(11-14-2019 10:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 05:51 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 04:25 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 04:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 04:08 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  leaked emails....Hmm...wasn't leaking emails the foundation of the Trump/Russia conspiracy theory? (since debunked). It was supposed;y a horrible thing, but now it is OK?

Same old double standard.

But let's say, as in the Hillary dump, the emails are true and undoctored. How does this make calling Trump a racist NOT a lie?

Yet we have Democratic members of Congress who are openly antisemitic. I am sure AE fully supports them, since they are Democrats, so that means HE is antisemitic. Heck, I bet he supported Robert Byrd.

OO, be careful before you breathlessly post false equivalencies.

Trump/Russia - leak of stolen emails.

These emails - not stolen.

Quote:McHugh, who was fired from Breitbart in 2017, apparently for anti-Muslim tweets, has abandoned far-right principles and shared her emails with Miller on the SPLC's Hatewatch blog.

"We used [CIS material] to spin a narrative where immigrants of color were not only dangerous, violent individuals but also posed an existential threat to America," McHugh told Hatewatch about Miller's pitches to Breitbart. "We never fact-checked anything. We never called up other organizations to get any other perspective about those studies."

https://www.newsweek.com/stephen-miller-...io-1471830

I didn't use the word "stolen", did I?

the emails are leaked, period.

But according to the Democratic double standard, it doesn't matter.

It's like saying revenge porn is OK because the videos were sent voluntarily.

Gotta give you credit for this pretzel, it is a master piece.

No pretzel, just straightforward thinking.

Once you eliminate the "stolen" part that you imagined(and that you claimed made the difference), it is a clear 1:1.

But connecting imaginary dots seems to be a democratic art form the last four years. Adam Schiff is a Master (or is that a Magister?) at it.

Once you ignore the crime that was proven to have been committed? Really?

(11-15-2019 07:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 10:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 05:51 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 04:25 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 04:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  OO, be careful before you breathlessly post false equivalencies.

Trump/Russia - leak of stolen emails.

These emails - not stolen.


https://www.newsweek.com/stephen-miller-...io-1471830

I didn't use the word "stolen", did I?

the emails are leaked, period.

But according to the Democratic double standard, it doesn't matter.

It's like saying revenge porn is OK because the videos were sent voluntarily.

Gotta give you credit for this pretzel, it is a master piece.

No pretzel, just straightforward thinking.

Once you eliminate the "stolen" part that you imagined(and that you claimed made the difference), it is a clear 1:1.

But connecting imaginary dots seems to be a democratic art form the last four years. Adam Schiff is a Master (or is that a Magister?) at it.

Once you ignore the crime that was proven to have been committed? Really?

Really, rich, a Democrat whining about a crime being ignored.

Yes, Virginia, too bad somebody stole those emails. But the person revealing them was not the thief. Trump was not the thief, nor was he in collusion to steal them. So, ...? In both cases people had their private communications made public against their will. Seems like a parallel to me. Exactly like revenge porn, which apparently you think is OK if one party decides to take them public.

I think the democrats have been crying "wolf" so long now, with no wolf, that the public, at least the ones they are trying to reach, are ignoring a lot of the hype. Nobody is glued to their TV watching the witch trials. No "wow" factor so far, nor is there likely to be. Just a bunch of hearsay and innuendo.

Last night I was at a poker game. Normally politics and religion are avoided, but for some reason last night, the hearings became an object of discussion at our table...and an object of derision. People who think this is stupid and a ploy on the part of the Democrats included a truck driver and a shop teacher. Hellooooo, middle America (Not a scientific survey)

(11-15-2019 09:06 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 07:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 10:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 05:51 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 04:25 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I didn't use the word "stolen", did I?

the emails are leaked, period.

But according to the Democratic double standard, it doesn't matter.

It's like saying revenge porn is OK because the videos were sent voluntarily.

Gotta give you credit for this pretzel, it is a master piece.

No pretzel, just straightforward thinking.

Once you eliminate the "stolen" part that you imagined(and that you claimed made the difference), it is a clear 1:1.

But connecting imaginary dots seems to be a democratic art form the last four years. Adam Schiff is a Master (or is that a Magister?) at it.

Once you ignore the crime that was proven to have been committed? Really?

Really, rich, a Democrat whining about a crime being ignored.

Yes, Virginia, too bad somebody stole those emails. But the person revealing them was not the thief. Trump was not the thief, nor was he in collusion to steal them. So, ...? In both cases people had their private communications made public against their will. Seems like a parallel to me. Exactly like revenge porn, which apparently you think is OK if one party decides to take them public.

Equating personal emails without sensitive personal information to pornography is laughable, and I’m surprised you think they are equal.

Does that mean hunting is the same as murder because in both cases a living being is killed?

(11-15-2019 10:19 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 09:06 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 07:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 10:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 05:51 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Gotta give you credit for this pretzel, it is a master piece.

No pretzel, just straightforward thinking.

Once you eliminate the "stolen" part that you imagined(and that you claimed made the difference), it is a clear 1:1.

But connecting imaginary dots seems to be a democratic art form the last four years. Adam Schiff is a Master (or is that a Magister?) at it.

Once you ignore the crime that was proven to have been committed? Really?

Really, rich, a Democrat whining about a crime being ignored.

Yes, Virginia, too bad somebody stole those emails. But the person revealing them was not the thief. Trump was not the thief, nor was he in collusion to steal them. So, ...? In both cases people had their private communications made public against their will. Seems like a parallel to me. Exactly like revenge porn, which apparently you think is OK if one party decides to take them public.

Equating personal emails without sensitive personal information to pornography is laughable, and I’m surprised you think they are equal.

Does that mean hunting is the same as murder because in both cases a living being is killed?

Now you are equating rabbits to humans?

Talk about a pretzel.

In both of the cases I mention, somebody’s private communications are made public by the recipient. You think one case is wonderful, the other terrible, purely on partisan grounds.

It's not false equivalence if OOwl does it.

(11-15-2019 11:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 10:19 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 09:06 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 07:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 10:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  No pretzel, just straightforward thinking.

Once you eliminate the "stolen" part that you imagined(and that you claimed made the difference), it is a clear 1:1.

But connecting imaginary dots seems to be a democratic art form the last four years. Adam Schiff is a Master (or is that a Magister?) at it.

Once you ignore the crime that was proven to have been committed? Really?

Really, rich, a Democrat whining about a crime being ignored.

Yes, Virginia, too bad somebody stole those emails. But the person revealing them was not the thief. Trump was not the thief, nor was he in collusion to steal them. So, ...? In both cases people had their private communications made public against their will. Seems like a parallel to me. Exactly like revenge porn, which apparently you think is OK if one party decides to take them public.

Equating personal emails without sensitive personal information to pornography is laughable, and I’m surprised you think they are equal.

Does that mean hunting is the same as murder because in both cases a living being is killed?

Now you are equating rabbits to humans?

Talk about a pretzel.

In both of the cases I mention, somebody’s private communications are made public by the recipient. You think one case is wonderful, the other terrible, purely on partisan grounds.

In one case, someone stole them (illegal) and in the other case, someone published emails they were CC'd on.

You're trying to equate emails with pornography to try and rationalize why it is bad to publish communications without consent. The issue is that communications and pornography are not the same thing.

Do you really believe they are the same exact thing? Do you think that our justice system views written words and pornographic images similarly?

In one case, emails were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.

In the pornrevence, videos were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.


Sounds the same to me. What is the difference you see? Just content.?

You say I am trying to rationalize something. Once again, you are connecting dots that aren't there

I am trying to show the Democratic double standard. Thanks for your help.

(11-15-2019 12:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  In one case, emails were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.

In the pornrevence, videos were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.


Sounds the same to me. What is the difference you see? Just content.?

You say I am trying to rationalize something. Once again, you are connecting dots that aren't there

I am trying to show the Democratic double standard. Thanks for your help.

Again, your example only works if written communication = pornography.

Are nudie photos and book recommendations the same thing?

(11-14-2019 10:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 09:35 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 07:56 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Why do all these racists keep joining the GOP? They don't, so no why to it.

That’s interesting.
Which do you suppose is the case?
The emails are not demonstrative of racism?
The emails were not authored by Stephen Miller, as alleged?
Stephen Miller is not a Republican?
As someone who seems to be unfairly accused of racism with some frequency, at least given your previous protestations, it would be unfortunate to lose credibility with those denials.

How about
Stephen Miller = one person.
Stephen Miller =/= "all these racists"

And when democrats have their fair share of racists, "all those racists" are clearly not joining the GOP.

I reject any racist elements of Miller's or anybody else's emails. But his views on race or any other issue do not project onto me or anyone else.

Thanks for your answer.

He is just one person. But given that he is arguably the closest advisor to a President that enjoys overwhelming support and defense from Republicans, has influenced controversial policy regarding immigration and foreigners that are very popular with Republicans, and to my knowledge has not faced any pressure to resign from Republicans following the release of these emails (by contrast, 76 Democratic congresspersons have), then yes, this absolutely projects onto to the party that he continues to serve a leadership role in.

(11-15-2019 12:34 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 10:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 09:35 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(11-14-2019 07:56 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Why do all these racists keep joining the GOP? They don't, so no why to it.

That’s interesting.
Which do you suppose is the case?
The emails are not demonstrative of racism?
The emails were not authored by Stephen Miller, as alleged?
Stephen Miller is not a Republican?
As someone who seems to be unfairly accused of racism with some frequency, at least given your previous protestations, it would be unfortunate to lose credibility with those denials.

How about
Stephen Miller = one person.
Stephen Miller =/= "all these racists"

And when democrats have their fair share of racists, "all those racists" are clearly not joining the GOP.

I reject any racist elements of Miller's or anybody else's emails. But his views on race or any other issue do not project onto me or anyone else.

Thanks for your answer.

He is just one person. But given that he is arguably the closest advisor to a President that enjoys overwhelming support and defense from Republicans, has influenced controversial policy regarding immigration and foreigners that are very popular with Republicans, and to my knowledge has not faced any pressure to resign from Republicans following the release of these emails (by contrast, 76 Democratic congresspersons have), then yes, this absolutely projects onto to the party that he continues to serve a leadership role in.

If Miller was some aid for a less-known Republican (like Sessions, who he previously worked for), I would agree with the argument that he is just one man in a big machine and his views do not project onto the party as a whole.

But when you are a principal adviser to the leader of the party, that's a whole other story, and your views definitely do project onto the leader of the Republican party.

(11-15-2019 12:34 PM)At Ease Wrote:  Thanks for your answer.
He is just one person. But given that he is arguably the closest advisor to a President that enjoys overwhelming support and defense from Republicans, has influenced controversial policy regarding immigration and foreigners that are very popular with Republicans, and to my knowledge has not faced any pressure to resign from Republicans following the release of these emails (by contrast, 76 Democratic congresspersons have), then yes, this absolutely projects onto to the party that he continues to serve a leadership role in.

None of which amounts to "all these racists." The use of that terms implies both that racism is widespread among republicans and non-existent among the democrats. I reject both assertions.

(11-15-2019 02:32 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 12:34 PM)At Ease Wrote:  Thanks for your answer.
He is just one person. But given that he is arguably the closest advisor to a President that enjoys overwhelming support and defense from Republicans, has influenced controversial policy regarding immigration and foreigners that are very popular with Republicans, and to my knowledge has not faced any pressure to resign from Republicans following the release of these emails (by contrast, 76 Democratic congresspersons have), then yes, this absolutely projects onto to the party that he continues to serve a leadership role in.

None of which amounts to "all these racists." The use of that terms implies both that racism is widespread among republicans and non-existent among the democrats. I reject both assertions.

If we're getting into semantics, the phrase "all these racists" isn't exhaustive like "all THE racists" would be. So this title doesn't necessarily imply that racists only support republicans, just perhaps, the ones we are talking about in this thread.

(11-15-2019 12:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 12:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  In one case, emails were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.

In the pornrevence, videos were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.


Sounds the same to me. What is the difference you see? Just content.?

You say I am trying to rationalize something. Once again, you are connecting dots that aren't there

I am trying to show the Democratic double standard. Thanks for your help.

Again, your example only works if written communication = pornography.

Are nudie photos and book recommendations the same thing?

I can see where your mind is going. Either you are very innocent or very dense. I hope(and expect) it is the former.

I am talking about the cases where a woman emails nude pictures or videos of herself to her boyfriend. They break up. He posts the pictures or videos on the internet, to get even. That is revenge porn. I guess you could have googled it, but it so much easier to assume.

So we have a person who sends stuff to another, expecting it to be held confidentially, only to be betrayed when the stuff is made public. See the parallel now?

You think it is fine when a Republican is betrayed by a former friend with emails, so that would indicate the revenge porn would have the same level of acceptability. Betrayal = betrayal.

The thread title implies that there are a lot of racists in the GOP. It in no way implies that there are none among the democrats.

Stephen Miller is racist and if the republican party were interested in refuting the narrative that this title thread suggests, they would do well to disown him.

When I say republican party, I do not mean you personally, #s.

(11-15-2019 02:42 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 12:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 12:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  In one case, emails were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.

In the pornrevence, videos were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.


Sounds the same to me. What is the difference you see? Just content.?

You say I am trying to rationalize something. Once again, you are connecting dots that aren't there

I am trying to show the Democratic double standard. Thanks for your help.

Again, your example only works if written communication = pornography.

Are nudie photos and book recommendations the same thing?

I can see where your mind is going. Either you are very innocent or very dense. I hope(and expect) it is the former.

I am talking about the cases where a woman emails nude pictures or videos of herself to her boyfriend. They break up. He posts the pictures or videos on the internet, to get even. That is revenge porn. I guess you could have googled it, but it so much easier to assume.

So we have a person who sends stuff to another, expecting it to be held confidentially, only to be betrayed when the stuff is made public. See the parallel now?

You think it is fine when a Republican is betrayed by a former friend with emails, so that would indicate the revenge porn would have the same level of acceptability. Betrayal = betrayal.

On the most superficial of levels, you are correct. But again, it is superficial and a very shallow comparison that barely holds up.

(09-21-2018 11:27 AM)At Ease Wrote:  

Quote:Florida GOP gubernatorial candidate Ron DeSantis has a problem, one he shares with a lot of Republicans these days: For some reason, racists are attracted to his campaign and seem eager to give him money and lend their vocal support.

Why does this keep happening to members of the Republican Party who desire nothing but equality and respect for all people? It’s a real mystery.

Quote:But the vast majority of conservatives will tell you that they strongly believe in racial equality. Even the donor who wrote “F— THE MUSLIM N—–” about Obama says he is “absolutely not” a racist. They do believe, however, that they are constantly being unfairly accused of being racists by liberals.

Quote:But just by virtue of being Republicans in 2018, being lumped in with racists is a risk they run. Their favored news outlets are positively saturated with white nationalist rhetoric. Their party is led by a man who is not only an obvious bigot but who also turned himself into a political figure by advocating the racist lie that Barack Obama is not actually an American, who ran a presidential campaign built on xenophobia and racial resentment, and who, in office, continues to stoke fear and hatred of immigrants. President Trump doesn’t get celebrated on white nationalist websites because they’re laboring under some misimpression about who he is. So, if you’re a Republican standing enthusiastically behind Trump, racists have every reason in the world to think you’re on their side.

Quote:And so Republicans who think themselves to be people of goodwill might ask themselves: Why is it that all these racists are so supportive of my party? Why is it that a bunch of actual Nazis won Republican nominations for elected offices this year, and our nominee for the Senate in Virginia is a neo-Confederate? Why is it that every white nationalist thinks they can find a home in the GOP? And what can I do to change that?

I would be interested to hear their ideas. But so far, we’ve heard pretty much nothing.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plu...03296f2d2d

Repost of the source and rationale behind the titular question.

(11-15-2019 03:14 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 02:42 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 12:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-15-2019 12:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  In one case, emails were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.

In the pornrevence, videos were voluntarily sent to somebody who later made them public.


Sounds the same to me. What is the difference you see? Just content.?

You say I am trying to rationalize something. Once again, you are connecting dots that aren't there

I am trying to show the Democratic double standard. Thanks for your help.

Again, your example only works if written communication = pornography.

Are nudie photos and book recommendations the same thing?

I can see where your mind is going. Either you are very innocent or very dense. I hope(and expect) it is the former.

I am talking about the cases where a woman emails nude pictures or videos of herself to her boyfriend. They break up. He posts the pictures or videos on the internet, to get even. That is revenge porn. I guess you could have googled it, but it so much easier to assume.

So we have a person who sends stuff to another, expecting it to be held confidentially, only to be betrayed when the stuff is made public. See the parallel now?

You think it is fine when a Republican is betrayed by a former friend with emails, so that would indicate the revenge porn would have the same level of acceptability. Betrayal = betrayal.

On the most superficial of levels, you are correct. But again, it is superficial and a very shallow comparison that barely holds up.

It holds up. Thanks for the honesty.

Well, that is more than the oh-so-substantial Russia/Trump conspiracy theory did. All the wailing about Trump Tower.

More than the three plus years of antiTrump hysteria has done. Nothing has held up.

So count me as one up on the democrat establishment you so assiduously defend.

relax dude

(11-15-2019 05:45 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  relax dude

Naw, let him champion the barely grade-school equating of email correspondence to personal pornography.