action' as the yanks say, is and always will be discrimination. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
