SCOTUS thread

[Good1]

You are evading again from answering a simple question and I understand why - your entire belief structure which you inherited from your peers cannot withstand any acceptance of contradiction or it would collapse.

It could be that Wallace was as confused about political terms as you are. To him, conservatism may have meant he wanted to preserve cultural conservatism, preserving how things were in 1833 (not to be confused with 1933 Germany). And who knows what the term liberal meant to him. We only know, in general, that his beef with the North was similar to the beef the South had just prior to and during the civil war. Lincoln spent money like a liberal to win, and suspended habeus corpus, and other measures what were considered authoritarian, impinging on the rights of the Southerners to be "free" (to own slaves). The reasons for that war have been spun by Southerners ever since, and the spinning has not ceased. The Democratic party is still, de facto, THE MOST RACIST party to politic on the planet earth, right up there with the most notoriously racist political parties of all time.

Pandering to race, by the way, is racist.

 

[exGOPer]

It could be that Wallace was as confused about political terms as you are. To him, conservatism may have meant he wanted to preserve cultural conservatism, preserving how things were in 1833 (not to be confused with 1933 Germany). And who knows what the term liberal meant to him. We only know, in general, that his beef with the North was similar to the beef the South had just prior to and during the civil war. Lincoln spent money like a liberal to win, and suspended habeus corpus, and other measures what were considered authoritarian, impinging on the rights of the Southerners to be "free" (to own slaves). The reasons for that war have been spun by Southerners ever since, and the spinning has not ceased. The Democratic party is still, de facto, THE MOST RACIST party to politic on the planet earth, right up there with the most notoriously racist political parties of all time.

Pandering to race, by the way, is racist.

It's possible he confused his terms but his actions weren't confusing

"Known as the "Stand in the Schoolhouse Door," Alabama Governor George Wallace stood in front of Foster Auditorium at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963, to stop the enrollment of African-American students Vivan Malone and James Hood."

So which party would he be in at the present time?

 

[Good1]

It's possible he confused his terms but his actions weren't confusing

"Known as the "Stand in the Schoolhouse Door," Alabama Governor George Wallace stood in front of Foster Auditorium at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963, to stop the enrollment of African-American students Vivan Malone and James Hood."

So which party would he be in at the present time?

He would be in the party which mostly favored segregated places and events, especially segregated places and events within universities. So didn't i already tell you which party he would be in?

 

[Cuddles]

But when did I claim to be a moderate and when did I claim to be moderate 'because both sides'?

You have completely botched what the term means. Did you not see me advocating for court expansion? But when I pointed out that it is not practical because of the balance of power, I become a moderate? Accepting realities makes you a moderate?

How much more explicit can you get? The statement below is what started it all. It's a centrist take bothsiding w/false equivalence.

.... doesn't mean I don't get to tell progs that they are responsible for destruction of liberal institutions for their petty need for attention. Virtue signaling and not seeing things as they are is very hard for rich progs just like the MAGAtards.

Did you have the power to speak up? yes or no?

Is opting not to equivalent to partaking in the murder yes or no?

Voting gives you that power and if you choose to throw it away knowing fully well what it would do in real life, then you own responsibility for your actions.

I don't disagree and in fact call it selfish if doing so w/the full knowledge of the consequences towards the underprivileged. Not everyone doing it is on a Biden revenge bend however.

Antifa isn't because their numbers are tiny and like most leftist groups they are constantly fighting with each other. And that's not my analysis, that's according to Chomsky.

No, antifa isn't because they did not partake in the insurrection (at least in a number of much significance). Having done so in equal numbers is what makes equivalence valid.

But I didn't disagree that authoritarianism looks any different coming from right or left, we are talking even in the most liberal democracies where conservatives are always looking to bully some out group.

Yet you still equivocate MAGA to lefties abstaining (see above).

 

[exGOPer]

How much more explicit can you get? The statement below is what started it all. It's a centrist take bothsiding w/false equivalence..

That definition only applies when someone claims to have political positions based on their perception of other people's ideology. My political positions don't depend on whatever you believe.

Yet you still equivocate MAGA to lefties abstaining (see above).

Because in the end only results matter.

Lefties abstained in few elections and affirmative action ended which is what MAGAs wanted, end result is the same.

 

[exGOPer]

He would be in the party which mostly favored segregated places and events, especially segregated places and events within universities. So didn't i already tell you which party he would be in?

Just name the party, why are you waffling.

 

[Cuddles]

That definition only applies when someone claims to have political positions based on their perception of other people's ideology. My political positions don't depend on whatever you believe.

What?? Someone takes on a disparaging self definition when they have a shit neutral take? C'mon now. Do you get how disparaging remarks (aka insults) work? The receiver doesn't get to decide

Because in the end only results matter.

Lefties abstained in few elections and affirmative action ended which is what MAGAs wanted, end result is the same.

still doesn't change the fact of who the perpetrators were and their level of responsibility

 

[Good1]

Just name the party, why are you waffling.

I'm surprised you are not aware of this, especially in light of what just happened with SCOTUS. But admissions is not the only event that fosters segregation on campus. Which party is mostly likely to pander to those students (racists) who want to self-segregate into their own, for example, graduation ceremony?

Or, if you were to poll the students in the video below, whose party pandering are they mostly responding to?

Or in the next video, who are the racists, i mean students, who are most likely to attend the segregated event offered by the university, who are they most likely to vote for in the next, or in the last election? And who, among the university staff who offered this segregated event, who are they most likely to vote for?

Or who are these ASU racists, i mean students, most likely to vote for in response to political pandering? You remember those girls who were protecting their safe space on campus?

Which party is most likely to sponsor critical race theory on campus (which breeds this kind of segregation), and the concept of equity, which bypasses the concept of equal opportunity and simply forces outcomes?

 

[exGOPer]

What?? Someone takes on a disparaging self definition when they have a shit neutral take? C'mon now. Do you get how disparaging remarks (aka insults) work? The receiver doesn't get to decide

Enlightened centrism is 'you made me do it' of politics, if I don't care for other people's take on my belief structure, how would the definition even apply.

still doesn't change the fact of who the perpetrators were and their level of responsibility

Perpetrators repeatedly advertised what they would do, they could have been stopped.

 

[exGOPer]

I'm surprised you are not aware of this, especially in light of what just happened with SCOTUS. But admissions is not the only event that fosters segregation on campus. Which party is mostly likely to pander to those students (racists) who want to self-segregate into their own, for example, graduation ceremony?

Or, if you were to poll the students in the video below, whose party pandering are they mostly responding to?

Or in the next video, who are the racists, i mean students, who are most likely to attend the segregated event offered by the university, who are they most likely to vote for in the next, or in the last election. And who, among the university staff who offered this segregated event, who are they most likely to vote for?

Or who are these ASU racists, i mean students most like to vote for in response to political pandering. You remember those girls who were protecting their safe space on campus?

Which party is most likely to sponsor critical race theory on campus (which breeds this kind of segregation), and the concept of equity, which bypasses the concept of equal opportunity and simply forces outcomes?

Your posts are very similar to what's posted on Neo-Nazi forums, illogical, pretentious and pseudo intellectual trash where evidence is sought after jumping to conclusions.

Pretty sure you didn't find those videos yourself, some another low intellect old boomer fed it to you so you can vomit it elsewhere pretending its your own thoughts on the subject.

Now tell me, which party would George Wallace be in these current times?