Conservatives awarded hypocrite accolades

[TC Talks]

Bottom line is, I don't have much to say about a hypothetical situation, before inauguration, from somebody who doesn't hold actual power. If Trump were to carry through with doing this (ie, blanket pardon) there would be SEVERE political consequences to pay.

Yet, if someone affiliated with Obama said that our President was going to ignore the rule of law, you'd be ballistic about it. I am expecting you to kick Trump in the nuts just as hard for the stupid (and trust me, it's coming) things he does just as hard as you do for the best President we've had in a generation (Obama).

[zzand]

Best president in a generation? What the fuck are you smoking man?

[Bryce]

Best president in a generation? What the fuck are you smoking man?

Well, he IS the best black president we've ever had. Unless you count Bill Clinton.

[Plate Cap]

[
Well, he IS the best black president we've ever had. Unless you count Bill Clinton.

I've a question I've never heard addressed in the media or anything mainstream. Of course, it is an issue that "shall not be discussed", probably.....

.....how is it that a person born of a white woman and black man is a black man, any more than he is a white man?

Is there a rule I missed somewhere along the line?

[Lester The Nightfly]

.....how is it that a person born of a white woman and black man is a black man, any more than he is a white man?

Is there a rule I missed somewhere along the line?

I suppose for those that feel it's a thing, they could consult the Pantone book.

[Deleted User 8570]

[
Well, he IS the best black president we've ever had. Unless you count Bill Clinton.

I've a question I've never heard addressed in the media or anything mainstream. Of course, it is an issue that "shall not be discussed", probably.....

.....how is it that a person born of a white woman and black man is a black man, any more than he is a white man?

Is there a rule I missed somewhere along the line?

At one time one drop of black blood made someone black in societies eyes ... at least that's what I've heard. I never looked into it though... if that was true than the black population would greatly increase especially in the south among whites...

[Turkeytop]

I'm lost here. What does one's colour or race have to do with their ability to serve as President? In the 21st century, why is it even an issue for discussion?

[bmw]

Yet, if someone affiliated with Obama said that our President was going to ignore the rule of law, you'd be ballistic about it.

Well, when someone affiliated with Trump says that Trump IS going to outright ignore the rule of law, let me know. Until then, you're drawing a straw man.

[Deleted User 8570]

I'm lost here. What does one's colour or race have to do with their ability to serve as President? In the 21st century, why is it even an issue for discussion?

Somebody brought it up...

But it shouldn't and yet there are lots of people with Proto-societal views...

[Plate Cap]

I'm lost here. What does one's colour or race have to do with their ability to serve as President? In the 21st century, why is it even an issue for discussion?

Oh, golly-gee-willikers, shame on whoever noticed! How positively un-trendy and yet another example of our non-urbane south-of-the-border thinking as recognized from our "mentors" and general so-much-better-than-us folks from the north!!!

Male? Female? Tall? Short? Fat? Skinny? Of course no one in the 21st century would notice any of these, especially if members of any of the forbidden-to-mention subcategories constantly push it down the throats of all.

Generally, you post rather odd but generally innocent comments. You've delicately added 'ability to serve' to the mix here to provide an opportunity here to push your agenda. No one, certainly not me, mentioned ability.....the topic turn was purely nomenclature.

Not so nice try. You're right....you are lost.

[Plate Cap]

I suppose for those that feel it's a thing, they could consult the Pantone book.

Not a "thing", perhaps except for those who choose to make it one in order to further some other agenda. Perhaps we need a list of questions that might be 'things' so we don't offend anyone by asking about them.

I'm looking purely at the technology of the naming convention.

[Turkeytop]

I'm lost here. What does one's colour or race have to do with their ability to serve as President? In the 21st century, why is it even an issue for discussion?

Oh, golly-gee-willikers, shame on whoever noticed! How positively un-trendy and yet another example of our non-urbane south-of-the-border thinking as recognized from our "mentors" and general so-much-better-than-us folks from the north!!!

Male? Female? Tall? Short? Fat? Skinny? Of course no one in the 21st century would notice any of these, especially if members of any of the forbidden-to-mention subcategories constantly push it down the throats of all.

Generally, you post rather odd but generally innocent comments. You've delicately added 'ability to serve' to the mix here to provide an opportunity here to push your agenda. No one, certainly not me, mentioned ability.....the topic turn was purely nomenclature.

Not so nice try. You're right....you are lost.

Wow. Now I'm totally lost. I don't even know what any of this means. What is this "agenda" I'm supposedly advancing Here?

[screen glare]

TurkTop - you can't relate because you hail from a land where nobody justified the classification of human beings as animals - or property to be owned by other human beings.

Where you come from human beings were and are - human beings. Period. Not slaves. Not property. Not animals.

The very young country with an experimental form of government - The United States - made a grave beginners error when white men and women of means decided it was proper for them to institute slavery. And that system of brutally breaking wills and killing souls and breaking apart families caused repercussions that remain a hot and blazing fire to this day.

Unless you were raised in The United States - you can't grasp the subtle cues that have been inundating Americans with one deeply rooted, unshakable message: White skinned humans are superior to non-white skinned humans.

You've got to be carefully taught, TurkTop. And you haven't been. Lucky you.

[Deleted User 8570]

I'm lost here. What does one's colour or race have to do with their ability to serve as President? In the 21st century, why is it even an issue for discussion?

Oh, golly-gee-willikers, shame on whoever noticed! How positively un-trendy and yet another example of our non-urbane south-of-the-border thinking as recognized from our "mentors" and general so-much-better-than-us folks from the north!!!

Male? Female? Tall? Short? Fat? Skinny? Of course no one in the 21st century would notice any of these, especially if members of any of the forbidden-to-mention subcategories constantly push it down the throats of all.

Generally, you post rather odd but generally innocent comments. You've delicately added 'ability to serve' to the mix here to provide an opportunity here to push your agenda. No one, certainly not me, mentioned ability.....the topic turn was purely nomenclature.

Not so nice try. You're right....you are lost.

Care to translate?

[Turkeytop]

TurkTop - you can't relate because you hail from a land where nobody justified the classification of human beings as animals - or property to be owned by other human beings.

Where you come from human beings were and are - human beings. Period. Not slaves. Not property. Not animals.

The very young country with an experimental form of government - The United States - made a grave beginners error when white men and women of means decided it was proper for them to institute slavery. And that system of brutally breaking wills and killing souls and breaking apart families caused repercussions that remain a hot and blazing fire to this day.

Unless you were raised in The United States - you can't grasp the subtle cues that have been inundating Americans with one deeply rooted, unshakable message: White skinned humans are superior to non-white skinned humans.

You've got to be carefully taught, TurkTop. And you haven't been. Lucky you.

I wish what you say was true. We have our own shameful past and our own shameful present. Early in our history we hunted native Canadians for sport. The Beothuk Nation was hunted to extinction.

Another of our dirty secrets is that we had slavery in Canada and it continued long after it had been abolished in the U.S. Whereas the U.S. emancipated all of its slaves, we ended slavery here in typically Canadian fashion. The buying and selling of slaves was outlawed and a law was passed that said no one could be born into slavery. But existing slaves remained slave for the rest of their days.

For most of the 20th century native Canadian children were taken from their families and shipped off to residential schools, mostly run by churches. They were forced to unlearn their native culture and language. They became victims of horrible physical and sexual abuse.

In 1946 Viola Desmond, a black woman, was arrested and jailed for sitting in the White's Only section of a Halifax movie theatre. The Bank of Canada recently announced that Desmond's portrait will appear on our new $10 Bill.

And, of course, today we still have the annual seal hunt, where hundreds of sportsmen, armed with baseball bats, go out onto the ice and club baby seals to death.

We Canadians have no right to present ourselves as superior to any other nation.