US Politics : Biden 100 days edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
36,901
So not likely?

He is financially backed by gazillionaire Peter Thiel so that is why I am optimistic about his chances. He's also a proper working class lad, which will play well in Ohio.

Edit: Now that I think about it, whoever Trump backs in the Ohio primary will win the GOP primary and very likely the GE. Tim Ryan thinks he has a chance... lol. Has he not noticed how 'red' Ohio has become?
 
Last edited:

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
25,833
Well, the history part was divided into international history and local (SA) history. The international history was fine I guess as it focused on WW2 and didn't overlook the inherent evilness of the USSR.

SA history was all about apartheid (yawn) and how gloriousness of the ANC (reality check: international sanctions were far more influential in ending apartheid than the 'internal resistance' of the ANC. The apartheid security apparatus was far better equipped to defeat if the ANC if it came to war. Disgusting attacks by ANC terrorists like the massacre at Kenilworth church or Andrew Zondo's bombing of Sanlam were mentioned as a single line and not thoroughly examined).
So you're saying, from the most biased BS you've ever known, you learned there was a massacre at Saint James by the military wing of the PAC, and a bombing at Sanlam by the military wing of the ANC.

Hmmmm. :unsure:
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
36,901
Back to US politics and I note Biden has arrived in the glorious UK for the G7 summit in the seaside resort of Cornwall. Let's hope for no obvious verbal slip ups. As an aside, Cyril Ramaphosa has somehow got himself invited along with Australia and South Korea (good nations that are important allies against the Chinese).
 

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
25,833
@The_Right_Honourable_Brit

Seen this?


Seems like Greg's decided that succeeding from Mexico is *the* patriotic moment in Texas' history... "Patriotic education" sounds pretty NK to me, but whatever...

I wonder if Greg's patriotic education includes section 9 of the General Provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Texas, or *why* they seceded from Mexico in the first place?

You wanna take a guess?

Give you a hint... It's the same reason they seceded from the union in 1861.

Yup. Texas has seceded from *two* countries just to keep slaves.

What odds you recon your bookies will give you on these patriotic education folks teaching that to Texas kids the way your teachers told you about Kenilworth and Amanzimtoti?
 
Last edited:

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
25,833
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
36,901
@The_Right_Honourable_Brit

Seen this?


Seems like Greg's decided that succeeding from Mexico is *the* patriotic moment in Texas' history... "Patriotic education" sounds pretty NK to me, but whatever...

I wonder if Greg's patriotic education includes section 9 of the General Provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Texas, or *why* they succeeded from Mexico in the first place?

You wanna take a guess?

Give you a hint... It's the same reason they succeeded from the union in 1861.

Yup. Texas has succeeded from *two* countries just to keep slaves.

What odds you recon your bookies will give you on these patriotic education folks teaching that to Texas kids the way your teachers told you about Kenilworth and Amanzimtoti?

I think you mean 'secede' instead of 'succeed'.

Well, I had to some reading on this (I did have a vague collection that Texas was part of Mexico at some stage, as Alaska was 'owned' by Russia I think).

It appears that Abbott is correct that Texas, in its current form, started in 1836. From here.

Texas itself was the northern part of a larger state called Coahuila y Tejas [...]. On March 2, 1836, Texas declared its independence from Mexico and announced its intention to divorcing Coahuila, which joined up with Tamaulipas and Nuevo León to form the short-lived Republic of Rio Grande.

Although it does appear to be somewhat about slavery, the same link always talks about the Mexican president also centralizing power, which would piss off the Texans who had previously not given much thought to the political dynamics of Mexico.

The new republic of Mexico was preoccupied elsewhere and gave Coahuila y Tejas a free hand when it came to governance, a policy that would come back to bite Mexico City in the rear. Mexico City also liberalized its immigration laws so that English-speaking settlers from the United States could establish themselves in Coahuila y Tejas. The settlers came mostly from slaveholding American states, and this clashed deeply with Mexican views on race and slavery.

Nothing came of this proposed divorce until 1835, when Santa Anna, who was a decentralist just two years prior, abolished the Mexican constitution of 1824 and began centralizing power. The states that had originally joined the Mexican republic were disbanded and replaced with “departments” that were created by Santa Anna, and Coahuila y Tejas revolted.
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
36,901

Perhaps look at his background rather than his achievements? His background is literally the definition of working class. You know if you get into Yale Law doesn't make you part of the liberal elite, right? You need to look more broadly than his achievements. He had a tough, gritty, tumuous childhood and yet has still achieved so much. A truly heart-warming American story.
 

buka001

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
12,620
The foundations only deal with the legal avenue. The field has developed since then, as all "academic" (or in this pseudo-academic) fields do.

This journal article makes the point: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1757743819871316





So no quotes from any of the works on the subject supporting any of the claims that CRT says all whites are racists or that white kids must be taught to hate their country?
 

buka001

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
12,620
Well, the history part was divided into international history and local (SA) history. The international history was fine I guess as it focused on WW2 and didn't overlook the inherent evilness of the USSR.

SA history was all about apartheid (yawn) and how gloriousness of the ANC (reality check: international sanctions were far more influential in ending apartheid than the 'internal resistance' of the ANC. The apartheid security apparatus was far better equipped to defeat if the ANC if it came to war. Disgusting attacks by ANC terrorists like the massacre at Kenilworth church or Andrew Zondo's bombing of Sanlam were mentioned as a single line and not thoroughly examined).
You are probably too young to recall the direct experience, but all this CRT moral outrage reminds me of the good old Satanic panic of the 1980's.
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
36,901
So no quotes from any of the works on the subject supporting any of the claims that CRT says all whites are racists or that white kids must be taught to hate their country?

Well, you are not going to get quotes from the original founders because as my article literally just said, they only dealt with the legal issues...it has now evolved into a complete monster. I've given you a quote about CRT and the extremely broad definition of white supremacy. (which if you read closely, basically assumes every white person is a white supremacist)..what more do you want?
 

buka001

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
12,620
Well, you are not going to get quotes from the original founders because as my article literally just said, they only dealt with the legal issues...it has now evolved into a complete monster. I've given you a quote about CRT and the extremely broad definition of white supremacy. (which if you read closely, basically assumes every white person is a white supremacist)..what more do you want?
Proof of the claim that CRT has somewhere in its writings claimed that all white people are racist and kids will be taught to hate the country of their birth.
 

buka001

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
12,620
Back to US politics and I note Biden has arrived in the glorious UK for the G7 summit in the seaside resort of Cornwall. Let's hope for no obvious verbal slip ups. As an aside, Cyril Ramaphosa has somehow got himself invited along with Australia and South Korea (good nations that are important allies against the Chinese).
Got to laugh at this tweet from Boris, though.

Immeasurably myopic.

Virtue signalling about building a greener future, while walking off from a plane, which he flew on from London to Cornwall ...

 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
45,208
Can't believe there are actually people in this thread defending Critical Race Theory.
*throws up a little*

fd4a6f104cc9fd8714ade437de8b032a.jpg
 

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
25,833
I think you mean 'secede' instead of 'succeed'.

Well, I had to some reading on this (I did have a vague collection that Texas was part of Mexico at some stage, as Alaska was 'owned' by Russia I think).

It appears that Abbott is correct that Texas, in its current form, started in 1836. From here.



Although it does appear to be somewhat about slavery, the same link always talks about the Mexican president also centralizing power, which would piss off the Texans who had previously not given much thought to the political dynamics of Mexico.
Yup. I didn't even see the secede/succeed. Think my Mac decided for me...

Somewhat? And just look at you states-rights-ing for TX and Mexico, Chris.

Mexico abolished slavery in 1829, so by 1836...
SEC. 9. All persons of color who were slaves for life previous to their emigration to Texas, and who are now held in bondage, shall remain in the like state of servitude, provide the said slave shall be the bona fide property of the person so holding said slave as aforesaid. Congress shall pass no laws to prohibit emigrants from the United States of America from bringing their slaves into the Republic with them, and holding them by the same tenure by which such slaves were held in the United States; nor shall Congress have power to emancipate slaves; nor shall any slave-holder be allowed to emancipate his or her slave or slaves, without the consent of Congress, unless he or she shall send his or her slave or slaves without the limits of the Republic. No free person of African descent, either in whole or in part, shall be permitted to reside permanently in the Republic, without the consent of Congress, and the importation or admission of Africans or negroes into this Republic, excepting from the United States of America, is forever prohibited, and declared to be piracy.

Section 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of Texas starts like this...
All persons, (Africans, the descendants of Africans, and Indians excepted,) who were residing in Texas on the day of the Declaration of Independence, shall be considered citizens of the Republic, and entitled to all the privileges of such.

And here's Texas from it's declaration of secession in 1861...
We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

By the secession of six of the slave-holding States, and the certainty that others will speedily do likewise, Texas has no alternative but to remain in an isolated connection with the North, or unite her destinies with the South.
 

AlmightyBender

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
6,384
So you're saying, from the most biased BS you've ever known, you learned there was a massacre at Saint James by the military wing of the PAC, and a bombing at Sanlam by the military wing of the ANC.

Hmmmm. :unsure:
What he meant was that it was biased because the NP weren't the protagonists in the story. He wants the history that is taught to be about the ANC terrorism.

Our boi is showing his true colours tonight
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
46,482
And there's the canard.



Thanks, Chris.

Let's dig into that, shall we?

We've had our own problematic history, so tell me, which lessons teach us to hate our South African skin?

Is it the Dutch colonists? Maybe the British invaders? Can't kids look in the mirror after learning about the Boer trekkers and the Zulu, or Sotho, or Ndebele? Maybe the Anglo Zulu war is the final straw? Maybe it's the Boer War? Maybe it's apartheid, Chris?

What part of our history teaches us to hate the land of our birth?

I certainly don't remember the moment when all of those lessons clicked, and I though, 'goddamnit, I hate being a South African'. In fact, I'm exactly the opposite... Got the refund for my Springboks/Lions tickets today and I'm pissed I won't be able to cheer South Africa spanking the whole kingdom live.

Because of *all* of our history, I'm South African to my marrow, and I want everyone to know it.

But worse, much worse than your, "teaching white kids to hate the land of their birth" BS...

Statues.

Statues are your tell, Chris.

Y'all defend statues because, inexplicably, we learn history from them, right? That's why y'all keep defending them, or so I keep being told.

Edward Colston's statue should stay up, but please, keep the slaves perspective out of schools.

I mean, all you'll ever need to know about the Atlantic slave trade is right here, amirite?

url.json


That's the supremacy, Chris. That's your tell, and I see you.

Historic facts are just that; historic fact... They're part of a tapestry, and when you stand back to look at the whole thing, they tell the full story of who you are.

Light and dark. Dark and light.

Lord knows, I'd rather look at the colours than sanitised monochrome... I just don't get why you're afraid to.
We know the type of "education" Chris prefers... Thinly veiled propaganda that props up his ideological mores.

The "1836 project", eh?

"After the Texas Revolution ended in 1836, the Constitution of the Republic of Texas made slavery legal. The General Provisions of the Constitution forbade any slave owner from freeing his slaves without the consent of Congress and forbade Congress from making any law that restricted the slave trade or emancipated slaves."



1623270505932.png
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
46,482
Nope.

Here's the book you need to read about CRT:

View attachment 1085891

You also need to read articles like this or this

Only then you will realise the cancer of CRT.
Once again, the tell is that you don't actually want anyone to read the seminal works of CRT, but instead want right wing activists' screeds to be the arbiter of what it is and isn't. Absurd.

And can you please stop dodging the question - what are the central tenets of CRT that you very confidently asserted you know earlier?
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
46,482
Can you quote the exact paragraph in any CRT text that says CRT proposes educational courses that will teach White kids to hate the land of their birth?!

I will wait and ask you for this everyday.


Again quote any CRT text that states any of what they are saying here must be taught in schools.


The quote from any CRT theory that says all white people are racist?

Which of the original theorists proposed this in any of their academic works?

What amazes me here is in a county with a population that is only 8.1% black will feel so threatened at something which isn't even part of their curriculum, to act so fearful, it really makes me wonder why?

Oh wait, they are in Virginia.



I wonder if Loudoun County schools teaches that paragraph, which has very significant historic significance for the State of Virginia, when they teach the history of Virginia?

Or who Howard Bromley was?
This is a rundown of people who have been brain-poisoned by Fox News and charlatans like Christopher Rufo (as he explicitly stated his goal is). CRT is the catch-all term for whatever moral panic they've bought into.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top