From Harper’s Weekly, 1876. Drawing by A.B. Frost.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Boris Seymour on Homerun!
- George Boardman on TRUMP OR…?
- RL CRABB on TRUMP OR…?
- Michael R. Kesti on TRUMP OR…?
- rlcrabb on The Freedom To imbibe
Categories
Archives
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
That’s nasty, Bob. But yeah, the politics of 2016 are shaping up thusly.
Ugly sentiments from the both of you.
Greg lose the self-righteous indignation. Both Bob and Mike made comments on the state of political affairs. The ugliness is the state of our politics, not comments on the nastiness that abounds. Your comment;
“Make some real statements that can be backed up by facts. Be specific” applies to you as well.
There was nothing self righteous or indignant in my comments. I met hyperbole regarding a claim of scapegoating in current political speech with a request for an example… but there were apparently too many to choose from to actually show, for example, that “immigrants” were being scapegoated.
My statement was clear; I’ve not witnessed “immigrants” being scapegoated by any substantive politician. At the most, I’ve noticed “illegal immigrants” being a target, and generalizing that as “all immigrants” has been left-of-center sleight of hand for many years.
I can’t prove by induction that there hasn’t been scapegoating of legal immigrants by some candidate or office holder somewhere, but since Frisch claims to be a witness to many such comments, he can prove to all I had missed something by finding one, in context. Trump came close a time or two.
Just a reflection of the real ugliness that seems to get worse day by day, Greg.
Their sentiments are merely a refection of the state of our national dialogue under the strain of politicians scapegoating immigrants, Muslims, African-Americans and the President.
Innuendo is too easy for the three of you. Make some real statements that can be backed up by facts. Be specific.
Well, let’s see… Here’s one… http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/maine-governor-drug-dealers-often-impregnate-young-white-girl-n492501
Covered up for a year…witnesses intimidated…no, nothing to see here… http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/11/25/laquan-mcdonald-chicago-shooting-dashcam-video-orig-mg.cnn/video/playlists/digital-studios-topicals/
Covered up by who… Rahm Emanuel and friends? Allegations of witness intimidation. Not sure that’s a big blot on the GOP primary.
“McDonald, by most accounts, was a troubled kid. At the time of his death, he was a ward of the state, and although he had no adult criminal record, authorities said he had racked up numerous juvenile arrests. Autopsy results obtained by the Tribune show McDonald had PCP in his system at the time of his death… ”
There will be a criminal trial, the cop is charged with murder. Let’s wait and see what a jury says, after all evidence is in. It’s a shame the young man didn’t choose to stop and drop the knife blocks earlier as the police followed him, as a Tribune account claimed.
Put the idiot up in Maine in the same class as the idiot in Nola who proclaimed that city would remain “chocolate”.
When did I link any of this to the Republican primary? Nowhere.
Frisch did.
I did not respond to you Greg, I responded to Bob; I did not link it to the Republican primaries you did; I merely responded to Bob’s analogy between today and our nativist (or in this case Jim Crow) past.
You want to continue the ‘vendetta’ here? I don’t. I am perfectly happy never talking to you in person or virtually.
“Their sentiments are merely a refection of the state of our national dialogue under the strain of politicians scapegoating immigrants, Muslims, African-Americans and the President.”
Sure looks like it’s a reference to GOP primaries by Steve Frisch; unfortunately, it’s a Democratic caricature of GOP politics. Scapegoating?
I’m happy to note Gary Johnson is again running for the LIB nomination.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoating
I think I will stand by the use of the word to describe the current national dialogue, whether from Republicans or Democrats.
In Greg’s defense; you could describe anyone as being less than sympathetic to people of color or other-than-Christian, and 99% of the world’s population would know exactly which US political party your were referencing. (Obviously, even people of that political persuasion recognize the inference.)
Not that Greg is, was, or ever would be a member of said party. (Mandatory LOL)
“Stand behind” being a euphemism for not justifying the statement. Just to pick one apart, I’ve not seen Republicans blaming legal immigrants for any ill, but I do see Democrats demagoguing any Republican’s call for treating illegal immigration as if it was, well, illegal, as hate speech against all immigrants.
The silly season is upon us, time for political ‘toonists to earn their keep.
I said “stand by” not “stand behind”; I provided a definition of scapegoating and clearly stated that is could be applied to both Democrats and Republicans; and I could provide numerous instances of legal immigrants or moderate Muslims (or even non Muslims like Sikhs) being scapegoated along with the illegal or radical. Of course I think many ‘progressives’ scapegoat business as well. I know many a Democrat who are “less than sympathetic to people of color or other-than-Christian.” But of course Greg will never recognize that my statement was not partisan because it does not fit your narrative.
“Not that Greg is, was, or ever would be a member of said party. (Mandatory LOL)”
Par for Peterson’s course. It’s a public record; I’ve been continuously registered to vote in California since 1972 and, while I’ve always declared a party I’ve never registered GOP.
Were the GOP to move closer to the Libertarians (they do steal their only good ideas from LIBs), I’d consider them but I’m not holding my breath. I’d prefer the Progressives to abandon DEMs and make it palatable to return… a Saunders nomination and crushing loss could do for the DEMs what Goldwater did for the GOP. One can only hope.
Steve,
I’m not denying that there are “many” democrats who hold the same views as republicans, but politics is largely a field of perception, and even republicans acknowledge that they are perceived that way by the overwhelming majority. Saying it ain’t so doesn’t change that fact.
“I could provide numerous instances of legal immigrants or moderate Muslims (or even non Muslims like Sikhs) being scapegoated along with the illegal or radical.”
Then do so; GOP officeholders or competitive candidates (not yahoos on the street), in context.
Greg,
Sanders, not Saunders. And I’ll take that race any day. Anyone but Clinton or the clowns out-fearmongering each other on the other side.
Par for me is not supporting any of the candidates that the MSM has been told to sell us, or pretending I’m anything but a unabashed liberal.
I think you are intentionally missing the point Greg.
I said, “Their (Bob and Michael’s) sentiments are merely a refection of the state of our national dialogue under the strain of politicians scapegoating immigrants, Muslims, African-Americans and the President.”
I was referencing their sentiments and I was saying that the political dialogue going on in the country was creating the conditions for their sentiments, which you described as ugly, coming to the fore.
I do not agree with you that their (Bob and Michael’s) sentiments are ‘ugly’. They are actually the sentiments of compassionate people who feel for the poor sod caught up in the ugliness, like the Sikh attacked in his store, the Muslim protester who stand in silence and is vilified as she is ejected from a rally, or the worker warned not to make waves because they are vulnerable to deportation.
I don’t need to provide ‘examples’ of their (Bob and Michael’s) sentiments they are right there in their comments.
What you want me to do is provide examples of scapegoating. Do you really want that? We could bury you in scapegoating. It is the Trump news reel. My point was that it is also the Sanders newsreel on some days.
“What you want me to do is provide examples of scapegoating. Do you really want that? We could bury you in scapegoating.”
Since you again offer it, sure. Three instances of Trump scapegoating legal immigration, in context, should do as a bury. I’m already on the record for not being a past, current or future Trump supporter, so have at it.
The GOP ticket I could vote in for November would be Kasich/Paul, but I’d be more likely to win the Powerball lotto with a $20 ticket than see that.
“…the state of our national dialogue under the strain of politicians scapegoating…”
Once again you are attributing to my statements a limitation to Trump. I did not mention Trump.
And once again you miss the point, I said the national dialogue created the conditions for Bob and Michael to hold their respective sentiments.
I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to see that Bob was making an analogy between our 1870’s Jim Crow ugliness and our current national ugliness.
Ironically, Kasich is the only Republican currently in the field that I could vote for under the right conditions. 🙂
“We could bury you in scapegoating. It is the Trump news reel.”
-Frisch 11:29AM
“Once again you are attributing to my statements a limitation to Trump. I did not mention Trump. ”
-Frisch 12:04PM
I was giving you an easy target by your own standards and yet, still no substantive reply.
Original point stands. I did not originally mention republicans, Trump or even politics. I also did not address the comment to you. But since you seem obsessed with trying to take any comments of mine either out of context, or find picayune fault with them, I may get back with examples. I could use Trump, or Sanders, or Santorum, or La Paige, or even Cruz…..the list is endless. Which I think was really the point that Bob was making…our national dialogue seems to have descend to the pre-Civil War know-nothing or the post Civil War Jim Crow level and it harms us all. Of course I recognize that for some that is always where the level of their world views were.
Trumpers have no problem flaunting their racism in public… https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/08/muslim-woman-escorted-out-of-trump-rally-in-south-carolina/
From the WP article you linked:”Before the rally began, the crowd was told that no protesting of any sort would be allowed, and that protesters needed to stay in a free-speech space outside the venue.”
Free speech zones- another part of the ignorant Bush legacy. I remember when W would swing through in a campaign year and protesters would be only “allowed” in a fenced-in area a mile from his location.
As the Constitution says: the right of citizens to peaceably assemble, “within fenced areas of a republican candidate’s choosing.”
The event was in a closed stadium, not the National Mall, and by all accounts protests were not welcome. The campaign rented the space, the campaign gets to set the rules.
What would Hillary do?
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/08/politics/hillary-clinton-1992-rope-reporters/
“The campaign rented the space, the campaign gets to set the rules.” So, if I rent a venue, I get to decide what goes on outside?
This gets funnier as it goes along. Where’d you get that, Justice Scalia?
You would get a 9-0 SCOTUS vote supporting the Trump campaign’s ability to enforce their rules in a private venue on that one.
Regarding the history of “Free Speech Zones”, the wiki reports Atlanda Mayor Andrew Young’s “designated protest zone” to keep the 1988 Democratic Convention from being disrupted as the first such segregation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone#History
wikipedia?
Please Greg, show a bit of restraint. Or are you behind the times on their problems with monetary influence in regards to their supposed “unbiased” knowledge.
Got enough money? Wikipedia will present the facts any way you choose. It’s a business; not a public service.
Par for the progressive course, attack the messenger, not the veracity of the information.
Roping off areas to keep demonstrators out of public areas where they would be a nuisance is a Democratic innovation.
Closing the loop here, I asked my favorite Wikipedian about this charge of Peterson’s, and Wikipedia and it’s parent, Wikimedia, are non-profits that run on donations. There have been supposed volunteer editors who have been found to be taking money in order to promote points of view and the usual response is to bar the editor from editing and erasing their contributions.
If that isn’t the case perhaps Chris will be specific.
Not interested, Greg. You remind me of an old 78rpm record that has run it’s course and continues to jump the inside track until someone removes the needle.
Didit…bop…didit…bop…
There’s no sense in listening or responding.
Addios
In the absence of information to the contrary, it appears that the concept of free speech zones does originate in the mind of Democrats at the 1988 Convention and not with Bush II. Myself, I think I’d give an honorable mention to Mayor Daley in ’68 and his police riots hitting anyone they felt like hitting, incuding those revolutionaries Mike Wallace, Dan Rather and Edwin Newman who were roughed up *inside* the convention venue.
Chris, I accept your forfeit.
Yeah…..those Trumpsters……who do they think they are…..democrats?
http://www.politico.com/story/2008/06/muslims-barred-from-picture-at-obama-event-011168
Yeah, because not being chosen for a backdrop of a President’s speech is right up there with a call to distrust all 1.3 billion Muslims and deny them entry into the US based on their religious preference.
That’s your “gotcha'”?
My reply was posted in response to Rls above
rl crabb says:
January 9, 2016 at 6:26 pm
He made the connection….apparently you couldn’t.
Ghoti,
“Grass is purple.”
“No, it’s green.”
“I wasn’t talking to you.”
“My bad; you’re right.”
(Note to self: brush up on blog protocol.)
What’s good for the goosed is good for a gander. Dems get no free pass here.