The Weeds "illiberal right" podcast has a succinct section where they talk about how there's not much of a constituency for libertarian free markets and not much of a constituency for hardcore Catholic fundamentalists but there is a huge constituency for white resentment and the conservative project has been to transmute that constituency into more respectable and presentable facades

Maybe you guys should just go with Chezfront, and then ban Chez from the forum.

Or let him return and call it Chezback.

Yeah man check the timestamps on that before you accuse me of dishonesty.

But after being suitability chastened, any chance of you returning to my question about who taught you about the left? Because it kinda seems that the self-serving fairytales about how the white ones are all just as racist as you but faking tolerance to cause income inequality and the black ones are black nationalists seem to keep falling apart.

Maybe... it is possible to just not be racist? And also to morally oppose racism on the merits as a bad thing?

The Biden thing is actually a great springboard into your nonsense about where the empathy deficit lies. In defending the segregationist Biden says that he never called Biden "boy". Like, no ****, and if he had you wouldn't have been offended. Being nice and civil to a white fellow member of Congress is not really as strong of a mark of good character as Biden thinks.

The analog to this thread seems pretty straightforward.

I was fond of the politics and eugenics moniker.

Sam Harris would probably answer yes, and argue that is his MO, but you would probably disagree.

To answer the question in a more broad, philosophic manner; do I believe it is possible for human beings to divorce themselves from custom and circumstance, and be a truly moral self moving soul. No, not really.

And even if there was a way, I don’t think it would be accomplished through moralizing and name calling.

This post is a lie, but hey civility!

Stormnamed?

Kontentions, Kontroversies, and Konflicts?

I think if we're going that route I'd like to change it to "Kontentions, Kontroversies, and Krispy Kremes"

Just based on the tweet itt, I don’t think he was trying to say that.

“At least there was some civility. We got things done”

His job as a senator is to get things done for his constituency, just like foreign diplomats are supposed to get things done for their country. Oftentimes doing so requires being civil to the morally repugnant or political opposition in order to get things done. I think that’s what he was trying to say. He probably could have found a better example to make his point, though.

I don't think you're gonna like what's behind door number 2, then. Here's a hint: it isn't "agreeing with you"

Or maybe there're reasons why people are on tv besides being effective communicators with well thought out ideas?


But that wasn't your claim. You said that you knew from that one quote that he was only ever about race issues, would never say anything negative about minorities, and is openly hostile to whites who aren't actively taking positions against racism.

I can understand why someone wouldn't take bidens chummy response as an endorsement of the guys politics but it gets pretty close to that line. He went above and beyond to signal positive vibes for one of the most prolific racists still alive.

Do you really think he was being uppity for drawing attention to it? Or are you just the target market that biden was signaling to?

That's not a personal attack... clearly his comment had intent. He wanted to convey something to some group of people regardless of whether it was a transparent account of how he feels. What do you think that message was?

CBS News Battleground Tracker
Democrats in Early Primary/Caucus States

34. Which is a priority in a Democratic nominee...someone who, if elected President, would try to...

Work with Republicans to get things done . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65%
Get things done without Republicans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35%

There is so much bad faith in this post I am not even going to bother.

I’d say there’s a bit of a gap between a commitment to bipartisanship / working with republicans and fondly remembering a democratwho last held office in the 70s whose legacy is being a passionate segregationist.

Is it bad faith, or is that I’m not using the tiniest shred of plausible deniability to rationalize the conclusion I want to arrive at?

It’s not a lie if you believe it.

Well, when you tell me what I said 2 posts ago and get it wrong in a very uncharitable fashion, it is going to be a nonstarter, whatever your motives.

I think the concept she's looking for is....existing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/20/u...ees-trump.html

lol I lived next to some Somalis once. Super nice and friendly. Basically everyone is.

****ing xenophobes.

Like srsly I wouldn't post uTubz if the guy wasn't good and the guy is scary good.

It's a bit dubious.We don't elect em and they aren't 'unaccountable men with guns' but minorities still have a very healthy mistrust of the police. Nothing like as bad as 'merica but that's in large part down to improvements made via a parliamentary democracy.

Nice beard through.

Heh.


Kelhus, here's the first time I "punched a nazi":


https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...6&postcount=59