(11-25-2018 12:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The joke she made about attending a public lynching was not about attending a public lynching. Try to get the quote straight.

Okay, keep telling people that. You do NOT joke about public lynchings. Especially in Mississippi. Especially if you have Confederacy turrets and a voting record that is pretty much all bigotry all the time. Especially if you're running against an African American.

The stories write themselves, btw. The pics of her playing Confederate Dress Up are not a good look. Her resolutions in favor of the Confederacy are not a good look. Basically, she's skated by until now, and now the media is looking at her. And they are finding a clown.

Sure, after she wins, this will die down a bit, but the residue will stick to Mississippi and more importantly, to her.

----

You know, Espy reminds me a lot of Artur Davis, a African American Democrat Congressman from Alabama that was really accommodationist (he eventually lost his seat as a result - then moved to DC and became a Republican). He very well could, if elected, behave in a very accommodating way towards Trump, which might be far more valuable to the Republicans than having a caricature of every stereotype about Mississippi held by the people of the greater world represent them in the US Senate for 2 years. In some respects, depending on how Espy will behave in DC, it might just be better for the Dems to have CHS win. Its certainly better for Mississippi that she doesn't.

Let's set the record straight on a couple of things.

1) The word she used was "public hanging," not public lynching. Lynchings were not public, at least not in the area with which I am familiar. They were done in secret, generally at night, and the bodies were discovered later. If you think that's what she meant, then I can't stop you. I don't believe that. For the record, her comment would not have passed for acceptable public discourse where I grew up when I was growing up there. Somebody needs to tell her that she needs to cool the confederate crap, it's just not a good look. But that does not mean that she was suggesting or approving lynchings. It just doesn't. I'm afraid you probably grew up in a more racist city than I did.

2) This whole "dog whistle" stuff is totally out of line. The very point of a dog whistle is that nobody hears it but the dog. If you are hearing it, then either you are a dog or it is not a dog whistle.

Democrats are playing identity politics, and almost nothing else. At heart their agenda is collectivist, redistributionist, and globalist. Those are the very things that the US has successfully rejected for nearly 250 years. I would be sad to see the world end, not with a bang, but a whimper, but I am afraid that Dylan Thomas nailed it. The problem is that republicans are doing nothing but whimpering about it. I am counting on republicans to protect me from socialism, communism, and globalism. So far they are doing a horse**** job.

I know Davis well. As I'm sure you know, he represented my former home county. My parents and other family who are still there voted for him. Espy could do the things you suggest. So could Doug Jones. I don't expect either of them to do anything but turn into Chuck Schumer's lap dogs. So far Jones has done so and I am quite certain that Espy would do the same. Whatever views he holds or does not hold are irrelevant. He will do what Chuckie tells him to do.

(11-25-2018 12:49 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Let's set the record straight on a couple of things.

1) The word she used was "public hanging," not public lynching. Lynchings were not public, at least not in the area with which I am familiar. They were done in secret, generally at night, and the bodies were discovered later. If you think that's what she meant, then I can't stop you. I don't believe that. For the record, her comment would not have passed for acceptable public discourse where I grew up when I was growing up there. Somebody needs to tell her that she needs to cool the confederate crap, it's just not a good look. But that does not mean that she was suggesting or approving lynchings. It just doesn't. I'm afraid you probably grew up in a more racist city than I did.

2) This whole "dog whistle" stuff is totally out of line. The very point of a dog whistle is that nobody hears it but the dog. If you are hearing it, then either you are a dog or it is not a dog whistle.

Democrats are playing identity politics, and almost nothing else. At heart their agenda is collectivist, redistributionist, and globalist. Those are the very things that the US has successfully rejected for nearly 250 years. I would be sad to see the world end, not with a bang, but a whimper, but I am afraid that Dylan Thomas nailed it. The problem is that republicans are doing nothing but whimpering about it. I am counting on republicans to protect me from socialism, communism, and globalism. So far they are doing a horse**** job.

I know Davis well. As I'm sure you know, he represented my former home county. Espy could do the things you suggest. So could Doug Jones. I don't expect either of them to do anything but turn into Chuck Schumer's lap dogs. So far Jones has done so and I am quite certain that Espy would do the same. Whatever views he holds or does not hold are irrelevant. He will do what Chuckie tells him to do.

1) Espy is far more conservative than Doug Jones. Jones is not planning on running as anything but a Democrat in 2020. Espy has a history of bucking the Dems, and the Congressional Black Caucus too.

2) I'd argue that appeals to Confederate sympathies are every bit as race/identity based as anything the Dems are accused of doing

3) Her comments, in a Mississippi context, were either borne out of of a desire to openly play to the Chris McDaniel crowd, or out of ignorance of their impact. I'd argue that it was probably the latter.

What she was saying was 'I like you so much, I'd risk showing up at a public lynching if you asked, knowing that in polite Mississippi society, the lynchings and dirty work of Jim Crow was left to the rubes in the Klan'. The problem with that is that it still conveys...'yep, we know it is going on, and we just let it happen, but we pretend to be above all that'. She was probably just trying to pay the host a compliment, but did so in a way that was incredibly ignorant and/or stupid. Politicians do stupid things all the time. But if your voting record and other actions dovetail with the message of the original comment, which they did in her case (no - not lynchings, but certainly white nationalism) then it becomes a problem.

I suspect that in her worldview, the fact that the expression is rooted in the fact that the white power structure fully knew exactly what was going on and did nothing to stop it, while at the same, pretending that they were above all that, was something she never even considered that would be considered an acceptance of lynchings, which is what the expression does.

And then she waited a week to "apologize". I'm pretty tired of the 'I'm sorry if anyone was offended' BS apology game. All that says is that you're sorry that someone was offended, not that youre sorry that you said/did what you said/did.

And to those of you who think that Ms Hyde-Smith has been treated unfarily, understand that she has made a career out of doing the same to other minority groups (specifically my minority group) for her political profit. I don't think the charges are unfair, but even if you do think so, understand that she's just getting a dose of her own medicine.

Doug Jones was a lot more conservative than Doug Jones until Chuck Schumer got hold of him. I would expect the same from Espy. You might have different expectations. I don't.

Republicans are really playing this stupid. Somebody needs to take them all to the woodshed and explain, "Look, democrats are going to twist everything you say to put the worst possible spin on it. Race, abortion, global warming--any misstep is going to be blown out of proportion because that's how they play identity politics." Democrats keep doing it, and they keep not learning. Newt imposed that kind of discipline in 1994 and won. No republican has been able to do so since. Apparently because none has tried.

Public hangings do not suggest lynchings to me. I'm a little older, and a few lynchings were at least in recent memory when I grew up. They were all carried out in secret, and as best I can recall, were all done at night and the bodies discovered the next day or so. Maybe to somebody who doesn't know the history of lynchings, "public hangings" might suggest lynchings. But that would be the opposite of "dog whistle"--something heard by everyone but the dog. And I suspect very strongly that any Mississippian who would be attracted to the notion of lynchings would be very aware of the exact difference that I have discussed here and elsewhere.

(11-25-2018 01:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Doug Jones was a lot more conservative than Doug Jones until Chuck Schumer got hold of him. I would expect the same from Espy. You might have different expectations. I don't.

Republicans are really playing this stupid. Somebody needs to take them all to the woodshed and explain, "Look, democrats are going to twist everything you say to put the worst possible spin on it. Race, abortion, global warming--any misstep is going to be blown out of proportion because that's how they play identity politics." Democrats keep doing it, and they keep not learning. Newt imposed that kind of discipline in 1994 and won. No republican has been able to do so since. Apparently because none has tried.

Public hangings do not suggest lynchings to me. I'm a little older, and a few lynchings were at least in recent memory when I grew up. They were all carried out in secret, and as best I can recall, were all done at night and the bodies discovered the next day or so. Maybe to somebody who doesn't know the history of lynchings, "public hangings" might suggest lynchings. But that would be the opposite of "dog whistle"--something heard by everyone but the dog. And I suspect very strongly that any Mississippian who would be attracted to the notion of lynchings would be very aware of the exact difference that I have discussed here and elsewhere.

Public hangings suggests the wild west before the electric chair or lethal injections.
Progressives interpretations of things are not the same as most people not matter how much they tell themselves that.

(11-25-2018 01:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Doug Jones was a lot more conservative than Doug Jones until Chuck Schumer got hold of him. I would expect the same from Espy. You might have different expectations. I don't.

Republicans are really playing this stupid. Somebody needs to take them all to the woodshed and explain, "Look, democrats are going to twist everything you say to put the worst possible spin on it. Race, abortion, global warming--any misstep is going to be blown out of proportion because that's how they play identity politics." Democrats keep doing it, and they keep not learning. Newt imposed that kind of discipline in 1994 and won. No republican has been able to do so since. Apparently because none has tried.

Public hangings do not suggest lynchings to me. I'm a little older, and a few lynchings were at least in recent memory when I grew up. They were all carried out in secret, and as best I can recall, were all done at night and the bodies discovered the next day or so. Maybe to somebody who doesn't know the history of lynchings, "public hangings" might suggest lynchings. But that would be the opposite of "dog whistle"--something heard by everyone but the dog. And I suspect very strongly that any Mississippian who would be attracted to the notion of lynchings would be very aware of the exact difference that I have discussed here and elsewhere.

Doug Jones has never pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat, which is what Chuck Schumer is.

From a political standpoint, he cannot win without extraordinary support from the Democratic base in Alabama, which does exist AND without the GOP putting up a profoundly flawed candidate to oppose him. Bradley Byrne would crush him in 2020, for example, regardless of whatever he does. Jones doesn't make himself any more safe by voting with the GOP.

I think he's just going to vote according to his views, and if he loses his seat for it, he will either retire to the accolades of millions of Alabamians or take his pick of positions in a new Democratic Administration.

(11-25-2018 01:46 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 01:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Doug Jones was a lot more conservative than Doug Jones until Chuck Schumer got hold of him. I would expect the same from Espy. You might have different expectations. I don't.
Republicans are really playing this stupid. Somebody needs to take them all to the woodshed and explain, "Look, democrats are going to twist everything you say to put the worst possible spin on it. Race, abortion, global warming--any misstep is going to be blown out of proportion because that's how they play identity politics." Democrats keep doing it, and they keep not learning. Newt imposed that kind of discipline in 1994 and won. No republican has been able to do so since. Apparently because none has tried.
Public hangings do not suggest lynchings to me. I'm a little older, and a few lynchings were at least in recent memory when I grew up. They were all carried out in secret, and as best I can recall, were all done at night and the bodies discovered the next day or so. Maybe to somebody who doesn't know the history of lynchings, "public hangings" might suggest lynchings. But that would be the opposite of "dog whistle"--something heard by everyone but the dog. And I suspect very strongly that any Mississippian who would be attracted to the notion of lynchings would be very aware of the exact difference that I have discussed here and elsewhere.

Doug Jones has never pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat, which is what Chuck Schumer is.
From a political standpoint, he cannot win without extraordinary support from the Democratic base in Alabama, which does exist AND without the GOP putting up a profoundly flawed candidate to oppose him. Bradley Byrne would crush him in 2020, for example, regardless of whatever he does. Jones doesn't make himself any more safe by voting with the GOP.
I think he's just going to vote according to his views, and if he loses his seat for it, he will either retire to the accolades of millions of Alabamians or take his pick of positions in a new Democratic Administration.

That pick of positions in a democrat administration, or a cushy position in a DC left-leaning law firm, depends on his remaining Chuck Schumer's lapdog. And he certainly pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat during the Alabama senate special election campaign. If he is truly a mainstream democrat, then he lied big-time then.

How republicans managed to let idiot Roy Moore get their nomination is a perfect storm comedy of errors. Are they inept enough to repeat it? Probably. But I hope not.

Look, I truly believe that the democrat leaders are evil people who would gladly destroy this country in order to enact their collectivist/redistributionist/globalist agenda. I think there are many otherwise intelligent people who have been duped into becoming useful idiots in advancing that cause. I would put you and Mach, among others, in that group.

(11-25-2018 12:01 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  LOL. I think the Dems have really won this even if Cindy Hyde-Smith wins.

Less than 24 hours and we're already to the moral victory phase.

Low energy!

(11-25-2018 01:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 01:46 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 01:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Doug Jones was a lot more conservative than Doug Jones until Chuck Schumer got hold of him. I would expect the same from Espy. You might have different expectations. I don't.
Republicans are really playing this stupid. Somebody needs to take them all to the woodshed and explain, "Look, democrats are going to twist everything you say to put the worst possible spin on it. Race, abortion, global warming--any misstep is going to be blown out of proportion because that's how they play identity politics." Democrats keep doing it, and they keep not learning. Newt imposed that kind of discipline in 1994 and won. No republican has been able to do so since. Apparently because none has tried.
Public hangings do not suggest lynchings to me. I'm a little older, and a few lynchings were at least in recent memory when I grew up. They were all carried out in secret, and as best I can recall, were all done at night and the bodies discovered the next day or so. Maybe to somebody who doesn't know the history of lynchings, "public hangings" might suggest lynchings. But that would be the opposite of "dog whistle"--something heard by everyone but the dog. And I suspect very strongly that any Mississippian who would be attracted to the notion of lynchings would be very aware of the exact difference that I have discussed here and elsewhere.

Doug Jones has never pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat, which is what Chuck Schumer is.
From a political standpoint, he cannot win without extraordinary support from the Democratic base in Alabama, which does exist AND without the GOP putting up a profoundly flawed candidate to oppose him. Bradley Byrne would crush him in 2020, for example, regardless of whatever he does. Jones doesn't make himself any more safe by voting with the GOP.
I think he's just going to vote according to his views, and if he loses his seat for it, he will either retire to the accolades of millions of Alabamians or take his pick of positions in a new Democratic Administration.

That pick of positions in a democrat administration, or a cushy position in a DC left-leaning law firm, depends on his remaining Chuck Schumer's lapdog. And he certainly pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat during the Alabama senate special election campaign. If he is truly a mainstream democrat, then he lied big-time then.

How republicans managed to let idiot Roy Moore get their nomination is a perfect storm comedy of errors. Are they inept enough to repeat it? Probably. But I hope not.

Look, I truly believe that the democrat leaders are evil people who would gladly destroy this country in order to enact their collectivist/redistributionist/globalist agenda. I think there are many otherwise intelligent people who have been duped into becoming useful idiots in advancing that cause. I would put you and Mach, among others, in that group.

The Trumpers and the anti-Globalists have made it VERY clear where my people fit in their world order. History has shown us that nativism/nationalism never works out well for minorities.

(11-25-2018 02:51 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 12:01 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  LOL. I think the Dems have really won this even if Cindy Hyde-Smith wins.

Less than 24 hours and we're already to the moral victory phase.

Low energy!

You are free to spin some white Republican lady with Confederacy turrets winning in Mississippi over a black Democrat as some sort of win for your side.

Guess what....you won in East Texas too! And in Eastern Kentucky and Jackson Tennessee! Congrats I suppose are in order.

I think the National GOP wishes that your candidate had a little less energy right about now.

(11-25-2018 10:33 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-24-2018 03:17 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  it's a slam dunk for Smith....

espy has zero chance...

I wouldn't say zero. Special elections are unpredictable. Its how John Tower became the first Republican in Texas since reconstruction in 1961 (and maybe in the entire South).

The Dem could win if they stuff the ballot box, like Florida, Orange Co. ca, Montana and Az.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't think this lady is evil or hate-filled, but I do think she has lived a very segregated life and has gone out of her way to do so. She is like 80% of upper-middle class whites in Mississippi... not evil but not without significant bias, and certainly not going to send her kids to school with blacks.

(11-25-2018 01:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 01:46 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 01:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Doug Jones was a lot more conservative than Doug Jones until Chuck Schumer got hold of him. I would expect the same from Espy. You might have different expectations. I don't.
Republicans are really playing this stupid. Somebody needs to take them all to the woodshed and explain, "Look, democrats are going to twist everything you say to put the worst possible spin on it. Race, abortion, global warming--any misstep is going to be blown out of proportion because that's how they play identity politics." Democrats keep doing it, and they keep not learning. Newt imposed that kind of discipline in 1994 and won. No republican has been able to do so since. Apparently because none has tried.
Public hangings do not suggest lynchings to me. I'm a little older, and a few lynchings were at least in recent memory when I grew up. They were all carried out in secret, and as best I can recall, were all done at night and the bodies discovered the next day or so. Maybe to somebody who doesn't know the history of lynchings, "public hangings" might suggest lynchings. But that would be the opposite of "dog whistle"--something heard by everyone but the dog. And I suspect very strongly that any Mississippian who would be attracted to the notion of lynchings would be very aware of the exact difference that I have discussed here and elsewhere.

Doug Jones has never pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat, which is what Chuck Schumer is.
From a political standpoint, he cannot win without extraordinary support from the Democratic base in Alabama, which does exist AND without the GOP putting up a profoundly flawed candidate to oppose him. Bradley Byrne would crush him in 2020, for example, regardless of whatever he does. Jones doesn't make himself any more safe by voting with the GOP.
I think he's just going to vote according to his views, and if he loses his seat for it, he will either retire to the accolades of millions of Alabamians or take his pick of positions in a new Democratic Administration.

That pick of positions in a democrat administration, or a cushy position in a DC left-leaning law firm, depends on his remaining Chuck Schumer's lapdog. And he certainly pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat during the Alabama senate special election campaign. If he is truly a mainstream democrat, then he lied big-time then.

How republicans managed to let idiot Roy Moore get their nomination is a perfect storm comedy of errors. Are they inept enough to repeat it? Probably. But I hope not.

Look, I truly believe that the democrat leaders are evil people who would gladly destroy this country in order to enact their collectivist/redistributionist/globalist agenda. I think there are many otherwise intelligent people who have been duped into becoming useful idiots in advancing that cause. I would put you and Mach, among others, in that group.

Who was it in Nevada? Sharon Angle? There was another clown in Missouri running for Senate that year. And Clayton Williams gave us Ann Richards. Fortunately the governor of Texas doesn't have too much power so she didn't do much harm.

Both parties nominated the person most likely to lose to the other party for president last time.

(11-25-2018 05:14 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I don't think this lady is evil or hate-filled, but I do think she has lived a very segregated life and has gone out of her way to do so. She is like 80% of upper-middle class whites in Mississippi... not evil but not without significant bias, and certainly not going to send her kids to school with blacks.

I think that may be a fairly accurate characterization.

As soon as this election is over, assuming she wins, somebody in the republican hierarchy needs to explain a few things to her. One thing she needs to understand is that she needs to do a lot of work to repair her image with African-Americans. She's got a few people who can help her if she is serious about doing it--Ben Carson, Tim Scott, Mia Love--but she's got to do a lot herself. Something like the kind of epiphany that George Wallace had in his last term as governor would be appropriate.

And republicans on the whole need to ask some serious questions about how they end up with candidates like Hyde-Smith, Roy Moore, Richard Mourdock, Todd Akin, Sharron Angle, and Christine O'Donnell. Bottom line--the press is no friend of any republican and is looking for any excuse to skewer any republican candidate. So learn how to be very wary and don't make any mistakes. And find ways to do a better job vetting potential candidates. Democrats saw Barack Obama as a candidate for the future at least as early as 2004, when he gave a prime time speech at their convention, and they saw to it that he was properly cultivated as a candidate. Republicans need to do things like that. They need to become better at the craft of politics.

(11-25-2018 03:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  The Trumpers and the anti-Globalists have made it VERY clear where my people fit in their world order. History has shown us that nativism/nationalism never works out well for minorities.

No, the religious right have made it very clear where you fit in their world order. I am not one of them. I am pro-abortion, with reasonable restrictions, and I recently voted for my church to perform a same-sex marriage. Personally, I would be much happier with the republican party if the religious nuts left, or at least had less influence in the party. But they're not going anywhere, because there is nowhere else that isn't anathema to them. That tells me that the republicans could loosen up a bit without losing them; they sure as hell weren't going to vote for Hillary, and there's nobody in the democrat field for 2020 that they would like any better.

I would prefer something more libertarian, perhaps closer to the Bill Clinton/Tony Blair "third way" of center-right fiscal policy and center-left social policy. Unfortunately, Blair is no longer an active voice, and Bill Clinton has pretty much abandoned the position he occupied as president. So have the democrats as a party, but they were not always that comfortable with it even 20 years ago. Hence the triangulation.

So I don't like the republican theocracy, and cannot stand the democrat collectivism/redistributionism. Forced to choose, I lean republican, but I do wish they would change a few things.

Quote:And republicans on the whole need to ask some serious questions about how they end up with candidates like Hyde-Smith, Roy Moore, Richard Mourdock, Todd Akin, Sharron Angle, and Christine O'Donnell.

Because the party elitists for so long were unrelatable. Mitt Romney is the epitome. Same reason they ended up with Trump. People can relate to someone with flaws more than a robot with handlers. With that, some with fatal flaws are going to slip through the cracks until their are under the pressure of national media.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(11-25-2018 03:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 01:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 01:46 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 01:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Doug Jones was a lot more conservative than Doug Jones until Chuck Schumer got hold of him. I would expect the same from Espy. You might have different expectations. I don't.
Republicans are really playing this stupid. Somebody needs to take them all to the woodshed and explain, "Look, democrats are going to twist everything you say to put the worst possible spin on it. Race, abortion, global warming--any misstep is going to be blown out of proportion because that's how they play identity politics." Democrats keep doing it, and they keep not learning. Newt imposed that kind of discipline in 1994 and won. No republican has been able to do so since. Apparently because none has tried.
Public hangings do not suggest lynchings to me. I'm a little older, and a few lynchings were at least in recent memory when I grew up. They were all carried out in secret, and as best I can recall, were all done at night and the bodies discovered the next day or so. Maybe to somebody who doesn't know the history of lynchings, "public hangings" might suggest lynchings. But that would be the opposite of "dog whistle"--something heard by everyone but the dog. And I suspect very strongly that any Mississippian who would be attracted to the notion of lynchings would be very aware of the exact difference that I have discussed here and elsewhere.

Doug Jones has never pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat, which is what Chuck Schumer is.
From a political standpoint, he cannot win without extraordinary support from the Democratic base in Alabama, which does exist AND without the GOP putting up a profoundly flawed candidate to oppose him. Bradley Byrne would crush him in 2020, for example, regardless of whatever he does. Jones doesn't make himself any more safe by voting with the GOP.
I think he's just going to vote according to his views, and if he loses his seat for it, he will either retire to the accolades of millions of Alabamians or take his pick of positions in a new Democratic Administration.

That pick of positions in a democrat administration, or a cushy position in a DC left-leaning law firm, depends on his remaining Chuck Schumer's lapdog. And he certainly pretended to be anything but a mainstream Democrat during the Alabama senate special election campaign. If he is truly a mainstream democrat, then he lied big-time then.

How republicans managed to let idiot Roy Moore get their nomination is a perfect storm comedy of errors. Are they inept enough to repeat it? Probably. But I hope not.

Look, I truly believe that the democrat leaders are evil people who would gladly destroy this country in order to enact their collectivist/redistributionist/globalist agenda. I think there are many otherwise intelligent people who have been duped into becoming useful idiots in advancing that cause. I would put you and Mach, among others, in that group.

The Trumpers and the anti-Globalists have made it VERY clear where my people fit in their world order. History has shown us that nativism/nationalism never works out well for minorities.

Your people are the citizens of this country, and its government, who don't pick you up for an alternative lifestyle and make you disappear forever, like they would in China. You might want to keep that in mind. We are sworn to protect you whether we approve of you or not. You won't find that in 90% of the "Globe".

Would Muslims approve of "your people"? No.
Would China approve of "your people"? No.
Would African Tribes approve of "your people"? No.

You have some metropolitan areas in the remnant of the Western Civilization that historically have been the only dependable bastion for the LGBT community. Odd that those who support them the best are the ones you most hate.

(11-25-2018 12:16 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-24-2018 11:59 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(11-24-2018 11:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-24-2018 11:41 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(11-24-2018 03:04 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/23/mississi...-espy.html

Just throwing this out here for people to predict and comment on the race.

I for the record, think that Mike Espy is going to have a real difficult road. Here's why

1) Cindy Hyde-Smith is a far-far-FAR right wing candidate. But she's not Roy Moore. And her views and statements appear to match those of many white Mississippians.

2) Hyde-Smith got 41 percent on the general election date. An even worse candidate, Confederate/Southern Nationalist Chris McDaniel, got 19 percent. Espy had 40 percent. Its hard to imagine McDaniel voters voting for Mike Espy, an African American

3) Both candidates in the runoff have had issues. For Espy, there have been claims that he had some financial improprieties. Cindy Hyde-Smith has had Confederacy/Jim Crow turrets, including joking about attending public lynchings.

4) For Espy to win, he needs African Amreican voters to be north of 40% of the runoff turnout (They were 33 percent in November). In addition, he will need 30 percent of the non-black vote (He didn't get that in November).

Espy does have the momentum right now, but I just see it as too far of a distance to cover. And its Mississippi.

Tom, seriously, are you a paid propagandist?

No idea if this has been pointed out below, I’d hope so-

But do you have any kind of link or source for her “joking about attending ‘public lynchings’?”

Im a relatively keen observer of affairs and have a decent background in history. I can’t really recall many public lynchings.

Can you point to a couple in the last 100-150 yrs or so?!?

Thx

Just google "Cindy Hyde-Smith lynching" and you'll get a mountain of sources from any number of news outlets. Rather than pick one myself, I'll just let you pick the outlet of your choice.

Where do you get your news? Even Fox News has carried stories about Cindy Hyde-Smith joking about attending a public lynching.

This isn't in dispute. She said it on video.

----

Lynchings of Black persons is sadly a very real part of our history. I'd argue that the Micheal Donald lynching in my hometown in the 1980's qualified as a public lynching, as they left the body hanging from a tree 5 blocks from my house as a symbol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_i...ted_States

----

Lynchings are not a joke. There are certain things that are not okay to joke about. Combined with her documented history of horrendous bigotry (the Mississippi Agricultural Center case was pretty instructive to me when she was Ag. Commissioner of Mississippi) and her jokes about not wanting certain people to vote (she made those comments on video as well the day after the video of her joking about her willingness to attend a public lynching make her unacceptable as a US Senator. But she'll probably win. And Mississippi will suffer for it.

Said WHAT on video?

Public hangings are/were a real thing, yes. Everyone caught and convicted in assassination of Lincoln was sentenced to execution by hanging. Ergo, a public hanging.

Is a lynching what she commented on? Do you recognize/understand the difference?

No, I'm not even going to consider your implication that African American lynching victims were in any way comparable to the hanging after a trial of persons involved in a crime - the assassination of the President of the United States.

I'm also not getting into some sort of semantic argument with you about what she said. I've seen the video, I grew up 20 miles from Mississippi, and I know damn well that she knew exactly what she was saying. You are free to argue that she really was making some other statement if you'd like. I'm just going to pass on going down that rabbit hole.

She isn't denying she said it either.

Yea, get it.

Blah blah blah.

Try and distort what I asked, cause as per usual you’re f*cking wrong.

Clownfish,

Did she or didn’t she say shed go to a public “lynching”.

Simple yes or no, GW.

Simple yes or no


Why do you continue to make this so embarrassingly easy?

Sad

(11-24-2018 11:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Lynchings of Black persons is sadly a very real part of our history. I'd argue that the Micheal Donald lynching in my hometown in the 1980's qualified as a public lynching, as they left the body hanging from a tree 5 blocks from my house as a symbol.

Lynchings are an awful part of our history that need to be treated with utmost contempt looking back and eliminated going forward. I don't think anyone would argue with you there, including quite frankly Cindy Hyde-Davis.

I'd argue that the Donald lynching wasn't public. It certainly wasn't the kind of event that people would "attend." And leaving the body hanging from a tree after the fact does not make the event public.

I think the left found something that they could exploit as an issue if they could misrepresent and conflate it enough, and after all winning elections is more important than anything else, right?

Now I've also posted that I think Hyde-Smith needs a considerable ass-chewing by republican leadership, and I hope somebody takes it upon himself to do that. If elected, she needs to do whatever she can to make amends to the African-American community. I would hope that she could have the kind of epiphany that George Wallace had in his last term as governor of Alabama.