Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

(12-10-2018, 01:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]We need to set policy according to the few crazies, because they cause unnecessary and tragic deaths. Many examples can be given. Life is not a statistic. And the crazies can be influential too to a degree, as they have influenced the followers of Trump, and all those demonstrators at Charlottesville and elsewhere.

Forgiveness is a release of emotional attachment to what we experience as hurt. Forgiveness is beneficial primarily for the forgiver. The understanding should be remembered; emotional clinging to the past is not needed, although we often do it. Understanding that, as Jesus said about those who crucified him, "they know not what they do", or like the African-American Christian victims of Dylann Roof who forgave him, forgiveness and transcending hate is possible.

 If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

Just as a point of order, the single largest group of terrorists in the US are American citizens, most of them white and nominally Protestant. The Muslims who came here and did serious harm were the Saudi 9/11 hijackers, and none arrived illegally. So, your point is weak at best, and nonsensical … unless you also wish to expel all the militia and white nationalist types, like Timothy McVeigh.

(12-10-2018, 04:31 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-08-2018, 03:17 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-07-2018, 08:02 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]I hear about all the hatred that supposedly exists on the American right these days. I hear liberals talking about how bad the white supremacist groups are and the bad stuff that members of those groups have done and so forth. However, I do actually hear and see the amount of hatred and the obvious signs and activities associated with hatred that exists on the left these days.

Just yesterday one white supremacist was convicted of first-degree murder for driving his car into a bunch of people who had been protesting people like him (he is an admirer of Adolf Hitler) in Charlottesville, Virginia. A few years ago a blatant racist went into a historic African-American church and killed worshipers who had tried to guide him away from white racism.  (The second fellow has been sentenced to death as the result of a federal prosecution and judgment). A neo-Nazi recently shot several Jews to death in a synagogue in Pittsburgh.

Is there any question that white racism is dangerous to people that the racists see as pariahs?

What do I dislike among the Red?

There is a belief in the short term economically.  Much of reaganomics has been reduced to short term thinking.  You let the debt grow which has been demonstrated to lead to collapse in a decade or so.

Their view of ecology and especially global warming is also short term.  The problems won't hit until the current generations are dead of old age.  It is also a population density thing.  Rural folk don't see the problems which come with lots of people living close together.  If you don't see the evidence of the problem, you are slow to see a problem.  You can rage against them, you can try to fight it, but you can understand.

Then there is prejudice, the Southern Strategy, which is clinging to the past rather that a reluctance to deal with the future.  Different beast, and something that speaks of a corrupt soul.  I can suppose that some might be used to privilege, and one can be used to dumping on individuals due to minority membership,  but I feel more judgmental and personal about equality.  However, you must admit is is different.

Does the desire to solve your own problems, your way, locally, mean you can ignore very real problems that will present grave situations to future generations?  Is it optional that all men and women should be treated well?

I am less concerned with the lone nuts, the crazies.  You can't let yourself set policy according to the acts of an extreme few.  When it becomes a majority, however, that walks the line, it enables the acts of people who have lost it, and actually do what used to be the norm.  (Do you remember the pictures of a town's white population gathering to have their picture taken at a lynching?)

There is a difference between understanding someone and forgiving them.  One can understand clinging to the past, and it is hard to hate that which you understand, but they can be so determined to be blind.

What do you know really know about the Southern Strategy? Do you know as much about it as you know about the Whig's that you identify with today? Here's what I know about the rural folks, the rural folks aren't all that friendly with city folks. The rural folks don't like the hustle and bustle, glamor and glitz, dog eat dog mentality that's  often associated with suburban/urban lifestyles. The rural folks don't like our attitude towards other people and the way we view them and the way we often treat them. I spent a lot if time in rural America growing up. I spent a lot of time getting to know the rural folks throughout the years. I'm usually welcomed because I'm generally viewed as one of them even though I prefer to live in suburbia.

Bob, I assume that you wouldn't like the idea of me telling you what you can do with your life, how you're supposed to raise your kids, what you have to believe, what you have to teach your kids and what you have to accept your kids being taught, what values you have to acknowledge and accept, what values you have to let go of or else, what you can no longer believe in, what you have to believe in and so forth. I get the impression that they actually believe that they're the only adults living in this country. I get the impression that blues are accustomed to being around wimps, fearful adults and submissive/passive adults based on the way they speak to us and the way they conduct themselves in public eye.

Who determines the population of New York city, the rural and suburban red voters or the blues who control/manage New York city and the blue voters who keep them in office and support their people friendly policies that draw in all kinds of people from every where including the entire globe. I mean, you don't have to work to live in New York city or any other blue city or some blue states because there's plenty of welfare and plenty of subsidies and no concerns of federal law enforcement and if the weather is decent all you need is a tent/box and a piece of free public ground that's available to all to squat on and treat as your own. The well to do blues have a problem. The well to do blues have all kinds of problems they've been creating for themselves and creating for the not so well to do blue's who are struggling to remain living in the older blue areas they were born and raised these days. Eric's blaming reds for all the issues relating to the blues. However, I'm seeing blues who are the ones running things and the ones making the policies and enforcing the policies in those areas.

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 01:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]We need to set policy according to the few crazies, because they cause unnecessary and tragic deaths. Many examples can be given. Life is not a statistic. And the crazies can be influential too to a degree, as they have influenced the followers of Trump, and all those demonstrators at Charlottesville and elsewhere.

Forgiveness is a release of emotional attachment to what we experience as hurt. Forgiveness is beneficial primarily for the forgiver. The understanding should be remembered; emotional clinging to the past is not needed, although we often do it. Understanding that, as Jesus said about those who crucified him, "they know not what they do", or like the African-American Christian victims of Dylann Roof who forgave him, forgiveness and transcending hate is possible.

 If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

Well, we did destabilize the Middle East, which is primarily Islamic.  We did offer many who gave the US and western values a chance to immigrate when we cut, run, and made their life a potential hell in their homeland.  So, I do have some sympathy for some immigrants.  

With the lies and corruption of Big Oil and the Bush 43 administration, I can show a little sympathy for the Islamic extremists as well.  Both communism and the capitalists showed their worst to the Middle East from colonial rule through the modern day.  I don't even blame them for conservatively sticking with what they knew, the religious law of the Agricultural Age, even though that is as elitist, autocratic and obsolete enough to never go anywhere.  Traditional Islamic rule is a doomed proposition, but we have shown them even worse in terms of empowering elites and keeping the common man impoverished.

That does not mean I support a massive intake of terrorists.

But, again, setting policy on a few crazies, whether they are "Americans" driving through peaceful anti fascist protestors or Taliban insurgents driving airplanes into buildings, is apt to lead to irrational over reaction.  You set rational policy on larger groups.  Middle Easterners who sympathized with US attempts to change the culture to mesh with western values are much more common than the pilots who flew into buildings.  So too, red Americans living in the middle of the country are much more common than the lone nuts who drive automobiles through crowds.

What is common is that the nuts take the more common larger group's values to an extreme, use the many as an excuse for rabid extremism.  They make the rabid extremists who post here look sane and moderate.  What is also common is that both common groups are frustrated by wealthy elite governments that care little for the common people.  I sympathize with the peaceful Islamic immigrants as much as I sympathize with the peaceful red 'Americans' who grew so frustrated with their establishment to look to Trump to fulfill Reagan's impossible dream.

(12-10-2018, 07:30 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

Just as a point of order, the single largest group of terrorists in the US are American citizens, most of them white and nominally Protestant.  The Muslims who came here and did serious harm were the Saudi 9/11 hijackers, and none arrived illegally.  So, your point is weak at best, and nonsensical … unless you also wish to expel all the militia and white nationalist types, like Timothy McVeigh.

Ah, that wasn't my point, I don't support the idea of getting rid of all Islamic's because some of them have been involved in more recent terrorist attacks. I think you should pay more attention to what you read before you respond and look like an idiot. BTW, I don't think the American group of largely white Protestant terrorists is a very large group. I'd say the blue groups have got them outnumbered by about 10-1 and I'd say the bulk of the white race could care less about what happens to them these days.

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 01:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]We need to set policy according to the few crazies, because they cause unnecessary and tragic deaths. Many examples can be given. Life is not a statistic. And the crazies can be influential too to a degree, as they have influenced the followers of Trump, and all those demonstrators at Charlottesville and elsewhere.

Forgiveness is a release of emotional attachment to what we experience as hurt. Forgiveness is beneficial primarily for the forgiver. The understanding should be remembered; emotional clinging to the past is not needed, although we often do it. Understanding that, as Jesus said about those who crucified him, "they know not what they do", or like the African-American Christian victims of Dylann Roof who forgave him, forgiveness and transcending hate is possible.

 If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

Have you ever been in Dearborn, Michigan, which has one of the largest concentrations of Muslims in America? It is a much safer place than the southwest side of Detroit. The southwest side of Detroit is a cesspool, with prostitutes offering themselves, drunks and addicts wandering about, drug dealing, and sexually-oriented businesses. Dearborn does not have that. There is typically a Dearborn police car at the city limit, and the cop in that police car is there to bust anyone who brings Detroit depravity into Dearborn. The Muslims insist upon a family-friendly community.

I could live with that. I would rather hear an Islamic call to prayer than be offered drugs or a 'trick'. Better the mosque than the whorehouse, right?

Dearborn is a no-go zone -- if you are a drunk, pusher, addict, pimp, or whore. Otherwise it is a safe haven. I have had a drink in a nice, quiet Irish bar there... but I was not there to get drunk.

Many Christians and Jews like things that way. I certainly do!

If you think that there has been terrorist activity there -- there was. Some extremists were caught with materials intended for a bombing. The target was a mosque, and the terrorists are associated with the fascistic Right. Note well: the terrorists of 9/11 stayed clear of Dearborn. Someone would have been reported.

(12-10-2018, 08:49 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]BTW, I don't think the American group of largely white Protestant terrorists is a very large group. I'd say the blue groups have got them outnumbered by about 10-1 and I'd say the bulk of the white race could care less about what happens to them these days.

Not so sure.  There are a lot of blues that organize to protest Nazi and KKK types.  If such deplorables show up to advertise their position, they are apt to be outnumbered badly by semi organized blue counter protestors.  But those are protestors, not nuts.  There are people who protest on both sides with none hurt beyond a few fistfight bruises.  At that level I don't care, but some kids just enjoy hurting and getting hurt.

It is not the organized protest groups that bother me so much as the lone nuts driving cars through crowds, abusing weapons, and setting off bombs.  A lot of those nuts lean red.  I wouldn't think most in the middle of the country would worry about them.  Such nuts are rare and seldom target reds who pretty much mind their own business.

There were a few exceptions targeting police officers a few years back who were a bit free killing blacks.  This cop killing would be more blue, but as a whole the blue would not approve of cop killing any more than they would approve of prejudiced cops.  Still, the cops and the protestors far far outnumbered those few nuts abusing weapons.

It seems the elites have stopped caring about protests, the protests are quite strong, with a few nuts regarding the protests as justification for their extreme use of violence.

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 01:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]We need to set policy according to the few crazies, because they cause unnecessary and tragic deaths. Many examples can be given. Life is not a statistic. And the crazies can be influential too to a degree, as they have influenced the followers of Trump, and all those demonstrators at Charlottesville and elsewhere.

Forgiveness is a release of emotional attachment to what we experience as hurt. Forgiveness is beneficial primarily for the forgiver. The understanding should be remembered; emotional clinging to the past is not needed, although we often do it. Understanding that, as Jesus said about those who crucified him, "they know not what they do", or like the African-American Christian victims of Dylann Roof who forgave him, forgiveness and transcending hate is possible.

 If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

We had a restrictive but generally fair immigration policy under Obama. Nothing that the current interloper does is in any way reasonable. Arbitrary discrimination against travelers and immigrants from a few Muslim countries that the Orange Menace doesn't do business with has nothing to do with a good policy to deal with crazies.

(12-10-2018, 11:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

We had a restrictive but generally fair immigration policy under Obama. Nothing that the current interloper does is in any way reasonable. Arbitrary discrimination against travelers and immigrants from a few Muslim countries that the Orange Menace doesn't do business with has nothing to do with a good policy to deal with crazies.

Unfortunately, too many who think in the old way believe arbitrary discrimination is reasonable. There are many who will not or can not distinguish between an Iranian who worked for the Americans when they were occupying Iran and some Islamist who drove an airplane into an American building. Once upon a time, in the days of "no Irish need apply", and it was hardly better to be black or Chinese, that way of prejudiced thinking was the norm. It is part of the reason I dislike the blue late night 'humor' that teaches stereotyping against reds.

Then again I see the threat lurking in any smile, in any humor. Did you know that some researchers believed the smile was originally a threat display, a bearing of teeth, a willingness to use force in a day when teeth were a threat? Only much later did external weapons like the hand axe or bows make teeth obsolete, not a threat. A bearing of teeth became sign that there was no serious threat present, that if it were one would get weapons at ready.

(12-10-2018, 11:43 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 11:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

We had a restrictive but generally fair immigration policy under Obama. Nothing that the current interloper does is in any way reasonable. Arbitrary discrimination against travelers and immigrants from a few Muslim countries that the Orange Menace doesn't do business with has nothing to do with a good policy to deal with crazies.

Unfortunately, too many who think in the old way believe arbitrary discrimination is reasonable.  There are many who will not or can not distinguish between an Iranian who worked for the Americans when they were occupying Iran and some Islamist who drove an airplane into an American building.  Once upon a time, in the days of "no Irish need apply", and it was hardly better to be black or Chinese, that way of prejudiced thinking was the norm.  It is part of the reason I dislike the blue late night 'humor' that teaches stereotyping against reds.

Then again I see the threat lurking in any smile, in any humor.  Did you know that some researchers believed the smile was originally a threat display, a bearing of teeth, a willingness to use force in a day when teeth were a threat?  Only much later did external weapons like the hand axe or bows make teeth obsolete, not a threat.  A bearing of teeth became sign that there was no serious threat present, that if it were one would get weapons at ready.

The blue humorists are holding up the red side in ridicule. It can be a sign of exercizing superiority over one's opponent, or fearlessness in its face. But, for sure, if the red side didn't present so many opportunities for ridicule, which you must admit must be some kind of an all-time record, then they would be happy to ridicule the blues just as they always have gone after both sides. And they continue to do so (witness Bill Maher's ridicule of blues who interrupt Republicans while they are eating dinner, as well as his ridicule of political correctness). That of course is not teaching stereotyping, but just holding up the red behavior to the light of truth and exaggerating it for humorous effect. The essential element that makes us laugh is surprise. A good political humorist like Colbert or Meyers will say something about the powers-that-be that is true, but is a bit more than we expect him to say. And without them, the blue side would have almost no representation in the public sphere today. So they are performing a HUGE service. Speaking truth to power is invaluable under a regime which could soon be imposing a dictatorship upon us. And since I enjoy them so much, you can be sure I will counter your statements about them.

Sorry we continue to disagree again, but we usually don't resolve our differences of opinion; nor do you nor I nor anyone else today resolve any differences of opinion in online discussions. Or even in any other discussions. It is a condition of our society and especially our generation today.

(12-10-2018, 11:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 01:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]We need to set policy according to the few crazies, because they cause unnecessary and tragic deaths. Many examples can be given. Life is not a statistic. And the crazies can be influential too to a degree, as they have influenced the followers of Trump, and all those demonstrators at Charlottesville and elsewhere.

Forgiveness is a release of emotional attachment to what we experience as hurt. Forgiveness is beneficial primarily for the forgiver. The understanding should be remembered; emotional clinging to the past is not needed, although we often do it. Understanding that, as Jesus said about those who crucified him, "they know not what they do", or like the African-American Christian victims of Dylann Roof who forgave him, forgiveness and transcending hate is possible.

 If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

We had a restrictive but generally fair immigration policy under Obama. Nothing that the current interloper does is in any way reasonable. Arbitrary discrimination against travelers and immigrants from a few Muslim countries that the Orange Menace doesn't do business with has nothing to do with a good policy to deal with crazies.

Dude, the pictures that were taken of the poor immigrant kids in the kennels were taken during the Obama years. Obama was a dickhead. Do you know how many poor illegal Mexicans disappeared during the Obama years. I'll give you an idea, my old neighbor's social gatherings decreased in size by over half within the first few years of the Obama Administration. However, I do get some credit for saving one by convincing him to go through the process and pay the costs associated with acquiring legal status for his wife before she's caught and ends up being deported. He was kind of like you, his emotional wants/needs just didn't allow him to listen to reason. However, the reality of receiving news from family members and friends about the issues their illegal family members and friends were facing opened his mind to reason. BTW, Obama's policy was to ignore/avoid terrorist attacks committed by crazy Islamic's who were living here and try to have them labelled as being something else.

(12-11-2018, 12:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 11:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 01:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]We need to set policy according to the few crazies, because they cause unnecessary and tragic deaths. Many examples can be given. Life is not a statistic. And the crazies can be influential too to a degree, as they have influenced the followers of Trump, and all those demonstrators at Charlottesville and elsewhere.

Forgiveness is a release of emotional attachment to what we experience as hurt. Forgiveness is beneficial primarily for the forgiver. The understanding should be remembered; emotional clinging to the past is not needed, although we often do it. Understanding that, as Jesus said about those who crucified him, "they know not what they do", or like the African-American Christian victims of Dylann Roof who forgave him, forgiveness and transcending hate is possible.

 If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

We had a restrictive but generally fair immigration policy under Obama. Nothing that the current interloper does is in any way reasonable. Arbitrary discrimination against travelers and immigrants from a few Muslim countries that the Orange Menace doesn't do business with has nothing to do with a good policy to deal with crazies.

Dude, the pictures that were taken of the poor immigrant   kids in the kennels were taken during the Obama years. Obama was a dickhead. Do you know how many poor  illegal Mexicans disappeared during the Obama years. I'll give you an idea, my old neighbor's social gatherings decreased in size by over half within the first few years of the Obama Administration. However, I do get some credit for saving one by convincing him to go through the process and pay the costs associated with acquiring legal status for his wife before she's caught and ends up being deported. He was kind of like you, his emotional wants/needs just didn't allow him to listen to reason. However, the reality of receiving news from family members and friends about the issues their illegal family members and friends were facing opened his mind to reason. BTW, Obama's policy was to ignore/avoid terrorist attacks committed by crazy Islamic's who were living here, and try to have them labelled as being something else.

Obama was known as the deporter-in-chief, which I would have thought made you happy, considering your usual statements. But Trump has made it worse, without any cause for doing so; separating families, taking men away from their families off the streets, holding immigrants in detention centers, issuing a no-tolerance policy, threatening them with violence, etc. The Obama immigration policy regarding Muslims was very strict, and I don't think your charge against Obama regarding them is correct. Obama and Bush before him and their administrations were good at finding terrorists and stopping them before they could do anything, and at attacking them abroad as well.

(12-10-2018, 11:43 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 11:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 06:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] If that's what you believe and how you view things, why do you support the idea of giving more Islamic's the right to immigrate to this country and support the right of Islamic immigrants to remain living in this country after seeing/experiencing  what a few Islamic crazies have already  done? Gee, I've never suggested we that we ban all Islamic's or round them all up and ship them back to where they came from.

We had a restrictive but generally fair immigration policy under Obama. Nothing that the current interloper does is in any way reasonable. Arbitrary discrimination against travelers and immigrants from a few Muslim countries that the Orange Menace doesn't do business with has nothing to do with a good policy to deal with crazies.

Unfortunately, too many who think in the old way believe arbitrary discrimination is reasonable.  There are many who will not or can not distinguish between an Iranian who worked for the Americans when they were occupying Iran and some Islamist who drove an airplane into an American building.  Once upon a time, in the days of "no Irish need apply", and it was hardly better to be black or Chinese, that way of prejudiced thinking was the norm.  It is part of the reason I dislike the blue late night 'humor' that teaches stereotyping against reds.

Then again I see the threat lurking in any smile, in any humor.  Did you know that some researchers believed the smile was originally a threat display, a bearing of teeth, a willingness to use force in a day when teeth were a threat?  Only much later did external weapons like the hand axe or bows make teeth obsolete, not a threat.  A bearing of teeth became sign that there was no serious threat present, that if it were one would get weapons at ready.

Could you tell the difference between them just by looking at them?

(12-11-2018, 12:07 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Obama was known as the deporter-in-chief, which I would have thought made you happy, considering your usual statements. But Trump has made it worse, without any cause for doing so; separating families, taking men away from their families off the streets, holding immigrants in detention centers, issuing a no-tolerance policy, threatening them with violence, etc. The Obama immigration policy regarding Muslims was very strict, and I don't think your charge against Obama regarding them is correct. Obama and Bush before him and their administrations were good at finding terrorists and stopping them before they could do anything, and at attacking them abroad as well.

Well, it didn't upset me anymore than those pictures upset me and didn't seem to upset the Mexican American voters who voted for Hilary or the liberal news chief or members of the liberal who most likely saw those pictures either. I don't mind if an American president ( any American President) responds to a potential border crisis by sending US troops to back up/reinforce the border patrol as a means to stop 5,000 illegal immigrants who are approaching our southern border in mass who could clash with and overwhelm border security forces in areas. Would you prefer they're dealt with by trained professionals or an angry mod of Americans? I'm glad someone sunk some sense into Obama's head & reminded him which country he was elected to be the President of and who he was suppose to serve before American citizens began taking the law the into their own hands. Now that the blues have regained the House that they lost and the blue Queen seems to have regained the seat that she lost, the blues are going to have to be careful and learn how to submit to the will of the American people because that's what the blues are going to be judged on now. As I've mentioned before, I've never associated the blues with America. I never viewed blues as being American in their views or their values. I associate the older Democrats like my father in law and their kids as Americans but not the blues. My Democratic friends and casual acquaintance aren't blues which is why I view them as friends and casual acquaintances and don't view them or treat them as adversaries or the enemy so to speak. This is also the reason why, I don't blame them for the stupid shit the blues tend to do and the way the blues tend to act and behave and so forth.

(12-10-2018, 11:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The blue humorists are holding up the red side in ridicule. It can be a sign of exercizing superiority over one's opponent, or fearlessness in its face. But, for sure, if the red side didn't present so many opportunities for ridicule, which you must admit must be some kind of an all-time record, then they would be happy to ridicule the blues just as they always have gone after both sides. And they continue to do so (witness Bill Maher's ridicule of blues who interrupt Republicans while they are eating dinner, as well as his ridicule of political correctness). That of course is not teaching stereotyping, but just holding up the red behavior to the light of truth and exaggerating it for humorous effect. The essential element that makes us laugh is surprise. A good political humorist like Colbert or Meyers will say something about the powers-that-be that is true, but is a bit more than we expect him to say. And without them, the blue side would have almost no representation in the public sphere today. So they are performing a HUGE service. Speaking truth to power is invaluable under a regime which could soon be imposing a dictatorship upon us. And since I enjoy them so much, you can be sure I will counter your statements about them.

Sorry we continue to disagree again, but we usually don't resolve our differences of opinion; nor do you nor I nor anyone else today resolve any differences of opinion in online discussions. Or even in any other discussions. It is a condition of our society and especially our generation today.

The blue humorists are exercising their rights as Americans. The blue humorists have little to no opposition present to counter them either. As far as ridicule and the ability to hold up against ridicule, damnation, insult and so on, I'd take a red over a blue any day. Sorry dude, we are tougher, we are emotionally stronger, we are able to deal with shit, we are more cunning, we have more character, we have more natural instincts, we have more faith in ourselves and God above and so forth.

I'm sure Bill Maher doesn't want that kind of stuff eventually happening to him and I'm sure he doesn't want political correctness being applied to him or his shows either. Well, tough shit if they do eventually. I mean, there's a price that must be paid for being aligned with a bunch of morons and a bunch people who aren't experts in anything other than what blues think or how blues feel about the issues or the people that are being discussed on his show. Have you ever seen him react to an expert who actually knows something? I have, it's quite funny when his untested ego is trampled on by someone with real knowledge who views him as a fool.

(12-11-2018, 12:57 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-11-2018, 12:07 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Obama was known as the deporter-in-chief, which I would have thought made you happy, considering your usual statements. But Trump has made it worse, without any cause for doing so; separating families, taking men away from their families off the streets, holding immigrants in detention centers, issuing a no-tolerance policy, threatening them with violence, etc. The Obama immigration policy regarding Muslims was very strict, and I don't think your charge against Obama regarding them is correct. Obama and Bush before him and their administrations were good at finding terrorists and stopping them before they could do anything, and at attacking them abroad as well.

Well, it didn't upset me anymore than those pictures upset me and didn't seem to upset the Mexican American voters who voted for Hilary or the liberal news chief or members of the liberal who most likely saw those pictures either. I don't mind if an American president ( any American President) responds to a potential border crisis by sending US troops to back up/reinforce the border patrol as a means to stop 5,000 illegal immigrants who are approaching our southern border in mass who could clash with and overwhelm border security forces in areas.

Cruelty is itself evil, even if it arises from bureaucratic incompetence or insensitivity.

Quote:Would you prefer they're dealt with by trained professionals or an angry mob of Americans?

Is there any way in which to identify illegal aliens by appearance? The illegal aliens at the border are hard to distinguish from many Americans in border areas from San Diego to Brownsville. We already have a large Hispanic population, and we have had a large one in America since the incorporation of the Republic of Texas into the United States.

Many illegal immigrants end up marrying Americans, the attraction being similarity of culture. Just ask yourself a question: if you were single and dating, would your first question be about citizenship? Compatibility matters far more. I would be more concerned about her (whoops! I have exposed that I am a straight male!) political and religious values and her musical tastes than what sort of citizenship she has.

Quote:I'm glad someone sunk some sense into Obama's head & reminded him which country he was elected to be the President of and who he was suppose to serve before American citizens began taking the law the into their own hands.

I have never had any question about the loyalty of Barack Obama to the United States. His legal education has left no doubt in his mind. He may be more loyal to the rule of law than to any chest-pounding nationalism. Besides, his legal education has surely left no doubt that exercise of legal process is for the experts in specific roles. As an attorney he knows what his role is in that legal system.

He certainly knows better than Michael Cohen did, or at least practiced! Donald Trump's personal lawyer is going to be disbarred (if he has not yet been), and he has been convicted of participating in the criminal misdeeds of his client -- a clear breach of legal ethics. An attorney's response to knowledge of a client's illegal or even suspect legal activities is to steer his client away from committing crimes. The only imaginable exception to such a prohibition is civil disobedience, and that is as a rule more for showing that a law is fundamentally unjust than to try to get away with something.

Quote: Now that the blues have regained the House that they lost and the blue Queen seems to have regained the seat that she lost, the blues are going to have to be careful and learn how to submit to the will of the American people because that's what the blues are going to be judged on now.

That is incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. She is not royalty. But we did not elect someone with any right to act as a despot as Donald Trump has tried to do. Note well that the Constitution of the United States has a genius in weakening the sort of President who tries to act as a dictator  if a soulless creep like Donald Trump and empowers a President like Washington, Lincoln, or FDR in a crisis involving the survival of the United States.

Politics in a democracy must have a strong nexus with service to the People; should that nexus be broken, then it is the right and indeed duty to seek a restitution of that nexus. Maybe a parliamentary system would work better in America than our Founding Fathers thought (the Declaration of Independence excoriates the largely-picked parliament beholden to George III) due to the vote of no confidence that can remove a Prime Minister for incompetence as well as malfeasance (Presidents can be impeached only for malfeasance, whether committing a war crime, taking or soliciting a bribe, or lying about oral sex -- and the case for impeachment of Donald Trump exists already). Nancy Pelosi would not have a chance to be Speaker of the House had President Trump been more competent and more respectful of the sensibilities of the American people, the majority of which voters voted for Hillary Clinton. It was up to President Trump to win some of us over. He has failed badly at that,  and America is in a foul mood for that.

The Crisis of 2020 may have Donald Trump as its focus for his incompetence, cruelty, and lack of respect for American institutions.

Quote:As I've mentioned before, I've never associated the blues with America. I never viewed blues as being American in their views or their values.  I associate the older Democrats like my father in law and their kids as Americans but not the blues.

My last immigrant ancestor was born in 1833, so it is safe to say that my politics do not define me as an American or a non-American. It is arrogance on your part to define people as un-American for holding opinions common to a near-majority of American voters in the 2016 Presidential election and a majority of American voters in the 2018 elections overall.

I am not going to deny that you are an American. I did not deny the American citizenship of the late Timothy McVeigh even if I thought that his mass murder by bombing a federal building an extreme abomination. You are stuck with people like me who believe that America is something other than your ideal.

Quote:My Democratic friends and casual acquaintance aren't blues which is why I view them as friends and casual acquaintances and don't view them or treat them as adversaries or the enemy so to speak. This is also the reason why, I don't blame them for the stupid shit the blues tend to do and the way the blues tend to act and behave and so forth.

They know you and are onto you. I know how to play the game against someone with your beliefs. I know how to apply traditional conservative values, including tradition and patriotism, against you.  That is an old trick called reductio ad absurdum that Euclid used in proving topics of geometry and number theory over two millennia ago.

Is proposition A possible with conclusion C? Prove that proposition A necessitates proposition B, and that B makes C impossible. Such proves that A and C cannot both be true. As an example, ask whether there is a largest prime number P. Then the multiple of all primes (2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, and 29  up to P) is a whole number W. But W+1 is also a whole number, and it cannot be divided by any prime as large as P. Thus W+1 is divisible by some combination of primes each greater than P or is itself prime, and either way establishes that the condition that there is a last prime P is impossible.

You may believe the slogan "Make America Great Again", but I must ask you what would bring America to its alleged lost greatness.

Let's see: would abolition of same-sex marriage make America better? Nope. Some men can love men but not women and some women love women but cannot love men. Letting such people enjoy a benign and wholesome love in a marital situation does not harm the marriage of heterosexual couples.

Aid to disabled people? That may be exactly what they need for survival, let alone having a chance to fully participate in the American consumer society (whether of material goodies or of experience). Besides, many of the disabled have been war veterans who deserve better than to be left out in the cold, so to speak. Welfare? Likewise. The parents may be lazy, good-for-nothing bums, but their children deserve better.

Banning abortion? There are cases in which it is a necessity. Technically the removal of an ectopic pregnancy (pre-born is stuck in the Fallopian tube) is an abortion. That is the easiest choice.

Banning contraception? Sex enhances a marriage, and it is no longer necessary that families have more than two children just to keep their genetic heritage alive.

Banning interracial marriage and sex? If it is only black and white, then there are white people who get excited about black people as sexual and marital partners but can't get excited by white sexual or marital partners. Love is a good thing.

Gender equity? Fascism is largely a male club, which alone expresses the need for women to have political power.

Letting polluters pollute with impunity? Yeah, sure -- if you want to die young of air pollution and have lead ravaging your brain.

White-only voting? Mississippi, the state that most mistreated black people, was a political and economic cesspool under white-only voting -- even having a secret police analogous to the Gestapo or KGB. No thanks!

No Interstate highway system? Have you ever driven to Kansas City and back on Interstate 35? It is much safer than old US 65 and US 69. I do not miss any of the local Blood Alleys, and I would like to see such highways as US 6 between Hartford and Providence replaced (from what I hear, as I have never been on that road) with safer highways. Interstate highways, with their separate lanes of traffic and no direct intersections, are far safer than the two-lane death-traps that they supplanted. They have paid for themselves in lower numbers of deaths and crippling injuries from traffic collisions.

No right to form labor unions? If redress against an unresponsive government is an enumerated right in the Constitution, then why should workers have no means of getting redress of grievance against employers who combine to overwork and underpay them?

Free education for children instead of consigning them to early starts in mines and factories? Let children be children so that they can be competent, prosperous adults.

Can anyone imagine bringing back slavery? Sure -- if one wants a war over its abolition, whether against the Confederacy or the Third Reich.

Divine Right of Kings? Letting the Inquisition torture and execute people for being of the wrong religion?

Now what was so great that you wanted to bring back? Maybe in some respect life was easier in the past -- most obviously not having
to spend half one's income on property rent for a flat less spacious than a cabin-in-the-woods motel room on US 40 in the 1930s. Maybe  there was opportunity to pioneer a business or technology that did not then exist. On the other hand, I am glad to have missed out on smallpox or being burned at the stake in an auto-da-fe.

(12-11-2018, 02:21 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 11:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The blue humorists are holding up the red side in ridicule. It can be a sign of exercizing superiority over one's opponent, or fearlessness in its face. But, for sure, if the red side didn't present so many opportunities for ridicule, which you must admit must be some kind of an all-time record, then they would be happy to ridicule the blues just as they always have gone after both sides. And they continue to do so (witness Bill Maher's ridicule of blues who interrupt Republicans while they are eating dinner, as well as his ridicule of political correctness). That of course is not teaching stereotyping, but just holding up the red behavior to the light of truth and exaggerating it for humorous effect. The essential element that makes us laugh is surprise. A good political humorist like Colbert or Meyers will say something about the powers-that-be that is true, but is a bit more than we expect him to say. And without them, the blue side would have almost no representation in the public sphere today. So they are performing a HUGE service. Speaking truth to power is invaluable under a regime which could soon be imposing a dictatorship upon us. And since I enjoy them so much, you can be sure I will counter your statements about them.

Sorry we continue to disagree again, but we usually don't resolve our differences of opinion; nor do you nor I nor anyone else today resolve any differences of opinion in online discussions. Or even in any other discussions. It is a condition of our society and especially our generation today.

The blue humorists are exercising their rights as Americans. The blue humorists have little to no opposition present to counter them either. As far as ridicule and the ability to hold up against ridicule, damnation, insult and so on, I'd take a red over a blue any day. Sorry dude, we are tougher, we are emotionally stronger, we are able to deal with shit, we are more cunning, we have more character, we have more natural instincts, we have more faith in ourselves and God above and so forth.

I'm not so sure about that. Meyers made fun of Californians last night, and I laughed the most about it than any of his jokes about Trump. I'm not sure most of you reds can take a joke about you. On the contrary, you guys react with severe anger at what you see as us putting you down ("condescending" you call it), and make that the main reason for your reactionary views and votes. The reds are subject to prejudice and fear to a much greater degree than blues. I understand and respect the natural virtues of rural people, but these days I do so less because they are so easily taken in by sloganeers like Reagan, Bush and Trump. Some of us blues are also greens like me, and we know that God is not "above" but "within," so we have that advantage over you. We are rivals now, but if the pall of red ideology and fear lifts over your side as new generations arise, things might smooth over in the future.

As for the older Democrats being closer to your views, I'm not so sure about that either. How far do you take that? The civil rights, green, gun control and anti-war views of blues go back to the sixties. But the views of older Democrats on such things as social welfare, taxes, unions and social security were if anything further to the left than the views of blues today after 40 years of neo-liberal dominance. But reports I've seen of opinion polls today show a shift back to the left on such things as support for Medicare for All. Whether the people are ready to make that change remains to be seen, however, and blue politicians are frequently still held back by the neo-liberal/classical liberal power in government. Reports are that the new House members tend to be more often center-left moderate than progressive.

Quote:I'm sure Bill Maher doesn't want that kind of stuff eventually happening to him and I'm sure he doesn't want political correctness being applied to him or his shows either. Well, tough shit if they do eventually. I mean, there's a price that must be paid for being aligned with a bunch of morons and a bunch people who aren't experts in anything other than what blues think or how blues feel about the issues or the people that are being discussed on his show. Have you ever seen him react to an expert who actually knows something? I have, it's quite funny when his untested ego is trampled on by someone with real knowledge who views him as a fool.

He seems to do very well from what I've seen.

(12-11-2018, 12:57 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-11-2018, 12:07 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Obama was known as the deporter-in-chief, which I would have thought made you happy, considering your usual statements. But Trump has made it worse, without any cause for doing so; separating families, taking men away from their families off the streets, holding immigrants in detention centers, issuing a no-tolerance policy, threatening them with violence, etc. The Obama immigration policy regarding Muslims was very strict, and I don't think your charge against Obama regarding them is correct. Obama and Bush before him and their administrations were good at finding terrorists and stopping them before they could do anything, and at attacking them abroad as well.

Well, it didn't upset me anymore than those pictures upset me and didn't seem to upset the Mexican American voters who voted for Hillary or the liberal news chief or members of the liberal who most likely saw those pictures either. I don't mind if an American president ( any American President) responds to a potential border crisis by sending US troops to back up/reinforce the border patrol as a means to stop 5,000 illegal immigrants who are approaching our southern border in mass who could clash with and overwhelm border security forces in areas. Would you prefer they're dealt with by trained professionals or an angry mod of Americans? I'm glad someone sunk some sense into Obama's head & reminded him which country he was elected to be the President of and who he was suppose to serve before American citizens began taking the law the into their own hands. Now that the blues have regained the House that they lost and the blue Queen seems to have regained the seat that she lost, the blues are going to have to be careful and learn how to submit to the will of the American people because that's what the blues are going to be judged on now. As I've mentioned before, I've never associated the blues with America. I never viewed blues as being American in their views or their values.  I associate the older Democrats like my father in law and their kids as Americans but not the blues. My Democratic friends and casual acquaintance aren't blues which is why I view them as friends and casual acquaintances and don't view them or treat them as adversaries or the enemy so to speak. This is also the reason why, I don't blame them for the stupid shit the blues tend to do and the way the blues tend to act and behave and so forth.

I'm not sure you can make that distinction. Blues is a term that means Democrats.

Do you think the caravan of refugees from Central America thought they could just crash the border and move in? I think they expected an asylum process. By law they are entitled to that process, according to the Courts. Trump's labeling them as criminals and terrorists is his big lie, the one he began his campaign with, and if the reds buy that lie it reflects very poorly upon them. Trump said his troops could shoot the immigrants; that if anything is un-American.

(12-10-2018, 10:24 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-10-2018, 08:49 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]BTW, I don't think the American group of largely white Protestant terrorists is a very large group. I'd say the blue groups have got them outnumbered by about 10-1 and I'd say the bulk of the white race could care less about what happens to them these days.

Not so sure.  There are a lot of blues that organize to protest Nazi and KKK types.  If such deplorables show up to advertise their position, they are apt to be outnumbered badly by semi organized blue counter protestors.  But those are protestors, not nuts.  There are people who protest on both sides with none hurt beyond a few fistfight bruises.  At that level I don't care, but some kids just enjoy hurting and getting hurt.

It is not the organized protest groups that bother me so much as the lone nuts driving cars through crowds, abusing weapons, and setting off bombs.  A lot of those nuts lean red.  I wouldn't think most in the middle of the country would worry about them.  Such nuts are rare and seldom target reds who pretty much mind their own business.

There were a few exceptions targeting police officers a few years back who were a bit free killing blacks.  This cop killing would be more blue, but as a whole the blue would not approve of cop killing any more than they would approve of prejudiced cops.  Still, the cops and the protestors far far outnumbered those few nuts abusing weapons.

It seems the elites have stopped caring about protests, the protests are quite strong, with a few nuts regarding the protests as justification for their extreme use of violence.

What makes you think those folks lean red or Republican? I'm not a Nazi voter or a Confederate voter.You must have missed the exchanges between me and one of them during the Republican primary. What he saw was a Republican voter who didn't recognize him as being superior or a savior who actually viewed him as white trash/a white criminal. A view of him that turned out to be quite accurate based in his reactions and the threats he made against me. Evidently, he wasn't aware that he'd need our full support to overthrow the US government and establish themselves as the authority over all of us.

Hilary wasn't defeated by them as she claimed.  She was defeated by Americans who weren't happy about the direction that the blues were perceived as taking the country. An accurate perception based on who the blues tend/seem to take their cues from these days. BTW, the blues tend to take their cues from those who live abroad these days because that's where the bulk of their extra money and extra financial support seems to be coming from these days. Look at you, you'd prefer that we be governed by the United Nations. I'm an American voter who leans heavily Republican these days. BTW, I'm leaning heavily these days because I can see that we are on the verge of splitting a political party that has two sets of conflicting values.

(12-11-2018, 12:45 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-11-2018, 12:57 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-11-2018, 12:07 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Obama was known as the deporter-in-chief, which I would have thought made you happy, considering your usual statements. But Trump has made it worse, without any cause for doing so; separating families, taking men away from their families off the streets, holding immigrants in detention centers, issuing a no-tolerance policy, threatening them with violence, etc. The Obama immigration policy regarding Muslims was very strict, and I don't think your charge against Obama regarding them is correct. Obama and Bush before him and their administrations were good at finding terrorists and stopping them before they could do anything, and at attacking them abroad as well.

Well, it didn't upset me anymore than those pictures upset me and didn't seem to upset the Mexican American voters who voted for Hillary or the liberal news chief or members of the liberal who most likely saw those pictures either. I don't mind if an American president ( any American President) responds to a potential border crisis by sending US troops to back up/reinforce the border patrol as a means to stop 5,000 illegal immigrants who are approaching our southern border in mass who could clash with and overwhelm border security forces in areas. Would you prefer they're dealt with by trained professionals or an angry mod of Americans? I'm glad someone sunk some sense into Obama's head & reminded him which country he was elected to be the President of and who he was suppose to serve before American citizens began taking the law the into their own hands. Now that the blues have regained the House that they lost and the blue Queen seems to have regained the seat that she lost, the blues are going to have to be careful and learn how to submit to the will of the American people because that's what the blues are going to be judged on now. As I've mentioned before, I've never associated the blues with America. I never viewed blues as being American in their views or their values.  I associate the older Democrats like my father in law and their kids as Americans but not the blues. My Democratic friends and casual acquaintance aren't blues which is why I view them as friends and casual acquaintances and don't view them or treat them as adversaries or the enemy so to speak. This is also the reason why, I don't blame them for the stupid shit the blues tend to do and the way the blues tend to act and behave and so forth.

I'm not sure you can make that distinction. Blues is a term that means Democrats.

Do you think the caravan of refugees from Central America thought they could just crash the border and move in? I think they expected an asylum process. By law they are entitled to that process, according to the Courts. Trump's labeling them as criminals and terrorists is his big lie, the one he began his campaign with, and if the reds buy that lie it reflects very poorly upon them. Trump said his troops could shoot the immigrants; that if anything is un-American.

Actually, its not hard to make that determination, I've been doing it for a long time. Why wouldn't they? They crashed through Mexico's southern border or weren't you paying attention to that at the time. As far as I know, US troops can shoot foreigners who attack and threaten the lives of US citizens. You better pull your head out before you have no say in what the American people decide to do about the blue issue and your queen better figure out that most American people are able to make determinations between the Democrats of old and the blues who are running/controlling their party today.