Prestor Jon wrote:

The post I responded to never mentioned David Duke. If it was supposed to be a reference to David Duke then it should have been more clear. You seem to be under the impression that I stated or implied that Byrd never renounced his former leadership role in the KKK, when I have done nothing of the sort.

Prestor Jon wrote:By that logic every Democrat that Robert Byrd ever endorsed and any Democrat that cosponsored or supported any of the legislation he proposed in the Senate is a racist. Guilt by association is pretty weak sauce dude.

 Ahtman wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
There have always been racists, bigots, bullies and criminals in society and always will be. They always have some excuse or rationale behind their acts. It is unfortunate that such crimes are on the rise.

But you recognize they are on the rise, which is the whole point. It isn't surprise that such things happen, but that they are growing in number.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Condemning such acts on Internet forums isn't going to make a difference either.

Of course it makes a difference, just a slight one, as the first part of any problem is recognizing there is a problem, but the argument was never that taking note of the rise was going to solve the problem anyway. The problem is that we have data that there is a growing number of incidents but that people want to ignore it. This is a discussion forum where we discuss things. Hand waving something and acting as if the only way we can talk about something is if we are going to make the largest difference would mean never discussing anything or sharing any information.

Prestor Jon wrote:
The KKK and nephew nazis don't pose an existential threat to the US and they no longer have widespread support in local and state govts so they are pursued and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Don't be an alarmist.

The reason they don't have overt support in those areas isn't because people just pretended nothing could or would happen. Ignoring a small fire doesn't put out that fire. Putting our head in the sand does even less than what you complain about that already does very little.

Even if we make it political Trump isn't happy about this and I imagine many of his voters aren't either but what we get is "well leftist media conspiracy" and "herp derp Dems" instead. The craziness isn't (entirely) in the article but in the ludicrous response we are seeing.

Like the rash of racist attacks that followed the election of Barack Obama in 2008 and, more recently, the “wave of hate crimes and hate incidents [that] washed over the U.K.” after this summer’s Brexit vote to leave the European Union, Potok said he predicts the current swell in post-election incidents will “peter out over the course of a couple of weeks.”

Hate crimes in the United States ticked back up in 2015, after a 20-year low the year before, fueled in part by a 67 percent increase in crimes against Muslims, according to an FBI report released today.

Crimes against religious groups overall were up by 23 percent since 2014 and anti-black, white and LGBT incidents were all up last year as well. Most incidents -- nearly 30 percent -- in 2015 were anti-black crimes, the data show.

Crimes ran the gamut from simple assault to murder and rape.

In 2015, there were 257 anti-Muslim hate crimes, compared to 154 the year before, the data show. Overall hate crimes were up just under 7 percent, to 5,850 reported incidents.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Once again, Hillary was also endorsed by the KKK. I don't see how either side can proclaim some kind of moral high ground on this issue.

 infinite_array wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

The post I responded to never mentioned David Duke. If it was supposed to be a reference to David Duke then it should have been more clear. You seem to be under the impression that I stated or implied that Byrd never renounced his former leadership role in the KKK, when I have done nothing of the sort.

No, no, you're not going to weasel out of this. Lying by omission is still lying. You wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:By that logic every Democrat that Robert Byrd ever endorsed and any Democrat that cosponsored or supported any of the legislation he proposed in the Senate is a racist. Guilt by association is pretty weak sauce dude.

Which implies that Byrd was unchanged during the entirety of his political career. You left out a very important, critical fact.

And I find it difficult, based on your posting history (which, yes, we can look at), you wouldn't be able to make the logical conclusion that a person talking about a former grand wizard of the KKK supporting Trump would be talking about David Duke.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Trump has never been a member of the KKK but because he is endorsed by somebody who used to be a leader of the KKK Trump is considered racist. Just because people with a certain viewpoint support a given candidate that doesn't meant that the candidate holds that same viewpoint.

Prestor Jon wrote:

The claim was made that America shouldn't elect anyone who is endorsed by a former KKK leader and I pointed out that was ridiculous. Not every former KKK member is going to be a life long racist or bigot and the fact that a former KKK member is indeed no longer part of the racist organization implies that there was at least to some degree a change in views. There are former KKK members are still racist and there are former KKK members who are not. Making absolutist claims about endorsement from former KKK members without using specificity is poor form.

Your continued argument is further evidence of the hypocrisy I was highlighting. Byrd is a former KKK leader who had a change of heart so his past association is no longer held against him. Trump has never been a member of the KKK but because he is endorsed by somebody who used to be a leader of the KKK Trump is considered racist. Just because people with a certain viewpoint support a given candidate that doesn't meant that the candidate holds that same viewpoint.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
There was a really interesting story on Russia Today. They were discussing the Trump presidency, and there is a possibility that the USA might get a new state, a 51st state, and it's not Britain

Puerto Rico have a plan to send people to Washington, and do a 'Louisiana.'

They'll occupy the senate building and peacefully demand statehood. Trump is said to be open to the idea of Puerto Rico joining the USA.

Yeah, they might be only worth 1 EC vote or something,

but the whole thing sounds pretty neat.

There could be another star on old glory

Your thoughts?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
There was a really interesting story on Russia Today. They were discussing the Trump presidency, and there is a possibility that the USA might get a new state, a 51st state, and it's not Britain

Puerto Rico have a plan to send people to Washington, and do a 'Louisiana.'

They'll occupy the senate building and peacefully demand statehood. Trump is said to be open to the idea of Puerto Rico joining the USA.

Yeah, they might be only worth 1 EC vote or something,

but the whole thing sounds pretty neat.

There could be another star on old glory

Your thoughts?

Minimum of three (two senators and one house rep). Good idea, IMO. 3.5M people live there, without representation.


Edit; someone worked it out and they would actually have 5reps if the total didn't change. So 7 ECs.

ender502 wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:By that logic every Democrat that Robert Byrd ever endorsed and any Democrat that cosponsored or supported any of the legislation he proposed in the Senate is a racist. Guilt by association is pretty weak sauce dude.

Hillary Clinton lists Robert Byrd as one of her mentors, and nobody calls her a racist, so I definitely empathize. I'll say it again for the benefit of everyone: at this point the only thing I care about is financial and border security. As long as I can support and spoil my family, my own personal social viewpoints come firmly in last place. I'd hope that there'd still be a balanced view when it comes to social issues, but I'm not holding my breath.

Well trump will at least give you back handed border security. With as lousy as the economy will be there wont be anyone wanting to get in here! Then we can pick the strawberries!

That'll protect you from all those dangerous produce pickers. Though not from terrorists.

ender502 wrote:

 infinite_array wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:By that logic every Democrat that Robert Byrd ever endorsed and any Democrat that cosponsored or supported any of the legislation he proposed in the Senate is a racist. Guilt by association is pretty weak sauce dude.

Hillary Clinton lists Robert Byrd as one of her mentors, and nobody calls her a racist, so I definitely empathize. I'll say it again for the benefit of everyone: at this point the only thing I care about is financial and border security. As long as I can support and spoil my family, my own personal social viewpoints come firmly in last place. I'd hope that there'd still be a balanced view when it comes to social issues, but I'm not holding my breath.

Oh great, so we're back to willful ignorance on Byrd.

Is no one going to mention the fact that Robert Byrd actually managed to change his life, disavowed the KKK, and became a civil rights supporter? To the point at which, at his death, the NAACP wrote:

NAACP MOURNS THE PASSING OF U.S. SENATOR ROBERT BYRD

June 29, 2010
Longest Serving Member of Congress Became a Champion for Civil Rights and Liberties

WASHINGTON, DC - The NAACP is saddened by the passing of United States Senator Robert Byrd. Byrd, the longest serving member of congress was first elected to the U.S. House from in 1952 and was elected Senator in 1958. Byrd passed away this morning at the age of 92.

"Senator Byrd reflects the transformative power of this nation," stated NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous. "Senator Byrd went from being an active member of the KKK to a being a stalwart supporter of the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act and many other pieces of seminal legislation that advanced the civil rights and liberties of our country.

"Senator Byrd came to consistently support the NAACP civil rights agenda, doing well on the NAACP Annual Civil Rights Report Card. He stood with us on many issues of crucial importance to our members from the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, the historic health care legislation of 2010 and his support for the Hate Crimes Prevention legislation," stated Hilary O. Shelton, Director of the NAACP Washington Bureau and Senior Vice President for Advocacy and Policy. "Senator Byrd was a master of the Senate Rules, and helped strategize passage of legislation that helped millions of Americans. He will be sorely missed."

Founded in 1909, the NAACP is the nation's oldest and largest civil rights organization. Its members throughout the United States and the world are the premier advocates for civil rights in their communities, conducting voter mobilization and monitoring equal opportunity in the public and private sectors.

Trump supporters and Hillary haters have been trafficking in ignorance for so long why would they change now?

ender502

 djones520 wrote:
I thought the issue of statehood for Puerto Rico was still being hotly debated by Puerto Rican's?

 djones520 wrote:
I thought the issue of statehood for Puerto Rico was still being hotly debated by Puerto Rican's?

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I thought the issue of statehood for Puerto Rico was still being hotly debated by Puerto Rican's?

I think the tide has significantly shifted in recent years/months... Basically, more and more stories are surfacing related to the Panama Papers and other stuff, where a number of formerly die-hard anti-state Puerto Ricans are now softening that stance because even they realize that they've been given a raw deal. I could be wrong, but I can ask one of my old army buddies who is from there, and lives there again what things are like "on the ground"

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Its time the US began to expand again. With Puerto Rico lets grab American Samoa. With Disney's new propaganda piece it shouldn't be hard to convince Congress.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Its time the US began to expand again. With Puerto Rico lets grab American Samoa. With Disney's new propaganda piece it shouldn't be hard to convince Congress.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Its time the US began to expand again. With Puerto Rico lets grab American Samoa. With Disney's new propaganda piece it shouldn't be hard to convince Congress.

Didn't someone earlier ITT suggest that if we add Puerto Rico, we actually need to add three total state (as 53 is a prime number which is.... important? Or something)

I do wonder if the people in charge of the US flag have blueprints drawn up for what a flag would look like beyond 50 stars....

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I thought the issue of statehood for Puerto Rico was still being hotly debated by Puerto Rican's?

I think they're in favour of it and see in Trump, the man to deliver it.

EDIT. Trump has Casino and hotel interests there or something.

CptJake wrote:Interesting graphic:

Spoiler:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-09/trump-redefined-us-politics-after-hillary-spent-nearly-twice-much-vote-nothing

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I would say to all American dakka members, that the prospect of people actively wanting to join the USA is a morale boost for the nation and increases American prestige worldwide.

After all, you must be doing something right, if more people want in, and if Brexit goes horribly wrong, a precedent is set for Britain to join

Go for it.

PS, just for a joke, could somebody answer this question:

If Britain became a American state, we'd get 2 senators, but how many congressmen would we get, and how many EC votes would we get?

UK population is 67 million people

Thanks.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


If Britain became a American state, we'd get 2 senators, but how many congressmen would we get, and how many EC votes would we get?

UK population is 67 million people

Thanks.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Interesting, with all the money spent on polling you'd think they'd have had a better idea they were going to lose

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I thought the issue of statehood for Puerto Rico was still being hotly debated by Puerto Rican's?

I think they're in favour of it and see in Trump, the man to deliver it.

EDIT. Trump has Casino and hotel interests there or something.

What's the process for becoming a state? I didn't think it was up to the president to deliver statehood.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I would say to all American dakka members, that the prospect of people actively wanting to join the USA is a morale boost for the nation and increases American prestige worldwide.

After all, you must be doing something right, if more people want in, and if Brexit goes horribly wrong, a precedent is set for Britain to join

Go for it.

PS, just for a joke, could somebody answer this question:

If Britain became a American state, we'd get 2 senators, but how many congressmen would we get, and how many EC votes would we get?

UK population is 67 million people

Thanks.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I would say to all American dakka members, that the prospect of people actively wanting to join the USA is a morale boost for the nation and increases American prestige worldwide.

After all, you must be doing something right, if more people want in, and if Brexit goes horribly wrong, a precedent is set for Britain to join

Go for it.

PS, just for a joke, could somebody answer this question:

If Britain became a American state, we'd get 2 senators, but how many congressmen would we get, and how many EC votes would we get?

UK population is 67 million people

Thanks.

If you joined america, what would become of the royal family?

and you'd probably get at least 60, maybe even up to 90 EC votes based on your size comparison to California.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I would say to all American dakka members, that the prospect of people actively wanting to join the USA is a morale boost for the nation and increases American prestige worldwide.

After all, you must be doing something right, if more people want in, and if Brexit goes horribly wrong, a precedent is set for Britain to join

Go for it.

PS, just for a joke, could somebody answer this question:

If Britain became a American state, we'd get 2 senators, but how many congressmen would we get, and how many EC votes would we get?

UK population is 67 million people

Thanks.

If you joined america, what would become of the royal family?

and you'd probably get at least 60, maybe even up to 90 EC votes based on your size comparison to California.

We'd have to abolish the Monarchy prior to joining.