Missouri Democrat Senator Hopes for Trump Assassination

[jamil]

Who invented the term Alt Right and what does it actually mean? The implication is that it is racist at its core. Where does that come from? Until about a year ago I had never heard that term. I am still unclear as to what it actually means. I know the MSM uses it as a buzzword for evil. What is this definition based upon and who, exactly, are they talking about?

They kinda invented it themselves. There are leaders of the so-called alt right. They have defined themselves.

But it is a mistake to claim that Trump is alt right. Or that the alt right are all the same as Nazis and White supremacists. I do think the identitarian principles the alt-right officially endorses are inherently racist, just like I think the identitarian principles of the left are racist. But alt-right does not equal white supremacists. The left is trying to lump every idea they disagree with, even free speech, for crying out loud, in with the alt-right.

The leftern hemiphere of the twitterverse is now saying, if you participate in or support the free speech rally in Boston, you're a racist white supremacist.

 

[Dddrees]

Who invented the term Alt Right and what does it actually mean? The implication is that it is racist at its core. Where does that come from? Until about a year ago I had never heard that term. I am still unclear as to what it actually means. I know the MSM uses it as a buzzword for evil. What is this definition based upon and who, exactly, are they talking about?

I'm not entirely sure however I know I heard that Steve Bannon supposedly defined what the Alt Right was. I vaguely remember that being those who felt they were disenfranchised or left out because of the imergence and acceptance of blacks, gays, lbgts, and the like,

Keep in mind this is my vague recollection. Not even sure if that meant he came up with the reference or just applied his definition to a term that already exists.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Who invented the term Alt Right and what does it actually mean? The implication is that it is racist at its core. Where does that come from? Until about a year ago I had never heard that term. I am still unclear as to what it actually means. I know the MSM uses it as a buzzword for evil. What is this definition based upon and who, exactly, are they talking about?

Ding! You didn't even know, but you recognized it. I'll be over presently to hand you your liberal membership pin.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I'm not entirely sure however I know I heard that Steve Bannon supposedly defined what the Alt Right was. I vaguely remember that being those who felt they were disenfranchised or left out because of the imergence and acceptance of blacks, gays, lbgts, and the like,

Keep in mind this is my vague recollection. Not even sure if that meant he came up with the reference or just applied his definition to a term that already exists.

They invented it themselves. There's no "kinda" about it. Richard Spencer, the WN, created the term.

 

[Dddrees]

I'm not saying that one side doesn't live by live and let live. I'm saying that neither side does--that's why they taking sides. I'm saying stop that. Stop caring about things that don't really matter, and we won't create the circumstances which brings about the election of a guy like Donald Trump. Or Hillary Clinton for that matter. Or Bernie Sanders. If we didn't give a **** about what's not really important we wouldn't want to impose those things that aren't important on other people. And then we wouldn't have to vote for people that want to impose those things.

Understand, I just had to point out that it seems Trump and to a part his election fly's in the face of that philosophy.

 

[Birds Away]

Ding! You didn't even know, but you recognized it. I'll be over presently to hand you your liberal membership pin.

Well, in all honesty anyone who disagrees with the groupthink is racist, xenophobic, homophobic, misogynist, etc.

 

[Dddrees]

They invented it themselves. There's no "kinda" about it. Richard Spencer, the WN, created the term.

Ah, I see thanks.

 

[jamil]

I'm still waiting on the BLM reparations demand from white people, because honestly, I'm curious how (if the govt is paying) one distinuishes between black, asian, and hispanic taxpayer money... and white money. That's what makes it racist, right, that only white people have to pay?

So you didn't see the link in the BLM thread? You didn't find your own post where you said you didn't agree with them saying that? As I recall, your biggest objection to it was something to the effect that you can't condemn the whole organization because of what a few people say, and that BLM is not an organization with a hierarchical structure led by these people saying that. And then I showed you that it was.

 

[jamil]

I'm not entirely sure however I know I heard that Steve Bannon supposedly defined what the Alt Right was. I vaguely remember that being those who felt they were disenfranchised or left out because of the imergence and acceptance of blacks, gays, lbgts, and the like,

Keep in mind this is my vague recollection. Not even sure if that meant he came up with the reference or just applied his definition to a term that already exists.

Breitbart published a piece which sought to define the alt-right. There's a manifesto of sorts out there. I started a thread on the alt right several months ago and posted a link to it. That term was pretty new then and people didn't really know what it was. They just knew that they were being labeled that by the left. But most of INGO who participated in that thread concluded that many of their principles do require some racism.

 

[jamil]

Understand, I just had to point out that it seems Trump and to a part his election fly's in the face of that philosophy.

The distilation of all the things that don't matter led me to voting for Trump over Hillary. Hillary wanted to impose so many more of the things she thinks matters on me. I wouldn't have had to vote for Donald Trump if there were a viable "live and let live" option.

 

[Dddrees]

Breitbart published a piece which sought to define the alt-right. There's a manifesto of sorts out there. I started a thread on the alt right several months ago and posted a link to it. That term was pretty new then and people didn't really know what it was. They just knew that they were being labeled that by the left. But most of INGO who participated in that thread concluded that many of their principles do require some racism.

Thanks I may just have to try and find that one. I have to say I'm reassured a bit that a good number here have the same impression about the Alt Right.

 

[Kutnupe14]

So you didn't see the link in the BLM thread? You didn't find your own post where you said you didn't agree with them saying that? As I recall, your biggest objection to it was something to the effect that you can't condemn the whole organization because of what a few people say, and that BLM is not an organization with a hierarchical structure led by these people saying that. And then I showed you that it was.

Geez, ok. I'll say again I don't agree with them asking for reparations. Now, since you won't direct me, I actually have to look 150 pages, of fluff.... actually, I'm not. I went through 14 pages with no success so I'm stopping. Since you apparently know where this claim is made, but are refusing to direct me to it, I am compelled to call your reparations claim as purposefully unfounded.

 

[Dddrees]

The distilation of all the things that don't matter led me to voting for Trump over Hillary. Hillary wanted to impose so many more of the things she thinks matters on me. I wouldn't have had to vote for Donald Trump if there were a viable "live and let live" option.

I doubt that there would ever be. Good thought however and actually that just might be an ideal path, but seeing how people have always been I'm not even sure that has actually ever existed anywhere. Even the most real tranquil places like Tibet probably impose some type of behavior thus some conformity is necessary, I could be wrong.

 

[Birds Away]

Today there are thousands of Americans rallying in Boston against free speech. That is a huge win for the communists and their unwitting supporters. They have effectively disarmed any opposition by labeling anyone who resists as Nazis, Klansmen or the like. Since the communists have a stranglehold on the propaganda machine their word is final. These are dark days indeed for our country.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I'm not entirely sure however I know I heard that Steve Bannon supposedly defined what the Alt Right was. I vaguely remember that being those who felt they were disenfranchised or left out because of the imergence and acceptance of blacks, gays, lbgts, and the like,

Keep in mind this is my vague recollection. Not even sure if that meant he came up with the reference or just applied his definition to a term that already exists.

It is not a matter of acceptance of any of those groups being a problem so much as having them imposed on them. It is the demand that all others are not merely expected to accept them, but also affirm their righteousness and accept having these people's issues shoved down their throats. You will notice that those people tend NOT to accept 'live and let live'. They insist on imposing themselves on others.

Let me refer you to the 'transgender' little sh*t in Colorado. He decided that he was a girl and didn't feel 'comfortable' going to the boys' room. The school tried the best compromise it could come up with which was to have it use the single-user staff restrooms. That wasn't good enough, it wanted to go to the girls' room regardless of how uncomfortable it made any or all of them. (Had one of these girls' dads decided to solve this problem with a good hollowpoint, I would NOT have condemned him for doing so.)

While this is one of the easier examples to address, overall, the same theme seems to repeat. Indifference toward the proclivities of others is n't good enough. Making accommodations that alleviate the supposed problem the snowflakes have which do not impose more distress on others than the distress from which they seek relief isn't good enough. Any solution which would allow them to exist without any encroachment on themselves but does not demand active social acceptance and changing the lives of others isn't good enough. Those upon whom they feel the need to encroach tend to get tired of it.

it just seems to me that Trump flys in the face of that live and let live philosophy. I mean there where other factors why he was elected but the Alt Right who he seems to be catering to and by the way brought directly into his administration don't actually exemplify that. Besides being elected to clear the swamp, stem the tide of liberalism, it also seems there was a desire to stem the tide of acceptance and diversity. That message seemed to come across rather strongly, at least to me anyway,


Thank you I did very much. My groups still need some work but I'm made some progress as center mass is more center. It felt good the guy next to me didn't do much better. Here I thought I was the only one. LOL

Explain please how Trump fails in this regard. He condemned all groups who where failing to live and let live when rubber met the road, even though that wasn't politically correct since he was expected to condemn only one general group while praising the other for doing the same damned things. It seems like some others are the ones with the problem here.

 

[jamil]

Geez, ok. I'll say again I don't agree with them asking for reparations. Now, since you won't direct me, I actually have to look 150 pages, of fluff.... actually, I'm not. I went through 14 pages with no success so I'm stopping. Since you apparently know where this claim is made, but are refusing to direct me to it, I am compelled to call your reparations claim as purposefully unfounded.

Well, Geez. I'm not going to look through 150 pages of fluff either. It's there. You commented on it. I'm mostly astonished that you don't remember it. But there you go again imposing your moral judgements on me.

 

[jamil]

I doubt that there would ever be. Good thought however and actually that just might be an ideal path, but seeing how people have always been I'm not even sure that has actually ever existed anywhere. Even the most real tranquil places like Tibet probably impose some type of behavior thus some conformity is necessary, I could be wrong.

I'm saying it's the solution. I'm not saying it's achievable. Human nature is to be tribal. It takes a lot of self reflection to even decide not to be, let alone actually achieving it.

 

[Dddrees]

It is not a matter of acceptance of any of those groups being a problem so much as having them imposed on them. It is the demand that all others are not merely expected to accept them, but also affirm their righteousness and accept having these people's issues shoved down their throats. You will notice that those people tend NOT to accept 'live and let live'. They insist on imposing themselves on others.

Let me refer you to the 'transgender' little sh*t in Colorado. He decided that he was a girl and didn't feel 'comfortable' going to the boys' room. The school tried the best compromise it could come up with which was to have it use the single-user staff restrooms. That wasn't good enough, it wanted to go to the girls' room regardless of how uncomfortable it made any or all of them. (Had one of these girls' dads decided to solve this problem with a good hollowpoint, I would NOT have condemned him for doing so.)

While this is one of the easier examples to address, overall, the same theme seems to repeat. Indifference toward the proclivities of others is n't good enough. Making accommodations that alleviate the supposed problem the snowflakes have which do not impose more distress on others than the distress from which they seek relief isn't good enough. Any solution which would allow them to exist without any encroachment on themselves but does not demand active social acceptance and changing the lives of others isn't good enough. Those upon whom they feel the need to encroach tend to get tired of it.



Explain please how Trump fails in this regard. He condemned all groups who where failing to live and let live when rubber met the road, even though that wasn't politically correct since he was expected to condemn only one general group while praising the other for doing the same damned things. It seems like some others are the ones with the problem here.

He simply talks as if he is intolerant in my opinion and he uses inflammatory speech almost solely as his way of getting his message across when he talks about others, His Adminisration consist of Alt Right individuals which most I think would agree that they have a racist component. His way of communicating the new Administration policy on Transgenders in the military whether you agree with the philosophy or not is not the best way of communicating a policy if you are tolerant. Even if he believes strongly that the medical reasons are justifiable reasons this is not the way one who is tolerant or reasonable with others acts. You can attribute it too many things but when one is tolerant they don't tend to pull the rug out from underneath someone like that, I'm pretty sure I could come up with other examples but for me these are enough to explain where I am coming from.

I don't know what to say about Transgenders other than they are people too. Not unlike you or I however there are some issues which do make them very unique. I think it was you that said you were against abortion. But they are people so what do you suggest? Do we jail them just because they are Transgender? Do we require them to carry their birth certificate and check that at the bathroom door? Do we have them lift their skirt or drop their drawers and check the genitalia they currently have before we admit them to the appropriate lavatory? Do we impose on every restaurant, bar, school, or other brick and mortar to have 1 Men, 1 Woman, 1 Family, 1 Other Lavatory? I simply don't know but they are people too, so what do we do?

 

[jamil]

About transgenders. It seems reasonable to use the restroom that you're equipped for. If you have a pecker use the restroom that's equipped for that. If you have a *****, use that one. If you're one of the very rare people who are genetically neither, well, you get to chose. If people stopped caring about it the solution would be much simpler.

 

[IndyDave1776]

He simply talks as if he is intolerant in my opinion and he uses inflammatory speech almost solely as his way of getting his message across when he talks about others, His Adminisration consist of Alt Right individuals which most I think would agree that they have a racist component. His way of communicating the new Administration policy on Transgenders in the military whether you agree with the philosophy or not is not the best way of communicating a policy if you are tolerant. Even if he believes strongly that the medical reasons are justifiable reasons this is not the way one who is tolerant or reasonable with others acts. You can attribute it too many things but when one is tolerant they don't tend to pull the rug out from underneath someone like that, I'm pretty sure I could come up with other examples but for me these are enough to explain where I am coming from.

I don't know what to say about Transgenders other than they are people too. Not unlike you or I however there are some issues which do make them very unique. I think it was you that said you were against abortion. But they are people so what do you suggest? Do we jail them just because they are Transgender? Do we require them to carry their birth certificate and check that at the bathroom door? Do we have them lift their skirt or drop their drawers and check the genitalia they currently have before we admit them to the appropriate lavatory? Do we impose on every restaurant, bar, school, or other brick and mortar to have 1 Men, 1 Woman, 1 Family, 1 Other Lavatory? I simply don't know but they are people too, so what do we do?

You are a step ahead of the problem. The trans-WTF-evertheyares have already declared that this is not acceptable. I don't have a problem with their existence. I don't have a problem with making an effort to get along. I do have a problem with the fact that the only 'acceptable' solutions are those which create the maximum negative impact on everyone else, not dissimilar with the homosexuals thoroughly rejecting the civil union compromise because they demand what amounts to legislating social acceptance rather than affording equal rights.

Your memory is correct. Abortion is one of the few issues where I am absolutely unwilling to compromise. It is not a freedom/liberty issue. It is not an issue of a woman doing as she chooses with her own body. It is the murder of a separate and distinct human life. There is zero room for compromise in that.