***Official Political Discussion Thread***

I heard that interview as well. Good stuff.

She really came proper on Karen Hunter’s show. I’d love to see her debate Karen with same energy she has on her weekly show. I can honestly say that I think Sonnie is for black People in her mind, but she still sounds like a right wing conspiracy theorist when she digs deep into her personal ideology. On one side she’s forcing conversations in the republican side that no one wants to have, she’s saying “I’m loud, I’m black, and you have to except everything that comes with that cause I’m not changing”, but At the same time speaking out of the Alex Jones hand book about how America is going to turn into venuzuela. I don’t think she properly represented herself or her views on the show.
 
She really came proper on Karen Hunter’s show. I’d love to see her debate Karen with same energy she has on her weekly show. I can honestly say that I think Sonnie is for black People in her mind, but she still sounds like a right wing conspiracy theorist when she digs deep into her personal ideology. On one side she’s forcing conversations in the republican side that no one wants to have, she’s saying “I’m loud, I’m black, and you have to except everything that comes with that cause I’m not changing”, but At the same time speaking out of the Alex Jones hand book about how America is going to turn into venuzuela. I don’t think she properly represented herself or her views on the show.

That would be a great debate. To be honest, I would have more respect for Black conservatives if they would call out the White supremacy that is a staple of the Republican party amplified by Don's presidency. I respect Ana Navarro for calling this nonsense out. Unfortunately most of the Blacks for Trump crowd will do backflips making nonsensical arguments for the butter biscuits.
 
That would be a great debate. To be honest, I would have more respect for Black conservatives if they would call out the White supremacy that is a staple of the Republican party amplified by Don's presidency. I respect Ana Navarro for calling this nonsense out. Unfortunately most of the Blacks for Trump crowd will do backflips making nonsensical arguments for the butter biscuits.

After listening to more of her show and hearing her speak on something’s, her idea of white supremacy isn’t exactly the same as how you and I understand it atleast not operationally. For her, white supremacy is the empty promises of Democrats to the black community. White supremacy is “democratic” run cities with urban poverty rates that are sky high, and the money being sucked out those school systems. And to be honest, that’s true, that’s white supremacy as well. But she doesn’t believe that our government institutions are steeped in what liberals consider systemic racism. And that she believes these problems essentially took
Place in a democratic incubator. And then the intellectual dishonesty that we see from the dwalks and inthehallways starts to set in, ignoring nuance and historical context in away that supports their ideology. That’s problematic to me. It’s still intellectual dishonesty but I think we get caught up in the race debates and the whiteness of it all that the motivation isn’t always racism but at base the ideology or atleast what it’s turned into over these last few decades is problematic as f*ck and frankly a bit hypocritical. She throws shade on the white supremacy caused by the Democratic Party, but shares a plat form with actual white supremacists. I can appreciate her trying to create a lane in conservatism where people can be authentically black, but who shes tethered herself too isn’t going to get her to her ideological goal, but to be real about it, neither is the Democratic Party. If you’ve got access to SiriusXM I suggest listening to Her latest episode.
 
Last edited:
So yesterday on the Karen hunter show she had Sonnie Johnson on her show. And for those who don’t know Sonnie Johnson is a black conservative but not the typical tap dancing butter biscuit eating kind. She claims to be someone that pushes for black interests within the conservative movement. She believes that part of the civil rights movement was black Democrats confronting the racist aspects of Democratic Party and that is exactly what the conservative side needs today. On the Karen hunter show she sounded like she was really for black People, and that the only differences between a (non tap dancing) black conservative and a black democrat isn’t what the issues are with the black community, it’s how to solve those issues that they disagree on. Well after that interview I decided to listen to her show and I am perplexed. I can honestly hear bits and pieces of dwalk, rico, and even ninjahood. The parts that make sense. I hear “conservative values aka anti abortion” I hear entrepreneurship and I hear here referring to herself as a Capitalist. And on the surface it all sounds like things that I can see why people chose to get behind them. But then the conservative ideology kicks in. And I’m not talking about the positions they take on issues, I’m talking about the reasoning behind it. And I can see why Steve Bannon have her a plat form to begin with. She fully acknowledges white supremacy but at the same time links white supremacy to socially democratic policy and views while almost pushing what seems to be hyper capitalism. It’s like the twilight zone. To hear a black centered view on conservatism really makes me question whether or not conservatism is a tool for white supremacy or the other way around.
Black conservatism is an oldddd tradition, going back to Booker T. Washington clashing with Frederick Douglass. Booker T was on his pull ourselves up by our boot straps and Frederick was not about that. I think that black people historically have a lot of socially conservative values, so it makes sense that black people are pulled in. But when you talk about the Republican Party, present day, that's different and you cannot talk about them without their role in propping up and maintaining a system built around white supremacy.
 
Black conservatism is an oldddd tradition, going back to Booker T. Washington clashing with Frederick Douglass. Booker T was on his pull ourselves up by our boot straps and Frederick was not about that. I think that black people historically have a lot of socially conservative values, so it makes sense that black people are pulled in. But when you talk about the Republican Party, present day, that's different and you cannot talk about them without their role in propping up and maintaining a system built around white supremacy.

The socially conservative aspect of black republicans is understandable. The problematic part about present day conservatism is this weird obsession with their idea of “liberty”, capitalism, and demonizing democratic policy and Framing it as a hop skip and a jump away from full blown Marxism. She’s got none of the dog whistles or white centered rhetoric but the rest of the message is still there.She (and others) are absolutely pro black. I’m not gonna deny that. But the conclusions they draw through the lens of their conservative ideology requires exactly the kind of intellectual dishonesty that lets conservative l people say “Democrats are the real racists because they created the kkk” that she applies in broad strokes to so many of her arguments.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...sia-ecuador-embassy-london-secret-escape-plan
Revealed: Russia’s secret plan to help Julian Assange escape from UK
Tentative plot to whisk fugitive from London embassy on Christmas Eve was considered too risky

Russian diplomats held secret talks in London last year with people close to Julian Assange to assess whether they could help him flee the UK, the Guardian has learned.

A tentative plan was devised that would have seen the WikiLeaks founder smuggled out of Ecuador’s London embassy in a diplomatic vehicle and transported to another country.

One ultimate destination, multiple sources have said, was Russia, where Assange would not be at risk of extradition to the US. The plan was abandoned after it was deemed too risky.

The operation to extract Assange was provisionally scheduled for Christmas Eve in 2017, one source claimed, and was linked to an unsuccessful attempt by Ecuador to give Assange formal diplomatic status.
08bf2acc0fb3baeff8c79609b16ec43a.png

The involvement of Russian officials in hatching what was described as a “basic” plan raises new questions about Assange’s ties to the Kremlin. The WikiLeaks editor is a key figure in the ongoing US criminal investigation into Russia’s attempts to sway the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

Robert Mueller, the special counsel conducting the investigation, filed criminal charges in July against a dozen Russian GRU military intelligence officers who allegedly hacked Democratic party servers during the presidential campaign. The indictment claims the hackers sent emails that embarrassed Hillary Clinton to WikiLeaks. The circumstances of the handover are still under investigation.

According to Mueller, WikiLeaks published “over 50,000 documents” stolen by Russian spies. The first tranche arrived on 14 July 2016 as an encrypted attachment.

Assange has denied receiving the stolen emails from Russia.

Details of the Assange escape plan are sketchy. Two sources familiar with the inner workings of the Ecuadorian embassy said that Fidel Narváez, a close confidant of Assange who until recently served as Ecuador’s London consul, served as a point of contact with Moscow.

In an interview with the Guardian, Narváez denied having been involved in discussions with Russia about extracting Assange from the embassy.

Narváez said he visited Russia’s embassy in Kensington twice this year as part of a group of “20-30 more diplomats from different countries”. These were “open-public meetings”, he said, that took place during the “UK-Russian crisis” – a reference to the aftermath of the novichok poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in March.
cad1b0a3a3362155422e077c809f7f8d.png


Sources said the escape plot involved giving Assange diplomatic documents so that Ecuador would be able to claim he enjoyed diplomatic immunity. As part of the operation, Assange was to be collected from the embassy in a diplomatic vehicle.

Four separate sources said the Kremlin was willing to offer support for the plan – including the possibility of allowing Assange to travel to Russia and live there. One of them said that an unidentified Russian businessman served as an intermediary in these discussions.

The possibility that Assange could travel to Ecuador by boat was also considered.

Narváez previously played a role in trying to secure Edward Snowden’s safe passage following his leak of secret NSA material in 2013. Narváez gave the former NSA contractor a so-called safe-conduct pass when he left Hong Kong for Moscow, where Snowden eventually found asylum. At the time, the then president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, said Narváez had issued the pass without the government’s knowledge. The Spanish-language broadcaster Univision reported that Narváez travelled to Moscow the same day that he issued the safe passage document to Snowden; other sources have corroborated this report.

Assange’s Christmas Eve escape was aborted with just days to go, one source claimed. Rommy Vallejo, the head of Ecuador’s intelligence agency, allegedly travelled to the UK on or around 15 December 2017 to oversee the operation and left London when it was called off.

In February Vallejo quit his job and is believed to be in Nicaragua. He is under investigation for the alleged kidnapping in 2012 of a political rival to Correa.

Ecuador’s new president, Lenín Moreno, has said he wants Assange to quit the embassy. In March the government in Quito cut off his internet access and restricted his visitors.

Melinda Taylor, a lawyer specialising in human rights and international criminal law who represents Assange, has denounced his confinement in the embassy.

“I think it is shocking that Assange has been detained arbitrarily for approximately eight years for publishing evidence of war crimes and human rights violations. The UK could end this situation today, by providing assurances that Assange will not be extradited to the United States.”

Sources offered conflicting accounts of who cancelled the Assange operation, but all agreed it was deemed to be too risky. The stumbling block was the UK’s refusal to grant Assange diplomatic protection.

Under UK law, diplomats are immune from criminal prosecution if their diplomatic credentials have been accepted by the British government, and if the Foreign Office has been alerted to the diplomat’s status.

This is not the first time Assange has apparently considered seeking refuge in Russia. The Associated Press reported this week that the WikiLeaks founder tried to obtain a Russian visa. He signed a letter in November 2010 granting power of attorney to “my friend” Israel Shamir – a controversial supporter who passed leaked US state department cables from Assange to journalists in Moscow. Shamir would deliver Assange’s passport to the Russian consulate, and collect it afterwards, Assange wrote.

At the time Assange was facing allegations of rape and sexual assault made by two women in Sweden. In 2012 he sought asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy after he lost a battle against extradition in the supreme court.Assange denies the women’s claims. Swedish authorities eventually dropped both cases after the statute of limitations expired. Assange faces arrest for breaching his bail conditions.

During the US presidential campaign, Donald Trump praised WikiLeaks for releasing the emails that damaged Clinton. Confidential visitor logs obtained by the Guardian reveal that Assange received several Russian nationals during the summer of 2016, including senior figures from RT, the Kremlin’s international propaganda channel.

In March 2017 WikiLeaks published confidential CIA documents. Assange believes a grand jury indicted him over this and other leaks, with the charges filed under seal. Were he to leave the embassy the US would seek his extradition, his lawyers say.

The Ecuadorian government declined to comment. The Russian embassy in London tweeted on Friday that the Guardian story was “another example of disinformation and fake news from the British media”.
 
After listening to more of her show and hearing her speak on something’s, her idea of white supremacy isn’t exactly the same as how you and I understand it atleast not operationally. For her, white supremacy is the empty promises of Democrats to the black community. White supremacy is “democratic” run cities with urban poverty rates that are sky high, and the money being sucked out those school systems. And to be honest, that’s true, that’s white supremacy as well. But she doesn’t believe that our government institutions are steeped in what liberals consider systemic racism. And that she believes these problems essentially took
Place in a democratic incubator. And then the intellectual dishonesty that we see from the dwalks and inthehallways starts to set in, ignoring nuance and historical context in away that supports their ideology. That’s problematic to me. It’s still intellectual dishonesty but I think we get caught up in the race debates and the whiteness of it all that the motivation isn’t always racism but at base the ideology or atleast what it’s turned into over these last few decades is problematic as f*ck and frankly a bit hypocritical. She throws shade on the white supremacy caused by the Democratic Party, but shares a plat form with actual white supremacists. I can appreciate her trying to create a lane in conservatism where people can be authentically black, but who shes tethered herself too isn’t going to get her to her ideological goal, but to be real about it, neither is the Democratic Party. If you’ve got access to SiriusXM I suggest listening to Her latest episode.

I don't like how she doesn't address the elephant in the room of the adoption of openly racist rhetoric from conservatives. I'd love to have lower taxes and many of the things Republicans promise but I will not support a party that openly supports racism the way they do.
 
I don't like how she doesn't address the elephant in the room of the adoption of openly racist rhetoric from conservatives. I'd love to have lower taxes and many of the things Republicans promise but I will not support a party that openly supports racism the way they do.

100% she then shifts the argument to
“Democrats are the real racist” smh
 
Who could've possibly seen this coming? It's almost like it was a ridiculous expectation to leave the EU without any kind of plan on how to do so and then expecting the EU to give them a good deal.
All 27 EU leaders rejected May's plan :lol:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...emands-respect-from-eu-in-brexit-negotiations
Theresa May demands respect from EU in Brexit negotiations
Prime minister gives combative speech after EU leaders’ rejection of Chequers plan

Theresa May has accused the European Union of not treating the UK with respect, in a hastily arranged Downing Street statement a day after she was humiliated at the Salzburg summit when EU leaders declared her Chequers plan would not work.
A combative prime minister said she stood by Chequers and added that throughout the Brexit negotiations she had treated her counterparts with “nothing but respect” and added: “The UK expects the same.”

May said the two sides remained “a long way apart” but insisted the UK was prepared to negotiate, and called on the EU to explain what it believed was wrong with her trade proposals, although significantly she did not mention Chequers by name.

“It is not acceptable to simply reject the other side’s proposals without a detailed explanation and counter proposals,” May said. “So we now need to hear from the EU what the real issues are and what their alternative is so that we can discuss them.”

The prime minister also signalled that the UK would unilaterally safeguard the rights of the EU citizens living in the country in an attempt to reassure them that the impasse in negotiations would not affect their status.

“There are over 3 million EU citizens living in the UK who will be understandably worried about what the outcome of yesterday’s summit means for their future. I want to be clear with you that even in the event of no deal your rights will be protected. You are our friends, our neighbours, our colleagues. We want you to stay,” May said.

Ministers are expected to confirm details in a couple of weeks, after the party conference season.

At the EU summit in Salzburg on Thursday May was ambushed by the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and the EU council president, Donald Tusk, who embarrassed the prime minister by declaring that Chequers would not work.

Downing Street is calculating that May can win support by appearing to stand up to the EU, although her critics in the party believe this would be the moment to give up the Chequers plan, which is an attempt to ensure that there is no return to a hard border in Ireland.

Chequers proposes the UK shares a common rulebook for goods and services after Brexit in an attempt to prevent a return of customs checks for goods crossing the Irish border. But EU leaders believe it will undermine the single market by giving British companies a competitive advantage and pose a threat to the “European project”.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the chair of the European Reform Group of hard BrexitTories, said that Salzburg was a “failure” and repeated that it was time to abandon Chequers and propose a Canada-style free-trade deal. But he also accused the EU of not acting in good faith, and praised May for showing “steely resolve”.

The prime minister repeatedly rejected an EU backstop proposal which would see Northern Ireland remain inside the customs union if the UK could not agree a free trade agreement with Brussels in the divorce talks.

Ratcheting up the language on the issue, May said: “Creating any form of customs border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK would not respect that Northern Ireland is an integral part of the United Kingdom, in line with the principle of consent, as set out clearly in the Belfast/Good Friday agreement.

“It is something I will never agree to – indeed, in my judgment it is something no British prime minister would ever agree to. If the EU believe I will, they are making a fundamental mistake.”

EU diplomats warned that the prime minister’s statement only made a no-deal scenario more likely, and expressed their astonishment at May’s bellicose tone. “She is now playing into a negative dynamic,” one diplomat said. “My best assessment is that rhetoric won’t bring an orderly exit. I think she should have taken that away from the 27 approach [in Salzburg].”

In her statement the prime minister took aim at the European council president, Donald Tusk. While some EU diplomats admitted to feeling uncomfortable at the bluntness of Tusk’s message, there was general support for the substance of his statement in which he had repeated Brussels’ negative assessment of the economic planks in the Chequers plan. An EU official said: “The EU’s position has been clear for a long time. The EU27 expressed their unity on this in Salzburg.”

Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, criticised both the prime minister and the European Union in his statement: “Theresa May’s Brexit negotiating strategy has been a disaster. The Tories have spent more time arguing among themselves than negotiating with the EU.

“From day one, the prime minister has looked incapable of delivering a good Brexit deal for Britain. The political games from both the EU and our government need to end because no deal is not an option.”
 
The problem with most black conservatives is that their political analysis is not really about analyzing the country as a whole, but instead to amplify the missteps of the Democratic Party.

The Dems deserve criticism for all the places and ways they have failed black folk, but most people don't make honest or good criticism on them. Black progressives give that criticism more honestly than black conservatives.

Like one second we have to blame city level Dems for the state of urban poverty, yet this logic is never used to blame the GOP for rural poverty. Furthermore, we ignore the poorest states in the country are mainly red States. One second Dems are liars that break their promises, the next minute they have to keep all their promises but by left-wing policy just naturally fails black people. Black conservatives arguments are so littered with intellectual dishonesty it becomes a chore just keeping the argument on a path where it can be productive.

I'm sorry but conservativism and the GOP abandoned the fight for Civil Rights decades ago. Now black conservatives want to give a warped history lesson and make the case that since both sides have done the black community wrong in different ways, then we should pick the party that has done wayyyy more dirt and is actively trying to make the country more and more hostile to African Americans.

If the road to justice was a cross-country hike/race relay. The Dems have the compass, maps, and equipment to make the trip, they have just been walking slowly in the right direction and black folk is screaming at then to start running, pick up the pace, Forrest Gump that ****.

The GOP, on the other hand, has no equipment to make the trip, sipping on Mountain Dew mixed with Bud Light, and if the race started in 1964, they took a half step forward then decided "**** it", and started backpedaling. They have zero interest in running the race. They just need to make sure the Dems don't get there because that will politically kill the GOP as we know it. They are now miles behind the starting line, and send goons up the road to throw branches in the Dems way. Like no wonder, he flipped out when a dude from Kenya showed up. And this is the who black conservatives what folk to put their support behind.

Nahhhhhh.

Whatever good points black conservatives make, and there are some good points to make, I know it comes from a place of rampant intellectual dishonesty. And I am not dumb enough to get lost on a point and ignore the larger picture.

Respectability politics, austerity, and bootstraps are not a way forward for black people.
 
Last edited:
Respectability politics is something like 95% of black political figures peddle. Obama used it, so does Rev Barber, so did Malcolm, so did MLK, so does Ben Carson, Colin Powell, and Thomas Sowell. The issue is how it is frame and how it is used within the broader context of the message they are trying to convey

Black people are always open to some "we gotta do better talk". Hell some black preachers make their entire surmmons about it. Black activist tell people in communities this too all the time.

But there is a difference with the way black liberals and progressives use them, and black conservatives.

The problem is telling black people that they can achieve social and economic justice strictly by changing their behavior, especially when one of the supossed benefits of the behavioral changes is white people might view you better, and in turn might treat you better. It is the modern day equivalent to saying "if you behave and try real hard to make Massa happy, he might let you sleep in the big house". Yeah maybe in some sense your life has improved, but you still have no agency, and are still under the boot of white supremacy.

Telling someone they should floss, wear sunscreen, and avoid added sugar is cool with me if you also support a system of affordable and accessable healthcare. But when you tell people that **** because only you are willing to accept a crooked healthcare system to persist, then **** you.
 
Last edited:
Black conservatives use a sleight of hand where they essentially say that black people should try conservatism because black people experience poverty in times and spaces where Democrats have held power.

Democrats have been bad to black people on many occasions and it is always when they compromise with, or outright embrace, conservative ideals of capitalism and white supremacy. So when black conservatives say that black folks should embrace the Republican party they are saying that black folks should take every failure of Clinton and Obama's administrations, magnify them, and that is what Federal policy towards law enforcement, housing, jobs and healthcare should be.

Often times, black conservatives will bring up the black mayor trope. They argue that because many black people people live in cities with black, Democratic mayors, the cure for their wretched material conditions is to elect a Republican (presumably white) mayor who could then cure the problem afflicting those hereto for black run cities. This ignores the fact that the federal government decided, as mater of policy to make capital mobile and it ignore the rule that the state and federal government played in trapping black folks in economically divested inner cities. let's look at the black mayor theory, let's look at Flint and Detroit, in recent years the GOP dominated State government in Michigan installed a pro-business, dictatorial financial manager-essentially, the GOP appointed strongman in the place of the black, elected officials- did those cities enjoy an economic and moral revival based on white, bourgeois principles? hell no, the people on those conquered Michigan cities got a rapacious and venal kleptocracy which gave the children of those cities deadly mold in their schools and lethal lead in their water.

Capitalism and white supremacy gave use policy choices that put and keep black folks in poverty and in fear of their own civic "protectors," why on earth should they support a political party whose mission is to inflict more horror, more plunder and more humiliations upon them?
 
100% she then shifts the argument to
“Democrats are the real racist” smh
Respectability politics is something like 95% of black political figures peddle. Obama used it, so does Rev Barber, so did Malcolm, so did MLK, so does Ben Carson, Colin Powell, and Thomas Sowell. The issue is how it is frame and how it is used within the broader context of the message they are trying to convey

Black people are always open to some "we gotta do better talk". Hell some black preachers make their entire surmmons about it. Black activist tell people in communities this too all the time.

The problem is telling black people that they can achieve social and economic justice strictly by changing their behavior, especially when one of the supossed benefits of the behavioral changes is white people might view you better, and in turn might treat you better. It is the modern day equivalent to saying "if you behave and try real hard to make Massa happy, he might let you sleep in the big house". Yeah maybe in some sense your life has improved, but you still have no agency, and are still under the boot of white supremacy.

Telling someone they should floss, wear sunscreen, and avoid added sugar is cool with me if you also support a system of affordable and accessable healthcare. But when you tell people that **** because only you are willing and support for a crooked healthcare system to persist. Then **** you.

Tell that to America's Sheriff Elect David Biscuits Clarke and the King of the HUD BENJAMIN FRANKLIN CARSON. These are my heroes and they are right and always have the RIGHT mindset.
 
**** being respectful when people are racists and rapists. Use that to kill their careers as it should. They should just be happy they aren’t dead or in jail
 
Back
Top Bottom