Trump names white nationalist to top White House position

Post Reply New Topic

He's been hounded for years about his narrative but to no avail.

If you watch the political landscape for a while, you quickly discover that the most sexist people are the loud anti-sexists, and the most racist people are the loud anti-racists.

...and here I thought that it couldn't possibly get any worse than karl rove....

I get the feeling that if your idea would remove itself, it's probably absurd/terrible.

There is no doubt that there are other group loyalties in existence, but partisanship is a major loyalty in the US. Past that, I wouldn't take something like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a good source.


LOL. We're currently talking about the National Review, which is privately held. Regardless, your statement that some companies hold other companies still doesn't justify anything.


I don't think that in practice, this is going to make a big difference for any complaints about Bannon. Given that what currently is in the space of being "alt-right", also includes things that do literally and overtly transgress the traditional lines of what is acceptable behavior.

If you're trying to walk this back from "white nationalist" to "nationalist who just happens to be racist/willing to promote racism", I don't have a strong objection, but I'm not that concerned with splitting hairs on something terrible.
http://qz.com/841036/is-steve-bannon-a-white-supremacist-trumps-advisor-wants-to-rebrand-racism-as-american-nationalism/


It means that he has strong affiliations with the concept.


Ian Tuttle's use of the word and your implication by comparing it to 4chan really is a bit of mischaracterization, because of the whole "news source and opinion website" thing.


*shrug* I really didn't see them as important for the purposes of this thread. I mean, this isn't an amazing defense, as it still doesn't suggest that he should be in the white house or near the levers of power.

As for the last bit, a lot of the time, conservatives use these as dog whistles, but otherwise, they're perfectly acceptable things to talk about. And I hope this doesn't come off as condescending, but... conservative use of these as dog whistles really does undermine the possibility of fruitful conversation. This isn't to say that SJWs aren't toxic either, as they are, but I think they have less power on the left than dogmatism has on the right.(basically, uneven polarization has occurred between the sides)

Then more polite than usual. How about that?

But I'm not calling all white southerners as crackers, just the purposely ignorant and bigoted among them.

Read my response to ASPartOfMe.

Only according to the alt right and their shills at Breitbart, and the like, when they attack people who oppose bigotry. According to that fat closet case Limbaugh, the real racists are not the Klan, or Neo-Nazis, but black civil rights leaders.
So no, we who speak out against the evils of racism, sexism, homophobia, and the like, are not the real bigots, despite what you try to convince everyone else about.

Only by you and a few of your bosom buddies. And the more you hound me, the louder I'll get!

This is disconcerting, but his choice for Spook #1 is Mike Pompeo who not only wants to continue, but greatly expand domestic spying operations.

Whilee I harbor no treasonous intentions against my own country, I hate the thought that my government sees fit to treat the citizens that it governs as potential perpetrators, and to harvest data accordingly.

If he gets away with this it pretty much kills the 'Great Experiment', at least for the time being, and I highly doubt that subsequent administrations will cease to use a tool that it can potemtially find useful.

Remember back in the day, when Republicans were condemning Obama For just that?

I agree that Sessions is an absolutely dreadful choice. He seems to be a genuine white supremacist, although the controversies surrounding him seem to be quite old and there is a possibility he has mellowed with age.

I think your use of "inbred" is shameful, particularly in conjunction with "cracker". I don't think cracker is a racist term, but I think it can be a classist one. It seems like a fair description of Jeff Sessions. However, the use of "inbred" makes it a nasty attack from a coastal Democrat on a Southern Republican. Even if he is inbred and you're not just resorting to hateful stereotypes, what relevance does that have to whether he's a good person or a good appointment?

In what way is Jeff Sessions a 'genuine white supremacist'?


Part 8648763478658 of the series "Everyone that disagrees with me is a racist"

Jeff once said KKK was alright. He changed his mind when he found out they did drugs. There's numerous other things but I honestly think you would call it "mainstream lies" like you usually do. So why bother? You can easily find the information on the internet.

So I will say... Sessions is part of the series "Everyone that Trump picks is fine with Jacoby"

I know this is an autism forum and people take thing literally but this is going to far, a 30-40 year old joke does not make him a white supremacist or a KKK member. Sessions was actually prosecuting the Klan at the time.

Yeah, the louder you wail about being bullied and set upon. Then there's that well used straw man of yours about "attacks" on your family.

I can guess who these "bosom buddies" are you but about all we have in common is penchant for calling you out and running you up a tree. You don't see us wooing each other like you and your bosom buddy after each post that one of you makes with all those compliments and thank yous and other gushy pleasantries, ad nauseam.