Sanders: America Was Founded On ‘Racist Principles. That’s A Fact.

a reply to: neo96

Anti business record eh.

Sanders would be a disaster for the middle class.

Anti-business or anti-corporate?

You do know that the original corporate charter system put in place in this country was very strict on what a corporation could do and if they did not follow the rules, their charter was pulled? The founding fathers spoke-out against the dangers of corporations and too many people are ignorant of that fact.

You keep talking about hating the rich and I do not hate the rich. The founders did not hate the rich. But they learned from experience and said that we cannot allow the rich to form entities that jeopardize our existence by breaking the very rules in place that were designed to fight against their ability to create economic tyranny.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

Oh now the 'context' was provided

Right here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

What context? You showed how he stood on certain issues but did not provide any context in to why he took those stances.

a reply to: introvert

Anti-business or anti-corporate?

Same difference because every single business has to incorporate just to do business.

Hell that is the entire 'idear' behind 'corporate person hood'.

It's the LAW.

The founding fathers spoke-out against the dangers of corporations and too many people are ignorant of that fact.

They spoke out against big government too. Hell that is why the bill of rights exists.

Big government is what Sanders represents.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

Oh now the 'context' was provided

Right here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

What context? You showed how he stood on certain issues but did not provide any context in to why he took those stances.

Where was the 'context' in Sanders diatribe ?

Oh thats right there was none.

a reply to: neo96

Many people voting for Obama voted solely on the color of his skin.

a reply to: Logarock

Yes milions had to die because our nation couldn't come together on the simple issue of not owning people...

And justifying owning them by their color. Not racist at all. Not sure emancipation was the only good thing to come out but it was a good thing. Sad it took another civil rights movement to get it right.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

And I bet plenty voted against him for the same reason.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

And I bet plenty voted against him for the same reason.

And plenty voted against him solely based on his political ideology.

Guess which one was bigger?

a reply to: neo96

Same difference because everyone single business has to incorporate just to do business.

Hell that is the entire 'idear' behind 'corporate person hood.

It's the LAW.

Ok. Let me clarify by saying it is the mega-corps that I am referring to. You understand the difference.

They spoke out against big government too. Hell that is why the bill of rights exists.

Big government is what Sanders represents.

That's true. They spoke-out about the rights of individuals and how the government was to protect those rights. But our government protects the rights of big business and corporations before the rights of the people. Sanders talks about the working class and what can be done through government to benefit the people it was created for.

Disclaimer: I've yet to decide whom I'm voting for.....if that adds a bit of perspective.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: neo96

Anti business record eh.

Sanders would be a disaster for the middle class.

Anti-business or anti-corporate?

You do know that the original corporate charter system put in place in this country was very strict on what a corporation could do and if they did not follow the rules, their charter was pulled? The founding fathers spoke-out against the dangers of corporations and too many people are ignorant of that fact.

You keep talking about hating the rich and I do not hate the rich. The founders did not hate the rich. But they learned from experience and said that we cannot allow the rich to form entities that jeopardize our existence by breaking the very rules in place that were designed to fight against their ability to create economic tyranny.

I am struck by how fine the distinction is between our positions.

I believe that the entity with the greatest ability to be economically (and otherwise) tyrannical is the state.

Perhaps some good examples would be Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc. Being the largest companies, are you more vulnerable to them or the state?

Who among them can compel the others to do their bidding?

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
OK...Truth = Hate.

Got it.

Ya apparently. If we speak the truth about our founding then we hate America. Glad you wanted to point our the black slave owner, fine. Racism is racism so it still makes the same point

a reply to: neo96

Where was the 'context' in Sanders diatribe ?

Oh thats right there was none.

Please, Neo. You can come up with a rebuttal than a snarky bit of nonsense than that. I'm not a teenager and I suspect neither are you.

Can you provide any context for why he says what he says or are you just concerned that what he says does not fit your agenda?

a reply to: introvert

Ok. Let me clarify by saying it is the mega-corps that I am referring to. You understand the difference.

Alrightie then.

Let me clairfy just EXACTLY what Sanders represents.

Mega Government. Government is the 'sole' provider that would be infinitely worse than Spain,Greece,the UK combined.

That's a GIVEN.

originally posted by: introvert
Imagine that. A thread created under the premise of a statement taken without full context and it evolved enough to show that it was not created to address the actual issue of what was said, but simply discredit the person whom made the statement.

This isn't about addressing the underlying issue. It's about demonizing and discrediting Sanders because some people just don't like him, or perhaps they feel he is a threat on this election.

Regardless the motive, some people are simple hateful and have no integrity.

So much hatred.

Hate: disagreeing with what I say or believe no matter reason, logic, or validity of that disagreement.

People baffle me.

Can't imagine anyone hating Sanders or Trump. Why hate people who have no shot at winning? Clinton or Bush, pick your poison. Only two corrupted and connected enough to do it.

a reply to: neo96

Probably the ones that disagreed with him politically, but can we say that more people voted for him just based on skin color then felt that he represented him?

I am sure you will say that is the case, but I would doubt it.

a reply to: neo96

Let me clairfy just EXACTLY what Sanders represents.

Mega Government. Government is the 'sole' provider

Where has he said that and what policies does he propose that indicate that?

originally posted by: Sremmos80

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
OK...Truth = Hate.

Got it.

Ya apparently. If we speak the truth about our founding then we hate America. Glad you wanted to point our the black slave owner, fine. Racism is racism so it still makes the same point

If we are going to dissect his statement, I wonder what specific principles he is referring to?

Which "principles" of our nation's founding are racist?

a reply to: Sremmos80

but can we say that more people voted for him just based on skin color then felt that he represented him?

Well we all know that 90%+ of AA community did just that now don't we?

www.ropercenter.uconn.edu...

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

And I bet plenty voted against him for the same reason.

So what you are saying is racism is on both ends of the spectrum, I agree. I would bet more voted in favor due to color, but fully agree with what you said.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Well, you are constant if nothing else. As usual, completely missing the mark, and with no understanding whatsoever what you are talking about. Deny ignorance... uh huh...

Truth = hate. If you speak the truth about slavery in this country, how it started, who was first, who was responsible, etc, you will be branded as a hater. Try reading the posts, then try understanding them before you knee-jerk your rhetoric.

Yes. The first slave owner was a black man. And a great portion of black slaves were sold into slavery by their own people. If a black man sells another black man to a third black man, how is that racist?