Donald Trump

Byrd changed his mind because he was wrong.
Did he? And if he did, when did he? I think part of the problem many Non-democrat minorities have is the lack of similar scrutiny when the perpetrator is a Democrat.

Yes, it is true that Byrd many times denounced or claimed he regrets his associates with the KKK. In his memoirs he himself claimed it was something he "joined for excitement and because he thought it opposed communism."

He claimed he was in it briefly and has haunted him ever since. He has claimed he was in it for just a short while btw in 1941 and left it in 1943 when he moved to Baltimore.

However there are letters of his addressed to other KKK members long after he claimed he had left. For example his letter from 1945 to a Kkk Senator whining about integration

Here is what he wrote:

"I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.

That does not sound like the words of a man who lacked conviction or was looking for an opposition to communism.

You'd have to forgive me if I struggle to find an adult who says this somehow miraculously changed. Especially, when the claim of his change itself is a half truth.
Has Vance actually changed his mind that Trump is America's Hitler or just changed his mind to think that's now a good thing?
Unless you think Trump or Vance are eventually likely to get this sort of "eulogy":
Well, he said he was wrong about Trump. And he gives ample evidence why he believes he was wrong.

Aw for Byrd on the other hand seemed to have changed his mind because being a racist wasn't commensurate with his political aspirations once he was outside the cesspit that was W. Virginia at the time.

It is almost certain that his political career in West Virginia was launched on the backs of KKK support, and inspirations.

As a letter from 1946, long after he claimed he had left the KKK, youwhere he wrote to the Grand Wizard:
"the Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia."

This years after he claimed 'technically' left the clan. Soon after he organized and ran for office in WV and won and kept doing so until he became a Senator.

It seems it was when being a racist stopped being a career advancement track, that he himself began to recalibrate. Or so it would seem to anyone who gives his history an honest look over rather than the hand waving of "He changed his mind and the Liberal blacks of the NAACP who he allocated money gave him a pass."
When Byrd died at age 92 on June 28, 2010, the NAACP released a statement saying that over the course of his life he “became a champion for civil rights and liberties” and “came to consistently support the NAACP civil rights agenda.”
Yes, this is often how Left reframe Byrd. He was young man who made a mistake joining the clan, changed his mind and felt bad or guilty and was later supported by the NAACP. This all is forgiven.

In reality his history is way more complicated. And an explanation of self preservation is far more sensible and plausible than the whitewashed version Democrats like telling themselves.

Byrd has the sole distinction of being the ONLY Senator of all Seven who had the opportunity to vote on the confirmation of the first 2 black Supreme Court Justices. One from the Left and one from the Right. Who opposed both!

He also opposed the Civil Rights act of 64 and 65.

In 2001 8 years before be died and well into his 80s he had an interview where he said we have "White N-words" in West Virginia too. 2ice. As always he apologized and was quickly forgiven for the misstep. No one thought to inquire as to why a supposedly changed man was so comfortable using such language.

This is the kind of hand waving 'good' left minded people seem to partake in.


I can go on about the convoluted history of Byrd's race relations. Sure, he supported the integration of the Capitol force, supported a Martin Luther King holiday and gave the NAACP 10 million. Which is probably why they screwed black people and signed off on his transformation.

But his language late in his life, the lies in his KKK stories and when he left, his constant focus on how joining the KKK is an albatross for anyone trying to become politically important and his own timeline of when he changed, all suggests he was a full blown racist longer after Democrats want us to pay attention.
 
Did he? And if he did, when did he? I think part of the problem many Non-democrat minorities have is the lack of similar scrutiny when the perpetrator is a Democrat.

Yes, it is true that Byrd many times denounced or claimed he regrets his associates with the KKK. In his memoirs he himself claimed it was something he "joined for excitement and because he thought it opposed communism."

He claimed he was in it briefly and has haunted him ever since. He has claimed he was in it for just a short while btw in 1941 and left it in 1943 when he moved to Baltimore.

However there are letters of his addressed to other KKK members long after he claimed he had left. For example his letter from 1945 to a Kkk Senator whining about integration

Here is what he wrote:

"I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.

That does not sound like the words of a man who lacked conviction or was looking for an opposition to communism.

You'd have to forgive me if I struggle to find an adult who says this somehow miraculously changed. Especially, when the claim of his change itself is a half truth.

Well, he said he was wrong about Trump. And he gives ample evidence why he believes he was wrong.

Aw for Byrd on the other hand seemed to have changed his mind because being a racist wasn't commensurate with his political aspirations once he was outside the cesspit that was W. Virginia at the time.

It is almost certain that his political career in West Virginia was launched on the backs of KKK support, and inspirations.

As a letter from 1946, long after he claimed he had left the KKK, youwhere he wrote to the Grand Wizard:
"the Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia."

This years after he claimed 'technically' left the clan. Soon after he organized and ran for office in WV and won and kept doing so until he became a Senator.

It seems it was when being a racist stopped being a career advancement track, that he himself began to recalibrate. Or so it would seem to anyone who gives his history an honest look over rather than the hand waving of "He changed his mind and the Liberal blacks of the NAACP who he allocated money gave him a pass."

Yes, this is often how Left reframe Byrd. He was young man who made a mistake joining the clan, changed his mind and felt bad or guilty and was later supported by the NAACP. This all is forgiven.

In reality his history is way more complicated. And an explanation of self preservation is far more sensible and plausible than the whitewashed version Democrats like telling themselves.

Byrd has the sole distinction of being the ONLY Senator of all Seven who had the opportunity to vote on the confirmation of the first 2 black Supreme Court Justices. One from the Left and one from the Right. Who opposed both!

He also opposed the Civil Rights act of 64 and 65.

In 2001 8 years before be died and well into his 80s he had an interview where he said we have "White N-words" in West Virginia too. 2ice. As always he apologized and was quickly forgiven for the misstep. No one thought to inquire as to why a supposedly changed man was so comfortable using such language.

This is the kind of hand waving 'good' left minded people seem to partake in.


I can go on about the convoluted history of Byrd's race relations. Sure, he supported the integration of the Capitol force, supported a Martin Luther King holiday and gave the NAACP 10 million. Which is probably why they screwed black people and signed off on his transformation.

But his language late in his life, the lies in his KKK stories and when he left, his constant focus on how joining the KKK is an albatross for anyone trying to become politically important and his own timeline of when he changed, all suggests he was a full blown racist longer after Democrats want us to pay attention.
Dax, just curious, are you a married man and if so, how does your wife feel about this weird Right Wing anti women’s rights thing. Not prying on your personal life, don’t care, just curious.
 
Well, if you don't care very much, why are you asking?

Of course they have grievances.

Do I think most are "genuine" (I'm defining that as do I think they are "problems" that should go to the top of the U.S. agenda to solve)?

Some of them, yes, some no.

:)

Forgive me for asking a question. You guys are very touchy about anyone questioning what is happening.
 
So, just to make sure I understand your stance: you believe those people currently supporting, aiding, and planning to vote for Trump (and MAGA more generally) in the upcoming general election are acting rationally and reasonably?

I don't know, I don't have a stance which is why I am asking the question. Personally, if I was an American citizen, I wouldn't. He has always been a **** and I tend not to vote for cunts, unless the alternative is a bigger ****.

Not sure why I have to keep justifying my question by explaining my personal convictions but I suppose that is where we are in the debate.

But I am generally suspicious of people who talk with 100% conviction about anything, so when I hear on here what I hear on here, I just ask myself the question if maybe, just maybe, there are genuine (most likely perceived) reasons why 75% of the electorate (say) who don't vote to keep Trump out are unreasonable, irrational, stupid confused people and the 25% of the electorate (say) who vote Democrat are 100% right.

That's all. Apologies if the question upsets people.
 
I don't know, I don't have a stance which is why I am asking the question. Personally, if I was an American citizen, I wouldn't. He has always been a **** and I tend not to vote for cunts, unless the alternative is a bigger ****.

Not sure why I have to keep justifying my question by explaining my personal convictions but I suppose that is where we are in the debate.

But I am generally suspicious of people who talk with 100% conviction about anything, so when I hear on here what I hear on here, I just ask myself the question if maybe, just maybe, there are genuine (most likely perceived) reasons why 75% of the electorate (say) who don't vote to keep Trump out are unreasonable, irrational, stupid confused people and the 25% of the electorate (say) who vote Democrat are 100% right.

That's all. Apologies if the question upsets people.
The question doesn’t upset anyone. The premise just perplexes some of us, as it seems quite problematic on the face of it. And you haven’t been asked to justify the question, just to explain the premise. And, in turn, we have tried to explain why it is faulty (any perceived grievances people may have are completely separate from the question of whether their behaviour is rational and reasonable), in the same way someone can be justifiably angry and still in the wrong to physically assault someone.

I will say your example percentages are quite interesting, though, given how wildly divergent they are from any actual voting percentages that have occurred when Trump has been involved (particularly when you consider both Clinton and Biden got more votes than Trump in 2016 and 2020). It is intriguing you assigned 75% to Trump, when he has never gotten about 47%.

But, beyond all that, this disagreement seems to mostly come down to a difference in defining what is and isn’t rational and reasonable behaviour based on the parsing we have already done.

You have said you think Germans supporting Hitler through his rise to power and all the way through the war represented rational and reasonable behaviour, so you are likely to think people supporting Trump now is completely rational and reasonable, as well.

Whereas I (and others) do not.

I do wonder if there is any answer other than the one that satisfies the premise of your question that you would accept as valid?
 
Last edited:
:)

Forgive me for asking a question. You guys are very touchy about anyone questioning what is happening.
I didn’t mean it THAT seriously. But why ask here when you can just find out the answers from experts for free online — dozens of them? Millions of words have been spilled on this already.

Part of the reason I get a bit on edge is the deluge of “I’m just asking questions” posters (now most thankfully gone) who really weren’t asking anything, but trying a thinly-veiled exercise to absolve their side from blame for/compliance with Trumpian cultist ideals.

So forgive me if I seem “touchy” — kind of have a reason to be.
 
I didn’t mean it THAT seriously. But why ask here when you can just find out the answers from experts for free online — dozens of them? Millions of words have been spilled on this already.

Part of the reason I get a bit on edge is the deluge of “I’m just asking questions” posters (now most thankfully gone) who really weren’t asking anything, but trying a thinly-veiled exercise to absolve their side from blame for/compliance with Trumpian cultist ideals.

So forgive me if I seem “touchy” — kind of have a reason to be.

Naah, it's OK, I get that. No worries. Believe it or not, it was just an innocent question.
 
Did he? And if he did, when did he? I think part of the problem many Non-democrat minorities have is the lack of similar scrutiny when the perpetrator is a Democrat.

Yes, it is true that Byrd many times denounced or claimed he regrets his associates with the KKK. In his memoirs he himself claimed it was something he "joined for excitement and because he thought it opposed communism."

He claimed he was in it briefly and has haunted him ever since. He has claimed he was in it for just a short while btw in 1941 and left it in 1943 when he moved to Baltimore.

However there are letters of his addressed to other KKK members long after he claimed he had left. For example his letter from 1945 to a Kkk Senator whining about integration

Here is what he wrote:

"I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.

That does not sound like the words of a man who lacked conviction or was looking for an opposition to communism.

You'd have to forgive me if I struggle to find an adult who says this somehow miraculously changed. Especially, when the claim of his change itself is a half truth.

Well, he said he was wrong about Trump. And he gives ample evidence why he believes he was wrong.

Aw for Byrd on the other hand seemed to have changed his mind because being a racist wasn't commensurate with his political aspirations once he was outside the cesspit that was W. Virginia at the time.

It is almost certain that his political career in West Virginia was launched on the backs of KKK support, and inspirations.

As a letter from 1946, long after he claimed he had left the KKK, youwhere he wrote to the Grand Wizard:
"the Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia."

This years after he claimed 'technically' left the clan. Soon after he organized and ran for office in WV and won and kept doing so until he became a Senator.

It seems it was when being a racist stopped being a career advancement track, that he himself began to recalibrate. Or so it would seem to anyone who gives his history an honest look over rather than the hand waving of "He changed his mind and the Liberal blacks of the NAACP who he allocated money gave him a pass."

Yes, this is often how Left reframe Byrd. He was young man who made a mistake joining the clan, changed his mind and felt bad or guilty and was later supported by the NAACP. This all is forgiven.

In reality his history is way more complicated. And an explanation of self preservation is far more sensible and plausible than the whitewashed version Democrats like telling themselves.

Byrd has the sole distinction of being the ONLY Senator of all Seven who had the opportunity to vote on the confirmation of the first 2 black Supreme Court Justices. One from the Left and one from the Right. Who opposed both!

He also opposed the Civil Rights act of 64 and 65.

In 2001 8 years before be died and well into his 80s he had an interview where he said we have "White N-words" in West Virginia too. 2ice. As always he apologized and was quickly forgiven for the misstep. No one thought to inquire as to why a supposedly changed man was so comfortable using such language.

This is the kind of hand waving 'good' left minded people seem to partake in.


I can go on about the convoluted history of Byrd's race relations. Sure, he supported the integration of the Capitol force, supported a Martin Luther King holiday and gave the NAACP 10 million. Which is probably why they screwed black people and signed off on his transformation.

But his language late in his life, the lies in his KKK stories and when he left, his constant focus on how joining the KKK is an albatross for anyone trying to become politically important and his own timeline of when he changed, all suggests he was a full blown racist longer after Democrats want us to pay attention.
Maybe someday you’ll put this much effort into a self-examination.
 
Oh my God - the Swifties will awake like the Kraken and smite Vance for being a prick


Trump is a **** and Vance seems a dope but since I've had kids myself I do believe that people with kids should have a little more say than those without and that the voting age should be higher instead of lower.

If twas me I'd weight votes somehow based on your dependency on the state of the society you live in. For example, if you emigrate you have less say than if you stick it out at home, etc. Like City's points system.

Also cats are evil cunts!
 
Last edited:

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.