Riddle me This:
How does an organization predicated on a bigoted outlook on life and other humans, go around and show people they aren't bigots?
You’re kidding right! Did you not follow the DNC emails? A bunch of Bigots. Yet, spin it and it’s not about what is in the emails, you make it about who hacked the emails. And that’s how an organization does it.
No, I didn't follow that. The only things I saw were exaggerations from my evangelical Aunt. What did I miss? Quote the bigotry.
big·ot·ry ˈbiɡətrē/ noun
“intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."
Well, for one example there was another guy running for nomination called Bernie Sanders. The leaked emails were so bigotry against Sanders that Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman for the DNC had to resign. But don’t worry about Schultz, Hilary put her in another position. In the emails you have Clinton’s lawyer directing the DNC against Sanders. That part is not bigotry, but it did surprise me that Clinton had that much control over the DNC.
You can read the email yourself at https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/
Riddle me This:
How does an organization predicated on a bigoted outlook on life and other humans, go around and show people they aren't bigots?
You’re kidding right! Did you not follow the DNC emails? A bunch of Bigots. Yet, spin it and it’s not about what is in the emails, you make it about who hacked the emails. And that’s how an organization does it.Well I'm talking about white supremacist types.
Not sure what the DNC emails have to do with that.
The riddle was how could a group expect the people to see them as something they are not? Is that not correct?
In post #1, you asked the questioned. I answered the question. The answer was miss-direction. Which you can see happening in the elections. All the white bigotry group has to do is tell people that they are not bigots and change the direction of thought.
Another example, what was it about two weeks ago the government got people back from Iran? Trump said that the government payed to get the guys back with the 400 million dollars. Which was a total of 1.7 billion dollars. The government said there was no connection in any way of the money and the release of the hostages. Our government does not make deals with terrorist or blackmailers. But it is coming on election time and the White-house wanted this cleared up. So we were lead to believe it was just a remarkable coincidence of timing between the release of the hostages and the payment of money. Now, check the news that came out today. The money and the hostage payment were very connected. Call it miss-direction or lying. It is coming from the very top, what are we to think?
Riddle me This:
How does an organization predicated on a bigoted outlook on life and other humans, go around and show people they aren't bigots?
You’re kidding right! Did you not follow the DNC emails? A bunch of Bigots. Yet, spin it and it’s not about what is in the emails, you make it about who hacked the emails. And that’s how an organization does it.
No, I didn't follow that. The only things I saw were exaggerations from my evangelical Aunt. What did I miss? Quote the bigotry.
big·ot·ry ˈbiɡətrē/ noun
“intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."
Well, for one example there was another guy running for nomination called Bernie Sanders. The leaked emails were so bigotry against Sanders that Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman for the DNC had to resign. But don’t worry about Schultz, Hilary put her in another position. In the emails you have Clinton’s lawyer directing the DNC against Sanders. That part is not bigotry, but it did surprise me that Clinton had that much control over the DNC.
You can read the email yourself at https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/
Just checking if you had actually read them. How incredibly boring. Somebody had a bad idea, put it in an email. I got 5 of those today and I just work for a County. You are comparing 3 or 4 sentences made by operatives, one guy was a consultant who had only billed $10,000. You are comparing that to the head guy saying things to large crowds knowing it is being recorded and will be on the evening news.
Riddle me This:
How does an organization predicated on a bigoted outlook on life and other humans, go around and show people they aren't bigots?
You’re kidding right! Did you not follow the DNC emails? A bunch of Bigots. Yet, spin it and it’s not about what is in the emails, you make it about who hacked the emails. And that’s how an organization does it.
No, I didn't follow that. The only things I saw were exaggerations from my evangelical Aunt. What did I miss? Quote the bigotry.
big·ot·ry ˈbiɡətrē/ noun
“intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."
Well, for one example there was another guy running for nomination called Bernie Sanders. The leaked emails were so bigotry against Sanders that Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman for the DNC had to resign. But don’t worry about Schultz, Hilary put her in another position. In the emails you have Clinton’s lawyer directing the DNC against Sanders. That part is not bigotry, but it did surprise me that Clinton had that much control over the DNC.
You can read the email yourself at https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/
I'm not going to read through 19,252 emails to find the bigotry. As Lausten asked, quote it for us, and as I asked, provide link giving the context. All I've been able find online are cherry picked quotes on right-wing websites. Actually, they all had the same quote about taco bowls, taken out of context to make it look like bigotry when the comment was a jab as Trump's attempt to appeal to Latinos.
Riddle me This:
How does an organization predicated on a bigoted outlook on life and other humans, go around and show people they aren't bigots?
You’re kidding right! Did you not follow the DNC emails? A bunch of Bigots. Yet, spin it and it’s not about what is in the emails, you make it about who hacked the emails. And that’s how an organization does it.
No, I didn't follow that. The only things I saw were exaggerations from my evangelical Aunt. What did I miss? Quote the bigotry.
big·ot·ry ˈbiɡətrē/ noun
“intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."
Well, for one example there was another guy running for nomination called Bernie Sanders. The leaked emails were so bigotry against Sanders that Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman for the DNC had to resign. But don’t worry about Schultz, Hilary put her in another position. In the emails you have Clinton’s lawyer directing the DNC against Sanders. That part is not bigotry, but it did surprise me that Clinton had that much control over the DNC.
You can read the email yourself at https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/
I'm not going to read through 19,252 emails to find the bigotry. As Lausten asked, quote it for us, and as I asked, provide link giving the context. All I've been able find online are cherry picked quotes on right-wing websites. Actually, they all had the same quote about taco bowls, taken out of context to make it look like bigotry when the comment was a jab as Trump's attempt to appeal to Latinos.
Too bad, you are going to have to read the emails yourself. You have accused me of cherry picking data to many times. Therefore there is no way that I can pick out the data for you.
Maybe this will help.
Leaked Emails Reveal the Real Bigots Are in the Democratic Party
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/24/emails-wikileaks-real-jew-haters-democratic-party/
Riddle me This:
How does an organization predicated on a bigoted outlook on life and other humans, go around and show people they aren't bigots?
You’re kidding right! Did you not follow the DNC emails? A bunch of Bigots. Yet, spin it and it’s not about what is in the emails, you make it about who hacked the emails. And that’s how an organization does it.
No, I didn't follow that. The only things I saw were exaggerations from my evangelical Aunt. What did I miss? Quote the bigotry.
big·ot·ry ˈbiɡətrē/ noun
“intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."
Well, for one example there was another guy running for nomination called Bernie Sanders. The leaked emails were so bigotry against Sanders that Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman for the DNC had to resign. But don’t worry about Schultz, Hilary put her in another position. In the emails you have Clinton’s lawyer directing the DNC against Sanders. That part is not bigotry, but it did surprise me that Clinton had that much control over the DNC.
You can read the email yourself at https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/
Just checking if you had actually read them. How incredibly boring. Somebody had a bad idea, put it in an email. I got 5 of those today and I just work for a County. You are comparing 3 or 4 sentences made by operatives, one guy was a consultant who had only billed $10,000. You are comparing that to the head guy saying things to large crowds knowing it is being recorded and will be on the evening news.
I got to agree. It is not good practice to make conclusions from just parts of a conversation. But, when Schultz is removed by the President, you can bet that the claims of bigotry are correct.
You know what bothers me, isn’t this the same type of problem we had with Hoover and the FBI. He controlled a lot of data on people and used it to gain power. Now these leaks or hacks are just showing part of the picture. Isn’t the idea that all these emails and records are to open to the public so we don’t have these types of problems.
Riddle me This:
How does an organization predicated on a bigoted outlook on life and other humans, go around and show people they aren't bigots?
Simple. Just bullshit people. Tell "them" they are not bigots, because they are "only looking out for themselves, because no one else is." It's been working for centuries and longer.
I'm not going to read through 19,252 emails to find the bigotry. As Lausten asked, quote it for us, and as I asked, provide link giving the context. All I've been able find online are cherry picked quotes on right-wing websites. Actually, they all had the same quote about taco bowls, taken out of context to make it look like bigotry when the comment was a jab as Trump's attempt to appeal to Latinos.
Too bad, you are going to have to read the emails yourself. You have accused me of cherry picking data to many times. Therefore there is no way that I can pick out the data for you.
Maybe this will help.
Leaked Emails Reveal the Real Bigots Are in the Democratic Party
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/24/emails-wikileaks-real-jew-haters-democratic-party/
I have accused you of cherry picking and misrepresenting data "too many times" because that is what you do. Now you come back with more cherry picked bullshit from a website started by a known liar and run by ideological right wingers. BTW, where is the link to the IPCC differentiating between climate change and global warming? You never came up with that one either. I also recall you saying Germany was importing factory workers and hurting its economy when the opposite is true; Germany is building factories in other countries and keeping the higher paying engineering jobs at home.
See Mike, that's why I don't take your word for anything. You are wrong about almost everything, then when called out on your fact errors and misrepresentations you get your feelings hurt and say I'm not playing nice.
Too bad, you are going to have to read the emails yourself. You have accused me of cherry picking data to many times. Therefore there is no way that I can pick out the data for you.
Maybe this will help.
Leaked Emails Reveal the Real Bigots Are in the Democratic Party
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/24/emails-wikileaks-real-jew-haters-democratic-party/
So, is it possible, just possible, that the people who are accusing you of cherry picking have a case? Of course you can pick out the data, that's how you make a case. And if you could find MORE data showing racism, that would help you. If you could find more prominent people making racist remarks consistently, that would make your case. If those comments could be tied to things they said in public, then you'd have a real case. That's how cases are made. Why do you not understand that?
Instead, despite your not having read 19,000 emails, you say we should. You just show that there are really emails. That's not a case.
Instead, you show us what you actually read, which was a handful of snippets from a handful of emails by people who are not actually running for office. Compare that number, 5, to 19,000. That's the definition of cherry picking. Let's say I'm wrong, and it's 10 times more. That's still 50. That's still cherry picking.
See how I used data to make my case? That's how it's done. (Keyboard drop).
Too bad, you are going to have to read the emails yourself. You have accused me of cherry picking data to many times. Therefore there is no way that I can pick out the data for you.
Maybe this will help.
Leaked Emails Reveal the Real Bigots Are in the Democratic Party
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/24/emails-wikileaks-real-jew-haters-democratic-party/
So, is it possible, just possible, that the people who are accusing you of cherry picking have a case? Of course you can pick out the data, that's how you make a case. And if you could find MORE data showing racism, that would help you. If you could find more prominent people making racist remarks consistently, that would make your case. If those comments could be tied to things they said in public, then you'd have a real case. That's how cases are made. Why do you not understand that?
Instead, despite your not having read 19,000 emails, you say we should. You just show that there are really emails. That's not a case.
Instead, you show us what you actually read, which was a handful of snippets from a handful of emails by people who are not actually running for office. Compare that number, 5, to 19,000. That's the definition of cherry picking. Let's say I'm wrong, and it's 10 times more. That's still 50. That's still cherry picking.
See how I used data to make my case? That's how it's done. (Keyboard drop).
Of course people can cherry pick a case and it happens all the time. But are you saying that Obama ask Schultz to step down and basically ruin her career because some people were just possibly cherry picking a case? I don’t think so. The system of corruption is most likely getting better over the years. But the Lois Lerner actions shows us that there is corruption in positions of power in the government. What I am personally seeing is a sort of caste system being played out. The general public is watching the actions of the government. If the government takes the position that the general public is poor and uneducated and basically can’t do anything about the actions of the government anyway, then the government will have created the caste system to the point that the American dream of equality will be destroyed. Obama did the right thing, and I bet a room full of lawyers looked deeply into the emails for Obama.
Of course people can cherry pick a case and it happens all the time. But are you saying that Obama ask Schultz to step down and basically ruin her career because some people were just possibly cherry picking a case? I don’t think so. The system of corruption is most likely getting better over the years. But the Lois Lerner actions shows us that there is corruption in positions of power in the government. What I am personally seeing is a sort of caste system being played out. The general public is watching the actions of the government. If the government takes the position that the general public is poor and uneducated and basically can’t do anything about the actions of the government anyway, then the government will have created the caste system to the point that the American dream of equality will be destroyed. Obama did the right thing, and I bet a room full of lawyers looked deeply into the emails for Obama.
Of course people can cherry pick a case and it happens all the time. But are you saying that Obama ask Schultz to step down and basically ruin her career because some people were just possibly cherry picking a case?
No, I'm talking about you and the accusation of racism throughout the DNC. And what does Obama have to do with it? Shultz was under pressure for years and the emails about Bernie were just the last straw. I'm not going to sort this out for you. As far as I'm concerned, you just admitted to cherry picking, and are trying to say "everybody does it". I heard everyone was jumping off a bridge, are you going to do that too?
Riddle me This:
How does an organization predicated on a bigoted outlook on life and other humans, go around and show people they aren't bigots?
You’re kidding right! Did you not follow the DNC emails? A bunch of Bigots. Yet, spin it and it’s not about what is in the emails, you make it about who hacked the emails. And that’s how an organization does it.
No, I didn't follow that. The only things I saw were exaggerations from my evangelical Aunt. What did I miss? Quote the bigotry.
big·ot·ry ˈbiɡətrē/ noun
“intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself."
Well, for one example there was another guy running for nomination called Bernie Sanders. The leaked emails were so bigotry (sic) against Sanders that Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman for the DNC had to resign. But don’t worry about Schultz, Hilary put her in another position. In the emails you have Clinton’s lawyer directing the DNC against Sanders. That part is not bigotry, but it did surprise me that Clinton had that much control over the DNC.
You can read the email yourself at https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/
I'm not going to read through 19,252 emails to find the bigotry.
Lausten asked, quote it for us, and as I asked, provide links giving the context. All I've been able find online are cherry picked quotes on right-wing websites. Actually, they all had the same quote about taco bowls, taken out of context to make it look like bigotry when the comment was a jab as Trump's attempt to appeal to Latinos.
Too bad, you are going to have to read the emails yourself.
How many of those emails have you read? Seems that if you had them and found bigotry in them you'd be able to quote them in context.
You have accused me of cherry picking data to many times. Therefore there is no way that I can pick out the data for you.
Maybe this will help.
Leaked Emails Reveal the Real Bigots Are in the Democratic Party
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/24/emails-wikileaks-real-jew-haters-democratic-party/
I have also accused you of misinterpreting things, so what do you do? Misinterpret the article to which you linked. Did you even read past the headline? The quoted email discusses outing Sanders atheism. While that would be an unconscionable campaign tactic in my opinion it is not racism.
Now that you and Stardusty have sidetracked this thread with irrelevant and useless comments can we get back to the subject: the American Nazi Party's attraction to a Donald Trump presidency.
Of course people can cherry pick a case and it happens all the time. But are you saying that Obama ask Schultz to step down and basically ruin her career because some people were just possibly cherry picking a case?
No, I'm talking about you and the accusation of racism throughout the DNC. And what does Obama have to do with it? Shultz was under pressure for years and the emails about Bernie were just the last straw. I'm not going to sort this out for you. As far as I'm concerned, you just admitted to cherry picking, and are trying to say "everybody does it". I heard everyone was jumping off a bridge, are you going to do that too?
It was my understanding that Schultz was moving up the political ladder. And she had to have backers to become the chairwoman of the DNC. Though I did read that she was upsetting a lot of people and making herself more important in the DNC than she should have.
Of course I cherry pick when it comes to political issues. Everybody does. They have to because there is too much trash floating around. Being political is not about the science, it is about the power and money. Political spin reacting to opposing political spin.
The cost of the presidential campaign may be as much as 5 billion. http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/230318-the-5-billion-campaign And with 5B they can publish a lot of spin.
Of course I cherry pick when it comes to political issues. Everybody does. They have to because there is too much trash floating around. Being political is not about the science, it is about the power and money. Political spin reacting to opposing political spin.
I'm glad you said it. It's what I've always thought, but wasn't quite sure. You see the world as if the spin is truth. You don't know how to determine what's real, so you just pick things you think sound good. If you get 10 hits on something, and they all say about the same thing, then you think that's what everybody is hearing and what everybody is thinking. I'm guessing you do the same thing for your own life. You don't actually do the things you talk about, you just imagine you do or think you might some day, then after a while, your own fiction becomes reality.
There's really no point in listening to you, or arguing with you, not even about what you say is your personal experience.
Of course I cherry pick when it comes to political issues. Everybody does. They have to because there is too much trash floating around. Being political is not about the science, it is about the power and money. Political spin reacting to opposing political spin.
I'm glad you said it. It's what I've always thought, but wasn't quite sure. You see the world as if the spin is truth. You don't know how to determine what's real, so you just pick things you think sound good. If you get 10 hits on something, and they all say about the same thing, then you think that's what everybody is hearing and what everybody is thinking. I'm guessing you do the same thing for your own life. You don't actually do the things you talk about, you just imagine you do or think you might some day, then after a while, your own fiction becomes reality.
There's really no point in listening to you, or arguing with you, not even about what you say is your personal experience.
What ever it's worth, it is a good insight into the mind of your average Trump fan.
DarronS - But he’s done an excellent job highjacking this thread and making it about him.
One idea leads to another and then another, it is called a conversation.
This statement appeared on this thread, that makes it a topic in this thread, if not the topic of the OP.
LoisL - to be “pro white" means you are anti anyone who does not fit the “white" description.
That statement is false. It betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the difference between an irrevocable trait of birth as opposed to an ideology.
That statement is a direct attack upon me, because I am pro white.
According to LoisL's "logic" to be pro women is to be anti men. I am a man. I am ok being pro women because I am also pro men
See
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amy-siskind/why-the-pro-women-movemen_b_602207.html
If it is ok to be pro women, and it is, then it is also ok to be pro men and pro white and pro black, and we can be all of these things simultaneously without contradiction because these are not inherently opposed ideologies.
DarronS - But he’s done an excellent job highjacking this thread and making it about him.
One idea leads to another and then another, it is called a conversation.
This statement appeared on this thread, that makes it a topic in this thread, if not the topic of the OP.
LoisL - to be “pro white" means you are anti anyone who does not fit the “white" description.
That statement is false. It betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the difference between an irrevocable trait of birth as opposed to an ideology.
That statement is a direct attack upon me, because I am pro white.
According to LoisL's "logic" to be pro women is to be anti men. I am a man. I am ok being pro women because I am also pro men
See
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amy-siskind/why-the-pro-women-movemen_b_602207.html
If it is ok to be pro women, and it is, then it is also ok to be pro men and pro white and pro black, and we can be all of these things simultaneously without contradiction because these are not inherently opposed ideologies.
No, to be pro white is not to be anti everyone else. It's anti putting anyone else in a superior position. But while we're on the sibject. i didn't say I am pro-white. .
I am pro equality on sex and race, which means I am anti putting either sex or any orientation or any race in a superior or inferior position.
I'm not sure everyone here can get his mind around anything that "complicated."
Lois