Yet another Trump sign went up today

[Alan]

For one thing, it means they came armed.

Ahhh, post #22 didn't mention that. The author seemed more offended by their dress.

You're tying yourself in knots to defend troublemakers who are indefensible.

No, actually I'm not. I don't see much difference in anyone looking for trouble or engaging in destruction, whether you agree with some of them or not and whether you downplay one side and accentuate another is up to you. It's that disparity that I comment on, it doesn't make sense.

[Jane v2.0]

I see no conflict in believing both that black lives really do matter, and that people should be judged by the content of their character. Dr. King's words pointedly implied that people have been, and are, judged by their color. It was true when he was assassinated, and it's still true today.

[Jane v2.0]

From news reports, there's a world of difference between BLM protesters and right-wing hate groups. I can defend the latter's right to denigrate women, Muslims, POC, leftists, Jews, and myriad others, but they still constitute a violent hate group which is under scrutiny by the FBI, Homeland Security and other government agencies. In a Republican administration, I must point out.

[Jane v2.0]

But there is what this means and what people might have imagined it would mean. If people imagined a return to a pre-NAFTA world with much less outsourcing. Well nope, not happening. It's a few minor concessions that likely are improvements, affecting a small number of people, some of the better provisions of which were forced on Trump by the Dem house in negotiating anyway, and so actually are to their credit as much as anything. So a small number of people affected may care, but the type of change people might have thought was promised? Well it's not a large change to NAFTA.

Also, he keeps touting bills he's passed that were really passed by President Obama's administration, making him look like a real go-getter:

From Military.com:
At the end of Saturday's press conference, a reporter asked why Trump "keeps saying [he] passed 'Veterans Choice,'" when it was "passed in 2014." Trump told the reporter she was "finished," and he abruptly ended the press conference.

[iris lilies]

Maybe it means that to you but to me it's a natural extension of "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

If you want to live in a color blind society, you have to stop segregating.

But being colorblind is old school and that is not how generic Janes want things to be. Apparently we are to shake off the shackles of color blindness and now SEE and RECOGNIZE color because to do otherwise , to say “one of the most obvious and conspicuous characteristics about a person is something you ignore is dismissive and trivializing.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2019/02/15/why-the-i-dont-see-color-mantra-is-hurting-diversity-and-inclusion-efforts/#18319b252c8d

ok, whatever. Personally, I am tired of attitude whiplash in the different points of view we are supposed to have taken over many decades. This one too shall pass and will become outdated and fuddy duddy, you wait and see.

Living in a place where everything is about race even when it’s not, here the Gestault 25 years ago when our neighborhood was going through some troubling times and we were trained up in correct=think, we learned the basic premise was people are not born racist they are made that way. So you ( generic you) have to look at how racists got that way.


Now the Gestault seems to be tribalism and recognition of The Other is inborn. Kinda 180% difference from previous training.

But of course the real rubber meets the road is to figure out how to get beyond those theories to live and work in a harmonious and diverse society that values equality for all.

[frugal-one]

Ahhh, post #22 didn't mention that. The author seemed more offended by their dress.
No, actually I'm not. I don't see much difference in anyone looking for trouble or engaging in destruction, whether you agree with some of them or not and whether you downplay one side and accentuate another is up to you. It's that disparity that I comment on, it doesn't make sense.

No, I was not just offended by their dress. I neglected to mention the reason they were dressed this way. They were armed to the hilt. I did not correct my mistake because post#29 so elequently established the case.

[Alan]

No, I was not just offended by their dress. I neglected to mention the reason they were dressed this way.

Ok, so you've mentioned it a second time, how were they dressed? Was it somehow different than any of their counter-protesters?

[Jane v2.0]

...

But of course the real rubber meets the road is to figure out how to get beyond those theories to live and work in a harmonious and diverse society that values equality for all.

That sounds perfectly fine to this Jane. You're right; we have to figure out how to get there.

[Jane v2.0]

Proud Boys.jpg"Some very fine people on both sides"

[catherine]

Maybe it means that to you but to me it's a natural extension of "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

If you want to live in a color blind society, you have to stop segregating.

Opting to be colorblind so that you can also be blind to the injustice that is still real is not the point. People who point out injustice are not segregationists. You can sit there and say "I'm colorblind--I'm not a racist" while ignoring realities of injustice but that doesn't mean the injustice doesn't exist and shouldn't be addressed. You may be colorblind if you fail to acknowledge it, but a nation that has that kind of colorblindness is not the nation that MLK was dreaming about.