Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Joe Biden and race


Bronan

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Sup_Yo said:

Go away. 

Truth hurts....

Biden is really, a racist

We all know it....some just don't want to hear it because just maybe.....

only a racist would vote for a racist....or so I've been told.

Edited by Opie
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Bronan said:

False accusations? 

Imagine being so desperate to find reasons to support the guy that you are making excuses for a guy who tried to enforce segregation laws. 

I was pretty shocked by that opening sequence, which led me to inquire as to whether there was context I was missing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree on Joe Biden being racist.  His rhetoric during the Crime Bill era (laws he wrote that were devastating to the black community) was as 'dogwhistley' as it gets.  These remarks would be appalling to people today.  

Then there's his comments on Indians, the way he talked about "illegals," his fearmongering against "the Chinese."  

Then there's his many idiotic gaffes about the black community, several whoppers in just the past few months alone.  "You ain't black," how the Latino community is very diverse unlike the African American community, poor kids being just as talented as white kids.  

Then there's his eulogy and partnership with Strom Thurmond.  I'm sure he got some shots in against Islam during the war on terror too.  Maybe he is not outward and proud of it, but the backwards old-people racism seems to rear its head all the time.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Like most people his age, Biden is probably a little racist.

Given a choice between Biden (slightly racist) versus Trump (very overtly racist), this is a pretty easy decision.

Curious, can you provide examples of Trumps racism that dont require you to resort to mental gymnastics and long leaps of faith? Name a few please. 

Biden was advocating policy that enforced segregation. And thats just the tip of the iceberg. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bronan said:

Curious, can you provide examples of Trumps racism that dont require you to resort to mental gymnastics and long leaps of faith? Name a few please. 

Biden was advocating policy that enforced segregation. And thats just the tip of the iceberg. 

 

Must have been that "Muslim Ban".

You remember?
The one that didn't ban Muslims?   :rolleyes:

Edited by Opie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the audacity to try and limit travel from a part of the world that was a breeding ground for terrorism. I wonder how ISIS is doing these days we dont really hear much about them its almost like they were kind of dealt with. 

I look forward though to genuine examples of Trumps racism. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Red Hot Tamales said:

I was once opposed to shutting this forum down because I did not want the trolls to win.

Just asking questions bro. 

See what you want to do now that those uncomfortable questions are being asked and you cant virtue signal with impunity is report this to the moderators and pray that one of the more left leaning mods takes action to silence any and all wrong think that upsets your feelings. 

Thats your next step. 

What are your thoughts on Joe though? You happy electing a guy like that given his racist background? I dont want you guys to be inconsistent with your views and opinions or anything given that you have the moral high ground and all that. 

Edited by Bronan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bronan said:

Yeah, the audacity to try and limit travel from a part of the world that was a breeding ground for terrorism. I wonder how ISIS is doing these days we dont really hear much about them its almost like they were kind of dealt with. 

I look forward though to genuine examples of Trumps racism. 

https://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/495955920/donald-trump-plagued-by-decades-old-housing-discrimination-case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, bigbottom said:

People who bring this up, always seem to fail to mention that this suit was dismissed with prejudice that is, dismissed permanently
A case dismissed with prejudice is over and done with, once and for all, and can't be brought back to court. 

 

Edited by Opie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Opie said:

People who bring this up, always seem to fail to mention that this suit was dismissed with prejudice that is, dismissed permanently. 

It was dismissed because of settlement by the Trump Org agreeing to make remediation. Trump's suit against the FHA - because he did sue them, was always frivolous - was dropped as part of the overall agreement. As typically happened Trump Org accepted no responsibility - much like his administration - but took all sorts of remedial steps by court order signifying racial practices that had to be remedied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

It was dismissed because of settlement by the Trump Org agreeing to make remediation. Trump's suit against the FHA - because he did sue them, was always frivolous - was dropped as part of the overall agreement. As typically happened Trump Org accepted no responsibility - much like his administration - but took all sorts of remedial steps by court order signifying racial practices that had to be remedied.

Wrong again.

The Trumps admitted no wrong doing and promised to obey the laws in place.....FAR way from any admission of, or proof of guilt.
The suit was dismissed with prejudice.

The first of many baseless accusations that would follow...magically AFTER Mr. Trump announced his candidacy for POTUS.

Edited by Opie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Opie said:

 

People who bring this up, always seem to fail to mention that this suit was dismissed with prejudice that is, dismissed permanently
A case dismissed with prejudice is over and done with, once and for all, and can't be brought back to court. 

 

The suit was dismissed as part of an agreed upon settlement in which the Trump organization was required to take remedial action.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Opie said:

Wrong again.

The Trumps admitted no wrong doing and promised to obey the laws in place.....FAR way from any admission of, or proof of guilt.
The suit was dismissed with prejudice.

The first of many baseless accusations that would follow...magically AFTER Mr. Trump announced his candidacy for POTUS.

All cases that are resolved as part of a settlement are dismissed with prejudice.  Otherwise, they wouldn't be settled. As part of the settlement, the Trump organization did not admit guilt - again, this is very typical of settlement arrangements, but they did agree to take remedial action as part of the settlement.  In other words, the resolution of the suit against the Trump organization is not in any way a vindication that they did nothing wrong (to the contrary).  It is the evidence that led to the enforcement action in the first place that is evidence of their discriminatory practices.  If you want to ignore or dismiss that evidence, fine, but that is precisely what you were asking for, which is why I cited it.

Edited by bigbottom
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Opie said:

Wrong again. The Trumps admitted no wrong doing and promised to obey the laws in place.....FAR way from any admission of, or proof of guilt. The suit was dismissed with prejudice. ...

Quote

 

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the defendant, its officers, agents, employees, successors, and all persons in active concert or participation with any of them, are hereby permanently enjoined from:

1. Refusing to sell or rent, refusing to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise making unavailable or denying any dwelling to any person on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. 2. Discriminating against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. 3. Making, printing, or publishing, or causing to be made, printed, or published, any notice, statement or advertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin, or an intention to make such preference, limitation or discrimination. 4. Representing to any person because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin that any dwelling is not available for inspection, sale or rental when such dwelling is in fact so available. 5. Influencing the residential choice of any person on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. 6. Coercing, threatening, or interfering with, or attempting to coerce, threaten or interfere with any person in the exercise or enjoyment of the right to equal housing opportunity protected by the Fair Housing Act of 1968, or in the exercise or enjoyment of the right to assist others to secure equal housing opportunity. 7. Engaging in any act or practice which has the purpose or the effect of denying or abridging the right to equal housing opportunity protected by the Fair Housing Act. In this connection, defendants shall not, in determining the income qualification for rental of any person, family, or other group of persons, fail or refuse to fully count a woman's total income, including salary, wages, alimony, support payments or other income from whatever source received.

Trump was enjoined from doing all of the above - that means he had to stop doing these things.

 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Trump was enjoined from doing all of the above - that means he had to stop doing these things.

 

They were also required to personally inform themselves of the requirements of applicable Fair Housing laws, communicate those requirements to all of their staff through implementation of an education and training program, implement an affirmative compliance program to ensure compliance with Fair Housing laws, undertake a public advertising campaign designed to inform minorities of the new compliance program, and comply with a detailed reporting procedure (among other things).  

Edited by bigbottom
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bigbottom said:

All cases that are resolved as part of a settlement are dismissed with prejudice.  Otherwise, they wouldn't be settled. As part of the settlement, the Trump organization did not admit guilt - again, this is very typical of settlement arrangements, but they did agree to take remedial action as part of the settlement.  In other words, the resolution of the suit against the Trump organization is not in any way a vindication that they did nothing wrong (to the contrary).  It is the evidence that led to the enforcement action in the first place that is evidence of their discriminatory practices.  If you want to ignore or dismiss that evidence, fine, but that is precisely what you were asking for, which is why I cited it.

Anybody...and I mean anybody can file a lawsuit.

Nothing else is needed....except, maybe greed.

The proof comes in the outcome.

This particular one was dismissed with prejudice
."A case will be dismissed with prejudice if there is reason for the case not to be brought back to court; for example, if the judge deems the lawsuit frivolous or the the matter under consideration is resolved outside of court."

The Trumps merely claimed that they would follow the law....as they always had.

No racism proven....only alleged....must as it has been since he announced his candidacy.

Seriously...if this is the best example that you've got of President Trump's supposed, racism....

.

Edited by Opie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Joe Mammy said:

Another day closer to the election. Another day of straw grasping in desperation. It's all they have...doctored videos decades old. It's comical. Wait 'till tomorrow. The countdown intensifies each day.

The feigned outrage over racism is pretty hilarious.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Opie said:

Anybody...and I mean anybody can file a lawsuit.

Nothing else is needed....except, maybe greed.

The proof comes in the outcome.

This particular one was dismissed with prejudice
."A case will be dismissed with prejudice if there is reason for the case not to be brought back to court; for example, if the judge deems the lawsuit frivolous or the the matter under consideration is resolved outside of court."

The Trumps merely claimed that they would follow the law....as they always had.

No racism proven....only alleged....must as it has been since he announced his candidacy.

Seriously...if this is the best example that you've got of President Trump's supposed, racism....

.

Lawsuits are ALWAYS dismissed with prejudice when there is a settlement. Because if you could get sued again for the same conduct, you wouldn’t settle. And an agreed injunction is an actual remedy against you. Also, they didn’t just agree to follow the law. They had to take all sorts of remedial actions - implement training and education programs, personally familiarize themselves with the Fair Housing requirements, implement affirmative compliance programs, take out advertising targeted at minority populations, including dedicating a percentage of their advertising budget to placing housing ads in publications with minority readership, report quarterly on their housing statistics and minority applicants, and on and on. As part of the settlement, they were required to expend both time and money to implement a wide range of remedial measures designed to eradicate discriminatory housing practices. You are free to disregard all of this for sure (as I would certainly expect you to), but it is objectively responsive to your request. 

Edited by bigbottom
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was always one kid in every non-math related class that thought they were smarter than the teacher. They would argue about the subject matter with audacious superiority while the rest of the class rolled their eyes.  Most of the time teacher would capitulate as there were other people there to learn. This gave the kid victory, a smug smile on their face, and proof that Mensa would soon be named after them.

Must be some sort of stargate or vortex that brought every single one of those kids to this forum.

 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...