Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2019 20:23:15 GMT
Can you provide a link to her saying that or is that only your interpretation of her actual words? If you're talking about the 30 second clip Ted Lieu played during the hearings, he got it so wrong. He left out all context in order to make it something it was not. Completely dishonest. And totally incorrect. linkHere you go. “Conservative activist Candace Owens addressed a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Hate Crimes and White Nationalism on Tuesday and said the left uses such terms for "fear mongering, power and control.""There isn't a single adult today that in good conscience would make the argument that America is a more racist, more white nationalist society than it was when my grandfather was growing up and yet we are hearing these terms center around today because what they want to say is that brown people need to be scared which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years right ahead of a presidential election," Owens said in her opening statement."Let me be clear the hearing today is not about white nationalism or hate crimes, it is about fear mongering, power and control," Owens said. "It is a preview of a Democrat 2020 election strategy the same as the Democrat 2016 election strategy.""The goal here is to scare Blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims into helping them censor dissenting opinions ultimately to helping them regain control of our countries narrative which they feel that they lost," she said."The biggest scandal in American politics is that Democrats have been conning minorities into the belief that we are perpetual victims all but ensuring our failure. Racial division and class warfare are central to the Democrat party platform. They need Blacks to hate whites, the rich to hate the poor. Soon enough it will be the tall hating the short," Owens concluded.”Only problem, regardless of what she is saying, white nationalism is on the rise. Enough so that it needs to be addressed. Her words are meant to try and marginalized the real threat of the resurgence of white nationalism in this country. Now you may chose to believe “there is nothing there” and that is your choice. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t something there that we all need to be concerned about. Oh and this Candace Owens is full of shit. There is nothing there addressing 950nancy's issue... I did go back and listen to what she said. The part that stuck out the most to me was about Hitler and it being okay to take over a nation.
|
|
|
Post by Peace Sign on Apr 15, 2019 20:26:37 GMT
white supremacy has continued to worm itself into law enforcement too. and before someone gets ready to pounce on me, of course NOT ALL law enforcement. but consider where law enforcement comes from. I’m going to try not to imagine what you mean by “where law enforcement comes from” ... there wasn't any significant law enforcement before slaves began to run away. that is when the number of sheriff's and deputies grew exponentially. and during the late civil rights movement, many KKK members went underground but still held power as sheriffs. some people think that the KKK became law enforcement. and that there are plenty their ancestors serving now, those who grew up being taught great prejudice. i believe there is more than a grain of truth to it, although i know several very nice police officers.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2019 20:27:58 GMT
linkHere you go. “Conservative activist Candace Owens addressed a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Hate Crimes and White Nationalism on Tuesday and said the left uses such terms for "fear mongering, power and control.""There isn't a single adult today that in good conscience would make the argument that America is a more racist, more white nationalist society than it was when my grandfather was growing up and yet we are hearing these terms center around today because what they want to say is that brown people need to be scared which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years right ahead of a presidential election," Owens said in her opening statement."Let me be clear the hearing today is not about white nationalism or hate crimes, it is about fear mongering, power and control," Owens said. "It is a preview of a Democrat 2020 election strategy the same as the Democrat 2016 election strategy.""The goal here is to scare Blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims into helping them censor dissenting opinions ultimately to helping them regain control of our countries narrative which they feel that they lost," she said."The biggest scandal in American politics is that Democrats have been conning minorities into the belief that we are perpetual victims all but ensuring our failure. Racial division and class warfare are central to the Democrat party platform. They need Blacks to hate whites, the rich to hate the poor. Soon enough it will be the tall hating the short," Owens concluded.”Only problem, regardless of what she is saying, white nationalism is on the rise. Enough so that it needs to be addressed. Her words are meant to try and marginalized the real threat of the resurgence of white nationalism in this country. Now you may chose to believe “there is nothing there” and that is your choice. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t something there that we all need to be concerned about. Oh and this Candace Owens is full of shit. There is nothing there addressing 950nancy's issue... I did go back and listen to what she said. The part that stuck out the most to me was about Hitler and it being okay to take over a nation.Maybe so, but it doesn’t change what her agenda was when speaking at that committee. Which I think I was pretty clear what it is.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2019 20:39:38 GMT
There is nothing there addressing 950nancy's issue... Maybe so, but it doesn’t change what her agenda was when speaking at that committee. Which I think I was pretty clear what it is. So you weren't interested in providing the information I asked for at all, you just wanted to get your opinion out there on something else entirely. Got it.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Apr 15, 2019 20:48:28 GMT
I’m going to try not to imagine what you mean by “where law enforcement comes from” ... there wasn't any significant law enforcement before slaves began to run away. that is when the number of sheriff's and deputies grew exponentially. and during the late civil rights movement, many KKK members went underground but still held power as sheriffs. some people think that the KKK became law enforcement. and that there are plenty their ancestors serving now, those who grew up being taught great prejudice. i believe there is more than a grain of truth to it, although i know several very nice police officers. That last line makes me wonder if you say to your nice police officers, “You’re a credit to your profession.” There wasn’t any significant local law enforcement anywhere, not just in the U.S., until the 19th century. It takes a lot of imagination to deduce that law enforcement = slave hunters. The police officers I know today are black, white, Asian, Latino, men and women, gay and straight, mostly college educated, and certainly not KKK (or, as far as I know, descendants of KKK). Of course there are officers (and leadership) out there who clearly shouldn’t be. But you are painting with a very broad brush.
|
|
|
Post by Peace Sign on Apr 15, 2019 21:06:50 GMT
there wasn't any significant law enforcement before slaves began to run away. that is when the number of sheriff's and deputies grew exponentially. and during the late civil rights movement, many KKK members went underground but still held power as sheriffs. some people think that the KKK became law enforcement. and that there are plenty their ancestors serving now, those who grew up being taught great prejudice. i believe there is more than a grain of truth to it, although i know several very nice police officers. That last line makes me wonder if you say to your nice police officers, “You’re a credit to your profession.” There wasn’t any significant local law enforcement anywhere, not just in the U.S., until the 19th century. It takes a lot of imagination to deduce that law enforcement = slave hunters. The police officers I know today are black, white, Asian, Latino, men and women, gay and straight, mostly college educated, and certainly not KKK (or, as far as I know, descendants of KKK). Of course there are officers (and leadership) out there who clearly shouldn’t be. But you are painting with a very broad brush. I think I used the term “plenty”. I feel that’s accurate. Agree to disagree, because you and I are clearly looking at it through two different lenses.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2019 21:09:12 GMT
A friend on FB today quoted her as saying this. This poster gets her info straight from Fox (oftentimes) and I wonder if something is just being spread around that is false information (from whatever source). It drives me crazy because this lady posts so many untrue things and then every few months just complains that we all need to just get along. She said the words have become meaningless because they are to the Democrat platform, nothing more than an election strategy. It's not saying that it doesn't exist, it's saying that the term is being watered down. You have to listen to what she said in context, not pluck out a single phrase and assign meaning to it, as some seem to be doing. Here you go. Happy now it’s attached to the right response? “ Conservative activist Candace Owens addressed a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Hate Crimes and White Nationalism on Tuesday and said the left uses such terms for "fear mongering, power and control."
"There isn't a single adult today that in good conscience would make the argument that America is a more racist, more white nationalist society than it was when my grandfather was growing up and yet we are hearing these terms center around today because what they want to say is that brown people need to be scared which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years right ahead of a presidential election," Owens said in her opening statement.
"Let me be clear the hearing today is not about white nationalism or hate crimes, it is about fear mongering, power and control," Owens said. "It is a preview of a Democrat 2020 election strategy the same as the Democrat 2016 election strategy."
"The goal here is to scare Blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims into helping them censor dissenting opinions ultimately to helping them regain control of our countries narrative which they feel that they lost," she said.
"The biggest scandal in American politics is that Democrats have been conning minorities into the belief that we are perpetual victims all but ensuring our failure. Racial division and class warfare are central to the Democrat party platform. They need Blacks to hate whites, the rich to hate the poor. Soon enough it will be the tall hating the short," Owens concluded.”Only problem, regardless of what she is saying, white nationalism is on the rise. Enough so that it needs to be addressed. Her words are meant to try and marginalized the real threat of the resurgence of white nationalism in this country. Now you may chose to believe “there is nothing there” and that is your choice. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t something there that we all need to be concerned about. Oh and this Candace Owens is full of shit.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2019 22:02:48 GMT
She said the words have become meaningless because they are to the Democrat platform, nothing more than an election strategy. It's not saying that it doesn't exist, it's saying that the term is being watered down. You have to listen to what she said in context, not pluck out a single phrase and assign meaning to it, as some seem to be doing. Here you go. Happy now it’s attached to the right response? “ Conservative activist Candace Owens addressed a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Hate Crimes and White Nationalism on Tuesday and said the left uses such terms for "fear mongering, power and control."
"There isn't a single adult today that in good conscience would make the argument that America is a more racist, more white nationalist society than it was when my grandfather was growing up and yet we are hearing these terms center around today because what they want to say is that brown people need to be scared which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years right ahead of a presidential election," Owens said in her opening statement.
"Let me be clear the hearing today is not about white nationalism or hate crimes, it is about fear mongering, power and control," Owens said. "It is a preview of a Democrat 2020 election strategy the same as the Democrat 2016 election strategy."
"The goal here is to scare Blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims into helping them censor dissenting opinions ultimately to helping them regain control of our countries narrative which they feel that they lost," she said.
"The biggest scandal in American politics is that Democrats have been conning minorities into the belief that we are perpetual victims all but ensuring our failure. Racial division and class warfare are central to the Democrat party platform. They need Blacks to hate whites, the rich to hate the poor. Soon enough it will be the tall hating the short," Owens concluded.”Only problem, regardless of what she is saying, white nationalism is on the rise. Enough so that it needs to be addressed. Her words are meant to try and marginalized the real threat of the resurgence of white nationalism in this country. Now you may chose to believe “there is nothing there” and that is your choice. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t something there that we all need to be concerned about. Oh and this Candace Owens is full of shit. Here you go. Happy now it’s attached to the right response? I love how you mess up your point and then get snippy with me because your point made no sense. So now that you've got your point all situated in the right spot, it still doesn't show Candace saying that racism doesn't exist. So you have not refuted anything I said, if that's what you were trying to do.
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Apr 15, 2019 22:07:03 GMT
Candace Owens did not say racism doesn't exist. She did. At CPAC 2019: “The truth is on our side as conservatives,” she proclaimed, ahead of speakers including Trump and Vice-President Mike Pence. “Truth number one: America is not a racist country. The people that continue to tell us that have a vested interest in racism. (Let me assure you that racism is very much alive in case you’re disposed to agreeing with Owens.) Re Hitler – Turning Point USA Dec 2018: I actually don't have any problems at all with the word "nationalism". I think that the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism. Globalism is what I don't want. ... Whenever we say "nationalism", the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler. You know, he was a national socialist, but if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine. The problem is that he wanted—he had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalize. He wanted everybody to be German, everybody to be speaking German. Everybody to look a different way. That's not, to me, that's not nationalism. (This is without even bringing up the fact that Hitler would still have eradicated Jews in Germany even if he had constrained his ambition to only that country.)
|
|
|
Post by 950nancy on Apr 15, 2019 22:38:27 GMT
linkHere you go. “Conservative activist Candace Owens addressed a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Hate Crimes and White Nationalism on Tuesday and said the left uses such terms for "fear mongering, power and control.""There isn't a single adult today that in good conscience would make the argument that America is a more racist, more white nationalist society than it was when my grandfather was growing up and yet we are hearing these terms center around today because what they want to say is that brown people need to be scared which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years right ahead of a presidential election," Owens said in her opening statement."Let me be clear the hearing today is not about white nationalism or hate crimes, it is about fear mongering, power and control," Owens said. "It is a preview of a Democrat 2020 election strategy the same as the Democrat 2016 election strategy.""The goal here is to scare Blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims into helping them censor dissenting opinions ultimately to helping them regain control of our countries narrative which they feel that they lost," she said."The biggest scandal in American politics is that Democrats have been conning minorities into the belief that we are perpetual victims all but ensuring our failure. Racial division and class warfare are central to the Democrat party platform. They need Blacks to hate whites, the rich to hate the poor. Soon enough it will be the tall hating the short," Owens concluded.”Only problem, regardless of what she is saying, white nationalism is on the rise. Enough so that it needs to be addressed. Her words are meant to try and marginalized the real threat of the resurgence of white nationalism in this country. Now you may chose to believe “there is nothing there” and that is your choice. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t something there that we all need to be concerned about. Oh and this Candace Owens is full of shit. There is nothing there addressing 950nancy's issue... I did go back and listen to what she said. The part that stuck out the most to me was about Hitler and it being okay to take over a nation.I said the part that stuck out most to me was about Hitler and it being okay to take over a nation. His issue was when he tried to go outside of Germany. Can't I have an issue? This doesn't seem like something most people would say. I mean, not most people I know anyway. Yes, she said he was an awful person but sometimes when you see both sides of things and one part of it is still shocking, well, it is shocking.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2019 23:00:48 GMT
Here you go. Happy now it’s attached to the right response? “ Conservative activist Candace Owens addressed a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Hate Crimes and White Nationalism on Tuesday and said the left uses such terms for "fear mongering, power and control."
"There isn't a single adult today that in good conscience would make the argument that America is a more racist, more white nationalist society than it was when my grandfather was growing up and yet we are hearing these terms center around today because what they want to say is that brown people need to be scared which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years right ahead of a presidential election," Owens said in her opening statement.
"Let me be clear the hearing today is not about white nationalism or hate crimes, it is about fear mongering, power and control," Owens said. "It is a preview of a Democrat 2020 election strategy the same as the Democrat 2016 election strategy."
"The goal here is to scare Blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims into helping them censor dissenting opinions ultimately to helping them regain control of our countries narrative which they feel that they lost," she said.
"The biggest scandal in American politics is that Democrats have been conning minorities into the belief that we are perpetual victims all but ensuring our failure. Racial division and class warfare are central to the Democrat party platform. They need Blacks to hate whites, the rich to hate the poor. Soon enough it will be the tall hating the short," Owens concluded.”Only problem, regardless of what she is saying, white nationalism is on the rise. Enough so that it needs to be addressed. Her words are meant to try and marginalized the real threat of the resurgence of white nationalism in this country. Now you may chose to believe “there is nothing there” and that is your choice. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t something there that we all need to be concerned about. Oh and this Candace Owens is full of shit. Here you go. Happy now it’s attached to the right response? I love how you mess up your point and then get snippy with me because your point made no sense. So now that you've got your point all situated in the right spot, it still doesn't show Candace saying that racism doesn't exist. So you have not refuted anything I said, if that's what you were trying to do. I didn’t mess up my point, may have attached it to the wrong post, but I didn’t mess up the point. To be clear, I was commenting on this remark from you. “She said the words have become meaningless because they are to the Democrat platform, nothing more than an election strategy. It's not saying that it doesn't exist, it's saying that the term is being watered down. You have to listen to what she said in context, not pluck out a single phrase and assign meaning to it, as some seem to be doing.”To make sure I “listened” to the words I posted the entire quote. I’m not talking about racism. I never was on this thread. I’m talking about her comments I bolded and yours that I bolded. Sorry it wasn’t clearer for you. This isn’t snippy. Just making sure you understand. If you agree or disagree with my comments that is entirely up to you.
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Apr 15, 2019 23:11:24 GMT
The funny thing about Candace Owens is that she wasn't always a conservative, and ran a fairly anti-Trump blog. www.theroot.com/your-girl-candace-owens-ran-a-trump-bashing-website-les-1826071683She's nothing but an opportunist who will use an extreme platform for money and fame. Same as Tomi Lahren. quillette.com/2018/05/08/problem-candace-owens/So. And to answer the original question, white supremacy is part of the very foundation of our country. It was written into our constitution, written into our laws, written into Supreme Court decisions. It rears its head in the way students are disciplined in school, in the way votes are suppressed, and in the way much of the media continues to portray people of color. White supremacy is alive and well, and it's not always manifested in terrorists wearing hoods or brandishing guns. It's BBQ Becky calling the police on people having a cookout, too. Look around and notice. And if you're white, think of what you can do to dismantle white supremacy.
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Apr 15, 2019 23:26:46 GMT
I’m going to try not to imagine what you mean by “where law enforcement comes from” ... there wasn't any significant law enforcement before slaves began to run away. that is when the number of sheriff's and deputies grew exponentially. and during the late civil rights movement, many KKK members went underground but still held power as sheriffs. some people think that the KKK became law enforcement. and that there are plenty their ancestors serving now, those who grew up being taught great prejudice. i believe there is more than a grain of truth to it, although i know several very nice police officers. That’s a huge jump to make. And not really based on fact considering Boston has the claim to oldest local police force in the country and they weren’t ‘chasing run away slaves’. Has there been localized issues in some areas at some times with respect to law enforcement? Absolutely. But, organized policing was established in part in response to the ‘good ole boy’ aspect of when local Constables went wrong, in response to when not organized policing went awry. As with anything humans do it is plagued with human mistakes, but it was not created in our nation as a whole to gather slaves. More like to counter when constableships were practically ‘hereditary’ in some locations. To make the blanket statement that all law enforcement has its roots in chasing runaway slaves is just inaccurate.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 19:37:12 GMT
Candace Owens did not say racism doesn't exist. She did. At CPAC 2019: “The truth is on our side as conservatives,” she proclaimed, ahead of speakers including Trump and Vice-President Mike Pence. “Truth number one: America is not a racist country. The people that continue to tell us that have a vested interest in racism. (Let me assure you that racism is very much alive in case you’re disposed to agreeing with Owens.) Re Hitler – Turning Point USA Dec 2018: I actually don't have any problems at all with the word "nationalism". I think that the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism. Globalism is what I don't want. ... Whenever we say "nationalism", the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler. You know, he was a national socialist, but if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine. The problem is that he wanted—he had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalize. He wanted everybody to be German, everybody to be speaking German. Everybody to look a different way. That's not, to me, that's not nationalism. (This is without even bringing up the fact that Hitler would still have eradicated Jews in Germany even if he had constrained his ambition to only that country.) America ISN'T a racist country. We may have racists here, but as a country we do not promote racism, it's widely condemned. So it still stands that she didn't say that racism doesn't exist.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 16, 2019 19:55:51 GMT
Why on earth are we listening to the blather of a woman who couldn't be bothered to finish her undergraduate degree - which was not, by the way, in history or anything related to it? One who previously garnered online attention with anti-Trump rhetoric but then found she got more attention by coming out in favor of Trump? Why do we give this woman one second of room in our heads? She has no background that would suggest she's an expert on anything. Who cares what she thinks or says? Shame on the congresspeople who brought her in to speak on a topic about which she apparently knows nothing. Obviously they could not find a credible historian to validate their views. Candace Owens
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 21:45:04 GMT
Why on earth are we listening to the blather of a woman who couldn't be bothered to finish her undergraduate degree - which was not, by the way, in history or anything related to it? One who previously garnered online attention with anti-Trump rhetoric but then found she got more attention by coming out in favor of Trump? Why do we give this woman one second of room in our heads? She has no background that would suggest she's an expert on anything. Who cares what she thinks or says? Shame on the congresspeople who brought her in to speak on a topic about which she apparently knows nothing. Obviously they could not find a credible historian to validate their views. Candace OwensYou can come up with endless reasons and justifications to dismiss those you don't agree with, but hearing from other viewpoints is good for your growth and can open your closed and made up mind. Elizabeth Cady Stanton—an activist and leader of the early women’s rights movement— said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinion of others…the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls.”
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 16, 2019 22:19:36 GMT
Why on earth are we listening to the blather of a woman who couldn't be bothered to finish her undergraduate degree - which was not, by the way, in history or anything related to it? One who previously garnered online attention with anti-Trump rhetoric but then found she got more attention by coming out in favor of Trump? Why do we give this woman one second of room in our heads? She has no background that would suggest she's an expert on anything. Who cares what she thinks or says? Shame on the congresspeople who brought her in to speak on a topic about which she apparently knows nothing. Obviously they could not find a credible historian to validate their views. Candace OwensYou can come up with endless reasons and justifications to dismiss those you don't agree with, but hearing from other viewpoints is good for your growth and can open your closed and made up mind. Elizabeth Cady Stanton—an activist and leader of the early women’s rights movement— said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinion of others…the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls.” Um, OK. I don't think my mind needs to be opened to Owens' fictional version of US history and current events, but you do you. You might ask yourself why Republicans in Congress couldn't find a single historian to make their point for them and had to rely on an online provacateur. The southern strategy is a well documented part of our history - not a matter of opinion. I'm fine with hearing others' opinions, but I am surely not fine with lies being presented as facts before congress, and neither should you be.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Apr 16, 2019 23:32:03 GMT
I’m guessing this (if true) only bothers you when Democrats do it. Because you’ve been awfully silent when Trump and Republicans do it to Democrats every. damn. day. And yes, now you can complain about my abuse of what-aboutism. I suppose you want to. Conservatives aren't the ones who introduced the objection to whataboutism. It's obviously only a problem for you when conservatives do it. Okay then, Gia.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Apr 16, 2019 23:47:38 GMT
Why on earth are we listening to the blather of a woman who couldn't be bothered to finish her undergraduate degree - which was not, by the way, in history or anything related to it? One who previously garnered online attention with anti-Trump rhetoric but then found she got more attention by coming out in favor of Trump? Why do we give this woman one second of room in our heads? She has no background that would suggest she's an expert on anything. Who cares what she thinks or says? Shame on the congresspeople who brought her in to speak on a topic about which she apparently knows nothing. Obviously they could not find a credible historian to validate their views. Candace OwensYou can come up with endless reasons and justifications to dismiss those you don't agree with, but hearing from other viewpoints is good for your growth and can open your closed and made up mind. Elizabeth Cady Stanton—an activist and leader of the early women’s rights movement— said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinion of others…the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls.” Bwaahaaaa. Hilarious coming from someone who constantly tries to cram misinformation all over anyone who doesn’t think like you and refuses to acknowledge the facts of most matters. Funny shit right here—hypocrite much?
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Apr 16, 2019 23:52:31 GMT
Please—Candace Owens was trotted out in front of that committee as a political move on the part of the Republicans just to promote their continued gaslighting if “see, even OOC don’t think there is racism”...
The same was that Mark Meadows did with Lynne Patton a month or so ago.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2019 0:31:38 GMT
Why on earth are we listening to the blather of a woman who couldn't be bothered to finish her undergraduate degree - which was not, by the way, in history or anything related to it? One who previously garnered online attention with anti-Trump rhetoric but then found she got more attention by coming out in favor of Trump? Why do we give this woman one second of room in our heads? She has no background that would suggest she's an expert on anything. Who cares what she thinks or says? Shame on the congresspeople who brought her in to speak on a topic about which she apparently knows nothing. Obviously they could not find a credible historian to validate their views. Candace OwensYou can come up with endless reasons and justifications to dismiss those you don't agree with, but hearing from other viewpoints is good for your growth and can open your closed and made up mind. Elizabeth Cady Stanton—an activist and leader of the early women’s rights movement— said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinion of others…the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls.” Dismiss or don’t agree with? There is a difference. I read what the woman said, and IMO, she is full of shit. Now you may agree with or disagree with my assessment of the woman, that is your choice. Way too many people get upset because not everybody agrees with their opinion and when that happens, terms like “dismiss those you don’t agree with” pops up. When in fact it’s just not everyone is agreeing with that person’s opinion or belief. And it’s just that simple. When people offer their viewpoints, there is absolutely nothing written in stone that people must automatically agree with what they are saying. If these folks can’t handle that not everyone is agreeing with them, then maybe they should keep their opinions to themselves if it hurts their feelings in anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2019 1:08:18 GMT
You can come up with endless reasons and justifications to dismiss those you don't agree with, but hearing from other viewpoints is good for your growth and can open your closed and made up mind. Elizabeth Cady Stanton—an activist and leader of the early women’s rights movement— said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinion of others…the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls.” Dismiss or don’t agree with? There is a difference. I read what the woman said, and IMO, she is full of shit. Now you may agree with or disagree with my assessment of the woman, that is your choice. Way too many people get upset because not everybody agrees with their opinion and when that happens, terms like “dismiss those you don’t agree with” pops up. When in fact it’s just not everyone is agreeing with that person’s opinion or belief. And it’s just that simple. When people offer their viewpoints, there is absolutely nothing written in stone that people must automatically agree with what they are saying. If these folks can’t handle that not everyone is agreeing with them, then maybe they should keep their opinions to themselves if it hurts their feelings in anyway. Merge's words were a complete dismissal of the woman herself, not her opinions or viewpoints.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2019 1:49:38 GMT
Dismiss or don’t agree with? There is a difference. I read what the woman said, and IMO, she is full of shit. Now you may agree with or disagree with my assessment of the woman, that is your choice. Way too many people get upset because not everybody agrees with their opinion and when that happens, terms like “dismiss those you don’t agree with” pops up. When in fact it’s just not everyone is agreeing with that person’s opinion or belief. And it’s just that simple. When people offer their viewpoints, there is absolutely nothing written in stone that people must automatically agree with what they are saying. If these folks can’t handle that not everyone is agreeing with them, then maybe they should keep their opinions to themselves if it hurts their feelings in anyway. Merge's words were a complete dismissal of the woman herself, not her opinions or viewpoints. You keep telling yourself that if it helps you think you made a point. 😀
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 17, 2019 2:14:36 GMT
Dismiss or don’t agree with? There is a difference. I read what the woman said, and IMO, she is full of shit. Now you may agree with or disagree with my assessment of the woman, that is your choice. Way too many people get upset because not everybody agrees with their opinion and when that happens, terms like “dismiss those you don’t agree with” pops up. When in fact it’s just not everyone is agreeing with that person’s opinion or belief. And it’s just that simple. When people offer their viewpoints, there is absolutely nothing written in stone that people must automatically agree with what they are saying. If these folks can’t handle that not everyone is agreeing with them, then maybe they should keep their opinions to themselves if it hurts their feelings in anyway. Merge's words were a complete dismissal of the woman herself, not her opinions or viewpoints. I'm dismissing her credibility as an expert witness before Congress on the subject of history, civil rights and white nationalism. There is nothing in her education or past experience that leads me to believe she is qualified to speak before Congress on these subjects, and my skepticism is borne out by the fact that she made statements on the subject that are easily proved false. If I'm missing something, please do educate me. I couldn't possibly dismiss the woman herself as I've never met her and don't know the first thing about her personally. This goes back to the idea that everyone can have their own opinion, but everyone can't have their own facts. Calling out demonstrably inaccurate statements is not refusing to hear an opinion. It's refusing to let lies become "truth" because someone wishes them so.
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Apr 17, 2019 3:32:54 GMT
This bears repeating.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2019 5:22:37 GMT
Why on earth are we listening to the blather of a woman who couldn't be bothered to finish her undergraduate degreeDismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. One who previously garnered online attention with anti-Trump rhetoric but then found she got more attention by coming out in favor of Trump? Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. Why do we give this woman one second of room in our heads? Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. She has no background that would suggest she's an expert on anything. Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. Who cares what she thinks or says? Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. to speak on a topic about which she apparently knows nothing. Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. Obviously they could not find a credible historian to validate their views. Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. I couldn't possibly dismiss the woman herself Your words show you doing just that.
Calling out demonstrably inaccurate statements is not refusing to hear an opinion. It's refusing to let lies become "truth" because someone wishes them so. Speaking of refusing to let lies become "truth" because you wish them so. You did not call out one single statement. Your dismissals were all about the woman herself. That's the fact. As you said... "This goes back to the idea that everyone can have their own opinion, but everyone can't have their own facts."
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 17, 2019 11:06:52 GMT
Why on earth are we listening to the blather of a woman who couldn't be bothered to finish her undergraduate degreeDismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. One who previously garnered online attention with anti-Trump rhetoric but then found she got more attention by coming out in favor of Trump? Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. Why do we give this woman one second of room in our heads? Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. She has no background that would suggest she's an expert on anything. Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. Who cares what she thinks or says? Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. to speak on a topic about which she apparently knows nothing. Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. Obviously they could not find a credible historian to validate their views. Dismissing the woman herself, not her opinions and viewpoints. I couldn't possibly dismiss the woman herself Your words show you doing just that.
Calling out demonstrably inaccurate statements is not refusing to hear an opinion. It's refusing to let lies become "truth" because someone wishes them so. Speaking of refusing to let lies become "truth" because you wish them so. You did not call out one single statement. Your dismissals were all about the woman herself. That's the fact. As you said... "This goes back to the idea that everyone can have their own opinion, but everyone can't have their own facts." No, Gia, in the context of the thread, my statements were all about whether she deserves our attention on this subject or any serious historical or political issue. My dismissals were based on the fact that she doesn't have any credibility on this issue and has been making demonstrably false statements to prop up a particular political narrative. I'll freely concede that she'd make an excellent expert witness on how to monetize making inflammatory statements on the internet. Back to the point, though - why do you think she's a credible witness on the subject of history, civil rights and white nationalism? Why do you suppose congressional Republicans chose her instead of, say, someone whose life work has been to study these issues and trends?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 9:50:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2019 12:38:11 GMT
Someone is playing the game of diverting a thread on the broad topic of America's growing white supremacy, toward a tangential point.
Just because someone wants to play a game doesn't mean any of us have to play along.
Here's something to ponder. Bannon setting up a modern day 'gladiator training' school. Reasserting the "judeo christian values". Oh goody. Let's go back to LGBT, minorities, women, etc. afraid and in the closet.
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Apr 17, 2019 13:47:01 GMT
Someone is playing the game of diverting a thread on the broad topic of America's growing white supremacy, toward a tangential point. Just because someone wants to play a game doesn't mean any of us have to play along. Here's something to ponder. Bannon setting up a modern day 'gladiator training' school. Reasserting the "judeo christian values". Oh goody. Let's go back to LGBT, minorities, women, etc. afraid and in the closet. That’s why I stopped. I’ve found this diversionary tactic to be a favored M.O. by Ms 1824 (and the significance of that year, I’m sure, has not escaped too many). Bannon has found his second calling in Europe, bent on disseminating his populist alt-right agenda since he’s already been marginalized in the US. This “school,” I would guess, is no more than a headquarters to recruit those eager to amplify Bannon’s racist messages and advance the goals of white nationalists under the cover of “Judeo-Christian values.”
|
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
Jun 26, 2014 23:58:32 GMT
|
Post by sassyangel on Apr 17, 2019 15:46:59 GMT
Why on earth are we listening to the blather of a woman who couldn't be bothered to finish her undergraduate degree - which was not, by the way, in history or anything related to it? One who previously garnered online attention with anti-Trump rhetoric but then found she got more attention by coming out in favor of Trump? Why do we give this woman one second of room in our heads? She has no background that would suggest she's an expert on anything. Who cares what she thinks or says? Shame on the congresspeople who brought her in to speak on a topic about which she apparently knows nothing. Obviously they could not find a credible historian to validate their views. Candace OwensYou can come up with endless reasons and justifications to dismiss those you don't agree with, but hearing from other viewpoints is good for your growth and can open your closed and made up mind. Elizabeth Cady Stanton—an activist and leader of the early women’s rights movement— said, “The moment we begin to fear the opinion of others…the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls.”That's not a blanket opening for giving value wholesale to every single opinion there is, though. Hitler had opinions. Dangerous ones. Opinions people should have been much more afraid of, than they initially were.
|
|