The Democratic Candidates
Comments
-
Does he or does he not basically say that black people don't know how to raise their children?
Star Lake 00 / Pittsburgh 03 / State College 03 / Bristow 03 / Cleveland 06 / Camden II 06 / DC 08 / Pittsburgh 13 / Baltimore 13 / Charlottesville 13 / Cincinnati 14 / St. Paul 14 / Hampton 16 / Wrigley I 16 / Wrigley II 16 / Baltimore 20 / Camden 22 / Baltimore 24 / Raleigh I 25 / Raleigh II 25 / Pittsburgh I 250 -
That's reading what you want to read into gibberish. We either accept that the current state of the African American community in this country is related to the legacy of slavery in this country, or we don't. An answer can be bad without being racist. And, again, Biden was miles from cleverly disguising anything last night.HesCalledDyer said:Does he or does he not basically say that black people don't know how to raise their children?___________________________________________
"...I changed by not changing at all..."0 -
I beleive its “them there ideas”dankind said:
I know, right? I'm an editor (words, not film) by trade, so most of my waking life is spent helping folks communicate their ideas more clearly. I have been doing this for nearly 20 years, and if something hit my desk that looked like this, I would not even bother with it. It would go directly into the trash, and the author would receive a "thanks but no thanks" reply for the submission.JimmyV said:
Huh?HesCalledDyer said:
That particular part of it, yes. Cleverly disguised racism and blaming victims for being victimized.dankind said:
You can actually understand what it’s about?HesCalledDyer said:The terrible, sad, & pathetic part is that the comment isn't even about record players.
The whole world will be different soon... - EV
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-130 -
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
0 -
The problem with Castro's attack, even more than Kamalas previously, is that it was wrong on the merits. And that's why he's taking flak today. Maybe Biden is old, but Castro is either too stupid, too lazy, or too premeditated in his attack.
0 -
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.I SAW PEARL JAM0 -
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.0 -
Premeditated? I'm positive that everyone on that stage had "go after Joe" top of mind. He's the front-runner after all. So in that respect, yes, such a response was premeditated. But unless he had a transcript of Biden's ramblings beforehand, there's no possible way that his exact response was premeditated. Biden said buy into and not much later tried to assert that he didn't say that. It is in no way wrong to point out that he's being misleading. Sure, Biden may not have meant "buy into," but that's what he said. And we're not here to read his mind; we're here to find out exactly what his vision and policies are for our nation and its citizenry. If anyone was sloppy during that exchange (and throughout the latter half of the debate), it was Biden. If the point one is trying to make is nuanced, one should choose one's words more carefully than Joe Biden did in this instance.mrussel1 said:
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.I SAW PEARL JAM0 -
Premeditated because his opening statement foreshadowed his intent on old policies, old ideas. Then he sought to make what is fundamentally a policy disagreement into an acuity one. Biden said something to the effect of everyone who can't afford it will get automatically enrolled, not everyone will get enrolled nor there's isn't automatic enrollment. Castro was ready to imply age as a deterrent.dankind said:
Premeditated? I'm positive that everyone on that stage had "go after Joe" top of mind. He's the front-runner after all. So in that respect, yes, such a response was premeditated. But unless he had a transcript of Biden's ramblings beforehand, there's no possible way that his exact response was premeditated. Biden said buy into and not much later tried to assert that he didn't say that. It is in no way wrong to point out that he's being misleading. Sure, Biden may not have meant "buy into," but that's what he said. And we're not here to read his mind; we're here to find out exactly what his vision and policies are for our nation and its citizenry. If anyone was sloppy during that exchange (and throughout the latter half of the debate), it was Biden. If the point one is trying to make is nuanced, one should choose one's words more carefully than Joe Biden did in this instance.mrussel1 said:
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.
If you're going to take a shot at the leader and former VP, you better not miss. He missed.
This won't buy him votes and probably cost him a cabinet position from more than one candidate.0 -
A US presidential candidate should not say "something to the effect of" anything. A US presidential candidate should say precisely what s/he means to say. I don't think that Joe Biden is capable of this. I do believe that his heart is in the right place. I'm willing to extend that same belief to Julian Castro. I'm not voting for either one of them. It sounds like you are.mrussel1 said:
Premeditated because his opening statement foreshadowed his intent on old policies, old ideas. Then he sought to make what is fundamentally a policy disagreement into an acuity one. Biden said something to the effect of everyone who can't afford it will get automatically enrolled, not everyone will get enrolled nor there's isn't automatic enrollment. Castro was ready to imply age as a deterrent.dankind said:
Premeditated? I'm positive that everyone on that stage had "go after Joe" top of mind. He's the front-runner after all. So in that respect, yes, such a response was premeditated. But unless he had a transcript of Biden's ramblings beforehand, there's no possible way that his exact response was premeditated. Biden said buy into and not much later tried to assert that he didn't say that. It is in no way wrong to point out that he's being misleading. Sure, Biden may not have meant "buy into," but that's what he said. And we're not here to read his mind; we're here to find out exactly what his vision and policies are for our nation and its citizenry. If anyone was sloppy during that exchange (and throughout the latter half of the debate), it was Biden. If the point one is trying to make is nuanced, one should choose one's words more carefully than Joe Biden did in this instance.mrussel1 said:
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.
If you're going to take a shot at the leader and former VP, you better not miss. He missed.
This won't buy him votes and probably cost him a cabinet position from more than one candidate.
Also, I would hope that no one is "buying" votes. (There's that word again.)I SAW PEARL JAM0 -
Something to the effect is me paraphrasing because I'm not quoting.dankind said:
A US presidential candidate should not say "something to the effect of" anything. A US presidential candidate should say precisely what s/he means to say. I don't think that Joe Biden is capable of this. I do believe that his heart is in the right place. I'm willing to extend that same belief to Julian Castro. I'm not voting for either one of them. It sounds like you are.mrussel1 said:
Premeditated because his opening statement foreshadowed his intent on old policies, old ideas. Then he sought to make what is fundamentally a policy disagreement into an acuity one. Biden said something to the effect of everyone who can't afford it will get automatically enrolled, not everyone will get enrolled nor there's isn't automatic enrollment. Castro was ready to imply age as a deterrent.dankind said:
Premeditated? I'm positive that everyone on that stage had "go after Joe" top of mind. He's the front-runner after all. So in that respect, yes, such a response was premeditated. But unless he had a transcript of Biden's ramblings beforehand, there's no possible way that his exact response was premeditated. Biden said buy into and not much later tried to assert that he didn't say that. It is in no way wrong to point out that he's being misleading. Sure, Biden may not have meant "buy into," but that's what he said. And we're not here to read his mind; we're here to find out exactly what his vision and policies are for our nation and its citizenry. If anyone was sloppy during that exchange (and throughout the latter half of the debate), it was Biden. If the point one is trying to make is nuanced, one should choose one's words more carefully than Joe Biden did in this instance.mrussel1 said:
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.
If you're going to take a shot at the leader and former VP, you better not miss. He missed.
This won't buy him votes and probably cost him a cabinet position from more than one candidate.
Also, I would hope that no one is "buying" votes. (There's that word again.)0 -
But my estimation is that's exactly what happened, which would make quoting him antithetical to proving your point.mrussel1 said:
Something to the effect is me paraphrasing because I'm not quoting.dankind said:
A US presidential candidate should not say "something to the effect of" anything. A US presidential candidate should say precisely what s/he means to say. I don't think that Joe Biden is capable of this. I do believe that his heart is in the right place. I'm willing to extend that same belief to Julian Castro. I'm not voting for either one of them. It sounds like you are.mrussel1 said:
Premeditated because his opening statement foreshadowed his intent on old policies, old ideas. Then he sought to make what is fundamentally a policy disagreement into an acuity one. Biden said something to the effect of everyone who can't afford it will get automatically enrolled, not everyone will get enrolled nor there's isn't automatic enrollment. Castro was ready to imply age as a deterrent.dankind said:
Premeditated? I'm positive that everyone on that stage had "go after Joe" top of mind. He's the front-runner after all. So in that respect, yes, such a response was premeditated. But unless he had a transcript of Biden's ramblings beforehand, there's no possible way that his exact response was premeditated. Biden said buy into and not much later tried to assert that he didn't say that. It is in no way wrong to point out that he's being misleading. Sure, Biden may not have meant "buy into," but that's what he said. And we're not here to read his mind; we're here to find out exactly what his vision and policies are for our nation and its citizenry. If anyone was sloppy during that exchange (and throughout the latter half of the debate), it was Biden. If the point one is trying to make is nuanced, one should choose one's words more carefully than Joe Biden did in this instance.mrussel1 said:
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.
If you're going to take a shot at the leader and former VP, you better not miss. He missed.
This won't buy him votes and probably cost him a cabinet position from more than one candidate.
Also, I would hope that no one is "buying" votes. (There's that word again.)
He didn't say what he meant to say. It came out wrong, and Castro offered him a chance to clarify because he and those watching or listening took his words to mean what those words mean.I SAW PEARL JAM0 -
No because I'm on a plane from Vegas and don't feel like looking up a transcript right now.dankind said:
But my estimation is that's exactly what happened, which would make quoting him antithetical to proving your point.mrussel1 said:
Something to the effect is me paraphrasing because I'm not quoting.dankind said:
A US presidential candidate should not say "something to the effect of" anything. A US presidential candidate should say precisely what s/he means to say. I don't think that Joe Biden is capable of this. I do believe that his heart is in the right place. I'm willing to extend that same belief to Julian Castro. I'm not voting for either one of them. It sounds like you are.mrussel1 said:
Premeditated because his opening statement foreshadowed his intent on old policies, old ideas. Then he sought to make what is fundamentally a policy disagreement into an acuity one. Biden said something to the effect of everyone who can't afford it will get automatically enrolled, not everyone will get enrolled nor there's isn't automatic enrollment. Castro was ready to imply age as a deterrent.dankind said:
Premeditated? I'm positive that everyone on that stage had "go after Joe" top of mind. He's the front-runner after all. So in that respect, yes, such a response was premeditated. But unless he had a transcript of Biden's ramblings beforehand, there's no possible way that his exact response was premeditated. Biden said buy into and not much later tried to assert that he didn't say that. It is in no way wrong to point out that he's being misleading. Sure, Biden may not have meant "buy into," but that's what he said. And we're not here to read his mind; we're here to find out exactly what his vision and policies are for our nation and its citizenry. If anyone was sloppy during that exchange (and throughout the latter half of the debate), it was Biden. If the point one is trying to make is nuanced, one should choose one's words more carefully than Joe Biden did in this instance.mrussel1 said:
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.
If you're going to take a shot at the leader and former VP, you better not miss. He missed.
This won't buy him votes and probably cost him a cabinet position from more than one candidate.
Also, I would hope that no one is "buying" votes. (There's that word again.)
He didn't say what he meant to say. It came out wrong, and Castro offered him a chance to clarify because he and those watching or listening took his words to mean what those words mean.
The assumption is that because he didn't verbatim say what he previously said, he must have forgotten. That's a ridiculous position and a standard no one else is being held to.0 -
Safe travels.mrussel1 said:
No because I'm on a plane from Vegas and don't feel like looking up a transcript right now.dankind said:
But my estimation is that's exactly what happened, which would make quoting him antithetical to proving your point.mrussel1 said:
Something to the effect is me paraphrasing because I'm not quoting.dankind said:
A US presidential candidate should not say "something to the effect of" anything. A US presidential candidate should say precisely what s/he means to say. I don't think that Joe Biden is capable of this. I do believe that his heart is in the right place. I'm willing to extend that same belief to Julian Castro. I'm not voting for either one of them. It sounds like you are.mrussel1 said:
Premeditated because his opening statement foreshadowed his intent on old policies, old ideas. Then he sought to make what is fundamentally a policy disagreement into an acuity one. Biden said something to the effect of everyone who can't afford it will get automatically enrolled, not everyone will get enrolled nor there's isn't automatic enrollment. Castro was ready to imply age as a deterrent.dankind said:
Premeditated? I'm positive that everyone on that stage had "go after Joe" top of mind. He's the front-runner after all. So in that respect, yes, such a response was premeditated. But unless he had a transcript of Biden's ramblings beforehand, there's no possible way that his exact response was premeditated. Biden said buy into and not much later tried to assert that he didn't say that. It is in no way wrong to point out that he's being misleading. Sure, Biden may not have meant "buy into," but that's what he said. And we're not here to read his mind; we're here to find out exactly what his vision and policies are for our nation and its citizenry. If anyone was sloppy during that exchange (and throughout the latter half of the debate), it was Biden. If the point one is trying to make is nuanced, one should choose one's words more carefully than Joe Biden did in this instance.mrussel1 said:
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.
If you're going to take a shot at the leader and former VP, you better not miss. He missed.
This won't buy him votes and probably cost him a cabinet position from more than one candidate.
Also, I would hope that no one is "buying" votes. (There's that word again.)
He didn't say what he meant to say. It came out wrong, and Castro offered him a chance to clarify because he and those watching or listening took his words to mean what those words mean.
The assumption is that because he didn't verbatim say what he previously said, he must have forgotten. That's a ridiculous position and a standard no one else is being held to.I SAW PEARL JAM0 -
Dankedankind said:
Safe travels.mrussel1 said:
No because I'm on a plane from Vegas and don't feel like looking up a transcript right now.dankind said:
But my estimation is that's exactly what happened, which would make quoting him antithetical to proving your point.mrussel1 said:
Something to the effect is me paraphrasing because I'm not quoting.dankind said:
A US presidential candidate should not say "something to the effect of" anything. A US presidential candidate should say precisely what s/he means to say. I don't think that Joe Biden is capable of this. I do believe that his heart is in the right place. I'm willing to extend that same belief to Julian Castro. I'm not voting for either one of them. It sounds like you are.mrussel1 said:
Premeditated because his opening statement foreshadowed his intent on old policies, old ideas. Then he sought to make what is fundamentally a policy disagreement into an acuity one. Biden said something to the effect of everyone who can't afford it will get automatically enrolled, not everyone will get enrolled nor there's isn't automatic enrollment. Castro was ready to imply age as a deterrent.dankind said:
Premeditated? I'm positive that everyone on that stage had "go after Joe" top of mind. He's the front-runner after all. So in that respect, yes, such a response was premeditated. But unless he had a transcript of Biden's ramblings beforehand, there's no possible way that his exact response was premeditated. Biden said buy into and not much later tried to assert that he didn't say that. It is in no way wrong to point out that he's being misleading. Sure, Biden may not have meant "buy into," but that's what he said. And we're not here to read his mind; we're here to find out exactly what his vision and policies are for our nation and its citizenry. If anyone was sloppy during that exchange (and throughout the latter half of the debate), it was Biden. If the point one is trying to make is nuanced, one should choose one's words more carefully than Joe Biden did in this instance.mrussel1 said:
How about Castro was wrong, sloppy and premeditated and deserves the criticism. You can be young and stupid and deserve the criticism for not understanding a nuanced point.dankind said:
That was one factor in my explanation for the public shaming of Julian Castro. So, yes, that's absolutely a thing, but it's not everything.mrussel1 said:
So this is a racism thing. Got it. Genius comments prevaildankind said:
We're supposed to respect our elders, especially our white male elders -- you know, the ones mostly responsible for our nation's structural racism, overpopulation, the proliferation of gun violence, climate change, etc. etc.Jearlpam0925 said:
Preach.HesCalledDyer said:Also good on Castro for calling Biden out. And fuck the media for saying "Castro's attack on Biden" He caught Biden flipping on what he just said 2 sentences ago but he's the bad guy? He's the attacker. Biden is the victim. Fuck off with that shit! No wonder this country is so fucked when it comes to politics. Castro should be praised for calling him out on his lying, mind-changing bullshit. But that's not what CNN, MSNBC, and the DNC want, they want to spread lies about personal attacks, making fun of Biden's memory, etc. I mean, did Biden not fucking say the exact god damn opposite of what he said just a couple statements before? That's not a personal attack, that's questioning clarity of what someone said.
Also props to Castro telling Buttigieg that this is a fucking primary, this is what elections are for - ain't nobody got time for "please this is not what the American people want" blah blah blah.
Who the fuck does this random Chicano think he is to talk to our white elder statesman that way?
Also, I've never not been a genius. I was born this way.
If you're going to take a shot at the leader and former VP, you better not miss. He missed.
This won't buy him votes and probably cost him a cabinet position from more than one candidate.
Also, I would hope that no one is "buying" votes. (There's that word again.)
He didn't say what he meant to say. It came out wrong, and Castro offered him a chance to clarify because he and those watching or listening took his words to mean what those words mean.
The assumption is that because he didn't verbatim say what he previously said, he must have forgotten. That's a ridiculous position and a standard no one else is being held to.0 -
I'm down with him, but Bernie was flat out yelling the whole time.Bristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 061320180
-
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
0 -
-
Yeah confiscation is a no go for me. If he s the dems candidate he just handed the election to trump with that stance.PJPOWER said:Beto losing my support based on his approach to gun control (mass confiscation essentially). I do still admire his airdrumming and Napoleon Dynamite mimicking though.
I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
Warren does much better with a stage where people are not fighting for time as much. She still seems old but she didn't come off like an a-hole, which I felt she did last time with all of the yelling. Bernie still comes across that way, though.I think if you removed the 3 oldsters and had a debate it would be very interesting.I don't agree with much of what they say, but I will vote for them anyway.Also, the scripting out of that babbling from Joe is awesome.Was watching with my wife and I said to her at the next break after that part - "If you were to write all of that out it would seem like a Trump answer. He makes no sense. 1,000 years old, he is done."Please, don't make me vote for great grandpa, America! (But, I will. And I think if he still had it all together he would be the guy. He doesn't.)The love he receives is the love that is saved0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.2K The Porch
- 279 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.3K Flea Market
- 39.3K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help