Nobody ever claimed he said "black families were better off under Jim Crow laws" (quotes are there for a reason).
I watched the video.
He absolutely did insinuate that.
US continues to go backward...
- Thread starter PF5
- Start date
I watched the video.
He absolutely did insinuate that.
Comprehension? Democrat leader Hakeem Jeffries specifically said “It has come to my attention that a so-called leader has made an inaccurate statement that Black folks were better off during Jim Crow”.
(quotes are there for a reason)
Last edited:
Nobody in this thread or the original thread posted by @Polds4OSU.
Both of those explicitly stated that he insinuated that Black folks were better off during Jim Crow.
My comprehension is fine.
Insinuate: impart or suggest in an artful or indirect way
And he absolutely did insinuate that black folks were better off during Jim Crow….Donalds’s backtracking notwithstanding.
Last edited:
A number of Republican lawmakers in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Wednesday booed two law enforcement officers who defended the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack.
I love how you added “mislead, mischaracterize” in the same post you are now tripling-down on being wrong.
I just laid out the exact quote from House Minority Leader Jeffries who said that. Bold.
* Normally I wouldn’t bother replying to you, but admit I find it humorous when you like you own posts.
Last edited:
I love how you added “mislead, mischaracterize” in the same post you are now tripling-down on being wrong.
I just laid out the exact quote from House Minority Leader Jeffries who said that. Bold.
* Normally I wouldn’t bother replying to you, but admit I find it humorous when you like you own posts.
So you’re in the moron brigade of two believing @Vakarian74 and are the same person.
Good to know.
Reveals your complete lack of intellectual acuity quite nicely.
Last edited:
This will be my last response to a post by you.
1) You claimed no one ever claimed that Donald’s said “black families were better off under Jim Crow laws”. I provided you a direct quote from House Minority leader Jeffries saying that. Why can’t you just admit you were incorrect? This is an anonymous message board…who cares?
2) Why do you act like you do? Admittedly, I have more experience reading your posts on the other OSU political board. I realize you get made fun of a ton on that board, but honestly it is your own doing. I believe your last post complained “$ht hole board with $ht hole posters”.
On the sports board earlier this year you attempted to shut down someone’s question and got into argument because you felt they were not entitled to ask due not being a patreon supporter. Again, these are anonymous message boards — why act like that?
I was clearly referring to no one here on this board having said that. I clearly wasn’t asserting that no one on the entire earth claimed that. I further clarified that with an explicit post stating exactly that which you have consistently ignored and passed over. Congratulations on mischaracterizing the context of my statement and then finding someone out there not posting on this board or even quoted on this board with regards to Donalds’s statements to misdirect and pivot from the clear insinuation of Donalds’s statement.
Misdirect, mischaracterize, and mislead….it’s what you do.
As far as the rest of your bs mischaracterization of what happened on the politics board at some other site and what happened here…that’s all it is and that’s all you do.
I can guarantee your response that I have just quoted won’t be your last to a post by me.
I wish it was so, but there’s no chance in hell of that happening. You can’t help yourself from doing what you do.
Last edited:
HacklemanPoke
Deputy
Its actually pretty simple but quite disgusting.
Over 80% of wealth in the US is owned by white households. Women in the US earn 85ish cents on the dollar that men do and own 55 cents on the dollar tht men do.
Fact: American wealth is owned by white men.
From the early days of our country how did white men generate wealth. In part cheap labor. First there was slavery. Then after the civil war there was immigration from eastern Europeans and still cheap black labor. That last through the Great Depression and WW2 and Korean War. Women were forced into the workforce and when men came back from war many became what we would today call first generation college students thanks to GI Bill. Then the Civil Rights Act happened and in the 80’s we finally turned back to immigration except this time it was southern immigrants, SE Asia and some African. Notice how each class of labor has earned Pennie’s on the dollar of white men.
Fast forward to turn of the century. Notice how GOP had plenty of opportunities to fix immigration but (1) the economic world knew our economy was thriving on cheap immigrant labor (2) the democrats were on their side when it came to immigration policy bc they were “bleeding heart liberals.”
With Trump and his golden escalator ride the game changed for the white wealth owners. The immigration spicket is being turned off but they still need cheap labor. Until AI and automation take over and the baby boomers retire out how do we get cheap labor.
1) Raise SS age forcing seniors into hourly wage jobs
2) Change child labor laws making it easier for kids to go into factories and corporate farms. Side benefit they also will become less likely to go to college or trade school which becomes cyclical and generational lowering the education of minorities and marginalized.
So where does birth control access come into play.
1) Think back to stories from your parents /grandparents from the farm. More kids = more workers. Limit birth control access now which we all know will affect minority and poor people disproportionately (remember we are going to be sending fewer kids to college. Studies already show this is already happening due to choice and lower birth rates) and you creat more cheap labor 15-20 yrs from now.
2) People won’t stop having sex so more births will result at younger ages. Also, Christian Nationalists are going to move to restrict divorce laws. (I am all for strengthening marriage but believe there are better ways to do it that require investment that today’s Rs would never go for.) so this all limits women’s abilities to control their own lives and compete with men for opportunities.
To sum it all up. White men own a disproportionate share of US wealth. They have had 250+ yrs of cheap labor to do this via slavery, immigration, minorities and women. They need access to cheap labor. Where will it come from?
Last edited:
HacklemanPoke
Deputy
He didn’t say that by accident.
HacklemanPoke
Deputy
There are 2 and only 2 options to what you have done on these last 2 pages. You are either
1) A completely naive idiot who can’t take contextual clues to deduce that when a poster references other posts and clarifies his meaning of “nobody/anybody” he’s referencing people in this thread and not anyone in or outside the known universe. Although if you stand by this he should be excused for an allowance to be made in the event multiverses actually exist.
2) Intellectually dishonest.
I’ve stated before I think you are intelligent so…
I agree with you he did not specifically say that.
But, do you think what he said was defensible?
To me, at best, it was an "At least Mussolini made the trains run on time" type statement.
And, at worst, it was a dog whistle. I wish politicians had to function like the military and even federal workers. Not only do you have to avoid impropriety. You have to avoid the appearance of impropriety.
The link showing the quote from Jeffries I referenced was in the very first post in this thread about this issue. All it took was someone to read the article. It does require someone who is not a completely naive idiot to read the article first.
Last edited:
Anytime someone uses “Jim Crow” they are treading on thin ground - no doubt. Your comparison of Mussolini is valid and fair
When I first read the article I was surprised Donalds, or for that matter anyone, would say that. The headline and the quotes from the CDC were startling. But listening and seeing the video..the context appears fairly innocent. I don’t think Donalds was utilizing Jim Crow as a dog whistle. I believe he was saying times were different in the past.
HacklemanPoke
Deputy
Again. Intellectual dishonesty. You are consistent. Gotta give you that.
So you didn’t take the time to read and comprehend the article either. Got it.
mugatu
Ranger
The scale of potential (probable) monetary influence on the highest court is staggering. Like the Trump and other issues in our current and very recent government, I wish there was a means of making the government serve the country and people at large and not just the wealthy and lobbies. Unfortunately, I don't see a path to making that needed change any time soon.
I'm more concerned about the faction of people who are now firmly in the republican camp who take these things that keep getting said as a dog whistles, no matter if that was the intent or not.
Similar threads
