The Partisan Divide on Issues

[Classic-Xer]

(09-03-2020, 02:57 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-03-2020, 01:36 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Evidently, race still matters more and racism is still a bigger concern and a major driving force on Earth 1 than Earth 2. I think Biden summed up the situation on Earth 1 pretty good when he told a black man that he would no longer be viewed as a black man if he supported the President of Earth 2 and basically loose entitlements and special protections related to his race if he were to side or be forced to pack up and move to Earth 2 where no racial identities or racial protections exist because Earth 2 is exclusively American these days. So, how much money are your political and economic elites paying, promising to pay violent groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter to leave Cape Cod and Martha's Vineyard and Manhattan alone for now these days? Any idea? I see all kinds of foolish legislation that would either hamper, restrict and completely eliminate capabilities of law enforcement. I'm going to ask you a question, do you believe that America wouldn't unite, adjust the rules (lower its standards enough and remove legal protection) for American society to directly engage with criminals and completely crush an old French or old Russian like style revolt. If you do, you should pay more attention and become more familiar with American history and the values that the bulk of Americans still hold dear and will slaughter millions of left wingers to pass them on to the American generations of the next century. I hope the Democratic party is able to pay the bills for all the damage that we are seeing in America now and all the American business's that are being destroyed now and all the costs associated with their war with the people of the United States when this war is over?

There were protests in places like Boston and New York City.  They just did not go as violent.  The areas are too blue.  I think there were too many people involved to bribe without the bribes being leaked to the press.  Thus, it was more that there was no red rural area around.  The racist violent police murdering folks and the Trump faction people stirring up violence are just found more out in the mid west and west, near the red rural areas.  That is a far larger factor than any imaginary bribes that you make up.  Bribes between elites and politicians?  Sure.  I believe that.  There are a smaller number of people involved.  Bribing a group like the Boogaloo Bois?  Unlikely.

I am not worried about violent revolts as long as one major party is listening.  If the government does not listen to the people, sure.  I still have a feeling that the Chinese Communist Party and places like Belarus are going to lose it eventually, but don’t see it as immanent.  The spirals of rhetoric and violence are there, but not escalating that strongly yet.  In America, with one party listening to the people rather than trying to use violence to maintain the racist status quo, there is much more hope of a non violent solution.

The red violence in the rural areas?  We will deal with it in time.

Again, Antifa has served it’s purpose.  The were anti fascists, the natural opposition to the KKK and Neo Nazi.  Once Black Lives Matter took off, Antifa’s mission was accomplished.  The KKK and Neo Nazi went poof.  I am aware that the motives of the Boogaloo Bois are being shifted in the red propaganda to Antifa.  I am also aware that some people call the Boogaloo Bois a right wing group, though they are so far right to stand for entirely different ideals than either the red or blue factions.  But really, they are frustrated by the racist violent police murders and lately by the Trump crowd.  If the reds are looking for violence, the Bois will use them, the people be damned.  Again, they should be well targeted by the good cops and renounced as Biden has done all violent groups.

On Earth One, one major problem is that some reds want to practice racism.  There is an opposition to the racists, not a war like there is on Earth Two.  Mind you, I am talking real racism.  I am talking about people wanting to see power distributed more or less as the population indicates, not reserving powerful jobs to white males.  Redefinition and double speak is not any sort of answer.

Antifa is still serving it's purpose and causing all kinds of trouble and even forced the Democratic mayor of Portland to leave his home (condo located inside the xity) the other night. It's a good thing he's privileged and has another home to flee to and reside in these days. Evidently, the governor of Oregon doesn't view that as a big deal. I mean lives in a state mansion located in Salem with a detachment of state police and private security and the head of the Oregon National on speed dial. I wonder if the head of the national guard is an American believer (Trump supporter) or as warped and out of touch as him? I view it as typical for a liberal Democrat or Liberal puppet myself. 

Also, the Antifa guy with a BLM tattoo on his neck who murdered the so called evil right winger in cold blood is out on bail thanks to Liberal donations to create a Liberal slush fund to pay the bail of rioters who are caught breaking the law and he's doing an interview on Vice (HBO documentary series) which you may want to watch to learn what one of your sides heroes has to say about murdering one of ours. Oh, I sure justice will be served and someone will find that piece of shit hero yours floating in some river or hopefully his head on a spike in front of some Democrats home or office or some rich Democratic supporters home or office. Fair is fair. Aren't you the one that's telling me words don't mean what they mean in the dictionary and the one flip flopping between me and the other liberal supporters. Sooner or later, the reddish Democrats are going to be forced to choose the side that more closely represents their beliefs and values these day.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-04-2020, 01:52 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Antifa is still serving it's purpose and causing all kinds of trouble and even forced the Democratic mayor of Portland to leave his home (condo located inside the xity) the other night. It's a good thing he's privileged and has another home to flee to and reside in these days. Evidently, the governor of Oregon doesn't view that as a big deal. I mean lives in a state mansion located in Salem with a detachment of state police and private security and the head of the Oregon National on speed dial. I wonder if the head of the national guard is an American believer (Trump supporter) or as warped and out of touch as him? I view it as typical for a liberal Democrat or Liberal puppet myself. 

Also, the Antifa guy with a BLM tattoo on his neck who murdered the so called evil right winger in cold blood is out on bail thanks to Liberal donations to create a Liberal slush fund to pay the bail of rioters who are caught breaking the law and he's  doing an interview on Vice (HBO documentary series) which you may want to watch to learn what one of your sides heroes has to say about murdering one of ours. Oh, I sure justice will be served and someone will find that piece of shit hero  yours floating in some river or hopefully  his head on a spike in front of some Democrats home or office or some rich Democratic supporters home or office. Fair is fair. Aren't you the one that's telling me words don't mean what they mean in the dictionary and the one flip flopping between me and the other liberal supporters. Sooner or later, the reddish Democrats are going to be forced to choose the side that more closely represents their beliefs and values these day.

I was wondering where you get your group affiliation information?  Last I knew, Antifa didn't issue official ID cards or that they would be hard to forge.  I go by motivation.  The Antifa people are against the KKK and Neo Nazi.  The Boogaloo Bois are trying to start violence, their boogaloo.  For some reason the red media likes to play games with affiliations and group membership.  Where did you get you affiliation from?

Edit:  Just stumbled on an interview as reported by CNN.  Apparently this guy is very much an Antifa sympathizer, but not a member of any organized Antifa group.  He supposedly answered violence with violence, responding to a knife wielding Trump follower attacking a friend.  Enough blame to go around?

[Classic-Xer]

(09-03-2020, 02:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: And I hope some people see through the obvious racial bias of folks like you Classic Xer who have no concern over the USA turning into a police state, especially in black neighborhoods, but focus all your concern on keeping the police trained for violence and permitted to commit crimes themselves, and on making false accusations about those who are NOT committing or paying for the crimes you are allegedly concerned about. If you don't want businesses damaged in some of these blue cities you claim to so love, then support keeping the police well-behaved.

You must have missed my lack of concern about where you live turning into a police state because that's what you've been voting for, allowing and supporting for years. I hope posters are also able to read  "especially in black neighborhoods" and associate it with racial bias and understand/identify who wrote it and which side he's on. As I read further, I ask myself a question "since when have the crooks and criminals become more valuable/important than police and law enforcement and why is that?" I assume it has something to do with Democratic politics and its need for political alliances with unsavory groups of voters to keep itself in power.

[Classic-Xer]

(09-04-2020, 03:00 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 01:52 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Antifa is still serving it's purpose and causing all kinds of trouble and even forced the Democratic mayor of Portland to leave his home (condo located inside the xity) the other night. It's a good thing he's privileged and has another home to flee to and reside in these days. Evidently, the governor of Oregon doesn't view that as a big deal. I mean lives in a state mansion located in Salem with a detachment of state police and private security and the head of the Oregon National on speed dial. I wonder if the head of the national guard is an American believer (Trump supporter) or as warped and out of touch as him? I view it as typical for a liberal Democrat or Liberal puppet myself. 

Also, the Antifa guy with a BLM tattoo on his neck who murdered the so called evil right winger in cold blood is out on bail thanks to Liberal donations to create a Liberal slush fund to pay the bail of rioters who are caught breaking the law and he's  doing an interview on Vice (HBO documentary series) which you may want to watch to learn what one of your sides heroes has to say about murdering one of ours. Oh, I sure justice will be served and someone will find that piece of shit hero  yours floating in some river or hopefully  his head on a spike in front of some Democrats home or office or some rich Democratic supporters home or office. Fair is fair. Aren't you the one that's telling me words don't mean what they mean in the dictionary and the one flip flopping between me and the other liberal supporters. Sooner or later, the reddish Democrats are going to be forced to choose the side that more closely represents their beliefs and values these day.

I was wondering where you get your group affiliation information?  Last I knew, Antifa didn't issue official ID cards or that they would be hard to forge.  I go by motivation.  The Antifa people are against the KKK and Neo Nazi.  The Boogaloo Bois are trying to start violence, their boogaloo.  For some reason the red media likes to play games with affiliations and group membership.  Where did you get you affiliation from?

Edit:  Just stumbled on an interview as reported by CNN.  Apparently this guy is very much an Antifa sympathizer, but not a member of any organized Antifa group.  He supposedly answered violence with violence, responding to a knife wielding Trump follower attacking a friend.  Enough blame to go around?

I heard the other side from one of his friends who was next to him at the time he was shot. According to him, they were being followed by a group of them and when they turned around the guy shot his friend and none of them were armed. Also, the guy was telling people before that he wanted to shoot a Trump supporter. Well, you got what he wanted and I'm sure he'll get what he deserves one way or another. Fire is fair and when the Liberal justice fails which it's in the process of failing now then eye for an eye becomes the law until American justice is reestablished. Are the law enforcement people they're fighting with KKK and Neo Nazi's? Personally, I think they're trying to take over a city and prove at point to whoever cares or pays them by wearing down a local police force that's restricted from brandishing and using their guns. Whoever they are, whatever their motivation be it good or bad, they're making the entire Democratic party/leadership look bad and look like fools in front of Americans who don't live in a bubble. Hint...You can't with die hard Democratic - Progressive voters alone.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-04-2020, 04:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Are the law enforcement people they're fighting with KKK and Neo Nazi's? Personally, I think they're trying to take over a city and prove at point to whoever cares or pays by wearing down a local police force that's restricted from brandishing and using their guns. Whoever they are, whatever their motivation be it good or bad, they're making the entire Democratic party look powerless and bad in front of Americans who don't live in a bubble. Hint...You can't with die hard Democratic - Progressive voters alone.

That’s exactly why I don’t think they are acting with Antifa motivation.  Apparently, some of the anti fascist people have decided that some Trump supporters are as fascist as the KKK and Neo Nazi, and have began responding to violence with violence.  I just think if you are going to use the self defense defense, you would be better off sticking around for the police to get there.  This guy seemed unsure of his actions enough to flee.  

The red rural militias that have recently started attacking the Black Lives Matter people believe black lives do not matter, and wish racist policy to continue.  Some on the blue side will meet violence with violence if they have to.  I am dubious about non lethal stuff like fireworks or paint ball guns which are attempts to escalate.  I believe both factions have a right to use weapons to protect themselves, their family, their neighbors, to defend their community and enforce the law.  That’s how the founding fathers intended things to work.  But when you are brandishing weapons to make a political point or leaving your home areas to instigate things with others on their home ground, you have crossed a line.  If in such cases if you draw a weapon you had best clearly not be the instigator.  There are certainly those ready to respond to violence with violence, to lethal weapons with a more lethal weapon.

Those you refer to as Americans are within a bubble.  The progressive time ended with the Southern Strategy.  There were more people with racists motives wanting to hurt the workers than there were workers living on the poverty line.  Not sure that is true anymore.  Old values disappear.  We’ll see.

[Eric the Green]

(09-04-2020, 12:16 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-03-2020, 11:53 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-03-2020, 12:59 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-02-2020, 11:58 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: To be ruled by liberal elites would be to ruled by people who value fairness, democracy and equal opportunity for all. That's a lot better than your supposed American loop.

What amazes me is there are so many people online who live within your bubble. You are tools of the elites that value unfairness, authority and elitism.

You won't find many Americans who live in a bubble these days.

You are in a bubble.

You're right in a way. I'm in your bubble posting stuff mainly related to people outside your bubble.

We've been trying to prick your bubble. Fun I guess, but today's tribal bubbles are pretty durable.

[Eric the Green]

(09-04-2020, 03:37 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-03-2020, 02:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: And I hope some people see through the obvious racial bias of folks like you Classic Xer who have no concern over the USA turning into a police state, especially in black neighborhoods, but focus all your concern on keeping the police trained for violence and permitted to commit crimes themselves, and on making false accusations about those who are NOT committing or paying for the crimes you are allegedly concerned about. If you don't want businesses damaged in some of these blue cities you claim to so love, then support keeping the police well-behaved.

You must have missed my lack of concern about where you live turning into a police state because that's what you've been voting for, allowing and supporting for years. I hope posters are also able to read  "especially in black neighborhoods" and associate it with racial bias and understand/identify who wrote it and which side he's on. As I read further, I ask myself a question "since when have the crooks and criminals become more valuable/important than police and law enforcement and why is that?" I assume it has something to do with Democratic politics and its need for political alliances with unsavory groups of voters to keep itself in power.

It seems we live in a police state pretty much wherever we live. Progressives keep trying to put restraints on police, but the police culture seems to cross all boundaries and city lines. The BLM movement may bring change to some blue cities. It is the only thing that will.

Democrats don't make alliances with unsavory groups, and Democrats in cities and Biden at the national level have and would support law enforcement. The best support now is to make reforms so police don't kill innocent people. Law enforcement does not need to be unjust, racist and/or illegal to carry out its work.

There is no doubt, unless you live in a bubble, that the main problem with police misconduct today happens in black neighborhoods. Or, what planet did you say you live on, now?

[Eric the Green]

(09-04-2020, 12:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-03-2020, 02:59 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We on the blue side disagree with you about what are the important things. We think democracy, the environment, and equal opportunity for all are the important things. You think vigilantism, phony use of symbols, Reaganomics bullshit and xenophobia are the important things. I don't.

If you valued democracy, you wouldn't be placing the integrity of it at risk by purchasing and trading for votes and supporting the aristocratic/plutocratic system that you have either.

That's an amazing bit of projection there. Facts don't matter to your side. Just attribute your own faults to the other guys, and broadcast it on Fox, and then Biden's lead goes down in Florida.

The aristocratic/plutonic system that you have was voted in, created entirely with Republican votes over the last 40 or 50 years, and of course its roots go back into the 19th century.

Quote: You'd be leaving the state like everyone else who can see the writing on the wall who know they've been removed/excluded from the political process and know they can't stop what they see coming by voting. You don't represent equal opportunity for all.  You represent equal outcomes for most, limited opportunity based on identity and belief and mainly race driven politics. America represents equal opportunity for all, freedom for all, blind justice and peace through strength vs weakness. Like I said, you better find a place to hide when America erupts and the majority want to see the Democrats punished. We're a couple months away from fate determining courses and history hasn't been kind to the groups on the wrong side of fate.

Your kind of America represents the power of the already strong over the currently weak. Liberty and justice for the white, rich and powerful only.

Quote:I think the American flag is important. I think the American way of life is important. I think the American Constitution is important. I think American jobs are important. I think American borders are important. I think American business is important. I think American law enforcement is important. I think the American Rule Of Law is important. Now, if you want to cling to an old tree that's past its prime and is going to die anyway because nothing that lives lives forever. Nature's cruel.

Most of those things have some importance. But Labor is important too, and good government. And people are important, whether they are white Americans or not. You don't think so. The Earth environment is important, and you approve of its total destruction, because you support the destroyers. You support Trump, so you do not think the rule of law is important at all. You support people voting illegally, because that is what Trump supports. Business is fine, but we need more socialism, and more green politics, and we need more democracy. You only are interested in the power of the white and rich. That's the tree that needs to die, and I hope it does. All you care about are your own money, guns, the border, and flags. These are relatively unimportant.

[Classic-Xer]

(09-04-2020, 11:28 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 03:37 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-03-2020, 02:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: And I hope some people see through the obvious racial bias of folks like you Classic Xer who have no concern over the USA turning into a police state, especially in black neighborhoods, but focus all your concern on keeping the police trained for violence and permitted to commit crimes themselves, and on making false accusations about those who are NOT committing or paying for the crimes you are allegedly concerned about. If you don't want businesses damaged in some of these blue cities you claim to so love, then support keeping the police well-behaved.

You must have missed my lack of concern about where you live turning into a police state because that's what you've been voting for, allowing and supporting for years. I hope posters are also able to read  "especially in black neighborhoods" and associate it with racial bias and understand/identify who wrote it and which side he's on. As I read further, I ask myself a question "since when have the crooks and criminals become more valuable/important than police and law enforcement and why is that?" I assume it has something to do with Democratic politics and its need for political alliances with unsavory groups of voters to keep itself in power.

It seems we live in a police state pretty much wherever we live. Progressives keep trying to put restraints on police, but the police culture seems to cross all boundaries and city lines. The BLM movement may bring change to some blue cities. It is the only thing that will.

Democrats don't make alliances with unsavory groups, and Democrats in cities and Biden at the national level have and would support law enforcement. The best support now is to make reforms so police don't kill innocent people. Law enforcement does not need to be unjust, racist and/or illegal to carry out its work.

There is no doubt, unless you live in a bubble, that the main problem with police misconduct today happens in black neighborhoods. Or, what planet did you say you live on, now?

Well, that's the main problem that we get to see and hear the most about the days. Outside the Progressive bubble, the Americans understand that cops representing all races and crooks/ criminals of all races have violent run ins /dangerous situations that occur and result in the death of both of them and they also understand that some accidents/improper use of force will occur with the police from time to time as well.

[Bob Butler 54]

CNN has militia member felons proceeding with weapons towards Kenosha and Portland.  I have in the past assumed most rural militias were concerned more with the 2nd Amendment and their own possession of weapons than other issues, and thus that they would remain inactive until blues tried to violate the constitution.  At this point some militias are clearly involved in illegal and violent support of Trump, ready to move out of their home territory and instigate violence without respecting the law.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-04-2020, 02:05 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Well, that's the main problem that we get to see and hear the most about the days. Outside the Progressive bubble, the Americans understand that cops representing all races and crooks/ criminals of all races have violent run ins /dangerous situations that occur and result in the death of both of them and they also understand that some accidents/improper use of force  will occur with the police from time to time as well.

The thing with fourth turnings, though, is that past injustices will no longer be tolerated.  Those that have long thought taxation without representation, slavery, dictators, were all to be tolerated, find the values have suddenly shifted, that what was once traditional are moved to the past.  

Many reds seem to presume violent racist policing will just continue along.  It has always been there, and will continue.  I doubt it.  The greatest problems presented in the culture are removed in the crisis.  Every once in a while folks get tired of racial injustice and demand that it be removed.  It was so in the Civil War, and in the Civil Rights movement.  It is so now.  That improper use of force should be tolerated is a non-starter.

I had been a bit concerned that no new birth of freedom would occur.  If the worst elements of the culture have already been removed by past crises, what is left is less severe.  Crisis war triggers have become more rare for major powers in this time of nukes, insurgent proxy war, non-violent confrontation and major legislative transitions.  Trump?  The best one can say for him is that he has provoked a true 4T, has shown acutely how some of the old values have been tolerated long enough.  If Hillary had won in 2016, things might not have been pushed to an edge where a true 4T would have been triggered.  A true 4T is immediately preceded by a president who demonstrates well why the old values don't work anymore.  Hillary would not have done that.

National laws protecting against racial violent policing will have to wait on new control of the senate and White House.  I have been typing "We'll see" a lot.  That is as it is nigh on impossible to penetrate bubbles, to get people to take seriously the S&H theory they have supposedly been studying these many years.  As is, the conservative love of violence by a few is something quite different from progressive love of periodic new births of freedom.  We seem attracted to the theory by quite different things.

We'll see.

[Eric the Green]

(09-04-2020, 02:05 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 11:28 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 03:37 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-03-2020, 02:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: And I hope some people see through the obvious racial bias of folks like you Classic Xer who have no concern over the USA turning into a police state, especially in black neighborhoods, but focus all your concern on keeping the police trained for violence and permitted to commit crimes themselves, and on making false accusations about those who are NOT committing or paying for the crimes you are allegedly concerned about. If you don't want businesses damaged in some of these blue cities you claim to so love, then support keeping the police well-behaved.

You must have missed my lack of concern about where you live turning into a police state because that's what you've been voting for, allowing and supporting for years. I hope posters are also able to read  "especially in black neighborhoods" and associate it with racial bias and understand/identify who wrote it and which side he's on. As I read further, I ask myself a question "since when have the crooks and criminals become more valuable/important than police and law enforcement and why is that?" I assume it has something to do with Democratic politics and its need for political alliances with unsavory groups of voters to keep itself in power.

It seems we live in a police state pretty much wherever we live. Progressives keep trying to put restraints on police, but the police culture seems to cross all boundaries and city lines. The BLM movement may bring change to some blue cities. It is the only thing that will.

Democrats don't make alliances with unsavory groups, and Democrats in cities and Biden at the national level have and would support law enforcement. The best support now is to make reforms so police don't kill innocent people. Law enforcement does not need to be unjust, racist and/or illegal to carry out its work.

There is no doubt, unless you live in a bubble, that the main problem with police misconduct today happens in black neighborhoods. Or, what planet did you say you live on, now?

Well, that's the main problem that we get to see and hear the most about the days. Outside the Progressive bubble, the Americans understand that cops representing all races and crooks/ criminals of all races have violent run ins /dangerous situations that occur and result in the death of both of them and they also understand that some accidents/improper use of force  will occur with the police from time to time as well.

Too many cops don't represent all races, because they are biased and disposed to improper use of force against one race. Some people outside the progressive ranks do understand this.

The progressive bubble is less thick because progressives value facts and hearing all sides, while today's conservatives do not.

[Eric the Green]

(09-04-2020, 12:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: If you valued democracy, you wouldn't be placing the integrity of it at risk by purchasing and trading for votes...

Another note about this statement, again.

We Democrats and progressives do need the votes of disadvantaged groups. So we are careful to include concern for their interests and policies that benefit them in order to shore up their votes for us. As I said before, politics involves making alliances and coalitions, especially party politics. And since progressives of all races and creeds naturally believe and agree with justice and the rights of people against power, people in disadvantaged groups are our natural allies and colleagues, and are a natural and valued part of the progressive party and/or faction. You call it purchasing and trading for votes, which implies you don't want disadvantaged groups in your coalition, and don't offer any concern for their interests or policies that benefit them. So instead you and those on your side of the aisle cater to those who scapegoat, fear or resent these groups. Seems a natural trade-off, although not a pleasant and I hope not a lasting one.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-04-2020, 11:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 12:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: If you valued democracy, you wouldn't be placing the integrity of it at risk by purchasing and trading for votes...

Another note about this statement, again.

We Democrats and progressives do need the votes of disadvantaged groups. So we are careful to include concern for their interests and policies that benefit them in order to shore up their votes for us. As I said before, politics involves making alliances and coalitions, especially party politics. And since progressives of all races and creeds naturally believe and agree with justice and the rights of people against power, people in disadvantaged groups are our natural allies and colleagues, and are a natural and valued part of the progressive party and/or faction. You call it purchasing and trading for votes, which implies you don't want disadvantaged groups in your coalition, and don't offer any concern for their interests or policies that benefit them. So instead you and those on your side of the aisle cater to those who scapegoat, fear or resent these groups. Seems a natural trade-off, although not a pleasant and I hope not a lasting one.

I would add the conservatives also trade positions on the issues for votes.  They have always been the party of the Robber Barons.  The Robber Barons have wealth, but not that many votes.  They have to take up populist positions in order to survive.  They have an advantage in accepting 'campaign finance contributions', but they need votes.

Thus, they became the strong on military party when Mao won in China and Truman was unwilling to start a land war in Asia.  They became the racist party when LBJ allied with MLK for the black vote, going with the civil rights legislation and the war on poverty.  As there turned out to be more dedicated racists than border line poor workers, this ended the progressive era.  

We will see if that last it remains true in the modern era.  The Neo Cons already went down when the Iraq War went proxy insurgent.  We will have to see how the racists do. 

It is just a question of which groups the party seeks to attract.  With nukes, insurgent wars and non violent change, it is less beneficial to be the party of using force to get your way.  Too many people have realized that boots on the ground are a bad idea.  When a bunch of people are protesting racial violent policing, it is less effective to be the party of racism and violence.  They can continue to try to attract votes by placing the race card.  Will they succeed?

But to prove this to Classic it will have to become painfully obvious.  He is obsessed with violence, thus sees violence as solving all problems.  Not true anymore.

[Classic-Xer]

(09-04-2020, 11:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 12:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: If you valued democracy, you wouldn't be placing the integrity of it at risk by purchasing and trading for votes...

Another note about this statement, again.

We Democrats and progressives do need the votes of disadvantaged groups. So we are careful to include concern for their interests and policies that benefit them in order to shore up their votes for us. As I said before, politics involves making alliances and coalitions, especially party politics. And since progressives of all races and creeds naturally believe and agree with justice and the rights of people against power, people in disadvantaged groups are our natural allies and colleagues, and are a natural and valued part of the progressive party and/or faction. You call it purchasing and trading for votes, which implies you don't want disadvantaged groups in your coalition, and don't offer any concern for their interests or policies that benefit them. So instead you and those on your side of the aisle cater to those who scapegoat, fear or resent these groups. Seems a natural trade-off, although not a pleasant and I hope not a lasting one.

So, are you using your own tax dollars to purchase and trade for their votes or are you using our tax dollars as well? I don't mind if liberal Democrats and progressive use their own money (tax dollars) to purchase the votes and sustain the votes that they need sustain themselves and keep themselves in power. Yes, its a natural trade off that the country ( the Americans outside the liberal Democratic/ progressive bubble ) are becoming more and more aware of these days.

[Classic-Xer]

(09-05-2020, 12:40 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 11:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 12:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: If you valued democracy, you wouldn't be placing the integrity of it at risk by purchasing and trading for votes...

Another note about this statement, again.

We Democrats and progressives do need the votes of disadvantaged groups. So we are careful to include concern for their interests and policies that benefit them in order to shore up their votes for us. As I said before, politics involves making alliances and coalitions, especially party politics. And since progressives of all races and creeds naturally believe and agree with justice and the rights of people against power, people in disadvantaged groups are our natural allies and colleagues, and are a natural and valued part of the progressive party and/or faction. You call it purchasing and trading for votes, which implies you don't want disadvantaged groups in your coalition, and don't offer any concern for their interests or policies that benefit them. So instead you and those on your side of the aisle cater to those who scapegoat, fear or resent these groups. Seems a natural trade-off, although not a pleasant and I hope not a lasting one.

I would add the conservatives also trade positions on the issues for votes.  They have always been the party of the Robber Barons.  The Robber Barons have wealth, but not that many votes.  They have to take up populist positions in order to survive.  They have an advantage in accepting 'campaign finance contributions', but they need votes.

Thus, they became the strong on military party when Mao won in China and Truman was unwilling to start a land war in Asia.  They became the racist party when LBJ allied with MLK for the black vote, going with the civil rights legislation and the war on poverty.  As there turned out to be more dedicated racists than border line poor workers, this ended the progressive era.  

We will see if that last it remains true in the modern era.  The Neo Cons already went down when the Iraq War went proxy insurgent.  We will have to see how the racists do. 

It is just a question of which groups the party seeks to attract.  With nukes, insurgent wars and non violent change, it is less beneficial to be the party of using force to get your way.  Too many people have realized that boots on the ground are a bad idea.  When a bunch of people are protesting racial violent policing, it is less effective to be the party of racism and violence.  They can continue to try to attract votes by placing the race card.  Will they succeed?

But to prove this to Classic it will have to become painfully obvious.  He is obsessed with violence, thus sees violence as solving all problems.  Not true anymore.

The Neo Cons are still around but no longer in charge as far as foreign policy. Trump is committed to peace through strength or walk lightly and carry a big stick. Right now, I'd have to say that the Democratic is the more racist and more lawless and more violent of the two parties. Granted, the American right is mainly idle and hasn't turned to violence and begun supporting violence yet.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-05-2020, 01:20 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The Neo Cons are still around but no longer in charge as far as foreign policy.

I would say they are in charge of about nothing.  The individuals are still around, but they are tied up by the feeling of both parties that boots on the ground are a bad idea.

(09-05-2020, 01:20 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Trump is committed to peace through strength or walk lightly and carry a big stick.

Trump is committed to Trump.  He is keeping up the demonstrations against China, but that is about it.  He has blown away any former alliances to enable Putin.

(09-05-2020, 01:20 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Right now, I'd have to say that the Democratic is the more racist and more lawless and more violent of the two parties.

Racism is in part keeping the important jobs reserved for white males.  Your definition of racism is for minorities to take away jobs that are traditionally reserved to white males.  It has it backwards.

(09-05-2020, 01:20 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Granted, the American right is mainly idle and hasn't turned to violence and begun supporting violence yet.

The violent racist police have been active for several hundred years.  Most militias had in the past been much more concerned with keeping their guns than other issues.  As a result they were a force in being that never really came into play.  Well in 41's and 42's day the feds got overly aggressive, at least until the OKC bombing and the rules of engagement were pulled back.  In the last few days, however, we have so called militias starting to leave the red and rural areas to confront Black Lives Matter and black neighborhoods.  Their goal has been to instigate violence.

The real militia is all males of military age.  The state appoints officers, and could quite easily make anyone with a badge an officer in the militia, or just the state police to bypass the most militant police unions.  The rank and file must obey the officers.  The state governor has the ability to call them up if there is a state of emergency.  If things were to work as the founding fathers had intended, one of the purposes of the militia is to suppress insurrections, the governors could start calling up the militia and having the police issue orders.  In my daydreams, they would disobey, get arrested for a felony, and thus lose their right to bear arms.

The Congress can call up the militia as well, but I somehow doubt Pelosi will bless the Commander in Chief with authority over the militia.

But nobody is paying much attention to the founding fathers these days.  The original system isn't all that bad, but folks are paying too much attention to the rights, not enough to the duties.

[Eric the Green]

(09-05-2020, 12:40 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 11:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 12:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: If you valued democracy, you wouldn't be placing the integrity of it at risk by purchasing and trading for votes...

Another note about this statement, again.

We Democrats and progressives do need the votes of disadvantaged groups. So we are careful to include concern for their interests and policies that benefit them in order to shore up their votes for us. As I said before, politics involves making alliances and coalitions, especially party politics. And since progressives of all races and creeds naturally believe and agree with justice and the rights of people against power, people in disadvantaged groups are our natural allies and colleagues, and are a natural and valued part of the progressive party and/or faction. You call it purchasing and trading for votes, which implies you don't want disadvantaged groups in your coalition, and don't offer any concern for their interests or policies that benefit them. So instead you and those on your side of the aisle cater to those who scapegoat, fear or resent these groups. Seems a natural trade-off, although not a pleasant and I hope not a lasting one.

I would add the conservatives also trade positions on the issues for votes.  They have always been the party of the Robber Barons.  The Robber Barons have wealth, but not that many votes.  They have to take up populist positions in order to survive.  They have an advantage in accepting 'campaign finance contributions', but they need votes.

Thus, they became the strong on military party when Mao won in China and Truman was unwilling to start a land war in Asia.  They became the racist party when LBJ allied with MLK for the black vote, going with the civil rights legislation and the war on poverty.  As there turned out to be more dedicated racists than border line poor workers, this ended the progressive era.  

We will see if that last it remains true in the modern era.  The Neo Cons already went down when the Iraq War went proxy insurgent.  We will have to see how the racists do. 

It is just a question of which groups the party seeks to attract.  With nukes, insurgent wars and non violent change, it is less beneficial to be the party of using force to get your way.  Too many people have realized that boots on the ground are a bad idea.  When a bunch of people are protesting racial violent policing, it is less effective to be the party of racism and violence.  They can continue to try to attract votes by placing the race card.  Will they succeed?

But to prove this to Classic it will have to become painfully obvious.  He is obsessed with violence, thus sees violence as solving all problems.  Not true anymore.

I am in agreement. I think the parties traded positions over a century and more, in phases. In the 1890s the Democrats became the party of the common man and the working class, seeking to rein in the power of big business. Over time this bifurcation became stronger, especially during the New Deal era. In the sixties and the 80s and now under Trump, further shifts occurred. For better or worse, the two parties have become more consistent. The price of this consistency is a more divided nation.

Some aspects of the progressive era continued under Nixon and Carter, even after the Southern strategy and the civil rights bill put the racists in the Republican camp. The victory of the McGovern anti-war camp in the Democratic Party also put what we now call neo-con militarists squarely in the Republican Party too at this time. Under Trump they are not quite sure they belong there anymore. 

But there was still some major progress on consumerism and the environment in the 1970s, as well as increasing opportunity for women. Nixon backed the environmentalists, and that was a big deal. Tax policy still favored the middle class, and unions were still strong. But then Reagan was put in to put a halt to the reduction and erosion of corporate power that had occurred from these kinds of movements and legislation. The Republican Party, already the Party of Hoover and trickle-down economics, cemented its identity as the Party of Reaganomics, and this was combined with the racist element to create their predominant policy position (of which Classic Xer is the prime example for us here) of scapegoating welfare and "socialist, bureaucratic" programs as a burden of taxation and regulation on white wealth and business. The charming faux-macho actor became Saint Ronnie and deceived the people, and any alternatives to Reaganomics became taboo as "socialism" in our country, affecting the policies of both parties. Trump has just brought this scapegoating out of the closet so that it became a trumpet of white identity politics rather than just a dog-whistle.

The Republican Party's dominant conservative wing has been successful at times in recruiting show-biz performers that create a cult following for them. Only some success by Democrats in finding the great talents of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama has up until now prevented the wholesale slide into fascism that is happening under Trump.

[Eric the Green]

(09-05-2020, 12:41 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 11:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-04-2020, 12:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: If you valued democracy, you wouldn't be placing the integrity of it at risk by purchasing and trading for votes...

Another note about this statement, again.

We Democrats and progressives do need the votes of disadvantaged groups. So we are careful to include concern for their interests and policies that benefit them in order to shore up their votes for us. As I said before, politics involves making alliances and coalitions, especially party politics. And since progressives of all races and creeds naturally believe and agree with justice and the rights of people against power, people in disadvantaged groups are our natural allies and colleagues, and are a natural and valued part of the progressive party and/or faction. You call it purchasing and trading for votes, which implies you don't want disadvantaged groups in your coalition, and don't offer any concern for their interests or policies that benefit them. So instead you and those on your side of the aisle cater to those who scapegoat, fear or resent these groups. Seems a natural trade-off, although not a pleasant and I hope not a lasting one.

So, are you using your own tax dollars to purchase and trade for their votes or are you using our tax dollars as well? I don't mind if liberal Democrats and progressive use their own money (tax dollars) to purchase the votes and sustain the votes that they need sustain themselves and keep themselves in power. Yes, its a natural trade off that the country ( the Americans outside the liberal Democratic/ progressive bubble ) are becoming more and more aware of these days.

Yes, it needs to be a policy to which all Americans contribute, in the renewed sense that Wade Davis talked about in this interview I posted before.





Of course it would mean that some of you Republicans would pay more in taxes, as well as some of the Democrats (including now likely myself too). Unless we are forever to expand our national debt beyond all recognition, the upper middle class and the oligarchy has to pay more. We need to spend less on the military and needless wars. And we all need to contribute to a society that works for all, and not just for the few or for one race. This is what Wade Davis calls a sense of solidarity when we know that everyone in our country counts and is supported. How much more in taxes you personally Classic Xer would need to pay, I am not privy to, since I don't know what your wealth status and tax bracket is. But such taxation would not, in my choice, be unreasonable or debilitating; it would only be irritating to your ideology and your prejudice against providing tax money to non-whites and liberals who are poor.

We do need more socialism in our society, as Davis describes it. I am in agreement with him. That does not mean we need the kind of socialism that puts private enterprise out of business, especially small business. Even corporations would still exist. They just would not be in the position they are in now of controlling our politics and squeezing out all reform and progress and keeping our nation in decline, and evading their proper responsibility to the commonweal. 

An unequal country divided between rich and poor and between white and people of color, and thus in stagnation and stalemate, is not sustainable. It is not in the interest of any American of any Party. The policies of the Democratic Party needs to become again the new consensus if we are to survive as a prosperous nation, rather than a banana republic. Trickle-down, self-reliance-meme individualism and opposition to any collective action needs to be defeated at the polls from now on.

[pbrower2a]

(09-04-2020, 12:04 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-03-2020, 02:59 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We on the blue side disagree with you about what are the important things. We think democracy, the environment, and equal opportunity for all are the important things. You think vigilantism, phony use of symbols, Reaganomics bullshit and xenophobia are the important things. I don't.

If you valued democracy, you wouldn't be placing the integrity of it at risk by purchasing and trading for votes and supporting the aristocratic/plutocratic system that you have either. You'd be leaving the state like everyone else who can see the writing on the wall who know they've been removed/excluded from the political process and know they can't stop what they see coming by voting. You don't represent equal opportunity for all.  You represent equal outcomes for most, limited opportunity based on identity and belief and mainly race driven politics. America represents equal opportunity for  all, freedom for all, blind justice and peace through strength vs weakness. Like I said, you better find a place to hide when America erupts and the majority want to see the Democrats punished. We're a couple months away from fate determining courses and history hasn't been kind to the groups on the wrong side of fate.

I remember when I was young that politics was often a matter of cutting deals -- one that I would suggest is that some Minnesota pol insists on getting an Interstate highway built from Moorehead (near Fargo) to Duluth that eventually leads into northwestern Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, but to get that one must deal with some politician in Texas who wants a similar highway built connecting Austin and Houston. So cut some deals. Representative Ron Dellums of Berkeley, California wanted improvements to his district to have it better prepared for an earthquake and some politician his near opposite in ideology in Louisiana wanted some improvements in levees. On the same Committee they were able to get such a deal... both the anti-earthquake and anti-flood measures got passed.  

Politics is about solving problems at best, and at worst it devolves into a contest between infantile personalities who say "$crew you!" to each other and get nothing. We have gone from cutting deals to solve problems to having opposing sides saying "$crew you!" to each other. 

In a capitalist culture most people recognize that quality for quality is the only viable deal. It is just the same in politics as in business. It is of course up to people to ensure that they can do good so that they don;t simply hemorrhage assets to survive. That explains why we have schools...

Our system has never been designed to allot opportunities based upon ethnic divides.   

Quote:I think the American flag is important. I think the American way of life is important. I think the American Constitution is important. I think American jobs are important. I think American borders are important. I think American business is important. I think American law enforcement is important. I think the American Rule Of Law is important. Now, if you want to cling to an old tree that's past its prime and is going to die anyway because nothing that lives lives forever. Nature's cruel.

The American flag represents something. But know well: if one has no viable alternatives one must use it in otherwise-disrespectful ways if necessary for something more important at the time -- like lifesaving. If I am to use a US flag as something for a struggling swimmer to grasp onto and it gets wet... well, there are other flags. If one is a firefighter, one can expect that a US flag can get burned. If one must choose between rescuing a kitten, let alone a child, over a flag then the kitten, let alone the child, takes precedence. 

"Flag" and "rag" rhyme, you know. 

I consider the American Constitution important, too. This said, the American flag that you so cherish means something because it has civil liberties to back it up. Without those civil liberties it might have some ugly connotations, especially if it has odious practices offensive to most of the world... 



Apartheid

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/General_Forrest%27s_Flag.svg/200px-General_Forrest%27s_Flag.svg.png

slavery, racism, and fascism



religious persecution, cultural suppression



genocide and military aggression



mass murder in the name of an ideology

(I will spare us all an image of the flag of the Third Reich) 

all of the above

............................

Let us make sure that the US flag considers to be an object of hope. Vote out Donald Trump, a man who violates the Constitutional principles as well as some other basic decencies in the service of nothing nobler than his sick ego, on November 3. Ideally the US flag means what it meant as it advanced into Italy, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, and even Germany in WWII and appeared heavily in Civil Rights marches in the 1960's. Let us keep it that way.