A Word on Guisling Traitor Losers from My Buddy Steve Gilliard

[Mucho]

The party of racism and bigotry - - the party of George Allen and Trent Lott - - does not have the right to accuse anyone of bigotry or racism.

I don't know anyone in here who speaks for the GOP party. They speak for themselves, as is their right, Fact is i don't know any GOP member in here who is a racist.

Perhaps i missed one. Care to point them out?

Me?

Plane?

Ami?

Sirs?

Ricky?

TP?

Yet we have Knute having the chutzpah to say people of a certain color are NOT ALLOWED to join whatever political party they choose. That they are NOT SMART ENOUGH to decide for themselves, they need someone else, like you or giiliard or Knute himself to take care of them and guide them down the righteous path.

That's rubbish and so was your post.

Michael Steele can join the Nazi party if he wants and Steve Gilliard would be right calling him a traitor then too. (It isnt really so different anyway) I would never say any black person was not smart enough to decide for themselves. It is just that these three chose money , power & selfishness before any consideration for their people who are still oppressed by RW fruitcakes.
BTW- Those RWers you mentioned dont speak for the Repub party,. They only regurgitate whatever that party says. And I respectively  disagree that they are not racists. They just dont know it.

[BT]

Your attacks on Knute and Steve Gilliard were rubbish, my post was right on the mark.

You just don't get it do you.

Saying blacks can only belong to the democrat party is a akin to saying blacks can't listen to classical music or anything other than rap or the blues. you are demanding that individuals conform to the group. You are saying they should not be free to decide for themselves what associations they think would be in their best interest. And if they dare to wander off the reservation they are fair game to be castigated as traitors and fellow travellers. What paternalistic crap that is.

[BT]

And I respectively  disagree that they are not racists. They just don't know it.

And you do, based on what evidence?

[Universe Prince]

I'd like to ask our right wing posters to tone down the flaming hypocrisy.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. That's funny. I'm watching Knute compare African-Americans who don't agree with him to genocidal killers while trying to position himself as tolerant, and you're asking the right-wing folks to "to tone down the flaming hypocrisy"? Wow.

The party of racism and bigotry - - the party of George Allen and Trent Lott - - does not have the right to accuse anyone of bigotry or racism.

I was not aware that the Republican Party itself had posted here. In fact, I'm pretty sure it hasn't.

The only blacks they ever stick up for are the tiny percentage of quisling traitors who turn their backs on their own people to seek their fortune with Whitey.  Steve Gilliard and Knute were perfectly right on in calling them out on it.

That is just pure adult male bovine excrement. The racism charge is unfounded nonsense. The "quisling traitors" is bigoted nonsense. No, actually it's worse than that. It's bigoted language intended to shame any one of dark skin from daring to consider ideas other than those someone else has deemed acceptable for people with dark skin to think. If that isn't racism, seems to me it really is only a hair's breadth away.

It's an old Nazi trick to accuse your opponents of doing exactly what you won't admit to doing yourself.

Mucho, or Knute or whatever he calls himself these days, brought that up too. Interesting that you're both trying to insinuate those who don't agree with you are either traitors to their race or Nazis. Hm. Perhaps you can explain how that is tolerant and not bigoted, because I'm just not seeing it.

Just like Hitler falsely accused the Jews of aiming at world domination while he was actively planning for it himself, so the party of racism accuses its opponents of racism when those opponents go on the attack against turncoats and Uncle Toms.

Which of us is currently complaining about the political choices of people based on their skin color? That would be you, Mucho and Mr. Gilliard. And for those who disagree with that sort of thing, you're essentially calling them racists and Nazis. Hm. Seems to me you're the one accusing people of what you refuse to admit to doing yourself. So perhaps you need to consider taking your own advice and "tone down the flaming hypocrisy."

Oh - - and another thing.  The "hate" issue.  Anyone who fights to empower blacks, who fights against racism - - bonus points for any Republican who can accuse them of being "hate-filled."  LMFAO.  The party that chose war in Iraq and the death of 600,000 Iraqis is the party of "love" and its opponents, who are against war and against torture are "hate-filled" "angry" or "hateful."  Blow it out your ass, guys, it doesn't work any more.    (Psssst!  It never did.)

That is the stupidest argument in your post. Anyone who calls Republicans "quisling traitors" to their race because they have dark skin is open to being called hateful, because the "Uncle Toms" and "traitors" bit is hateful language. Just because you say "Uncle Tom" rather than "nigger" doesn't mean you're not hateful or judging someone because of his race. In fact, few things come across to me as more patronizing than to insist that African-American Republicans have turned their backs on their race. You might not be saying that African-Americans are not allowed to think for themselves, to consider the issues and desire for themselves what they should be, but you are implying that they should not be allowed to do so. You are saying that people with dark skin should have their political identity defined by their skin color, by who their parents are, by their race, and not by being allowed to think and decide for themselves. That sure seems racist to me. And before you start telling me that you didn't actually say that, anyone who wants to tell me that the political right uses code words for racism, like "states' rights" or some such, has zero authority to insist that his words cannot be taken to have subtle implications of racism or hate. And I'm saying this as someone who has turned away from the Republican Party over the last 10 years or so, is against the war in Iraq, and is against torture. So all your stereotyping bombast intended to paint as hateful anyone not agreeing with you is wasted. If you want to defend yourself or Knute or Mr. Gilliard as not hateful, you're going to have to do a hell of a lot better job.

Honestly, a "we're not hateful because you are" argument? What do you think this is? Sixth grade?

[Universe Prince]

I would never say any black person was not smart enough to decide for themselves.

Of course you wouldn't. But you would say that any black person who decides something other than what you like is a traitor to his race. You would call that African-American person greedy, selfish, and the next thing to Nazis and genocidal killers. So maybe you wouldn't say directly that African-Americans are not smart enough, but you're still trying to degrade any of them you don't like so you can feel morally and intellectually superior. You're a bigot. That much would be obvious even to a casual observer. Stop trying to deny it. Sheesh. Next you're going to tell me you can't be racist because some of your best friends are black.

[Mucho]

I would never say any black person was not smart enough to decide for themselves.

Of course you wouldn't. But you would say that any black person who decides something other than what you like is a traitor to his race. You would call that African-American person greedy, selfish, and the next thing to Nazis and genocidal killers. So maybe you wouldn't say directly that African-Americans are not smart enough, but you're still trying to degrade any of them you don't like so you can feel morally and intellectually superior. You're a bigot. That much would be obvious even to a casual observer. Stop trying to deny it. Sheesh. Next you're going to tell me you can't be racist because some of your best friends are black.

I am vaguely interested in what you think a bigot is. I am not judging these three weasels on the color of their skin , but the content of their soul which is sell-out evil.

[Universe Prince]

I am vaguely interested in what you think a bigot is.

A bigot is someone who is so biased toward his own group, creed, politics and/or opinions that he is intolerant of those who differ or disagree.

I am not judging these three weasels on the color of their skin , but the content of their soul which is sell-out evil.

I would ask if you were joking, but I know you're serious. You're judging them as "sell-out evil" because of the color of their skin. It is the color of their skin, their race that you claim they are selling out. You're not condemning them because they have dark skin, but because they have dark skin and dare to disagree with your politics. They have an African-American ancestry and have left the Democratic Plantation, er, the Democratic Party, and so to you they are selfish traitors to their race, as if there was some sort of ideological purity that people of dark skin had an obligation to maintain. You do not get away with acting like race is not part of your condemnation of African-American Republicans because clearly it is. If it was not, you would not be calling them sell-outs and traitors. But that is exactly what you are calling them. There is nothing about your rhetoric on the matter that is not intolerant contempt and therefore bigoted.

[The_Professor]

The initial post was deamning and shameless. This is a FACT. If you do not see it, then that perhaps confirm many many things.

Perhpas you would like to retract these statements as "Character is much easier kept than recovered, " according to Thomas Paine.

[Michael Tee]

<<The initial post was deamning and shameless. This is a FACT.>>

Professor, with all due respect, it's an OPINION.  And a sadly misguided one at that.

[Mucho]

I am vaguely interested in what you think a bigot is.

A bigot is someone who is so biased toward his own group, creed, politics and/or opinions that he is intolerant of those who differ or disagree.

I am not judging these three weasels on the color of their skin , but the content of their soul which is sell-out evil.

I would ask if you were joking, but I know you're serious. You're judging them as "sell-out evil" because of the color of their skin. It is the color of their skin, their race that you claim they are selling out. You're not condemning them because they have dark skin, but because they have dark skin and dare to disagree with your politics. They have an African-American ancestry and have left the Democratic Plantation, er, the Democratic Party, and so to you they are selfish traitors to their race, as if there was some sort of ideological purity that people of dark skin had an obligation to maintain. You do not get away with acting like race is not part of your condemnation of African-American Republicans because clearly it is. If it was not, you would not be calling them sell-outs and traitors. But that is exactly what you are calling them. There is nothing about your rhetoric on the matter that is not intolerant contempt and therefore bigoted.

I hate no group that can not help its status, I only hate the individuals that oppress and betray them.
Since you just make shit up (and tons of it too might add) as you go along, you might as well be a Repub.

[Michael Tee]

Prince, you're becoming unhinged.  You're rambling all over the place and it's hard to answer you concisely but I will try.

Black people still have interests as black people in the U.S. today.  The problems of racism have not all gone away.  So there's a common interest they all have in fighting racism and in redressing the injustices of the past, most of which are still present today, although progress has been made.

It's a phony, straw-man issue to argue that any black man has the right to associate with any political party of his choice.  No one denies that.  It's a phony straw man issue to claim that a black man has sufficient intelligence to choose the Party that he thinks best represents his interests.  No one denies that.

The question is, what do we (Knute, Steve Gilliard, myself) think of a man who turns his back on his own people and embraces the cause of their enemies, the racists, the white supremacists, the Trent Lotts, the George Allens - - and quite frankly, we don't think much of him, and aren't shy about saying so.   And if you want to call that racism and hatefulness - - I say thanks, because we needed a good laugh and we always can count on your childish rhetorical tricks and faked indignation for that.

[Universe Prince]

I hate no group that can not help its status,

Cannot help its status? Is that what you really think of African-Americans? You have a lower opinion of them than I gave you credit for. I suppose next you're going to tell me they should all be grateful for the privilege of being part of the Democratic Party.

I only hate the individuals that oppress and betray them.

Thanks for that comment. It'll come in handy later. And good for you for admitting that you're hateful toward people with whom you disagree. That is what you mean, right? The individuals who supposedly oppress and betray the African-Americans are really just the people who disagree with you, right?

[_JS]

I have to agree that this is racist trash knute.

I wonder though, would those on the right make the opposite argument? I've seen arguments in here (well, in the old fora) that implied that the majority of the African-American voters who vote for Democrats were voting against their best interests. The argument implied that the Democrats trick and decieve the African-Americans into voting for them which implies that African American voters are somehow not intelligent enough to see this alleged deception for themselves, yet a group of white right wing individuals can clearly see it for them.

I've always found it interesting that those on the right somehow never condemn that line of thought as being racist and patronistic at all.

[Amianthus]

I've always found it interesting that those on the right somehow never condemn that line of thought as being racist and patronistic at all.

Actually, I would also condemn that reasoning.

However, the reasoning from the right I remember was more along the lines of "the Dems just assume most blacks will vote for them and take that vote for granted."

[Mucho]

I hate no group that can not help its status,

Cannot help its status? Is that what you really think of African-Americans? You have a lower opinion of them than I gave you credit for. I suppose next you're going to tell me they should all be grateful for the privilege of being part of the Democratic Party.

You do live in a marvelous l;land of fantasy. There is no condesesion there. It is not condescending to understand that there have been and are racial, ethnic religious and others with situations beyond their contrl that are oppressed here
That last statement is just pure idiocy.

I only hate the individuals that oppress and betray them.

Thanks for that comment. It'll come in handy later. And good for you for admitting that you're hateful toward people with whom you disagree. That is what you mean, right? The individuals who supposedly oppress and betray the African-Americans are really just the people who disagree with you, right?

I do not hate all people that disagree with me only the stupid and arrogant ones that continue to oppress and sometimes murder people either in thought or did. You can use that quote anytime you want and never forget it either. There are folks that still fight blind hatred and stupidity.