Ku Klux Klan Grand Dragon Will Quigg Endorses Hillary Clinton for President
53 replies, posted
[quote]Grand Cyclops - president or presiding officer of a meeting or "Den."[/quote]
[t]https://filmicfilly.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/goodman.jpg[/t]
ah so thats what goodman's rank was in o'brother where art thou
[editline]15th March 2016[/editline]
the difference here is hillary will denounce these people, unlike trump with his "eh idk whats a klan?" stance
So both Trump and Hilary have had members of the KKK support them?
Hmmm.
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;49933921]"I rolled 2."
"AH! A nigger stole your job!"
"Damnit!"
(soon available in all stores in the South?)[/QUOTE]
If you roll a 1 you get assigned the worst stats of all:
You're a negro.
"I walk outside the door and roll a 7."
You're put on trial for the murder of a white woman.
"I rolled 2."
You're assigned an all-white jury. Things look bad.
"I rolled an 8."
Evidence comes to light proving you weren't there at the murder and that a local white man did it.
"I rolled 9."
But the jury doesn't give a shit since who in their right mind convicts a white man over a negro? They're about to find you guilty when an angry mob bursts into the court and strings you up by a tree.
THE END.
[QUOTE=GarbageCan;49934448]Have you considered it's because a lot of Trump's supporters are legit white supremacists while Hillary has worked with the African American community for years?
Gee I wonder why they'd take it more seriously it's not like context matters or anything[/QUOTE]
Gonna need a source on that claim that "a lot of trump's supporters are legit white supremacists."
[QUOTE=GarbageCan;49934448]Have you considered it's because a lot of Trump's supporters are legit white supremacists while Hillary has worked with the African American community for years?
Gee I wonder why they'd take it more seriously it's not like context matters or anything[/QUOTE]
Hillary Clinton supported the 3 Strikes law which overwhelmingly hurt the black community. Meanwhile, Trump was praised by the Wall Street Journal for his actions against racism in 2000
Trump must be kicking himself
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;49936055]Gonna need a source on that claim that "a lot of trump's supporters are legit white supremacists."[/QUOTE]
I also need that source.
Every right wing candidate attracts right wing extremists, same as how Sanders is attracting leftist extremists. One or two people who support him but are otherwise unrelated to his campaign performing the Nazi salute doesn't represent the norm.
Might this be a "false flag" type of thing? Smear hillarys campaign so people don't vote for her, so people vote for sanders instead who will never get past the electoral college, probably won't win national elections and if by some chance he does get in, congress will shoot him down at every step.
[sp]I absolutely love Sanders and pretty much everything he stands for. He's like a politician without all the corruption and bigotry and hatred for the poor. He's consistently a good person - I just don't think America is ready for politicians like him and the system in America won't permit such a man to make any meaningful changes[/sp]
[QUOTE=Fapplejack;49933714]Not gonna lie Grand Dragon is a bitchin title to have.[/QUOTE]
almost as good as 'supreme wizard goon'
[QUOTE=Svinnik;49936129]I also need that source.
Every right wing candidate attracts right wing extremists, same as how Sanders is attracting leftist extremists. One or two people who support him but are otherwise unrelated to his campaign performing the Nazi salute doesn't represent the norm.[/QUOTE]
Leftist extremists as in???
Marxist terrorists?
Communist juntas?
Anarchist vandals?
Collectivist squatters?
Stalinist splinter cells?
Anti-facist facists?
Atheists marauders?
Ah civil rights campaigners - if civil rights and fair treatment belong to "the left" then what exactly does your "right" stand for? Less civil rights? Less fair representation?
Libertarians can stand for those things and I'd consider them liberal right wing. Likewise Stalin was left wing but he was very conservative and authoritarian.
Just lumping people you don't like in with the left is a pretty transparent and blatant attempt to marginalise that which you don't agree with. It reminds me when neo-nazis spout stories about elite marxist jewish oligarch cabals - its like they don't understand anything they're saying, just finding things they don't like and putting them in a sentence together.
[QUOTE=kyle877;49933739]Man, the KKK must love D&D.[/QUOTE]
Except for those fucking [I]Dark Elves[/I]!
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;49936170]Leftist extremists as in???
Marxist terrorists?
Communist juntas?
Anarchist vandals?
Collectivist squatters?
Stalinist splinter cells?
Anti-facist facists?
Atheists marauders?
Ah civil rights campaigners - if civil rights and fair treatment belong to "the left" then what exactly does your "right" stand for? Less civil rights? Less fair representation?
Libertarians can stand for those things and I'd consider them liberal right wing. Likewise Stalin was left wing but he was very conservative and authoritarian.
Just lumping people you don't like in with the left is a pretty transparent and blatant attempt to marginalise that which you don't agree with. It reminds me when neo-nazis spout stories about elite marxist jewish oligarch cabals - its like they don't understand anything they're saying, just finding things they don't like and putting them in a sentence together.[/QUOTE]
Oh please, you mean like how people love to do the same with the right wing?
This sounds like he realizes his endorsement can be used as a weapon against her campaign.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;49936170]Leftist extremists as in???
Marxist terrorists?
Communist juntas?
Anarchist vandals?
Collectivist squatters?
Stalinist splinter cells?
Anti-facist facists?
Atheists marauders?
Ah civil rights campaigners - if civil rights and fair treatment belong to "the left" then what exactly does your "right" stand for? Less civil rights? Less fair representation?
Libertarians can stand for those things and I'd consider them liberal right wing. Likewise Stalin was left wing but he was very conservative and authoritarian.
Just lumping people you don't like in with the left is a pretty transparent and blatant attempt to marginalise that which you don't agree with. It reminds me when neo-nazis spout stories about elite marxist jewish oligarch cabals - its like they don't understand anything they're saying, just finding things they don't like and putting them in a sentence together.[/QUOTE]
I'd consider BLM supporters who looted Ferguson, caused major riots in Chicago, and are racist against white people extremists.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;49936209]Oh please, you mean like how people love to do the same with the right wing?[/QUOTE]
In the USA I think there are probably more radical conservatives than radical liberals. And conservatives in the USA tend stand for/support the economic right wing, because the mainstream party which best represents their views is conservative right wing. Same goes for lots of europe. So I think its fair to associate the right wing with conservatism and thus with radical conservatism.
If your running presidential candidate for the republican (conservative right wing) party is talking about wholesale discrimination against muslims, saying most mexicans who come into the US are rapists and drug dealers then you can guess most people support his fairly radical views. People saying Obama is a muslim or not a US citizen and the presidential candidates not challenging that further supports my views.
If you were to talk about radical left wing in say china, russia or turkey then I would agree. There you have radical conservative left wing extremists (or radical liberal left wing extremists in turkeys case).
Since extremism (in the west) generally belongs to conservative groups and conservative groups generally belong to the right wing I think its fair to say the right wing contains a larger number of extremists.
Doesn't mean all right wingers or conservatives are extremists, libertarians are right wing and, apart from their economic ideology, I really like what they're selling. Lots of conservatives might have slightly backwards views like wanting a none secular rule, not liking gays much and generalising about people of different ethnicity but imo its mostly old fashioned and I can be ambivalent to it, providing they don't hurt anyone or express their views in a way intended to hurt then imo they're free to hold their beliefs.
tl;dr imo rightwing and/or conservative are more likely to hold extremists than leftwing and/or liberal in the west.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;49936251]In the USA I think there are probably more radical conservatives than radical liberals. And conservatives in the USA tend stand for/support the economic right wing, because the mainstream party which best represents their views is conservative right wing. Same goes for lots of europe. So I think its fair to associate the right wing with conservatism and thus with radical conservatism.
If your running presidential candidate for the republican (conservative right wing) party is talking about wholesale discrimination against muslims, saying most mexicans who come into the US are rapists and drug dealers then you can guess most people support his fairly radical views. People saying Obama is a muslim or not a US citizen and the presidential candidates not challenging that further supports my views.
If you were to talk about radical left wing in say china, russia or turkey then I would agree. There you have radical conservative left wing extremists (or radical liberal left wing extremists in turkeys case).
Since extremism (in the west) generally belongs to conservative groups and conservative groups generally belong to the right wing I think its fair to say the right wing contains a larger number of extremists.
Doesn't mean all right wingers or conservatives are extremists, libertarians are right wing and, apart from their economic ideology, I really like what they're selling. Lots of conservatives might have slightly backwards views like wanting a none secular rule, not liking gays much and generalising about people of different ethnicity but imo its mostly old fashioned and I can be ambivalent to it, providing they don't hurt anyone or express their views in a way intended to hurt then imo they're free to hold their beliefs.
tl;dr imo rightwing and/or conservative are more likely to hold extremists than leftwing and/or liberal in the west.[/QUOTE]
Depends on which demographic you are looking at. If you look at younger generations, such as those who are college aged, you will find many more left wing extremists than right wing extremists, although people love to pretend that these people don't exist.
If you look at the older generations, then yes, there are more right wing extremists than left wing extremists.
The point is that both sides do have extremists. To say "but they have more!" is not an excuse for a double standard. It's just justifying confirmation bias.
[QUOTE=Svinnik;49936236]I'd consider BLM supporters who looted Ferguson, caused major riots in Chicago, and are racist against white people extremists.[/QUOTE]
In the UK we had riots in 2011 with a similar type of thing. A criminal gets shot by the police, nobody quite knew what was going on, suddenly you have hysteria, crime and vandalism. Some of the people didn't even know why they were rioting. Thats not idealism left or right.
In the floods in new orleans you had the same thing. Those people might have voted republican or democrat but their riots were idealistic. People turning violent coz they're angry.
In the student protests in 2010 (uk) some people got violent, one guy was charged for throwing a fire extinguisher. In manchester stuff was thrown and buildings were occupied. Is not wanting to pay 9k a year for education an extremist view?
People riot when they're angry. People get angry when they're misrepresented, mistreated and poor. Blacks are more likely to suffer from all 3 of those things. In ferguson 94% of the police force is white despite most of the people there being black. Blacks are more likely to face jail time and will get disproportionatly longer sentences than whites for the same crimes. Blacks are more likely to live in poverty. They're right to be angry and should be protesting. [b]A protest should never turn to violence. Sadly angry people protesting sometimes turn to violence - this isn't a "leftist" trait.[/b]
The "racist against white" stuff is again a minority. Its not right but let me put it into perspective.There is more racism in the US of whites against blacks than blacks against whites. Way more. [URL="http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/133024-10-charts-show-racist-america-really/"]I can[/URL] [URL="http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2015/05/06/institutional-racism-is-our-way-of-life"]bombard[/URL] [URL="https://www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-racial-discrimination"]you[/URL] [URL="http://americablog.com/2015/05/institutional-racism-by-the-numbers.html"]with[/URL] [URL="http://www.jbwtucker.com/ultimate-white-privilege-statistics/"]stats[/URL] [URL="http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/racism-still-big-problem-u-s-say-majority-latinos-n404641"]and[/URL] [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States"]figures [/URL]but I wanted to keep this concise. [sp]And please don't start with bullshit about bias sources, look where they get the figures from and wise up - only applies if you we're about to put your fingers in your ears and go lalala bias sources I can't hear you lalal like a fucking 5 year old[/sp]
A protest turning violent isn't extremist ideology. Extremist would be someone protesting for an extremist cause and turning violent. Someone protesting against racism isn't an extremist likewise a bigot believing blacks should be slaves is an extremist. If a protest turning violent makes people extremists then anybody who goes to nearly any protest is an extremist - they generally have some violent element who may or may no fizzle out.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49936176]Except for those fucking [I]Dark Elves[/I]![/QUOTE]
DROW LIVES MATTER
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;49936274]Depends on which demographic you are looking at. If you look at younger generations, such as those who are college aged, you will find many more left wing extremists than right wing extremists, although people love to pretend that these people don't exist.
If you look at the older generations, then yes, there are more right wing extremists than left wing extremists.
The point is that both sides do have extremists. To say "but they have more!" is not an excuse for a double standard. It's just justifying confirmation bias.[/QUOTE]
EDL rallies and anti muslim stuff have lots of young people. Often sporting skin heads and a friendly "white is right" outlook. They may not be politically left or right but they'll vote right since right is more likely to say "gays cause floods" or "send them home" or "close the doors!"
Like I said before imo extremist = extremist ideology. Someone protesting for fairer black representation and getting angry about it isn't an extremist. People get angry when they're mistreated in a restaurant - does that make them extremists? No. Its about ideology.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;49936339]In the UK we had riots in 2011 with a similar type of thing. A criminal gets shot by the police, nobody quite knew what was going on, suddenly you have hysteria, crime and vandalism. Some of the people didn't even know why they were rioting. Thats not idealism left or right.
In the floods in new orleans you had the same thing. Those people might have voted republican or democrat but their riots were idealistic. People turning violent coz they're angry.
In the student protests in 2010 (uk) some people got violent, one guy was charged for throwing a fire extinguisher. In manchester stuff was thrown and buildings were occupied. Is not wanting to pay 9k a year for education an extremist view?
People riot when they're angry. People get angry when they're misrepresented, mistreated and poor. Blacks are more likely to suffer from all 3 of those things. In ferguson 94% of the police force is white despite most of the people there being black. Blacks are more likely to face jail time and will get disproportionatly longer sentences than whites for the same crimes. Blacks are more likely to live in poverty. They're right to be angry and should be protesting. [b]A protest should never turn to violence. Sadly angry people protesting sometimes turn to violence - this isn't a "leftist" trait.[/b]
[/QUOTE]
Can you give me an example of a right wing violent protest in the US in the past 20 years?
The closest I can find is this
[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/23/nyregion/194-arrested-in-protests-at-buffalo-abortion-clinics.html"]http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/23/nyregion/194-arrested-in-protests-at-buffalo-abortion-clinics.html[/URL]
Depends on what you define as violent protest.
[QUOTE=Svinnik;49936381]Can you give me an example of a right wing violent protest in the US in the past 20 years?
The closest I can find is this
[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/23/nyregion/194-arrested-in-protests-at-buffalo-abortion-clinics.html"]http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/23/nyregion/194-arrested-in-protests-at-buffalo-abortion-clinics.html[/URL][/QUOTE]
Maybe they have less need to protest? Blacks are more likely to vote democrat since democrat are perceived as being marginally more likely to do them good. So blacks/minorities in general are associated with democrats and thus "left wing". Those groups have good reason to be protesting.
Conservatives - who want to conserve the way things are (more likely to be republican/right wing) are fairly happy or ambivilant to the way things are currently going and will generally only protest against new things ie gay rights/abortions/immigrants. Generally less likely to protest and less likely to protest en masse. Thus likely to cause violence when an angry protest turns violent.
So I can't give you many protests because they haven't really had much need for protest. I can give you an example of an [b]extremist conservative going into a planned parent hood clinic and shooting it up[/b]. Or how supporters at a trump rally (clearly right wing, conserative, republicans) [b][URL="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/13/i-went-to-donald-trump-rally-in-my-hijab-supporters-arent-just-racist-caricatures"]intimidated[/URL] and [URL="http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/21/politics/trump-muslims-surveillance/index.html"]attacked[/URL] minority groups on more than 1 occasion./[b]
[quote]"If a woman has [the right to an abortion], why shouldn’t a man be free to use his superior strength to force himself on a woman? At least the rapist’s pursuit of sexual freedom doesn’t [usually] result in anyone’s death."
-- Lawrence Lockman[/quote] How about widely held republican stances against gay marriage and abortion in general. Not all republicans/right wingers/conservatives hold these insane extremist reactionary views those views are generally held by right wingers rather than left wingers.
A protester doesn't make an extremist. The views they hold make them extremist and if wanting better treatment for blacks, an end to racism, free choice of abortion, gay rights, no discrimination is extremist then I guess being an extremist is a good thing?
Again though how the fuck are progressive things like that only attributed to the left? Why do you have to be left wing to be a good person? Why can you right wingers champion those things? If you offer those things you are going to tap into that voter base and spread your ideology. IMO fighting against social progression is a losing battle and in making it a left vs right issue you're resigning the right to eventual demise when those people get what they want and, since they rallied to the left wing politicans to get those rights, they'll go away supporting those left wing beliefs. Shooting yourself in the shoot. Myopic imo.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.