I agree with the GOP roughly 65% of the time, but when prominent republicans say shit like below, I got to call it out:
If slavery becomes political, I might have to switch party allegiance.
This is why some republicans in power are idiots
Posts
Total:
51
Kinky bitch.
-->
@TheUnderdog
It's bad optics but not untrue. Why is it controversial to say?
The ethics of slavery, has nothing to do with whether a few slaves thought their masters were awesome or not.
So,why is acknowledging that relationships between masters and slaves are complicated stupid?
From Roots
Connelly: You can't buy a slave. You got to make a slave. I am Kunta Kinte. That's not your name. [Screams] Toby's your name. Say your name so you know this ain't Africa. This is Virginia, and you're the property of John Waller like the horses and hogs. Nothing more. [Dogs barking] [Horse neighs] [Grunts] You can't trust Fiddler. Sell him. I'll buy him. This is none of your business, brother. The amount of money that you owe me, brother, the entire estate is my business. ♪♪
-->
@TheUnderdog
Let's note that the "good of slavery" is being raised as a counterpoint to the "evil of Critical Race Theory." It's not just the troubling morality of Republicans endorsing human slavery in a democracy, its the troubling ignorance Republicans demonstrate while actively outlawing the freedom of some groups to speak on unpopular topics.
-->
@TheUnderdog
If slavery becomes political, I might have to switch party allegiance.
Better to just get rid of party allegiance.
-->
@Double_R
Better to just get rid of party allegiance.
I don't disagree, but you have no room to talk. It is funny how half of Trump's policies were popular with liberals until he put an R behind his name and then we had liberals in congress vote against stuff they were pushing for just a few years before and conservatives opposed to things now pushing for them just because it was Trump.
-->
@TheUnderdog
Too many pop up ads on that link
-->
@Wylted
-->@Double_RBetter to just get rid of party allegiance.I don't disagree, but you have no room to talk. It is funny how half of Trump's policies were popular with liberals until he put an R behind his name and then we had liberals in congress vote against stuff they were pushing for just a few years before and conservatives opposed to things now pushing for them just because it was Trump.
That's wrong. The liberals didn't change, Trump changed.
Trump's views on abortion have changed significantly, for example.
wiki:
In 1999, Trump described himself as "very pro-choice" and said "I believe in choice." Although he said he hated the "concept of abortion," he said he would not ban it, nor the specific procedure sometimes called "partial-birth abortion". That year, he gave interviews describing himself as "totally pro-choice" and claiming that abortion should be "removed from politics. I believe it is a personal decision that should be left to the women and their doctors."
Let's recall that Stormy Daniel's non-disclosure agreement with Trump specifically forbids her from revealing any "paternity information" but Stormy Danielle's first child came 5 years after Trump. And hey, so lot's of people used to be pro-abortion and change their minds about the issue, even after having some themselves. I'm just saying, liberals haven't changed their minds, Trump did.
-->
@oromagi
Let's recall that Stormy Daniel's non-disclosure agreement with Trump specifically forbids her from revealing any "paternity information" but Stormy Danielle's first child came 5 years after Trump. And hey, so lot's of people used to be pro-abortion and change their minds about the issue, even after having some themselves. I'm just saying, liberals haven't changed their minds, Trump did
I'm talking about some of his platform ideals. For example he was wanting more gun control, but to appeal to his republican base he used rhetoric like, "we need more thorough checks on gun purchasers so we can avoid gang members getting them in the inner cities". Saying the same thing as democrats but using different rhetoric to get broader support. Trump was not really a republican, sonof course half his policies were things Democrats would like.
However, I saw a leaked memo after his victory that showed democrats wanted to oppose everything he was for, even stuff they agreed with, because he would get credit or some other such nonsense.
He was very shortly into his presidency maybe after a year, where he decided he could not pass any policies democrats agreed with. The only thing he could do is pretty much blackmail members of the republican party to vote on borderline liberal issues.
For example his reveal of the ACA was not really a repeal, but just worded that way to make changes to it that liberals have been wanting made to nk it for years, and he practically had to blackmail republicans to support these changes to the ACA, and he allowed them to save face by calling it a repeal.
-->
@oromagi
That's wrong. The liberals didn't change, Trump changed.
Liberals didn't change? You want to take a read of Roe v. Wade and its very limiting third trimester allowances for abortion, and then read the proposed legislation last year of NY and VA, allowing partial birth abortion as an allowed procedure? Both legislative bodies fortunately found common sense and turned both bills away; but to say liberals have not changed on the issue is a head in the sand.
-->
@oromagi
actively outlawing the freedom of some groups to speak on unpopular topics.
Those groups being ones funded by the public dime, yes?
I’m sure you’d be up in arms if tax dollars went to groups teaching federal workers or school children the benefits of segregation, wouldn’t you?
-->
@bmdrocks21
I’m sure you’d be up in arms if tax dollars went to groups teaching federal workers or school children the benefits of segregation, wouldn’t you?
Or if tax dollars were actively and aggressively being used to indoctrinate children to hate a group of people based solely on the color of their skin.
-->
@Greyparrot
Or if tax dollars were being used to indoctrinate children to hate a group of people for the color of their skin.
No that’s fine. Virtuous, in fact
-->
@bmdrocks21
No that’s fine. Virtuous, in fact
Well you can't scam out reparations if you don't invent an evil class of people based on an immutable birth defect.
-->
@Greyparrot
Or if tax dollars were actively and aggressively being used to indoctrinate children to hate a group of people based solely on the color of their skin.
Blacks are not the race we should be hating. Neither are Hispanics, asians, africans middle easterners or any variety of indian.
If I left out any race it was possibly accidental
-->
@Wylted
If I left out any race it was possibly accidental
I see what you did there.
-->
@Wylted
Blacks are not the race we should be hating. Neither are Hispanics, asians, africans middle easterners or any variety of indian.
It’s those damned Pacific Islanders isn’t it?!?
-->
@Greyparrot
Well you can't scam out reparations if you don't invent an evil class of people based on an immutable birth defect
We already have reparations. It is called (probably) every major welfare program that currently exists, if you consider who pays for the majority of it and who takes disproportionately large amounts from it
-->
@bmdrocks21
We already have reparations. It is called (probably) every major welfare program that currently exists, if you consider who pays for the majority of it and who takes disproportionately large amounts from it
I have no problem with a welfare state. You really have to control immigration if you have one though.
-->
@Wylted
I have no problem with a welfare state. You really have to control immigration if you have one though
I don’t have problems with many welfare programs. The autistic lefties say they want to be like Europe in terms of welfare, while also taking in millions of public charges per year.
Many of the countries with robust welfare programs (Denmark and Switzerland, for example) are stricter than us in terms of immigration
-->
@Wylted
It's implying that slavery was good (according to the original author) because some slaves loved their masters, which it was very rare if the slaves did.
-->
@oromagi
If someone says they support slavery, I think they should have the right to say that, but it is a horrible thing to say. If this was some extreme right winger saying it, it wouldn't be news. The issue is that the chair of the GOP for Louisiana said it. That's what I'm pissed off about.
-->
@Double_R
If I become president, I do want to make it illegal for politicians to run under a political party so everyone is an independent and therefore thinks for themselves. But in the meantime, sadly we are stuck with parties.
-->
@TheUnderdog
It's implying that slavery was good (according to the original author) because some slaves loved their masters, which it was very rare if the slaves did.
Why do you think it was rare?
My guess, is you think if a lot of slaves loved their slave masters it somehow makes slavery ethical. Which is far from the truth.
We can't know how many slaves loved or hated their masters, but slaves throughout other parts of history, are recorded for what can only be described as acts of love. Cleopatra's slaves committing suicide with her for example, or the great lengths Caesers slaves went to warn their master about an assassination attempt.
-->
@Wylted
My guess, is you think if a lot of slaves loved their slave masters it somehow makes slavery ethical. Which is far from the truth.
Exactly. There is nothing fucking wrong with stating that slaves tried to make the best of their situation by befriending their captors.
-->
@bmdrocks21
This seems like a pretty non-controversial statement from some club leader nearly nobody has heard of.
This is more of a problem with conservatives than liberal. It was popular after 9/11 for conservatives to call the hijackers cowards.
Like no. There is nothing more brave than sacrificing yourself for a cause you believe in.
I understand attacking them as people, but calling them cowards was clown stuff.
-->
@Wylted
I understand attacking them as people, but calling them cowards was clown stuff
Typical of conservatives to criticize something by calling it one of the few it isn’t.
Like how they call any opponent they don’t like “Marxist”.
Nah, I think “degenerate”, “ignorant”, etc are much more applicable. Honestly, if you want to criticize the affordable care act, don’t call it Marxist. Just call it r*tarded. It’ll resonate better
-->
@Greyparrot
Exactly. There is nothing fucking wrong with stating that slaves tried to make the best of their situation by befriending their captors.
It's socially inept in the biggest way.