IGX

thanks johno.

i don't know reason, but the text seems reasonable.

the report demonstrates that racism and religious bigotry were a backdrop to trump's campaign. his campaign was fueled at least in part by that bigotry. obviously every discontented voter is not motived by bigotry. but his campaign and election are at least in part feeding bigotry. (the w. va. facebook post about michelle being an ape in heels is an example.)

trump or no trump, we've got (as i have previously said) a shitload of different cultures in our country. they often don't mix and often don't play nice with one another. yes, the liberals can be intolerant dicks. it is difficult for some people to get along with others because they disagree about fundamental matters: god, my god vs your god, queers, individual rights and the government's role, et fucking cetera.

cable news addresses this by having shouting matches. the approach here at igx is anarchic, where the unstable engage with the deluded.

we've probably reached the point where we need more titty pics and a pirated video of melania doing girl-on-girl would be good.

in any case, johno, thanks again for good post.

dead man walking wrote: in any case, johno, thanks again for good post.

This Aggression will not stand, Man.

powerlifter54 wrote: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... 98293.html

This is a fine example of the dishonest or ignorance conundrum. You can start with the very first charge - he wasn't even arrested in LA during the riots. He was arrested in SF, released and never convicted. There's no evidence of the Seattle arrest and certainly no conviction, certainly no prison time.

As far as his politics, so what? He was a young radical - last I checked still perfectly legal.

That you repeat what you heard via right wing media without pausing to check veracity is... problematic.

So what it really comes down to is a strategically short memory about the losers influencing White House staffing on your part and beyond that an avoidance of direct comparisons. Is white nationalism less offensive than communism? Is a wife beating charge less offensive than being present at a protest? Granted, there is a difference there - neither was convicted but one was actually charged with a crime.

Or we can skip that and just admit you're kind of full of shit on this point. You don't mind the losing party exerting influence, when it's your party. The issue is not "losers trying to have a say" it's "Democrats trying to have a say" in Presidential staffing

milosz wrote:

powerlifter54 wrote: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... 98293.html

This is a fine example of the dishonest or ignorance conundrum. You can start with the very first charge - he wasn't even arrested in LA during the riots. He was arrested in SF, released and never convicted. There's no evidence of the Seattle arrest and certainly no conviction, certainly no prison time.

As far as his politics, so what? He was a young radical - last I checked still perfectly legal.

That you repeat what you heard via right wing media without pausing to check veracity is... problematic.

So what it really comes down to is a strategically short memory about the losers influencing White House staffing on your part and beyond that an avoidance of direct comparisons. Is white nationalism less offensive than communism? Is a wife beating charge less offensive than being present at a protest? Granted, there is a difference there - neither was convicted but one was actually charged with a crime.

Or we can skip that and just admit you're kind of full of shit on this point. You don't mind the losing party exerting influence, when it's your party. The issue is not "losers trying to have a say" it's "Democrats trying to have a say" in Presidential staffing

You're assuming that it was the public voices (the Republican ones) that did him in.. I can't imagine that Schumer and Gillibrand were happy with his '9/11 conspiracy' support.

milosz wrote:

powerlifter54 wrote: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... 98293.html

This is a fine example of the dishonest or ignorance conundrum. You can start with the very first charge - he wasn't even arrested in LA during the riots. He was arrested in SF, released and never convicted. There's no evidence of the Seattle arrest and certainly no conviction, certainly no prison time.

As far as his politics, so what? He was a young radical - last I checked still perfectly legal.

That you repeat what you heard via right wing media without pausing to check veracity is... problematic.

So what it really comes down to is a strategically short memory about the losers influencing White House staffing on your part and beyond that an avoidance of direct comparisons. Is white nationalism less offensive than communism? Is a wife beating charge less offensive than being present at a protest? Granted, there is a difference there - neither was convicted but one was actually charged with a crime.

Or we can skip that and just admit you're kind of full of shit on this point. You don't mind the losing party exerting influence, when it's your party. The issue is not "losers trying to have a say" it's "Democrats trying to have a say" in Presidential staffing

Mr. Jones attributed his conversion to the people he met during his incarceration:

"I met all these radical young people of color, I mean really radical, communists and anarchists," he told the East Bay Express. "It was like 'this is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary."

He is an Avowed Communist. See ya Van. Even Obama shitcanned his stuppid ass.

Reporters also uncovered a number of racist statements Mr. Jones has made, including this one from January of last year: "the white polluters and white environmentalists are essentially steering poison into the people-of-color communities."

To further answer your questions i equate white and Black nationalism. Jones is a Black nationalist and Communist. Bannon is not a white nationalist. He just wants the illegals to go home and stop committing crimes, along with BLM. So yes, you who lost don't get to pick Trump's advisors. But if you find arrests or admissions of Bannon calling for an all white Nation let us know. We will help give him the Jones exit plan. Hell if he supports a cop killer let us know.

Turdacious wrote: You're assuming that it was the public voices (the Republican ones) that did him in.. I can't imagine that Schumer and Gillibrand were happy with his '9/11 conspiracy' support.

Irrelevant. Do I need to quote the post again? The objection entered is about 'losers thinking they have a say' - the GOP losers thought they had a say. Goose/gander/etc.

powerlifter54 wrote: He is an Avowed Communist. See ya Van. Even Obama shitcanned his stuppid ass.

Was an avowed communist. Which still isn't illegal - you may find it objectionable but it is not illegal.

Reporters also uncovered a number of racist statements Mr. Jones has made, including this one from January of last year: "the white polluters and white environmentalists are essentially steering poison into the people-of-color communities."

This is not a racist statement.

To further answer your questions i equate white and Black nationalism. Jones is a Black nationalist and Communist.

So you object to Bannon and Jones equally, awesome.

However, to be pedantic, I see no evidence of "black nationalism" on Jones's part and if he is or was a communist that would be incompatible with black nationalist ideologies.

Bannon is not a white nationalist.

He just plays one on TV. He has bragged about his Breitbart being the voice of the alt-right, correct?
Here's what Breitbart published in a guide to the alt-right:
"
You’ll often encounter doomsday rhetoric in alt-right online communities: that’s because many of them instinctively feel that once large enough and ethnically distinct enough groups are brought together, they will inevitably come to blows. In short, they doubt that full “integration” is ever possible. If it is, it won’t be successful in the “kumbaya” sense. Border walls are a much safer option.

The alt-right’s intellectuals would also argue that culture is inseparable from race. The alt-right believe that some degree of separation between peoples is necessary for a culture to be preserved. A Mosque next to an English street full of houses bearing the flag of St. George, according to alt-righters, is neither an English street nor a Muslim street — separation is necessary for distinctiveness."

This is a white nationalist argument. If Bannon didn't agree, why does he brag about the alt-right and publish pieces describing it in such a manner?

But if you find arrests

You mean, like his arrest for domestic violence?

Again, you're full of shit. What you object to is not losers having a say, but Democratic losers having a say. You don't have to pretend to be reasonable, you're in a safe space - just say what you really mean. "Democrats lost, we get to do what we want." Honesty is freeing.

milosz wrote: You mean, like his arrest for domestic violence?

Again, you're full of shit. What you object to is not losers having a say, but Democratic losers having a say. You don't have to pretend to be reasonable, you're in a safe space - just say what you really mean. "Democrats lost, we get to do what we want." Honesty is freeing.

Charges dismissed. Same ex wife accused him of anti-semitism. Bullshit Flags everywhere there.

But let's be clear what I am saying. Your side just lost a monumental election. The list of reasons is legion but a terrible candidate who ran a terrible campaign defending 8 years of lies, lawlessness, and poor performance who had a media intent on cheerleading for them. And your side has hawked a self defined and deluded superiority. Well the bill has come due. If you are lucky you will get some say in some legislation. Bannon will keep his job until he screws up, Jones was gone forthwith. Trump was not a great candidate but there is a pretty good reason to believe he is a President who can play hardball. Focus on having some say in legislation because he will do that. But he won't let you pick his staff. The last two sentences being the exact opposite of the Obama.

PS The lefty post election meltdown has been the most enjoyment i have ever gotten from the interwebz. It won't last forever but it will for a long while.

Charges dismissed... just like Jones. Jones even got paid for his arrest, did Bannon?
If charges are irrelevant, only convictions, why did you bring them up regarding Jones.

It's okay to be a hypocrite, everyone is, but it's much easier to just be honest about your motivations from the jump.

Lol, just realized the goalposts shifted from 'losers don't get a say' to 'only pussies give in when the losers want to have a say.'

milosz wrote:

Turdacious wrote: You're assuming that it was the public voices (the Republican ones) that did him in.. I can't imagine that Schumer and Gillibrand were happy with his '9/11 conspiracy' support.

Irrelevant. Do I need to quote the post again? The objection entered is about 'losers thinking they have a say' - the GOP losers thought they had a say. Goose/gander/etc.

Cute try at sophistry.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Even Glenn Beck thinks Bannon is beyond the pale
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... ?cid=bitly

can we at least all agree that trump's bleach-blond hair is an embarrassment and that he's an odious, squishy slug who needs to drop at least 30?

bodyweight? low-carb? kettle bells? trx? xfit?

my vote is xfit for its ancillary benefits: there's willing pussy to grab there.

powerlifter54 wrote:

milosz wrote: You mean, like his arrest for domestic violence?

Again, you're full of shit. What you object to is not losers having a say, but Democratic losers having a say. You don't have to pretend to be reasonable, you're in a safe space - just say what you really mean. "Democrats lost, we get to do what we want." Honesty is freeing.

Charges dismissed. Same ex wife accused him of anti-semitism. Bullshit Flags everywhere there.

But let's be clear what I am saying. You are your side just lost a monumental election. The list of reasons is legion but a terrible candidate who ran a terrible campaign defending 8 years of lies, lawlessness, and poor performance who had a media intent on cheerleading for them. And your side has hawked a self defined and deluded superiority. Well the bill has come due. If you are lucky you will get some say in some legislation. Bannon will keep his job until he screws up, Jones was gone forthwith. Trump was not a great candidate but there is a pretty good reason to believe he is a President who can play hardball. Focus on having some say in legislation because he will do that. But he won't let you pick his staff. The last two sentences being the exact opposite of the Obama.

PS The lefty post election meltdown has been the most enjoyment i have ever gotten from the interwebz. It won't last forever but it will for a long while.

Here's lefty meltdowner Jonah Goldberg explaining that Bannon is not a conservative.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/44 ... nservative

Goldberg and NR picked the wrong side. They don't get to pick his staff either. And they also are both pussies.

This should stop being fun eventually. For me anyway.

This is where you start with the sexist, racist, homophobe, xenophobe, germaphobe, fascist chants.

I wouldn't guess that you're any of those, I don't even think the low-information voter tag that's appropriate for so much of Trump's base.

I think you're ideologically-motivated, willing to indulge in a bit of hypocrisy when it suits a rhetorical need and willing to accept whatever comes along with Trump because his election suits some other desire rooted in social conservatism and American exceptionalism/nationalism.

milosz wrote:So Democrats aren't calling for Bannon's ouster and Republicans didn't call for Jones's and on the same forum page where we're discussing those two no one said "the idea that the losers get to pick and approve the Winner's staff is just another level of hilarity since Tuesday"?

I don't know what Savage Nation is.

Despite the electoral "landslide", the popular vote still has us as a 50/50 nation. The Dems took a couple of days off after their loss and are back in the battle just like the Repugs were early in the Obama era.

It's the way it is now, political war all the time regardless of who's on top. Van Jones or Bannon, or whomever are evil and any president who would appoint such a person must be evil too, therefore TOTAL WAR.

DrDonkeyLove wrote: It's the way it is now, political war all the time regardless of who's on top. Van Jones or Bannon, or whomever are evil and any president who would appoint such a person must be evil too, therefore TOTAL WAR.

harry reid, the old boxer, may be on the ropes, but he's throwing back. he's either crazy or tough as a boot.

http://time.com/4572395/harry-reid-spee ... en-bannon/

powerlifter54 wrote:Goldberg and NR picked the wrong side. They don't get to pick his staff either. And they also are both pussies.

This should stop being fun eventually. For me anyway.

This is where you start with the sexist, racist, homophobe, xenophobe, germaphobe, fascist chants.

Not sure they picked the wrong side. Reelected GOP Senators tended to outperform Trump, and Ryan was unanamously reelected as Speaker. This was an establishment election.

As far as Bannon goes, we'll see how long he lasts...

A campaign watchdog group filed a complaint with federal election officials that alleges Stephen Bannon—recently named one of Donald Trump’s top White House advisers—may have gotten paid illegally during Trump’s campaign by pro-Trump billionaires. And now, a new set of Federal Election Commission filings that haven’t yet been reported on may give the group’s case some additional heft.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... itter_page
I doubt that LTG Flynn and Rudy will want to submit to Senate questioning either.

I didn't know who Bannon was until the last couple days. I did a little googling to find out what the uproar is all about. Thirteen months ago, when Trump was still a joke, Bloomberg did this profile.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graph ... ve-bannon/

It's long and seems pretty thorough, and yet there isn't anything about the racist monstrosity currently being portrayed.

Turdacious wrote: I doubt that . . . Rudy will want to submit to Senate questioning either.

did i understand this right: rudy was working for some iranian emigree group the state dept listed as a terrorist organzation?

sec'y of state seems a reach, but who knows with the roman circus in town

dead man walking wrote:

Turdacious wrote: I doubt that . . . Rudy will want to submit to Senate questioning either.

did i understand this right: rudy was working for some iranian emigree group the state dept listed as a terrorist organzation?

sec'y of state seems a reach, but who knows with the roman circus in town

With McConnell as ringmaster...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1wg1DNHbNU[/youtube]
Same as it ever was.