(09-17-2018, 12:00 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (09-15-2018, 09:31 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-15-2018, 04:26 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ] (09-14-2018, 10:29 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ] (09-14-2018, 08:50 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]You didn't see Barack resort to using the race card against the Clinton's and their supporters during the 2008 primary. Yes, capitalism can be cruel but socialism has shown us that it can be cruel too. Yes, some parts of America are racist. What you seem to understand is some of those parts are within blue America and the racists aren't the white one's the blues seem to be so worried about and always railing about as if there's 63 million of them or something stupid like that and so forth. Sounds like a good place for a mindless liberal like Eric to end up or a clueless liberal like you or Bob to wake up one morning find themselves stuck in the middle of for an extended period of time or a bunch of (profanity redacted) Democrats find themselves dealing a nasty crisis that's of their own creation that's largely occurring within blue territories.
Utterly incoherent. Take a break!
This seems to be a typical response that's coming from the mouth of a useful idiot.
I too needed the translation. I didn't bother to make sense of it. The incoherence before translation may be part of the reason for the lack of response, but I don't see much response since.
He got the jest of it. Blues are as bigoted as the reds that blues claim to be bigots these days. Blues probably represent/ attract more racist people with their anti-white rhetoric and their tolerance for racist rhetoric spewing from the mouths of leaders and supporters directly who are now directly associated with them these day than the reds do these days as well. Blues are always worried about the whites or blaming the whites or calling them racists without putting much or any thought into other reasons and motives. I don't know why the blues are so worried about the whites when the majority of them have already shown you that they don't have much interest in the blues. The blues issues as they relate to the needs and expectations associated with all their minority interest groups or the blue concerns related to the issue of inadequate funding associated with their long standing programs, newer programs added since the 60's, global programs and so forth.
Anti-white? White people are still the majority, and they have the majority of the land and the financial assets. So most non-whites must be careful about what they say if they want to hold a job. And let me tell you that non-whites are willing to have white spouses or in-laws.
The problem isn't race; it is social class, with class privilege as the cause of difference of most economic results. A mediocrity who owns some apartment blocks might make far more money than the well-educated, creative people who live therein.
Quote:Like I've eluded to many times, as the Democratic era of big government draws closer to it's eventual end and the realities of the extent of financial obligations and the eventual impacts of the costs associated with the debt begin to hit Americans, blue America is probably the place you want to be living or be around at the time. I'm sorry my writing skills ain't the greatest and you have trouble reading/following my written posts. It would sure be easier if we were talking. BTW, the chances of that occurring is none. I have no interest in speaking with liberals at all. From what I've learned speaking to them, the liberals next door ain't much better or much smarter or much different than the liberals here.
No, one era transforms into another. One set of priorities replaces another, which explains why a group such as the NAACP is still very much in existence. Founded on the one hundredth birthday of Abraham Lincoln (February 12, 1909), it obviously can't have exactly the same political and economic concerns that it had then. It is going strong.
I can assure you of this: people are not liberals because they are smarter. I can also tell you that many conservatives are beginning to find President Trump extremely objectionable.
Quote:Also, Trump appeals to working class voters like a portion of my friends who used to automatically vote Democratic in the past. I'm not a working class voter. I'm a business minded voter. I'm a libertarian minded voter. I'm an American minded voter. This should give you a clue about my values. The positions I've taken against liberals, the views I have shown you and the liberals I've taken a hard line and eventually eliminated should have given you a clue about my virtues as a person. Basically, if you're a crap human, you shouldn't expect to be treated like a decent person. I'm not bound to blue rules that largely pertain to blue social policy or proper blue edicate like you preach but have failed to uphold/ adhere to many times.
Trump has given a huge tax cut to the economic elites and since imposed a tariff, basically a sales tax upon imported goods or imported components of goods supposedly made here. Anyone not filthy rich who voted for Trump has been had. (It is the same with people who saw through him and voted for Hillary Clinton, but I failed to realize how bad he would be.
If we had gotten another Ronald Reagan we would be far better off. As a start, nobody ever had any doubt of the loyalty of President Reagan when he was meeting with Soviet leadership. Reagan never disparaged our democratic allies in favor of despots. Reagan could back down after a rhetorical goof, unlike Trump, who faults the character of people who disagree with him. Reagan could say a kind word utterly alien to Trump's MO.
Donald Trump shows beyond any doubt that with great wealth or institutional power, one can be a thoroughly awful person and be admired and obeyed out of fear. He is a pathological liar, as says Jay Sekulow, legal sidekick of the cranky Pat Robertson (
The 700 Club, which I can't stand to watch for long).
Contrast Obama: what he said checked against fact. Practically all accounts suggest that he is a decent person in treating subordinates at all levels. He might not have been the dream choice for dealing with terrorists until you realize that he paid attention to military intelligence to the extent that he could commission the demise of Osama bin Laden. Terrorism against the United States suddenly became a very bad idea.
Quote:Like you, I'm not all that impacted by some factory closing down and moving over seas or shrinking job markets for those want to be and want to remain working class people because you and others with higher income and higher paying jobs are my primary customers and the primary people who live in our areas. I do business in the metro area. I do business with lawyers, doctors, engineers, entrepreneurs, tradesmen, business people of all types, small/mid size business owners and so forth. I used to have Democratic supporters attacking me and blaming me for all the middle class job losses because I voted Republican during the Bush years. Sean Love comes to mind. At the time, I countered the attacks with a reminder that Democrats are the ones who are supposed to be the ones looking out for the interests of Democratic working class voters. At the time, I viewed that as more of a Democratic issue than a Republican issue. Evidently, the public sector working class voters must have grown enough to replace them as far as political importance and their financial interests and their future interests are concerned or something.
Guess what: I am broke. I got my debit card turned down for gasoline. I am using SNAP, and I am getting treatment for a very bad back. I may be culturally middle-class or even upper-middle class, but money is everything in America even in the fairer times. If I can get my back treated well, maybe I can get a warehouse job that pays far better than substitute school teaching.
My character is not going to turn on a dime at my age.