Having a hard time feeling bad about this at all. I hope the kid gets help, but the nazi dad being shot? I’m not losin’ any sleep.
Not even close to being on the same level.
Same level as what?
LonesomePolecat’s views are not close to those of the dead guy. He wants to restrict immigration, which isn’t quite the same as killing all the brown people.
He thinks allowing non-white people into the country is actively destroying “white culture,” and that people who don’t agree with him are race traitors. Is he a neo-nazi? Probably not, although I wouldn’t put money on it. Is he a racist shitstain? Indubitably. Was mhendo’s comment unfair to him? Not remotely. Particularly not by the standards of this forum.
Meh. I find Lonesome Polecat’s views on race generally loathsome and I still think it was a cheap, nasty shot IMO. You are entitled to disagree.
(That said - “Beria”? Really? That’s the best comeback you got?)
It’s amazing that you can get so much wrong in such a short post.
Firstly, if LonesomePolecat merely wanted to restrict immigration, i wouldn’t be comparing him with a white supremacist. Secondly, after reviewing the links found in this thread, and doing some searches of my own, i have found no evidence at all that Jeff Hall’s politics, reprehensible as they were, involved “killing all the brown people.”
In fact, after seeing what Jeff Hall had to say in the video provided in Locrian’s link, and after reading this interview with Hall from January of this year, it seems to me that Hall’s views conform extremely closely to those expressed frequently by LonesomePolecat on this board. If there’s a difference here, it’s a minor difference of degree, not of fundamental principles.
As i said, if all LonesomePolecat wanted were to “restrict immigration,” and he offered an economic argument about wanting to reserve employment opportunities for American citizens, especially in a poor economy, i never would have made the comparison. While i might have disagreed with those arguments, i think that there are some pretty reasonable arguments to be made for restricting immigration based on the idea that the American government has an obligation to preserve opportunities for American citizens.
But LonesomePolecat’s arguments are never merely about restricting immigration, and they’re not just about American citizens; they’re about restricting immigration specifically and primarily to preserve the privilege and position and power of the white race in America. That’s a fundamentally different thing, and it’s what puts him squarely in the same category as Jeff Hall.
Here are some examples of the OP’s positions on this and similar issues:
And, if the race stuff isn’t enough, how about this for good measure (directed at another Doper):
If you think i’ve somehow managed to misrepresent his arguments by pulling quotes out of context, you’re welcome to click on the links and go to the threads. I think his position is pretty clear.
Why cheap?
If someone died whose political position i had spent many long arguments supporting, and someone else came in to compare me to the dead person, i wouldn’t feel it was a cheap shot.
There are plenty of people on this board with whom i disagree on a regular basis. There are some people on this board who i actively dislike, and for whom i have no respect. But there is, to my knowledge, only one person on this whole board who i would consider a hypocrite for starting a thread to rant against a white supremacist, and that person is LonesomePolecat.
As for “nasty,” well i’m struggling to think of anything i could say that would be nastier than the type of arguments that make up his stock-in-trade.
I withdraw my objection.
Wow.
Not that I disagree with Miller and mhendo on LP’s nature, but it all seems really out of place for this thread. If LP had expressed sympathy for the victim, or said something like “a great man died,” it would be wholly justified. But all he did was express surprise at the act (which, even taking out the neo-Nazi aspect, is definitely unusual) and wondered what could have happened to drive the kid to do it.
Which it certainly is. And I specifically said Anglo-American culture. It is foolish to believe that Anglo-American civilization can be sustained without a white majority.
I don’t recall that I’ve ever used the term race traitor. I am, however, thoroughly disgusted with whites who think it’s alright for blacks, Hispanics and Asians to have strong racial identities and organize politically along racial lines, but horrifyingly evil for white people to do so.
Meh. I’m a realist. I don’t share your dumbass hippie fantasy about making America a beautiful, diverse multicultural rainbow, so I must be a racist shitstain. That’s not the reaction of a reasonable, open minded person. That’s the reaction of a fanatic who’s furious with someone for questioning his religion or political ideology.
And I have no use for Nazis. They’re totalitarians, and I have no use for totalitarians. Not even the ones who preach peace, love and brotherhood.
It was certainly unfair to me, as is your little tantrum here. You and Mhendo want to stone the heretic, that’s all.
Now can we please restrict the thread to the topic at hand?
I was going to go all Cat in the Hat on you, but due to time constraints I’ll fall back on Dick and Jain…
See Pop
See Pop drop
Drop, Pop, drop.
You’re quite right, you haven’t misrepesented my views at all. You just can’t seem to come up with any rational response to them. Explain it all over again, Mhendo. Why is okay for a Hispanic to want America to be more brown but shockingly immoral for an Anglo to want it to be more white?
I wasn’t ranting against a white supremacist. I have no use for totalitarians, whatever their specific ideology may be. His politics are not the issue here, it’s the cruelty to his family and son.
Gosh, I’m so impressed by your moral outrage.
In order for me to offer a response to that, you would have to demonstrate that Hispanics do, in fact, “want America to be more brown.” You have never managed to show this to be the case.
If his politics aren’t an issue, why did his politics constitute the very first words of your thread title? Why not “Abusive father killed by 10-year-old son.” Unless you think there might be a correlation between white supremacist beliefs and child abuse.
Actually, you might be onto something there.
It’s not really moral outrage. It’s simply a straightforward observation about your beliefs.
For what it’s worth, I have never heard of either of them.
Huh. See, I’m white, lived my entire life in the U.S., and I have no idea what this is. Do you have to request an application?
“White” is just too generic to even have a culture. In fact, I’d say there’s more diversity among white people themselves. There’s no “white culture”, because it’s too big of a group.
Oh, and LonesomePolecat, what do you call a “tolitarian”? Do you mean you don’t have a problem with neo-Nazi beliefs, as long as they’re not wide-spread? Do you agree with them, generally?
Or are you just a snippy little racist?
When people are trying to point out the stupidity inherent in racism, it’s generally quite a task to elevate racism by offering up something as a contrast. But you have heroically managed.
Back on topic.
The Inland Empire is a tough place. Grinding poverty, lots of violent crime, and its usually generational (grandparent, parent & child are in a gang, for example). Violent crime among young people is more common than other areas, even in CA. The prosecutors try to find options other than CYA when they can, but often placement is an improvement on the home. 
I will be watching this case (hubby is a former prosecutor out that way) closely. It’s a tragedy for that child, and his younger sister as well.
As for the “how the he’ll can mom lose custody to a Nazi?” part- the family court system out there is so fucking broken, Dahmer could get custody of a kid. :mad:
I was thinking of Letaecia Knolleys, later mother of the Earl of Essex, Lady Dudley, and “The She-Wolf” to QEI.
This is the only Letitia I’ve ever known of.