(12-17-2018, 08:57 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Bob, I'm not talking about you behind your back or spreading rumors about you behind you back or whining to moderators either. I called you a FUCKHEAD to your face and I told you the reason why I did it as well. I see that you didn't see or accept your own mistake and own up to it like a person with higher character would do. Well, I associate your lack of proper response with typical blue behavior. Judo is just another form of martial arts to me. I just used it as a way to remind you that you're not speaking to a stranger who doesn't know anything about you or anything about what you have written or about the positions that you have taken and the information that you've shared about yourself in the past.
What do you stand for? Do you stand for equality or do you just claim that you do? I don't know the answer but I'm sure I can come up with some more clever ways to test you further and find out. Or, are you willing to drop the term and never use it to your advantage again. Did you treat me as an equal or treat me as a lesser being? Well, if you were smart, you wouldn't treat me as a lesser being or snub me in any way because I'm able to hurt you and tarnish your image in many ways without using violence.
For the record, I have not been talking about or spreading rumors about anybody here. The forum does provide tools to send private messages, but I have not been using them.
I have been reporting what I perceive as violations of forum policy, and will continue to do so, whether the violator is red or blue, and whether the post in question is addressed to me or not. I keep the sending of these reports private to keep them out of the general conversations, which should be focused on history and politics, not personal vendettas. This does not mean I condone the violation of rules.
Equality? That could happen at many levels. Do I lie regularly about other people's position? Do I rely on insults and obscenity to make my point? (Well, sometimes you have to get Eric's attention.) In some ways we are not equal. Do I believe all people should follow the same rules, interpreted in the same way, equally? Yes. In that sense I do stand for equality.
Where it seems you do not.
That judo is different from kung fu is less important than that I do not use the threat of violence to change political opinions. You misrepresented me grievously, and in doing so you followed a typical pattern of lies.
And for the record, I would rather get back to politics and history. Drop the vendetta garbage.
(12-17-2018, 04:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 03:35 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I have Asperger's. I have poor facial recognition, so I have difficulty making friends. It is complicated, and you wouldn't understand it unless you had Asperger's or were trained in mental health.
Dale Carnegie's book has as a corollary that one can do things to avoid making enemies or looking like a horrible person.
Well, you're also a political hack according to your own words and view of yourself. I'll give you credit, you are more upfront and honest about yourself than the blues you're affiliated with here.
I admit to being a terribly-flawed person, above all else a pathetic waste of personal ability that I wish that I had put to better use. Maybe if I had known about Asperger's earlier I might have found appropriate uses of my intellectual talents than drifting along in jobs horribly suited to me. "But he has such good verbal and mathematical skills, acuity at spatial relationships, and an ear for music. So what could go wrong?"
It is easy to confuse me with a destructive sociopath or psychopath because I have weird expressions of feelings. At the worst I can seem insensitive, rebellious, and disloyal. This said, I need not feel the right thing to do the right thing. I know the rules, and I do not break them without some recognition that the rules deserve to be broken on occasion -- or that Asperger's acts up.
One of the rules is to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation. I had hoped that you would get the message on that.
If I lack empathy, I can at least act as if I have it.
Political hack? We all have agendas, do we not?
(12-17-2018, 10:24 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 08:57 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Bob, I'm not talking about you behind your back or spreading rumors about you behind you back or whining to moderators either. I called you a FUCKHEAD to your face and I told you the reason why I did it as well. I see that you didn't see or accept your own mistake and own up to it like a person with higher character would do. Well, I associate your lack of proper response with typical blue behavior. Judo is just another form of martial arts to me. I just used it as a way to remind you that you're not speaking to a stranger who doesn't know anything about you or anything about what you have written or about the positions that you have taken and the information that you've shared about yourself in the past.
What do you stand for? Do you stand for equality or do you just claim that you do? I don't know the answer but I'm sure I can come up with some more clever ways to test you further and find out. Or, are you willing to drop the term and never use it to your advantage again. Did you treat me as an equal or treat me as a lesser being? Well, if you were smart, you wouldn't treat me as a lesser being or snub me in any way because I'm able to hurt you and tarnish your image in many ways without using violence.
For the record, I have not been talking about or spreading rumors about anybody here. The forum does provide tools to send private messages, but I have not been using them.
I have been reporting what I perceive as violations of forum policy, and will continue to do so, whether the violator is red or blue, and whether the post in question is addressed to me or not. I keep the sending of these reports private to keep them out of the general conversations, which should be focused on history and politics, not personal vendettas. This does not mean I condone the violation of rules.
Equality? That could happen at many levels. Do I lie regularly about other people's position? Do I rely on insults and obscenity to make my point? (Well, sometimes you have to get Eric's attention.) In some ways we are not equal. Do I believe all people should follow the same rules, interpreted in the same way, equally? Yes. In that sense I do stand for equality.
Where it seems you do not.
That judo is different from kung fu is less important than that I do not use the threat of violence to change political opinions. You misrepresented me grievously, and in doing so you followed a typical pattern of lies.
And for the record, I would rather get back to politics and history. Drop the vendetta garbage.
No, you used to rely on those who were willing to do the dirty work for you which made it much easier for you to establish your points. Yes, you lie like you did with me. You lie about the views and beliefs of other people and you insult other people a lot too. You're not a saintly person or an innocent victim here. You are an active participant just like me. I'm not aware of any special rules or special protections that pertain to me here or that pertained to me or any of those who associated with me at the old 4T, I dunno, its seems that blues seem to think/feel that they're entitled to special rules and protections that reds aren't entitled to receive. In other words, you can imply whatever you want, you can lie about me, lie about what I believe, lie to me and insult me to my face, insult millions of Americans, lie about millions of Americans, lie to millions of Americans but there's a problem when I call you out and call out every blue who is guilty of the same crap a FUCKHEAD for doing it and laying into you for doing.
(12-17-2018, 11:21 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 04:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 03:35 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I have Asperger's. I have poor facial recognition, so I have difficulty making friends. It is complicated, and you wouldn't understand it unless you had Asperger's or were trained in mental health.
Dale Carnegie's book has as a corollary that one can do things to avoid making enemies or looking like a horrible person.
Well, you're also a political hack according to your own words and view of yourself. I'll give you credit, you are more upfront and honest about yourself than the blues you're affiliated with here.
I admit to being a terribly-flawed person, above all else a pathetic waste of personal ability that I wish that I had put to better use. Maybe if I had known about Asperger's earlier I might have found appropriate uses of my intellectual talents than drifting along in jobs horribly suited to me. "But he has such good verbal and mathematical skills, acuity at spatial relationships, and an ear for music. So what could go wrong?"
It is easy to confuse me with a destructive sociopath or psychopath because I have weird expressions of feelings. At the worst I can seem insensitive, rebellious, and disloyal. This said, I need not feel the right thing to do the right thing. I know the rules, and I do not break them without some recognition that the rules deserve to be broken on occasion -- or that Asperger's acts up.
One of the rules is to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation. I had hoped that you would get the message on that.
If I lack empathy, I can at least act as if I have it.
Political hack? We all have agendas, do we not?
What are you doing posting here? If you're supposed to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation, you shouldn't be posting here. You should stick to the rules and find a friendly left wing website that bans conservatives the moment one shows up.
(12-18-2018, 01:40 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]No, you used to rely on those who were willing to do the dirty work for you which made it much easier for you to establish your points. Yes, you lie like you did with me. You lie about the views and beliefs of other people and you insult other people a lot too. You're not a saintly person or an innocent victim here. You are an active participant just like me. I'm not aware of any special rules or special protections that pertain to me here or that pertained to me or any of those who associated with me at the old 4T, I dunno, its seems that blues seem to think/feel that they're entitled to special rules and protections that reds aren't entitled to receive. In other words, you can imply whatever you want, you can lie about me, lie about what I believe, lie to me and insult me to my face, insult millions of Americans, lie about millions of Americans, lie to millions of Americans but there's a problem when I call you out and call out every blue who is guilty of the same crap a (expletive deleted) for doing it and laying into you for doing.
No, you are lying again. I will report violations of rules, regardless of the political affiliation of the violator, and regardless of whether the violation targets me. You are only making me inclined to be more persistent about it to be uniform. This site should be about politics and history, not about vendettas. The rules should be and as far as I know do apply to all equally.
(12-18-2018, 03:50 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 11:21 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]If I lack empathy, I can at least act as if I have it.
Political hack? We all have agendas, do we not?
What are you doing posting here? If you're supposed to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation, you shouldn't be posting here. You should stick to the rules and find a friendly left wing website that bans conservatives the moment one shows up.
This site should be and is politically neutral, but limited in allowing things like insults and obscenity. You have it backwards.
Other sites can be different.
(12-18-2018, 03:50 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 11:21 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 04:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 03:35 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I have Asperger's. I have poor facial recognition, so I have difficulty making friends. It is complicated, and you wouldn't understand it unless you had Asperger's or were trained in mental health.
Dale Carnegie's book has as a corollary that one can do things to avoid making enemies or looking like a horrible person.
Well, you're also a political hack according to your own words and view of yourself. I'll give you credit, you are more upfront and honest about yourself than the blues you're affiliated with here.
I admit to being a terribly-flawed person, above all else a pathetic waste of personal ability that I wish that I had put to better use. Maybe if I had known about Asperger's earlier I might have found appropriate uses of my intellectual talents than drifting along in jobs horribly suited to me. "But he has such good verbal and mathematical skills, acuity at spatial relationships, and an ear for music. So what could go wrong?"
It is easy to confuse me with a destructive sociopath or psychopath because I have weird expressions of feelings. At the worst I can seem insensitive, rebellious, and disloyal. This said, I need not feel the right thing to do the right thing. I know the rules, and I do not break them without some recognition that the rules deserve to be broken on occasion -- or that Asperger's acts up.
One of the rules is to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation. I had hoped that you would get the message on that.
If I lack empathy, I can at least act as if I have it.
Political hack? We all have agendas, do we not?
What are you doing posting here? If you're supposed to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation, you shouldn't be posting here. You should stick to the rules and find a friendly left wing website that bans conservatives the moment one shows up.
You should not be talking about profanity.
You put it in this thread with a vile insult that includes the infamous word containing an infamous F-bomb. Do
you realize what I mean when I say "redacted"?
As liberals we need to interact with conservatives and even help them, when necessary, to hone their arguments against fascists, the persistent or recurring menace to all who value personal freedom. Conservatism will be part of the political mainstream again as at the least a default against liberals going too far in promoting radical reforms that fail or in aligning with corrupt interests.
Donald Trump has hijacked American conservatism, attempting to attach it to his personal narcissism, to superstition, to bigotry, to cruelty, to economic elitism, and even to linguistic fraud out of
Nineteen Eighty.Four.
"The wrong shall fail, the Right prevail, with peace on earth, good will toward men" -- Longfellow.
(12-18-2018, 08:24 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Donald Trump has hijacked American conservatism, attempting to attach it to his personal narcissism, to superstition, to bigotry, to cruelty, to economic elitism, and even to linguistic fraud out of Nineteen Eighty.Four.
They chose an outsider. They selected someone who wasn't one of the Washington DC elites, with an agenda that backed the elites. This I have no trouble with. They just chose the wrong outsider. The reds seem to select people like Trump or Palin, trying for a Reagan like agenda. If only they could get rid of the elite corruption, they would like to see that agenda succeed. I don't think that it can. It is too much of the past. But I don't blame them for disliking the corrupting and elite influence of the Republican establishment. They also disliked Hillary as she was painted for years as a member of the Democratic establishment. The Democrats would do well selecting someone far away from that.
(12-18-2018, 08:24 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]"The wrong shall fail, the Right prevail, with peace on earth, good will toward men" -- Longfellow.
Not this crisis / awakening. (I am still inclined to see the next decisive wave played out in the voting booth and congress rather than with violence. The spiral of violence is going nowhere thus far.) Not with representative democracy. The representatives will cozy up to the elites. There will likely be at least one more go aground.
I might be surprised. When the culture remakes itself, it usually goes much farther than anyone expected during the prior awakening. But I don't really see a sign of that much of a makeover.
(12-18-2018, 08:51 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-18-2018, 08:24 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Donald Trump has hijacked American conservatism, attempting to attach it to his personal narcissism, to superstition, to bigotry, to cruelty, to economic elitism, and even to linguistic fraud out of Nineteen Eighty.Four.
They chose an outsider. They selected someone who wasn't one of the Washington DC elites, with an agenda that backed the elites. This I have no trouble with. They just chose the wrong outsider. The reds seem to select people like Trump or Palin, trying for a Reagan like agenda. If only they could get rid of the elite corruption, they would like to see that agenda succeed. I don't think that it can. It is too much of the past. But I don't blame them for disliking the corrupting and elite influence of the Republican establishment. They also disliked Hillary as she was painted for years as a member of the Democratic establishment. The Democrats would do well selecting someone far away from that.
American politics has shown an alternation between conservatism and liberalism, with extremism and incompetence faring badly in re-election bids and never entrenching power. Outsiders can shake things up, which may be necessary at times. The problem is that the outsiders often shake up the wrong things.
Millions of Americans have been hurting in part because an increasingly-diverse America has little use for them (white people in the Mountain and Deep South). Republicans have won them over and will likely keep them indefinitely. Trump knows how to appeal to ignorance and bigotry, and those are available for exploitation because ignorance and bigotry numb people to the poor results. Add to this, the reduction of the share of manufacturing has caused a decline in opportunity for people of all backgrounds of limited skill and learning. 'Red' America needs more manufacturing jobs, but Big Business is either turning to high-technology production or has turned to importing to get stuff to sell in box stores.
Quote: (12-18-2018, 08:24 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]"The wrong shall fail, the Right prevail, with peace on earth, good will toward men" -- Longfellow.
Not this crisis / awakening. (I am still inclined to see the next decisive wave played out in the voting booth and congress rather than with violence. The spiral of violence is going nowhere thus far.) Not with representative democracy. The representatives will cozy up to the elites. There will likely be at least one more go aground.
I might be surprised. When the culture remakes itself, it usually goes much farther than anyone expected during the prior awakening. But I don't really see a sign of that much of a makeover.
People expect a return to the
status quo ante after a Crisis but are surprised (usually to the better) when such does not happen. The solutions that a Crisis Era imposes require the abandonment of bad practices and bad culture, and the reform of existing institutions or the formation of new ones, just to get through. America in the late 1940s looked and behaved very differently from the America of the mid-1920s, and practically nobody looked fondly upon the mid-1920s except for recovering some lost youth. I have never known of many people, even those born in the 1880s and 1890s when they were plentiful, to look fondly upon the 1920s. I've seen nostalgia for the 1930s despite the economic hardships. I've seen people who never knew the time enjoy 1930s' mass culture in movies and music. 1920s? No.
We just don't see the makeover yet. This said, evil causes tend to implode. The "Thousand Year Reich" died in twelve years. The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere that was to extend from Alaska to Australia and cross the Pacific to encompass San Francisco as well as Shanghai got whittled away to Japan itself. The slave order of the Confederacy had to die.
But let us consider the American Revolution. Simply overthrowing George III was not enough to settle things. All of the colonies sought to expand with settlement in the West. They had conflicting ideas on how to divide the territories between the Appalachians and the Mississippi River in what had been weakly-held British territory that the British Crown found impossible to control and develop. Consider that the claim of Virginia to anything north of a line from its southern border to a diagonal headed northwestward from the point on the Ohio River at what was then and now the western border of Pennsylvania... and claims by New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. There would have been some nasty disputes. Statehood allowed the former colonies to get reasonable western boundaries while the federal government would guarantee rights for those states. Just imagine the squabbling that could have happened between powerhouse Virginia and weaker states had it not been for a compromise that said that the Northwest Territory would not achieve statehood until such was ready. A national government also allowed states to separate from states, such as Vermont from New York, with new states (Vermont, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio) forming as equals to the other states. Nobody could have foreseen such while the war was going on between Britain and the Colonies even if it all seems obvious now.
I have no idea what the workable compromises will be this time.
(12-18-2018, 08:24 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]You should not be talking about profanity. You put it in this thread with a vile insult that includes the infamous word containing an infamous F-bomb. Do you realize what I mean when I say "redacted"?
As liberals we need to interact with conservatives and even help them, when necessary, to hone their arguments against fascists, the persistent or recurring menace to all who value personal freedom. Conservatism will be part of the political mainstream again as at the least a default against liberals going too far in promoting radical reforms that fail or in aligning with corrupt interests.
Donald Trump has hijacked American conservatism, attempting to attach it to his personal narcissism, to superstition, to bigotry, to cruelty, to economic elitism, and even to linguistic fraud out of Nineteen Eighty.Four.
"The wrong shall fail, the Right prevail, with peace on earth, good will toward men" -- Longfellow.
Yes, I know what you mean by "redacted". As I recall, we've been down this path before. Well, the moderator has been informed of a similar situation that occurred in the past and the outcome of that situation as well.
Here's the deal, I don't have Asperger's. I'm not a trained professional who treats or exclusively deals with those who have Asperger's and I'm not parent of someone has it either. According to the professionals and the rules your supposed to follow and comply with, you should not be participating in this kind of environment. So, what do we do about you and you're special needs and the special rules associated with you and the expectation you're placing on me that relate to you and the threat you're proposing to me now as well. I don't know, I guess I'm going have to get our moderator involved and see what he thinks about this situation and what he is going to do about it.
Now, I'm not sure if a long time pot smoker is quite as sharp as me intellectually or as familiar with laws as me but he better be because he is liable for your well being and accountable to me as a US citizen and the laws of our nation and he may end up on a hot seat of a civil law suit that's filed over this issue. You're pretty clever and smart but you have a weakness that an equally clever and smart person like me doesn't have working against him. Do you really want to go there with me again? I eliminated your entire system at the Old 4T with the help of a few American minded Gen Xr's.
You are the representative of conservatives here right now, Classic Xer. You are courageous to post in this den of liberals, but you would do well to represent your side well.
(12-18-2018, 08:51 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]They chose an outsider. They selected someone who wasn't one of the Washington DC elites, with an agenda that backed the elites. This I have no trouble with. They just chose the wrong outsider. The reds seem to select people like Trump or Palin, trying for a Reagan like agenda. If only they could get rid of the elite corruption, they would like to see that agenda succeed. I don't think that it can. It is too much of the past. But I don't blame them for disliking the corrupting and elite influence of the Republican establishment. They also disliked Hillary as she was painted for years as a member of the Democratic establishment. The Democrats would do well selecting someone far away from that.
They chose a complete political outsider. They selected someone who wasn't affiliated with politics who had some experience with politics. Palin was a politician and she had some political experience and she successfully governed a small tightly knit American state. Trump was a businessman with business experience who ran a multi billion dollar company that did business all over the world who had experience with working with politicians and getting support from politicians. Reagan made an attempt and got beat the first time. America suffered/struggled/endured through the next four years with wishy washy Carter at the helm. The rest is history as far as Reagan. Well, the Kennedy Democrats decided that it was time for a change and time to get the American train back on track which upset the old school tax and spend LBJ/FDR Democrats.
Are there problems when a complete political outsider actually wins a national election on their first attempt with a major upset ? Oh yeah, there are problems as we've seen with his Administration and the weeding out process that's been going on as he's learning the political aspects and sifting through and sorting out people and replacing the ham shack group of politicians and private citizens that he entered office with more committed people or competent people. I kind of expected that going in. So, I'm not that surprised or upset by seeing it going on.
(12-18-2018, 04:32 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]You are the representative of conservatives here right now, Classic Xer. You are courageous to post in this den of liberals, but you would do well to represent your side well.
You represent blue opinion here. Blue opinions of conservatives are always bad or negative. I don't take my ques from blues. How many Americans share your opinions? American opinion is primarily based on results. What's the result of saying no to a border wall and added security that would impede and stem the flow of illegal immigrants who are entering OUR country? Do you have to be a rocket scientist to read and answer that simple question? NO YOU DON'T AND ANYONE THINKS WE DO IS A FOOL. I don't care what happens to Pelosi, I don't care if she limps into office as a tarnished leader or never see's a position of power again. I don't care about the group of partisan blue idiots that I've been seeing a lot on CNN that she wants to appoint to positions of power either, I don't care if they squeal and whine on CNN the Senate Republicans for a couple of years or if they're eliminated by a Midwestern Democrat and their choices for those positions. I expect to see them on American news channel where the independents go to get their news and the Republican voters go to watch their shows. The blues seem so incapable of seeing things that I'm capable of seeing, Oh well, that's your/a blue problem not mine.
(12-18-2018, 06:12 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-18-2018, 03:50 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 11:21 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]If I lack empathy, I can at least act as if I have it.
Political hack? We all have agendas, do we not?
What are you doing posting here? If you're supposed to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation, you shouldn't be posting here. You should stick to the rules and find a friendly left wing website that bans conservatives the moment one shows up.
This site should be and is politically neutral, but limited in allowing things like insults and obscenity. You have it backwards.
Other sites can be different.
This site has an obvious political slant, an obvious three to one slant. You're a partisan blue. I'm not a partisan red. I'm a partisan American who doesn't view the blues as being all that American these days.
How about another blue cue? (queue)? If the flow of illegals were to be reduced any more than it was already before Trump's slogans appealing to fear and prejudice (which works on you), it would be a trickle. Come on dude, you like trickles! Your whole economic platform is based on the expectation of trickles! Trickle down riches from the leftovers that the rich pigs throw down from atop their skyscrapers to you poor guys out in the boonies. Well, drink up! Drink in the trickle of illegals too. The wall will only add to the debt, and that might dry up your trickle!
"This site has an obvious political slant, an obvious three to one slant. You're a partisan blue. I'm not a partisan red. I'm a partisan American who doesn't view the blues as being all that American these days."
But that's a red point view. My cue!
(12-18-2018, 05:17 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-18-2018, 08:51 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]They chose an outsider. They selected someone who wasn't one of the Washington DC elites, with an agenda that backed the elites. This I have no trouble with. They just chose the wrong outsider. The reds seem to select people like Trump or Palin, trying for a Reagan like agenda. If only they could get rid of the elite corruption, they would like to see that agenda succeed. I don't think that it can. It is too much of the past. But I don't blame them for disliking the corrupting and elite influence of the Republican establishment. They also disliked Hillary as she was painted for years as a member of the Democratic establishment. The Democrats would do well selecting someone far away from that.
They chose a complete political outsider. They selected someone who wasn't affiliated with politics who had some experience with politics. Palin was a politician and she had some political experience and she successfully governed a small tightly knit American state. Trump was a businessman with business experience who ran a multi billion dollar company that did business all over the world who had experience with working with politicians and getting support from politicians. Reagan made an attempt and got beat the first time. America suffered/struggled/endured through the next four years with wishy washy Carter at the helm. The rest is history as far as Reagan. Well, the Kennedy Democrats decided that it was time for a change and time to get the American train back on track which upset the old school tax and spend LBJ/FDR Democrats.
Are there problems when a complete political outsider actually wins a national election on their first attempt with a major upset ? Oh yeah, there are problems as we've seen with his Administration and the weeding out process that's been going on as he's learning the political aspects and sifting through and sorting out people and replacing the ham shack group of politicians and private citizens that he entered office with more committed people or competent people. I kind of expected that going in. So, I'm not that surprised or upset by seeing it going on.
But as you saw with the stats we posted, the Republican administrations of Nixon, Reagan and W. Bush included almost all those adminstration people who were indicted, arrested or jailed since the sixties. The Democratic administrations, and the more honest HW Bush and Ford ones, had virtually none. No such "weeding" needed! Already the "YOU'RE FIRED" Trump administration is swiftly joining the ranks of the corrupt administrations of Nixon, Reagan and W. Bush.
(12-18-2018, 07:11 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]How about another blue cue? (queue)? If the flow of illegals were to be reduced any more than it was already before Trump's slogans appealing to fear and prejudice (which works on you), it would be a trickle. Come on dude, you like trickles! Your whole economic platform is based on the expectation of trickles! Trickle down riches from the leftovers that the rich pigs throw down from atop their skyscrapers to you poor guys out in the boonies. Well, drink up! Drink in the trickle of illegals too. The wall will only add to the debt, and that might dry up your trickle!
"This site has an obvious political slant, an obvious three to one slant. You're a partisan blue. I'm not a partisan red. I'm a partisan American who doesn't view the blues as being all that American these days."
But that's a red point view. My cue!
Actually, the fear and prejudice that blues associate and claim to be those of reds are actually expressions of blue belief and opinion and accusations that are commonly used and seen written in post by blues here. If you don't believe me, read your posts. I don't write your posts. As far as the impacts, I'd say you're seeing and feeling it because it worked as intended. I assume most illegals have flocked to sanctuary cities and states. I assume some may have trickled out. I assume there will more organized efforts like the large caravans to try and get as many in before the laws change and the border becomes more secured.
(12-18-2018, 07:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]This site has an obvious political slant, an obvious three to one slant. You're a partisan blue. I'm not a partisan red. I'm a partisan American who doesn't view the blues as being all that American these days.
I see this site and the old site, like America as a whole, as on a see saw. The red and blue perspectives have each had their innings. What they have not enjoyed is a dominance, a regeneracy, a taking of so much power that the see saw stops for a time. As recently as September 11 and the immediate aftermath of the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions, the red point of view was dominant. It showed in the postings of the old site, where Bush 43 was seriously proposed as a grey champion.
That was then. This is now.
I don't see any red poster willing to defend the Washington Establishments, those aspects of the Republican Party that are entwined with corporate and elite interests. I also see few red posters willing to defend the corrupt and narcissistic Trump. There is a partisan disconnect between the blues who see corruption that may not be there, and reds that are willing to ignore or pretend not to see the corruption that is there. Thus, a lot of posters went away rather than try to defend the indefensible.
Now there is much honorable in the red mindset. The Washington Insiders are not honorable, those people who have been corrupted by corporate and elite interests. The deplorables (the KKK, the Neo Nazis, the Southern Strategy voters) are not honorable. The Evangelicals who would impose their religious beliefs on all America, red and blue, are not honorable. That leaves, and partisan blue extremists might disagree, much that is honorable and true in the red mindset, even if I disagree with much of it.
Now what issues are important to you personally, that you are willing to project on an immovable core of "Americans". I do not see immovable. I see a see saw. I lean blue. You lean red. But what issues are so important to you as to be dominant and immovable? I don't see you as an insider, deplorable or Evangelical. You haven't seem to have made those arguments, but some reds are too ashamed of their beliefs to argue for them. That leaves much else which a blue candidate for president will have to deal with. What beliefs does someone have to have to count as one of your 'Americans'?
And I still disagree with your trying to preempt the word. There are many elements of blue thought which have echoed through the history of American culture.
(12-18-2018, 06:01 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]No, you are lying again. I will report violations of rules, regardless of the political affiliation of the violator, and regardless of whether the violation targets me. You are only making me inclined to be more persistent about it to be uniform. This site should be about politics and history, not about vendettas. The rules should be and as far as I know do apply to all equally.
If I had a personal vendetta, you're life here would be miserable because I would be a full time poster like Eric coming at you viciously like Devils Advocate. He had a vendetta. Me, I viewed it more as business and I approached it that way. At what point do come to gripes with reality and give up the fight/dream? The blue flag alone isn't powerful enough to replace our flag.
I watched a show the other evening on HBO about the financial crisis. I think Bush summed it up pretty well, as the nation stood on the brink of the next Great Depression, he had a choice between Hoover or Roosevelt, he chose Roosevelt. The guy wasn't that stupid after all. If you have HBO, you should watch it. I think you'd learn why things haven't turned out as planned and off as far as following to script.
(12-18-2018, 07:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-18-2018, 06:12 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-18-2018, 03:50 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 11:21 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]If I lack empathy, I can at least act as if I have it.
Political hack? We all have agendas, do we not?
What are you doing posting here? If you're supposed to avoid angry expressions of profanity or personal degradation, you shouldn't be posting here. You should stick to the rules and find a friendly left wing website that bans conservatives the moment one shows up.
This site should be and is politically neutral, but limited in allowing things like insults and obscenity. You have it backwards.
Other sites can be different.
This site has an obvious political slant, an obvious three to one slant. You're a partisan blue. I'm not a partisan red. I'm a partisan American who doesn't view the blues as being all that American these days.
The problem is that American conservatives gave in to the idea that the only moral virtue is profit and what one can do with it. Conservatives used to believe that people who didn't own the assets needed a stake in the economic order. The economic elites largely now want complete servility by the masses and unconstrained indulgence for elites. They want the common man to pay as much as possible for as tawdry life as is available that results from being overworked and underpaid. Those elites might not be capitalists; they might be bureaucratic elites in Big Business or in the government or non-profit entities. Even if capitalists, they are strictly owners of income streams from easy-to-operate enterprises. I see them delighted to drive living conditions to what they were in the early-capitalist age, the age in which Karl Marx drew his conclusions on how capitalist societies would operate.
The political slant seems to represent a reality among educated people, and those people realize either that the order that the economic elites want is unconscionable even if they fare well for now -- and among the well-educated people who have been cast to the economic margin, they recognize that the system may never work for them.
We must all recognize that a forum such as this itself discriminates against the ignorant and ill-educated. So does reality!