world

Energized white supremacists cheer Trump convention message

98 Comments
By STEVE PEOPLES

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

98 Comments
Login to comment

Yeah, this is the dangerous part. The Trump campaign should have been a non-starter, but once bigotry become more mainstream on the right it turned into a regular political battle. My guy is racist? Well, yours could have done a better foreign policy job with Libya. It's just another policy position. Racism gets chalked up to as controversial domestic policy.

Guys like Alex Jones shouldn't be that close to the nomination. It's another example of someone on the fringe being brought closer to the party. Those guys shouldn't be there, they should be discredited and marginalized. Michelle Bachmann is another example. Just batshiat crazy, but suddenly acceptable again.

9 ( +15 / -6 )

prefer the term “Europeanists,” ‘‘alt-right,” or even “white nationalists.”

"Dixiecans" works just as well.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

In no way, shape or form would we ever sanction any group or individual that espoused those views.

Spicer than added in an exaggerated voice, "Wink, wink."

1 ( +7 / -6 )

It's the idiot Trump effect, every racist, bigot is crawling out from under a d*** heap to claim his fame.

11 ( +16 / -5 )

"I don’t think people have fully recognized the degree to which he’s transformed the party,” said Richard Spencer, a clean-cut 38-year-old from Arlington, Virginia, who sipped Manhattans as he matter-of-factly called for removing African-Americans, Hispanics and Jews from the United States." - article

Some have criticized the repetition of claims of racism, prejudice and bigotry. The article, "Energized White Supremacists Cheer Trump Convention Message" tells a very different story.

Donald J. Trump refused to condemn David Duke, Holocaust Denier, three times and the reason is clear. Trump is looking to these brown shirts to enforce his chaos propaganda.

Little surprise then: “Trust me. Trump thinks like me,” Spencer said. “Do you think it’s a coincidence that everybody like me loves Trump and supports him?” - article Is it any surprise every racist supports Trump? That's not a coincidence, it's Trump's battle plan and it's sick.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Energized white supremacists cheer Trump convention message

thats not surprising... after all, when Trump says he's going to make America great again, what he really means is thats he's going to make America white again....

2 ( +8 / -6 )

Donald J. Trump refused to condemn David Duke, Holocaust Denier, three times and the reason is clear. Trump is looking to these brown shirts to enforce his chaos propaganda.

Is it like when the Democrats have headlining speakers that openly express their happiness at the murder of cops ?

-13 ( +5 / -18 )

"Trump has repeatedly re-tweeted messages from Twitter users with questionable profiles, including an individual with the handle “@WhiteGenocideTM.”

"And late last year, he re-tweeted inaccurate and racially charged crime statistics that vastly overstated the percentage of whites killed by blacks." - article

The Americans must remember, these are the types of decisions and represent the thinking and judgement Donald J. Trump will bring to every situation and circumstance a President may face.

Trump then is not only irresponsible he clearly has no conscience and no sense of the harm he has created for millions of Americans.

Still, the GOP-tea could have sent Trump a 'Certificate of Accomplishment' and canceled Cleveland. They didn't and now the GOP-tea is permanently tied to the racists who cheer their candidate, Donald J. Trump.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

I'm sure Hillary doesn't need to call in any favors to get the MSM to put out this blatant propoganda since they're all part of the elitist/establishment cabal, warmongering with one side of their face and smiling at the decline of the middle class with the other.

Speaking of white supremacists, Dr. King had some words about this and I hope you name calling children take it to heart...someday.

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom

Absence of tension = EBT card

-17 ( +6 / -23 )

"Speaking of white supremacists, Dr. King had some words about this" - comments

The comment presents: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom", (note, without citation).

What timetable of a man's freedom is the article's "Richard Spencer, . . .(demanding as he) matter-of-factly called for removing African-Americans, Hispanics and Jews from the United States."?

When the White Supremacists use Dr. King's words to justify their racism and defend the prejudice of Donald J. Trump, they might as well quote Jesus in defense of Hitler.

5 ( +10 / -5 )

Secure borders. Jobs. Improved vetting. End ISIS.

Open borders. Increased regulations. Passive state. TTP.

Which one would a supremist pick?

This is an article completely attempting to discredit the GOP. Irreputable evidence that the MSM does everything they can to reach a single party system and try to control the thoughts of the rest of the population.

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

CrazyJoe JUL. 24, 2016 - 07:29AM JST It's the idiot Trump effect, every racist, bigot is crawling out from under a d*** heap to claim his fame.

Agree with it or not, it is called free speech. If this is the Trump effect then what is the Hillary effect? The suppression of opposing or unpopular ideas?

-9 ( +6 / -15 )

Exactly Shrapnel. The left thinks they are superior and have all the answers. With that said, mind control would be desired as we see everyday with the efforts the left puts forth.

The right constantly is ridiculed for just about every statement made. Fortunately the right has thinkers and strong will otherwise the relentless attacks would have crumbled us long ago. I've been called sexist, racist and stupid on JT numerous times simply because I support secure borders and do not support Hillary or Obama. I have never attacked others here with such imaginary accusations.

2nd ammendment first. Free speach next.....the dem party dream.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

"This is an article completely attempting to discredit the GOP." - comments

Really? The Main Stream Media, like FOXNews, haven't changed what Speaker Ryan said. Ryan, as a Republican and Speaker of the House said in this transcript:

SYKES: I know. But has tweeted something that at some point does Reince Priebus or somebody else need to get him on the phone and say, “Mr. Trump you have got to stop tweeting these things. These things are no longer accidents.”

RYAN: Yeah, I really believe he needs to clean up the way his new media works. Most importantly, as you know, one of the few times I spoke out against him during the primary very forcefully was in this area. When he failed to disavow supremacists, white supremacists.

source: 'Ryan Says Trump Tweet Was Anti-Semitic' July 6, 2016 by Ed Brayton

Quite the opposite from some misrepresentation, the article further confirms . . .

"House Speaker Paul Ryan was among those who spoke out against a recent Trump tweet that showed an image shaped like the Star of David over Hillary Clinton’s likeness and a pile of money." - article

What Trump fans have latched on to, is a wild claim that only they know the truth about anything Trump tells them to believe.

They blame the MSM, like FOXNews, for presenting facts. Then they blame the Democrats for the facts reported and confirmed by hundreds of recordings and reports.

This article presents the truth. White Supremacists LOVE the Trump because. as Spencer says: “Trust me. Trump thinks like me,” Spencer said. “Do you think it’s a coincidence that everybody like me loves Trump and supports him?”

Donald J. Trump has just given the bigot permission to hate race and religion and his White Supremacists, like David Duke, Holocaust Denier, have already made that abundantly clear. Now they want everyone to stop talking about the Hate Trump promotes. They can't have it both ways.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Trump has a long history of bigotry that is impossible to deny (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ari-rabin-havt/donald-trumps-four-decade_b_10509158.html), and I have no problem calling him a bigot. I hesitate to call him a white supremacist, if only because A) white supremacy requires an intellectual framework (however fallacious) to structure the change in thought from merely actively hating other groups to asserting one's superiority, and I don't think Trump has room in his head for intellectual frameworks, and B) holding any ideology would require Trump to put some ideal ahead of his personal gratification, and I don't think that's something Trump will ever do.

But his behavior is very welcoming to white supremacists. His constant, bold-face lying and reflexive dismissal of any facts that inconvenience him as products of the "mainstream media" create an intellectual space where white supremacists can pursue their delusional fantasies without being troubled by facts which don't support them. Then couple that with his constant positioning of his obnoxious behavior as some kind of virtue, like tossing out sexist criticism of Megyn Kelly for asking him hard questions and passing off childish attacks as some kind of daring truth-telling. This gives white supremacists cover to position their bigotry as a kind of courage.

Trump is definitely a bigot. He may or may not be a white supremacist, but regardless, his popularization of his obnoxious, truth-ducking style is the best thing that ever happened to them.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Fox News is not MSM when it's the only televised conservative station. What newspaper in print is conservative?

Libs control the media and Hollywood. Thank goodness for radio and net news.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Oh good grief, I suppose Trump's going to have to disavow Duke once more.

Hey, some rascists support Hillary, it doesn't mean she is rascist, though she remains a criminal who hasn't yet been arrested.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Oh, here we go, another Trump hit piece. Duke has endorsed McCain, Romney, they have been doing that for a few election cycle. Trump doesn't support these nuts! You want Trump to publicly denounce Duke and his ilk and I think Obama and Hillary should do the same to the BLM and the NBP. Obama doesn't call out radical Islam for what it is and yet, you libs say, he doesn't need to, we just have to go on blind faith that he believes radical Islam is the cancer of the true Islam, if so, then liberals should equally give Trump the same benefit of a doubt. Even if he doesn't want to give these idiots the time of day, which I do understand, in not doing so, does not even in the slightest confirms that Trump supports these nut jobs.

Fox News is not MSM when it's the only televised conservative station. What newspaper in print is conservative? Libs control the media and Hollywood. Thank goodness for radio and net news.

Ohhhh, without a doubt. You're bringing back memories.

-6 ( +6 / -12 )

"You want Trump to publicly denounce Duke"? - comments

Donald J. Trump already had that chance. Three times in succession on live television. He didn't.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The 20,000 Hillary emails released by wikileaks raised serious questions about the DNC's impartiality during the Democratic primary. Since the rigged process was already common knowledge, I don't suppose it's really newsworthy.

"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything."~ Joe Stalin

It can't be said that today's Democrats don't study history.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Donald J. Trump already had that chance. Three times in succession on live television. He didn't.

So how do you feel about Hillary and Obama refusing to denounce the BLM and the NBP? They had their chances as well and yet, NO condemnation.

-8 ( +3 / -11 )

"Oh, here we go, another Trump hit piece. Duke has endorsed McCain, Romney, they have been doing that for a few election cycle"

Why is Duke endorsing GOP candidates if the Democrats are the real racists? Why do minorities overwhelmingly vote Democrat when the Democrats are the real racists?

A whataboutblacklivesmatterHillayBenghaziROFL answer won't suffice here.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Everyone needs to come to senses to stop this man who is an evil in humanity. If humanity is not important, what else is important to you?. We cannot go back to these dark days of US History.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

MarkG: Secure borders. Jobs. Improved vetting. End ISIS. / Open borders. Increased regulations. Passive state. TTP. / Which one would a supremist pick?

The racist one. It's a trick question.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Serrano: "Hey, some rascists support Hillary, it doesn't mean she is racist"

Nope, but Trump also IS racist, and hence these guys are feeling the love and moving up in the world. They certainly wouldn't have near the support if Trump had not poured energy into them and barely denounced their support (only after immense pressure). Face it, Serrano, you're guy is a massive bigot, and so are those who deny it and support him.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

bass4funkJUL. 24, 2016 - 11:37AM JST

Donald J. Trump already had that chance. Three times in succession on live television. He didn't.

So how do you feel about Hillary and Obama refusing to denounce the BLM and the NBP? They had their chances as well and yet, NO condemnation.

Trump wasn't shy about saying BLM activists at his rallies should have been roughed up, was he? You must be so proud.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

GOP leader Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation that freed black slaves (after losing the war between the states,

Exactly. Wise ole' Abe. Mm-hmm, he was a republican too.

it was the southern democrats who founded the KKK).

The (D) will never wear that shoe although it is absolutely true. White supremacists, kkk are wrong! America belongs to middle America no matter what color you are. Must be law abiding, taxpayer too. Must be legal. No short-cuts. With that said -Go Trump! Go USA!

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

I'm curious if tomorrow's headline will read; 'Convicted felons saddened since can't vote for the democrats'

Don't think so.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

"Nope, but Trump also IS racist"

I'm not convinced he is but he certainly rings the dinner bell for racists. In some ways, I prefer sincere racists. At least they are honest about it.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Rest assured, it all comes out in the wash. For a year now MSM has been desperately trying to dig up the dirt on Trump. I assure you if only 10% of that effort was directed at digging up Hillary's dirt, I'd eat my hat! Thank goodness for the minor media outlets who actually do some digging.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

I'm curious if tomorrow's headline will read; 'Convicted felons saddened since can't vote for the democrats'

Ahha-ha-ha-haa!! LmFao@MarkG

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

"America First"

A thinly veiled euphemism for White Americans First.

This guy and others like him seem to be under the delusion that United States belongs only to white people.

They often fail to realize that their very way of life and standard of living was made possible by slavery/exploitation of cheap immigrant labor which were the primary contributors to US hegemony.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

"Rest assured, it all comes out in the wash. For a year now MSM has been desperately trying to dig up the dirt on Trump. I assure you if only 10% of that effort was directed at digging up Hillary's dirt, I'd eat my hat! Thank goodness for the minor media outlets who actually do some digging."

Talking about news, the women at Fox might be more focused on Hillary hit-jobs now they don't have to worry about an old pervert peering up their tiny skirts.

I think they should appoint a declared racist at the head of Fox now that racism is something to be brushed off among the US right. You know, keep up with the times.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Trump has repeatedly re-tweeted messages from Twitter users with questionable profiles, including an individual with the handle “@WhiteGenocideTM.”

A US presidential candidate retweeting from #WhitePower and getting away with it. It's the new normal for the GOP.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

A thinly veiled euphemism for White Americans First.

Wrong. There are many 2nd, 3rd generation hispanic Americans who think like this too. Blacks too. The veterans. Even immigrants who've become citizens via legal means. Did you not hear Antonio Sabato's speech @RNC?

Go back. Refresh your memory:

http://tvline.com/2016/07/18/antonio-sabato-jr-rnc-republican-national-convention-speech-video/

Mm-hmm, that's right! Love what he says about "socialism" too. Learn this man!

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Why is Duke endorsing GOP candidates if the Democrats are the real racists?

To a point, Because in his twisted head, he believes like many other misguided racists loons that the GOP in their strong stance and opposition to illegal immigration and the acknowledgment of radical jihadism that coincides with their beliefs in White separation. They believe the Democrats do not believe in the stance of keeping our borders safe and allowing in illegal immigrants and allowing Islam to take root in our nation and that liberals are content with that.

Why do minorities overwhelmingly vote Democrat when the Democrats are the real racists?

Because minorities are spoon fed this propaganda that the Democratic Party will take of them and the way to do that is to get them hooked and loaded up on entitlements and government dependency. Many become accustomed to that and believe that safety is the key and to depend on the government. Working in the private industry is not encouraged as well as entrepreneurialism?

Talking about news, the women at Fox might be more focused on Hillary hit-jobs now they don't have to worry about an old pervert peering up their tiny skirts. I think they should appoint a declared racist at the head of Fox now that racism is something to be brushed off among the US right. You know, keep up with the times.

Bill Clinton did a lot of peering up skirts and he was the president. AIles was the president of Fox, so what's the difference, both are dirty and disgusting, I'm sure you would agree, right? So where have they been racist?

Trump wasn't shy about saying BLM activists at his rallies should have been roughed up, was he? You must be so proud.

And the liberal fascists DID physically rough up a lot of people, almost every time. Also, how many videos of Trump supporters bashing people skills, as compared to the liberal fascist that have been beating up and pulverizing every person and a Trump rally. Liberals wallow in racism, it's natural and 2nd nature them.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Trump's strength being all things to all people saying and not saying. A true demagogue with the unique ability to make bedfellows of white supremacists, angry left-behinds, the fearful, and the just plain angry... all self-deluded, hearing what they want to hear.

Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-is-a-unique-threat-to-american-democracy/2016/07/22/a6d823cc-4f4f-11e6-aa14-e0c1087f7583_story.html

The Trump litany of victimization has resonated with many Americans whose economic prospects have stagnated. They deserve a serious champion, and the challenges of inequality and slow wage growth deserve a serious response. But Mr. Trump has nothing positive to offer, only scapegoats and dark conspiracy theories.

The Republican Party has moved the lunatic fringe onto center stage, with discourse that renders impossible the kind of substantive debate upon which any civil democracy depends.

Sad, for a once great party.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The MSM is in full blown shriek mode.White supremacy advocate say they approve of what Mr. Trump is saying ; ergo, Mr. Trump must hate all minorities.

If that is true, then Mrs. Clinton is in the same boat since she is on record as saying all republicans (regardless of skin color) are her enemy. However, the MSM is noticeably silent about that pesky little fact.

This is not a business as usual election cycle. Liberals are now supporting a ticket made up of old, white establishment politicians because they are soooooo.....progressive.

Mr. Trump is gonna defeat Mrs. Clinton in a little more than 100 days. So at this point "What Difference Does It Make Anyway!!"

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

bass4funkJUL. 24, 2016 - 03:27PM JST

Trump wasn't shy about saying BLM activists at his rallies should have been roughed up, was he? You must be so proud.

And the liberal fascists DID physically rough up a lot of people, almost every time.

Irrelevant. You were originally moaning on about Obama and Clinton not condemning the violence. Have they explicitly condoned it the way Trump did?

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Irrelevant. You were originally moaning on about Obama and Clinton not condemning the violence. Have they explicitly condoned it the way Trump did?

Oh, it's very relevant. If didn't do it publicly doesn't mean he condones Duke's endorsement. Or are you saying, you can peer into Trump minds and heart.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Come on, the republicans has been promoting a racist line for decades. All Trump did was bring it out into the open, so instead of using a dog whistle Trump uses KKK tweets instead. For years the pathetic posters on the board have tried to deny the racist nature of their party feigning indignation when confronted with the truth. Now they embrace their inner racism as Trump is giving them the permission to do so, hence the anti-political correct theme. As if not being political correct means you can be openly racist. The KKK fully endorses Trump as he is their man. And the fact is they are right. Trump's Dad was involved in the KKK directly and the apple does not fall far from the tree in this case. Trump became infamous for his birther campaign, pure racism. So stop denying the KKK reason for endorsing Trump. It is the same reason most republicans endorse Trump.

“Trust me. Trump thinks like me,” Spencer said. “Do you think it’s a coincidence that everybody like me loves Trump and supports him?”

0 ( +4 / -4 )

There is a litmus test to see if your GOP buddy is a racist. Tell them former RNC chair Michael Steele said BLM have legit complaints and check the reaction. If they start sounding like David Duke, you got yourself a real live racist! If still not sure, mention Philando Castile and check how fast they try to change the subject.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

"Bill Clinton did a lot of peering up skirts and he was the president. AIles was the president of Fox, so what's the difference, both are dirty and disgusting, I'm sure you would agree, right?"

Come on, Bass, I think you can forgive both. You forgave Trump for mocking disabled people in a flash.

You constantly rant against PC. I'm honestly unclear about where the line is these days between what is acceptable and unacceptable speech or actions for the rightists. What about Obama talking about southerners with their guns and religion, lipstick on a pig, Trump talking about biased judges based on ethnicity and mocking the disabled?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Make AmeriKKKA HATE AGAIN should be trumps slogan!

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Such a transparent and obvious hit piece is obviously written for not-very-bright people or true-believers who are no longer interested in facts that run contrary to their belief (in this case, that Trump is a racist).

I read some equally awful stuff targeting Democrats, and find it embarrassing, as would any conservative with half a brain. I wonder if there is even one anti-Trump person here embarrassed by this.... Thought not.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

It's times like this when I wish I hadn't clicked on the photo.

The whole GOP campaign is ugly, in all senses of the word.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Now wait, commanteer, this was actually a fascinating article about the racists lurking in the shadows of the convention. Are you suggesting that Richard Spencer extremists don't exist or get their ideas distorted by author Steve Peoples?

If this is a hit piece, what do you call Reince Priebus taking to Twitter to reassure everyone that the hateful bigotry of David Duke will never have a place in the Republican Party?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Another hatchet job smear article by the biased press. But this time I think it wont work that well any more. They have been calling anybody that disagrees with the regressive left a "racist" and "supremacist" so long, the labels have lost their magic power. It is gradually becoming a badge of honor to be smeared by the biased press, and that is why the Trump campaign does not need to spend much money responding to the liberal propaganda press. They have become a caricature themselves.

I notice also by the way that Trump clearly defended the rights of gays and lesbians to live... while Hillary & Co. prioritizes the sensibilities of islamists.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

When during an election and with commentaries such as these, it is important to view it without the "labeling" which often detracts from the true identity and intentions of an individual or a group. Everyone has an opinion, usually biased by past exposure and experiences. The important thing is to look at how that individual approaches the issues that is being discussed at that specific situation, circumstances and environment. Every person or group address the questions being asked differently each time it is asked. It depends on the context and the manner in which a question is asked.

Because of the labeling in this article, the issues have become secondary.

The issue by the nature of the discussion appears to be the question of why does the those that are extremely nationalistic supporting Trump. And it was apparently an interview with only one individual that supposedly represented the entire group. It was Spenser that indicated his views on race. Then the article referred to Duke with KKK.

What that demonstrated is that Duke and his group can identify with Trump's "America First" philosophy. Nothing was said about racial issues or matters that relates to blacks and their problems. What was said related to "immigration" issues and Trumps views regarding "Making America Great Again".

As for Spencer and Duke going to the RNC convention, they have the very right as a citizen to go. They can express their thoughts as long as they do not harm others. Gingrich's comments are his thoughts. Trump can handle his own.

The key now is to vote for that candidate that serves the USA. The article points to groups with extreme ideologies that can identify with Trump's "America First" concept that they are willing to participate in and may support. Whether they agree 100% or if Trump will act as they may wish him to, the fact is they chose Trump over Clinton on the issues which the America First concept identifies and addresses, such as immigration and economics.

It has nothing to do with Trump being a racist, hating minorities, Muslims or any specific domestic or foreign policy unless so stated by Spencer or Duke. The article let the readers assume, by the language and the way it is written, that all of what was said at the convention by Trump is identifiable with Spencer's and Duke's opinions and that Trump has the same philosophy and opinions as Spencer and Duke.

That is definitely media bias.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Wow, kooks are gonna krack up when the Democrats run a smooth convention without calling for sharia courts for gays and lesbians. I will try to remember this amazing prediction by the prescient WilliB, as long as it doesn't hurt too many brain cells.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Wow, this is just blatant propaganda alright. I know I shouldn't be surprised but I am.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Make AmeriKKKA HATE AGAIN should be trumps slogan!

. . . . And with her stupid "building bridges" nonsense, and accepting islamic refugees, tolerance. . . we (usa) might as well join the EU or have a civil war again. HRC cannot & will NOT take my guns -that's for sure. Bring it!! Bring it!! Go USA, Go. Go Trump supporters!!

Don't let them burn our flag, divide us, trample Law Enforcement, allow Trojan Horses, weaken our military, make more "stupid deals" with our foes. WAKE UP.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

A lot of non-white people are racist and I haven't heard Obama address this in any way or form.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

bass4funkJUL. 24, 2016 - 04:16PM JST

Irrelevant. You were originally moaning on about Obama and Clinton not condemning the violence. Have they explicitly condoned it the way Trump did?

Oh, it's very relevant. (snip)

I couldn't make much sense of the rest, but it looks as if you're trying to avoid any reference to the fact that Trump said that BLM activists deserved to be roughed up, whereas I'm pretty sure neither Obama nor Clinton have ever said anything of the sort about troublemakers at their rallies. I have absolutely no idea what the references to David Dukes and "peering into Trumps mind and heart" were all about, but I see no connection to the issue of who's condemning violence and who's condoning it.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Come on, the republicans has been promoting a racist line for decades.

Decades? As Democrats? Or are you talking about the 70's through the 80's?

All Trump did was bring it out into the open, so instead of using a dog whistle Trump uses KKK tweets instead. For years the pathetic posters on the board have tried to deny the racist nature of their party feigning indignation when confronted with the truth.

When are the Democrats going to ever own up or even explain their racists policies that have been keeping Blacks and Latinos heavily dependent on big government? Why is it this racist party doesn't believe in teaching people self-reliance. Why is it the Democrats have NO problem aligning themselves with with racists groups like BLM or NBP?

Now they embrace their inner racism as Trump is giving them the permission to do so, hence the anti-political correct theme. As if not being political correct means you can be openly racist. The KKK fully endorses Trump as he is their man. And the fact is they are right.

Anti-political? I think you mean, trying to put an end to out of control Political Correctness, so that Americans don't have to tippy-toe over every situation that makes Americans afraid to even have a conversation with their fellow citizens.

Trump's Dad was involved in the KKK directly and the apple does not fall far from the tree in this case. Trump became infamous for his birther campaign, pure racism. So stop denying the KKK reason for endorsing Trump. It is the same reason most republicans endorse Trump.

Is that so special? Now Trump is responsible for his fathers life and past? So was JFK reponsible for his father being an outright racist that supported the Klan and believed Blacks were the abomination of society? Millions supported Kennedy, despite his flaws. You are making a very weak argument. I know liberals try so hard to try their very best to demonize conservatives, but it's not working. But I will be relieved once liberals take a long look in the mirror and admit that they themselves need to come to grips with their deep-rooted racism.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

MSM. "Political correctness." The less intelligent toss out terms with no idea what they mean mostly because they read them somewhere and parroting is easier than thought. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was doing a job that he believed in in a way he believed in a country he loved when he was killed, and his mother had asked - begged - several times that his tragic death not be used for political purposes.

Trump, of course, ignores this. Talk about MSM and "political correctness" til your blue in the face. There are actual consequences. Trump will only make them worse.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/23/politics/benghazi-ambassador-mother-trump-complaint/index.html

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Apparently, the bête noire of leftists, the Koch brothers, are now supporting Hillary and punishing those who support Trump. Wonder how the left will spin that one. (For those Hillary supporters here, "bête noire" means arch-enemy, or pet hate.)

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Amazing almost zero black vote for Trump. Pretty low for Hispanics too. What do you expect from Trump calling Hispanics a bunch of cockroaches and the KKK, white supremacists, and Bundies cheering for Trump to win?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Nemrut Dagi JUL. 24, 2016 - 01:46PM JST "America First" A thinly veiled euphemism for White Americans First. This guy and others like him seem to be under the delusion that United States belongs only to white people.

Former presidential candidate Ross Perot wrote a book called 'United We Stand: How We Can Take Back Our Country' in your narrow view, was he also racist? I was under the impression that the United States belongs to its citizens and those who immigrate legally. That apparently is the delusion.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

"Apparently, the bête noire of leftists, the Koch brothers, are now supporting Hillary and punishing those who support Trump. Wonder how the left will spin that one. (For those Hillary supporters here, "bête noire" means arch-enemy, or pet hate.)"

Don't use French around Trump supporters. They'll think you're an arty socialist.

Isn't he sending his whooping chimps into ecstasy by roaring about making it harder for the French to enter the US?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Trump wants to prevent any Europeans from entering the US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow JT - what a hit piece! Looking forward to next weeks article on black supremacists from BLM and Hispanic supremacists from La Raza (ie. The Race) next week.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

"Trump wants to prevent any Europeans from entering the US."

Good grief, nishikat, just make up stuff and post it! Sheesh!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

MSM will never print those Wolfpack. Check out Debbie Wasserman Schultz uninvited to speak at the DNC! See if JT posts that one. Talk about a divided party!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Hillary ran a racist campaign against Obama in 2008.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

“SUPER PREDATOR THEORY”

“Super predators, no conscience, no empathy, we can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel”~ Hillary Clinton, discussing Bill's 1994 crime bill. Is that not a racist comment?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Wolf, BLM simply wants black people to be treated like white people. La Raza simply wants Hispanics to be treated like white people. White supremacists want blacks and Hispanics forced out of the country. Deny that all you'd like, but it is a fact - and there is rather a big difference there. If you cared about the issue at all, you might have looked into it rather than expressing ignorance.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Laguna JUL. 24, 2016 - 10:30PM JST Wolf, BLM simply wants black people to be treated like white people. La Raza simply wants Hispanics to be treated like white people.

Where do Asians fit into your equation? Are we treated equally? Does Affirmative Action help us in any way? Do we demand government intervention to gain equal footing? Quite the opposite I'd say.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Hillary ran a racist campaign against Obama in 2008 Can you be more specific? Did she refer to Mexicans as human trash that need to be taken out and dumped?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Laguna, you are severely mislead. White supremacists gain little to no recognition. BLM has been to the White House. white supremacists are an extreem minority with nearly zero followers. BLM is a much larger population with many followers. Just watch the convention, they'll be there.

The new black panther party wants whites gone. Why? They are Black racists.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

White supremacists gain little to no recognition They sure do to the blacks since they are almost zero count towards Trump.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

White supremacists gain little to no recognition.

Agree with you there, Mark - aside from nominating the Republican Party candidate, pretty much zero. (Snark over)

I don't want to pretend that Trump's nomination was entirely due to white angst over shifting balances in racial power, but to pretend that that is not a factor is to ignore obvious reality. And if that incident in which a caretaker of mentally ill people was forced to lie down in the middle of a blistering-hot street with his hands held up for no other reason than BBIP (being black in public) yet was nonetheless shot in the leg - with his poor charge playing with a toy truck beside him (and still managed to be polite: "Why did you shoot me, sir?") - if that does not give you pause, you have lost all humanity.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Agree with it or not, it is called free speech. If this is the Trump effect then what is the Hillary effect? The suppression of opposing or unpopular ideas?

A "Hillary effect" has yet to be articulated. As one who will vote for Mrs. Clinton, I assert that all should WELCOME the free speech that enables haters and bigots like ones who defend Trump to reveal themselves for who and what they are.

One poster's attempt to use the words of Dr. King to justify Trump's dog-whistle (and overt) bigotry is nothing short of amazing. Dr. King would sympathize with and support the multi-racial movement that is BLM, while rejecting any support for violent rhetoric. King opposed inaction in the face of injustice; the actions he undertook are very much like the ones that BLM takes. Dr. King would NOT be advising them to support haters and bigots (by signing up with the GOP).

Today's modern conservative has swallowed the notion that feeding a hungry person is evil because it "makes them dependent." They seem to believe that there is no "dynamic" in our vast society in that the safety nets successfully help millions of people up the ladder back into productive lives at the same time millions of others suffer circumstances which drive them into need. Meanwhile, the same conservatives have fostered conditions which make social mobility in the USA much harder.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

BLM simply wants black people to be treated like white people. La Raza simply wants Hispanics to be treated like white people.

I guess you're not aware that what you said is very racist. Maybe you meant something different, but I'm sure blacks don't want to be treated like whites, they want to be treated equally. If blacks want to be treated like whites, then they act like a white person.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

bass: Because minorities are spoon fed this propaganda that the Democratic Party will take of them and the way to do that is to get them hooked and loaded up on entitlements and government dependency

Well you just told millions of hard working minorities not on government assistance that they vote Democrat because they are lazy and want to keep their handouts. For a hard working Latino family who pays taxes like everyone else I'm guessing that kind of message would be insulting. Surely you can see how that would damage the Republican party.

kazetsukai: the fact is they chose Trump over Clinton on the issues which the America First concept identifies and addresses, such as immigration and economics.

It just doesn't sound genuine that your mind would go here instead of immediately going to things like retweeting @WhiteGenocideTM. Would you mind if I asked you a few questions about Jewish people?

Shrapnel: Hillary Clinton, discussing Bill's 1994 crime bill. Is that not a racist comment?

(sigh) Clinton has high support in the black community because she has spent the time meeting with them and building her coalition. In her early days she worked for a civil rights activist and spent a summer pretending to be a parent while investigating segregation in private schools. At the same time Trump was running a company with a policy that denied applications from black people.

It really isn't rocket science why she has so much support and Trump has none. But I'm sure someone will be along shortly to swat that aside and talk about all that free stuff.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

If blacks want to be treated like whites, then they act like a white person.

Gee, Fizz, I know a lot of white people, and they all act in accordance with their own personalities. I do not understand what you mean by "act like a white person." I also know many blacks, and the same rule applies. How exactly should a black person act like a white person? Perhaps one could get a Ph.D. and a position at Harvard - that would be cool, eh? Henry Louis Gates Jr. did that - and look at all the good his "acting white" did him while he was entering his own home. And right-wingers still bring this up as Obama's "divisiveness."

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Fair warning. For those who aren't familiar with BLM - Black Lives Matter, no, they are not a hate group. NBPP and BLM, are not the same thing - conflating the two is a pretty transparent propaganda technique say like conflating the KKK with the GOP.

The folks who make such claims would be hard pressed to back it up. They rarely if ever try to offer any evidence to support their claim and any "evidence" they offer always fails the giggle test.

The other common propaganda technique... is to repeat said falsehood and count on not being challenged.

The "Big Lie" - His [Hitler's] primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.

https://www.splcenter.org/news/2016/07/19/black-lives-matter-not-hate-group

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter

They're controversial, no doubt. A hate group? Make your own minds up but not based regurgitations of the right-wing propaganda machine.

In any case, the issue at hand here isn't who's showing up at the rallies... but who the dog whistles are targetting. And, Trump's statements pretty clearly include dog whistles to right-wing white supremacists - that's why they show up. They certainly hear the whistle. And, Trump, couldn't be in less of a hurry to make it clear he doesn't need 'em.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I thought Trump was gaining after his female relatives speech. But it seems some people are sabotaging

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I do not understand what you mean by "act like a white person."

Then I would say that this is the fault of the liberal education system where identity is less important than multiculturalism. Which in turn, hinders the growth of understanding human and race relations.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Then I would say that this is the fault of the liberal education system where identity is less important than multiculturalism.

I would like to know what if any responsibility a "liberal education" has upon instilling or promoting white supremacy in students?

Obviously, identity is VERY important to white supremacists. They also opposed to multiculturalism. (As you also appear to be.) So what in the development of the white supremacist has gone wrong? Unless you're claiming that they are desired outcome of an education system..

0 ( +1 / -1 )

As you also appear to be.

Nice, the MSM has sought you well my son.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Democrats do nothing to elevate minorities. Job suppression does nothing for the less educated. Industry is needed back in USA for the employment possibilities for all. A thriving economy can employ at market driven wages. No need to raise minimum wage to $15/hr. Minimum wage jobs are for kids and workforce entry types. A career order taker at McDonalds can and will be replaced with an electronic ordering monitor.

Republicans do generate jobs. Real jobs not fast food or retail.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

bass4funkJUL. 25, 2016 - 01:58AM JST

And yet they support the BLM, I'm doing so, they are supporting the violence that comes with their rhetoric and like Sheriff Clerke said, this group is a vile and racist organization.

Totally missing the point again, aren't you? BLM leaders actually denounce violence themselves. Donald Trump, the self-proclaimed law and order candidate, has said troublemakers at his rallies deserve to be roughed up, that he would pay the legal fees of any of his supporters doing the roughing up, and that he personally would like to punch protesters in the face. I can only infer from your inability to offer a comment on any of this is that you would prefer to ignore it or that you think it's all perfectly acceptable.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Does the bubble talk about Kansas, Mark?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Totally missing the point again, aren't you? BLM leaders actually denounce violence themselves.

I will say this, the intent of BLM has some valid points, but the leadership is the problem and a few of them on record have called for violence.

Donald Trump, the self-proclaimed law and order candidate, has said troublemakers at his rallies deserve to be roughed up, that he would pay the legal fees of any of his supporters doing the roughing up, and that he personally would like to punch protesters in the face. I can only infer from your inability to offer a comment on any of this is that you would prefer to ignore it or that you think it's all perfectly acceptable.

Jeez! You don't excuse bad behavior with more bad behavior, however, the point is, even though Trump said what he said, almost EVERY single time you have seen violence and riots, it's always the ANTI-Trump crowd, the Anti-fascist crowd that engages in the violence. Again, you will find tons of videos of people threatening to usurp the process or use violence to attack and intimidate Trump supporters, so if you are asking if I think what he said was wrong, to a point, if you think Trump was wrong in his words and should apologize, have the same standards and hold the BLM to the same standard. Remember, there is a difference between calling out violence and engaging in physical violence.

I just wonder now with all that's going on at the DNC if violence will break out. Yikes!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

bass4funkJUL. 25, 2016 - 07:19AM JST

Jeez! You don't excuse bad behavior with more bad behavior, however, the point is, even though Trump said what he said, almost EVERY single time you have seen violence and riots, it's always the ANTI-Trump crowd, the Anti-fascist crowd that engages in the violence. Again, you will find tons of videos of people threatening to usurp the process or use violence to attack and intimidate Trump supporters, so if you are asking if I think what he said was wrong, to a point, if you think Trump was wrong in his words and should apologize, have the same standards and hold the BLM to the same standard.

I think a US Presidential candidate should be held to a somewhat higher standard than a bunch of activists, don't you? But - I readily and gladly denounce and repudiate anyone of any political alignment who explicitly advocates or condones violence. If any BLM leaders or activists ever aspire to be President of the United States and they have supported or been involved in violence, they should be rejected by the voters unless they reflect on and apologise for their misconduct, as indeed they should under any other circumstances. There. That wasn't so hard. Now, how about you condemning Donald Trump. No...? Thought not.

Remember, there is a difference between calling out violence and engaging in physical violence.

I don't recall any BLM leaders engaging in any physical violence themselves, or Donald Trump for that matter, so what was that comment about?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

the leadership is the problem and a few of them on record have called for violence.

I was actually more confused by this one. Who is the leadership and what did they say?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

SuperLibJUL. 25, 2016 - 04:53PM JST

the leadership is the problem and a few of them on record have called for violence.

I was actually more confused by this one. Who is the leadership and what did they say?

All I can find is what Donald Trump and Chris Christie said they said. Oh, wait - they said what "some supporters" had "essentially" said.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Laguna: Wolf, BLM simply wants black people to be treated like white people. La Raza simply wants Hispanics to be treated like white people.

I think you mean well but you are just being unknowingly (or knowingly) misled. Don't believe me? Go to their website and see for yourself. http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

Black Lives Matter is a chapter-based national organization working for the validity of Black life. We are working to (re)build the Black liberation movement.

They are a black separatist organization with Marxist goals. They are pushing distrust of authority (ie. white police) in order to undermine them in the black community. They do not want whites and blacks to get along. That is why they are exclusionary. They want black only "safe spaces" and they use the phrase "Black Lives Matter" on purpose - to separate and divide. If they just wanted to be treated equally they would use something like "Black Lives Matter Too" or something similar appealing to our common humanity. That's how MLK was successful during the Civil Rights era. BLM wants separatism - not a common culture.

La Raza simply wants Hispanics to be treated like white people.

La Raza is also a separatist organization. That's why they refer to themselves as "The Race". It has a similar ring to it as The Aryan Nation doesn't it?

Because of white liberals belief in multiculturalism they are helping to drive a wedge between the races by attempting to lend legitimacy to these separatist organizations. Watch it in action over the next four days in Philadelphia. Hillary Clinton will put on a show or racial, religious, sex, and ethnic grievance.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

They do not want whites and blacks to get along.

Wolfpack, looks like BLM was prepared for your misconceptions.

http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/

Misconception #8: 8. The movement hates white people.

The statement “black lives matter” is not an anti-white proposition. Contained within the statement is an unspoken but implied “too,” as in “black lives matter, too,” which suggests that the statement is one of inclusion rather than exclusion. However, those white people who continue to mischaracterize the affirmation of the value of black life as being anti-white are suggesting that in order for white lives to matter, black lives cannot. That is a foundational premise of white supremacy.

Looks like they're addressing you there, Wolfpack

As for La Raza, there is always a risk of losing something in translation. Indeed, racially, a multitude of La Raza are MIXED, so implying it's some racist thing is absurd. A better translation of La Raza is "the people" as in "the human race."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@yabits: However, those white people who continue to mischaracterize the affirmation of the value of black life as being anti-white are suggesting that in order for white lives to matter, black lives cannot. That is a foundational premise of white supremacy

Has it not occurred to you that it is likewise foundational to black supremacy - thus the exclusionary term Black Lives Matter. I support anyone who affirms the value of human life. BLM does not. That is readily apparent in their dehumanization of all police, and white police in particular, leading to numerous indiscriminate assassinations. Black supremacy is equally as odious as white supremacy. BLM, and apparently folks here on JT do not agree and that is a sad testament to the state of race relations in this world. Anyone who rejects equal treatment under law (color blind society) is color conscious and contributes to the problem. Race relations in the US never improves because Americans refuse to embrace the concept of valuing individual life beyond race - and no longer even try. The political Left re-enforces separatism through multiculturalism and political movements like Black Lives Matter. The chickens are again coming home to roost.

Contained within the statement is an unspoken but implied “too,” as in “black lives matter, too,” which suggests that the statement is one of inclusion rather than exclusion.

How does exclusion imply inclusion? It doesn't. What kind of mind pretzel rationale can come up with that? 'All lives matter' is not stated because that is not what the movement wishes to convey.

A better translation of La Raza is "the people" as in "the human race."

Actual a better translation is 'breed'. Why make excuses for an ethnically exclusionary group? You are embracing separatism.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Has it not occurred to you that it is likewise foundational to black supremacy - thus the exclusionary term Black Lives Matter.

As the post said, the inference is "Black Lives Matter (too)." Not being a white supremacist, but growing up with and knowing a great many white supremacists, I understand how you can try to derive your perception.

You don't know any BLM supporters personally and so you can ignorantly claim they are "supremacists" out of your own worst projections on them. When Dylann Roof went into that church -- members of which support BLM -- they welcomed him and worshiped together for an hour or so before the young man decided he'd had enough.

Actual a better translation is 'breed'. Why make excuses for an ethnically exclusionary group?

I have known Hispanic supporters of La Raza, and I'll say that I have never received anything but kindness and cordiality in my relations with them. Then again, I never approached them or anyone with the notion that they are "exclusionists." (You actually think those people don't have regular, friendly relations with non-Hispanics?) I'd bet if you approached them in a spirit of respect, they would welcome you too. Why not try it, rather than wallow in fear and ignorance?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

yabits: As the post said, the inference is "Black Lives Matter (too).

Did you not go to the BLM website? I gave you the link to it. Did you not read the statement on their site that informs everyone of the purpose of their movement? Here it is again:

Black Lives Matter is a chapter-based national organization working for the validity of Black life. We are working to (re)build the Black liberation movement.

They are an exclusionary race-centric organization. Imagine an organization whose purpose is 'to (re) build the White liberation movement.' A major problem with the Left is that it does not hold all individuals, regardless of race, to the same standard. Racism is racism period. Holding people of different races to different standards is de facto discrimination. Separate is not equal.

I have known Hispanic supporters of La Raza, and I'll say that I have never received anything but kindness and cordiality in my relations with them.

So you hang with Hispanics that support racial/ethnic separatism. Is that anything to be proud of?

I'd bet if you approached them in a spirit of respect, they would welcome you too.

I bet if I were to challenged people with a racial/ethnic separatist world view like La Rasa and BLM they would reject my view that all people should be treated as individuals based on the content of their character instead of the color of their skin. I would hope that someday they would become better educated and accept everyone as equals regardless of race.

Why not try it, rather than wallow in fear and ignorance?

What's the point of this cheap shot? I contend that it is ignorant to stress a racially focused ideology that stresses differences rather than commonalities. Stressing 'Black Lives Matter' rather than 'All Lives Matter' has had the intended effect - racial animosity and conflict. If BLM and The Race have to pretend that their racially exclusionary message means the exact opposite of what it says they are not going to win support from those who believe in an inclusionary message like 'All Lives Matter.'

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Imagine an organization whose purpose is 'to (re) build the White liberation movement.'

It would be absurd in America, as whites are not subject to discrimination that people of color are subject to. Whites liberated from what? White supremacists have somewhat successfully portrayed the suppression of many forms of racism as "political correctness," and cheer Donald Trump's attempts to break down the barriers and allow open expression of white supremacy again.

One of the tricks that racists use is the attempt to portray groups composed of members who have been victims of white supremacy as "racist" and "supremacist." My view is that those groups' use of seemingly exclusionary language is there to help expose white racists -- to flush them out of the woodpile, so to speak. I think it's working to great success.

I would hope that someday they would become better educated and accept everyone as equals regardless of race.

I bet that if you actually went out and met some folks in a spirit of respect -- and not trying to change them to your views, G-d forbid -- you would find out they hold the very same point of view. Maybe you'd learn to see white people in the way that white people come across to them. ("you have to change your views to suit mine" -- another form of supremacy in action. Color-blindness is what whites, often racist, declare it is.)

But it's easier to make false judgments while wallowing in fear and ignorance.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Oh boy, just listen to the media spin. For the the next few months, the liberal-biased media (and those of us who have seen some of leaked e-mail exchange between the Democrat party headquarters and the media, we´d rather say "liberal controlled") will be on a Trump-bashing frenzy, screaming all the usual epithets every day.

However, I have the feeling this time around the playbook does not work so much any more. Being called "racist" by the Democrac party hacks has been so over-played, it is becoming a yawn. Anybody who is against Hillary is a racist, a bigot, a (fill in the the blanks).... we get it.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Energized white supremacists cheer Trump convention message

And likewise the hate-filled DNC and the lawlessness occurring outside that venue are energized and cheering too. They're even obstructing the police, burning flags, dozens of arrests too. Funny how the chaos climaxed while President Obama spoke.

I do not agree with white supremacist, but if an ordinary white cheers for Trump, somehow, now, I am a racist. So 1-sided.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Here is my comment concerning this: I'll be GLAD once this election cycle is O-V-E-R, OVER!

It's been a mess, and cannot end too soon!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Agree with it or not, it is called free speech. If this is the Trump effect then what is the Hillary effect? The suppression of opposing or unpopular ideas

Shrapnel--like Trumps response to those who criticized him at the DNC was not a clear-cut suppression of "unpopular" ideas?? REALLY? He said that he would like to HIT those who criticized him. This will, if this clown is ever ELECTED become SHOOT those who criticize him. And you will just shrug it off as you are a Fascist like him.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites