The Partisan Divide on Issues

[pbrower2a]

(01-31-2020, 03:05 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 10:42 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Yes, words that have strong emotive content have clear meanings, or language is worthless. If you think a handicap unpleasant, then think of how emotionally-crippling it would be to live in a nightmare such as the Oceania of Nineteen Eighty-Four  in which something so basic as expressive language loses all subtlety and something so much a cornerstone of life as romantic love becomes impossible. The sex drive remains but it has no humanity to keep it from becoming an animal lust. Maybe I overuse synonyms to avoid boring people with my prose (and I recognize that I can be a numbing bore at times). A totalitarian or even harshly-authoritarian regime invariably debases life. It is telling that a study of where people were happiest showed that the happiest people were the people in societies with entrenched democracy (let us say France) and the least-happy people were living under repressive regimes (Saudi Arabia). This also distinguishes India from China. 

I loathe Donald Trump because he does much that I associate with someone who debases democratic life, in part by degrading the language so that words become lies in themselves, trivializes the intellectual processes that make life interesting, and short-circuiting established traditions for his own gratification. Maybe the next Presidency will repudiate Trump more convincingly than Trump pretends to repudiate Obama, and maybe the next effective conservative President will have a personal life and the integrity of Obama and prove an even more complete repudiation of Trump.  Then again, I have compared Obama to Eisenhower by temperament and conduct, so that may be no stretch of the imagination. 

There are basic rules of decency, and Trump violates those. I find it appalling that someone in a position of commercial, cultural, or political responsibility mocks the handicapped. (OK, drunks and addicts are fair game... but I quit hearing Helen Keller jokes from my peers before I was a teenager). I do not mock personal tragedy unless the mockery is a lesson. OK, I did nominate someone for a Darwin Award:



      

I don't mock personal tragedy or use it to my advantage or support those who take advantage of it and use it a political weapon either. As far as Trump, I'm sorry he mocked one you to send a strong message to those who are exploiting people and using people consumed by personal tragedy or represent personal tragedy the wrong way for the wrong reasons these days. What would be cool, find one them and bring them so you can see what's going to eventually happen to them here.

So why do you not mock handicaps and personal tragedy, but Donald Trump does? Because you are better than he is, at least at that!

Emotional IQ is parallel to intellectual IQ in that people develop more mature attitudes as they grow up. People ideally learn that principles are safer than immediate self interest, that empathy works better than egoism, that boundaries exist, that impulses are far from reliable... infants think only of themselves and get away with it, but adults who think only of themselves are monsters. Because maturity involves increases in physical strength, verbal skill, and cunning, one had better develop emotionally. Those who act at immature levels of moral development are often criminals, if not other losers (including addicts, sex fiends, sadists, and the pathologically lazy). With small size one can be a sociopath (a cat is a prime example), but there's not much difference in behavior between a house cat and a tiger.

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-31-2020, 04:07 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 07:23 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: In politics, I do expect negative implications and opinions.  I do not expect constant schoolyard level taunts, word redefinition, lies or threats.  Is this expectation unusual in your view?  Un-American, whatever that means to you?

I'm cool with it. The question is, are you capable of living up to it and owning up to your mistakes or not. You can't expect having it both ways. The conservatives who pass through here from time to time and visit aren't running rough shot, attacking new posters at will/as they please and parading around, parroting each other and acting like a vicious cult like the liberals did/ were able to get away for a while in the old forum. You should know what American means, you should know the American pledge of allegiance by heart, you should understand the human losses and the sacrifices and the hardships and the goodness associated with the American flag and be able to recognize yourself and your freedoms as being with American flag and the American Constitution and the country for which it stands. At what point has the terms Liberal Democrat ever been placed above the terms America or American or viewed as above them and no longer accountable to them and so forth? Do you get my
drift or do you require more education?

Well, the predecessors of the Liberal Democrats have been struggling with the more conservative for a long time, at least since they settled on the City on a Hill.  More conservative people insisted on kings and slaves.  They said no.  Yes, human loses and sacrifice was involved in righting the traditional wrongs.  

This time around the problems include racism, the environment, defending the Constitution from autocracy and the division of wealth.  

Yes, we in the Northeast, of the coasts, are kind of pushy.  While battle and war may not be called for this time around, I do not expect the Whiggish arrow of progress to suddenly stop.  Every four score and seven years we force a new birth of freedom.  Every once in a while, long endured injustices seem to be no longer tolerable.  

I’m afraid you are going to have to learn to live with it.  If you don’t, you can find yourself labelled under the newer values as part of the problem, not part of the solution.  You have to look at the elites, the environment, the racists, the autocrat, and decide where exactly you feel it necessary to make a stand.

And, yes, I believe I can grow.  When should we change cultures by force?  How did the 2nd come to be?  It seems neither extreme is free of ignoring the Constitution when some of the long injustices and parts of the culture are within it.  ‘All men are created equal’ changes meaning as new injustices come to the fore.

Or, at least, I feel kind of alone in listening to both sides, and having neither say thank you for it.

But on another front, the mothers of the coast commonly ask their young children what the magic word is.  The answer, of course, is the word ‘please’.  Mature children eventually learn, and scatter the magic word about their conversation.  When the complaint includes common threats of violence, do you consider another threat of violence to replace the magic?  If you want the accusations of demonization to stop, have you tried the magic word?

Of course, stopping acting like a demon would also help.  Can you demonize a demon?

I doubt the mothers of the place you call America are that much different when they find their little darlings full of taunts, lies and threats.  Most are expected to learn.  Some never do.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-31-2020, 11:16 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 03:05 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 10:42 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Yes, words that have strong emotive content have clear meanings, or language is worthless. If you think a handicap unpleasant, then think of how emotionally-crippling it would be to live in a nightmare such as the Oceania of Nineteen Eighty-Four  in which something so basic as expressive language loses all subtlety and something so much a cornerstone of life as romantic love becomes impossible. The sex drive remains but it has no humanity to keep it from becoming an animal lust. Maybe I overuse synonyms to avoid boring people with my prose (and I recognize that I can be a numbing bore at times). A totalitarian or even harshly-authoritarian regime invariably debases life. It is telling that a study of where people were happiest showed that the happiest people were the people in societies with entrenched democracy (let us say France) and the least-happy people were living under repressive regimes (Saudi Arabia). This also distinguishes India from China. 

I loathe Donald Trump because he does much that I associate with someone who debases democratic life, in part by degrading the language so that words become lies in themselves, trivializes the intellectual processes that make life interesting, and short-circuiting established traditions for his own gratification. Maybe the next Presidency will repudiate Trump more convincingly than Trump pretends to repudiate Obama, and maybe the next effective conservative President will have a personal life and the integrity of Obama and prove an even more complete repudiation of Trump.  Then again, I have compared Obama to Eisenhower by temperament and conduct, so that may be no stretch of the imagination. 

There are basic rules of decency, and Trump violates those. I find it appalling that someone in a position of commercial, cultural, or political responsibility mocks the handicapped. (OK, drunks and addicts are fair game... but I quit hearing Helen Keller jokes from my peers before I was a teenager). I do not mock personal tragedy unless the mockery is a lesson. OK, I did nominate someone for a Darwin Award:



      

I don't mock personal tragedy or use it to my advantage or support those who take advantage of it and use it a political weapon either. As far as Trump, I'm sorry he mocked one you to send a strong message to those who are exploiting people and using people consumed by personal tragedy or represent personal tragedy the wrong way for the wrong reasons these days. What would be cool, find one them and bring them so you can see what's going to eventually happen to them here.

So why do you not mock handicaps and personal tragedy, but Donald Trump does? Because you are better than he is, at least at that!

Emotional IQ is parallel to intellectual IQ in that people develop more mature attitudes as they grow up. People ideally learn that principles are safer than immediate self interest, that empathy works better than egoism, that boundaries exist, that impulses are far from reliable... infants think only of themselves and get away with it, but adults who think only of themselves are monsters. Because maturity involves increases in physical strength, verbal skill, and cunning, one had better develop emotionally. Those who act at immature levels of moral development are often criminals, if not other losers (including addicts, sex fiends, sadists, and the pathologically lazy). With small size one can be a sociopath (a cat is a prime example), but there's not much difference in behavior between a house cat and a tiger.

I understand the nature of those oppose to him, they are monsters as you say. I should know them, I've already faced them and defeated most of them. Only monsters (albeit cowardly monsters) would be willing convince two heart stricken/broken parents who lost their son in Iraq that Trump was a racist, hates them and all other immigrants and doesn't want anymore immigrant people like them entering this country ever and then use them as means to deliver cheap shots and spread their lies about him, his policies and his motives to a national which makes them look foolish or horrible to us for doing it and supporting them (the cowardly monsters). What kind of people would do that to good people like them other than despicable people like those you describe to me in your post. Like all wars/major disputes, innocent people get caught in the cross fire so to speak So, who is left on the Democratic side who has the balls to reverse the flow of information/orders that obviously flow from above?

Where are the X'er's who don't follow orders like Tulsi? There are plenty of them on the other side men and women alike but where are the ones on the Democratic side?

[pbrower2a]

(02-01-2020, 01:10 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 11:16 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 03:05 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 10:42 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Yes, words that have strong emotive content have clear meanings, or language is worthless. If you think a handicap unpleasant, then think of how emotionally-crippling it would be to live in a nightmare such as the Oceania of Nineteen Eighty-Four  in which something so basic as expressive language loses all subtlety and something so much a cornerstone of life as romantic love becomes impossible. The sex drive remains but it has no humanity to keep it from becoming an animal lust. Maybe I overuse synonyms to avoid boring people with my prose (and I recognize that I can be a numbing bore at times). A totalitarian or even harshly-authoritarian regime invariably debases life. It is telling that a study of where people were happiest showed that the happiest people were the people in societies with entrenched democracy (let us say France) and the least-happy people were living under repressive regimes (Saudi Arabia). This also distinguishes India from China. 

I loathe Donald Trump because he does much that I associate with someone who debases democratic life, in part by degrading the language so that words become lies in themselves, trivializes the intellectual processes that make life interesting, and short-circuiting established traditions for his own gratification. Maybe the next Presidency will repudiate Trump more convincingly than Trump pretends to repudiate Obama, and maybe the next effective conservative President will have a personal life and the integrity of Obama and prove an even more complete repudiation of Trump.  Then again, I have compared Obama to Eisenhower by temperament and conduct, so that may be no stretch of the imagination. 

There are basic rules of decency, and Trump violates those. I find it appalling that someone in a position of commercial, cultural, or political responsibility mocks the handicapped. (OK, drunks and addicts are fair game... but I quit hearing Helen Keller jokes from my peers before I was a teenager). I do not mock personal tragedy unless the mockery is a lesson. OK, I did nominate someone for a Darwin Award:



      

I don't mock personal tragedy or use it to my advantage or support those who take advantage of it and use it a political weapon either. As far as Trump, I'm sorry he mocked one you to send a strong message to those who are exploiting people and using people consumed by personal tragedy or represent personal tragedy the wrong way for the wrong reasons these days. What would be cool, find one them and bring them so you can see what's going to eventually happen to them here.

So why do you not mock handicaps and personal tragedy, but Donald Trump does? Because you are better than he is, at least at that!

Emotional IQ is parallel to intellectual IQ in that people develop more mature attitudes as they grow up. People ideally learn that principles are safer than immediate self interest, that empathy works better than egoism, that boundaries exist, that impulses are far from reliable... infants think only of themselves and get away with it, but adults who think only of themselves are monsters. Because maturity involves increases in physical strength, verbal skill, and cunning, one had better develop emotionally. Those who act at immature levels of moral development are often criminals, if not other losers (including addicts, sex fiends, sadists, and the pathologically lazy). With small size one can be a sociopath (a cat is a prime example), but there's not much difference in behavior between a house cat and a tiger.

I understand the nature of those oppose to him, they are monsters as you say. I should know them, I've already faced them and defeated most of them. Only monsters (albeit cowardly monsters) would be willing convince two heart stricken/broken parents who lost their son in Iraq that Trump was a racist, hates them and all other immigrants and doesn't want anymore immigrant people like them entering this country ever and then use them as means to deliver cheap shots and spread their lies about him, his policies and his motives to a national which makes them look foolish or horrible to us for doing it and supporting them (the cowardly monsters). What kind of people would do that to good people like them other than despicable people like those you describe to me in your post. Like all wars/major disputes, innocent people get caught in the cross fire so to speak So, who is left on the Democratic side who has the balls to reverse the flow of information/orders that obviously flow from above?

Regrettably you don't. Donald Trump convinced the Muslim parents of a son who died in Iraq in an attempt to establish a democratic order to replace a regime that was antithetical to democracy and hostile to a large part of its Muslim population... of his hostility to Islam. No, hostility to Islam is not racist in the sense that Nazi-style antisemitism is racist above all else. Bosnian Muslims do not look like Indonesian Muslims who do not look like Nigerian Muslims. Trump is not so much a racist as a religious bigot.

Let us recall what George Washington said in his letter to the Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island in 1787:

Quote:  

Quote:The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for giving to Mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection, should demean themselves as good citizens.

Washington’s concluding paragraph perfectly expresses the ideal relationship among the government, its individual citizens and religious groups:

Quote:May the Children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid.

Washington closed with an invocation: “May the father of all mercies scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way everlastingly happy.”

The letter, a foundation stone of American religious liberty and the principle of separation between church and state, is signed, simply, “G. Washington.” Each year, Newport’s Congregation Kahal Kadosh Yeshuat Israel, now known as the Touro Synagogue, re-reads Washington’s letter in a public ceremony. The words deserve repetition.

Muslims claim a similar link to Abraham through his son Ishmael. It is as legitimate as the Jewish claim to a connection more directly through Abraham. Those who admire our Founding Fathers (and I could make the case that Martin Luther King is the last of those Founding Fathers) . Religious bigotry of any kind is a menace to us all. I once told a Nazi that as a German-American with no Jewish ancestry and no family ties to Judaism that if I had to choose between being a Nazi and a Jew I would be a Jew -- and it would be easy because there is no cultural or moral difference between Judaism and me, but that Nazism is an affront to my culture (after all, many of the Jews that Hitler killed might have as well been Germans) and would destroy much of my culture (of course, German-Americans are the gentiles most similar to the Ashkenazim in culture). Too bad about pork and shellfish if I had to go Orthodox... but far better would it be giving up pork and shellfish than becoming a murderer in spirit. 

I am going further: if I had to choose between tyranny that adopts American garb and starts setting up torture chambers or shooting pits for dissidents and pariahs and Islam... I would choose Islam, whose culture is very different from mine and which, unlike Reform Judaism, precludes pork, shellfish, beer, and wine -- all of which I enjoy. Morality means more than culture... 

When the time comes to incarcerate Donald Trump for his offenses against the Constitution and against the federal and state criminal codes, I have my idea of how to treat him. I would inflict upon him classical music and literary classics. I would compel him to read the Bible, the Quran, and Buddhist sutras, as well as secular philosophy. (My idea of how to run a male reformatory is to make sissies out of those tough macho types and make them fully human. I would compel them to wear pink uniforms as signals of their bad choices in life). Donald Trump is about as shallow as the typical criminal in the penal system. That is the problem: he gets away with it. Unlike the usual pimp or pusher he has been able to find people in awe of him.  

...Trump has said horrible things of Islam. It is fair to judge Muslims by the ethical standards of Islam, which explains how we could allow Muslims to judge Saddam Hussein. Murder, plunder, and persecution of Muslims are violations of Islamic law. They are also un-Christian. The ethical standards of Islam are far higher than the standards that Donald Trump has for himself. 

Quote:Where are the X'er's who don't follow orders like Tulsi? There are plenty of them on the other side men and women alike  but where are the ones on the  Democratic side?

I am satisfied with those X'ers who believe that Donald Trump is contrary with their rational self-interest as is so with me. Trump exuded warning signs in 2016, and more people have come to recognize those throu8gh his actions. .

[Classic-Xer]

(02-01-2020, 12:04 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Well, the predecessors of the Liberal Democrats have been struggling with the more conservative for a long time, at least since they settled on the City on a Hill.  More conservative people insisted on kings and slaves.  They said no.  Yes, human loses and sacrifice was involved in righting the traditional wrongs.  

This time around the problems include racism, the environment, defending the Constitution from autocracy and the division of wealth.  

Yes, we in the Northeast, of the coasts, are kind of pushy.  While battle and war may not be called for this time around, I do not expect the Whiggish arrow of progress to suddenly stop.  Every four score and seven years we force a new birth of freedom.  Every once in a while, long endured injustices seem to be no longer tolerable.  

I’m afraid you are going to have to learn to live with it.  If you don’t, you can find yourself labelled under the newer values as part of the problem, not part of the solution.  You have to look at the elites, the environment, the racists, the autocrat, and decide where exactly you feel it necessary to make a stand.

And, yes, I believe I can grow.  When should we change cultures by force?  How did the 2nd come to be?  It seems neither extreme is free of ignoring the Constitution when some of the long injustices and parts of the culture are within it.  ‘All men are created equal’ changes meaning as new injustices come to the fore.

Or, at least, I feel kind of alone in listening to both sides, and having neither say thank you for it.

But on another front, the mothers of the coast commonly ask their young children what the magic word is.  The answer, of course, is the word ‘please’.  Mature children eventually learn, and scatter the magic word about their conversation.  When the complaint includes common threats of violence, do you consider another threat of violence to replace the magic?  If you want the accusations of demonization to stop, have you tried the magic word?

Of course, stopping acting like a demon would also help.  Can you demonize a demon?

I doubt the mothers of the place you call America are that much different when they find their little darlings full of taunts, lies and threats.  Most are expected to learn.  Some never do.

I don't have a problem if you demonize a demon as long as they're an obvious demon and not someone who simply disagrees or politically opposes you or is a fixture of your imagination or a kind of person that you don't like for some reason or another.

[Classic-Xer]

(02-01-2020, 09:57 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Regrettably you don't. Donald Trump convinced the Muslim parents of a son who died in Iraq in an attempt to establish a democratic order to replace a regime that was antithetical to democracy and hostile to a large part of its Muslim population... of his hostility to Islam. No, hostility to Islam is not racist in the sense that Nazi-style antisemitism is racist above all else. Bosnian Muslims do not look like Indonesian Muslims who do not look like Nigerian Muslims. Trump is not so much a racist as a religious bigot.

Let us recall what George Washington said in his letter to the Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island in 1787:

Quote:  

Muslims claim a similar link to Abraham through his son Ishmael. It is as legitimate as the Jewish claim to a connection more directly through Abraham. Those who admire our Founding Fathers (and I could make the case that Martin Luther King is the last of those Founding Fathers) . Religious bigotry of any kind is a menace to us all. I once told a Nazi that as a German-American with no Jewish ancestry and no family ties to Judaism that if I had to choose between being a Nazi and a Jew I would be a Jew -- and it would be easy because there is no cultural or moral difference between Judaism and me, but that Nazism is an affront to my culture (after all, many of the Jews that Hitler killed might have as well been Germans) and would destroy much of my culture (of course, German-Americans are the gentiles most similar to the Ashkenazim in culture). Too bad about pork and shellfish if I had to go Orthodox... but far better would it be giving up pork and shellfish than becoming a murderer in spirit. 

I am going further: if I had to choose between tyranny that adopts American garb and starts setting up torture chambers or shooting pits for dissidents and pariahs and Islam... I would choose Islam, whose culture is very different from mine and which, unlike Reform Judaism, precludes pork, shellfish, beer, and wine -- all of which I enjoy. Morality means more than culture... 

When the time comes to incarcerate Donald Trump for his offenses against the Constitution and against the federal and state criminal codes, I have my idea of how to treat him. I would inflict upon him classical music and literary classics. I would compel him to read the Bible, the Quran, and Buddhist sutras, as well as secular philosophy. (My idea of how to run a male reformatory is to make sissies out of those tough macho types and make them fully human. I would compel them to wear pink uniforms as signals of their bad choices in life). Donald Trump is about as shallow as the typical criminal in the penal system. That is the problem: he gets away with it. Unlike the usual pimp or pusher he has been able to find people in awe of him.  

...Trump has said horrible things of Islam. It is fair to judge Muslims by the ethical standards of Islam, which explains how we could allow Muslims to judge Saddam Hussein. Murder, plunder, and persecution of Muslims are violations of Islamic law. They are also un-Christian. The ethical standards of Islam are far higher than the standards that Donald Trump has for himself. 


I am satisfied with those X'ers who believe that Donald Trump is contrary with their rational self-interest as is so with me. Trump exuded warning signs in 2016, and more people have come to recognize those throu8gh his actions. .

You are satisfied with Xr's going along with so called liberals? Just so I understand who you are and your values , which term do you identify with more these days, the term Democrat or the term liberal?

[pbrower2a]

I am a liberal and a Democrat. I see no contradiction. I also see myself showing more respect for tradition as I see radical assaults upon tradition by people calling themselves conservative.

[David Horn]

(01-31-2020, 04:07 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: ... You should know what American means, you should know the American pledge of allegiance by heart, you should understand the human losses and the sacrifices and the hardships and the goodness associated with the American flag and be able to recognize yourself and your freedoms as being with American flag and the American Constitution and the country for which it stands. At what point has the terms Liberal Democrat ever been placed above the terms America or American or viewed as above them and no longer accountable to them and so forth? Do you get my
drift or do you require more education?

So tell us, what sacrifices you have made -- you or anyone truly close to you. Did your father or grandfather or even an uncle go off to fight WW-II or Korea? What about Vietnam? And what of you? Did you volunteer to fight after the Iraq War? Did you go after 9/11? If you can't answer positively to some of what I asked, then please, ratchet down the patriotic rhetoric. It's not playing well.

[Bob Butler 54]

(02-01-2020, 02:41 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I don't have a problem if you demonize a demon as long as they're an obvious demon and not someone who simply disagrees or politically opposes you or is a fixture of your imagination or a kind of person that you don't like for some reason or another.

Well, liars, people that frequently threaten violence, people who commonly redefine words to something so indecipherable to make their attempts to communicate undecipherable, people who use schoolyard taunting in their common conversation…. All would qualify as ‘a kind of person that you don't like for some reason or another.’  But if the reason has no relation to politics, or cyclic theory, or anything with meaning to the site, I could see it.  Like, I would not demonize someone whose fashion was not mine, or died her hair an odd color.  That would not matter in her making a contribution to the site.

Does this create a problem?

One problem I have is illustrated by your claiming the Koch brothers are liberal.  They reworked Fox News into the model of a pro conservative propaganda machine, and created the split reality which in turn split the country.  I am a liberal and live among liberals, and don't know of anyone who would count the Koch brothers as among their own.  Yet, if you redefine liberal to mean something quite different than the standard definition, the statement might be true...  if meaningless.  You don't know which problem to take seriously.  I turns the statement from a lie to a problem akin to where the speaker has defined 'white' to mean 'black' but has not told anybody.  If it happens regularly, you have to throw a lot of baby out with the bathwater.

[Classic-Xer]

(02-01-2020, 03:44 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-31-2020, 04:07 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: ... You should know what American means, you should know the American pledge of allegiance by heart, you should understand the human losses and the sacrifices and the hardships and the goodness associated with the American flag and be able to recognize yourself and your freedoms as being with American flag and the American Constitution and the country for which it stands. At what point has the terms Liberal Democrat ever been placed above the terms America or American or viewed as above them and no longer accountable to them and so forth? Do you get my
drift or do you require more education?

So tell us, what sacrifices you have made -- you or anyone truly close to you.  Did your father or grandfather or even an uncle go off to fight WW-II or Korea?  What about Vietnam?  And what of you?  Did you volunteer to fight after the Iraq War?  Did you go after 9/11?  If you can't answer positively to some of what I asked, then please, ratchet down the patriotic rhetoric.  It's not playing well.

Well, I built a successful career from the bottom up and built an American business from the ground up so to speak and paid a lot of taxes ( Company payroll  for 8 employees, personal income taxes, capitol gains taxes  and state and local taxes and state and federal unemployment tax and work comp insurance and so forth) while doing them. The government invested less than fifteen hundred dollars in my education via grants. I owed less than one thousand dollars in government backed low interest school loans. What you see written here required a lot of sacrifice and financial risk to accomplish.

You served in Vietnam, what did you actually do over there? Did you earn any metals, see any battles, dodge any bullets or see any armed Viet Cong or North Vietnamese Army regulars at all? Did you enlist or were you drafted? I didn't have to volunteer for the Iraq war because the 1st Iraq war was more or less a cake wake as far as wars go that didn't require further enlistment. My buddy shot more Iraqi Republican Guard who were either ordering gunners via gun point or shooting unarmed Iraqi soldiers trying to surrender with machine guns. You see that was his job during the 1st Iraq war.

Me, I had several veterans in the family. I had a grandfather who was about to deploy to France when the 1st World War ended. I have a picture of him and in his buddies in their Dough Boy uniforms after completing basic training. He would have been over there but his battalion was depleted by influenza which delayed their deployment a few months as their ranks were replenished. I had two uncles who served during World War II. One of them us called back into service and served during Korea as well. My dad served during Korea. Another uncle served in Germany during its post war occupation. Me, I bounced around the idea of joining the Marine Corp after high school but my uncle told me that I'd be bored to death and get tired of being prepared and trained for a war that wouldn't occur and he was right about that back then. The mid to late 80's would have been a boring time to be serving in the military. So, I took his advice and went to school for HVAC instead.

[Classic-Xer]

(02-01-2020, 03:52 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(02-01-2020, 02:41 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I don't have a problem if you demonize a demon as long as they're an obvious demon and not someone who simply disagrees or politically opposes you or is a fixture of your imagination or a kind of person that you don't like for some reason or another.

Well, liars, people that frequently threaten violence, people who commonly redefine words to something so indecipherable to make their attempts to communicate undecipherable, people who use schoolyard taunting in their common conversation…. All would qualify as ‘a kind of person that you don't like for some reason or another.’  But if the reason has no relation to politics, or cyclic theory, or anything with meaning to the site, I could see it.  Like, I would not demonize someone whose fashion was not mine, or died her hair an odd color.  That would not matter in her making a contribution to the site.

Does this create a problem?

One problem I have is illustrated by your claiming the Koch brothers are liberal.  They reworked Fox News into the model of a pro conservative propaganda machine, and created the split reality which in turn split the country.  I am a liberal and live among liberals, and don't know of anyone who would count the Koch brothers as among their own.  Yet, if you redefine liberal to mean something quite different than the standard definition, the statement might be true...  if meaningless.  You don't know which problem to take seriously.  I turns the statement from a lie to a problem akin to where the speaker has defined 'white' to mean 'black' but has not told anybody.  If it happens regularly, you have to throw a lot of baby out with the bathwater.

I didn't say that Koch brothers were liberals. I said that the Koch brothers were supporting/backing Democratic candidates during the 2018 election. As I mentioned, it's alright to demonize an obvious demon but you better make sure that you're right about the rest or you can expect see reprimands and reprisals and lethal strikes. Hint..I don't mince words, sugar coat or waste time playing mind games. Do you prefer to be warned or prefer to be engaged and shredded. Common courtesy requires a warning before violence or other nastiness ensues.

[Bob Butler 54]

(02-02-2020, 01:45 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I didn't say that Koch brothers were liberals. I said that the Koch brothers were supporting/backing Democratic candidates during the 2018 election. As I mentioned, it's alright to demonize an obvious demon but you better make sure that you're right about the rest or you can expect see reprimands and reprisals and lethal strikes. Hint..I don't mince words, sugar coat or waste time playing mind games. Do you prefer to be warned or prefer to be engaged and shredded. Common courtesy requires a warning before violence or other nastiness ensues.

(01-30-2020, 03:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-30-2020, 01:55 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

The global elites are on your side, The bulk of the media elites are on your side. The bulk of the Hollywood elites are on your side. The bulk of the coastal city elites like Bloomberg who have substantial interests in China are on your side. The Koch Brothers are on your side. The modern day robber barons are on your side. The remnants of the old Bush wing elites are on your side. You may as well quit sucking up to me and slip back over with Eric like its always been since I arrived many years ago.

The way I keep score...

Primarily Establishment Conservative: Global Elites.  Fox News.  Breitbart.  The Elites.  The Koch Brothers.  The Robber Barons.  The Bush era Elite remnants.  The KKK.  The Neo nazis.  Racists.  Evangelicals.

Primarily Liberal: The Bulk of the coastal media.  Hollywood.  The Antifa.

I likely missed a lot of liberal elements, in part because you listed so many conservative elements that things got lopsided.

No mention of the 2018 election.

I saw my side as Democratic, liberal, progressive or blue.  I see them opposed primarily by the Republicans, conservatives or red.  As I support the 2nd Amendment, you are not pushing elite or racist ideas, but primarily, we are blue and red respectively.  The Koch brothers too are not pure, but mostly red. (Who does fit one of the two major stereotypes purely?)  I see in your putting the elites and racists as not on your side, so they are put on mine.  I think we are both correct in rejecting them. Putting them on my side means you are not listening.

I confess I do not take the threats of violence seriously.  If I did, I would take out a restraining order, talk to the police about the threats, moved around my various old martial arts weapons to make them more available, or at least made a complaint to the moderator.  It is interpreted as you just being immature, as being unable to defend your opinions otherwise, so you practice bullying mostly as a diversion.

How many times have you been arrested for murder, assault, disturbing the peace or similar crimes?  Do you boast about being a criminal?  Do you see it as ‘American’ to be a criminal?  Do you really advocate violence, or are you just playing internet mind games?  If I did go to the police, would I get laughed at?

Me, both martial arts schools I attended (The MIT Goju club and the Eternal Tao) had the instructors warn us that if you used what they taught for bullying or intimidation, you would be kicked from the school.  That seems entirely proper.

And, common courtesy would require smaller steps before demonization.  It is just that you have been so persistent.

[Classic-Xer]

(02-02-2020, 03:01 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(02-02-2020, 01:45 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I didn't say that Koch brothers were liberals. I said that the Koch brothers were supporting/backing Democratic candidates during the 2018 election. As I mentioned, it's alright to demonize an obvious demon but you better make sure that you're right about the rest or you can expect see reprimands and reprisals and lethal strikes. Hint..I don't mince words, sugar coat or waste time playing mind games. Do you prefer to be warned or prefer to be engaged and shredded. Common courtesy requires a warning before violence or other nastiness ensues.

(01-30-2020, 03:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-30-2020, 01:55 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

The global elites are on your side, The bulk of the media elites are on your side. The bulk of the Hollywood elites are on your side. The bulk of the coastal city elites like Bloomberg who have substantial interests in China are on your side. The Koch Brothers are on your side. The modern day robber barons are on your side. The remnants of the old Bush wing elites are on your side. You may as well quit sucking up to me and slip back over with Eric like its always been since I arrived many years ago.

The way I keep score...

Primarily Establishment Conservative: Global Elites.  Fox News.  Breitbart.  The Elites.  The Koch Brothers.  The Robber Barons.  The Bush era Elite remnants.  The KKK.  The Neo nazis.  Racists.  Evangelicals.

Primarily Liberal: The Bulk of the coastal media.  Hollywood.  The Antifa.

I likely missed a lot of liberal elements, in part because you listed so many conservative elements that things got lopsided.

No mention of the 2018 election.

I saw my side as Democratic, liberal, progressive or blue.  I see them opposed primarily by the Republicans, conservatives or red.  As I support the 2nd Amendment, you are not pushing elite or racist ideas, but primarily, we are blue and red respectively.  The Koch brothers too are not pure, but mostly red.  (Who does fit one of the two major stereotypes purely?)  I see in your putting the elites and racists as not on your side, so they are put on mine.  I think we are both correct in rejecting them.  Putting them on my side means you are not listening.

I confess I do not take the threats of violence seriously.  If I did, I would take out a restraining order, talk to the police about the threats, moved around my various old martial arts weapons to make them more available, or at least made a complaint to the moderator.  It is interpreted as you just being immature, as being unable to defend your opinions otherwise, so you practice bullying mostly as a diversion.

How many times have you been arrested for murder, assault, disturbing the peace or similar crimes?  Do you boast about being a criminal?  Do you see it as ‘American’ to be a criminal?  Do you really advocate violence, or are you just playing internet mind games?  If I did go to the police, would I get laughed at?

Me, both martial arts schools I attended (The MIT Goju club and the Eternal Tao) had the instructors warn us that if you used what they taught for bullying or intimidation, you would be kicked from the school.  That seems entirely proper.

And, common courtesy would require smaller steps before demonization.  It is just that you have been so persistent.

I don't advocate violence. Personally, I view it as a last resort and only proper when used for defense and war. I don't ignore the possibility of it being used improperly nor reject the right to use it altogether either. I've haven't been arrested for a crime or investigated for a crime either. I've had a few speeding tickets and a couple minor citations but that's it. 

I'd suggest that you reevaluate and remove the KKK, Neo Nazi's and racists from the Republican side. I've had encounters with racists on your side who aren't white. Hint..they don't like you anymore than me and don't like any of there own race who don't share the racist beliefs either. Hint...Calling me a racist and blaming me for racism isn't going to change their racist beliefs pertaining to white people in general. The same goes for the KKK and the Neo Nazies and other white supremacists out there. What's cool, the non racist American population substantially outnumbers them all these days.

Dude, I don't cry demoziation or use the term against you like you do with me or accuse you of doing it a lot either. It would be nice if you were able to recognize and admit you did something bad and say your sorry instead of lying to me and denying that you did anything wrong. It would be nice but it doesn't seem to be in your nature these days. You're not alone, the liberal side has a major problem with it these days.

[Bob Butler 54]

(02-03-2020, 12:29 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I don't advocate violence. Personally, I view it as a last resort and only proper when used for defense and war. I don't ignore the possibility of it being used improperly nor reject the right to use it altogether either. I've haven't been arrested for a crime or investigated for a crime either. I've had a few speeding tickets and a couple minor citations but that's it. 

I'd suggest that you reevaluate and remove the KKK, Neo Nazi's and racists from the Republican side. I've had encounters with racists on your side who aren't white. Hint..they don't like you anymore than me and don't like any of there own race who don't share the racist beliefs either. Hint...Calling me a racist and blaming me for racism isn't going to change their racist beliefs pertaining to white people in general. The same goes for the KKK and the Neo Nazies and other white supremacists out there. What's cool, the non racist American population substantially outnumbers them all these days.

Dude, I don't cry demoziation or use the term against you like you do with me or accuse you of doing it a lot either. It would be nice if you were able to recognize and  admit you did something bad and say your sorry instead of lying to me and denying that you did anything wrong. It would be nice but it doesn't seem to be in your nature these days. You're not alone, the liberal side has a major problem with it these days.

I’ve also had a few traffic citations, so I figure we’re in about the same place there.

The social justice warriors may have got a bit aggressive in the late Obama years.  I never encountered it, and the long history of racism made me not eager to join that fight.  Over the long long term, minorities have had to endure far worse.  I remained out of it.  Trump seems to be more aggressive and in part is responsible for the resurgence of the KKK and Neo Nazi, and far less directly in the Antifa response.  I don’t see anyone here big into that scene.  I would as soon it disappeared both ways.  

Still, wishing does not make it so.  Trump and some Republicans encourage or use racism and racists.  Some progressives fight it.  The Southern Strategy is real.  That does not mean all Republicans are engaged in it, or all progressives in physically fighting it, bit it does exist.  Racism is a part of the struggle between the two sides, like it or not.  The better of the conservatives will sincerely repudiate it, and I would wish them well in the repudiation.   Those who will not acknowledge that it is there are part of the problem.

The trouble I had were with your persistent style, the common threats of violence, the weirdly defined terms, etc.  My calling you on them was the only way I could see of countering them.  My calling you on these problems will go away when the behaviors stop.  I can even give you benefit of the doubt for a bit.  

I don’t see it as anything to do with sides.

[David Horn]

(02-01-2020, 11:34 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Well, I built a successful career from the bottom up and built an American business from the ground up so to speak and paid a lot of taxes ( Company payroll  for 8 employees, personal income taxes, capitol gains taxes  and state and local taxes and state and federal unemployment tax and work comp insurance and so forth) while doing them. The government invested less than fifteen hundred dollars in my education via grants. I owed less than one thousand dollars in government backed low interest school loans. What you see written here required a lot of sacrifice  and financial risk to accomplish.

I won't argue your accomplishments in the business world, nor deny you credit for working hard and being frugal. That was not my point. My point has to do with flag-waving rhetoric, when 99% of Americans your age never served. You can thank Nixon for that, though it's now becoming painfully obvious that eliminating any mandatory form of service-to-country has been a tragic mistake. I got excoriated for saying so at the time.

Classic-Xer Wrote:You served in Vietnam, what did you actually do over there? Did you earn any metals, see any battles, dodge any bullets or see any armed Viet Cong or North Vietnamese Army regulars at all? Did you enlist or were you drafted? I didn't have to volunteer for the Iraq war because the 1st Iraq war was more or less a cake wake as far as wars go that didn't require further enlistment. My buddy shot more Iraqi Republican Guard who were either ordering gunners via gun point or shooting unarmed Iraqi soldiers trying to surrender with machine guns. You see that was his job during the 1st Iraq war.

A lot of question there, but answering in Cliff Notes fashion: I wasn't in the infantry (11B20), so no battles. We got mortared on a semi-regular basis, but lost no one from my unit during the time it was deployed. And I enlisted, fwiw. Getting drafted was the best way to get assigned to 11B. My unit was a military extension of the NSA, so we were considered targets.

Classic-Xer Wrote:Me, I had several veterans in the family. I had a grandfather who was about to deploy to France when the 1st World War ended. I have a picture of him and in his buddies in their Dough Boy uniforms after completing basic training. He would have been over there but his battalion was depleted by influenza which delayed their deployment a few months as their ranks were replenished. I had two uncles who served during World War II. One of them us called back into service and served during Korea as well. My dad served during Korea. Another uncle served in Germany during its post war occupation. Me, I bounced around the idea of joining the Marine Corp after high school but my uncle told me that I'd be bored to death and get tired of being prepared and trained for a war that wouldn't occur and he was right about that back then. The mid to late 80's  would have been a boring time to be serving in the military. So, I took his advice and went to school for HVAC instead.

Most vets of those earlier wars said little about their service after returning home, because it was just that bad. WW-I: the trenches. WW-II: Marine assaults in the Pacific and any number of major battles in Europe. Korea: many battles in a very short time. Vietnam and the later wars are more familiar to most. In all cases, the potential of getting killed or injured was always there, even when things got boing. Again, that wasn't really my point.

[Classic-Xer]

(02-03-2020, 08:36 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(02-03-2020, 12:29 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I don't advocate violence. Personally, I view it as a last resort and only proper when used for defense and war. I don't ignore the possibility of it being used improperly nor reject the right to use it altogether either. I've haven't been arrested for a crime or investigated for a crime either. I've had a few speeding tickets and a couple minor citations but that's it. 

I'd suggest that you reevaluate and remove the KKK, Neo Nazi's and racists from the Republican side. I've had encounters with racists on your side who aren't white. Hint..they don't like you anymore than me and don't like any of there own race who don't share the racist beliefs either. Hint...Calling me a racist and blaming me for racism isn't going to change their racist beliefs pertaining to white people in general. The same goes for the KKK and the Neo Nazies and other white supremacists out there. What's cool, the non racist American population substantially outnumbers them all these days.

Dude, I don't cry demoziation or use the term against you like you do with me or accuse you of doing it a lot either. It would be nice if you were able to recognize and  admit you did something bad and say your sorry instead of lying to me and denying that you did anything wrong. It would be nice but it doesn't seem to be in your nature these days. You're not alone, the liberal side has a major problem with it these days.

I’ve also had a few traffic citations, so I figure we’re in about the same place there.

The social justice warriors may have got a bit aggressive in the late Obama years.  I never encountered it, and the long history of racism made me not eager to join that fight.  Over the long long term, minorities have had to endure far worse.  I remained out of it.  Trump seems to be more aggressive and in part is responsible for the resurgence of the KKK and Neo Nazi, and far less directly in the Antifa response.  I don’t see anyone here big into that scene.  I would as soon it disappeared both ways.  

Still, wishing does not make it so.  Trump and some Republicans encourage or use racism and racists.  Some progressives fight it.  The Southern Strategy is real.  That does not mean all Republicans are engaged in it, or all progressives in physically fighting it, bit it does exist.  Racism is a part of the struggle between the two sides, like it or not.  The better of the conservatives will sincerely repudiate it, and I would wish them well in the repudiation.   Those who will not acknowledge that it is there are part of the problem.

The trouble I had were with your persistent style, the common threats of violence, the weirdly defined terms, etc.  My calling you on them was the only way I could see of countering them.  My calling you on these problems will go away when the behaviors stop.  I can even give you benefit of the doubt for a bit.  

I don’t see it as anything to do with sides.

The SJW's, the globalists/so called global citizens and the Quasi Socialists are the ones with the most influence and causing the most trouble for the Democratic side these days.

[Bob Butler 54]

(02-04-2020, 03:12 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The SJW's, the globalists/so called global citizens  and the Quasi Socialists are the ones with the most influence and causing the most  trouble for the Democratic side these days.

My three basic problems with the conservative movement are a habitual alliance between the establishment Republicans and the Elites, the racist element, and the small government theory that we should not work on things that need to be done.  I have not exactly been shy to denounce all three.  I note you are not an advocate of the racist or elites elements.  The Tea Party is an attempt to free the conservative base from elites.  I noted a prior post where you admitted it is not a good thing to let problems sit around and get worse.  You have denounced racism a number of times.

In theory, we should be on the same side.

My problem is that many in the middle of the country pursue the agenda set by the elites and racists.  While in many ways the Tea Party is ahead of the Democrats in fighting elite influence, still the elite influence is sending jobs abroad to the profit of a few, and that in fighting the minorities the racists ended up hurting the poor of the Xers and Millennials.  If you didn’t start saving way back when the influence of the Progressive Era was still strong, you find the fruit of your labor going to the elites instead of a retirement account.

I want to shake the typical person from the middle of the country and demand he wake up, to ask who he is really helping.

[David Horn]

(02-04-2020, 04:31 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: … I want to shake the typical person from the middle of the country and demand he wake up, to ask who he is really helping.

Excellent point, though a futile one. I'm afraid the media programming on that side of the divide has been more than just successful. It's created a true faux reality. I live in an area where this magical thinking is the norm, and it's freaky to say the least. Then again, I'm used to it, and don't return-fire when things are said that are undeniably wrong. A word of warning: you don't have to drink the Kool-Aid to have it affect you.

[Bob Butler 54]

(02-04-2020, 05:36 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(02-04-2020, 04:31 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: … I want to shake the typical person from the middle of the country and demand he wake up, to ask who he is really helping.

Excellent point, though a futile one.  I'm afraid the media programming on that side of the divide has been more than just successful.  It's created a true faux reality.  I live in an area where this magical thinking is the norm, and it's freaky to say the least.  Then again, I'm used to it, and don't return-fire when things are said that are undeniably wrong.  A word of warning: you don't have to drink the Kool-Aid to have it affect you.

I did start early enough that the influence of the progressive era was still strong. I am not effected personally. I just see the disaster to the Republicans coming when it all breaks down. As the Great Republican said, “You can’t fool all of the people, all of the time.”

[Classic-Xer]

(02-04-2020, 04:31 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(02-04-2020, 03:12 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The SJW's, the globalists/so called global citizens  and the Quasi Socialists are the ones with the most influence and causing the most  trouble for the Democratic side these days.

My three basic problems with the conservative movement are a habitual alliance between the establishment Republicans and the Elites, the racist element, and the small government theory that we should not work on things that need to be done.  I have not exactly been shy to denounce all three.  I note you are not an advocate of the racist or elites elements.  The Tea Party is an attempt to free the conservative base from elites.  I noted a prior post where you admitted it is not a good thing to let problems sit around and get worse.  You have denounced racism a number of times.

In theory, we should be on the same side.

My problem is that many in the middle of the country pursue the agenda set by the elites and racists.  While in many ways the Tea Party is ahead of the Democrats in fighting elite influence, still the elite influence is sending jobs abroad to the profit of a few, and that in fighting the minorities the racists ended up hurting the poor of the Xers and Millennials.  If you didn’t start saving way back when the influence of the Progressive Era was still strong, you find the fruit of your labor going to the elites instead of a retirement account.

I want to shake the typical person from the middle of the country and demand he wake up, to ask who he is really helping.

You're associated with an agenda set by elites and racists. I've run into/ seen more racist minorities associated with progressive politics than KKK and Neo Nazi's these days. Nope, it's not a good thing to ignore these problems and let these problems get even worse and become a major problem for Democrats. I don't tolerate racism that exists on the progressive side and I don't bow down or submit to their form of pressure either. So, who are you helping?