ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags birtherism , Breitbart.com , donald trump , media criticism , Obama Conspiracies , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 3rd January 2017, 08:18 AM   #201
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
Except when you need to in order to control the narrative- that way you can so narrowly limit the definition as to exclude anyone you need to. That's a game you can play by yourself, I think.
What is so narrow about asking for proof that birtherism began as a racist plot against Obama?




Quote:

If you wouldn't worry so much about labeling people all the time, maybe you wouldn't need such weak strawmen to lean on.
I don't mind labels, you?


Quote:

Prove who are racists? Racists? You seem to be struggling with the construction; here, let me lay it out for you (again)- "not all birthers are racists, but a racist is more likely to be a birther." Can you not follow this, can you not understand that you're requiring me to prove something that either doesn't need proving, or can't be proved to someone (that would be you) who utterly rejects any basis for proof?
Than you don't have to post, we were never discussing whether some birtherism were racists or not, we are discussing if birtherism was a racist movement against Obama. You are the one who has misunderstood it.


Quote:
[Ronald Reagan voice] There you go again...[/Ronald Reagan voice] You just can't help yourself, can you? The politics of "Make America Great Again" seems to mean, to you, making it a land of total political polarization, eternally "us vs them"; because you can't seem to get it through your head that it's not a zero-sum game, winner take all and be damned to the rest. There are conservatives here on this forum who, even when I disagree with them, I can respect their ability to articulate a POV that isn't all about mere mule-headed opposition; they can do more than just sneer "stoopid libs" every second line. They even occasionally change my mind. But you're not after persuasion or progress; you don't want politics or compromise, you demand either conversion or capitulation.
Lol
I don't mind polarization, politics is mostly ugly all the time, if you're not up to it, you don't have to post. I'm not compromising with the left on anything.

Quote:
I'd also like to point out that saying "ha ha, the morons won, didn't they, neener neener" doesn't make them not morons- for morons, all it takes is sheer weight of numbers, and they've always had that. Sometimes they can be shown when they're acting against their own interest; sometimes they can't. (Shrug) What comes around goes around; no political victory is permanent.

But not this time!
When a person votes to give money back to the government, that isn't voting against their own interest, its voting for a greater cause than themselves.

Quote:

What would you accept as proof of some birtherism being racist in character?
Put it up, lets see it.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 08:19 AM   #202
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,674
Originally Posted by logger View Post
You don't think putting up Klansman holding a rally in support of birtherism is moving the goal posts?
This isn't about whether some racists support birtherism. Racists supported Trump and your side tried to make the argument that made Trump a racist.
This is about whether birtherism was about race or was in fact racist to bigin with.
I think it was about whether birtherism had a racist aspect to it. It does. So sorry you couldn't make it wholly about what you needed it to be.

Edited by kmortis:  Removed to comply with Rule11
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King

Last edited by kmortis; 3rd January 2017 at 10:03 AM.
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 08:20 AM   #203
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
And as long as that sincere one can ignore the fact that, in practice, "separate but equal" must be a function of power based on an assumed superiority- when "separate" is the primary consideration of the folks that create it and can enforce it, "equal" is a secondary consideration.
Looks like a good thread to start.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 08:24 AM   #204
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
I think it was about whether birtherism had a racist aspect to it. It does. So sorry you couldn't make it wholly about what you needed it to be.
The klan holding a rally doesn't lead to birtherism having racist aspects. Unless the people leading the charge were in support of that rally? My Trump comparison should give you a clue.

Edited by kmortis:  Removed to comply with Rule11

Last edited by kmortis; 3rd January 2017 at 10:03 AM.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 08:30 AM   #205
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,674
Originally Posted by logger View Post
What is so narrow about asking for proof that birtherism began as a racist plot against Obama?
Nothing at all, if you need your narrow victory. Knock yourself out.



Quote:
I don't mind labels, you?
Sure, gotta keep it simple, right? Otherwise, we might have to actually (gasp!) think about what other people are really saying.


Quote:
Than you don't have to post, we were never discussing whether some birtherism were racists or not, we are discussing if birtherism was a racist movement against Obama. You are the one who has misunderstood it.
Misunderstood, or expanded beyond your ability (or willingness) to consider that (pardon the pun) it's not as black-and-white an issue as you need it to be.



Quote:
Lol
I don't mind polarization, politics is mostly ugly all the time, if you're not up to it, you don't have to post. I'm not compromising with the left on anything.
I expect nothing less from you. Also nothing more. (lol)




Quote:
But not this time!
When a person votes to give money back to the government, that isn't voting against their own interest, its voting for a greater cause than themselves.
lolwut? "Greater cause" like what?

Quote:
Put it up, lets see it.
You've already seen it; can't make you understand it.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 08:37 AM   #206
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,674
Originally Posted by logger View Post
The klan holding a rally doesn't lead to birtherism having racist aspects. Unless the people leading the charge were in support of that rally? My Trump comparison should give you a clue.
Yes, it really does. The KKK didn't embrace birtherism because they're race-neutral; birtherism fit what they wanted to believe.

Edited by kmortis:  Removed to comply with Rule11
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King

Last edited by kmortis; 3rd January 2017 at 10:04 AM.
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 09:39 AM   #207
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
Yes, it really does. The KKK didn't embrace birtherism because they're race-neutral; birtherism fit what they wanted to believe.
You would apply that to every investigation?

It doesn't work that way.
If a AA loses his life in a car accident and the Klan cheers, his death had a racist aspect?

A Klan member suppoted hillarys campaign did her campaign have racist aspects?


Edited by kmortis:  Removed to comply with Rule11

Last edited by kmortis; 3rd January 2017 at 10:04 AM.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 09:48 AM   #208
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 10,592
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Put it up, lets see it.
Loggerese to English translation: Put it up, and I'll wave my arms so frenetically I may achieve flight.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 09:51 AM   #209
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Loggerese to English translation: Put it up, and I'll wave my arms so frenetically I may achieve flight.
Just to help you with your point. You think because the Klan held a rally, the birther scandal makes it about race?
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 09:58 AM   #210
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
You would apply that to every investigation?

It doesn't work that way.
If a AA loses his life in a car accident and the Klan cheers, his death had a racist aspect?
I think it's safe to say that anything the Klan would actually hold a rally for has a racial aspect. Can you provide any examples of Klan rallies that do not have anything to do with racism?

Originally Posted by logger View Post
A Klan member suppoted hillarys campaign did her campaign have racist aspects?
A single Klan member supporting something doesn't necessarily make it racist. The Klan holding a rally for something pretty much means that something is racist.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:03 AM   #211
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
I think it's safe to say that anything the Klan would actually hold a rally for has a racial aspect. Can you provide any examples of Klan rallies that do not have anything to do with racism?
I agree everything they do is racial. lets say they support freedom. Does that mean loving freedom is now racist



Quote:
A single Klan member supporting something doesn't necessarily make it racist. The Klan holding a rally for something pretty much means that something is racist.
Interesting, so one racist won't do it, but a group would.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:08 AM   #212
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
I agree everything they do is racial. lets say they support freedom. Does that mean loving freedom is now racist
Do you have examples of Klan rallies specifically and solely based on "loving freedom"?

Originally Posted by logger View Post
Interesting, so one racist won't do it, but a group would.
You claim to run a business, so perhaps this will help you understand the concept: An employee of a company holding a specific view does not mean that the company itself holds that view. Let's say you hired a liberal (I know, I know). Does that mean that your company now officially holds liberal ideals?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:16 AM   #213
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post



You claim to run a business, so perhaps this will help you understand the concept: An employee of a company holding a specific view does not mean that the company itself holds that view. Let's say you hired a liberal (I know, I know). Does that mean that your company now officially holds liberal ideals?
So if its a large company and a group of employees holds a particular view of a certain political issue. Does that political issue become their view?
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:18 AM   #214
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
So if its a large company and a group of employees holds a particular view of a certain political issue. Does that political issue become their view?
If it's the official position of the company then that company holds that view, regardless of how many employees personally hold contrary views.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:20 AM   #215
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
If it's the official position of the company then that company holds that view, regardless of how many employees personally hold contrary views.
I'll give you that. Does the view now become the view of the certain political issue?
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:26 AM   #216
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
I'll give you that. Does the view now become the view of the certain political issue?
I can't parse this out. Political issues don't have views. Those promoting political issues can have views. If the Klan is officially promoting birtherism as an organization, you can bet they are promoting it for racist reasons.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:32 AM   #217
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
I can't parse this out. Political issues don't have views. Those promoting political issues can have views. If the Klan is officially promoting birtherism as an organization, you can bet they are promoting it for racist reasons.
That's what we're asking, does the political issue of birtherism stem from racism, was it a racist cause? Some here think if a racist group attaches themselves to anything, the political issue becomes racist. My opinion is the people pushing birtherism were not racists, they never brought race into it.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:37 AM   #218
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
That's what we're asking, does the political issue of birtherism stem from racism, was it a racist cause? Some here think if a racist group attaches themselves to anything, the political issue becomes racist. My opinion is the people pushing birtherism were not racists, they never brought race into it.
By only ever pushing this stupid, easily disproven cause on one President, who happens to be black, they never brought race into it? By claiming that the black guy was a secret African, they never brought race into it? That view appears either disingenuous or extremely naive.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:48 AM   #219
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,861
Originally Posted by logger View Post
If that is directed at me, you would of course be incorrect. Segregation is segregation, which probably has racist overtones and is also very destructive.
It was directed at you of course, because you specifically said that racism requires the belief that one race is superior to another. Destructiveness was not a criterion. So why would I be "of course" incorrect? Even in denying it, you cannot get beyond "probably has racist overtones!" According to your previous definition of racism, if a person truly believed that races should not mix, without an accompanying belief about superiority, it would not be racist. Unless, of course, we're back to the usual goal post moving of saying a statement should not be considered to mean what it actually says.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 10:52 AM   #220
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 41,417
Ahem.... "political career"?
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 11:10 AM   #221
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
By only ever pushing this stupid, easily disproven cause on one President, who happens to be black, they never brought race into it?
Yes that's correct. You are actually the one who just brought race into it. Show me where "they" brought race into it?


Quote:
By claiming that the black guy was a secret African, they never brought race into it?
Where did they call him a secret African, this seems to be you and others on the left bringing secretAfrican into it?

Quote:
That view appears either disingenuous or extremely naive.
Show where "they" brought race into it, you can't. This is you guessing like the others that this was about race.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 11:14 AM   #222
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
It was directed at you of course, because you specifically said that racism requires the belief that one race is superior to another.
That is the definition of racism?

Quote:
Destructiveness was not a criterion. So why would I be "of course" incorrect? Even in denying it, you cannot get beyond "probably has racist overtones!" According to your previous definition of racism, if a person truly believed that races should not mix, without an accompanying belief about superiority, it would not be racist. Unless, of course, we're back to the usual goal post moving of saying a statement should not be considered to mean what it actually says.
You are incorrect because you're insinuating that I'm a segregationist, straight from the playbook of course.

I do not believe races shouldn't mix, I'm living proof of it!
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 11:22 AM   #223
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Yes that's correct. You are actually the one who just brought race into it. Show me where "they" brought race into it?



Where did they call him a secret African, this seems to be you and others on the left bringing secretAfrican into it?



Show where "they" brought race into it, you can't. This is you guessing like the others that this was about race.
Secret African is because according to the birther theory, Obama was secretly born in Africa not Hawaii. Are you unfamiliar with birtherism?

And I'm going to go with "disingenuous" on the claim that when one only applies standards or criticisms to one race, that one has not "brought race into it". One can be racist without specifically admitting to be a racist, and actions or words can be racist even if the perpetrator of those actions or words doesn't explicitly say "I'm doing this because I'm racist."
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 12:11 PM   #224
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Secret African is because according to the birther theory, Obama was secretly born in Africa not Hawaii. Are you unfamiliar with birtherism?
That is your term, not "theirs" You are bringing race into it, not "them"



Quote:
One can be racist without specifically admitting to be a racist,
Agreed, the leaders of this movement haven't telepathically hinted of their racism.

Quote:
and actions or words can be racist even if the perpetrator of those actions or words doesn't explicitly say "I'm doing this because I'm racist."
Agreed, we already have an example of this.

Once again I'll point out that tha leaders of this movement haven't said one word about race. I'm trying to get your side to admit this, thereby, making your sides claims that this was a racist movement BS.

Are you done playing games and ready to admit this wasn't a racist movement or issue?
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 12:28 PM   #225
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
That is your term, not "theirs" You are bringing race into it, not "them"





Agreed, the leaders of this movement haven't telepathically hinted of their racism.



Agreed, we already have an example of this.

Once again I'll point out that tha leaders of this movement haven't said one word about race. I'm trying to get your side to admit this, thereby, making your sides claims that this was a racist movement BS.

Are you done playing games and ready to admit this wasn't a racist movement or issue?
Hypothetical: a restaurant in your town refuses to serve black people. If questioned about any particular refusal, they have an excuse, but these reasons to refuse are never applied to any white patron. The owner never admits to being racist. Are these actions racist?

If someone brings up the fact that this restaurant only refuses service to black people, did the person who can see that 'bring race into it'? Or did the restaurant owner bring race into it by treating would-be patrons differently based on the color of their skin?


Eta: and saying someone is secretly an African is no different from calling them a secret African. I didn't invent the idea, birthers did.

Last edited by wareyin; 3rd January 2017 at 12:32 PM.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 01:10 PM   #226
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Hypothetical: a restaurant in your town refuses to serve black people. If questioned about any particular refusal, they have an excuse, but these reasons to refuse are never applied to any white patron. The owner never admits to being racist. Are these actions racist?
If the restaurant is refusing to serve black people it is racist!
Quote:
If someone brings up the fact that this restaurant only refuses service to black people, did the person who can see that 'bring race into it'? Or did the restaurant owner bring race into it by treating would-be patrons differently based on the color of their skin?
Yes the owner brought race into it by bringing up race.

Did the people leading the birther issue bring up race?

Quote:
Eta: and saying someone is secretly an African is no different from calling them a secret African. I didn't invent the idea, birthers did.
Lol, hilarious

No one disputes Obama is of African heritage. Saying secret African was never necessary, it was invented by your side.

I've never seen such desperation to hang on to a narrative.

Last edited by logger; 3rd January 2017 at 01:13 PM.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 01:16 PM   #227
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,861
Originally Posted by logger View Post
That is the definition of racism?
That is YOUR definition of racism, as taken directly from Post #187, in which you said, and I quote: "As I said before, racism is thinking ones race is superior to the other. You can understand definitions?
Quote:



You are incorrect because you're insinuating that I'm a segregationist, straight from the playbook of course.

I do not believe races shouldn't mix, I'm living proof of it!
I am not at all insinuating that you are a segregationist, since you have made it clear that you are not, if for reasons beyond simple racism ( I do, after all, agree that segregation is destructive), nor am I suggesting that you believe races shouldn't mix, as I rather suspect you don't. What I am saying is that your definition of racism, as quoted above, would exclude those things from being necessarily racist, and that, as a result, your definition of racism is defective.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 02:16 PM   #228
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 30,042
Don't feed it anymore.


Does anyone really question that Trump stayed on the Birther bandwagon long after the wheels had fallen off?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"You are the herp to my derp" -- bit_pattern
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 02:43 PM   #229
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
If the restaurant is refusing to serve black people it is racist!
Even if they don't explicitly claim that they are racist? Good, we're getting somewhere. Since the birthers refused to accept a black President, it is similarly racist.

Quote:
Yes the owner brought race into it by bringing up race.

Did the people leading the birther issue bring up race?
In the same way as the restaurant owner, they did. They refused to accept the same forms for Obama that they accepted for the white candidates. And, since you have accepted that a restaurant owner treating black people differently solely on the basis of their skin is racist even without explicitly saying he is, I think we can agree that the politicians and others refusing to accept Obama's short form BC while accepting every white candidate's short form is simarly racist.


Quote:
Lol, hilarious

No one disputes Obama is of African heritage. Saying secret African was never necessary, it was invented by your side.

I've never seen such desperation to hang on to a narrative.
African heritage does not mean born in Africa. Claiming Obama is secretly an African is claiming Obama is a secret African. I've never seen such transparent attempts to dispute such a simple point.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 03:40 PM   #230
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
That is YOUR definition of racism, as taken directly from Post #187, in which you said, and I quote: "As I said before, racism is thinking ones race is superior to the other. You can understand definitions?I am not at all insinuating that you are a segregationist, since you have made it clear that you are not, if for reasons beyond simple racism ( I do, after all, agree that segregation is destructive), nor am I suggesting that you believe races shouldn't mix, as I rather suspect you don't. What I am saying is that your definition of racism, as quoted above, would exclude those things from being necessarily racist, and that, as a result, your definition of racism is defective.
Take it up with google, the definition is there's.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 03:53 PM   #231
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Even if they don't explicitly claim that they are racist? Good, we're getting somewhere. Since the birthers refused to accept a black President, it is similarly racist.
You're not getting it. If they exclude "black" people they are explicitly claiming to be racists. The birthers never mention"black president" and you know it! Your twisting of this issue is getting dishonest. I suppose that's what you have to do to make it work.

Care to post where they make it about our "black president"




Quote:
In the same way as the restaurant owner, they did. They refused to accept the same forms for Obama that they accepted for the white candidates. And, since you have accepted that a restaurant owner treating black people differently solely on the basis of their skin is racist even without explicitly saying he is, I think we can agree that the politicians and others refusing to accept Obama's short form BC while accepting every white candidate's short form is simarly racist.
No actually you're contorting again. They felt they had evidence Obama was lying, therefore the birth certificate was a fake. They couldn't prove it, they lost. Nothing about race, you're inventing that.


Quote:
African heritage does not mean born in Africa. Claiming Obama is secretly an African is claiming Obama is a secret African. I've never seen such transparent attempts to dispute such a simple point.
That is really the oddest post I've ever seen here.

My point is no one uses the term "secret African" except the left. It is and was done to mock birtherism. Show me where the birthers use the term secret African? I'm not talking about some one-off publication.,I'm talking about Orly Taitz or Jerome Corsi. Hell see if you can even find it anywhere.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 04:16 PM   #232
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 10,592
Originally Posted by logger View Post
My point is no one uses the term "secret African" except the left. It is and was done to mock birtherism. Show me where the birthers use the term secret African? I'm not talking about some one-off publication.,I'm talking about Orly Taitz or Jerome Corsi. Hell see if you can even find it anywhere.
OMG this is mind boggling. In baby steps...

You say birtherism is politics as usual, based on legitimate concerns of eligibility, as was the challenge to Ted Cruz (and McCain for that matter). So far so good?

There were no controversies as to where Cruz and McCain were born. The challenges, such that they were, were based simply on eligibility per the constitution. So far so good?

With Obama, it's far more than that. Birthers claim that Obama has lied about his place of birth. They claim Obama has kept it a secret that he was actually born in Kenya -- that he secretly is an African. Regardless if they use these precise words, this is the core contention of birtherism.

Right?
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 3rd January 2017 at 04:17 PM.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 04:43 PM   #233
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
OMG this is mind boggling. In baby steps...

You say birtherism is politics as usual, based on legitimate concerns of eligibility, as was the challenge to Ted Cruz (and McCain for that matter). So far so good?

There were no controversies as to where Cruz and McCain were born. The challenges, such that they were, were based simply on eligibility per the constitution. So far so good?

With Obama, it's far more than that. Birthers claim that Obama has lied about his place of birth.
Because of evidence. They weren't just pulling it out of thin air like your side is pulling the racism card.

Quote:
They claim Obama has kept it a secret that he was actually born in Kenya -- that he secretly is an African.
Seems to me they felt his presidency was illigitement because he didn't meet the requirements for being president. Never once did they present the case as you have. Most likely because it isn't about race.


Quote:
Regardless if they use these precise words, this is the core contention of birtherism.

Right?
Wrong, see above.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 04:51 PM   #234
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
You're not getting it. If they exclude "black" people they are explicitly claiming to be racists. The birthers never mention"black president" and you know it! Your twisting of this issue is getting dishonest. I suppose that's what you have to do to make it work.

Care to post where they make it about our "black president"
And here I thought you were close to admitting it was racist to treat black people differently (such as refusing to serve them at a restaurant or refusing to accept the same papers proving citizenship), even if one didn't say the magic words "I am a racist". Guess you're back to disingenuously pretending that simply treating black people worse is ok as long as you don't say they're black.



Originally Posted by logger View Post
No actually you're contorting again. They felt they had evidence Obama was lying, therefore the birth certificate was a fake. They couldn't prove it, they lost. Nothing about race, you're inventing that.
Nothing about race? Treating black people worse than white people isn't about race? I don't believe you are sincere in your claim. We all know that all the evidence pointed to a Hawaiian birth, the birther movement never had any, and never felt they needed any more than the color of the man's skin.



Originally Posted by logger View Post
That is really the oddest post I've ever seen here.

My point is no one uses the term "secret African" except the left. It is and was done to mock birtherism. Show me where the birthers use the term secret African? I'm not talking about some one-off publication.,I'm talking about Orly Taitz or Jerome Corsi. Hell see if you can even find it anywhere.
What, exactly, is the difference between saying 'he was secretly born in Africa' and 'he is a secret African'?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 04:52 PM   #235
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 10,592
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Because of evidence. They weren't just pulling it out of thin air like your side is pulling the racism card.
Baby steps please. I'm simply confirming the basic facts.

Quote:
Seems to me they felt his presidency was illigitement because he didn't meet the requirements for being president. Never once did they present the case as you have. Most likely because it isn't about race.
The reason they give for him not meeting the requirements is because he was supposedly born in Africa, which he kept secret.

Geez, you're so paranoid about boxing yourself into a corner that you won't own up to basic facts that aren't even in dispute (except by you).

<man banging head on desk emoticon goes here>
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 05:03 PM   #236
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
And here I thought you were close to admitting it was racist to treat black people differently (such as refusing to serve them at a restaurant or refusing to accept the same papers proving citizenship),
It is racist to serve them because of race. You're making the jump to "his papers" and its quite strange.

Quote:
even if one didn't say the magic words "I am a racist". Guess you're back to disingenuously pretending that simply treating black people worse is ok as long as you don't say they're black.
Another crazy jump to the ridiculous.

You're talking about labeling a group or movement racist with no proof whatsoever.




Quote:
Nothing about race? Treating black people worse than white people isn't about race? I don't believe you are sincere in your claim. We all know that all the evidence pointed to a Hawaiian birth, the birther movement never had any, and never felt they needed any more than the color of the man's skin.
Just prove it then, stop your race pedaling and prove it.




Quote:
What, exactly, is the difference between saying 'he was secretly born in Africa' and 'he is a secret African'?
Nothing but that wasn't their argument. Their argument was he didn't meet the requirkents because he wasn't a natural born citizen.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 05:08 PM   #237
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Baby steps please. I'm simply confirming the basic facts.
In typical form you're leaving facts out.
Quote:
The reason they give for him not meeting the requirements is because he was supposedly born in Africa, which he kept secret.
Actually the reason they give is because he wasn't a natural born citizen. Do you have any clue about this issue?
Quote:
Geez, you're so paranoid about boxing yourself into a corner that you won't own up to basic facts that aren't even in dispute (except by you).

<man banging head on desk emoticon goes here>
Lol
I'm giving you the facts that were reality, not your spun leftist narrative.
I'm having way too much fun boxing you guys in. Anyone can clearly see this was hardball politics not race.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 05:10 PM   #238
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,861
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Take it up with google, the definition is there's.
Do you read your own posts? Do you care? Please reread post #187 and see if there is any possibility that the statement you made was not a statement you made. It was not in quotation marks. It was not attributed to Google then. It does not matter if you got the definition from Google. I take it up with you because it is the definition you used, as an argument to support the position you took.


Are you now disavowing the definition you cited so enthusiastically then, going so far as to accuse others of obtuseness for not accepting it?
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 05:22 PM   #239
logger
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,939
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Do you read your own posts? Do you care? Please reread post #187 and see if there is any possibility that the statement you made was not a statement you made. It was not in quotation marks. It was not attributed to Google then. It does not matter if you got the definition from Google. I take it up with you because it is the definition you used, as an argument to support the position you took.
That is the definition. What is your problem with it?

In post #222 I said "that is the definition of racism?"
You do understand that post? The question mark was put there to see if you agree with that definition.
Quote:
Are you now disavowing the definition you cited so enthusiastically then, going so far as to accuse others of obtuseness for not accepting it?
No, that is the definition.

Last edited by logger; 3rd January 2017 at 05:26 PM.
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2017, 05:27 PM   #240
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,194
Originally Posted by logger View Post
It is racist to serve them because of race. You're making the jump to "his papers" and its quite strange.
You apparently are unfamiliar with the birther stance, then. "His papers" are the forms he submitted that every other past candidate also submitted to verify his candidacy. As you clearly do not know, the birthers decided that the black man had to provide more than any white person ever had to before or since, and since this stance has only ever been taken with the black guy, it is patently obvious that the black guy is being treated differently because of his race, whether or not the racist actually say it out loud.

Originally Posted by logger View Post
Another crazy jump to the ridiculous.

You're talking about labeling a group or movement racist with no proof whatsoever.
I get it, in your eyes the KKK isn't a racist group, either. But to those who are honest in their assessment, the negative, disparate treatment towards black people is both evidence of racism, and proof that the racist actions are racist.


Originally Posted by logger View Post
Just prove it then, stop your race pedaling and prove it.
It has been proven. You have even agreed that those actions, when taken by a hypothetical restaurant owner, are racist.

Originally Posted by logger View Post
Nothing but that wasn't their argument. Their argument was he didn't meet the requirkents because he wasn't a natural born citizen.
Their argument was that he didn't meet the requirements because he was secretly born in Africa. If you contend otherwise, show me a prominent birther who did not claim an African birth.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:51 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.