That's nonsense and you know it. You were trying to support this statement: "Now dry your eyes and do what Jesus tell you to do." You then listed four passages, but only one of them was what Jesus said. But even at that, none of them (all of which did indeed come from God's Word) instructed you to go out and force your fellow citizens to engage in charity. All four of them were instructing YOU to engage in charity. It's just like I have said a million times here, this is all just the typical liberal dem philosophy of wanting to claim the moral high ground because you force other people to contribute to your favorite charity.

How am I forcing you to do anything? Liberals aren't making you do anything either, at least not in the repub dominated state you live in. Most states are repub lead, so why are liberals your problem, and not repubs? Bet even you don't know what you're talking about, you just want to blame your ills and pet peeves on liberals. It's no wonder you figured out a way to let yourself off the hook and not obey the rules of your own bible. So go do what your bible tells you to do and quit crying and making excuses why you can't and blaming it on liberals.

Cut out the guilt trips Tal

The U.S. gives more to charity worldwide than any other nation. On top of that, every illegal alien we take into the U.S. is "A CHARITY CASE"....I think the U.S. does enough and, it can be argued, too much in terms of charity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Cut out the guilt trips Tal

---

No guilt trip Clete, just calling out the excuses and hypocrisy of gospel spouting self righteous people who don't practice what they preach and blaming it on someone else like you're trying to do accusing me of guilt tripping JL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vacuum7

The U.S. gives more to charity worldwide than any other nation. On top of that, every illegal alien we take into the U.S. is "A CHARITY CASE"....I think the U.S. does enough and, it can be argued, too much in terms of charity.

---

Okay let's argue if it's too much and while we're at it why even use the term illegal alien when there is NOTHING illegal about asylum seekers. I guess we don't have to argue about those folks do we? How can we ignore that those charity cases take any job they can get and pay taxes which they cannot benefit from. That's the myth name calling tries to hide from the narrative. That way it's okay to exploit the brown people from the south and treat them like criminals, and animals.

Talaniman: No, I don't support treating anyone like a criminal unless they are criminal and certainly don't like the idea of treating humanity like animals: We've seen enough of that in the last 100 years to last the next 1000 years. I have been round and round with my own feeling about the "brown people" as you call them: I don't like it that they just walk across our border uninvited....but, I generally like them as a people, or at least the ones I know and have worked with....and it would make it easier for me to make a stronger opinion if I didn't like them....so I come back around to this: In the most general terms, these "brown people" are fine, upstanding people of mostly high moral character.....most of them are strong Catholics and I am Catholic: You see where that puts me? I can't deny that I would prefer to help them more than "other" immigrants, I am biased through faith and I know what Jesus said and my wife reminds me often. I JUST WISH THAT THEY WOULD GO THROUGH PROPER CHANNELS AND PROCEDURES! Why does this have to be so hard? It took my wife 10 years to become a U.S. Citizen...her girlfriends the same...I would prefer that the RULES be applied EQUALLY TO ALL AND IN ALL CASES....Its not fair to tug at our heartstrings because it interferes with good business sense.....my problem is that, in this case, I have trouble separating my religious beliefs/right and wrong and business...secular decision taking is not possible in the case of what is happening on the Southern Border, at least I am not capable of it.

I appreciate your honesty Vac, and all I have ever advocated was a fair humane process, for everybody. True some have been migrating north from the south for many decades and not just from Mexico, but many countries and in many cases have family here already, and despite the hype obey the laws and report as directed and basically keep within the law. Many get deported after going through that lawful process, and doing as directed. I have a problem though with the present administration making this a disgusting spectacle however with the exaggerated rhetoric and antics that I don't consider good behavior at all and that's what I am really against.

I just don't think that's necessary or appropriate from this country, and I believe we are better than that. Separating kids from parents and packing people together like sardines? Naw man just cannot abide by that kind of behavior. I mean in a supposed Christian country can't we at least do things in a Christian way and not act like Nazis? Am I asking to much?

Talaniman: The nerve for me is the incidences I have seen lately where U.S. Military Veterans have be put up for deportation: That is utterly intolerable to me and I can not find any position where I leverage my own conscious to support that kind of B.S.: Veterans have EARNED more rights than the rest of us than those of us that are not veterans (my personal opinion) and, as such, are not to be fooled with: Its a disgusting proposition to take a man who has served this country and then relegate him to so much garbage as to "send him packing" when his service is completed.

Its a dynamic problem and I wish it were an entirely "legal question" but to pawn something like this off and make it a sterile/clinical type decision is, to me, near impossible: I find myself too emotionally invested to make sound, reasonable decisions.

It is much easier to identify truly evil enemies, demonize those evil enemies, and convince yourself of what you must do to protect yourself and others.....it is harder to get psyched-up that way against the "brown people" at the border, at least for me anyway, especially when I know that they are, for the greatest majority, simply seeking a better life.

why is this reduced to a question of race, it is also a question of culture yet you continually refer to race, it comes down to sovereignty, people cannot just wander across a national border at will

Quote:

---

people cannot just wander across a national border at will

---

Exactly correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

why is this reduced to a question of race, it is also a question of culture yet you continually refer to race, it comes down to sovereignty, people cannot just wander across a national border at will

---

Said the migrant who is surrounded by water. With all due respect it's rather an insult that you think you can define our sovereignty which in due course has changed over the decades and at one time was a common thing until someone decide it wasn't. Some boat people were allowed and some were not and has resulted into a death penalty of others. We even rounded up and incarcerated some races for nothing else other than where they came from, and while culture is a factor race has always been the biggest factor. I don't remember Germans being hauled off to concentration camps during the war but the Japanese were.

As Vac has said and I agree it's disgusting to deport those that swear their lives to defend the country, and that goes for the families they leave behind, many subject to the same deportation order, and cruel as all get out to deport a kid or young adult who didn't have any choice as they were growing up and only know ONE home in their lives. If that's not just plain cruel then I don't know what is. Such unchristian behavior makes me sick, and represents a step back from humanity, not forward. So spare me please the sermon on it's about culture not race! It's always about race in this country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

It's always about race in this country.

---

Yes that would seem to be so, you are not colour blind. You want to say I am a migrant, but we are all migrants. I have not been a migrant for six, or maybe more generations, so my perspective might be different to some.

It is not cruel to deny entry to those who would flout your laws, you accept those who patiently wait in line and follow the laws, so do we. We temper acceptance with the ability to absorb the numbers, you apparently do not. Do not bring Christianity into this since yours is a secular nation and the laws that force such action are secular

Quote:

---

It's always about race in this country.

---

It is for liberal dems. For the rest of the country, race is mentioned rarely. It is not an issue.

You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base. Race always matters to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Yes that would seem to be so, you are not colour blind. You want to say I am a migrant, but we are all migrants. I have not been a migrant for six, or maybe more generations, so my perspective might be different to some.

---

Most migrants think of themselves as natives after a few generations of blood, sweat, tears, and struggle, and lets not leave out the perks of conquest. If this is the only home you know about then you would also feel that way especially if your culture and heritage were brutally beaten out of you for a few generations.

Quote:

---

It is not cruel to deny entry to those who would flout your laws, you accept those who patiently wait in line and follow the laws, so do we. We temper acceptance with the ability to absorb the numbers, you apparently do not. Do not bring Christianity into this since yours is a secular nation and the laws that force such action are secular

---

There are plenty of laws that call for a humane process, and none of them includes separation of kids from parents or family, or incarceration in unhealthy conditions. Those are policies to deter that has nothing to do with the law, and more to do with this administration. They all claim to be Christians so it very well should be included in the conversation. What, you don't think Christians can be cruel?

Quote:

---

You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base.

---

Those are the very kind of mindless, hateful comments that are the reason we have become so divided. It's on the same level as saying that the dem base is all welfare moms who want a bigger govt check. Pathetic. I'm not a repub, but I know a lot of repubs. They don't obsess about race nearly as much as you do.

The WWII Japanese were a special case and that case had a lot to do with what happened immediately after the Pearl Harbor attack: It was called the Niihau Incident where a downed Japanese Zero pilot and a resident man and wife of the island of Niihau conspired and went about killing off everyone on the island....the compelling part of this was that the man and wife of Japanese ancestry HAD NEVER BEEN TO JAPAN and chose to assist the Japanese pilot in the systematic murdering of their fellow citizens just because the pilot was of the same race (Japanese). The facts of this case were kept hush, hush because of the potential for wholesale bloodshed that may arise if the general stateside population found out about and went about killing the hell out of Japanese citizens. There were other incidents, too, of Japanese Americans supplying fuel to Japanese submarines....So, there was some "basis" for the incarceration of Japanese during WWII, it was not ALL just a xenophobic reaction perpetuated by evil Caucasians. All of this is part of the history record....but let's also state the other fact: The most highly decorated Army Unit of WWII was a unit entirely comprised of Japanese Americans that fought in Europe killing Nazis: in a weird twist, these Japanese had to "prove" their patriotism and they did in bunches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Those are the very kind of mindless, hateful comments that are the reason we have become so divided. It's on the same level as saying that the dem base is all welfare moms who want a bigger govt check. Pathetic. I'm not a repub, but I know a lot of repubs. They don't obsess about race nearly as much as you do.

---

I don't know if obssessed is an accurate description for the reality I live in, but being aware that these aforemention people exist and mean you no good, is crucial to the survival for many minorities. I don't know if denying their existence or minimizing their threat is a very healthy approach though. Sorry you took my comments so personally, and perhaps it's just because you don't feel as threatened by them as I do, but it does explain part of my attitude toward the dufus.

Perhaps you should talk to your minority neighbors to get a better perspective of what you think is just an obsession. Actually I'm glad your experience with such people seems very limited.

Talaniman: Not putting words in jlisenbe's mouth but I can assure you, as a fellow Southerner, we have an extraordinary amount of interaction with minorities and have had those interaction from very tender ages: Blacks were not people we read about or saw on TV or in televised sporting events: We went to school with them in great number, played with them, fought with them, ate with them, worked with them, and have prayed with them: Blacks are in no way strangers to us. And I can tell you that, generally speaking, almost always, the interactions between races in the South, at least in my time, have been good. Where a Southern man tends to get riled is when we are told that we are responsible for the any plight that exist in with the Black race or that we owe them anything or that the Black race may deserve certain "unalienable" privileges: Our generation of Southerners never owned Slaves (my ancestors weren't even here, honestly, at the time) and the idea we owe anything is not palatable.....I think most people, Southern or Northern, or where ever they may hail, would support the idea of removing all senses of "race" from all government documents and such.

Race designation is, in and of itself, a very divisive descriptor...especially when you lead with it.....if we want real harmony amongst ethnicities, we should abandon it.

I can certainly understand your position JL and Vac as southerners, and maybe someday we can get to that point, but MY point is that even if you and JL haven't a racist bone in your body, you cannot say that about others and I was specific in that regard. Good old boys and white supremist were the specific people I referenced. Of course there are others, all over the country, who do have racist intents and prejudices and to not be able to acknowledge that fact is baffling to any one who experiences it in todays age. We can never have harmony as long as the racists exist, and maybe they always will, and act on those feelings even if you could wipe out racial designations.

What say you to that fellows?

Quote:

---

being aware that these aforemention people exist and mean you no good, is crucial to the survival for many minorities.

---

But that was not what you said. You said that the core of Trump's support was white nationalists. That is completely untrue and smacks of bitterness.

Quote:

---

I don't know if denying their existence or minimizing their threat is a very healthy approach though. Sorry you took my comments so personally, and perhaps it's just because you don't feel as threatened by them as I do, but it does explain part of my attitude toward the dufus.

---

I haven't denied their existence. I did not take your comment personally. I did call you out on the outrageous assertion that Trump's base is a bunch of racists. It's those kind of reckless comments that need to be thought through more carefully.

Quote:

---

Perhaps you should talk to your minority neighbors to get a better perspective of what you think is just an obsession. Actually I'm glad your experience with such people seems very limited.

---

And that's another foolish comment. I worked in two schools for ten years with many black teachers on staff. I have interacted closely with many black parents. I worked for five years at a Choctaw Indian school. I attended a racially integrated church for over twenty years. To say my experience is "very limited" is ridiculous.

As you can see, I don't have much patience with this kind of thinking since it, on the surface at least, closely resembles racial prejudice. If someone had suggested that Obama's core support came from black nationalists, or that people only voted for him because he was black, it would rightly have condemned as outrageous statements. Hopefully your statements were inaccurate, or perhaps I misread your intent somehow.

Talaniman: I tend to get overly defensive on this subject....and I acknowledge that racists exists and they exists everywhere in the country, no part of it is exempt: Like the saying "You can't fix stupid" it is true beyond doubt...I just hate the stereotyping that the South gets on this subject: it is not constructive. I think I may have misread what you wrote and misunderstood your intent, also.

I really want this race thing to go away: I can think of no other subject with such potential to divide, weaken, and disrupt these United States Of America than racial divisions.

We have to be careful how we interpret and how we judge those individuals of the past: It is dangerous to view history through the prism of what we deem conventional wisdom of today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base. Race always matters to them.

---

You have stated many times you don't know any racists or supremist, and that's fine, and I'm glad you don't. But lets not pretend they are not part of the dufus/repub base. No not all, and probably a small number, but energized and emboldened in the dufus era, and let's examine why they gravitate to him. For one he has done some racist stuff in the past, things that use to disqualify someone for high office, like not wanting black people in his buildings, or around his racists clients. Fact check me yourself by just googling "Trump the racist". In addition, the ease in which it's dismissed and look the other way at such antics, not just you, is rather disturbing to anyone who has experienced such racist antics. and that's just real, and not imagined or mistaken. Makes me wonder W T F!

You obviously misunderstood my intent, and got carried away by your own outrage. Racism is a big freakin', life changing, traumatic deal to those subjected to it, and it's been going on a long darn time. Unlike you, I don't have the luxury of ignoring it or downplaying it. If you were confused by my words or intent, you could have just asked for clarity instead of jumping to conclusions.

Quote:

---

You have stated many times you don't know any racists or supremist, and that's fine, and I'm glad you don't.

---

I don't think I've said that. I have said that I rarely hear a racist remark from people I know, and I know a lot of people.

Quote:

---

But lets not pretend they are not part of the dufus/repub base. No not all, and probably a small number, but energized and emboldened in the dufus era, and let's examine why they gravitate to him. For one he has done some racist stuff in the past, things that use to disqualify someone for high office, like not wanting black people in his buildings, or around his racists clients. Fact check me yourself by just googling "Trump the racist". In addition, the ease in which it's dismissed and look the other way at such antics, not just you, is rather disturbing to anyone who has experienced such racist antics. and that's just real, and not imagined or mistaken. Makes me wonder W T F!

---

But again, that's not what you said. You said that Trump's base was composed of white supremacists. That is a flatly false statement. And as to Trump being a racist, the big gun aimed at him is the housing discrimination that did clearly seem to have happened BY HIS FATHER.

Quote:

---

You obviously misunderstood my intent, and got carried away by your own outrage. Racism is a big freakin', life changing, traumatic deal to those subjected to it, and it's been going on a long darn time. Unlike you, I don't have the luxury of ignoring it or downplaying it. If you were confused by my words or intent, you could have just asked for clarity instead of jumping to conclusions.

---

I see. You made an outrageously false statement, but it's my "outrage" that is the problem. Hmmm. I have been subjected to racism. I think your assumption that Trump's base is composed of white nationalists smacks of racism itself. It is plainly untrue, and I can't imagine any good reason for you to say it. You didn't say Trump was racist. You said his supporters were racists. But if you want to clarify your statement, then go ahead. Why did you say that Trump's base was composed of "white nationalists"?

I don't think you are a racist. I think you made a poorly worded statement.

Quote:

---

But again, that's not what you said. You said that Trump's base was composed of white supremacists. That is a flatly false statement. And as to Trump being a racist, the big gun aimed at him is the housing discrimination that did clearly seem to have happened BY HIS FATHER.

---

Why don't I just supply a LINK. Poorly worded could be the culprit, but white supremist ARE a part of his base. They love him, and I have called him a racist many times before because I have always believed he was.

Quote:

---

I see. You made an outrageously false statement, but it's my "outrage" that is the problem. Hmmm. I have been subjected to racism. I think your assumption that Trump's base is composed of white nationalists smacks of racism itself. It is plainly untrue, and I can't imagine any good reason for you to say it. You didn't say Trump was racist. You said his supporters were racists. But if you want to clarify your statement, then go ahead. Why did you say that Trump's base was composed of "white nationalists"?

---

Maybe this can explain it better than I can,They put the white supremist support at about 7% of his coalition, a lot, but not ALL by any means just to clarify and specify my position. In no way did I mean ALL or a large part of his base was racists.

so what does it matter if white supremacists support him they are not going to support namby pamby liberals and communist fellow travellers. What you are really saying is you don't like the idea the more militant members of society might support Trump, I think I'll just go over in the corner and eat worms

It matters because you must appease your base, be it with red meat, or stuff they like and feeding white supremists and racists means minorities get sacrificed and screwed. Enjoy your worms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

It matters because you must appease your base, be it with red meat, or stuff they like and feeding white supremists and racists means minorities get sacrificed and screwed. Enjoy your worms.

---

You see, this is the problem, you are not inclusive of all views, I like to eat red meat, doesn't make me a racist or a white supremacist.

I can tell you that I expect everyone to have equal opportunity and none to be excluded because of their political views no matter how much I disagree with them. Seems to me that such views are not easily tolerated there

Quote:

---

They put the white supremist support at about 7% of his coalition, a lot, but not ALL by any means

---

When did 7% become a "lot"? I would think it would be "relatively few". So would you say that a "lot" of Obama's support came from the BLM loonies?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

You see, this is the problem, you are not inclusive of all views, I like to eat red meat, doesn't make me a racist or a white supremacist.

I can tell you that I expect everyone to have equal opportunity and none to be excluded because of their political views no matter how much I disagree with them. Seems to me that such views are not easily tolerated there

---

No Clete you are a bit off if you are elevating white terrorists to the level of legitimacy. That is the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

When did 7% become a "lot"? I would think it would be "relatively few". So would you say that a "lot" of Obama's support came from the BLM loonies?

---

Same answer I just gave Clete. Are you righties comparing White Supremists to other social activist groups and defending them?

Hold on for a minute: White supremacist supporting Trump...these are extremist who really don't have "THEIR OWN PARTY"...why do they support Trump? Probably because the choices they have to support: they certainly cannot support leftists of the Democrat Party because socialist are in 180 degrees out of phase with the extremist ideals of supremist. I mean, why don't we point out the outright communist Marxist that support the Democrats? Because they are also extremist. As a candidate or party, you can't dictate WHO is going to come under your umbrella, uninvited. Trump didn't tell the supremist to come support him any more than the Democrats asked the communist to come and support them. Why does anyone want to pick out examples of extremist and hold them up as legitimate? This is just a play to the emotions and is disingenuous.

Quote:

---

Same answer I just gave Clete. Are you righties comparing White Supremists to other social activist groups and defending them?

---

I'm saying the white supremacists, the BLM loonies, most of the NAACP crowd, and other race-oriented groups are all negatives for our country. The loonie groups come in all kinds of colors.

You never did explain how 7% equates to "a lot" in your world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vacuum7

Hold on for a minute: White supremacist supporting Trump...these are extremist who really don't have "THEIR OWN PARTY"...why do they support Trump? Probably because the choices they have to support: they certainly cannot support leftists of the Democrat Party because socialist are in 180 degrees out of phase with the extremist ideals of supremist. I mean, why don't we point out the outright communist Marxist that support the Democrats? Because they are also extremist. As a candidate or party, you can't dictate WHO is going to come under your umbrella, uninvited. Trump didn't tell the supremist to come support him any more than the Democrats asked the communist to come and support them. Why does anyone want to pick out examples of extremist and hold them up as legitimate? This is just a play to the emotions and is disingenuous.

---

I can almost see your point, except for lumping White Supremists in with Marxist and the Communists, may be a stretch for me, because only one of those groups represents injury and death in my mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I'm saying the white supremacists, the BLM loonies, most of the NAACP crowd, and other race-oriented groups are all negatives for our country. The loonie groups come in all kinds of colors.

You never did explain how 7% equates to "a lot" in your world.

---

Like I wrote above, I have a hard time believing civil rights groups pose the same physical threat as White Supremists. and doing the math, 4 million extremists that may be violent to others is a lot in my mind, so I guess a persons politics and views are tolerable, and they have a right to express them, but I kind of draw a line with potential violence.

Quote:

---

Like I wrote above, I have a hard time believing civil rights groups pose the same physical threat as White Supremists.

---

When was the last time a white supremacist group caused, as BLM did, the kind of rioting and destruction as occurred in Ferguson, Missouri, and then only to find out that their core complaint of police violence wasn't even valid?

Quote:

---

and doing the math, 4 million extremists that may be violent to others is a lot in my mind, so I guess a persons politics and views are tolerable, and they have a right to express them,

---

If I accept your figure of 4 million (I don't), then your own estimate of 7% would mean that about 60 million are NOT white supremacists. So in what universe could 4 mil be the "core support" of a group of 60 mil? Besides, if there are really 4 mil of them, then why is it that WS demonstrations nearly always only attract a few dozen people? Where are the other 3,999,950 of them?

Quote:

---

but I kind of draw a line with potential violence.

---

So you draw the line with BLM, or with the Nation of Islam?

It just seems to me you have a standard you live by. If it's liberal, then it's good. If it's conservative, then it's bad.

Talaniman: The track record of KILLINGS BY WHITE SUPREMIST Vs. KILLING BY MARXIST/COMMUNIST weighs heavily in favor of the communist/Marxist: Stalin-communist + Mao-communist = 80 million dead: White Supremist, even if you throw Hitler in the midst, pales by comparison. Even recently, the hidden face Marxist of Antifa are attacking and causing injuries to people. Not defending the POS supremist, they are pure scum, but they are nothing of a threat compared to communist/Marxist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

When was the last time a white supremacist group caused, as BLM did, the kind of rioting and destruction as occurred in Ferguson, Missouri, and then only to find out that their core complaint of police violence wasn't even valid?

---

Violence like the loony shooters of synagogues? Actually Ferguson was a catalyst for many police community changes but how was BLM connected to that?

Quote:

---

If I accept your figure of 4 million (I don't), then your own estimate of 7% would mean that about 60 million are NOT white supremacists. So in what universe could 4 mil be the "core support" of a group of 60 mil? Besides, if there are really 4 mil of them, then why is it that WS demonstrations nearly always only attract a few dozen people? Where are the other 3,999,950 of them?

---

For one, I have never used the phrase core support, and obviously my estimate was a national estimate of WS voters. What you think they run around in a big gang? No guy there are many small local groups that fall under the Supremist label.

Quote:

---

So you draw the line with BLM, or with the Nation of Islam?

It just seems to me you have a standard you live by. If it's liberal, then it's good. If it's conservative, then it's bad.

---

Neither of which is connected to violence and TNI is a religious group like Christianity. It's never been about liberals or conservatives. That's just your spin. I think in previous posts I specified extremes on both sides. For the record BLM and TNI are nowhere near the threat that WS is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vacuum7

Talaniman: The track record of KILLINGS BY WHITE SUPREMIST Vs. KILLING BY MARXIST/COMMUNIST weighs heavily in favor of the communist/Marxist: Stalin-communist + Mao-communist = 80 million dead: White Supremist, even if you throw Hitler in the midst, pales by comparison. Even recently, the hidden face Marxist of Antifa are attacking and causing injuries to people. Not defending the POS supremist, they are pure scum, but they are nothing of a threat compared to communist/Marxist.

---

Vac I don't even count those old world political parties as part of the discussion of modern day American groups. It just ain't the same.

Quote:

---

For one, I have never used the phrase core support, and obviously my estimate was a national estimate of WS voters.

---

This was your quote. You said "base" which means the same as "core". "You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base. Race always matters to them."

Quote:

---

Violence like the loony shooters of synagogues? Actually Ferguson was a catalyst for many police community changes but how was BLM connected to that?

---

BLM was up to its elbows at Ferguson. The WS has never inititated anything even close to being that destructive. From Wikipedia: "The movement became nationally recognized for street demonstrations following the 2014 deaths of two African Americans: Michael Brown—resulting in protests and unrest in Ferguson, a city near St. Louis—and Eric Garner in New York City."

Quote:

---

Neither of which is connected to violence

---

BLM most definitely is.

Quote:

---

and TNI is a religious group like Christianity. It's never been about liberals or conservatives. That's just your spin.

---

I never said they were liberal. They are very much a race based movement and promote black superiority and black nationalism. If the WS/WN people are wrong, and they are, then why aren't the BS/BN people wrong?

Quote:

---

For the record BLM and TNI are nowhere near the threat that WS is.

---

Go tell that to the people in Ferguson and see how far you get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

This was your quote. You said "base" which means the same as "core". "You forgot the ultra conservative good old boys and the white supremists that make up the dufus/repub base. Race always matters to them."

---

Maybe I should have stipulated I meant WS and good old boys were a PART of conservative base. Would that have made a difference in your understanding?

Quote:

---

BLM was up to its elbows at Ferguson. The WS has never inititated anything even close to being that destructive. From Wikipedia: "The movement became nationally recognized for street demonstrations following the 2014 deaths of two African Americans: Michael Brown—resulting in protests and unrest in Ferguson, a city near St. Louis—and Eric Garner in New York City."

---

I have seen no violent activity initiated or engaged by them and peaceful protests seem to be all they have ever done. You got something different than peaceful protests, march's and demonstrations, please share that.

Quote:

---

BLM most definitely is. I never said they were liberal. They are very much a race based movement and promote black superiority and black nationalism. If the WS/WN people are wrong, and they are, then why aren't the BS/BN people wrong?

---

Race based maybe, but you will have to show where they promote black superiority and black nationalism to even start equating them with the WS movement with a history of violence death and hate.

Quote:

---

Go tell that to the people in Ferguson and see how far you get.

---

Go ahead, Ferguson has changed quite a bit since the riots, for the better.

Talaniman: What about the Black Panther Party? They have a history of violence. I believe the Black Panthers have murdered cops before, have they not? They preach racially based hatred, as well as the White Supremist do. We can even go over to Louis Farrakan: He calls Caucasians "White Devils"...yet there are pictures of Obama and Farrakan together. Can you find a picture of Trump with the Imperial Wizard Of The KKK or Nazi Party? I know you can't. And, then there is the darling of the left: Antifa! Yes, Antifa who claims themselves to be against Fascist but who themselves act like Fascists and run up and down the streets with masks on while being fully supported by the left: And they are violent, as well.

Nothing precludes anyone from saying that they "support" one candidate over another or one party over another. And, sometimes, these supporters are mere plants from the opposition who are attempting to draw inferences between some despicable group and whomever they oppose. After all the intrigue we have seen with the falsities that have been exposed through the accusers in the Russia Investigation and the Ukraine accusation fiasco, I don't doubt anything any more.