laughing dog said:
Actually that makes him both an idiot and a panderer.
No, obviously (well, obviously to someone reading carefully and being epistemically rational).
laughing dog said:
All of which are irrelevant to the issue of pandering.
For those interested in the exchange.
you said:
Which brings me to my question which you ignored. Which is worse - an honest racist or someone who panders to racists? IMO, if Bannon is not a racist but a panderer to racists, that makes him even a more despicable human being than if he were an actual racist.
me said:
I don't know that he was pandering to racists, but your question is irrelevant. The answer depends on the circumstances. As it stands, there is insufficient info to tell. For example, why is the racist a racist? What does his racism consist in? Why is the panderer pandering?
you said:
All irrelevant to the issue of the whether he was pandering or not.
me said:
My reply " For example, why is the racist a racist? What does his racism consist in? Why is the panderer pandering?", was not a reply to your claim that he was pandering or he's an idiot, or to the issue of whether he was pandering. It was a reply to your question about who is worse, of course. You're now changing the subject.
you said:
All of which are irrelevant to the issue of pandering.
And (as a reply to " It was a reply to your question about who is worse, of course. ").
you said:
Are you just being irrational, or is your behavior deliberate?
laughing dog said:
You clearly have no clue what you are posting about. The available information about Steve Bannon is easy to access - just google Steve Bannon racist comments.
No, you clearly have no clue what I'm posting about. You should know better.
laughing dog said:
For example, this quote (source:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/quotes-from-steve-bannon-trumps-new-white-house-chief-strategist/) makes it abundantly clear to the even the most obtuse epistemicly obtuse that he knows he is pandering to racists:
Of course, that does not remotely establish that when Bannon made the statement about CEOs, he was pandering to racists. Even if he is an anti-Jewish racist (though Judaism is not a race, but whatever), that does not imply he is an anti-Asian racist (not that Asians are a race, either, but never mind).
If he was pandering to anti-Jewish racists in those other cases (which is at best not clear), it doesn't support the conclusion that he was pandering to anti-Asian racists when he made the comment I was talking about, or in any other comment.
Also, by the way, the quote on its own does not support your conclusion that Bannon is anti-Jew. Calling someone a "renegade Jew" might be an anti-Jew comment, or the comment of someone generally pro-Jewish who sees the target of his criticism as a traitor, or something else; more context is required. But no matter, let's the evidence of Bannon's anti-Judaism is conclusive. That still is no good reason to think he's an anti-Asian racist, let alone that his comment was racist.
Of course, even if Bannon is anti-Jew, one should not conclude on the basis of that that so is Trump.
By the way:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/donald-trump-israel-2016-netanyahu-213748
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/how-trump-got-tapped-to-lead-nycs-israel-parade.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#cite_note-670
http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/02/0...i-edelstein-at-second-annual-jewish-100-gala/
But if the matter is that Trump has an anti-Jewish advisor (assuming Bannon is so), well, he has a much closer Jewish advisor: Ivanka is a Jew:
https://www.algemeiner.com/2016/10/...holidays-and-said-you-better-pray-hard-for-me
laughing dog said:
The people you are criticizing are not simply basing their conclusions on one statement, but his documented and easily available history of remarks and content of Breitbart.com when he was in charge.
No, they're not. They provide no good evidence whatsoever that Bannon is an anti-Asian racist (never mind that Asians are not a race).
laughing dog said:
Given how easy this information is to access, one has to wonder what motivates your and many other rightwingers persistent epistemicly ignorant and irrational defense of Mr. Bannon.
Right-wingers usually classify me as a left-winger, liberal, etc., when they know some of my positions, and they tend to question my motivations, assuming some evil leftist agenda.
Left-wingers usually classify me as a right-winger, etc. when they know some of my positions, and they tend to question my motivations, assuming some evil rightist agenda.
The fact is that I find the persistent epistemic irrationality of so many people committed to an ideology/religion (be it leftism, rightism, Christianity, Marxism, or whatever) rather tiresome, and sometimes reply, though my insistence in threads is usually as a result of persistent irrational and hostile challenges.
For example, now I want to leave the thread - too much hostility - but I don't want to let that sort of attack on your part stand unchallenged, so I have to pick the lesser evil. For now, I continue to tear apart your claims, even if you will never realize that.