It was great to have a president who was 1/2 Black and 1/2 white, but the Biden administration, in my opinion is more demographically representative of our country. I love the fact we have now have more minorities in government and Kamala is no exception. Fifty years ago, this wouldn’t be. It would be mostly rich white men. Forty years ago, basically the same. It got better over the years with more women and people of colour, but a Black man couldn’t be president until 12 years ago and even then he got hate based on colour. It’s getting better, but we still have a long ways to go, but a woman VP, that was a dream even when Ferraro ran in '84. We’ve come a long ways, baby.
?
??
Yup, that second picture shows the epitome of @thatoneguy not getting it or understanding a thing. The dude looks totally confused. Maybe it’s for the best. Just sit right down and enjoy the ride.
I’m for being honest - completely honest. And that means acknowledging that black and brown people can be just as racist as white people. It means admitting that sometimes the black or brown person just isn’t as qualified for something as the white person. And visa versa. But I’ve heard numerous times, a black pundit say this or that person should have this or that position BECAUSE they’re black. That’s racist. We’ve seen how high profile blacks/the BLM movement wants to get this or that white guy’s status knocked down (whatever form that takes) because he has a history of sexual harassment, say. Absolutely! A scumbag is a scumbag. BUT then be honest, MLK was a horrible womanizer - I’ve even spoken to an older gentleman who witnessed it first hand. But wait whoa, how dare you suggest that about MLK. Boom. Sorry, that’s racist to suggest he’s immune from criticism because he’s black.
If you come up with standards of behavior then they need to be applied to all equally. If they’re not so applied - that’s racist! Does this mean there aren’t systemic problems? Absolutely not. And they need to be addressed. But not by implementing racist policies against non-blacks. Unfortunately I also understand this is a fine point that would be misunderstood by most liberals. (And I count myself as far more liberal than most liberals.)
I’m not saying they should have the jobs because they are people of colour or a woman. I’m saying it’s about time we put people in these position no matter they gender or skin colour, if they have the education and experience needed. These people do have the experience and education. They have what it takes to do the job AND they represent those who voted for them and those they represent. The demographic in the U.S. isn’t all white and male, but that’s what our government has been despite the fact that more women and people of colour have gotten the need education and experience to do the job. Decades now, women and people of colour haven’t been allowed in our highest position of government and it wasn’t for lack of trying, education, experience. We are now breaking into government positions and it’s showing a better representation of the demographic. Now if you want us to continue to have only racist, sexist, egotistical bigotted rich male WASPs, who refuse to represent anyone except the rich white men who line their pockets, then keep voting for the Moscow Mitches and dotards, but if you want someone who represents everyone of the U.S., then that means electing those who actually do represent the U.S., which isn’t all white and male. If you want someone represents the People, then that means voting for a woman, a woman of colour, and even a man of colour, who has the education and the experience for the position. Of course if you don’t want the Ferraros (white women), Harris (Biracial females), Obamas (Biracial males), Presselys (Black women), Bowmans (Black males), the Cortezes (Latinos), Tliabs, Haalands (Pueblo), Herrells (Cherokee), Davids (Ho-Chunk), the Omars (Muslims), or Jews, who run then don’t vote for them, but it’s about time our government started looking as colourful as the rest of the country and people not be kept out because they aren’t white males.
@cuthbertj. (And I count myself as far more liberal than most liberals.)I used to find it easy to identify with liberal, but I have no clue what it actually means anymore. Then often when I hear liberals talk, I cringe more than I care to admit.
Also a better appreciation for the Liberal Economic Philosophy’s dependence on consuming as much as fast as possible, sort of sours me on the label. Especially when it makes lies and deception and fraud legitimate forms of discourse and business. The most ruthless bully wins. Yippy, that supposed to be an enlighten America? But the Christian Right wing approach is even worse, with their totalitarian outlook on the rest of humanity and governing, and just as gluttonous when it comes to consuming and destroying Earth’s resources and our life support system.
{Oh, but that stupid stunt @Guy pulls up there, that’s downright infantile.}
https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/common-logical-fallacies
Logical fallacies – those logical gaps that invalidate arguments – aren’t always easy to spot.
While some come in the form of loud, glaring inconsistencies, others can easily fly under the radar, sneaking into everyday meetings and conversations undetected.
Having an understanding of these basic logical fallacies can help you more confidently parse the arguments and claims you participate in and witness on a daily basis – separating fact from sharply dressed fiction.
Our list is by no means an exhaustive guide to every formal and informal fallacy, but it should help you build better arguments and identify logical missteps.
So many choices, which is it:
4) The False Dilemma Fallacy This common fallacy misleads by presenting complex issues in terms of two inherently opposed sides.
The Hasty Generalization Fallacy
This fallacy occurs when someone draws expansive conclusions based on inadequate or insufficient evidence.The Correlation/Causation Fallacy
If two things appear to be correlated, this doesn’t necessarily indicate that one of those things irrefutably caused the other thing.The Anecdotal Evidence Fallacy
In place of logical evidence, this fallacy substitutes examples from someone’s personal experience.The Tu quoque Fallacy
The tu quoque fallacy (Latin for “you also”) is an invalid attempt to discredit an opponent by answering criticism with criticism – but never actually presenting a counterargument to the original disputed claim.
I’m not saying they should have the jobs because they are people of colour or a woman. I’m saying it’s about time we put people in these position no matter they gender or skin colour, if they have the education and experience needed. These people do have the experience and education. They have what it takes to do the job AND they represent those who voted for them and those they represent.Yet the fact they are non-White or female is why they were chosen. None of them have done anything for this country besides represent their tribes, which is not really an accomplishment.
The demographic in the U.S. isn’t all white and male, but that’s what our government has been despite the fact that more women and people of colour have gotten the need education and experience to do the job. Decades now, women and people of colour haven’t been allowed in our highest position of government and it wasn’t for lack of trying, education, experience. We are now breaking into government positions and it’s showing a better representation of the demographic. Now if you want us to continue to have only racist, sexist, egotistical bigotted rich male WASPs, who refuse to represent anyone except the rich white men who line their pockets, then keep voting for the Moscow Mitches and dotards, but if you want someone who represents everyone of the U.S., then that means electing those who actually do represent the U.S., which isn’t all white and male.Education and experience are two of the easiest things needed. The rest is much harder to quantify.
If you want someone represents the People, then that means voting for a woman, a woman of colour, and even a man of colour, who has the education and the experience for the position. Of course if you don’t want the Ferraros (white women), Harris (Biracial females), Obamas (Biracial males), Presselys (Black women), Bowmans (Black males), the Cortezes (Latinos), Tliabs, Haalands (Pueblo), Herrells (Cherokee), Davids (Ho-Chunk), the Omars (Muslims), or Jews, who run then don’t vote for them, but it’s about time our government started looking as colourful as the rest of the country and people not be kept out because they aren’t white males.These examples only represent some people. No way in hell do they represent me. While democracy is always a crapshoot, sometimes it's not even worth playing. Demographic representation is very important but it unfortunately doesn't mix with meritocracy or even democracy. There is no easy answer to this problem.
The truth is we can only have one or the other, and the former is much stronger in and of itself than the latter.
None of them have done anything for this country besides represent their tribes, which is not really an accomplishment.
And rich white men elected to office haven’t done anything except for the rich and large corporations?
Education and experience are two of the easiest things needed. The rest is much harder to quantify.
Maybe, but those two things are a good start and well needed.
No way in hell do they represent me.
Well, I’m sorry you’re a minority.
The truth is, we need more minorities (includes women) in our government in order to represent the majority, which is not the rich white male and corporations are not people.
And rich white men elected to office haven’t done anything except for the rich and large corporations?Virtually everything you respect in this world was created by rich White men.
The truth is, we need more minorities (includes women) in our government in order to represent the majority, which is not the rich white male and corporations are not people.Rich White men and corporations have never made up the majority of this country.
Well, I’m sorry you’re a minority.
The truth is, we need more minorities (includes women) in our government in order to represent the majority, which is not the rich white male and corporations are not people.
So much for liberal democracy.
Rich White men and corporations have never made up the majority of this country.
By definition, they are the majority because they are the ones in power and always have been. Those who have power are the majority. Minorities have never had the power. Who do you think owned slaves? Rich white men. Who do you think have controlled women? Rich white men. Who forced the Native Americans onto reservations? Rich white men. Who made laws to keep women and people of colour from voting? Rich white men Now, there’s a lame ass law that says corporations are people. Did you know that Hellmart hires more people than the military? That makes Hellmart one huge friggin’ plantation made up of poor people, mostly women, other minorities, and poor men. That bump up to $15/hour coming soon? It’s not a living wage and most of that Hellmart will get right back and the CEO who makes millions a year, knows this. The majority, rich white men, are in control and that is the very thing that makes them the majority. It’s not about numbers. It’s about power and wealth. In this world, people of colour are in greater numbers, but yet it’s the rich white male who holds the majority because of wealth and power. Even women are in greater numbers, but they are not a majority because they too have been suppressed because of the rich white male. People mistake high numbers as being the majority, when it’s really power and wealth that makes one the majority. Minorities have the numbers, but they have no power or wealth thanks to the rich white male suppressing them. It’s all about money and who has the most of it, in which to have the power to suppress others.
Virtually everything you respect in this world was created by rich White men.
What is that I respect in this world that was created by rich white men?
You liberials are unbelievable. Making a fuss all over identity politics while biden just spat workers in the face by killing the $15 dollar min wage.
President Biden didn’t kill the $15/hour bill. The Repugs didn’t want to pass the COVID relief in it, so the Dems decided to take it out so they could pass it and then work on the $15/hour. You cannot put complete blame on President Biden. The Repugs had a lot to do with it too.
If you read, it was not President Biden who removed the $15/hour.
Senate Democrats worked through the weekend to try to find some kind of legislative Plan B to encourage businesses to raise their wages, after the Senate parliamentarian told Democrats last week that including a minimum wage increase in the COVID-19 relief budget bill would break Senate rules.
The House did include a provision that would increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour over the next four years, but Senate Democrats will ultimately strip that provision out in order to comply with budgetary law.
Ultimately, the fate of the $15 minimum wage was always in peril in the Senate, and not only because of Senate procedure. Two Democrats, Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), are against the policy itself.
As you can see, President Biden didn’t do it, but rather, in order to make COVID relief pass, conservative Dems in the Senate decided the $15/hour need to be taken out of the bill in an effort to get the Repugs to vote for the bill. You cannot blame a president, any president, for what happens in Congress and such is the case with the $15/hour stipulation in the COVID relief bill. President Biden did not do that.
I don’t pay much attention to missing girl, and a comment about Biden like that is why. I can guess what sources she uses
President Biden didn’t kill the $15/hour bill. The Repugs didn’t want to pass the COVID relief in it, so the Dems decided to take it out so they could pass it and then work on the $15/hour. You cannot put complete blame on President Biden. The Repugs had a lot to do with it too.In a way, I do agree that some of those extra provisions don't belong in there. But that's the way the game is played. Stuff it with pork to get more to buy in, and/or use it as a bargaining chip to pull out as a compromise.
They’ve been talking $15 minimum wage and infrastructure projects for years.
But to your point - Correct it wasn’t President Biden. … there is definitely something “missing” with that kind of thought process.
I don’t pay much attention to missing girl, and a comment about Biden like that is why. I can guess what sources she uses
Yeah, probably Faux News, Newmax, and other Right Wing Fake News sources.