- Joined
- Feb 12, 2013
- Messages
- 5,729
- Reaction score
- 2,853
- Location
- Colorado mountains
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
What Nixon revealed in the Watergate tapes, was in what he thought were "private conversations".If there is something in Sterling's contract he violated by having a personal conversation I would be surprised. Remember this taped conversation that was released was a private conversation.
So after I scold you like a little boy you crawl back saying "please mister, I'll be good, I really can debate and discuss like an adult'. I'll think it over but for now run along boy, ya bother me.
He calls anyone who doesn't agree with him a "fascist moron" and then scolds us for "not holding a respectful intelligent conversation".:lamo
He has clearly lost the debate and now he runs away because he couldn't protect the racist.Yeah, but he doesn't have any space rented in my head that allows for him to scold me. Oh, and you wrote, "He calls anyone who doesn't agree with him . . ." Again, I pretty much think that was what he was saying in general, but he will now tell you that you are putting words in his mouth. And he still won't answer the question.
BS. She is no more a racist than she would be a rapist if she reported that he raped her.
Your convoluted, inside out, blame the victim thinking, tells us a lot about you and your warped values.
Thanks for that reveal...
.
What Nixon revealed in the Watergate tapes, was in what he thought were "private conversations".
I am not blaming any victim. The g/f was not a victim. What did he do to her? Nothing whatsoever other than trust her with his opinion or feelings about something in a private moment between the two of them.
I think you are entirely missing the whole point here that what we do in private, so long as we are not violating the rights of anybody else, is our own business and should be nobody else's business. If you disagree with that, make your best case for how I am wrong about that. But don't be a jerk and mischaracterize what I have said or accuse me of saying what I did not say.
Good luck, that is exactly what you can count on with libs in here.
Both examples speak to what were expected to be private conversations that brought down men who thought their power was unimpeachable.What Nixon revealed was illegal. Being a racist is sad but as of yet not illegal. see the difference?
Both examples speak to what were expected to be private conversations that brought down men who thought their power was unimpeachable.
The similarities out weigh the differences.
She was absolutely the victim of a a man in power who felt he had the right to tell her not to associate with black men in public because she was on his payroll. You called the victim of racism a racist. Nothing new . I have seen republicons do this exact same thing dozens of times, calling anyone who reports racism , a racist, in an attempt to defuse the gravity of the charge.I am not blaming any victim. The g/f was not a victim. What did he do to her? Nothing whatsoever other than trust her with his opinion or feelings about something in a private moment between the two of them.
You clearly do not comprehend the meaning of the word.Only in the mind of a fascist.
You are in the wrong political wing to be throwing around the word fascist.:lamoWorld English Dictionary
fascism (ˈfæʃɪzəm)
— n
1. any ideology or movement inspired by Italian Fascism, such as German National Socialism; any right-wing nationalist ideology or movement with an authoritarian and hierarchical structure that is fundamentally opposed to democracy and liberalism
2. any ideology, movement, programme, tendency, etc, that may be characterized as right-wing, chauvinist, authoritarian, etc
3. prejudice in relation to the subject specified: body fascism
You clearly do not comprehend the meaning of the word.
You are in the wrong political wing to be throwing around the word fascist.:lamo
. The term "social fascist" was used to describe social democratic parties, anti-Comintern and progressive socialist parties, and dissenters within Comintern affiliates throughout the interwar period."
She was absolutely the victim of a a man in power who felt he had the right to tell her not to associate with black men in public because she was on his payroll. You called the victim of racism a racist. Nothing new . I have seen republicons do this exact same thing dozens of times, calling anyone who reports racism , a racist.
It doesn't work and I will not let you get away with it.
Not this time ...not ever.
Exactly as you have used the term pejoratively and erroneously to attack anyone who disagrees with your racism biased view.
You have merely demonstrated a history of the erroneous misuse of the word.
He paid her plenty and he decided he could tell her what race of people she could publicly associate with because of that power of money he held over her.She wasn't on his payroll. She was reported to be his mistress lavished with hugely expensive gifts which is why Sterling's wife is suing her. She has denied a bf/gf relationship and claims she had a professional relationship as his archivist--as a contractor, not an employee--which came as a huge surprise to all of Sterling's friends, all of her friends, and Sterling's wife who had a very different perception about that.
For Sterling to be subject to and suffering consequences for breaking NBA rules is one thing. That is between him and the NBA. But we all should be leery of this new thing of destroying people by intercepting and recording private conversations that are intended to be private and do not involve violation of anybody's rights or illegal activities. Next time it could be you. And that angry outburst intended for the ears of a trusted friend only and that might or might not have been the whole story could be used to ruin you, get you fired, destroy a relationship, etc.
You are defending a racist in this thread.My racism biased view? Example please
All this media blitz on Bundy and The basketball guy has me wondering if we now have thought police in this country. I'm not racist myself but I don't see what the big deal is if you are. We have laws to protect people from racism so your opinion should be a right and you should not be punished for what you believe. IMO firing someone for being a racist is anti American and flies in the face of free speech.
Buck Ewer;1063233583[B said:]You are defending a racist in this thread.[/B]
There is a long history of people using the term fascist in an erroneously pejorative way. The term is universally seen as negative and as such makes a great slur for those who have run out of viable arguments.
He paid her plenty and he decided he could tell her what race of people she could publicly associate with because of that power of money he held over her.
If you are OK with that, it doesn't really matter, because the NBA isn't.
I personally am "leery" of the people who wish to protect racists and the secrecy of their racist opinions.
Send me a message next time you defend a communist or a gay person and I will consider believing you...I am defending freedom of speech and freedom to be a racist or a communist or a gay or ......
Calling the recipient of racism a racist, is the greatest non sequitur, red herring and straw man I have ever heard.And I have no desire to continue a conversation with somebody who insists on being non sequitur, ad hominem, and use red herrings and strawmen to avoid addressing the argument another person makes. I believe I made a very good argument that Sterling held no power whatsoever over Stiviano other than what she willingly accepted. You completely ignored that argument. Nor have I made a single argument in support of anybody's racism or acting out that racism. But the right of a person to be racist? That is sacrosanct if you believe in liberty at all. According to the poll on this thread, more than 90% of our fellow DP members agree with me on that.
Calling the recipient of racism a racist, is the greatest non sequitur, red herring and straw man I have ever heard.
I think you protest too much.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?