Biden VP Countdown!

[yuna628 9,676]

1 minute ago, Dashinka said:

Evidence?  In this case it is her own father making this assertion, but sure some of the families that have roots to the founding period might fall into that category.  But using your logic then it should be ignored, which of course it will be by the Leftist Mainstream Media.

Much of the claim is hearsay, insomuch as people make claims about their ancestors all the time that end up not being that true. It's very possible it's true, but that's certainly not a knock on her on anyone having such a link as the ancestry itself is the product of a slave being raped. Records on the subject particularly in these areas are very difficult to pin down. It's her father that makes some part of this claim, which has been rabidly repeated online now, without anyone actually digging into itself to determine the truth of it. And I can tell you, as someone that researches this stuff, it's dubious at best, within the realm of possibilities of course, but very difficult to prove. You can try and look for yourself and you're going to have a hard time. There's lots of reasons why for this, but I'm not particularly sure why people choose to run with this, when there's a million other angles of attack to approach her on. I tend to strongly dislike such bad behavior by people who rabidly attack on a subject, without you know, actually looking into it. Still, even if it were true why is this a terrible thing to reflect upon her? The vast majority of white and black Americans have these type of heritages. In fact I'd be willing to wager those complaining about this may actually have similar complicated and painful heritage.

[Dashinka 24,494]

33 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Much of the claim is hearsay, insomuch as people make claims about their ancestors all the time that end up not being that true. It's very possible it's true, but that's certainly not a knock on her on anyone having such a link as the ancestry itself is the product of a slave being raped. Records on the subject particularly in these areas are very difficult to pin down. It's her father that makes some part of this claim, which has been rabidly repeated online now, without anyone actually digging into itself to determine the truth of it. And I can tell you, as someone that researches this stuff, it's dubious at best, within the realm of possibilities of course, but very difficult to prove. You can try and look for yourself and you're going to have a hard time. There's lots of reasons why for this, but I'm not particularly sure why people choose to run with this, when there's a million other angles of attack to approach her on. I tend to strongly dislike such bad behavior by people who rabidly attack on a subject, without you know, actually looking into it. Still, even if it were true why is this a terrible thing to reflect upon her? The vast majority of white and black Americans have these type of heritages. In fact I'd be willing to wager those complaining about this may actually have similar complicated and painful heritage.

Are you certain of that in today's "Woke" cancel culture environment?  Kamala Harris was chosen to mollify the crowd that was saying Old Joe had to pick a Black woman, so this goes back to my original question, is she Black enough to satisfy that crowd?  Her long history as a top cop in CA and SanFran will also be mostly ignored by the MSM which is another strike against her.  Regardless it is Joe's "decision", but honestly I would have thought Susan Rice would have been a safer pick, she is actually Black and the biggest baggage she carries, Benghazi, is easily dismissed as conspiratorial.

 

 

[yuna628 9,676]

4 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Are you certain of that in today's "Woke" cancel culture environment?  Kamala Harris was chosen to mollify the crowd that was saying Old Joe had to pick a Black woman, so this goes back to my original question, is she Black enough to satisfy that crowd?  Her long history as a top cop in CA and SanFran will also be mostly ignored by the MSM which is another strike against her.  Regardless it is Joe's "decision", but honestly I would have thought Susan Rice would have been a safer pick, she is actually Black and the biggest baggage she carries, Benghazi, is easily dismissed as conspiratorial.

 

 

Don't really care about 'woke cancel culture' personally. I think it's silly to question anyone's 'blackness' unless that person is a fraudster like Rachel Dolezal. 😉To question her blackness based on some potential claim, that cannot be proven, of heritage to a white slaveholder that raped his slave is pretty silly - because there are many African Americans that have this same heritage. It is not something that makes a person less black, but it is a pretty painful period in their ancestor history. Plenty of other things to jump on Kamala about. If he had decided to pick Rice, it'd be Benghazi all over again ad nauseum and rambling about tarmac meetings, and would we be digging into dubious claims about her heritage and blackness? From a qualified standpoint Rice is fine, but maybe he has her pegged for another job? To me it seemed like it would either be Kamala for AG or VP from the get-go. 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

20 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Are you certain of that in today's "Woke" cancel culture environment?  Kamala Harris was chosen to mollify the crowd that was saying Old Joe had to pick a Black woman, so this goes back to my original question, is she Black enough to satisfy that crowd?  Her long history as a top cop in CA and SanFran will also be mostly ignored by the MSM which is another strike against her.  Regardless it is Joe's "decision", but honestly I would have thought Susan Rice would have been a safer pick, she is actually Black and the biggest baggage she carries, Benghazi, is easily dismissed as conspiratorial.

 

 

Yep.

 

Moreover, the people going after Kamala on that aren't doing this because of genuine outrage, but because she's part of a demographic that tries to make them feel bad for their heritage.

 

Seeing the reaction to this is every bit a testament as to why this sort of statue toppling idiocy shouldn't be catered to in the slightest bit, in fact, should be punished far more harshly than normal. Same goes for the outrage cudgel in general.

Edited August 12, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Dashinka 24,494]

5 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Don't really care about 'woke cancel culture' personally. I think it's silly to question anyone's 'blackness' unless that person is a fraudster like Rachel Dolezal. 😉To question her blackness based on some potential claim, that cannot be proven, of heritage to a white slaveholder that raped his slave is pretty silly - because there are many African Americans that have this same heritage. It is not something that makes a person less black, but it is a pretty painful period in their ancestor history. Plenty of other things to jump on Kamala about. If he had decided to pick Rice, it'd be Benghazi all over again ad nauseum and rambling about tarmac meetings, and would we be digging into dubious claims about her heritage and blackness? From a qualified standpoint Rice is fine, but maybe he has her pegged for another job? To me it seemed like it would either be Kamala for AG or VP from the get-go. 

Tarmac?  Are you thinking of Loretta Lynch?  Like I said, it is his “pick” and of course the expected fawning by the MSM is occurring.  My only point is will she truly be vetted by the same MSM that even forgot it was only four years ago that the Dems had a ticket consisting of a woman and a man.

[yuna628 9,676]

16 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Tarmac?  Are you thinking of Loretta Lynch?  Like I said, it is his “pick” and of course the expected fawning by the MSM is occurring.  My only point is will she truly be vetted by the same MSM that even forgot it was only four years ago that the Dems had a ticket consisting of a woman and a man.

Yes I was thinking of that, because Rice and Lynch run in tandem as part of the whole Benghazi conspiracy thing that talking heads went on and on about, and still go on about to this day. It would generally go Rice>Benghazi>Hilary!!!!!111!>emails/coverups>Lynch tarmacs>swamp>pizza?!>Satan voodoo>kids in cabinets as a sort of combination word salad. Good for fundraising I guess but it's getting tiring.

 

Why not just hit Kamala on things of substance like criminal justice and policing? The fact that she was not so progressive in her prosecuting as she tried to claim. They could say "hey she was a big meanie to Bill Barr and Kavanaugh!" and "hey she was mean to Joe too!" Many other ways to attack... this other stuff just seems lazy.

Edited August 12, 2020 by yuna628

[Dashinka 24,494]

19 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Yes I was thinking of that, because Rice and Lynch run in tandem as part of the whole Benghazi conspiracy thing that talking heads went on and on about, and still go on about to this day. It would generally go Rice>Benghazi>Hilary!!!!!111!>emails/coverups>Lynch tarmacs>swamp>pizza?!>Satan voodoo>kids in cabinets as a sort of combination word salad. Good for fundraising I guess but it's getting tiring.

 

Why not just hit Kamala on things of substance like criminal justice and policing? The fact that she was not so progressive in her prosecuting as she tried to claim. They could say "hey she was a big meanie to Bill Barr and Kavanaugh!" and "hey she was mean to Joe too!" Many other ways to attack... this other stuff just seems lazy.

I believe she has compared federal officers (ICE) to the KKK.  In the end, she is simply the Veep choice which generally is quite meaningless.  Of course there are those who think Old Joe is just a little past his prime, but she wasn't even close to be chosen by the Democrat electorate during the primary season.  We shall see how it all turns out, I really don't have an issue with the choice, my main issue is with the biased way the media will treat her simply because she has a "D" next to her name.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

3 hours ago, yuna628 said:

Dig into most people's family trees and you'll find slaveowners and slaves that were raped by those owners. It's not a surprise at all.

But if we are tearing down statues of our founding fathers, how can we elect someone who's family got wealthy on the slave trade

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

3 hours ago, yuna628 said:

Don't really care about 'woke cancel culture' personally. I think it's silly to question anyone's 'blackness' unless that person is a fraudster like Rachel Dolezal. 😉To question her blackness based on some potential claim, that cannot be proven, of heritage to a white slaveholder that raped his slave is pretty silly - because there are many African Americans that have this same heritage. It is not something that makes a person less black, but it is a pretty painful period in their ancestor history. Plenty of other things to jump on Kamala about. If he had decided to pick Rice, it'd be Benghazi all over again ad nauseum and rambling about tarmac meetings, and would we be digging into dubious claims about her heritage and blackness? From a qualified standpoint Rice is fine, but maybe he has her pegged for another job? To me it seemed like it would either be Kamala for AG or VP from the get-go. 

It's only "ramblings" because it doesn't fit your narrative.  To some, it indicated the depth of corruption that is rampant among politicians today.

[TBoneTX 45,288]

2 hours ago, Dashinka said:

main issue is with the biased way the media will treat her

As expected.  Sigh.

Quote

Democratic Party sets rules for criticizing Biden's VP pick Kamala Harris

by Tammy Bruce -- Tuesday, August 11, 2020

 

Media organizations have just been warned by the Democratic Party machine that they better be very, very careful with how they cover Joe Biden's vice presidential choice — just revealed to be Kamala Harris.  Any criticism of the expected woman will be considered racist and sexist, we are told.  Oh, they wrap up that threat in a word salad, but that's the bottom line: There should be second and even third thoughts about any criticism of Mr. Biden's VP pick.  [...]

 

Continues here: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/11/democratic-party-sets-rules-for-criticizing-bidens/  

 

Edited August 12, 2020 by TBoneTX

[Dashinka 24,494]

46 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

As expected.  Sigh.

Isn’t any criticism of any Democrat considered racist, and every other “-ist” they can add?

[yuna628 9,676]

5 hours ago, Dashinka said:

I believe she has compared federal officers (ICE) to the KKK.  In the end, she is simply the Veep choice which generally is quite meaningless.  Of course there are those who think Old Joe is just a little past his prime, but she wasn't even close to be chosen by the Democrat electorate during the primary season.  We shall see how it all turns out, I really don't have an issue with the choice, my main issue is with the biased way the media will treat her simply because she has a "D" next to her name.

I don't necessarily disagree. I just think there's plenty of things to attack her on, like her actual viewpoints on subjects and policies.

3 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

But if we are tearing down statues of our founding fathers, how can we elect someone who's family got wealthy on the slave trade

But that's just it NB. Her family didn't 'get wealthy' because of the slave trade. Her actual family were the slaves. The slaveholder just happened to father a child, supposedly... of which there is not any current evidence. No evidence to suggest there was any 'closeness' to the relationship or money passed onto this purported child. 

2 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

It's only "ramblings" because it doesn't fit your narrative.  To some, it indicated the depth of corruption that is rampant among politicians today.

What narrative is that exactly? We can agree that corruption is rampant, and that is especially apparent even now. But that will not change regardless of whatever administration comes next.

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

[TBoneTX 45,288]

"Brain cell... what did I do with my brain cell? ..."

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

harris aint a bad looking chick.