The Democrat Utopia

knapplc said:
I don't disagree with that, but it makes me curious why this thing was written, now, in today's political climate. 

Is Farrakhan a current problem?
Click to expand...


I'm perfectly capable of discussing what has been wrong on both sides of American politics in the past while still keeping an eye on what is going on in this very disturbing administration.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cool. I wasn't questioning your ability to do that. I know you can walk & chew gum at the same time. :D

I haven't read the article and aside from these drive-by questions in the short time I have to check back here, I don't know what's going on with that.  That's why I'm asking if Farrakhan is a current problem. 

 
knapplc said:
Cool. I wasn't questioning your ability to do that. I know you can walk & chew gum at the same time. :D

I haven't read the article and aside from these drive-by questions in the short time I have to check back here, I don't know what's going on with that.  That's why I'm asking if Farrakhan is a current problem. 
Click to expand...
I haven't heard Farrakhan's name for quite a while. However, I hadn't heard David Duke's name for quite a while either until Trump's campaign.

I believe two of the politicians who are pictured meeting with Farrakhan are still in Washington (Maxine Waters and Al Green).

 






Dunno if he's running this year. But this makes a racist Democrat (or at best, an ignorant buffoon) and a racist Republican nominee both in Chicago.

And holy s*** look at this map of another district in Chicago. This was drawn in 1993 so I don't know who it benefited but it's effing ridiculous.

Cong%20Dist%204_0.jpg


 
Last edited by a moderator:
What's bad about this is the use of the language of the anti-harrassment movement (are you familiar with the #TimesUp hashtag?) to express political differences.

I don't know that much about Feinstein, frankly. From what I do know I'm probably more inclined to support her opponent. And to be clear her opponent's supporters are not uniform in this tactic, but it's an ugly one. Feinstein is not someone who committed sexual assault or harassment and is now being justifiably outed on those grounds*. Nor is she comparable to one. The reason this is bad is not the injury to Feinstein, it's the way in which #MeToo has been co-opted and trivialized. IMO, #MeToo is an area where there's a great deal of inadequacy on the left, and this seems like an example of that. 

*I mean, maybe she is --- but AFAIK, this is largely about her "militarism" and deference to the security state; at least, if Glenn Greenwald's characterization is reliable. It isn't always.

 
zoogs said:
What's bad about this is the use of the language of the anti-harrassment movement (are you familiar with the #TimesUp hashtag?) to express political differences.

I don't know that much about Feinstein, frankly. From what I do know I'm probably more inclined to support her opponent. And to be clear her opponent's supporters are not uniform in this tactic, but it's an ugly one. Feinstein is not someone who committed sexual assault or harassment and is now being justifiably outed on those grounds*. Nor is she comparable to one. The reason this is bad is not the injury to Feinstein, it's the way in which #MeToo has been co-opted and trivialized. IMO, #MeToo is an area where there's a great deal of inadequacy on the left, and this seems like an example of that. 

*I mean, maybe she is --- but AFAIK, this is largely about her "militarism" and deference to the security state; at least, if Glenn Greenwald's characterization is reliable. It isn't always.
Click to expand...
I've heard of #MeToo but never #TimesUp, but I see what you're saying. I'm parsing semantics here, but I'd classify this as "distasteful" and not really "bad"- it can be an ugly side of politics but it is what it is. And at least from my perspective, Feinstein is a big part of the establishment and money in politics, which is why I'd vote her out moreso than Greenwald's arguments.

 
"My god, these liberals and their PC culture are out of control" is a conservative rallying cry that seems notably absent when it comes to the need to denounce a (to be clear, very denunciation-worthy) brown man.

 
Even though it seems like the Republican Party is the only one with idiots, contrary to popular belief, they don’t have a monopoly on it. 

Im fine with pointing out idiots on both sides. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top