[The Final Dakar]

Anyway I'm reminded of this:


Some of it fits pretty well with conversations on the right regarding BLM protests or police reform.

Apropos day to post it at least.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Yeah that's been the disconnect all season. I get feeling on the right racism is only reserved for people who use the n-word or think blacks are inferior, etc.. If you're ok with discrimination or subscribe to racial stereotypes I think it's hard to say you're not racist.

Is there a lesser term between racist and a normal person?

The argument is there should be, because it's awfully convenient to get to throw down on opponents with a label which means something worse than what they're guilty of.

[The Final Dakar]

I'm open to that but we need the language to exist for me to use it. BTW this discussion mirrors the issue with sexual assault = rape but sexual assault doesn't = physically forcing someone to have intercourse.

This reminds me of another thread I wanted to start. We've been mocking the 'bat-shit crazy' but I'm curious, what's the proper term for people who are decent but hold crazy views (like conspiracy theories or are immune to facts)

[OAW]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Anyway I'm reminded of this:


Some of it fits pretty well with conversations on the right regarding BLM protests or police reform.

Apropos day to post it at least.

This reflects perfectly something which I often say about MLK ....

"Martin Luther King Jr. - Hated in life. Co-opted in death."

Just look at his abysmal 28% approval rating among White Americans in 1966. It was even lower in March 1968 right before he was assassinated because he started speaking out against the Vietnam War. And let's keep it real ... that number would be even lower still if it only polled conservative White Americans ... the main ones claiming this revisionist history nonsense that MLK was somehow on their team.



The bottom line is that if all one knows about MLK is the "I Have A Dream" speech then please accept the fact that you are simply clueless about who the man was and what he stood for.

OAW

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

This reminds me of another thread I wanted to start. We've been mocking the 'bat-shit crazy' but I'm curious, what's the proper term for people who are decent but hold crazy views (like conspiracy theories or are immune to facts)

Mostly harmless?

Or even mostly fine.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Mostly harmless?

Or even mostly fine.

Michael Flynn is 'mostly harmless'?

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Michael Flynn is 'mostly harmless'?

If he's not harmless is he still decent?

[The Final Dakar]

Probably.

I guess I did a poor job of communicating my intent though. I don't want to call him crazy because it feels too far, but what do I call him to communicate that he holds some... outlier views?

[Waragainstsleep]

I have some out there friends who are into conspiracies but they are usually hippie types so they are fundamentally decent and unlikely to hurt anyone. Except by sharing snake oil alt-medicine stuff.

[The Final Dakar]

Yeah thats the Jill Stein nutters.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Someone doesn't seem to know what fascist means.

No, you don't.

Funny, I never see you do that.

You don't see much.

Right, the wealthy trust-fund jocks who keep getting piss-weak sentences for rape or let off with fatal car crashes for not knowing right from wrong are all in my imagination, not your "justice" system.

A small handful of real world cases do not a justice system make, how many times have your nobles and royalty been bailed out of bad situations over the years?

What happened for your utter disdain for the lame stream BBC? Its exaggerated. Its an issue, but its exaggerated.

When did I mention the BBC? No, it's not exaggerated, you have your head buried in the sand again.

Theres a reason for the backlash. You and you ilk just voted in everything they claim to despise as their own backlash for having to put up with a black guy and then being expected to take orders from a girl.
Decent law abiding folk who voted for a criminal far worse and more obvious than Hillary.
Decent Christian fol who voted for a liar who has likely never picked up a bible to more than swat flies with it.
Decent conservative folk who voted for a sexually aggressive pervert with strong, strong undertones of pedophilia and incest about him.
Decent honest businessmen who voted for an entitled failure who has only made what money he might actually have on his father's reputation and by screwing over anyone and everyone he wasn't scared might kill him if he did.
Decent folk who voted to screw over the real poor people because they haven't been getting as many vacations as they'd like while the demo try to fix the turdsplosion the last Republican government made of the economy.

How decent.
You call them decent, I call them dishonest. At best.

That's quite pathetic, even from you. Oh, and I didn't vote for Trump, sunshine.

FYI, they're much better people that you'll likely ever be.

That said, the left isn't the side denying climate change or talking to the antivaxers like they deserve a fair hearing.

The rest is sheer stupidity, not shocking since you wrote it, but the above is important and highlights, in part, what's wrong with you regressive types. You're losing because you self-righteous knobs don't listen to people. Are they wrong about vaccinations? Yep, but you're so sanctimonious about it that you refuse to have reasonable discussions, and it doesn't stop with that subject, it spreads to everything you believe is settled, leaving a massive number of voters whom you simply refuse to address, let alone treat with any respect. So all you have left are the people in your bubble, but there aren't enough of you in there to make much of a difference, let alone win elections.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

the Left is fine, the issues in the EU are totally exaggerated...