The Black Man Who Became a KKK Member

[Chris_Michael]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_585c250de4b0de3a08f495fc

Actually, it's the other way around. This man has been working with members of the hate group since the 80s and has converted 200 of them by being their friend.

One member he converted was a Grand Dragon (Edit: Imperior Wizard), which is one step below the Grand Wizard...(Edit: I don't know if that's the same thing) who came up with these ranks? A D&D player? Anyway, the Grand Dragon offered him a Klan robe at some point. Later, the Grand Dragon quit the Klan and attributed it to this black man's friendship.

BlackLivesMatter thinks this is reprehensible. So wait, why is it reprehensible to inform people of their ignorance and help them change?

Oooooooh right, it's because the left doesn't want that. The left has NO INTEREST in seeing people as individuals, but rather, it's groups and tribalism that matter. The individual does not matter at all, period. So when a liberal says they don't care about you, they don't. They only care about their bullshit agenda. They are not open to reason and logic.

By the way, since we're talking about the most infamous hate group, lets do some math.

200 people converted / 5000 total Klan members (today) = 4% people converted from the KKK by ONE BLACK MAN. Yes, I get it. He's been doing it since before I was born. But still, that is amazing, not reprehensible.

Let's get liberals go talk to ISIS members over in Afghanistan. Since the KKK is worse than ISIS, I'm sure 4% conversion would be a cake walk for you guys.

 

[phrodeau]

"The left has NO INTEREST in seeing people as individuals, but rather, it's groups and tribalism that matter. The individual does not matter at all, period. So when a liberal says they don't care about you, they don't. They only care about their bullshit agenda. They are not open to reason and logic."

Who told you that?

 

[Hard_Rom]

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Or the one.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

You should put your money where your mouth is.

Stop lumping all leftists/liberals/democrats into one huge group who all supposedly act as one.

Its not even true in this article you linked.

What you describe as "Black Lives Matter" is actually ONE person, (an individual) named:

Davis’ actions are not without critics in the African-American community.

Among them is Kwame Rose, an African-American activist [singular] who protested after the death of Freddie Gray — the unarmed, 25-year-old black man who died in police custody in April 2015. Rose sat down for a drink with Davis in the film.

“You’re uneducated about the reality of most of the people who look like you,” Rose tells Davis. “Stop wasting your time going to people’s houses who don’t love you, a house where they want to throw you under the basement. White supremacists can’t change.”

I can tell you Barack Obama would not agree with this. He's all about talking one on one with people--anyone.

You're on a one-man crusade to create this giant collective "liberal" mindset, which you then accuse (falsely) of doing just that.

Besides, why don't you pay attention to what Trump (your president) is doing?

Why is this more important than how they're trying to shift 1/6th of the economy away from health care into tax cuts for the rich?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_585c250de4b0de3a08f495fc

Actually, it's the other way around. This man has been working with members of the hate group since the 80s and has converted 200 of them by being their friend.

One member he converted was a Grand Dragon (Edit: Imperior Wizard), which is one step below the Grand Wizard...(Edit: I don't know if that's the same thing) who came up with these ranks? A D&D player? Anyway, the Grand Dragon offered him a Klan robe at some point. Later, the Grand Dragon quit the Klan and attributed it to this black man's friendship.

BlackLivesMatter thinks this is reprehensible. So wait, why is it reprehensible to inform people of their ignorance and help them change?

Oooooooh right, it's because the left doesn't want that. The left has NO INTEREST in seeing people as individuals, but rather, it's groups and tribalism that matter. The individual does not matter at all, period. So when a liberal says they don't care about you, they don't. They only care about their bullshit agenda. They are not open to reason and logic.

By the way, since we're talking about the most infamous hate group, lets do some math.

200 people converted / 5000 total Klan members (today) = 4% people converted from the KKK by ONE BLACK MAN. Yes, I get it. He's been doing it since before I was born. But still, that is amazing, not reprehensible.

Let's get liberals go talk to ISIS members over in Afghanistan. Since the KKK is worse than ISIS, I'm sure 4% conversion would be a cake walk for you guys.

 

[Chris_Michael]

You're right, I'm sorry. I read a couple of articles about this, and this article mentions where Black Lives Matter organizer says it's reprehensible.

https://www.rt.com/viral/371340-meet-black-man-kkk/

Black Lives Matter organizer J.C. Faulk thinks Davis’s actions are “reprehensible.”

I had never heard of rt, whatever that is, so I Googled it for a different source. So my bad. I had to see if this was legit.

And no, I'm not treating liberals as one big group. I'm treating it as a bunch of divided groups who are on a hierarchy of oppression. You have Black Lives Matter, Feminism, Transtrenders, etc. As a whole, they're "liberals," but when you break it down, they're just a bunch of groups who come into conflict often. BLM and feminism clash often, for example.

Classic liberalism is dead. And these illogical loons killed it.

 

[Chris_Michael]

"The left has NO INTEREST in seeing people as individuals, but rather, it's groups and tribalism that matter. The individual does not matter at all, period. So when a liberal says they don't care about you, they don't. They only care about their bullshit agenda. They are not open to reason and logic."

Who told you that?

The people who say "Don't vote."

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Or the one.

Apparently, voters didn't see it that way.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

They're just a bunch of groups who come into conflict often.

Sounds like a country.

You're right, I'm sorry. I read a couple of articles about this, and this article mentions where Black Lives Matter organizer says it's reprehensible.

https://www.rt.com/viral/371340-meet-black-man-kkk/



I had never heard of rt, whatever that is, so I Googled it for a different source. So my bad. I had to see if this was legit.

And no, I'm not treating liberals as one big group. I'm treating it as a bunch of divided groups who are on a hierarchy of oppression. You have Black Lives Matter, Feminism, Transtrenders, etc. As a whole, they're "liberals," but when you break it down, they're just a bunch of groups who come into conflict often. BLM and feminism clash often, for example.

Classic liberalism is dead. And these illogical loons killed it.

 

[RedSilk69]

The people who say "Don't vote."



Apparently, voters didn't see it that way.

Do you mean the three million more voters who went for Clinton, or those 80,000 in key states who swung it for Trump?

Should I group all conservatives together and say this is evidence they can't do math? Or just that they're OK with voter suppression and gerrymandering?

 

[Chris_Michael]

Do you mean the three million more voters who went for Clinton, or those 80,000 in key states who swung it for Trump?

Should I group all conservatives together and say this is evidence they can't do math? Or just that they're OK with voter suppression and gerrymandering?

Yes, I see your point. Voters were on Clinton's side in terms of raw numbers. Trump only won because of the EC. I'm not opposed to doing away with the EC if that's what you're getting at.

Clinton would have won obviously and I can see how frustrating it must be to know you had 3 million more votes and technically "lost" even though you really didn't.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Do you mean the three million more voters who went for Clinton, or those 80,000 in key states who swung it for Trump?

Should I group all conservatives together and say this is evidence they can't do math? Or just that they're OK with voter suppression and gerrymandering?

The reason Clinton had a plurality is there were two Republicans in the race. If Gary Johnson had not been a candidate, Trump probably would have gotten the plurality.

Although Johnson was listed as a Libertarian, he has held office as a Republican. It would have been about the same as Bernie running as a Socialist and splitting Clinton's votes. That probably would have given Trump a plurality too.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Don't forget the 5 - 6 million illegals who sneak voted for Hillary

QUOTE=Boxlicker101;85528002]The reason Clinton had a plurality is there were two Republicans in the race. If Gary Johnson had not been a candidate, Trump probably would have gotten the plurality.

Although Johnson was listed as a Libertarian, he has held office as a Republican. It would have been about the same as Bernie running as a Socialist and splitting Clinton's votes. That probably would have given Trump a plurality too.[/QUOTE]

 

[phrodeau]

Don't forget the 5 - 6 million illegals who sneak voted for Hillary

You're confused. The illegal voters were Russians who chose Trump.

 

[dan_c00000]

Please tell me this dude's name was Clayton Bigsby.

 

[Chris_Michael]

Please tell me this dude's name was Clayton Bigsby.

Hahaha He divorced his wife because she was a "nigger lover."