Politically Correct or Incorrect Bullshit Of The Day

[ellpieski]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

You seem to have missed the racial discrimination cases in the 1970s among other things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial...f_Donald_Trump

https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/122708...racism-history

https://www.newsweek.com/fair-housin...familys-879437

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.c9f022df51b3

So you have four articles that state the same thing, that a single housing settlement in the 70's constitutes a lifelong reality of racism. You completely ignore that he wasn't found guilty. That any substantive testimony referred to his fathers early days as a landlord, not him. And that he actually discriminated against welfare recipients without regard to race, keeping white welfare renters out as well as blacks or Hispanics.

You seem to have missed the reality of the situation, that he was given an achievement award in 1986 by Jesse Jackson, along with fellow recipients Rosa Parks and Muhammed Ali, for their contribution and support of the Black Community. Or that he was again honored for his support of black activism in 1998.

https://theblacksphere.net/2017/08/l...-racist-bigot/

As a former landlord in an urban democratic city I can tell you for a fact, that no matter what you do, you will eventually get called a racist by minority tenants simply to get out of paying rent. Fighting accusations of racism is just part of doing business.
This is from years of actual experience not "published on the internet" bullshit. The laws for tenant landlord relations became so restrictive that I once a had a drug dealing tenant who wouldn't pay rent, threatening all the other tenants, and trashing the building but I couldn't have him removed for 8 months because of the laws protecting him from the evil white landlord. This dude was attacking families with babies across the hall! I even had the local Police Precinct Captain testify that he was a menace to public safety because he was such a huge problem not just for the other tenants, but the community. You know what the judge did? Three 60 day extensions before I finally got to his liberal free lawyer with the other tenants who were insanely pissed and convinced the lawyer it was me protecting the other minority tenants, not her and her gratis white liberal legal representation.

The accusation and settlement are not evidence of racism. Its evidence of the damage bad tenants can do to any building. Section 8's are the worst.

If that's all you got, then you don't have any evidence at all.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by ellpieski

You seem to have missed the reality of the situation, that he was given an achievement award in 1986 by Jesse Jackson, along with fellow recipients Rosa Parks and Muhammed Ali, for their contribution and support of the Black Community. Or that he was again honored for his support of black activism in 1998.

https://theblacksphere.net/2017/08/l...-racist-bigot/

laughs Donald Sterling has a lifetime Achievement Award from the NAACP if you are a person of means buying an award from such an organization has been notoriously easy so I don't see your point at all. Money has been known to wash away a multitude of sins.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by ellpieski

As a former landlord in an urban democratic city I can tell you for a fact, that no matter what you do, you will eventually get called a racist by minority tenants simply to get out of paying rent. Fighting accusations of racism is just part of doing business.
This is from years of actual experience not "published on the internet" bullshit. The laws for tenant landlord relations became so restrictive that I once a had a drug dealing tenant who wouldn't pay rent, threatening all the other tenants, and trashing the building but I couldn't have him removed for 8 months because of the laws protecting him from the evil white landlord. This dude was attacking families with babies across the hall! I even had the local Police Precinct Captain testify that he was a menace to public safety because he was such a huge problem not just for the other tenants, but the community. You know what the judge did? Three 60 day extensions before I finally got to his liberal free lawyer with the other tenants who were insanely pissed and convinced the lawyer it was me protecting the other minority tenants, not her and her gratis white liberal legal representation.

The accusation and settlement are not evidence of racism. Its evidence of the damage bad tenants can do to any building. Section 8's are the worst.

If that's all you got, then you don't have any evidence at all.

I believe one of the articles mentioned all the race baiting in Trump's campaign speeches, but maybe I didn't link that one. As a former property accountant I can assure you that racial discrimination is still practiced by landlords and property managers. You are absolutely right about how one bad tenant can mess up up your building. It can take years to attract quality tenants after the ones you had flee to distance themselves from bad tenants.

Section 8s are a mixed bag, but IMO lawyers are the worst. With a private property management company, some building owners instructed us not to rent to lawyers. One of my last gigs was with a non-profit that managed a lot of HUD properties. It wasn't usually the tenants. Often it was their relatives who brought the crime, drugs, threats and violence. Getting rid of bad tenant is a hassle and HUD sometimes foisted bad tenants on us. But really, much depends on the resident property managers. If tenants are properly vetted, you have good buildings.

And you are right that one need not be a racist to discriminate. There is a responsibility to the tenants to provide good buildings and some tenants are more touchy about the race of their neighbors.

(You've brought back memories of one of our Latina property managers who ran a great building where tenants were not allowed to become delinquent in their rents. I think she ran that building with an iron fist. It was very clean despite all the kids. Since the tenant families spoke Spanish and were very reluctant to cross her, the county and HUD never troubled us about that building.)

As for the 1973 consent decree, the Trumps agreed to a remediation program and monitoring rather than risking a trial. They were sued again for violating the agreement in 1975. Donald counter sued and whatever resolution was arranged was not disclosed.

I would say, based on the campaign speeches, separating Hispanic refugee children from their parents, banning Muslim immigrants, and the various measures be taken by the DOJ, HUD, and Betsy DeVos, that Trump is a racist. (Quack, quack, quack, quack.)

[ellpieski]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

I would say, based on the campaign speeches, separating Hispanic refugee children from their parents, banning Muslim immigrants, and the various measures be taken by the DOJ, HUD, and Betsy DeVos, that Trump is a racist. (Quack, quack, quack, quack.)

You do realize that the separating of children began under Obama and his Attorney general Eric Holder who expanded the Flores Consent Decree right? and that it wasn't a muslim (not a race btw) immigrant ban, it was a ban on immigration from seven countries identified by the Obama administration which had previously banned travel from those countries without the accusations of racism, right? and that by definition, anyone who comes into the country as an illegal alien is already a criminal, right? so Obama was a racist too? Quack Quack....

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by ellpieski

You do realize that the separating of children began under Obama and his Attorney general Eric Holder who expanded the Flores Consent Decree right? and that it wasn't a muslim (not a race btw) immigrant ban, it was a ban on immigration from seven countries identified by the Obama administration which had previously banned travel from those countries without the accusations of racism, right? and that by definition, anyone who comes into the country as an illegal alien is already a criminal, right? so Obama was a racist too? Quack Quack....

It is quite clear that you are a Trump apologist who will regurgitate the propaganda published by the right wing media you absorb.

If you check my earlier posts, you will see that I have stated my extreme distaste for Donald Trump. My dislike stems from his business practices and dates back several decades before he ever considered running for president. Also, as a left leaning person, I get my news from different sources.

Therefore, it is highly unlikely that we are going to agree as to what the facts are. It is my opinion that Donald Trump is a bigot. You believe otherwise. It seems that those are the two facts which we can agree on.

[ellpieski]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

It is quite clear that you are a Trump apologist who will regurgitate the propaganda published by the right wing media you absorb.

If you check my earlier posts, you will see that I have stated my extreme distaste for Donald Trump. My dislike stems from his business practices and dates back several decades before he ever considered running for president. Also, as a left leaning person, I get my news from different sources.

Therefore, it is highly unlikely that we are going to agree as to what the facts are. It is my opinion that Donald Trump is a bigot. You believe otherwise. It seems that those are the two facts which we can agree on.

Facts are kryptonite to liberals, that we know.

When confronted with facts, deny and run to the race card. The Flores Decree is fact, not propaganda, not left or right wing, pure fact, and my information on it comes from The Immigration Lawyers of America, hardly a right wing site. But that's ok. Or should I call you out for getting information from Occupy Democrats even if I don't know where your information comes from as you did to me?

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by ellpieski

You do realize that the separating of children began under Obama and his Attorney general Eric Holder who expanded the Flores Consent Decree right? and that it wasn't a muslim (not a race btw) immigrant ban, it was a ban on immigration from seven countries identified by the Obama administration which had previously banned travel from those countries without the accusations of racism, right? and that by definition, anyone who comes into the country as an illegal alien is already a criminal, right? so Obama was a racist too? Quack Quack....

Prosecuting refugees as illegal immigrants is a violation of international law. Separating children from parents as a tactic to extract confessions of violating immigration law is likely a violation of our laws in addition to our international agreements. Subsequently deporting those parents while keeping the children in detention centers or "foster care" is likely criminal behavior under our laws in addition to international law. Arresting relatives who volunteer to care for refugee children seems neither legal, humane, nor moral. Detaining and deporting individuals while their immigration cases are still being heard is criminal behavior. Deporting native born citizens and people in the country legally is criminal behavior.

And it just so happens that all the countries included in the ban are Arab or African nations. And despite Trump's frequent campaign promises to ban Muslim refugees and people of color, he is not a racist or biased against Islam???

If you look through my previous postings regarding refugees you will see that I have consistently maintained that we have humanitarian and moral, if not legal, obligations to provide for refugees fleeing violence in countries that have been destabilized by our government's actions. I regard this as particularly true when the right wing paramilitary organizations terrorizing many of these people have been armed and financed by the CIA.

For many years it was illegal for people of differing races to marry and many sexual acts were outlawed. Do you really wish to categorize all actions that violate laws later found to be unconstitutional as criminal? Do you ever drive faster than the speed limit, which is by definition criminal behavior? Do you think you are a criminal?

One of the reasons the United States has refused to subject itself to the jurisdiction of the International Courts is for fear our political leaders, military personnel, and clandestine operatives would then be liable for prosecution for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other violations of international law. We set the precedent for these courts by trying and punishing Japanese and Nazi leaders. In my opinion, it is hypocritical to try the leaders of other nations while shielding such people as Bush, Obama, and Trump for similar actions or worse. Is it really OK to blow up innocent civilians as "collateral damage" with drone strikes even in countries we are not at war with? We don't seem to think that Mr. Putin should be killing his defectors in their overseas refuges.

[cicciobuki]

Originally Posted by ellpieski

Facts are kryptonite to liberals, that we know.

Trump and his gang, on the other side, seem completely immune to facts.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by cicciobuki

Trump and his gang, on the other side, seem completely immune to facts.

surely that is .....

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by ellpieski

Facts are kryptonite to liberals, that we know.

When confronted with facts, deny and run to the race card. The Flores Decree is fact, not propaganda, not left or right wing, pure fact, and my information on it comes from The Immigration Lawyers of America, hardly a right wing site. But that's ok. Or should I call you out for getting information from Occupy Democrats even if I don't know where your information comes from as you did to me?

I have been getting most of my news from Reuters and the Associated Press. I subscribe to The Washington Post, The Guardian and San Jose Mercury News, but am doing searches on many issues because I am aware of the biases these publications have. Thus, I am limiting the amount I read from these. Mainly, I am using the Post to keep abreast of science, technology, and world news, The Guardian for world news, and the Mercury News for local and sports. I also subscribe to Time, which the Koch Brothers just sold and Sports Illustrated which they have on the market. (I think SI is doomed unless it can transition to digital.) I checked refreshed my memory on the Flores Decree prior to my last post,

Since I have regarded Donald Trump as a liar, con man, and perpetrator of fraud since the 1980s, it is easy for me to believe he is a racist.

You will have to come up with something much more concrete to change the mind of this 69 year old retired accountant. I was raised by very religious people in the Catholic faith and my undergrad major was philosophy where I focused on ethics and epistemology. When I stumbled into accounting, I went back for professional studies, completed all the undergrad prereq's and have an MBA in the accounting option.

My politics are a mix of conservative values and radical politics. No party really expresses my political ideology. A lot of it has been shaped by the 10+ years I did international accounting, becoming familiar with other government's tax policies, business laws, and health and retirement plans. I do not believe we can compete internationally without improved education, and national health and retirement programs because the other advanced economies provide those to their workers and the emerging nations are in the process of doing likewise.

As an aside, I note that it was only in the 20th century that education and medicine were transformed from a public good and semi-charitable activity to profit making ventures. Frankly, I see seeking to enrich oneself at the expense of preparing the next generation or through exploiting the pain and suffering of the sick and dying as profoundly immoral and utterly reprehensible.

I will try to find time to go back and find my previous posts on immigration. I have my reasons for opposing Mr. Trump's programs.