Let's make fun of Trump, bash him, etc. while we can!

[Classic-Xer]

(01-26-2019, 08:20 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-26-2019, 01:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I associate (Eric's) socialist views and socialist ideology with communism. I associate the term socialism with the term communism as well. Now, you may not be directly advocating for communism as you say. However, I do believe that communism or a  more communist like system is the end result that you'd prefer to see representing you and your interests and serving the interests of blues in general. Yes, I view you and David as communist sympathizers/believers. However, I happen to  view PB as more of a useful idiot or political pawn at this point. BTW, I think the American Right could win an American war with the Left without having to count on foreign help these days. I mean, we'd have an American government in place and an American system in place and an economic system in place and an American army in place and a large population of Americans who would be willing to support them.

You are free to believe in the tooth fairy, if you wish, but belief doesn't make it so.  The grinding, abusive and totally corrupt economic system of today is Capitalism, and even the capitalists understand that.  Here is a perfect example ripped directly from today's headlines.  More to the point, Capitalists have mastered the brainwashing techniques to make everyone not-them into automatons, as described here.  Please tell me you are opposed to the insanity economy that's rapidly building right under your nose, because people like you are next to the trash heap.

And fwiw, if the war you describe actually happens, it will not be between the left and right.  It will be between the haves and have-nots.  Just so you know, you're closer to the second group than the first.

Don't worry, I stopped believing in the tooth fairy and fables a long time ago. It's funny, I view the grinding, abusive and totally corrupt economic system as socialist/fascist/blue that's financially linked to a portion of our government these days. You don't seem able to see what they're up to and don't seem to care about how much money they're making either. Personally, I don't think a wealthy self centered bitch like Nancy seems like the type who would give freely out of her own pocket without her life being threatened or her over all well being placed on the line. Now, I hope you don't believe me and stick to your views/beliefs and the favorable views of the wealthy blues. I just watched a couple of wealthy blues with political careers did nothing and offered nothing constructive for 33 days as their government workers were expected tom show up and work without pay. I'm going to ask you a question, understand that I'm meaner and more likely to significantly damage ther blue image a wothless liberal bitch who doesn't seem she would hold up very well under real emotional pressure and real fear of significant financial losses like 5.7 billion American dollars that are connected to various left wing groups that America itself doesn't really need to survive and half of the country shouldn't be expected to continue paying for these days. 

Now, you can be dumb and bitch about the billionaires and the millionaires and other more wealthier people (thousands of people that you don't know or have never met ) who own successful American companies of some sort that do something important or provide something important who employ millions of American citizens and provide millions of American citizens with adequate benefits or provides themselves with them and continue forming and reinforcing the evil image and evil view of all of them and continue associating all of them with the evil capitalist system. I mean, what good is a major party that's primarily focused on itself, its short term political needs pertaining to its not so distant future.

Oh, one other thing, now that the rules have been changed and wives and children are no longer protected and open to scrutiny, you can expect your candidates and your movie stars and politicians to be treated the same way if their dumb enough venture into unfriendly territory.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-26-2019, 08:10 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-25-2019, 09:21 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote: Trump is a son of Satan:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/christoph...70168.html

In today's insane world, there is certainly a percentage of otherwise functional adults who will believe this, given half a chance.  Most who do will fully approve. 

I agree, I think blues are both willing and able to believe in just about anything that's crazy these days and seem to be suffering from a new mental illness or PTTS  (Post Traumatic Trump Syndrome) these days.

[pbrower2a]

(01-26-2019, 01:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-24-2019, 04:06 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: But I don't think you understand what people on the left such as myself, David or P.Brower represent. You keep calling us communists, or say that what we advocate is communism, and that we are not Americans. As long as you do this, you are not capable of discerning what anyone on the Left thinks. There are differences among the Left and the Center-Left, to be sure, but the line is very fluid, and the moderates still have an electoral advantage, although this could shift in the next decade.

I suspect many on the Right and the Left alike are firm in a lot of their opinions. Right now those who lean left have about a 51 to 45% lead in opinion polls on various issues and approval/disapproval polls. There is some variation in this, of course. But our hope on the Left is that this lead will grow a bit over the next few years, and that it will be enough to overcome the systemic advantage that you guys on the right have through voter suppression, gerrymandering, the electoral college, the senate, the money in politics, the supreme court, etc. 

If we can have a winning streak in elections, then the right wing will shrink and gradually disappear amid the success of the country and the government. If the Left starts to win elections, it will be up to you guys whether to rebel over guns and/or taxes or immigrants, etc., and whether to do it violently. If the Left fails in the coming election years, then the country will decline, and some will exercize the option to move away. The Left historically has not been able to win a revolution unless it is well-organized with state and foreign help. That is also true on the Right. 

But I suspect the Left will not be the ones to organize such a successful revolution. We will just keep plugging away while right-wing rule ruins the country, in hopes the younger people will wake up. The more your side wins, the greater the decline our country will face. I suspect it will become quite a steep decline in short order, and fueled by climate change.

I associate your socialist views and socialist ideology with communism. I associate the term socialism with the term communism as well. Now, you may not be directly advocating for communism as you say. However, I do believe that communism or a  more communist like system is the end result that you'd prefer to see representing you and your interests and serving the interests of blues in general. Yes, I view you and David as communist sympathizers/believers. However, I happen to  view PB as more of a useful idiot or political pawn at this point. BTW, I think the American Right could win an American war with the Left without having to count on foreign help these days. I mean, we'd have an American government in place and an American system in place and an economic system in place and an American army in place and a large population of Americans who would be willing to support them.

All Communists are socialists, but socialists are not all Communists. The hostility between social democrats and Communists is severe, social democrats rejecting the concepts of 'dictatorship or the proletariat' and the oxymoronic 'democratic centralism' which is anything but democratic. Democratic socialists reject dictatorship in any form, including one consisting of workers or on their supposed behalf. Democratic socialists believe firmly in the rule of law, free and competitive elections, and the desirability of an opposition. 'Democratic centralism' means that decisions made by the Party leadership are binding upon all members of the Party, which ensures that there will never be any further discussion unless the Party leadership brings it up.

Useful idiot? Me? Of whom?

Yes, the Right could take over America, or at least huge parts of it, by force, if it so chose.  The Right has most of the agricultural areas and the energy production, and if it ever cut off the food, water, and energy to the Blue cities, it could starve those cities into surrender. People like you, Classic X'er, sound like the sort of Fifth Column that would sell out the Greater Twin Cities so that liberals would be helpless against being sent to the torture chambers, labor camps, and killing fields. The Right well knows how to drive people to the lower levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

But that right-wing America would be a nightmare as horrible as the Soviet Union, the sole differences being that there would be clear private ownership of assets and that the ruling elite would use religion (Obey us or suffer eternally in Hell!) as a means of controlling people. Teachers who teach the wrong lesson or clergy who preach sermons critical of the leadership would be tortured and murdered. Try to organize a union? Your employer will be free to organize a lynch mob against you!

I am satisfied that a fascistic America would eventually bring about its own demise through wars for profit that try to bring the America nightmare to places where such is unwelcome. The people slated for slavery fight bravely and prevail. In the end America would be like Italy in the latter years of World War II, where people welcome the invaders as liberators  from a brutal tyranny. Were I the right age I would be delighted to smash the icons of the regime, denounce secret police, and participate in establishing a new educational system. I have far more in common with an Iranian liberal than with an American fascist.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-26-2019, 07:56 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-26-2019, 01:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-24-2019, 04:06 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: But I don't think you understand what people on the left such as myself, David or P.Brower represent. You keep calling us communists, or say that what we advocate is communism, and that we are not Americans. As long as you do this, you are not capable of discerning what anyone on the Left thinks. There are differences among the Left and the Center-Left, to be sure, but the line is very fluid, and the moderates still have an electoral advantage, although this could shift in the next decade.

I suspect many on the Right and the Left alike are firm in a lot of their opinions. Right now those who lean left have about a 51 to 45% lead in opinion polls on various issues and approval/disapproval polls. There is some variation in this, of course. But our hope on the Left is that this lead will grow a bit over the next few years, and that it will be enough to overcome the systemic advantage that you guys on the right have through voter suppression, gerrymandering, the electoral college, the senate, the money in politics, the supreme court, etc. 

If we can have a winning streak in elections, then the right wing will shrink and gradually disappear amid the success of the country and the government. If the Left starts to win elections, it will be up to you guys whether to rebel over guns and/or taxes or immigrants, etc., and whether to do it violently. If the Left fails in the coming election years, then the country will decline, and some will exercize the option to move away. The Left historically has not been able to win a revolution unless it is well-organized with state and foreign help. That is also true on the Right. 

But I suspect the Left will not be the ones to organize such a successful revolution. We will just keep plugging away while right-wing rule ruins the country, in hopes the younger people will wake up. The more your side wins, the greater the decline our country will face. I suspect it will become quite a steep decline in short order, and fueled by climate change.

I associate your socialist views and socialist ideology with communism. I associate the term socialism with the term communism as well. Now, you may not be directly advocating for communism as you say. However, I do believe that communism or a  more communist like system is the end result that you'd prefer to see representing you and your interests and serving the interests of blues in general. Yes, I view you and David as communist sympathizers/believers. However, I happen to  view PB as more of a useful idiot or political pawn at this point. BTW, I think the American Right could win an American war with the Left without having to count on foreign help these days. I mean, we'd have an American government in place and an American system in place and an economic system in place and an American army in place and a large population of Americans who would be willing to support them.

All Communists are socialists, but socialists are not all Communists. The hostility between social democrats and Communists is severe, social democrats rejecting the concepts of 'dictatorship or the proletariat' and the oxymoronic 'democratic centralism' which is anything but democratic. Democratic socialists reject dictatorship in any form, including one consisting of workers or on their supposed behalf. Democratic socialists believe firmly in the rule of law, free and competitive elections, and the desirability of an opposition. 'Democratic centralism' means that decisions made by the Party leadership are binding upon all members of the Party, which ensures that there will never be any further discussion unless the Party leadership brings it up.

Use4ful idiot? Me? Of whom?

Yes, the Right could take over America, or at least huge parts of it, by force, if it so chose.  The Right has most of the agricultural areas and the energy production, and if it ever cut off the food, water, and energy to the Blue cities, it could starve those cities into surrender. People like you, Classic X'er, sound like the sort of Fifth Column that would sell out the Greater Twin Cities so that liberals would be helpless against being sent to the torture chambers, labor camps, and killing fields. The Right well knows how to drive people to the lower levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

But that right-wing America would be a nightmare as horrible as the Soviet Union, the sole differences being that there would be clear private ownership of assets and that the ruling elite would use religion (Obey us or suffer eternally in Hell!) as a means of controlling people. Teachers who teach the wrong lesson or clergy who preach sermons critical of the leadership would be tortured and murdered. Try to organize a union? Your employer will be free to organize a lynch mob against you!

I am satisfied that a fascistic America would eventually bring about its own demise through wars for profit that try to bring the America nightmare to places where such is unwelcome. The people slated for slavery fight bravely and prevail. In the end America would be like Italy in the latter years of World War II, where people welcome the invaders as liberators  from a brutal tyranny. Were I the right age I would be delighted to smash the icons of the regime, denounce secret police, and participate in establishing a new educational system. I have far more in common with an Iranian liberal than with an American fascist.

You're right, a socialist could actually prefer a Fascist system over a Communist system these days. I bet Nancy would be more likely to favor a Fascist system/state than a Communist system/state. As far as I know, the Fascist system/state doesn't require a complete sacrifice of personal wealth and privilege like the Communist system/state. I doubt the blue communists would have much of a chance defeating the blue fascists. After all, the blue fascists have a system in place and a military force that's in place as well. BTW, I'd say "democratic centralism" seems to be what you're supporting today and seems to be what you've been supporting for several years.

[pbrower2a]

(01-27-2019, 01:22 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-26-2019, 07:56 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-26-2019, 01:31 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-24-2019, 04:06 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: But I don't think you understand what people on the left such as myself, David or P.Brower represent. You keep calling us communists, or say that what we advocate is communism, and that we are not Americans. As long as you do this, you are not capable of discerning what anyone on the Left thinks. There are differences among the Left and the Center-Left, to be sure, but the line is very fluid, and the moderates still have an electoral advantage, although this could shift in the next decade.

I suspect many on the Right and the Left alike are firm in a lot of their opinions. Right now those who lean left have about a 51 to 45% lead in opinion polls on various issues and approval/disapproval polls. There is some variation in this, of course. But our hope on the Left is that this lead will grow a bit over the next few years, and that it will be enough to overcome the systemic advantage that you guys on the right have through voter suppression, gerrymandering, the electoral college, the senate, the money in politics, the supreme court, etc. 

If we can have a winning streak in elections, then the right wing will shrink and gradually disappear amid the success of the country and the government. If the Left starts to win elections, it will be up to you guys whether to rebel over guns and/or taxes or immigrants, etc., and whether to do it violently. If the Left fails in the coming election years, then the country will decline, and some will exercize the option to move away. The Left historically has not been able to win a revolution unless it is well-organized with state and foreign help. That is also true on the Right. 

But I suspect the Left will not be the ones to organize such a successful revolution. We will just keep plugging away while right-wing rule ruins the country, in hopes the younger people will wake up. The more your side wins, the greater the decline our country will face. I suspect it will become quite a steep decline in short order, and fueled by climate change.

I associate your socialist views and socialist ideology with communism. I associate the term socialism with the term communism as well. Now, you may not be directly advocating for communism as you say. However, I do believe that communism or a  more communist like system is the end result that you'd prefer to see representing you and your interests and serving the interests of blues in general. Yes, I view you and David as communist sympathizers/believers. However, I happen to  view PB as more of a useful idiot or political pawn at this point. BTW, I think the American Right could win an American war with the Left without having to count on foreign help these days. I mean, we'd have an American government in place and an American system in place and an economic system in place and an American army in place and a large population of Americans who would be willing to support them.

All Communists are socialists, but socialists are not all Communists. The hostility between social democrats and Communists is severe, social democrats rejecting the concepts of 'dictatorship or the proletariat' and the oxymoronic 'democratic centralism' which is anything but democratic. Democratic socialists reject dictatorship in any form, including one consisting of workers or on their supposed behalf. Democratic socialists believe firmly in the rule of law, free and competitive elections, and the desirability of an opposition. 'Democratic centralism' means that decisions made by the Party leadership are binding upon all members of the Party, which ensures that there will never be any further discussion unless the Party leadership brings it up.

Use4ful idiot? Me? Of whom?

Yes, the Right could take over America, or at least huge parts of it, by force, if it so chose.  The Right has most of the agricultural areas and the energy production, and if it ever cut off the food, water, and energy to the Blue cities, it could starve those cities into surrender. People like you, Classic X'er, sound like the sort of Fifth Column that would sell out the Greater Twin Cities so that liberals would be helpless against being sent to the torture chambers, labor camps, and killing fields. The Right well knows how to drive people to the lower levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

But that right-wing America would be a nightmare as horrible as the Soviet Union, the sole differences being that there would be clear private ownership of assets and that the ruling elite would use religion (Obey us or suffer eternally in Hell!) as a means of controlling people. Teachers who teach the wrong lesson or clergy who preach sermons critical of the leadership would be tortured and murdered. Try to organize a union? Your employer will be free to organize a lynch mob against you!

I am satisfied that a fascistic America would eventually bring about its own demise through wars for profit that try to bring the America nightmare to places where such is unwelcome. The people slated for slavery fight bravely and prevail. In the end America would be like Italy in the latter years of World War II, where people welcome the invaders as liberators  from a brutal tyranny. Were I the right age I would be delighted to smash the icons of the regime, denounce secret police, and participate in establishing a new educational system. I have far more in common with an Iranian liberal than with an American fascist.

You're right, a socialist could actually prefer a Fascist system over a Communist system these days. I bet Nancy would be more likely to favor a Fascist system/state than a Communist system/state. As far as I know, the Fascist system/state doesn't require a complete sacrifice of personal wealth and privilege like the Communist system/state. I doubt the blue communists would have much of a chance defeating the blue fascists. After all, the blue fascists have a system in place and a military force that's in place as well. BTW, I'd say "democratic centralism" seems to be what you're  supporting today and seems to be what you've been supporting for several years.

Let us not have the unspeakably horrific (Nazi extermination camps or the Killing Fields of the Khmer Rouge) as defenses of something simply awful. Such is like having a rapist or robber excuse himself by saying "at the least I stopped short of murder". Marxism-Leninism and fascism are both horrible. Trying to choose between them is like trying to decide which sort of terminal cancer you prefer.

[David Horn]

(01-26-2019, 06:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Don't worry, I stopped believing in the tooth fairy and fables a long time ago. It's funny, I view the grinding, abusive and totally corrupt economic system as socialist/fascist/blue that's financially linked to a portion of our government these days. You don't seem able to see what they're up to and don't seem to care about how much money they're making either. Personally, I don't think a wealthy self centered bitch like Nancy seems like the type who would give freely out of her own pocket without her life being threatened or her over all well being placed on the line. Now, I hope you don't believe me and stick to your views/beliefs and the favorable views of the wealthy blues. I just watched a couple of wealthy blues with political careers did nothing and offered nothing constructive for 33 days as their government workers were expected tom show up and work without pay. I'm going to ask you a question, understand that I'm meaner and more likely to significantly damage the blue image a worthless liberal bitch who doesn't seem she would hold up very well under real emotional  pressure and real fear of significant financial losses like 5.7 billion American dollars that are  connected   to various left wing groups that America itself doesn't really need to survive and half of the country shouldn't   be expected to continue  paying for these days. 

So, you hate Pelosi for being rich (and not giving it all away to the poor), yet you love rich guys like Trump who actually steal from the poor for their own gain.  Square that with reality, please.     Worse, you think that she should have folded like a lawn chair, and probably hate the fact that she won the standoff with Trump.  The fact is, Trump has talked a lot of populist BS and delivered on handouts to the wealthy.. If there has ever been a closer collaboration between big business, the banks and government, show me.  I might believe the Harding/Coolidge/Hoover years, but none since WW-II.

I sorta ignored the rest of your rant.

Classic-Xer Wrote:Now, you can be dumb and bitch about the billionaires and the millionaires and other more wealthier people (thousands of people that you don't know or have never met) who own successful American companies of some sort that do something important or provide something important who employ millions of American citizens and provide millions of American citizens with adequate benefits or provides themselves with them and continue forming and reinforcing the evil image and evil view of all of them and continue associating all of them with the evil capitalist system. I mean, what good is a major party that's primarily focused on itself, its short term political needs pertaining to its not so distant future.

Read the Davos article. Those people who own successful American companies know perfectly well that they are screwing people on an ongoing basis. They also know that there is a reckoning out there, but they keep doing it because their competitors do it. The only entity with the clout to change that is government. If that doesn't happen, then we all become serfs in the New Feudalism, or chaos ensues. I would predict both.

Classic-Xer Wrote:Oh, one other thing, now that the rules have been changed and wives and children are no longer protected and open to scrutiny, you can expect your candidates and your movie stars and politicians to be treated the same way if their dumb enough venture into unfriendly territory.

What? The only 'wives and children' that are now being or have been scrutinized are the ones who put their noses into the public space. Michele Obama certainly was 'scrutinized', and she tried to stay out of politics when BHO was POTUS. Then there's Hillary Clinton, who was investigated by Ken Starr for years when she was First Lady. So let's dismount our high horse, OK? Trump has actually put his children in his administration and had Don Junior running interference from the Trump Organization -- plenty of reason to look them over thoroughly.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-27-2019, 07:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Let us not have the unspeakably horrific (Nazi extermination camps or the Killing Fields of the Khmer Rouge) as defenses of something simply awful. Such is like having a rapist or robber excuse himself by saying "at the least I stopped short of murder". Marxism-Leninism and fascism are both horrible. Trying to choose between them is like trying to decide which sort of terminal cancer you prefer.

What the blues do or what they eventually become, you'll have no control over or ability to stop without assistance from the American right. How do we teach not so smart/clueless or not so sharp or focused Democratic voters the value of remaining connected and maintaining a good relationship with the American Right these days? The era of political appeasement between cozy blue Democrats and a pinky sized group of Republicans making decisions for themselves and their wealthy friends is in the final process of gradually coming to an abrupt end. David should be concerned about the American because I think David understands me and knows that there's is nothing stop us from allowing a complete investigation of corruption that relates to the entire government and both political party's vs only half the government and one political party. I think David understands that friends or acquaintances could end up sharing a cell with a corrupt government official associated with the Republican party and a corrupt business person associated with the Democratic party who made a fortune together with their direct involvement with some government programs or some government affiliated with some foreign investment or foreign investors.

The American right damn near politically decimated the more powerful of the two parties and the weaker of the two still thinks we are afraid of them and we view them as unbeatable? Think again or The people on Fox News don't even seem realize how powerful the American right is and how fearful the Republican party is of defying the will of its voters. I have to admit, the cozy pink elites who speak on Fox, are still a bit out of touch with the grim realities that reds who live along the southern border are finding, seeing and living with on a daily. I think its time to pack them on a plane and fly them down to see what a dead half rotted illegal alien looks like or a female illegal alien who has been gang rapped looks like or sounds like or what a family who lost a loved to some piece of crap illegal alien. You better wake up and start questioning your own leadership instead of assuming you'll benefit from having them in power and having them being the ones who are making most if not all the important decisions for you. I'm not sure if you really want to find out how much you'll have in common with a blue Iranian who has been raised to believe (indoctrinated from birth) that America is evil who have been placed in charge of exterminating blues who disagree with their fascist blue leaders or the blues that the fascist blues decide to persecute for whatever reason and confiscate all their wealth and possessions for greater good of the state and blue society in general. Reds aren't dumb. Reds aren't fools. Reds aren't uneducated. Reds aren't easily manipulated or tricked or persuaded into letting go of America, it's system, its flag or the values associated with American heritage.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-27-2019, 02:12 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-26-2019, 06:39 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Don't worry, I stopped believing in the tooth fairy and fables a long time ago. It's funny, I view the grinding, abusive and totally corrupt economic system as socialist/fascist/blue that's financially linked to a portion of our government these days. You don't seem able to see what they're up to and don't seem to care about how much money they're making either. Personally, I don't think a wealthy self centered bitch like Nancy seems like the type who would give freely out of her own pocket without her life being threatened or her over all well being placed on the line. Now, I hope you don't believe me and stick to your views/beliefs and the favorable views of the wealthy blues. I just watched a couple of wealthy blues with political careers did nothing and offered nothing constructive for 33 days as their government workers were expected tom show up and work without pay. I'm going to ask you a question, understand that I'm meaner and more likely to significantly damage the blue image a worthless liberal bitch who doesn't seem she would hold up very well under real emotional  pressure and real fear of significant financial losses like 5.7 billion American dollars that are  connected   to various left wing groups that America itself doesn't really need to survive and half of the country shouldn't   be expected to continue  paying for these days. 

So, you hate Pelosi for being rich (and not giving it all away to the poor), yet you love rich guys like Trump who actually steal from the poor for their own gain.  Square that with reality, please.     Worse, you think that she should have folded like a lawn chair, and probably hate the fact that she won the standoff with Trump.  The fact is, Trump has talked a lot of populist BS and delivered on handouts to the wealthy.. If there has ever been a closer collaboration between big business, the banks and government, show me.  I might believe the Harding/Coolidge/Hoover years, but none since WW-II.

I sorta ignored the rest of your rant.

Classic-Xer Wrote:Now, you can be dumb and bitch about the billionaires and the millionaires and other more wealthier people (thousands of people that you don't know or have never met) who own successful American companies of some sort that do something important or provide something important who employ millions of American citizens and provide millions of American citizens with adequate benefits or provides themselves with them and continue forming and reinforcing the evil image and evil view of all of them and continue associating all of them with the evil capitalist system. I mean, what good is a major party that's primarily focused on itself, its short term political needs pertaining to its not so distant future.

Read the Davos article.  Those people who own successful American companies know perfectly well that they are screwing people on an ongoing basis.  They also know that there is a reckoning out there, but they keep doing it because their competitors do it.  The only entity with the clout to change that is government.  If that doesn't happen, then we all become serfs in the New Feudalism, or chaos ensues.  I would predict both.

Classic-Xer Wrote:Oh, one other thing, now that the rules have been changed and wives and children are no longer protected and open to scrutiny, you can expect your candidates and your movie stars and politicians to be treated the same way if their dumb enough venture into unfriendly territory.

What?  The only 'wives and children' that are now being or have been scrutinized are the ones who put their noses into the public space.  Michele Obama certainly was 'scrutinized', and she tried to stay out of politics when BHO was POTUS.  Then there's Hillary Clinton, who was investigated by Ken Starr for years when she was First Lady.  So let's dismount our high horse, OK?  Trump has actually put his children in his administration and had Don Junior running interference from the Trump Organization -- plenty of reason to look them over thoroughly.

Dude, I don't hate people for being rich. You know that or at least you should know that about me by now. You're the rich people hater or at least that's what you project and promote. I'm just wondering why you don't seem to hate the rich people like Nancy too and seem to only hate the rich people that you don't know and have never met. Are you selective about the rich you hate? You seem to be selective as far as the rich people you hate? Why is that? Are you more fascist influenced these days than communist? I ask because fascism is more advanced and selective as far as the rich people it allows to remain rich and prosper and those it targets for persecution and wealth redistribution. BTW, this ain't a rant. There's to much logic involved for this to be an emotional rant. I'd suggest that you figure out what you're actually believing in and supporting these days which group is doing the bulk of the blue influencing and funding these days.

What did Michelle Obama do for a living? Was she a blue civil rights lawyer/activist like her hubby? Did she say anything bad or racist about white people in general or the country that she was lucky/fortunate enough to be born in? If she did, she deserved the scrutiny that she received for being stupid enough to believe the stupid crap that she was taught by liberals. What about their devil spawn (their daughters)? See anything bad, disgusting or demeaning pertaining to them. Yes, the Clinton's were involved in some shady business deals connected to the savings & loans crisis that occurred during the 80's. Lots of coincidental evidence but nothing strong enough to file charges and convict them. Do you think they were innocent or a couple of sharp lawyers who knew how to protect themselves and cover their tracks? Hey, Hilary broke a federal law & obstructed justice and got away with doing them too. I don't know how long we are going to continue functioning as a society with two sets of rules but I don't see it continuing much further. You must not be able see the system of hierarchy that clearly exists on the blue side that the entire American right are able to plainly see with their own eyes these days.

As far as moral high horse, I've yet to meet a blue who didn't believe that they were mounted on a moral high horse. Hell, even the lying, conniving, low life piece of crap blues believe they're mounted on a moral high horse these days. Yes, there's a reckoning coming and when that day gets here the blues can expect the reds to not to lift a finger to save or spare any of them from the suffering and hardship they going to have to endure by themselve's with no government to rely on for protection or necessities relating to survival.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-27-2019, 07:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Let us not have the unspeakably horrific (Nazi extermination camps or the Killing Fields of the Khmer Rouge) as defenses of something simply awful. Such is like having a rapist or robber excuse himself by saying "at the least I stopped short of murder". Marxism-Leninism and fascism are both horrible. Trying to choose between them is like trying to decide which sort of terminal cancer you prefer.

Well, that's up to the blue voters at this point. The red voters don't have much of a say as far as which system the blue leadership decides is best or viewed as necessary for blue America.

[Eric the Green]

(01-28-2019, 12:26 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-27-2019, 07:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Let us not have the unspeakably horrific (Nazi extermination camps or the Killing Fields of the Khmer Rouge) as defenses of something simply awful. Such is like having a rapist or robber excuse himself by saying "at the least I stopped short of murder". Marxism-Leninism and fascism are both horrible. Trying to choose between them is like trying to decide which sort of terminal cancer you prefer.

Well, that's up to the blue voters at this point. The red voters don't have much of a say as far as which system the blue leadership decides is best or viewed as necessary for blue America.

GIven that we aren't going to choose Marxism-Leninism or fascism, what do you think blue voters need to decide upon?

Quote:I associate your socialist views and socialist ideology with communism. I associate the term socialism with the term communism as well. Now, you may not be directly advocating for communism as you say. However, I do believe that communism or a more communist like system is the end result that you'd prefer to see representing you and your interests and serving the interests of blues in general. Yes, I view you and David as communist sympathizers/believers. However, I happen to view PB as more of a useful idiot or political pawn at this point. BTW, I think the American Right could win an American war with the Left without having to count on foreign help these days. I mean, we'd have an American government in place and an American system in place and an economic system in place and an American army in place and a large population of Americans who would be willing to support them.

As I suspected. As long as you think people on the Left in America are communists, then you don't really know or understand what we think. I'd suggest it would do your side better to understand your adversary.

As to who would win the battle, it sorta depends on which side is able to elect an administration. I don't think you can count on the electoral college or the Russians to choose the president forever. At some point, the majority of the voters will count for something. Your side has won an election fair and square without the electoral college only once since 1988.

[Eric the Green]

(01-27-2019, 10:59 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: As far as moral high horse, I've yet to meet a blue who didn't believe that they were mounted on a moral high horse. Hell, even the lying, conniving, low life piece of crap blues believe they're mounted on a moral high horse these days. Yes, there's a reckoning coming and when that day gets here the blues can expect the reds to not to lift a finger to save or spare any of them from the suffering and hardship they going to have to endure by themselves with no government to rely on for protection or necessities relating to survival.

I think we blues do believe we are mounted on a moral high horse compared to you reds; I'll give you that. We on the Left do think that moral values are important; but it's certainly likely that most reds believe that as well, as long as they are of the traditional religious kind, or at least moral values of American self-reliance.

Although it's a valid moral value, that self-reliance is where you guys go most astray, from my point of view. None of us are truly self-reliant, and the system of safety-net protection that you admit here that you want to destroy, protects you as well, although you are conceited enough, I would say, to think you can do without it and be self-reliant.

Tom Brokaw said on Meet the Press yesterday that he surmises, or has heard from Republicans, that Republicans resist immigration and illegal immigration because they think the immigrants will all vote Democratic. If so, this anti-immigration thrust that Trump has tapped into and stoked to get elected is purely a political calculation on the part of reds. What the reds may miss is that this hostility to Latinos and other immigrants is turning that population further against them than they otherwise might be.

[Bill the Piper]

(01-28-2019, 01:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I think we blues do believe we are mounted on a moral high horse compared to you reds; I'll give you that. We on the Left do think that moral values are important; but it's certainly likely that most reds believe that as well, as long as they are of the traditional religious kind, or at least moral values of American self-reliance.

I see it this way: the Left tends to base its political thought on some sort of moral values. For modern American Left (and Americanised Left in Europe) generally right to self-expression is paramount. The individual needs to have his material needs satisfied to express himself, so the Left views its as a moral duty to ensure noone is hungry. Equality is another "moral high horse" for blues, who are reds or purples on my diagram.

The Right is divided. The "old Right" with its Christian values (black on my diagram) is very moralistic, while the anti-PC "new Right" (blue on my diagram) often takes pride in promoting unabashed egoism. For example Mencius Moldbug, the "founding father" of neoreaction, mocked idealism and described secular humanism as no more reasonable than theism. I like the Christian right on some issues (mainly concerning sexual morality), but for anti-PC types like Moldbug or the UK blogger Sargon of Accad I have no feelings save disgust.

[David Horn]

(01-27-2019, 10:59 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Dude, I don't hate people for being rich. You know that or at least you should know that about me by now. You're the rich people hater or at least that's what you project and promote. I'm just wondering why you don't seem to hate the rich people like Nancy too and seem to only hate the rich people that you don't know and have never met. Are you selective about the rich you hate? You seem to be selective as far as the rich people you hate? Why is that? Are you more fascist influenced  these days than communist? I ask because fascism is more advanced and selective as far as the rich people it allows to remain rich and prosper and those it targets for persecution and wealth redistribution. BTW, this ain't a rant. There's to much logic involved for this to be an emotional rant. I'd suggest that you figure out what you're actually believing in and supporting these days which group is doing the bulk of the blue influencing and funding these days.

Do I differentiate between people?  Yes, and that's true regardless of their net worth.  People who attain a position of power over others can use that power for good or evil.  Donald Trump has proven through his own actions that he firmly falls into the first category.  He actually brags about screwing the contractors he has  hired as a developer, the students that attended his faux university and even his close friends if they seem even vaguely a threat to him.  I also put predatory capitalists like Carl Icahn in the same category.  Some of the tech Billionaires are starting to look like they qualify too.  It's all a matter of basic humanity, and too many powerful people simply lack that trait.

FWIW, we've had rich Presidents in the past.  Both Roosevelts and Jack Kennedy for example.  Being rich is not disqualifying.

Classic-Xer Wrote:What did Michelle Obama do for a living? Was she a blue civil rights lawyer/activist like her hubby? Did she say anything bad or racist about white people in general or the country that she was lucky/fortunate enough to be born in? If she did, she deserved the scrutiny that she received for being stupid enough to believe the stupid crap that she was taught by liberals. What about their devil spawn (their daughters)? See anything bad, disgusting  or demeaning pertaining to them. Yes, the Clinton's were involved in some shady business deals connected to the savings & loans crisis that occurred during the 80's. Lots of coincidental evidence but nothing strong enough to file charges and convict them. Do you think they were innocent or a couple of sharp lawyers who knew how to protect themselves and cover their tracks? Hey, Hilary broke a federal law & obstructed justice and got away with doing them too. I don't know how long we are going to continue functioning as a society with two sets of rules but I don't see it continuing much further. You must not be able see the system of hierarchy that clearly exists on the blue side that the entire American right are able to plainly see with their own eyes these days.

You'll be hard pressed to find dirt on the Obamas.  All the accusations to date have been disproven.  I agree that Hill and Bill are a bit shady, but the most serious accusations against them have also failed.  Ken Starr tried for almost 7 years, and failed.  BTW, what obstruction of justice do you think occurred? 

Classic-Xer Wrote:As far as moral high horse, I've yet to meet a blue who didn't believe that they were mounted on a moral high horse. Hell, even the lying, conniving, low life piece of crap blues believe they're mounted on a moral high horse these days. Yes, there's a reckoning coming and when that day gets here the blues can expect the reds to not to lift a finger to save or spare any of them from the suffering and hardship they going to have to endure by themselves with no government to rely on for protection or necessities relating to survival.

I recommend not holding your breath on a massive Blue Comeuppance.  More to the point, start working on excuses for Mafia Don, because his days really are numbered.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-28-2019, 04:45 PM)David Horn Wrote: Do I differentiate between people?  Yes, and that's true regardless of their net worth.  People who attain a position of power over others can use that power for good or evil.  Donald Trump has proven through his own actions that he firmly falls into the first category.  He actually brags about screwing the contractors he has  hired as a developer, the students that attended his faux university and even his close friends if they seem even vaguely a threat to him.  I also put predatory capitalists like Carl Icahn in the same category.  Some of the tech Billionaires are starting to look like they qualify too.  It's all a matter of basic humanity, and too many powerful people simply lack that trait.

FWIW, we've had rich Presidents in the past.  Both Roosevelts and Jack Kennedy for example.  Being rich is not disqualifying.

Classic-Xer Wrote:What did Michelle Obama do for a living? Was she a blue civil rights lawyer/activist like her hubby? Did she say anything bad or racist about white people in general or the country that she was lucky/fortunate enough to be born in? If she did, she deserved the scrutiny that she received for being stupid enough to believe the stupid crap that she was taught by liberals. What about their devil spawn (their daughters)? See anything bad, disgusting  or demeaning pertaining to them. Yes, the Clinton's were involved in some shady business deals connected to the savings & loans crisis that occurred during the 80's. Lots of coincidental evidence but nothing strong enough to file charges and convict them. Do you think they were innocent or a couple of sharp lawyers who knew how to protect themselves and cover their tracks? Hey, Hilary broke a federal law & obstructed justice and got away with doing them too. I don't know how long we are going to continue functioning as a society with two sets of rules but I don't see it continuing much further. You must not be able see the system of hierarchy that clearly exists on the blue side that the entire American right are able to plainly see with their own eyes these days.

You'll be hard pressed to find dirt on the Obamas.  All the accusations to date have been disproven.  I agree that Hill and Bill are a bit shady, but the most serious accusations against them have also failed.  Ken Starr tried for almost 7 years, and failed.  BTW, what obstruction of justice do you think occurred? 

Classic-Xer Wrote:As far as moral high horse, I've yet to meet a blue who didn't believe that they were mounted on a moral high horse. Hell, even the lying, conniving, low life piece of crap blues believe they're mounted on a moral high horse these days. Yes, there's a reckoning coming and when that day gets here the blues can expect the reds to not to lift a finger to save or spare any of them from the suffering and hardship they going to have to endure by themselves with no government to rely on for protection or necessities relating to survival.

I recommend not holding your breath on a massive Blue Comeuppance.  More to the point, start working on excuses for Mafia Don, because his days really are numbered.

Yes, the Democratic party has had many rich Presidents. Some were born rich like Kennedy ( the son of an outlaw/ bootlegger/Irish mafia type) and FDR ( the son of a wealthy American businessman/entrepreneur) and others were born poor and became rich after entering a career politics like Clinton and LBJ. BTW, the other Roosevelt was actually a Republican President so he doesn't count as Democratic.

You'd be hard pressed to find an investigative reporter or a journalist who would be willing to stick their neck out and place their careers/future  on the line to explore information relating to dirt or wrong doings by Obama and you'd be hard pressed to find a blue would be foolish or crazy enough to implicate Obama or his administration at the time. We know that he/his administration used the IRS inappropriately and we know that the FBI was used inappropriately as well. We know that the FBI directer made decisions that he didn't have the authority to make in regards to Hilary's case and we know she cleaned had her hard drive cleaned by a professional and we know she had her assistants destroy their government issued phones as well. How do we know this, it's all on record and it's all been collaborated by admittance of guilt. Even the Russian collusion thingy has more evidence of collusion between the DNC and Clinton Campaign and the Russians involving the Steele Dossier that was used as evidence by the FBI and the Department of Justice to obtain the FISA warrant to spy on the Trump Campaign and launch an investigation into collusion between the Trump Administration and the Russian government.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-28-2019, 08:21 PM)taramarie Wrote: Reading that this dispute is still going on over a year after i stopped posting here i am unsure whether to commend the people here for their perserverance or to shake my head as you would get more results from banging your head on a wall. Best of luck, guys. Namaste and peace to you all.

Civil Wars without large scale violence can take many years and lots of perseverance to effectively resolve.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-28-2019, 04:45 PM)David Horn Wrote: I recommend not holding your breath on a massive Blue Comeuppance.  More to the point, start working on excuses for Mafia Don, because his days really are numbered.

Don't worry, I'm not going to hold my breath for a decade and I won't be working on excuses for Trump either.

[Eric the Green]

(01-28-2019, 02:54 PM)Bill the Piper Wrote:

(01-28-2019, 01:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I think we blues do believe we are mounted on a moral high horse compared to you reds; I'll give you that. We on the Left do think that moral values are important; but it's certainly likely that most reds believe that as well, as long as they are of the traditional religious kind, or at least moral values of American self-reliance.

I see it this way: the Left tends to base its political thought on some sort of moral values. For modern American Left (and Americanised Left in Europe) generally right to self-expression is paramount. The individual needs to have his material needs satisfied to express himself, so the Left views its as a moral duty to ensure noone is hungry. Equality is another "moral high horse" for blues, who are reds or purples on my diagram.

The Right is divided. The "old Right" with its Christian values (black on my diagram) is very moralistic, while the anti-PC "new Right" (blue on my diagram) often takes pride in promoting unabashed egoism. For example Mencius Moldbug, the "founding father" of neoreaction, mocked idealism and described secular humanism as no more reasonable than theism. I like the Christian right on some issues (mainly concerning sexual morality), but for anti-PC types like Moldbug or the UK blogger Sargon of Accad I have no feelings save disgust.

It has been very clear for years that the Christian right and the Libertarian-economics right (neo-liberalism) are the two main factions in the Republican Party, and they are joined at the hip and overlap. Militarism is another strong component of the Republican brand, which we often call neo-con. George W Bush when he was president specifically mentioned these three items on the white house webpage as their purpose. Racism is in the background of neo-liberalism, although not explicitly stated, and so it has been since Nixon's southern strategy.

Now under Trump, the Christian right continues to back him, and he rewards them with policies, even though Trump is scarecly moral himself and totally egotistic. But I don't see that as any kind of ideology. It doesn't seem to be a factor at all for the Christian right; they back Trump. Some neo-liberals don't, but most do, because except on trade Trump policies are so thorougly neo-liberal libertarian free-market trickle-down economics. As for militarism, Trump is less interventionist, but not immune to it, and he is keen to build up the military just like previous Republicans. The main difference is that Trump is more outspoken in his racist xenophobia, although not completely overt about his racism, except in his anti-immigration policies which are the cornerstone of his campaign and his presidency.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-28-2019, 12:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: As I suspected. As long as you think people on the Left in America are communists, then you don't really know or understand what we think. I'd suggest it would do your side better to understand your adversary.

As to who would win the battle, it sorta depends on which side is able to elect an administration. I don't think you can count on the electoral college or the Russians to choose the president forever. At some point, the majority of the voters will count for something. Your side has won an election fair and square without the electoral college only once since 1988.

What do you think I've been doing here? Do you think I've been spending time getting to know my adversaries or spending time ignoring my adversary and posting red propaganda and other political stuff relating to reds? Yes, I think every American should read what the blues believe in and what the blues want to achieve and become more familiar with their adversaries. BTW, what makes you think that blues are going to have a choice whether their leadership decides in favor of implementing a Fascist system instead of a Communist system to replace the American system?

[Eric the Green]

(01-29-2019, 01:45 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-28-2019, 12:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: As I suspected. As long as you think people on the Left in America are communists, then you don't really know or understand what we think. I'd suggest it would do your side better to understand your adversary.

As to who would win the battle, it sorta depends on which side is able to elect an administration. I don't think you can count on the electoral college or the Russians to choose the president forever. At some point, the majority of the voters will count for something. Your side has won an election fair and square without the electoral college only once since 1988.

What do you think I've been doing here? Do you think I've been spending time getting to know my adversaries or spending time ignoring my adversary and posting propaganda and other political stuff relating to reds? Yes, I think every American should read what the blues believe and should become more familiar with their adversaries.

So why aren't you up on us, then? You have us completely un-pegged.

[Bill the Piper]

(01-29-2019, 01:43 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: It has been very clear for years that the Christian right and the Libertarian-economics right (neo-liberalism) are the two main factions in the Republican Party, and they are joined at the hip and overlap. Militarism is another strong component of the Republican brand, which we often call neo-con. George W Bush when he was president specifically mentioned these three items on the white house webpage as their purpose. Racism is in the background of neo-liberalism, although not explicitly stated, and so it has been since Nixon's southern strategy.

Now under Trump, the Christian right continues to back him, and he rewards them with policies, even though Trump is scarecly moral himself and totally egotistic. But I don't see that as any kind of ideology. It doesn't seem to be a factor at all for the Christian right; they back Trump. Some neo-liberals don't, but most do, because except on trade Trump policies are so thorougly neo-liberal libertarian free-market trickle-down economics. As for militarism, Trump is less interventionist, but not immune to it, and he is keen to build up the military just like previous Republicans. The main difference is that Trump is more outspoken in his racist xenophobia, although not completely overt about his racism, except in his anti-immigration policies which are the cornerstone of his campaign and his presidency.

This will always be a mystery for me: how can an alliance between political orientations that have almost nothing in common last so long?

Christian Republicans promote Rand, although she openly hated Christianity. She was praised by the famous Satanist Anton LaVey:
https://www.churchofsatan.com/satanism-and-objectivism/

On the other hand, Jesus made it clear that those who worship mammon are not his followers. I have pointed it out to some Republicans on Personality Cafe, but they typically come up with gimmicks like "glorifying personal achievement is not worship of mammon". In essence, they redefine this sin in such a way that it's almost impossible to commit.

As for racism, I don't agree that libertarianism is racist since it views the individual as most important, rather than a collective like race. But its outcomes ARE harmful for economically less powerful individuals, and those individuals are more likely to be non-White, so in practice you are almost right