In Obama’s case, he had an estranged father in Kenya who died in 1982. Kamala’s father is a tenured economy professor at Stanford (first black scholar granted tenure at Stanford too) and very much still alive at 85.
Kind of hard to sow doubts about her birth, when her father is not only living in the US, but also as an authority figure.
You are assuming that the birthers use logic. If that was the case, they would not have cared where Obama was born because his mother was an American born in Kansas. That would make him American even if he was born in Kenya or Canada (like Ted Cruz).
I hear your point, and you’re not wrong that certain birthers just won’t listen. Obama had neither of the people involved in this birth, his parents, around to speak about the conditions of his birth. Harris, though, will have people able to say, “No, I was there, I remember how it happened” in her corner.
All aid workers around the world don't have a choice but to collaborate with 'militant groups', gangs, dictators, mafia, warlords, cartels... if they have to make a deal with the devil himself to be able to help some children be damned sure they're gonna.
Having their ranks infiltrated is nothing new to aid orgs either (remember that sexual abuse scandal not long ago) or any other organization really, specially those that try to do good. Cutting the aid because an organization isn't perfectly invulnerable is imo utterly stupid.
So I don't care much for those proofs, as I think the facts are most certainly true (to a degree) but NORMAL. The way they are interpreted and used as an excuse to cut the aid is absolute bullshit.
I meant 'collaborate' as in having talks or meetings, paying a 'tax', playing by their rules... nothing that leaves much of a record.
'Ties with militant groups' is vague enough so many people will read 'on the terrorists' payroll'. And on time some 'proof' like phone calls, pictures in the same place with a 'militant group' member, or handing them some material aid, going to the same mosquee...
The thing is unless they're able to articulate more concrete accusations I wouldn't even ask for proof, proof of what? I mean I have a bunch of cousins I barely met when I was a child, and no clue what they've been up to these ~30 years... I might have some 'ties' to 'militant groups' too, who knows?
True. But in this case they alleged 12 UNRWA members to have participated in the attack as well. Which is more than just a vague claim but a very specific one. So now we can demand NYT and WSJ proof for their claims.
Yeah we should expect proof of this kind of claims, having to demand it only shows how low the bar is.
But even IF they can prove it, and that's a big if, twelve people among such a massive organization would still be a nothingburger unless they've infiltrated the highest ranks.
This is exactly the kind of thing intersectionality provides. You can attack her for being too black, not black enough, etc and with each attack you’re misfiring into the crowd. A minority in this country are black or asian or Kamala’s exact racial and gender makeup, but a majority of people belong to one “out” group or another.
…oh my goodness. How horrible. Just kill him & call it a day; this monster deserves it. And he should never be reintegrated into society. How in the world did a judge in Texas, of all places, not go for the death penalty?
Has there ever been done a sociological study on how many and why so many closeted homosexuals are homophobic? I can think of 2 reasons as to why, but I would love to see some numbers.
The 2 reasons I can think of: Non homosexuals don’t think as much about homo sex as closeted homosexuals, so they are less likely to constantly be thinking about gays having sex and thus less likely to speak out against it. And closeted homosexuals are probably jealous of gays that are no longer in the closet, a case of “how dare those people openly live happy lives doing what I would like to do, but can’t because I’m a bigot with a fragile ego”. And this last point is probably why it’s so often republicans who are like this: it fits with the republican mindset of being “the party of spite”.
I’ve been thinking a lot about it and I think many of these people are bi, not closeted gay. Hear me out…
To a bi person, being gay is literally a choice. You could just ignore your desire for the same sex and probably be perfectly happy with the opposite sex. That explains why these people always frame it as a choice.
But, when you deny something about yourself, you make it more present in your life. It’s like being told to not think about breathing (sorry), suddenly your breathing is top of mind. This explains why it is such a present thing to them.
When you constantly fixate on something, because you’re trying not to, and it’s something you find sexy… Well, you’ve just fetishized it. Which explains why they can’t just occasionally look at some gay porn or whatever and be happy, they always eventually get caught doing something extra freaky.
Finally, when you deny it all your life and go through your midlife crisis and decide you can’t take it anymore, you realize you don’t have the skills or knowledge that people who weren’t bottling it up have. Which is why so many get caught with staff members or prostitutes.
Like I’m white as the first 41 presidents, but it’s always just seemed fucking obvious that mixed race and mixed ethnicity people are just simultaneously both.
Even for white people - haven’t you ever heard someone say something like, “I’m German and Irish on my mother’s side”?
The idea of having two different heritages is completely common and obvious. It’s not that Trump or other Republicans are having trouble wrapping their heads around the concept. It’s a racist attack, plain and simple.
I’m still confused as to who they are trying to convince that Harris isn’t really black. Whose vote would change from Harris to Trump based on Trump claiming she isn’t really black? Or, if he’s not after votes, what will believing she’s not really black change for how his own followers see things if he loses?
Or does he think he’s out of the water as far as his legal troubles go and maybe he’s just trying to exit gracefully without making his base turn on him by making it look like he’s still fighting?
Trump was making modest gains with black voters, who have since surged in support for Harris. His message was as simple as “She’s not really one of you” because he’s upset he’s losing support.
Trump is butthurt anytime someone doesn’t like him - any individual, any constituency. It’s just the same narcissism he always shows.
Yeah ok, that angle does make a kind of sense. Since he was getting support from them, he assumed they thought like him and that this would be an effective argument.
Unfortunately, the experience of being mixed race is a bit more complicated than that.
There are several groups that see me as a potential member but it’s usually qualified with an implied “half-member”. There’s really no group that looks at me and instinctively says, “One of us.”
In an email, Mr. Bennett’s office said that Mr. Cody would be charged later this week in Marion County District Court with interference with the judicial process, a felony that is punishable by up to 23 months in prison but may result in lighter sentences for defendants with no prior convictions. from the NYT
Yeah, think of it this way; If you or I (unless your a cop) falsified affidavits in order to get a permission for you and a group of thugs to help you break into multiple locations and take documents/computers because of the possibility of your sorted past coming to light, you or I (unless you are a cop) would be looking at more then just this one charge.
New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for New York Times:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.