A Neat Little Comparison Chart

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Yep.

I never gave any estimated number because it's virtually impossible to do so. Also, "racism" is more of a variable than some sort of fixed entity. For example, some may have prejudice against a particular group but may never allow it to manifest itself in their behavior.

One of the things that really drives me nuts is the way in which the left employs identity politics.

Find a racist who is a Republican, all Republican's are racists.
Find a homophobe who is a Republican, all Republicans are homophobes.
Find an anti welfare person who is a Republican, all Republicans are anti welfare...
Find a white guy who doesn't believe in affirmative action, he's just a privileged white guy trying to keep the "system" that oppresses black people in place.

Etc

It comes in many forms nowadays, and the right has begun to employ similar tactics since the left began using it back in the late 80's and early 90's, but it's just nonsensical logic and people know it, yet they still use it.

It isn't helpful to any discussion and I'm just sick and tired of it.

 

[idav]

One of the things that really drives me nuts is the way in which the left employs identity politics.

Find a racist who is a Republican, all Republican's are racists.
Find a homophobe who is a Republican, all Republicans are homophobes.
Find an anti welfare person who is a Republican, all Republicans are anti welfare...
Find a white guy who doesn't believe in affirmative action, he's just a privileged white guy trying to keep the "system" that oppresses black people in place.

Etc

It comes in many forms nowadays, and the right has begun to employ similar tactics since the left began using it back in the late 80's and early 90's, but it's just nonsensical logic and people know it, yet they still use it.

It isn't helpful to any discussion and I'm just sick and tired of it.

That’s funny complaining about identity politics and accusing “the left” of generalizing.

 

[metis]

One of the things that really drives me nuts is the way in which the left employs identity politics.

Find a racist who is a Republican, all Republican's are racists.
Find a homophobe who is a Republican, all Republicans are homophobes.
Find an anti welfare person who is a Republican, all Republicans are anti welfare...
Find a white guy who doesn't believe in affirmative action, he's just a privileged white guy trying to keep the "system" that oppresses black people in place.

Etc

It comes in many forms nowadays, and the right has begun to employ similar tactics since the left began using it back in the late 80's and early 90's, but it's just nonsensical logic and people know it, yet they still use it.

It isn't helpful to any discussion and I'm just sick and tired of it.

What does this have to do with what I posted?

Secondly, those on the "left" are hardly homogeneous.

As for myself, I'm sortofa mixture, or as some say, mixed up.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

That’s funny complaining about identity politics and accusing “the left” of generalizing.

All you have to do is look at how this kind of logic started. It is a fact of history that identity politics was started by those on the left during the civil rights movement... For years they have painted Republicans with a broad brush using logic like I just gave.

Another example is how the left calls the GOP an old white guy party...

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

What does this have to do with what I posted?

Secondly, those on the "left" are hardly homogeneous.

As for myself, I'm sortofa mixture, or as some say, mixed up.

Just musing and complaining about a pet peeve of mine.

 

[tytlyf]

It is a fact of history that identity politics was started by those on the left during the civil rights movement... For years they have painted Republicans with a broad brush using logic like I just gave.

Republicans get painted with the brush because it's the truth. Racist elected officials, racist comments, racist dog whistles, targeting minorities, etc. Now you're going to tell me that progressives are the real racists.

Another example is how the left calls the GOP an old white guy party...

It is the old white guy party. The republican party would have been dead long ago if it weren't for their crooked media. The republican establishment benefits the wealthy due to tax breaks. It hurts the middle class. So now you're gonna tell me it's racist for me to say the word 'white' when referring to the conservative base?

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

That’s funny complaining about identity politics and accusing “the left” of generalizing.

Here's a good article, from a left leaning rag...

https://www.salon.com/2017/09/02/ti...ics-its-dragging-the-progressive-agenda-down/

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Republicans get painted with the brush because it's the truth. Racist elected officials, racist comments, racist dog whistles, targeting minorities, etc. Now you're going to tell me that progressives are the real racists.


It is the old white guy party. The republican party would have been dead long ago if it weren't for their crooked media. The republican establishment benefits the wealthy due to tax breaks. It hurts the middle class. So now you're gonna tell me it's racist for me to say the word 'white' when referring to the conservative base?

Bwhahahahah! Thanks for the laugh! Thank god my keyboard has a condom sheet on it.

 

[tytlyf]

Bwhahahahah! Thanks for the laugh! Thank god my keyboard has a condom sheet on it.

What part of what I said do you think is inaccurate?

 

[idav]

All you have to do is look at how this kind of logic started. It is a fact of history that identity politics was started by those on the left during the civil rights movement... For years they have painted Republicans with a broad brush using logic like I just gave.

Another example is how the left calls the GOP an old white guy party...

Your generalizing while complaining about generalizing. You don’t see the irony?

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Your generalizing while complaining about generalizing. You don’t see the irony?

No, I'm complaining about a practice that those on the left began. Identity politics was begun by leftists in the 1960's... Read the article I linked, it's long, but informative and instructive.

 

[Stevicus]

A friend of mine who I grew up with here in Michigan has lived down in central Tennessee for around 40 years now, and when I told him about a guy who lives in Tennessee who told me on a message board (not RF) that racism is all but dead there, my friend almost gave himself a hernia as he was laughing so hard.
And yes, we still got plenty of racism here in Michigan, including quite a few relatives and friends of mine.

It's not as overtly conspicuous as it used to be, so there is at least some improvement in that area. Plus it's less fashionable to make public racist statements, but still it often shows up in more subtle ways. Remember, in the case of Trump, he went around seven years claiming that Obama wasn't a U.S. citizen, including even after Obama's birth certificate was made public, and a survey of Republicans even in Obama's 2nd term had it that a majority of them believed as such.

1-2% racists? I don't think so.

I tend to agree with you, although over the course of my own life, I've seen people soften their views on race and become more accepting. Just because someone is racist today doesn't mean they'll be racist tomorrow, and I think we've all seen measurable progress in this area. Even George Wallace softened his views towards the end of his life.

But on the other side of the issue, there were those who questioned whether Obama would have received the same amount of praise or extolation if he was just an average white candidate. (Similar things were said about Hillary, that if she was a man, she'd only get 10% of the vote.) Some charged that race was a factor in liberals overly praising Obama and attacking any criticism as racially-motivated.

I honestly don't believe that questions about Obama's birth certificate or his citizenship had anything to do with his race as much as his national origin. If Obama's father was born in Bulgaria or Russia (and was an official in either government), then it would have been the same level of scrutiny.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

I tend to agree with you, although over the course of my own life, I've seen people soften their views on race and become more accepting. Just because someone is racist today doesn't mean they'll be racist tomorrow, and I think we've all seen measurable progress in this area. Even George Wallace softened his views towards the end of his life.

But on the other side of the issue, there were those who questioned whether Obama would have received the same amount of praise or extolation if he was just an average white candidate. (Similar things were said about Hillary, that if she was a man, she'd only get 10% of the vote.) Some charged that race was a factor in liberals overly praising Obama and attacking any criticism as racially-motivated.

I honestly don't believe that questions about Obama's birth certificate or his citizenship had anything to do with his race as much as his national origin. If Obama's father was born in Bulgaria or Russia (and was an official in either government), then it would have been the same level of scrutiny.

Exactly. Any opposition to Obama was characterized as, the person is complaining about X, but he is only complaining about X because Obama is black... He doesn't oppose X on principle, he just opposes X because Obama is black and he suggested it. If X had been proposed by a white guy, there would be no opposition, etc...

In fact a variant of that argument was used by someone up thread @Underhill ... They said that Republican opposition to the ACA was essentially because he was black, and his evidence that this was true was that the Republicans proposed a healthbill in the 90's that matched it word for word...

It's fakoking nonsense.

 

[Underhill]

Exactly. Any opposition to Obama was characterized as, the person is complaining about X, but he is only complaining about X because Obama is black... He doesn't oppose X on principle, he just opposes X because Obama is black and he suggested it. If X had been proposed by a white guy, there would be no opposition, etc...

In fact a variant of that argument was used by someone up thread... They said that Republican opposition to the ACA was essentially because he was black, and his evidence that this was true was that the Republicans proposed a healthbill in the 90's that matched it word for word...

It's fakoking nonsense.

First off, those were not my words. I said the level of vitriol demonstrated by the right did not match up with the policies of Obama or his actions. This points to something else at work and racism is the obvious culprit.

Second, opposition to the ACA was because it was proposed by a democrat. If McCain had suggested something similar, and the evidence says he probably would have, republicans would have jumped on board and democrats would have demonized it. My point was that a bill like that, which is fairly centrist in it's nature, does not explain the anger and hatred directed at Obama by so many very early in his career as president, and literally that was his only major legislative accomplishment for the first half of his time in office.

 

[Underhill]

One of the things that really drives me nuts is the way in which the left employs identity politics.

Find a racist who is a Republican, all Republican's are racists.
Find a homophobe who is a Republican, all Republicans are homophobes.
Find an anti welfare person who is a Republican, all Republicans are anti welfare...
Find a white guy who doesn't believe in affirmative action, he's just a privileged white guy trying to keep the "system" that oppresses black people in place.

Etc

It comes in many forms nowadays, and the right has begun to employ similar tactics since the left began using it back in the late 80's and early 90's, but it's just nonsensical logic and people know it, yet they still use it.

It isn't helpful to any discussion and I'm just sick and tired of it.

Find a democrat who wants to take all guns, all democrats want to take your guns.
Find a democrat who wants to take down all southern monuments, and all democrats want to destroy the southern heritage.
Find a democrat in favor of open borders, and all democrats want to open the floodgates.

Both sides play the same game. Pretending otherwise is insane.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Find a democrat who wants to take all guns, all democrats want to take your guns.
Find a democrat who wants to take down all southern monuments, and all democrats want to destroy the southern heritage.
Find a democrat in favor of open borders, and all democrats want to open the floodgates.

Both sides play the same game. Pretending otherwise is insane.

If you read the Salon article I linked earlier, you will see where it is pointed out that the right began to employ this same tactic as a response to it happening on the left. In other words, for decades, Conservatives took the identity politics abuse meted out by those on the left, got tired of it, and began to respond in kind, but don't be confused...The left began the process in the 60's. At first, conservatives just rolled their eyes and let the left paint them as racists, but eventually they got tired of it and began using the same style of argumentation against the left.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

First off, those were not my words. I said the level of vitriol demonstrated by the right did not match up with the policies of Obama or his actions. This points to something else at work and racism is the obvious culprit.

Second, opposition to the ACA was because it was proposed by a democrat. If McCain had suggested something similar, and the evidence says he probably would have, republicans would have jumped on board and democrats would have demonized it. My point was that a bill like that, which is fairly centrist in it's nature, does not explain the anger and hatred directed at Obama by so many very early in his career as president, and literally that was his only major legislative accomplishment for the first half of his time in office.

You said Republican opposition to his policy was from fear, "fear perpetrated by his color and by nonsense about guns". You then tried to characterize his policies as middle of the road and claim that his healthcare bill was a "word for word" copy of the 90's Republican bill.

If you think that because McCain proposed the bill that other Republicans would be on board, you're flat out wrong. McCain is known as the maverick of the party. That means he's on the bubble of the party so to speak. He's off the reservation from normal Republican philosophy and is mostly just a Republican in name only (RINO).

Is the ACA the GOP health care plan from 1993?

From the article:

Is the Affordable Care Act really the same as "the Republican plan in the early '90s?"


Short answer -- sort of. There was a Republican bill in the Senate that looked a whole lot like Obamacare, but it wasn’t the only GOP bill on Capitol Hill, it never came to a vote and from what we can tell, plenty of conservative Republicans didn’t like it.

 

[Underhill]

If you read the Salon article I linked earlier, you will see where it is pointed out that the right began to employ this same tactic as a response to it happening on the left. In other words, for decades, Conservatives took the identity politics abuse meted out by those on the left, got tired of it, and began to respond in kind, but don't be confused...The left began the process in the 60's. At first, conservatives just rolled their eyes and let the left paint them as racists, but eventually they got tired of it and began using the same style of argumentation against the left.

Perhaps, I don't really care who started it at this point. Most of those people are dead and gone. The right started this current trend of media bashing and name calling of anyone who disagrees with them. A practice that is just as destructive, and probably more so. And there are other examples of dirty deeds on the right. Many of which they will regret. Much like they regret their policy of backdoor blocking everything the democrats tried to do under Obama, which is backfiring on them now that they are in power.

The problem is that without an armistice of some kind, nothing will change as these tactics work in the short term to get votes or block legislation. In the long term they are undermining our democracy and creating a broken political system that serves no one.

 

[Underhill]

You said Republican opposition to his policy was from fear, "fear perpetrated by his color and by nonsense about guns". You then tried to characterize his policies as middle of the road and claim that his healthcare bill was a "word for word" copy of the 90's Republican bill.

If you think that because McCain proposed the bill that other Republicans would be on board, you're flat out wrong. McCain is known as the maverick of the party. That means he's on the bubble of the party so to speak. He's off the reservation from normal Republican philosophy and is mostly just a Republican in name only (RINO).

Is the ACA the GOP health care plan from 1993?

From the article:

Is the Affordable Care Act really the same as "the Republican plan in the early '90s?"


Short answer -- sort of. There was a Republican bill in the Senate that looked a whole lot like Obamacare, but it wasn’t the only GOP bill on Capitol Hill, it never came to a vote and from what we can tell, plenty of conservative Republicans didn’t like it.

Sure, I didn't claim all republicans liked it or that it came to a vote. But it was a republican bill that 'looked a whole lot like Obamacare'. And during the campaign, Republicans often touted Mitt's plan (again a near duplicate of Obamacare that was even closer to the Obama bill) as the example to follow moving forward.

And remember, many democrats weren't terribly fond of Obamacare either as some wanted a more liberal single payer plan and others (the blue dog democrats) thought it was too liberal.

 

[Twilight Hue]

If you are implying that squeaky clean Obama didn't accomplish much, then you have to explain why trump is spending so much time on reversing Obama era decisions.

DACA
Iran treaty
ACA
Paris Climate Accord

Well. Doing things right would be a start rather than half*** and rushed through.