• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rising conservative activist Candace Owens criticized over Hitler comments

Which is just a name and not relevant to how the government functioned. See, North Korea, aka the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea."

Thank you! Been seeing that for years. The democrat party are closely associated with nazi causes, slavery, jim crow, fascists, socialists, and communists.

They just lie about it. No one not evil, duped, or sane would willingly follow such policies of theft and worse. More recently the new democrat generation are much more apt to reveal their thoughts ahead of their actions.

The Ku Klux Klan was dead. All but destroyed by republicans. The first Hollywood blockbuster shown in a democrat whitehouse revived it.

"President Woodrow Wilson, considered by history to be a great progressive but who began segregation of federal offices at the request of Southern politicians, watched the movie in the White House with members of his Cabinet."

Now democrats flail about scrambling for some imagined moral high ground from the depths of their soulless cesspits where they propose to complete the legacy of Margaret Sanger and her kkk and nazi friends.
 
Thank you! Been seeing that for years. The democrat party are closely associated with nazi causes, slavery, jim crow, fascists, socialists, and communists.

There is no "democrat" party in the U.S. and I have no idea what country you're talking about. Sorry.
 
Acknowledged.

Hey, we agree on something - that I have no idea what in the hell you're talking about. That's always nice - to find places where opposing sides can find common ground. :peace
 
You defending this Bitch?

Actually I was supporting the truth which was initially and continually misrepresented. This would be noticed by anyone willing to observe in a serious manner.

A snippet out a paragraph is of little value except to twist as one sees fit. There is no reason to lie. Show the whole verbiage.

 
Actually I was supporting the truth which was initially and continually misrepresented. This would be noticed by anyone willing to observe in a serious manner.

A snippet out a paragraph is of little value except to twist as one sees fit. There is no reason to lie. Show the whole verbiage.



The Bitch was praising Hitler......Enough Said
 
I had not heard of Candice Owens before this thread.

That's not particularly surprising.

You guy's don't like her because she speaks the truth ...

Not so that I have noticed.

... and is smarter than you.

Not so that I have noticed.

You all seem to not like good looking people.[/qute]

Is she a "good looking people", I really didn't pay any attention to whether she was or not. Is that always the first thing that you notice about other people - their level of "physical attractiveness"?

She doesn't support your perpetual victimhood so of course you hate her.

I don't consider myself to be a victim of anything at all and I don't "hate her". In fact I have absolutely no opinion on her as a person whatsoever - never having met her personally.

Do you "hate" people that you have never met?

Why?

I've have now watched several videos where the animals in the crowd were shouting her and the others on the panel down.

Isn't there something in some obscure law that says that people have something sort of like a right to say what they feel like saying?

Possibly you could find out and get back to me on that one.

Meanwhile, she just peppered them with facts ...

Not so that I noticed.

... which they did not like go figure.

A lot of people don't like being told things that are manifestly untrue. Your opinion, however, may vary.

I watched the original video link. Notice how the two conservatives on the panel come off as intelligent while the two liberals sound like babbling idiots.

Does the term "confirmation bias" have any meaning to you?

The left is all about emotion.

Not that I have noticed.

Conservatives are all about the facts.

Not that I have noticed.

Stop looking for trouble because you will always find it.

What a blinding flash of the obvious.

You do know that statements like that could be interpreted as "threatening", don't you. I don't take it like that, but not everyone won't.
 
Wait...a conservative that makes pro nazi statements?

Imagine that.

I think that she's been "outed" (because everyone knows that "The Liberals are all Socialists." and "The Socialists are all Fascists." and "The Fascists are all Nazis." and "The Nazis all make pro-Hitler statements.") as the sneaking, unAmerican, left-wing, liberal, pinko, socialist, Commie" that she actually is. No Real Patriotic True Patriotic Conservative Patriotic American Patriotic Patriot would ever say anything like that.
 
No your Uncle Tom spouting Bitch praising Hitler

Just a personal note here, but I find the use of the term "Bitch" (in reference to anything other than a female canine) distasteful and I'm not even female.

Do you (and anyone else) know some other word that you could use in its place?
 

Did you happen to notice who sponsored that bill, what party they represented, or how the vote on that bill went?

Let me postulate a scenario and then ask one question based on that scenario:

(Wildly Improbable) SCENARIO


In 2020 the Democrats capture enough seats in both the Senate and House of Representatives to ensure a veto proof majority BUT, Mr. Trump edges out the Democrat candidate by one Electoral College vote (despite only capturing 39% of the popular vote). The Legislative Branch then passes legislation which abolishes all border controls for the United States of America.

QUESTION


Is it the fault of Mr. Trump that people can now flock across the borders and into the USA totally unhindered by any admissions process?

If your answer to the question above is "No." then why would it be the "fault" of Mr. Obama if a Republican dominated House and Senate passes any particular piece of legislation?
 
Is it the fault of Mr. Trump that people can now flock across the borders and into the USA totally unhindered by any admissions process?

Yes because the wall is not finished yet. Next.

The keyword is now without fanciful scenarios.
 
Yes because the wall is not finished yet. Next.

The keyword is now without fanciful scenarios.

Obviously there is something wrong with your ISP or your computer, because - apparently - you didn't see the whole post. Let me repeat it for you so that you can have a chance to actually respond to what was actually posted.


Did you happen to notice who sponsored that bill, what party they represented, or how the vote on that bill went?

Let me postulate a scenario and then ask one question based on that scenario:


(Wildly Improbable) SCENARIO


In 2020 the Democrats capture enough seats in both the Senate and House of Representatives to ensure a veto proof majority BUT, Mr. Trump edges out the Democrat candidate by one Electoral College vote (despite only capturing 39% of the popular vote). The Legislative Branch then passes legislation which abolishes all border controls for the United States of America.

QUESTION


Is it the fault of Mr. Trump that people can now flock across the borders and into the USA totally unhindered by any admissions process?



If your answer to the question above is "No." then why would it be the "fault" of Mr. Obama if a Republican dominated House and Senate passes any particular piece of legislation?

PS - I know that it is difficult, but I'd actually appreciate an honest answer to the actual question actually asked rather than a deliberate distortion of the question and an answer that doesn't actually deal with the actual question actually asked and I have full confidence that you can do it now that you actually have the actual question that was actually asked in your possession.
 
From Global News


Rising conservative activist Candace Owens criticized over Hitler comments

A rising conservative activist and Trump supporter is facing criticism after a video of her defending nationalism and differentiating it from Adolf Hitler’s policies went viral.

READ MORE: Kanye West distances himself from campaign urging black people to quit Democratic Party

Candace Owens is the communications director of Turning Point USA, a conservative advocacy group. She made the comments at a December event in the U.K. to promote the launch of Turning Point UK, a British offshoot of the group.

Buzzfeed reported on the video Friday.

In the video, Owens was asked about nationalism in Western politics.

“I actually don’t have any problems at all with the word ‘nationalism,'” Owens said. “I think that the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism.

“Whenever we say nationalism, the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler,” Owens said.“He was a national socialist. But if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine.”

COMMENT:-

Hey, there were a lot of good people in the German government under the Nazis.

I mean they were good to their kids and didn't beat their wives, or stuff like that, and they went to church regularly.

Not only that but Adolf Hitler didn't cheat on his wife - not even ONCE throughout his whole marriage.

[LINK TO VIDEO]

PS - The number of posts before someone says that Ms. Owens didn't say what she said because it was Buzzfeed who reported on it is estimated (at the time of posting) to be less than 10.


I'm pretty sure she didn't stop talking after saying, "He was a national socialist. But if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine."

What came next? It matters. A lot.
 
I'm pretty sure she didn't stop talking after saying, "He was a national socialist. But if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine."

What came next? It matters. A lot.

No doubt more babbling Bull****....Best ignored...The Bitch ain't to smart
 
Never mind. I found it. She said, "The problem is that he wanted, he had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalise."

So, in no way was she defending Hitler as the left would have us believe.

Bottom line is that giving half a quote is always the sign of an agenda.
 
No doubt more babbling Bull****....Best ignored...The Bitch ain't to smart

Just out of curiosity, have you ever made a post in which you expressed an actual position on something, or has it just been one boring, empty attempted slag after another?
 
Really?...But you responded....Are you defendingf this bitch praising Hitler?

I guess that answers my question. She didn't even come close to praising Hitler, and of course you know that as well as I do.
 
Just out of curiosity, have you ever made a post in which you expressed an actual position on something, or has it just been one boring, empty attempted slag after another?

You seem to figure it out....Funny to see your Kind reduced to defending this Nationalist Morons
 
No doubt more babbling Bull****....Best ignored...The Bitch ain't to smart

Doesn't look like you're to smart either. Nationalism is a good thing for ones country.
 
Back
Top Bottom