|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 22, 2020 20:09:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 23, 2020 11:47:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 24, 2020 9:32:15 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2020 10:19:04 GMT -5
Trump approved legislation for billions of $'s in aid for national parks. Why? Because it's an election year. www.cnn.com/2020/08/04/politics/donald-trump-great-american-outdoors-act/index.htmlTo be fair though, CNN doesn't give us the whole story. The legislation doesn't address only the backlog of prior funds needed, but adds $3+ billion in new funding to it (something I found out from different source/article).
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 25, 2020 11:43:02 GMT -5
Totally happen for real!
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 25, 2020 15:44:46 GMT -5
I realize nobody on here is from Alaska but Alaska is traditionally a Republican stronghold. Trump won with 51% to Hilary's 36%. I spent the morning when it was slow at work going to the typical right wing facebook groups. The mayor of Anchorage is a Democrat so of course they see him as Joseph Stalin.
Anyway with the Trump administration coming out against Pebble mine I was curious how they would react. If Hilary won the election and came out against Pebble mine she would be decried as another out of touch liberal socialist destroying the economy of Alaska from her mansion in D.C. stealing the food from Alaskan's workers mouths blah blah.
So how are they reacting to Trump and pebble mine?
They aren't. Sound of crickets chirping. The silence is deafening.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2020 16:39:57 GMT -5
The lower to middle classes are mostly brainwashed by the media (both the left and right leaning media) to believe that Trump is a true Conservative. In reality, he's a hybrid Plutocrat/Socialist who's used to getting his way and plays by his own rules. This upsets most of the establishment, so he's frequently criticized by wealthy politicians and other elites, regardless of their political affiliations. If you doubt he's part Socialist, I invite you to explain Trump's support of massive spending/debt increases, including increases in unemployment benefits and crisis aid for families and small business. muh Military spending increased too. Well, stop the presses. Military spending is also government spending and military personal work for the government. Also, it's not like certain Democrat presidents haven't exercised the U.S. military might, many even to a greater extent than Trump. If you doubt that he's often criticized by wealthy Republicans & politicians, I invite you to google/bing search it. You'll find many left-leaning sources & articles confirming this, so forget using right-wing media bias as an excuse. See for yourself... www.bing.com/search?q=republicans+criticize+trump&PC=U316&FORM=CHROMNBasically, Trump won because he read a Conservative's 'how to win the presidency by winning over America's heartland' book (I substituted the title with a made up one to help get the point across) and he implemented (another man's) election strategy successfully. He faked it and the lower to middle class voters bought it. In part, the strategy worked because U.S. politics has long been viewed with the same mentality as team sports. Root for your team, tow the line, and forget about independent/critical thinking. That's the sheep-like mentality of the majority and why independent party candidates rarely stand a chance in elections.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2020 17:08:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 28, 2020 17:49:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 28, 2020 17:55:09 GMT -5
So they are saying Biden is going senile hence he isn't qualified. You know Ronald Reagan had Alzheimers while he was president? www.snopes.com/fact-check/ronald-reagan-alzheimers-disease/Its listed as unproven but circumstantial evidence. Know what? Even if its true given our lesser of two evils choice I'm still going to vote Biden. If he is starting to get dementia he still has the vice president, his cabinet, Pelosi, and others to back him up.
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 29, 2020 9:11:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 29, 2020 18:46:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Cop on Aug 30, 2020 9:14:23 GMT -5
Of course he'll win, I've just about given up on the idea of the majority of US-citizens having any kind of common sense. The fact there are people actually thinking he's doing a good job just baffles the mind. One-issue voters are also a problem: 'Did he say he's against abortion? He's got my vote then.'
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 30, 2020 12:18:26 GMT -5
Of course he'll win, I've just about given up on the idea of the majority of US-citizens having any kind of common sense. The fact there are people actually thinking he's doing a good job just baffles the mind. One-issue voters are also a problem: 'Did he say he's against abortion? He's got my vote then.' Yeah when in a debate everything always comes down to abortion with them. Also then you point out abortion restrictions only effect the poor as before abortion was legal rich women/girls would just fly out of the country to get an abortion, and it also drives in underground and leads to dirty back alley abortions. Alcohol prohibition didn't stop drinking, so outlawing abortion won't stop abortion. Sadly tho lack of common sense isn't limited to the USA. In Germany they actually believe in a silly 4chan conspiracy theory QAnon:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2020 13:44:43 GMT -5
The reason your common sense/logic argument doesn't sway them is that conservatives view abortion as a moral issue. They categorize the unborn as weak and defenseless (humans/life), much like you might view the elderly or Covid-19 patients, and deserving of care & protection. Because they view it as a moral issue, boosting quantity and availability (making it legal - taking it from thousands, perhaps tens of thousands back alley abortions to 50+ million legal abortions, in the U.S.) is viewed as a negative, not a positive.
Let's consider the morality of war and the arms trade. The U.S. and Russia could try to make war illegal through a mutual pact with both agreeing to end the arms trade (U.S. and Russia are currently the chief suppliers). End the arms trade and smaller nations would lose the ability to fight effectively, meaning they'd be less willing to go to war in the first place. Point being, the arms trade is essentially our nation's legal stamp of approval on war, increasing the quantity and availability of arms, which multiplies the kill rate in war by a factor of millions. Sure, even ending the arms trade, people are still going to war with each other, albeit less often (using spears or their bare hands if that's all they have, resulting in fewer but more painful deaths). The difference is quantity & quality of weapons and rate of KIA's.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2020 13:48:14 GMT -5
Of course he'll win, I've just about given up on the idea of the majority of US-citizens having any kind of common sense. The fact there are people actually thinking he's doing a good job just baffles the mind. One-issue voters are also a problem: 'Did he say he's against abortion? He's got my vote then.' I just looked up his official stance on abortion. Trumpster supports abortion in cases of rape/incest and when it's necessary to protect the life of the mother.
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Aug 30, 2020 19:10:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Cop on Aug 31, 2020 9:23:33 GMT -5
Sadly tho lack of common sense isn't limited to the USA. In Germany they actually believe in a silly 4chan conspiracy theory QAnon: Oh, but there are still a lot of white nationalists left in Germany as well. They're getting more and more vocal as of late and they're just as dumb as the American variety...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2020 15:16:55 GMT -5
When ppl and the media toss around "white supremacist" and "Nazi" label (without specifying individuals or what they did that's racist) with great frequency, it's like the boy who cried wolf. I try to think of specific examples of who they're talking about, rather than some vague references to Conservative groups. Names like Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson having been labeled alt-right, come to mind. lol. JP, before his health & mental decline, was left of center (Socialist) and he's atheist/didn't attend church, supported the theory of evolution, etc (despite being mislabeled as religious by the left, who didn't truly understand the man and just assumed he's religious, because he'd sometimes wax philosophical about religions and interpret the pros & cons, possibly lessons for humanity from their teachings. Joe Rogan interviewed Democrats, such as Andrew Yang, and atheist scientists (like Neil deGrasse Tyson), and he was just as respectful as he was with conservative guests. Based on the few videos of his I've seen, imo, the idea that this man is some kind of alt-right fruitcake is utter nonsense.
I suspect that many of the ppl being labeled "white supremacists" are really just people who oppose mass immigration from poorer countries due to the tax burden that poor immigrants add to middle-class wage earners. Many, if not the majority, of the people who oppose the left's [open borders/no borders] agenda simply don't want to pay additional taxes (welfare) that would result from the left's open borders policy. The "systemic" racism narrative seems to be used a blanket attack to demonize all the left's political enemies and create division & race wars. I'm for unity of all peoples, so I hate any phony propaganda that's being broadcast to stir hatred & division.
We agree that racism exists and it's evil. That's not the argument. The argument is that the over-politicization of race, exaggerations, lies, propaganda, to divide the people and gain political power is evil (too). I don't believe it's systemic racism in the way the left often portrays (Nazis hiding around every corner, figuratively speaking.. or that most of the men in blue are racist just for wearing that uniform, etc). "Systemic" implies institutionalized and/or explicit official organizational policy. In that regard, systemic racism comes from the left (vis-à-vis institutionalized segregation on college campuses, i.e. black only zones, and preferential treatment & economic advantages for certain races & gender/'s', at the expense of other race/s and genders). i.e. social justice hierarchy embedded into the legal system that treats people differently based on skin color and/or what parts are between their legs.
Throw the massive, widespread BLM & left-leaning "protester" violence into the mix, frequently given a pass by mainstream media & Democrat politicians, along with many reported cases of these "protesters" being bus'd into small towns to spread their havoc to rural America. Conservatives starting to become agitated by the left's hubris and organizing into groups comes as no surprise to me. Any time people perceive inequality or unfair treatment, you should expect them to organize and push back.
If you honestly wanted to de-escalate violence, you wouldn't excuse or deny when ppl on your side of the political spectrum engage in violence. To de-escalate, you'd condemn anybody, regardless of their political affiliations, who thinks resorting to violence is a justifiable way to get their message across.
That's Trump's #1 major failing, imo. He's playing a similar game as the media organizations with hyper-sensationalism & attention seeking. It's done by picking one side, not condemning their own side for inexcusable behaviors, and propanda/lies to exaggerate opponents flaws & misdirect their viewership (as if real life were some kind of reality tv show).
Obama did a much better job speaking out against violence, including against the violence that was coming from black communities (when similar riots, arson, and killing were going on during his presidency). Granted, because Obama's black, he could talk about black communities without fear of being labeled a racist Nazi. Although, some ppl called him an Uncle Tom for condemning violence in black communities. So it was still somewhat of challenge for him to speak the truth and speak out against the violence, without being judged for it by certain ppl (not the entire black community, obviously.. just parts of it).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2020 15:19:51 GMT -5
Asshole Clarey's advice to immigrants.
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Sept 1, 2020 16:23:23 GMT -5
JP, before his health & mental decline, was left of center (Socialist) and he's atheist/didn't attend church, supported the theory of evolution, etc (despite being mislabeled as religious by the left, who didn't truly understand the man and just assumed he's religious, because he'd sometimes wax philosophical about religions and interpret the pros & cons, possibly lessons for humanity from their teachings. Joe Rogan interviewed Democrats, such as Andrew Yang, and atheist scientists (like Neil deGrasse Tyson), and he was just as respectful as he was with conservative guests. Based on the few videos of his I've seen, imo, the idea that this man is some kind of alt-right fruitcake is utter nonsense. Its sad to see what happened to Jordan Peterson and I thought it was cool to see a Psychologist get so popular since I have a Psychology degree as well but I don't think he would claim the socialism label if you asked him that: www.heritage.org/progressivism/commentary/jordan-peterson-explains-what-draws-people-socialismI don't think Joe Rogan is alt-right either but some of his guests were for sure. He has disappeared from the mainstream these days but Milo Yiannopolis was a guest on Rogan and he flat denied he was racist or alt-right, till his emails leaked and he was literally emailing alt-right figures constantly and even went to a bar with a bunch of literal nazis doing the nazi salute. I've heard "Joe Rogan is Oprah for dudes" and that is how I see him. I watch his show when he has certain guests on but I am not a huge fan and while I don't think he is a complete idiot or anything I don't think he is very high IQ. He is marketing himself to "dude bros". I suspect that many of the ppl being labeled "white supremacists" are really just people who oppose mass immigration from poorer countries due to the tax burden that poor immigrants add to middle-class wage earners. Many, if not the majority, of the people who oppose the left's [open borders/no borders] agenda simply don't want to pay additional taxes (welfare) that would result from the left's open borders policy. The "systemic" racism narrative seems to be used a blanket attack to demonize all the left's political enemies and create division & race wars. I'm for unity of all peoples, so I hate any phony propaganda that's being broadcast to stir hatred & division. I'm not aware of anyone with power on the left wanting to just throw open the borders, I don't think that is a thing. Immigration is a net plus for the economy. Elon Musk is an immigrant for example. I don't understand how immigrants can be "lazy freeloaders on welfare" while simultaneously "stealing jobs". We agree that racism exists and it's evil. That's not the argument. The argument is that the over-politicization of race, exaggerations, lies, propaganda, to divide the people and gain political power is evil (too). I don't believe it's systemic racism in the way the left often portrays (Nazis hiding around every corner, figuratively speaking.. or that most of the men in blue are racist just for wearing that uniform, etc). "Systemic" implies institutionalized and/or explicit official organizational policy. In that regard, systemic racism comes from the left (vis-à-vis institutionalized segregation on college campuses, i.e. black only zones, and preferential treatment & economic advantages for certain races & gender/'s', at the expense of other race/s and genders). i.e. social justice hierarchy embedded into the legal system that treats people differently based on skin color and/or what parts are between their legs. Throw the massive, widespread BLM & left-leaning "protester" violence into the mix, frequently given a pass by mainstream media & Democrat politicians, along with many reported cases of these "protesters" being bus'd into small towns to spread their havoc to rural America. Conservatives starting to become agitated by the left's hubris and organizing into groups comes as no surprise to me. Any time people perceive inequality or unfair treatment, you should expect them to organize and push back. Much like the supposed "migrant caravan" that was coming to destroy the southern border or whatever these "Antifa" people being "bused in" to rural America is BS. Cops are very right wing in general and follow the same Facebook conspiracy crap most right wingers do. Due Facebook crap you get incidents like this where a family cannot even go on vacation: www.cnn.com/2020/06/09/us/washington-family-accused-antifa/index.htmlAlso I don't have the link handy but supposedly a "busload of anita" was coming to town according to some crazy Facebook group so the police in I think Chicago actually sent a helicopter to go look for it on the highway. They literally believe some insane Facebook post to the point they sent an actual helicopter. You know it has been almost 20 years since 9/11 so people are no longer afraid of Muslim terrorists like they were. Now people are afraid of "Antifa" even tho they have not been linked to a single death. www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/27/us-rightwing-extremists-attacks-deaths-database-leftwing-antifa Isn't it convenient that 5 years ago I never even heard about Antifa but now the right goes on and on and on about them because they need an enemy to rally the troops. US vs Them. Now as to systematic racism the history of racism is the history of the USA. First of all we fought a Civil War over the right to own people. Then we had segregation in the South which only ended in the 1960s. The 1960s aren't that long ago. After WW2 many white people entered the middle class due to the GI Bill. The GI Bill was flat denied to black people. VA home loans as well. Redlining existed where certain neighborhoods were designated as black neighborhoods and high risk for loans. When the first modern suburbs were developed they were open that they were only for people of Caucasian decent. They didn't even try and hide it in those days. If you were black and saved every penny you made they would flat refuse to sell you a house in a nice neighborhood. When Malcom X's family was the first black family to move to their town they were endlessly harassed. That is just someone famous enough for us to know about. Back when the unions still had power in this country it was very common for black people to be openly passed over for whites in promotions if not hired at all. The US Government has been more proactive in hiring black people so any kind of "small government" where government jobs are done away will then throw black people out of work. One thing they have tried is submitting identical resumes to companies and traditional black names like Tyrone, DeShawn, and Jamal don't get call backs but white sounding names do. I find it difficult to see how "segregation on college campuses" can mean "institutional racism comes from the left" based off of America's history. www.vox.com/2020/6/17/21284527/systemic-racism-black-americans-9-charts-explained
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Sept 1, 2020 16:25:19 GMT -5
Also as for Trump's biggest failing it is increasing people's paranoia and reliance on social media insanity. Trump supporters don't trust the FBI, CIA, or USPS but they trust Facebook bullshit posted by russian bots because of him.
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Sept 1, 2020 16:28:32 GMT -5
Also I think its funny how Fox News spent months going on about that "migrant caravan" and now we have to worry about supposed "Antifa caravans" with no evidence.
There is only one real caravan and it is a bunch of Trump supporters who aren't even from Portland invading the city:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2020 17:06:20 GMT -5
I find it difficult to see how "segregation on college campuses" can mean "institutional racism comes from the left" based off of America's history. Most of those peoples from American history that participated in slavery have been dead for ages. The "we owe them reparations" forever + a day is bullshit. I took a course in law at college and it's highly illegal to hold any persons accountable for bad blood (i.e. crimes of their ancestors). Two wrongs don't make a right. Segregation in the past doesn't excuse or legitimize segregation in this day & age, even if it's done inversely, as retaliation for past racism or whatever. I'd bet Martin Luther King Jr would be rolling in his grave if he could see racial segregation re-emerging in our modern times. If it's about white sounding names being favored on jobs & college apps, explain the success of ppl w/ Indian and Asian names in engineering & IT (ppl with different skin colors, different sound names, but lacking special govt protections). I suppose their success has nothing to do with their cultural backgrounds, that emphasize education & hard work as the primary means to success?
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Sept 1, 2020 17:28:13 GMT -5
Most of those peoples from American history that participated in slavery have been dead for ages. The "we owe them reparations" forever + a day is bullshit. I took a course in law at college and it's highly illegal to hold any persons accountable for bad blood (i.e. crimes of their ancestors). Two wrongs don't make a right. Segregation in the past doesn't excuse or legitimize segregation in this day & age, even if it's done inversely, as retaliation for past racism or whatever. I'd bet Martin Luther King Jr would be rolling in his grave if he could see racial segregation re-emerging in our modern times. If it's about white sounding names being favored on jobs & college apps, explain the success of ppl w/ Indian and Asian names in engineering & IT (ppl with different skin colors, different sound names, but lacking special govt protections). I suppose their success has nothing to do with their cultural backgrounds, that emphasize education & hard work as the primary means to success? So if you are discriminated against for hundreds of years ending the discrimination "officially" doesn't all the sudden level the playing field. It takes time to do that. Like if you are trapped in "the hood" just because redlining is ended doesn't mean you can automatically claw your way out. Ending the War on Drugs would be one big way to really end systematic racism. As for Asians and Indians in IT, Asians and Indians are stereotyped as being "smart" so they are given interviews and jobs and such but are less likely to be promoted: hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely-group-in-the-u-s-to-be-promoted-to-management
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Sept 1, 2020 17:40:00 GMT -5
You thought caravans of Anita were scary now we have PLANES of Antifa DUN DUN DUN
Also are Anita weak soyboys or are they super soliders like in the Terminator? I can't keep up on that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2020 17:47:46 GMT -5
Most of those peoples from American history that participated in slavery have been dead for ages. The "we owe them reparations" forever + a day is bullshit. I took a course in law at college and it's highly illegal to hold any persons accountable for bad blood (i.e. crimes of their ancestors). Two wrongs don't make a right. Segregation in the past doesn't excuse or legitimize segregation in this day & age, even if it's done inversely, as retaliation for past racism or whatever. I'd bet Martin Luther King Jr would be rolling in his grave if he could see racial segregation re-emerging in our modern times. If it's about white sounding names being favored on jobs & college apps, explain the success of ppl w/ Indian and Asian names in engineering & IT (ppl with different skin colors, different sound names, but lacking special govt protections). I suppose their success has nothing to do with their cultural backgrounds, that emphasize education & hard work as the primary means to success? So if you are discriminated against for hundreds of years ending the discrimination "officially" doesn't all the sudden level the playing field. It takes time to do that. Like if you are trapped in "the hood" just because redlining is ended doesn't mean you can automatically claw your way out. Ending the War on Drugs would be one big way to really end systematic racism. As for Asians and Indians in IT, Asians and Indians are stereotyped as being "smart" so they are given interviews and jobs and such but are less likely to be promoted: hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely-group-in-the-u-s-to-be-promoted-to-managementFrom your link...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2020 17:50:13 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2020 17:57:40 GMT -5
There are many poor kids who dig their way out of the ghetto. My mother came from a family of 12 (kids) and dirt poor. Most of them, and many of their children & grandchildren are now doing well. Countless Asian and Indian people immigrant from abject poverty and succeed. Black females graduate from college at a high rate and do pretty well. Black males are afforded opportunities for many of the same scholarships, but only a small % take advantage because of the thug/gangsta culture in their own communities (not white society on the whole) that makes fun & shames them for pursuing education over a life of crime.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2020 19:14:55 GMT -5
More news on America's correcting systemic racism & legal changes. www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2020/09/01/a-court-orders-the-university-of-california-not-to-use-the-sat-or-act-during-the-pandemic/#371efe658dbeIs de-emphasis of merit the smartest move in the grand scheme of things (especially considering that China is predicted to overtake the U.S. economically)? Universities are increasingly global institutions with students from various countries around the world. Companies that want the best & brightest in academic performance (particularly those companies based in Asia, where the society doesn't base their decisions on fears of systemic racism) could start seeing foreign universities as the most prestigious (i.e. uni's that continue to value merit and students' abilities, over visible traits, get top billing).
|
|