Poll of the Day > Diversity consultant BLM activist says Amy Barret is racist for adopting blacks

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://tinyurl.com/y6zd7gpj

Apparently this guy is a university professor...which totally makes sense given what universities have now become lol

---

The train of thought isn't "she adopted them, so she's racist"

The train of thought is "given historical context, here's an explanation on how to interpret adoption of black children by some people who have simultaneously held racist views"

You either knew that, and you're being misleading about it... Or you didn't know it, because (fill in the blank)

---

I thought you rarely post about politics

---

Jen0125 posted...

I thought you rarely post about politics

Ill share a secret everyone here knows... he lies a lot.

---

Stop polluting potd with daily wire topics

---

Do you ever have some policy discussion or is it just my feelings hurt propaganda?

---

Jen0125 posted...

I thought you rarely post about politics

It's not politics, it's "things that happen in the world" remember?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/3-poll-of-the-day/78994993/945001864


---

This is not a political topic. This is not political.

---

*sigh* of course liberal potd won't condemn such abhorrent statements, really shows you what they're about though....


---

I'll condemn them. I'll condemn every stupid sjw bitch you can name off. Will you condemn Trump using secret police to bag random protestors? I've got a list. They randomly gas people just standing around.

Free speech warriors strangely silent when their president violates free speech protections.

---

People like Tim Pool, Tucker Carlson, Sargon, literally do not care about free speech. They only care about using it for their own political gain. Pointing out college students with pink hair every other day.

They don't get mad when the government suppresses the free speech of leftists. Groups of people getting gassed and beaten in intimidation tactics. They're frauds.

---

Yellow posted...

Do you ever have some policy discussion or is it just my feelings hurt propaganda?

Just his feelings since hes a gentle lil snowflake.

---

Yellow posted...

People like Tim Pool, Tucker Carlson, Sargon, literally do not care about free speech. They only care about using it for their own political gain. Pointing out college students with pink hair every other day.

They don't get mad when the government suppresses the free speech of leftists. Groups of people getting gassed and beaten in intimidation tactics. They're frauds.

BLM and Antifa Burning down buildings, rioting, assualting people, looting etc, are acts not protected by free speech.


---

Yeah but you can look up endless amounts of videos of police beating down peaceful protestors just for kicks

---

Yellow posted...

Yeah but you can look up endless amounts of videos of police beating down peaceful protestors just for kicks

Please don't encourage him. He's even shittier than Zeus at making arguments.
---

Yellow posted...

Yeah but you can look up endless amounts of videos of police beating down peaceful protestors just for kicks

I believe police shouldn't as much as touch peaceful protestors.
In some of those videos they may indeed be peaceful protesters, in some they may have done something bad before the video started which we don't get to see.

The on the ground reality is that leftists mobs rioting, looting and causing overall chaos in many democrat run cities, these people all wear black and wear masks so the police can't identify which is which, in the last 4 months said riots resulted in more deaths than deaths caused by police, yet you focus solely on the police while ignoring completely the leftist mobs causing mayhem where ever democrat mayors would let them solely because that fits your political side

no one of the people you said is okay with police brutality, yet many democrats are clearly okay with the riots, in fact they encourage them.

---

Wanded posted...

I believe police shouldn't as much as touch peaceful protestors.
In some of those videos they may indeed be peaceful protesters, in some they may have done something bad before the video started which we don't get to see.

The on the ground reality is that leftists mobs rioting, looting and causing overall chaos in many democrat run cities, these people all wear black and wear masks so the police can't identify which is which, in the last 4 months said riots resulted in more deaths than deaths caused by police, yet you focus solely on the police while ignoring completely the leftist mobs causing mayham where ever democrat mayors would let them solely because that fits your political side

no one of the people you said is okay with police brutality, yet many democrats are clearly okay with the riots, in fact they encourage them.

None of this is factual

---

im definitely not clicking on a shortened link from the dude who posts ben shapiro on here

---

So would NOT adopting children on the basis they have the wrong amount of melanin be more or less indicative of racism?

---

Mead posted...

Stop polluting potd with daily wire topics

But it's the go-to "news" source for fucking morons

---

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

So would NOT adopting children on the basis they have the wrong amount of melanin be more or less indicative of racism?

we'll have to hire a diversity consultant to answer this riddle for us

Far-Queue posted...

But it's the go-to "news" source for f***ing morons

don't like reality do ya

---

Clench281 posted...

The train of thought isn't "she adopted them, so she's racist"

The train of thought is "given historical context, here's an explanation on how to interpret adoption of black children by some people who have simultaneously held racist views"

You either knew that, and you're being misleading about it... Or you didn't know it, because (fill in the blank)

---

Clench281 posted...

The train of thought isn't "she adopted them, so she's racist"

The train of thought is "given historical context, here's an explanation on how to interpret adoption of black children by some people who have simultaneously held racist views"

You either knew that, and you're being misleading about it... Or you didn't know it, because (fill in the blank)

this is obviously an attempt at slandering our glorious new justice best girl Amy Barret as a racist
this attack wouldn't and couldn't exist had she not adopted black children
hence, she got called racist for adopting black children

---

Wanded posted...

glorious new justice best girl

How weird and infantilizing

---

Damn Wanded at least wait til October to start simpin'.

---

yet more proof that the Regressive Left is trying to unironically bring back segregation to totally pwn the Trumpanzees.

---

Jen0125 posted...

How weird and infantilizing

are you surprised that a republican would talk about women in a dehumanizing way

---

Yellow posted...

I'll condemn them. I'll condemn every stupid sjw bitch you can name off.

@Yellow

---

Lorthremar posted...

are you surprised that a republican would talk about women in a dehumanizing way

Nope but it still grosses me out

---

Jen0125 posted...

I thought you rarely post about politics

lmao yeah right

---

zebatov posted...

@Yellow

I condemn detention camps and other immoral bullshit because I can distinguish reality from propaganda. When I get mad it's because I've made an informed decision that's actually based in reality. I'm a step ahead of you or the pink haired girl that's trying to save the world from men. Frankly most people are very misled. Those are the same people that couldn't figure out multiplication in second grade. The limbo bar is above most people's heads and they try to jump over it. Same concept with people and "fake news".

---

Yellow posted...

Frankly most people are very misled.

Show us the way o enlightened one lol

---

Let's look at this from a different (much dumber) angle...

What percentage of all children up for adoption are of X race? Because if X/Y/Z race are the most statistically prominent, then there is zero bias.

---

Lmao those black kids should have stayed orphaned. Can't risk looking racist now can we?

---

Yellow posted...

Trump using secret police to bag random protestors

Rioters.

Yellow posted...

Groups of people getting gassed and beaten in intimidation tactics.

Groups of rioters.

Yellow posted...

People like Tim Pool, Tucker Carlson, Sargon, literally do not care about free speech. They only care about using it for their own political gain. Pointing out college students with pink hair every other day.

College students with pink hair are actively involved in fascism to suppress opposing opinions, that's why they're talked about.
---

Clench281 posted...

The train of thought isn't "she adopted them, so she's racist"

The train of thought is "given historical context, here's an explanation on how to interpret adoption of black children by some people who have simultaneously held racist views"

You either knew that, and you're being misleading about it... Or you didn't know it, because (fill in the blank)

Thank you for saving me the time.

---

Wanded posted...

In some of those videos they may indeed be peaceful protesters, in some they may have done something bad before the video started which we don't get to see.

We get to see a video in which they are not currently being violent, yet are being savagely assaulted. Whether or not they did something bad prior to the video doesn't change the fact that they are not being violent while police are assaulting them. That makes the violence from the police unnecessary, which is the entire problem.

It's very simple: Police should use only whatever violence is necessary to stop further violence or criminal activity from occurring. It is not necessary to beat, gas, pepper spray, taze, or shoot at somebody who is currently standing harmlessly and doing nothing to resist arrest. Prior criminal behaviour does not change the fact that such people can be arrested without such violence, which means that employing violence in arresting them is simply a matter of cops being angry, and that should never happen.

Wanded posted...

this attack wouldn't and couldn't exist had she not adopted black children
hence, she got called racist for adopting black children

That's a rather tenuous grasp of cause and effect you've got there. Might as well say that she got called racist for becoming a judge (since none of this would have come up if she weren't in the running for the SC), if you're taking such a superficial approach to the matter, and obviously that's pretty meaningless.

The actual comment is that she's racist independent of her adoption choices (although I should perhaps point out that preferentially adopting black children is - axiomatically - racial discrimination, so there's a case for calling that choice anti-white racism if you change your mind on whether or not you want to defend her), then going on to explain that her adoption choices don't necessarily indicate otherwise. Her decision to adopt black children isn't presented as support for the claim that she's racist, it's being brought up and addressed as a potential rebuttal.

---

adjl posted...

The actual comment is that she's racist independent of her adoption choices

Then you don't need to bring up her children and you need to offer actual evidence.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Then you don't need to bring up her children

adjl posted...

Her decision to adopt black children isn't presented as support for the claim that she's racist, it's being brought up and addressed as a potential rebuttal.

Wheeeeee...

Bear in mind that this is not being brought up de novo, it's being brought up in response to "She can't be racist because she adopted black kids!", which is very much an expected defense.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

and you need to offer actual evidence.

*Shrug*

Presumably, that's already happened elsewhere. Personally, I don't care enough to look for details, I'm just sniping the low-hanging fruit that is TC's fallacious logic.

---

adjl posted...

Wheeeeee...

Bear in mind that this is not being brought up de novo, it's being brought up in response to "She can't be racist because she adopted black kids!", which is very much an expected defense.

It's a solid argument. Anybody can do anything; a misogynist can help a woman, a racist could date outside their race etc. but it's much less likely. Her having adopted black kids makes it much less likely, so unless you have some substantial evidence, it's outright slanderous to fire those shots.

adjl posted...

*Shrug*

Presumably, that's already happened elsewhere.

So you have nothing but you still want to talk shit. This is why people mock the far left; you don't use logic, you just fall in line when your side turns nasty.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Her having adopted black kids makes it much less likely

But that's exactly the point: It doesn't. There are at least three very plausible explanations for adopting black children despite being racist:

• The person is in a job where public appearance matters, and wants to be able to use their adopted children as an easy escape from accusations of racism
• The person considers black would-be-parents to be inferior and unworthy of parenthood, so they preferentially snatch up black adoptees (recognizing that intra-racial adoptions are generally people's preference) with the intent of saving them from being raised into drug dealers and welfare queens
• The least malicious: Black kids were the only ones available, and they're not so racist as to turn down their only chance

Are those guaranteed? Of course not. But the ease of coming up with those explanations demonstrates why the race of her adopted children should be considered irrelevant to assessing how racist her behaviour is. It's basically "I have black friends," only with the added cuteness factor of children.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

So you have nothing but you still want to talk s***.

adjl posted...

Personally, I don't care enough to look for details, I'm just sniping the low-hanging fruit that is TC's fallacious logic.

You shouldn't deliberately cut segments out of posts you quote that directly address your attempted rebuttal. It just wastes everyone's time.

---

adjl posted...

The person considers black would-be-parents to be inferior and unworthy of parenthood, so they preferentially snatch up black adoptees (recognizing that intra-racial adoptions are generally people's preference) with the intent of saving them from being raised into drug dealers and welfare queens

This point is patently absurd given that it stands to reason that the child was already put up for adoption by someone who is already obviously unable or unwilling to raise the child in the first place.

---

So what can one do to look nonracist?

In other words, this is common kafkatrapping by critical racists. There is no way for anyone to prove they are not racist. Therefore any action or non action can be "proof" of their "racism".
---

Amuseum posted...

So what can one do to look nonracist?

I'm glad you asked! Maybe start with the book authored by the man whose tweet you misunderstand.

---

Amuseum posted...

So what can one do to look nonracist?

you need to hire a diversity consultant to keep telling you that you're racist so you'll keep giving him money

---

GanonsSpirit posted...

Please don't encourage him. He's even shittier than Zeus at making arguments.

Hes probably a Zeus alt to pad votes and troll. Wasnt shocking he was over a dozen and a handful were banned. So hes taken em out now to watch peeps hes blocked. Such a compulsive liar.

---

dang i can't believe potd liberals are actually defending this and actively shilling for people to buy this hacks book

guess that's the left for ya

---