Race Vs Class The New Dem Civil War

[BeatMan]

The Democrats have ended their unity tour more divided than ever. Unlike Republican quarrels, their war is mostly ignored by the media. And yet it will define what the left and its plan to take over the country will look like.

When Hillary lost, she didn’t just lose the White House. She also lost the DNC. Her loyalists, already discredited for their brazen tampering to disenfranchise Sanders supporters, had to make way for Obama’s people. The Clinton legacy is over. The Dems belong to Obama now.

Or do they?

When Obama inherited the DNC from the Clintons, he also inherited their bitter enemy.

Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders are the leaders of the two sides in the Dem civil war. The shots are already being fired. As usual, they are coming from the insurgent Sandernistas.

Keith Ellison, Bernie’s man to take over the DNC, fired the first shot, blaming Barack for Dem losses.

"Obama could have been a better party leader, and I think that the fact that he wasn’t, has put his legacy in jeopardy," he charged. "We lost a lot of state House seats, governorships, secretaries of states… he can’t say that he wasn’t part of those losses. I mean, who else?”

Who else indeed? It’s an obvious question that can’t be asked in Dem circles. Obama is the only truly national figure that the party has. And he has used the fall of the Clintons to take over the DNC.

If Obama is really responsible for Democrat losses, then the party and its donors just bought first class seats on the Titanic. That’s why Democrat autopsies of the defeat remain so explosive. Blame can be apportioned to white people, to racism, Islamophobia and to Global Warming, but not to Barack Obama.

Keith Ellison was the best messenger Sanders had to take a shot at Barry. Black loyalty to Obama is still the third rail of politics. And Ellison is one of the few black people in the Sanders inner circle. Obama’s pricey Wall Street speech offered the opportunity for a more direct attack from Bernie Sanders.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266570/race-vs-class-new-dem-civil-war

 

[Johan]

GOP = Whites vs Blacks & Latinos, Christians vs Muslims and Atheists, Rich vs Middle Class and Poors

 

[BeatMan]

GOP = Whites vs Blacks & Latinos, Christians vs Muslims and Atheists, Rich vs Middle Class and Poors

that race baiting and class baiting. cut it out and i asked you several questions in previous threads and you ignored them

 

[BeatMan]

typical post and run away

 

[Rattrap]

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266570/race-vs-class-new-dem-civil-war

The problem with reading/quoting/citing propaganda is that it can safely be dismissed, even before getting to the actual argument (which might be a good one!). Much like you wouldn't leave a broken clock on the wall, even though that clock is correct 0.0023% of the time (by the second - AKA twice a day). This is why sources matter: I could investigate whether or not the broken clock is telling me the correct time, but any rational person is going to dismiss it and find a better source.

You can read an amusing (and snark aside, not inaccurate) description of David Horowitz (under whose umbrella Frontpage Mag falls) here: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/David_Horowitz

The unfortunate thing is, there are kernels of truth in the article, but they're obscured by hyper-partisan, psuedo-intellectual (yet quite) vacuous bullshit. But then, the most effective propaganda usually is.

The second to last sentence though - that takes the cake in classic projection. I wouldn't find better examples looking through a psychology textbook.

 

[Jack Davenport]

The problem with reading/quoting/citing propaganda is that it can safely be dismissed, even before getting to the actual argument (which might be a good one!). Much like you wouldn't leave a broken clock on the wall, even though that clock is correct 0.0023% of the time (by the second - AKA twice a day). This is why sources matter: I could investigate whether or not the broken clock is telling me the correct time, but any rational person is going to dismiss it and find a better source.

You can read an amusing (and snark aside, not inaccurate) description of David Horowitz (under whose umbrella Frontpage Mag falls) here: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/David_Horowitz

The unfortunate thing is, there are kernels of truth in the article, but they're obscured by hyper-partisan, psuedo-intellectual (yet quite) vacuous bullshit. But then, the most effective propaganda usually is.

The second to last sentence though - that takes the cake in classic projection. I wouldn't find better examples looking through a psychology textbook.

From someone who propagates the lies,distortions and propaganda of the most dangerous ideology in this country.

The irony would be hilarious if he wasn't so far removed from reality he can't see how stupid he looks when he posts this shit.

:1orglaugh

http://www.conservapedia.com/Liberal_propaganda

 

[BeatMan]

The problem with reading/quoting/citing propaganda is that it can safely be dismissed, even before getting to the actual argument (which might be a good one!). Much like you wouldn't leave a broken clock on the wall, even though that clock is correct 0.0023% of the time (by the second - AKA twice a day). This is why sources matter: I could investigate whether or not the broken clock is telling me the correct time, but any rational person is going to dismiss it and find a better source.

You can read an amusing (and snark aside, not inaccurate) description of David Horowitz (under whose umbrella Frontpage Mag falls) here: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/David_Horowitz

The unfortunate thing is, there are kernels of truth in the article, but they're obscured by hyper-partisan, psuedo-intellectual (yet quite) vacuous bullshit. But then, the most effective propaganda usually is.

The second to last sentence though - that takes the cake in classic projection. I wouldn't find better examples looking through a psychology textbook.

rational wiki is not a valid source it s leftist rip off from conservapedia

 

[zeeblofowl_1969]

GOP = Whites vs Blacks & Latinos, Christians vs Muslims and Atheists, Rich vs Middle Class and Poors

GOP/Dems are working for the same people.
They both make noise to motivate thier base but in the end they both work to enrich themselves and the 'elite' the sad thing is most American actually believe there are sides......
And the sheep keep bleating....

 

[Rattrap]

rational wiki is not a valid source it s leftist rip off from conservapedia

Valid to the right's ideology, no. But if you're interested in any kind of objective truth, that shouldn't matter.

Are you?

 

[meesterperfect]

GOP/Dems are working for the same people.
They both make noise to motivate thier base but in the end they both work to enrich themselves and the 'elite' the sad thing is most American actually believe there are sides......
And the sheep keep bleating....

I think that is true.
But I do think there is a difference in how they , lets say, herd the sheep. Meaning us.
There is a competition between the partys. I think its pretty freaking clear that the democrats sink to lower levels and also pander more to the truly unaware and brainwashed or conditioned.
But both partys are motivated by the same thing. Appeasing their bosses and aquiring more personal wealth for themselves.
In the end it seems they are the same.
And if Trumps actions thus far doesn't convince someone they I doubt they will ever figure it out.

I also believe that there are some, some, politicians who actually do or at least did at one time want to truly serve The People.
But the level of corruption and criminality they are surrounded with makes that impossible and also dangerous.