Anybody care to defend Steve King?

[Skeptic Tank]

my theory that quite a few (usually white) people simply do not know what racism is

(snipped)

No, no... I get it completely.

Racism is when a white person does anything other than beg for forgiveness for being white and totally cuck themselves.

It is particularly racist when a white person makes any effort to preserve their power as a group, or their genetic integrity, or has any sort of positive feelings about their group, or prefers the company of whites, or mates with another white, makes white children, etc.

These are all the very epitome of racism.

 

[Brainster]

Just type COngressman Steve King Racist Remarks in a search engine and you will get all the proof you need,if you are serious.
But King's long history of racist remarks has gotten so much coverage that I can't believe you follow politics and and are not aware of them.
Sad to see you descend to the point of playing a silly game, though.

Sorry to disappoint you there. I thought this was a place where people backed up their claims and didn't say "Just Google it for yourself."

 

[JoeMorgue]

Oh *********. This is just a B.S. delaying tactic.

"Spoon feed me the racism that's already well established."

Yeah I'll get right on that right after I show you "just one transitional fossil."

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Sorry to disappoint you there. I thought this was a place where people backed up their claims and didn't say "Just Google it for yourself."

They prefer to just be able to appeal to the fact that a lot of other leftists and NYT articles have already called the man a "racist white supremacist Nazi KKK" and use that as their evidence that it's true. They want it to be a starting assumption and "settled science" that anyone who has been called a racist a lot, is definitely a racist.

This is easier than demonstrating it with quotes and such because the quotes generally tend to be less offensive than they want to imply, have other interpretations, and possibly just be worded awkwardly / boomerishly / poorly.

In the case of King, I've seen some of these quotes and he just seems like a bit ballsier conservacuck who is certainly better than a Paul Ryan or something but a white nationalist, he is not.

He comes the closest, but I promise you he'd still be cucking up a storm about "no no, I think Mexicans are perfectly lovely and I'd love it if my daughter adopted 20 African children. I just want them to fully embrace American values!" if you pressed him.

He clearly values the founding stock and he clearly does have a preference for his own people, which is totally normal, but as is ALWAYS the case, the left would have you believe he's about 75% more racist than he actually is.

Which suits me just fine. I like when the left helps my side meme these guys into having a higher power level than they actually do. It helps deepen divisions and makes it less possible to bridge the gap that's growing here. Forces the Republicans to become more pro-white and the dems to become more anti-white.

All is going exactly according to plan, and with any luck the country will break up on these lines.

 

[tyr_13]

Oh *********. This is just a B.S. delaying tactic.

"Spoon feed me the racism that's already well established."

Yeah I'll get right on that right after I show you "just one transitional fossil."

They probably have me on ignore, as I already spoon-fed some. But hell, I'll do some more.

Say 'ahh', here comes the train! "Diversity is not our strength."

“What does this diversity bring that we don’t already have? Mexican food, Chinese food, those things — well, that’s fine. But what does it bring that we don’t have that is worth the price? We have a lot of diversity within the U.S. already.” - said supporting the arguments of neo-nazis while being interviewed on a neo-nazis show.

Latinos “calves the size of cantaloupes because they’re hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert.” he vomited forth.

“We add to our population approximately 1.8 million of ‘somebody else’s babies’ who are raised in another culture before they get to us. We are replacing our American culture 2 to 1 every year.” - talking about brown babies.

“This whole ‘white people’ business, though, does get a little tired, Charlie. I mean, I’d ask you to go back through history and figure out, where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you’re talking about? Where did any other subgroup of people contribute to civilization?" on the concept of non-whites contributing to our culture.

And it goes on.

 

[theprestige]

No. He's asking if you defend this man.

I'd like to know. Do you think that this is a good man to be in Congress?

I promise I won't even argue against you. Just express your opinion.

He's asking if someone will reinforce his hateful stereotypes by daring to disagree with him.

This isn't some amicable Oxford debate, where two people take two sides of some question just for the exercise of arguing each side. When I first joined this forum, I thought that's the kind of discussion that might go on here. But it never really is. Why would I want to play dudalb's game?

 

[varwoche]

He's asking if someone will reinforce his hateful stereotypes by daring to disagree with him.

This isn't some amicable Oxford debate, where two people take two sides of some question just for the exercise of arguing each side. When I first joined this forum, I thought that's the kind of discussion that might go on here. But it never really is. Why would I want to play dudalb's game?

I have some advice on how to handle such a predicament when you don't trust a poster's motives, and you don't want to respond: don't respond. Instead, your opaque presentation leaves readers to fill in the blanks, you're poisoning the well, and you come across like a weasel.

You can nip this in the bud by answering phiwum's question in a straight forward manner.

 

[BobTheCoward]

(snipped)

No, no... I get it completely.

Racism is when a white person does anything other than beg for forgiveness for being white and totally cuck themselves.

It is particularly racist when a white person makes any effort to preserve their power as a group, or their genetic integrity, or has any sort of positive feelings about their group, or prefers the company of whites, or mates with another white, makes white children, etc.

These are all the very epitome of racism.

Yes, it is.

 

[Donal]

So, you'll defend the white supremacist by derailing the conversation. good to know.

Back to the topic: there's no logical defense of King. Hell, he won his district by 20% last time. this is actually quite an improvement.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Because what you call racism and white nationalism is literally someone in the current year attempting to represent the will of the founders, ALL previous generations of Americans and the interests of the actual intended citizenry of this nation.

The only alternative to being pro-white and white nationalist is to be:

1.) Anti-white
2.) Anti-American (literally, the country was founded as a white nationalist nation)
3.) Pro-invasion and pro-invaders
4.) In favor of whites losing political power and thus being at the mercy of groups which are actively being encouraged to hate our guts.

Ultimately, if people like you get your way, whites will be slaughtered at some point in the process (edit: and prior to that point, there will be a lot of ever-increasing legally enshrined moves to discriminate against whites, take property and wealth from them, etc.). It is NOT a good idea for any group to lose control over their space(s.) It does not tend to work out well for them.

Just to be clear, you think King is white nationalist?

 

[Foolmewunz]

Sorry to disappoint you there. I thought this was a place where people backed up their claims and didn't say "Just Google it for yourself."

Oh, cut it out. You are not ignorant and pretending to be so isn't cute nor winning the argument. Just scroll up or down and read ST's posts. Swell, company you're keeping there!

 

[tyr_13]

He's asking if someone will reinforce his hateful stereotypes by daring to disagree with him.

This isn't some amicable Oxford debate, where two people take two sides of some question just for the exercise of arguing each side. When I first joined this forum, I thought that's the kind of discussion that might go on here. But it never really is. Why would I want to play dudalb's game?

I get that you might not trust his assessment initially and even question his motives, but here is the thing; in this case he's absolutely correct.

Knowing that Steve King really is pretty horrible, exactly what 'hateful stereotype' do you think he's trying to get you to reinforce? The only ones I can think of are that the GOP will defend King (a lot of them won't because he's not their leader and some actually don't like racists), or will run interference for King. Do you realize that by trying to ad-hom and well poison, you are doing the latter? Trying to avoid reinforcing the 'hateful stereotype' has caused you to reinforce the 'hateful stereotype'. Absolutely Delphic.

Now that you know King is terrible, is it really that difficult to say, 'wow, I guess the Republican Congressional reelection group was right to pull support from him. He's horrible.'?

 

[Checkmite]

Ultimately, if people like you get your way, whites will be slaughtered at some point in the process (edit: and prior to that point, there will be a lot of ever-increasing legally enshrined moves to discriminate against whites, take property and wealth from them, etc.). It is NOT a good idea for any group to lose control over their space(s.) It does not tend to work out well for them.

For posterity's sake:

Yes, this statement is what at some point in the future may come to be called a "red flag". Yes, everyone here sees it and recognizes it as such. But at this point it is not actionable.

 

[varwoche]

Sorry to disappoint you there. I thought this was a place where people backed up their claims and didn't say "Just Google it for yourself."

Oh, cut it out. You are not ignorant and pretending to be so isn't cute nor winning the argument. Just scroll up or down and read ST's posts. Swell, company you're keeping there!

I'm vaguely aware that King is a vile, racist piece of work. The problem is, "vaguely aware" doesn't suffice.

On a daily basis, public figures are harshly criticized here for things they said ... but without quoting the things they said. Instead, posters cite opinion pieces in which the opinion writer characterizes what the person said. Then lo and behold when you look into it, the person didn't really say what was alleged; the criticism is BS.

If I want to convey that person X said something damning, the onus is on me to quote the specific words that best make my case. Otherwise I wouldn't have a consistent standard, because that's what I expect from "the other side".

Also -- I want to know the precise words, even if I don't question the premise. Maybe King is a worse piece of **** than even I'm aware of. I'd like to know that.

(No, this doesn't mean I require a citation to prove that Nixon said "I am not a crook". Some people/utterances are truly common knowledge.)

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Some people/utterances are truly common knowledge.

I think you'll find there's no end to what someone people won't know if it suits their purpose.

But as it happens, tyr_13 gave some quotes just upthread.

 

[Mumbles]

...so basically, nobody seems to want to defend him (except probably ST, but who cares?), but plenty of people are happy to say that they don't know who Steve King is, and you'd better tell them who he is.

Even though they could just look at his wikipedia page or something.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

For posterity's sake:

Yes, this statement is what at some point in the future may come to be called a "red flag". Yes, everyone here sees it and recognizes it as such. But at this point it is not actionable.

If you're implying I have the potential to be violent, you needn't worry.

I'm not an idiot nor a violent person. When I see some of these stories of these complete idiots doing some of what they've been doing, I can only shake my head and wish everyone had the mental fortitude and inner calm to properly process and deal with the nonsense we're facing, but I am not surprised that some people react stupidly and badly to seeing these things. The proper way to react to these challenges is with thought, consideration, convincing others and eventually splitting the country apart peacefully. In the meantime, the best move is to attempt to counter these trends electorally which may not really be viable but it's worth a shot AND what victories do come (like Trump winning, King winning, etc.) serve to drive the anti-white left nuts and make more people aware of how crazy and how anti-white they've become.

I think it's amazing that we've reached a point where you find someone expressing concern about violence coming toward THEM AND THEIR GROUP (and this isn't some crazed raving, either, virulent anti-white rhetoric is being completely normalized in our society - un-freaking-deniably so - I dare you to even pretend to deny it) is actually a red flag that THEY might be violent.

What a clown world.

 

[smartcooky]

The result says more about Iowa's Northwest "Redneck District" than it does about King....

 

[Checkmite]

I think it's amazing that we've reached a point where you find someone expressing concern about violence coming toward THEM AND THEIR GROUP (and this isn't some crazed raving, either, virulent anti-white rhetoric is being completely normalized in our society - un-freaking-deniably so - I dare you to even pretend to deny it) is actually a red flag that THEY might be violent.

A delusion about some deep plot by "people like [dudalb]" to literally slaughter "YOU AND YOUR GROUP" is the germ of a rationale for an eventual violent defense of "YOU AND YOUR GROUP" against those people, regardless of whether or not you profess in all honestly to be non-violent at the present time.

And your language about an "invasion" and "invaders" eerily echoes that of an individual who only days ago murdered several innocent people in a claimed attempt to protect "YOU AND YOUR GROUP" from the selfsame "invasion".

You can object to it being pointed out that these are red flags, but that's what they are nevertheless. And an act of violence isn't what makes such things red flags, it's just what sends future people into internet histories looking for them.

 

[ponderingturtle]

More likely because they get a picture of slavery, then one of Jim Crow, then MLK saying something about being judged by the content of one's character, and that's the contrast.

Much like they were entirely unable to recognize the clear racism of birtherism, of Zimmerman's chasing after Martin, of the parade of white people calling the cops on black people doing perfectly ordinary things like sitting in a Starbucks, or of Dolt45's campaign announcement speech, they see no issue with King sliding his toe up to the edge of the whole White Genocide theory.

I'm sure a lot of people who voted for King would swear that he's not racist at all. He's obviously a white supremacist, though.

But a non racist white supremacist, at least according to his voters.