Ron DeSantis accused of making racist slur about Andrew Gillum

You said socialism was the redistribution of wealth. I'm not asking you what's recognized by others, I'm asking you to adhere to your own definition. These programs redistribute wealth so is that socialism or not? If it isn't then would you like to revise your definition?

 

So long as we live in the past, we cannot progress.

Yes, there are cultural issues. In my view, principal among those is that too many so-called black people have divorced themselves, to varying degrees, from the rest of Americans; to the point of having essentially developed a separate language

Please check me for learning. What I'm getting is that you identify as being a 'black' person, and would identify me as being a 'white' person. I, on the other hand, identify myself as being me, and you as being you.

 

Good for you. That ignores the fact that many in society do not and have not and that has lead to serious inequities in our people. Have black people divorced themselves or were they forced and encouraged to by segregation? You mention a divide but you don't analyze how it came to be or discuss how to solve it so what use is your willfully blind world view to the rest of us?

 

I suppose they would technically have to be considered socialist, but certainly not socialist in the full definition of it. Again, are you under the impression that Andrew won't be radically escalating these programs?

 

"Have black people divorced themselves or were they forced and encouraged to by segregation?"

It wasn't forced by segregation. I watched its beginnings when I was growing up in Cleveland. Cleveland wasn't, officially, segregated (although there were unofficial housing barriers and such). At the time, I thought it was a bad idea. I think that I have been proven correct, but I don't think most people even know what I'm talking about.

"...so what use is your willfully blind world view to the rest of us?"

Are you even aware of the tactics that you use to shut down discussion?

 

You suppose? They either are or they aren't. Does DeSantis want to end these programs? If he doesn't then by your definition he is also a socialist and now we're just arguing degree. I guess socialism isn't all that bad since even you seem to think some socialism is good. Now that we have that out the way we can debate how much socialism is good and how much is just to much rather than arguing about redistribution of wealth.

Buddy I'm not going to hold your hand. I'm going to hammer your points as I expect you to do mine. Willfully blind might be colorful rhetoric but it isn't inaccurate. It's how you yourself have said you choose to see the world. There are differences between white and black americans. Recognizing that doesn't mean the same as thinking black or white skin makes us inherently different. I fully agree with you that it doesn't. And I share your hope that one day we reach the point where it isn't necessary to discuss the difference in crime, education, or poverty that exist among us. You say it wasn't forced segregation but also admit right after that there was some. But your micro analysis of Cleveland doesn't take into account the big picture. After the end of reconstruction and the beginnings of the brutality of the Jim Crow south blacks fled to northern states where they were fed into these urbanized environments. These communities are the results of millions of black refugees fleeing racial and political violence. The cultures that grew out these segregated are a result of this history.

 

Now it appears DeSantis is bring down Scott with him. Some Republicans are starting to distance themselves from him. Putnam walks to the Governors mansion if Trump stays out of it. Stupid primary system in Florida.

 

"Buddy I'm not going to hold your hand."

Is it at all possible to have a discussion without suffering through slings and arrows?

If you were a dumbass, I would have given up long ago. You are, unnecessarily, making it too much work, though.
------------------------------------------------------------
"You say it wasn't forced segregation but also admit right after that there was some."

Bzzzzt! NOT what I said!

What I said is that the CURRENT FORM of segregation is self- imposed; it's not forced, excepting for through peer pressure.

Believe it, or not, I have my own theory of what happened, that led to the current state of affairs. I believe that our current mess (the cultural divide) did have its beginnings during the transition away from institutionalized racism.

The equal rights movement was started, and after a period of struggle the American people realized that it was time to lift ourselves out of our own sort of "Dark Age" (Due to the rabid PC culture, I feel compelled to say: no pun intended. I really tried to come up with a better term.).

There were a number of people who led that movement. Many were 'black' and some were 'white'. Some were moderate, and some were radical. By far, the most influential was the moderate, Dr. King. It's impossible to kniw what might have been, but when he got murdered, I think that two things happened.

One is that it left a huge void, of leadership, which was filled by more radical, even separatist, leaders. The other thing, that I think happened, is that the shock, of that event, hardened many people's hearts. This caused them to be more willing to follow the more radical leaders.

My experience, from having grown up in the projecks, is that ATTITUDE IS EVERYTHING. I was no different from anybody else. I had a self-defeating attitude. We all believed that most people didn't live in the projecks, simply because they were "lucky", and we lived there because we weren't. It didn't matter what the teachers told us. We didn't believe them. It wasn't until I was in my 20s, and started making my own luck, that I began to realize how wrong I was.

There's a guy (spiritguide) on here who is conducting a master class on attitude. All of his posts on that subject deserve study.

 

Is it possible for you to be even more sensitive? You called me a dumbass and you don't see me reporting you are crying about it. Have it.

Actually it is. I have the quote.

​

It's projects. If you're going to lie about where you are from at least spell it properly.

 

"Is it possible for you to be even more sensitive?"

I'm simply asking why you're making the discussion so difficult. I'm having to catapult words over the walls of your fort.

"You called me a dumbass"

Umm... no. I said that you're not.

For some reason, you're not hearing (reading) what I'm saying (writing). You're reading stuff that I didn't write.

"It's projects.If you're going to lie about where you are from at least spell it properly. "

It's interesting that you quoted me there simply to hurl more crap. There's, like, 150 words there, and the only thing worth mention is the spelling of a word.

Have you ever considered the possibility that it isn't racism? That maybe you get treated like crap, because that's how reasonable people would naturally respond to your behavior?

 

"If you're going to lie about where you are from..."

I'll keep that in mind, if I should ever choose to do so.

Meanwhile, prove it.

 

What do you mean by "criminalize blacks?"

Okay, so the disenfranchisement laws only applied initially to whites?

The campaign spent the money. Why should the campaign be negatively affected by the guy's racist comment?

What do you mean "their share of the government pie?"

My point was that DeSantis doesn't have any socialist policies of his own that he wants to introduce, he just won't scrap what's already there. For the third time now, are you under the impression that Andrew won't be radically escalating these socialist programs? How is he going to fund them?

 

No and desantis did not refer to a specific black person or group of black people either.

He clearly refered to voters of all races.

This is pure bullshit as he said nothing racist at

 

He did not associate black people with monkeys and that is abundantly clear.

Your charge of racism is a flat out lie

 

He did not make a reference to a black person he refered to " we " learn some basic grammar.

 

True that in the age of hyper scrutiny and social media politicians have to be very careful in their choice of words


This is a massive fail however since he said nothing racist subtle or otherwise.

To say he did is to will fully ignore what he said.

 

Nothing to criticize as his comment was not racist.

 

You need to follow your own advice

What the man said was not racist and cannot be considered racist by any intelligent person.

He did not refer to a black person or black people. He refered to we which includes himself.

I don't care who wins or loses the election.

Accusing him of racism is dishonest and demonstrates exactly why trump won.

These accusations from the insane pc left are what motivated many flyover voters to pick trump.

People are sick of the gross lies from the left labeling everyone racist.

College educated people claim superiority and then shred every standard of logic and reason to twist something into a charge of racism. The average GED holder or public high school graduate knows that the statment in question was not racist.

The author of the op says it is because it referenced a black guy. While will fully ignoring the fact that it referenced we.

Your mental gymnastics have failed.

 

No he did not there is nothing racist about telling people not to monkey up an election by choosing socialism

 

No it is not rational and he did not reference the person he referenced the policies.

 

What support has trump given to white nationalism.

 

Actually he was specifically referencing a vote for his opponents policies.

You have not moved the goal posts far enough to twist it into a racist statement

 

I mean those who were opposed to former slaves having any political power or freedom used the criminal justice system incarcerate blacks en masse. Laws like the blacks codes and the convict lease laws allowed southern states, and some northern ones too, to arrest blacks and put them right back to work on private plantations.

No, but once blacks gained their freedom we see a disporpotionate way in which the laws are enforced, when they are enforced on whites at all, that continues to this day.

That's not how money works. He didn't spend the money already. Campaigns are always taking in money and spending money. It's very easy to give back the $20,000 from funds the campaign currently has. Why should he do it? Because the campaign shouldn't benefit from racists unless that the message it wants to send, which seems to be the case.

I mean nearly 45% of the population pays no federal income tax because they can't afford to and yet they still get to enjoy the protections of government. According to you this would also be socialism and yet there is no serious Republican candidate suggesting we implement a flat tax that would take the same percentage out of everyone's earnings. I guess we're all socialists.

You mean he just wants to protect the socialist policies that already exist.

Are you? I doubt you know much about his campaign, his policies or his budget proposals. Why don't you go educate yourself instead of crying about socialism that you already admit is acceptable.

 

yes it was

 

No it was not by any intelligent standard.

It does not even refer to a person or people.