How is this man still Governor?

Totally By Accident Discovered This Ha!ha! Guy Looks Like Him

Found another one.
3e5bfx.jpg (click to show)

That's uncanny. Here's another uncanny resemblance.
3h4juj.jpg (click to show)

And that's the truth

Like Trump with Ben Carson. Great point! I'm totally sure you'd give Trump a pass if he wore blackface or was in KKK garb.

Nobody can't not like gentle Ben. Politics aside. A brain surgeon as president would have been cool.

I know but the frustrating thing is that if it was a Republican, certain groups would not be so forgiving. The same with Justin Trudeau's blackfaces. Had a subordinate under him done that, he would have fired him and virtue signalled about how evil and racist he was.

Oh come on. Ben seems like one of the nicest guys in politics. Probably too nice for it.

So, you hate all those you disagree with? I know that's not true.

I doubt he'd be anything but respectful to you if you met.

A fact you're perpetually offended? ;)
Where'd he say lgbt people don't deserve equal treatment? I'd like to know.

Gee, that's a great way to be perpetually offended. Wouldn't you say that's the same situation he'd find himself in while dealing with you, even if you were respectful to him?

Bigotry goes both ways. That's why I think the word is useless.

Carson is a seemingly chill dude who somehow always looks sleepy and bored, doesn’t know how to run HUD, and is way too complacent about issues facing the great majority of African-Americans in this country who aren’t as privileged or (admittedly) talented at brain surgery as he is

Would have definitely been better than Trump though

Being calm is probably a prerequisite to being a great brain surgeon.

Why do you say he can't run HUD?

My wife worked for a HUD-affiliated local housing agency and she could tell you better than I could

Here’s just a top critical article of Carson from a quick Google search https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1014881

Bottom-line is the appointment of Carson as HUD Secretary was pretty clearly a favor-driven political appointment of someone with no prior experience in the field who has shown very little desire to learn on the job

You could go one step further and say it’s a deliberate appointment of someone who has a fundamental hostility to the agency’s mission and goals. Certainly, there is precedent for that: Rick Perry as Secretary of Energy when in a prior presidential run he famously promised to abolish it

Yeah, Justin Fairfax, who has been accused by two different women, Dr. Vanessa Tyson and Meredith Watson, of sexual assault and rape?

Believe all women with or without evidence. Isn't that how it works?

Now for some whataboutism. Trump has Dr. Carson and Dr. Jerome M. Adams, both black, as Cabinet Members and he is still called a racist.

I guess just having a POC on your executive team doesn't stop people from calling you a racist.

However, I would think that if you wear blackface and/or a KKK robe, maybe you should be called a racist.

Not my rules, but the rules of the intersectional left. If you did something racist at any time in your past, you must be canceled. Megyn Kelly was fired just for talking about wearing blackface on Halloween.

" My point was that if Ralph Northam was so racist, why would he have a black LG."

By that logic, since President Trump dated a black woman and has two black cabinet members, then he obviously cannot be called a racist. Yet the left insists he is racist.

What you said is what the left said when they "allowed" him to remain in office after the blackface/KKK thing came out.

The idea that the left forces Megyn Kelly to lose her job for just talking about blackface while Northam is given a pass for actually wearing blackface is the point.

I didn't address your fallacious argument because it is irrelevant and has no bearing on the larger issue of the hypocrisy of the left.

I don't attack people, I attack ideas.

I have never said you personally found it acceptable to fire Megyn, I said the leftist tribe you seem to support found it acceptable.

The left is hypocritical and has a double standard for a Democrat and a Republican.

"Which part of my argument was fallacious?"

Trying to make the argument that just because someone works with a person of another color proves then that person cannot be a racist is a fallacy.

Your statement is based on a false or invalid inference. The act of working with a person of another color provides no validation or corroboration on whether a person is bigoted or not.

If you truly believed your argument was correct, then you should be loudly defending President Trump every time the left calls him a racist. President Trump actually dated a black woman for several years. He has received an award for the work he has done helping minorities. He has also hired many POC to work with him, and as far as we know, he has never worn blackface or KKK robes. Yet the left screams that he is a racist.

Again the hypocrisy of the left is evident.

Except Northam wore blackface/KKK robes, and there is no evidence that President Trump has ever done such a racist thing.

Hey were have you been? Locked down with a lot lizard?

There are no more replies left on your last comment, so I will reply here.

"Is Ralph Northam racist today, right now, in 2020?"

I personally have no idea, but it doesn't seem to matter to the cancel culture left. According to the left, if you have at any time in your life appeared to do anything that is considered racist today, you deserve to be canceled.

I agree, the cancel culture of the left is despicable, but they do it all the time and nobody on the left pushes back. Maybe you should speak out about it at your next intersectional leftist meeting.

You can't defend Governor Northam, So you deflect, And whine about Trump.

And you can’t defend Trump, so you deflect and whine about Northam.

Solution? They should both resign!

The Meme is about Governor Northam, You can't defend him. So you deflect.
You're such a hypocrite you can't even see it in your own Meme.

Oh No... Trump said something. He should resign, A Democrat does something, You deflect and whine about Trump.

Exactly!

I literally just said they should both resign

You’re the one here saying only Northam should resign

Bill Clinton is another deflection from you, I never said I liked him or supported his conduct

You’re the hypocrite, good game

What you say doesn't matter, You're a clown whining about a Meme

Show me where I said Northam should resign...

You're Deflecting... Again.
Me posting the Meme about Clinton isn't deflecting, It's Whataboutism. You fail at failing.

Once again show me where I said you supported Clinton.. I said "Partisan hack Democrats" You're either a narcissist or you're a Partisan hack Democrat. Chose one.
You're a clown either way.

You're the hypocrite, You can't defend Northam, So you deflected. It's right there. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature can see it.

You thinking this was a game proves you're a clown.

“Show me where I said Northam should resign”

Well? Do you think Northam should resign?

I’m about to either get an answer or a deflection

Everything you’re saying about Northam suggests he should resign. And I don’t disagree!

My point is his refusal to do so is a symptom of a shameless new political culture that Trump, in his brazen refusal to accept accountability for scandal after scandal, bears a large share of responsibility for.

Ten years ago, politicians would have resigned over scandals way less controversial than this.

And a whole lot of Democrats did want Northam gone over this blackface thing. From what I read, they didn’t have a good way to eject him.

None of this makes me a narcissist.

Show me where 'I' said anything about Northam resigning. I'll wait.

Your point is to deflect from the Meme and whine about Trump, Like you Anti-Trumpers do on every Meme that triggers you. I can cite hundreds of examples I know you'll ignore.

You can't prove Trump committed a single crime, You saying he did means nothing.
You Anti-Trumpers were screaming for his impeachment before he was inaugurated. You have zero credibility.

10 years ago no one cared what you said,, No one cares what you say today, You're a clown whining on a Meme site.

And a whole lot of Democrats did want Northam gone over this blackface thing. From what I read, they didn’t have a good way to eject him.
Maybe if you whine on a Meme site you'll give Democrats a way, If that fails you can always scream at the sky.

So you're not a narcissist. You're a partisan hack, Thanks for clarifying.

And I’ll wait for you to reply to my question above.

Here it is again: Should Northam resign?

You didn't, explictly; I inferred it.
Once again you use your imagination as facts. You're a clown.

I don't have to answer your baited question. My opinion is my opinion. I don't use my opinion as fact, I let you make a clown out of yourself by making assumptions and inferring.
Keep struggling clown.

It is hilarious to watch you squirm when confronted with such a softball question as “Should Northam resign” the day after he was targeted with probably the most significant gun rights rally in world history

Share your opinion, man! Let your freak flag fly!

And if you think Northam should resign, then you’d be in good company: myself included!

As much as I love Northam from a policy perspective for this gun control stuff: no. He’s a lying and prevaricating dick who could have taken a very simple and easy step to heal up racial wounds in a state that a century and a half ago served as the hub of the Confederacy, and he didn’t.

As I've said, No one cares what you love or what you hate or what you think.
No one cares about your biased opinions, You're a clown trolling Memes that trigger you.

Sadly you dig your heels in time and time again thinking what you say matters.You'll limp off this Meme and crawl onto another one.

Keep trolling KylieClown.

See, here's the thing. It's your side that's leading outrage and cancel culture over bs like 'cultural appropriation' and the like. But then, when democrats do something that if a conservative did would invoke howls of outrage and calls to destroy them, there's utter silence. Try playing by your own rules. (I acknowledge that you think Northam should resign, but most on the left don't)

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/why-most-black-virginians-dont-want-ralph-northam-resign

This is all coming back to me now. Somehow, all three top Democrats in VA were embroiled in their own scandals at the same time — and all of them resigning would have meant ceding control to Republicans. What a f**king train-wreck. So: I can’t discount the role that pure partisan politics played in convincing some Democrats to begrudgingly keep Northam around.

If Trump were to step down (take your pick of reasons why), then Republicans wouldn't have that problem. While I disagree with VP Pence’s policies, he has stayed clean as a whistle from all the scandals as far as I can tell.

I floated the Pence option in a meme a few weeks ago and got pretty much crickets — from both Republicans and Democrats, to be fair.

That's right. The all 3 thing slipped my mind too.

All Trump's scandals have been manufactured. The worst I see is him asking a foreign prez to announce an investigation, which he didn't, and withhold aid, which he has the right to do, that they eventually got.

Hurt feelings on twatter or decisions like to deep six the Paris accord scam aren't scandals. Feel free to disabuse me of that notion tho. Like, Obama sending the IRS after tea partiers was a scandal. The trillion dollars found missing from the pentagon (I think) was a scandal for Dubya. Invading under false pretences SHOULD have been a scandal. Billy sticking a cigar in a vulnerable intern then lying about it was a scandal (Altho I'm not sure he should have been impeached as I don't see that as a high crime)

You can point to behavior before Trump became prez (cheating, sketchy university perhaps, etc) but what can you point to during? For all the screeching we hear day after day?

Clinton and the cigar were not the problem. Lying under oath, perjuring himself was the issue.

I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said he should resign.

You're moving the goalposts to avoid answering my question, Like you constantly do.

You didn't, explictly; I inferred it.

Well? Was I right? Should Northam resign?

Now you have the choice of either proving me right in my assumption, or defending the single most hated Democrat in the country right now, lol.

It's hilarious you think I have to answer you. I don't. I don't owe you anything.
You're a partisan hack, And a clown.

What Northam did 20 years ago has nothing to do with the Pro2a march yesterday.Your feeble brain can't distinguish between the 2 events.

I'm sure you were huddled in your safe space sucking your thumb, Terrified of all the people fighting for their rights, You think you have the right to deny them.

No one cares what you think KylieClown. You're a troll on a Meme site. You're no better at trolling than you are at life.

Blackface vs. 2A. Yup, two different issues, same governor. As I’ve already said: I love Northam for one, hate him for the other.

But that’s just my opinion, man. What’s yours?

Sadly you’ve already dug in your heels time and time again so I guess I’ll never know. Somehow, I will find a way to carry on.

1. Hmm. Do "unproven allegations" equal total exoneration (in your words, after stripping away a couple cleverly placed parenthetical phrases: "Trump never... sexually assaulted anyone")? No, they do not.
2. Lol! A big ol' distinction without a difference. Words matter. Hypothetically, if it had been an audio tape of Northam saying the N-word in the '80s: same sort of controversy would have resulted.
3. Is anyone really defending Northam over this? Not that I've seen. But are people defending Trump over what he said then and the boatload of offensive things he's said since? Yes: both at the time that tape came out, at any point in time over the past 3 years, and right here, right now. See: Your point 2.
4. No one's rights are being stripped. These are sensible gun restrictions that comply with the 2nd Amendment, and all the marching and whinging in the world from gun nuts can't change Supreme Court precedent on this.
5. Regardless of whether this opinion comes from a place of "Leftism" or not, I think Northam should have resigned. The fact that he didn't was shocking. As was the fact Trump was elected after that nasty October surprise.

They are 100% comparable

I have to disagree with you here. In my opinion, inalienable and constitutional rights are being removed.

My opinion is that since the right to self-defense and to own and bear arms is a "god-given" right and not a privilege given by the government, the 2nd amendment is very clear that the government "shall not infringe" on that right. I also feel that any gun law that restricts that right is illegal and unconstitutional.

Beyond outlawing ALL semi-automatic weapons, the proposed law also outlaws martial arts or any self-defense training, gun safety and tactical training, revokes the current open carry and canceled carry laws, and outlaws all non-state owned gun ranges. According to the law, you can't even teach your children how to shoot a gun.

In addition to these laws, the state legislature is also proposing laws to end all current voter ID requirements, and they are trying to change to the term of office for the governor from 4 years to 8 years. They also proposed a law that the governor would no longer be elected by popular vote of the state but rather by a vote of congressional districts (which are gerrymandered to favor Democrats)

When the of Virginia people started a recall petition of the governor and entire legislature (which already has 976,000 signatures), the legislature proposed a law changing the number of required signatures for recall from the current 10% of the voters to 25% of the voters.

The Virginia Democrat Legislature is out of control.

Yeah, I'm starting to see that. My positivity (yes, really) leads me to not see things clearly some time when it comes to people.

Classy way to bow out of a losing argument. Cheers.

I read it. You never acknowledged Per's point about gun ranges and the like, tho. That in particular doesn't fall under sensible gun control.

But we know your agenda so I suppose anything goes to get there.

Per’s comment below seems super factual and I would have to research a bit more closely into this to formulate a proper response, honestly

I love it when conservatives actually educate me on stuff

For now I would just say that Supreme Court precedent does permit states to impose restrictions on certain classes of firearms, and where they may be carried. Where exactly those limits lie has yet to be determined. There are surprisingly few cases in SCOTUS history that deal squarely with the Second Amendment. The biggest recent one was D.C. v. Heller (2008), probably the most conservative opinion on this topic in our constitutional history.

These bans are 99.999999% likely to be challenged in court by the gun lobby and their lawyers, so get ready to maybe see some new law!

That's what a proper debate should be! I've also had things I believed debunked here and I'm glad for it.

I would readily agree SCOTUS precedent isn’t sacrosanct. There are modern decisions a lot more recent than Dred Scott that I think were wrongly decided.

But the vast majority of the time, the justices in black robes don’t get it that wrong.

And the bevy of repressive laws on the books passed by state-level governments on or before Dred Scott (or since: Ser the failure of Reconstruction) demonstrate that states aren’t necessarily the bulwark of individual rights against federal oppression that so many “constitutional conservatives” believe them to be.

“I love it when conservatives actually educate me on stuff!”

That bit of sarcasm was a reference to you, not Perspicacity, lol.

Because for all the ink you spill in my general direction, you rarely present facts I wasn’t already aware of or perspectives I haven’t already encountered and considered.

Perhaps the most interesting thing you’ve thrown my way lately is pointing me in the direction of Thomas Sowell, but from what I read of him, I could not conclude he is the staggering genius that you portray him as. The “mismatch” theory has big problems that I encountered almost instantly when I started looking at the data from elite universities.

My efforts to get you to share any perspective of his that you found valuable other than his anti-affirmative action comments went unanswered.

As did my efforts to get you to discuss the ideas of Peterson or Friedman in greater specificity.

As far as Friedman’s air pollution tax, you offered lamely that Friedman “wasn’t talking about anthropogenic global warming” while ignoring the fact that my meme was titled “What *would* Friedman do about climate change?” (Emphasis added this time) or giving any real reason to doubt that Friedman’s modern followers erred in some way in applying his negative externality principles to the topic of CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions.

You could teach an entire class on not debating in good faith. See: Writing multiple 5-paragraph essays "educating" me and then claiming "tl;dr" when I respond in kind rather than addressing my points, which you've done several times now.

Time and again, your responses confirm that you regard me as a brainwashed "Leftist" "ideologue" "spouting propaganda" (your words), which is hardly charitable. In contrast, I've characterized your positions as those of a "constitutional Conservative," a non-judgmental description that you did not disagree with.

"Global warming denier" or even just "denier" is short and accurate shorthand. If you'd rather substitute that phrase with "*Anthropogenic* global warming denier," fine. You're still denying what the science says either way.

Whatever rhetorical crimes I've allegedly committed, they pale in comparison to your own.

Pfft. If your goal is to debunk me because you genuinely think I’m some sort of threat to America then come with actual facts rather than paragraphs of rhetoric and insults

Unfortunately the facts are on my side so that’s going to be difficult

That was sarcasm, huh? Don't I feel stupid.

Technically a sincere statement toward folks like you and Per, sarcasm toward Timber and others

You conveniently left out the beginning where he said 'they let you' referencing gold digging w**res like Kylie Minogue ;)

That defense works IF:
1. you assume Trump always tells the truth about his own conduct without any self-serving spin or gloss
2. is great at reading people
3. and you ignore all the women who have actually accused him of sexual misconduct

Who knows if all those allegations are true? But typically where there’s smoke there’s fire

1. In that case it could be all masculine bluster
2. I'm sure he's dealt with gold diggers his whole life
3. After the Kavanugh and Moore jokes, mattress girl and all the other false claims I've seen, #believeallwomen is a joke. Unfortunately. Watch them come out of the woodwork if Trump nominates another SCOTUS justice who's a male.

Gorsuch’s nomination and confirmation wasn’t like that at all, though. In theory, that one should have been more cantankerous because that seat was “supposed” to be Garland’s seat that was “stolen.”

Which I don’t entirely believe, by the way. The Senate stonewalled Garland for almost a whole year I think, but that was a gray area in Constitutional terms.

Now: Should Kavanaugh have paid a price for something he did 30 years ago or whatever it was? I don’t think so, necessarily. But I believe her story. It was damn plausible, honestly, to believe a couple high schoolers would have done that. And she risked a lot by coming forward.

Kavanaugh should have told the truth instead of digging in his heels and playing the woe-is-me card that, as we see, has served to cast doubt upon all women.

Dude, she was a liberal activist that lied repeatedly, like claiming she was so traumatized, she couldn't fly, yet did. What exactly did she risk besides a perjury or false claim charge? She's a liberal hero. Then there was the joke Avanatti represented, forget her name.

The Garland issue can be debated but that Kavanaugh should get hit with false rape charges is not. You guys had a chance to make the case, it failed. I accuse Hillary of unproven things but i'm not accusing someone at a SCOTUS trial of rape to kill their nomination.He's still innocent until proven guilty.

Yeah, doubt SHOULD be cast. It's turned into a political weapon and Ford contributed to that far more than Kavanaugh.

I'm sure you'd agree with me that definitive proof of events that happened in an upstairs bedroom 30 years ago is not really going to be possible. And the SOL on any such event would be long gone anyway. (By the way, Blasey-Ford didn't bring "rape charges." These were sexual assault allegations.)

A SCOTUS confirmation hearing is not a criminal trial, no matter how many times conservatives have tried to analogize it to one. It was a confirmation hearing to the highest judicial office in the land, at which any questions about a nominee's character and fitness are automatically relevant.

What did Blasey-Ford risk by coming forward, exactly? Just death threats and the ire of half the entire country.

Doubt should be raised? Indeed. Enough doubt was raised in *Kavanaugh's* direction that he should have either: A. Told the truth; B. Withdrawn his nomination in favor of another qualified conservative candidate; or, C. Trump or Senate Republicans could have done that for him as a face-saving measure.

He could have gone back to the D.C. Court of Appeals. He could have kept coaching his girls' softball team or whatever. His life would not have been ruined. Republicans could have easily picked another conservative judge from the short-list. Maybe a woman this time. Not that I believe in "quotas," but in this context, that would have been a magnanimous and healing gesture.

The fact Senate Republicans pressed forward on K. regardless of the significant doubt and distastefulness of the entire process simply because they had the votes was a Rubicon moment for me as far as my relationship with the modern Republican Party.

Jesus, so any 30 year old allegation is enough to keep one from achieving their dream of becoming a SCOTUS justice? Way to encourage more political rape/sexual assault accusations. But yeah, cuz baseless accusations, Clarence Thomas should have stepped down. Trump should have stepped down, Moore should have stepped down, Kavanaugh should have stepped down, the 3 lacrosse players at Duke should have stepped down, the falsely accused students in the Rolling Stone - University of Virginia saga should have stepped down, Malcolm Alexander, who spent 38 years in prison before dna exonerated him, should have stepped down, Christopher Miller, who spend 16 years in prison before dna exonerated him, should have stepped down, Paul Nungesser, who Mattress Girl accused falsely at Columbia U, should have stepped down etc etc etc

You have zero proof he didn't tell the truth. He's innocent until proven guilty, that's how it works.

Yeah, plenty of women already on the bench. How about just nominating the best choice?

Liar