The AIM of the DEMOCRATIC Party in America
In recent decades, the Democratic Party has become increasingly leftist. Examples of these are the decriminalization of marijuana, lax rules regarding criminals-there are no jail time for petty crimes, & the proliferation of illegal immigrants to the United States among other things. America is being destroyed in increments. What are YOUR thoughts?Americans want to trust their Government, the Government really doesn't care about the public opinions nor demon-cracy. The elite authorities trust each other more so , and simple lie to the public all the time. We know this lying, from when they open their mouths. It's why I trust far more in the greater good amoung my family and tribe of artists for the pass 50 years. All I seen done by Government God's, from youth is tripling taxes , and greedy financial institution less fun, less healthy, more difficult and divide and conquer. . Being more private investor at living creates a free trade, building relationships and a successful life. It's also a serious fun lifestyle.
Because elitists Government and madd greedies, don't care for people at all, at all. If much of the narrative doesn't believe me. So what do I care, as long as I'm experienceing less suffering and more pleasure giving it all away. Giving very little attention to the Governments makes most of those empty promises and worries go away.I agree that marijuana should be legalized, you can grow it in the backyard, they have made it into a major crime industry because they have illegalized it. There are tens of thousands of people rotting away in jail whose only crime was growing some weed in their yard or selling some small bag of it.
Its a waste of time and resources to fund police, jail, convict people who want to smoke a weed or sell some on the side.
The only thing it really helps making it illegal is the pharmaceutical industry and the gangs and cartels that sell and grow it because it is illegal.
As for the rest... what Democrats are today is simple and has really been put on display since Oct 7th.
They are all about Oppressed or Oppressor.
Victim or Victimizer
Based on that, you cannot be a criminal if you are a victim, if you have been oppressed. You cannot be a terrorist if you are the victim and have been oppressed.
Very simple ideology.
Yes it goes further than that, is more complex, involves race and religion.
But that essentially sums it up, which is why you see LGBTQ+ groups marching for and defending Hamas and Palestine. Doesn't make sense to people like you or I, but if you understand it through the new Left/Democrat prism it all makes sense.
Its why Jews are being attacked on campuses, why Transmen are replacing women in sports, why people who complain about millions streaming across the borders are racist, etc. etc.
Marxism changed and transformed to Postmodernism, which changed and realigned to Identity Politics and minorities rights. In sum we have a little bit of all of them driving the Democrat Party, their major funders and supporters.
In short, the Democrat Party used to be the party of the Blue Collar working class, but has shifted over to a intellectual socialist class focused on minority rights. While the Republicans have shifted to being a Nationalist, Capitalist, Blue Collar party.
Ultimately though, there is the Uniparty, which is Globalist, Corporatist and Socialist (Identity Politics) in nature. Globalist and Corporatist for the elites pulling the strings, and then lower class existence for the rest, tiered by victim and oppression status.A fair overall accessment.
I actually built a tiny houses partly out of hemp. And grew cannabis medicine in BC Canada . No other plant on earth can make 50,000 products and be the best medicine known to humankind. It's among the greatest conspiracy theories along with throw away light bulbs conspiracy.
Cannabis has been made into a billionaire profit recreational drug rather than a medicine, that can be best served.Here's a very interesting article on the subject. It claims that fear of Mexicans crossing the border was a basic cause of its becoming illegal years ago. So if this article is true, it was a discriminatory act, just the same as segregation or other acts passed against a race of people.
https://www.history.com/news/why-the-u- … na-illegalThe name Marijuana came from what they called the Mexican drug. As kids we smoked Mexican weed and it took 5 joints to get high. The marijanna properganda films we had to watch in school, (my favorite Reefer Maddness) only encouraged us more, to find out what stronger pot they were smoking. The beginnings of pleasure rebel, today everything in moderation.
Thank you, as I typed a moment of clarity struck.
Then it went away, so that is good.
This was pretty good.
Unfortunately it is much more complicated.
We have a union between the International Corporate elites which is coalesced into the World Economic Forum and we have the United Nations... which partnered with the WEF back in 2019.
We the People are essentially screwed because we are fighting the combined power and authority of the UN, IMF, WHO and the immense might of the world's largest corporations working in unison to move the Western World toward Agenda 2030 / Great Reset goals.
As if that wouldn't be bad enough...
The other more insidious, not so out in the open as the UN and WEF, power that America is fighting, that is having great success in deconstructing and destroying our nation, is the Chinese Communist Party, which has many fans in our Corporate Elites and some of our Political Elites as well.
The impact the Chinese are having on America reminds me a lot of the 1978 (?) version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, where the Alien pod slowly sucks all the life out of the sleeping human, until it is too late, and they are unable to awake.
What is worse, I believe Biden was their Manchurian Candidate, it is the only thing that explains how he could drive so many nations into China's arms in so short a time... Russia, Saudia Arabia, the UAE, the most significant of them."Based on that, you cannot be a criminal if you are a victim, if you have been oppressed. You cannot be a terrorist if you are the victim and have been oppressed."
Wrong assessment. This society contains a certain amount of oppression and unjust treatment as a very part of its DNA. You can be a criminal without being a "victim", and you can be victim without being a criminal.
Saying that LGBTQ are in favor of supporting Hamas and Palestine is a gross generalization. While I don't support Hamas, I support the Palestinians getting a fair shake in Gaza from the Israeli government, so it is not just deviants from your perspective that are anti-Israeli. Conservatives continue to confuse being opposed to the tactics of the Israeli government as anti-Semitic, and it is quite droll at this point. The distinction seems pretty clear to me.
I am not happy about millions streaming across the border if this not just another exaggeration of yours that I will have to fact check to verify.
Black people, for example, has always had to resort to identity politics as the politics always seem to identify them by the larger society as a group to be subjugated and exploited. Shouldn't everybody have rights, Ken? Why distinguish the rights of minorities from that of anyone else?
Your "new Republicans"seem to have a problem with Democracy, preferring authoritarianism. Nothing presented from the other side, which is basically the status quo, can be any worse in my opinion.
In the face of that, MAGA and Trumpism is certainly not the answer."Why distinguish the rights of minorities from that of anyone else?"
Because the minorities demand it be so. Problem is that too many minorities (individuals, not necessarily groups) demand that they are more, and different, rights than others. Transgenders, for instance, demand that they be able to use the bathroom reserved for the other sex and that they be able to compete in athletic endeavors reserved for the other sex. BLM demanded, at one point, that black folks be allowed to make their own set of laws rather than following those of everyone. The list is long of minorities demanding what no one else can have.Examples that are aberrations and not representative of the issue as a whole. I see that you are are still in good form, Wilderness
Contrarily, those "aberrations" have defined the "whole" of each issue in the public's mind. Set aside the views of strong supporters and strong opponents, and consider the views of moderate Americans, the middle-of-the-road kitchen-table issue Americans. They are the bulk of the public.
As I feel very representative of 'middle America,' I'll go with 'we.'
We accepted the reality of the LGBQ issue and were moving forward. Then the 'T' was added, then the other letters, and then the '+'s' were added, then the bathrooms were added, then the multiple sexes were added, and the physical males in physical female domains was added, and then . . .
Each of those 'added' issues that you define as aberrations—in your view, became the reality of the issue for us.
BLM is the same for us middle Americans. We have supported the drive for racial equality since the 70s. Most of us condemned the George Foreman-type examples that gave rise to BLM until the BLM started adding stuff like in the LGBQ example.
Those aberrations didn't just define the issues for us, they defined them for you too. Where we were saying, 'Hold on, let's slow down a bit,' you were putting your foot down and demanding acceptance of all those 'addeds' as new norms.
Now put the proponents and opponents back in. Your 1/3 'block' is demanding that our 2/3 block accept your reality as the true reality. That is how 'we' see your view of those aberrations.
GAAll very well said.
As always, GA, you are a voice of reason in an unreasonable world.
As for the quote above, this is exactly where we are at... extended to a lot more than those topics noted.Well, I was already presumptuous enough to speak for the "we" so I charged forward and presumed just those couple of examples would carry the point. There are 'others,' but those two spoke for them.
GA
Well put. Most diversity was well accepted by the large minority...but it never seems to end, just like the additional letters of the gay minority.
Yep. Except, the political size of the three blocks is saying we aren't the minority anymore. At least in numbers, but we still are in political power.
It's going to take a 3rd-party disruption of the political status quo (a la Perot) to wake up the zealots. In today's election choices, I could easily be a No Labels voter, maybe.
GAYou might appreciate this.
https://twitter.com/Pismo_B/status/1766302252036399171
Well GA, all of you have ganged up on me and I have to make a reply. The sty in the blue eye syndrome permits a myopic view of thing where others (not your definition of "public") would perhaps see things differently. These are expressions of varying shades of red, solely. But we can move beyond optics, many are tone deaf as well.
Your definition for "moderate" may well not be universally accepted. It is the reflexive tendency for white folks to see their views as naturally the norm, while those of everyone else is always in the extreme.
Do you guys see me as a bomb throwing, socialist, Marxist threat to America? Your "moderate" America might well believe so. But, as for me, I am my own normal. I embrace progressism as the only viable course toward what I consider a habitable society, and I can understand why the crimson folks would naturally resist the tendency for inclusion of the idea of multiethnic, democratic sharing of power. That is what this fundamentally all about, isn't it? So, then, I suppose that I am not representative of "middle America"? We are not the same.
So, I suppose that your aberrations are my front and center concerns and what I consider aberrations dominate the thoughts of the Red people all of the time.
It was well stated from material that I have read and most of you are reluctant to read in fear of revelations that you would find there. After the upheaveal in civil rights matters in the sixties, we came into a period after where an accommodation worked fine as long as the numbers and relative influence ultimately maintained white supremacy. Well, with the new demographics and the increasing power of minority voices in America that is the threat the Right is terrified of its offers a Trump as the remedy. How can so inept and crass a man attract so many of you, is it not fear of being backed into a corner in regards to the keeping the status quo? So, what do you do, you eradicate the very existence and experience of minorities in literature as, Woke. Come to Florida and see what that means in promoting lies and muzzling true history in favor of Disneyeque versions in our school libraries. Middle America is declaring war on me, so am I not going to keep my powder dry?
From our perspective, and we talked about this before, your "slow down" has too often meant a halt. There are a lot bones I have to pick with you folks, I am just being honest in making you aware of that.Geez bud, "the blue eye syndrome," "reflexive tendency for white folks," "most of you are reluctant to read in fear of revelations that you would find," and " ultimately maintained white supremacy." There weren't any thoughts like that in my original response. How you got there is on you.
The "we" that I spoke of representing would not see you as a bomb thrower simply because you are black. You seem so stuck on Righties and race that, in a nod to your penchant for tropes, you can't see the forest for the trees . . . "
"We" are not closed-minded bigots, yet that is how you see any opposition to your perspective. As an extreme example, "we" don't see believing there are more than two sexes as a biological fact, and you have said you don't either. Does that make you one of those folks that "are reluctant to read in fear of revelations that you would find?
In past discussions, you agreed that Voter IDs aren't necessarily a bad thing as long as they didn't disenfranchise 'your people.' Does that make you a Rightie?
Even more damning is your adoption of "W's" mantra that 'if you ain't with us you are against us' stance in almost every response to your proclamations (the idea that there are only Righties and Lefties with no moderate middle ground). Does that make you a Rightie?
In the previous conversations you allude to, as I remember, there were plenty of statements from Black leaders of the times that supported the belief that we have made, and continue to make good progress. I don't think you can support your thought that too often going slow means halting. I would say that most often it is going slow that achieves progress.
Taste the pudding for yourself. The past 30 years have seen (IMO) good and steady progress relative to LGBQ issues. Now look at the last 5 years with the addition of the trans aspects, the multiple sexes and pronouns stuff. Do you think we are still making good progress or do you think we have hit the wall of acceptance?
Consider the same question relative to the introduction of BLM. Too much too fast and once more the early years of slow progress has hit the wall of acceptance and there is less than no progress.
You guys are the minority now, relative to moderates, in numbers, and if you continue you will soon be the minority in political power too. But you will have a comparable amount of company because the Righties with your strength of conviction (but for their convictions), will be a minority too.
Of course, that's just prophesy based on opinion. It could be as wrong as I think it is right.
GA"The "we" that I spoke of representing would not see you as a bomb thrower simply because you are black. You seem so stuck on Righties and race that, in a nod to your penchant for tropes, you can't see the forest for the trees . ."
No, not just because I am black but because I am a radical leftist mutant as described by Donald Trump. I am stuck on what has always been America's primary sin and one that we continue to try to expunge our selves of. In my opinion this is at the very root of MAGA and Trump appeal. Strong stuff, but that is what I think.
Yes, I did say that voter ID is valid as long as access to it was free and unencumbered by any and all eligible voters.
We have been making progress until recently with the introduction of Trump and MAGA and their love of racist dog whistles. Under this new parodyme are we really progressing?
I cannot speak to the LGBQ issues except that they have the right to be treated fairly as anyone else. But I have to draw the line at bathrooms and sports competitions. Yes, I am a lefty but still somewhat old fashioned as to not really appreciate how we could cross that line with a straight face. Conservatives love to use this example to avoid others that are more difficult to defend.
I have never seen the Democratic Party embrace BLM in any ridiculous proposals. But I have seen the GOP get in bed with White Christian Nationalists, and any array of anti-democratic groups that find a home there. I have heard scuttlebut about repeal of the 19th amendment along with ideas from that Indian candidate as to how restrict voting by younger citizens, put it together and it spells trouble. So, where is my middle ground? A Party that embraces the Hungarian authoritarian as a model for the United States, as he was invited to address a C-PAC conference a couple of years ago. This is the current Republican Party, for which all conservatives are linked at the hip in one way another.
With current political climate, there is no middle of the road, either you accept multiethnic democracy or support a handmaiden tale world enforced by authoritarians and those that believe that they have the right to rule over a majority with their limited numbers. I have skin in the game to promote the former rather than the latter, because the resulting tyranny would more likely be visited upon me first.
More than you wanted to hear? Sorry, there is no brief simple answer, oftentimes.
.You are all over the place. You can see yourself being seen as a radical leftist, then say you're an out-fashioned Lefty. And then you agree with things even a Lefty wouldn't accept, i.e. the voter ID or sexes battles. You defend your statements with references to Trump and MAGA and the destruction of Democracy.
The context of our exchange was established in the first response. It was about a Moderate's or Independent's perspective of recent (last 5 years?) social change issues, which you called aberrations.
That first response even noted one consideration that tossed aside the extremes of the pros and cons to look at the 'aberrations' solely from what was offered as a middle-American moderate's view.
There was no Trump or MAGA mentioned or inferred. I'm not sure if the parties were even mentioned—relative to specifics.
A second response tried to point you back to the context of the origin of our exchange, but that didn't help. Look at the extremes of this post. You speak to everything except the perspective offered. It's like you have a quiver stocked with designated responses and you just grab and shoot. In this case, none of what you 'shot' was relative to what you were responding to.
You find no middle ground on issues because you won't accept it. There is a lot of middle ground to be found when you look for it.
Hey, I'm trying to save you bud, I know the Dark Side has it's power, but the Force is strong, there is hope. Open your mind Luke, there is hope for you. ROFLMAO poke, poke . . . ;-)
GAOK, GA
"You are all over the place. You can see yourself being seen as a radical leftist, then say you're an out-fashioned Lefty. And then you agree with things even a Lefty wouldn't accept, i.e. the voter ID or sexes battles. You defend your statements with references to Trump and MAGA and the destruction of Democracy."
All over the place, am I? No one is 100 percent anything, anyone who can walk between the raindrops like yourself without getting wet would acknowledge that. If I were tested, I would have been found to have a strong left leaning tendency in my attitudes and politics. The left is concerned about needless impediments in the path of any citizen who meets the qualification for voting to vote. If voter ID can be employed with that in mind, you will find that most of the Left have no issue with it.
"The context of our exchange was established in the first response. It was about a Moderate's or Independent's perspective of recent (last 5 years?) social change issues, which you called aberrations."
I say that is merely from the perspective of a strident right as what is "normal" So what is Middle American moderate? Whose Middle America, certainly not my perspective of it.
As long as I have known you you always chastised forum participants for mentioning Trump. Well "bud" most of us in the know are well aware that over the last 8 years he has been the focus of all reactionary rightwing politics that has virtually taken over the Republican Party. You will ignore the elephant in the room while clearly being pressed against the wall by it. I am not as easily distracted.
"A second response tried to point you back to the context of the origin of our exchange, but that didn't help. Look at the extremes of this post. You speak to everything except the perspective offered. It's like you have a quiver stocked with designated responses and you just grab and shoot. In this case, none of what you 'shot' was relative to what you were responding to."
Your perspective does not work for me, it is equivocation. In spite of your renown "purple" stance, in November there will only be two items on the menu: the continued struggle, status quo with the goal of a multicultural/multiethnic democracy or you can follow the path of Trump MAGA and the authoritarian approach and rule by fiat. Anyone that reads the papers can see the clear distinction and the danger and where it is leading. There is no one advocating for an alternate political path, this so called middle ground stuff you keep talking about.
Those that choose the path of strongman authoritarian tyranny, I have no use for. The choice is quite clear when you cut through all the BS."Walk between the raindrops." Now there's a chuckle. I feel you didn't mean it as a compliment, but I'm still slightly flattered. After all, I think I'm usually the one that gets most wet because I don't have an umbrella of a 'side' to make me feel dry.
I agree with your "If I were tested . . ." thought. You have projected yourself as a 'Lefty' over all these years. But, even when you go overboard—girded with sharpened quill held high—you are able to moderate your thoughts when a reasonably presented argument provides you with a reason—a la the voter ID and extreme trans stuff. A 'Lefty" can hold a comparable 'Moderate's' view, but a radical Leftist never would.
As for chastizing any talk of Trump, I think you are mistaken. I generally don't enter Trump conversations (now, not before), so my chastizement would be for introducing Trump into a discussion that isn't about him or need to include him.
This part is confusing:
"I say that is merely from the perspective of a strident right as what is "normal" So what is Middle American moderate? Whose Middle America, certainly not my perspective of it."
I have been presenting you my view, as representing a moderate middle-American perspective. The "strident Right's" view is different. I didn't address it, you did.
Since I have presumed to represent the Middle American moderate's view—from the beginning, your questions says you're not listening. You know what you want to fight against so it doesn't matter what challenge you are responding to, you respond to the one you want to fight. This exchange shows that.
You, as a Lefty and I as a Moderate have acknowledged common ground on several important issues over the years. Again, the Voter ID and trans stuff show this. We found a middle ground where a Lefty and Moderate agree, yet you brush that aside to reiterate that you can find no middle ground with a Righty. The genesis of our exchange wasn't about Righties, but that's where you went.
You see my position as equivocation and November being a two-item menu. You are wrong on both. My position may change but it doesn't equivocate. For me, November holds at least three choices; Trump, Biden, and Other.
I'm all for a 3rd party challenge. Both parties have gone off the rails. One or both of them need to crash to rebuild or that 3rd party disruption will become a legitimate 3rd choice. If we, as representing our claimed segments, can expand on the middle ground we have already found we might be the new 3rd choice party. I'll even let you name it. But you'll have to ditch this 'everybody that isn't a Lefty is a Righty' soapbox.
As for no one advocating a middle-ground party . . . media is presenting the possibility as possibly more serious than even Perot's attempt. Yes, people are seriously talking about the possibility of its threat. Look down, there's middle ground all around.
GAI am never going to deliberate insult you GA, you and I have been at it for too long. The comment might be akin to straddling the fence. Most of us have baggage and war wounds from the fray, yet you come out like that "magic bullet" (Warren Report) every-time. I have considered you a friend in the spirit of debate, but I must live with my comments as being honest and forthright every time I look at my reflection in the mirror.
Give me a reasonable argument and I will be reasonable. As I said from and ideological standpoint there can be no pure blue or red. There will always be a little contamination, the question is, how much?
You are supremely confident that you have a moderate middle American view, while the predomininent majority of Blacks, for example, politically lie to left of your "moderate center". Are so many outside of your norm?
Trump has changed the dynamics in what it means to be a Righty compared to your moderate definition. Trump, there's that word again, has redefined the meaning of that for all of us.
A vote for "other" is a nothing vote, there is not a political candidate named other. I am active in participation as I can ill afford to allow tyrannical clowns to take my government away from me, aka, the voters. GA, we all know that 3rd parties is not viable solution right now, and are unlikely to be in the near future. A parliamentary system may be better if you can turn the Constitution on its head.
While you say that both parties have gone off from the rails, the Republicans are far more dangerous and that is the issue where there can be no double speak from me.Yes, I am confident that my view represents the moderate view of most middle-Americans, but I don't think it is the only view, nor the only right one. It's just that all the others are wrong ;-o
Speaking of black voters is a good point. To be clear, I don't think of all black voters as BLM-type voters (like you think of all Republicans as Trump voters). If that's wrong then I am really off-base. Even though they typically vote Democrat, I have the perception that you are further left than most. Might even be safe to think of them as moderate Democrats rather than 'Lefties.' Moderate democrats can be a party vote without adopting the extremes of the party. They might fit right into my Moderates/Independents segment. In this Trump era, I'm not sure the moderate Republicans can do the same. The party has left too many of them.
You're not a 3rd-party voter because you don't think your party is as bad as the Republicans. I think you would change your mind if you thought they were. I think they are just as dangerous but for different reasons. A 3rd party option will never be viable until circumstances make it so. For me, this limited choice of Trump or Biden has provided those circumstances.
We will end up strong enough to disrupt this election to the point that both parties realize they need our vote. And voters will realize it is possible to break our two-party stranglehold. One step at a time.
GA“Yes, I am confident that my view represents the moderate view of most middle-Americans, but I don't think it is the only view, nor the only right one. It's just that all the others are wrong ;-o”
Aren't we modest? The right always believe that it is “right” without any substantive evidence to support it. It reminds me of the affliction of your ideological kindred spirit in this forum.
Well, gosh GA, what else are we suppose to think? Trump is being practically coronated for the nomination for the GOP, with virtually no challengers. That says that most GOP are Trump people for me.
Your perception about my being left of much of the black majority is correct. There is element of black conservatism (social) associated with the church and religion. I was a trouble maker as a kid as I did not like being told what to believe. I wanted to do my own thinking and assess things with my own relentless logic. I choose not to follow and saw the church as a point of vulnerability, too much of a crutch as a way to not insist on tangible solutions to problems rather than waiting on the LORD. So, I am a more strident left than most. But politics and economics realities in this society find the vast majority of blacks supporting Democrats.
I am not a third party voter because I cannot afford to allow my vote to be wasted with a third party candidate who cannot win. Wallace took a lot a white Democratic votes (when southern whites were voting for Democrats) in 1968, because of that Nixon defeated Humphrey narrowly that year. I need to keep Republicans and rightwing authoritarians out and my vote must count toward that end.
There are going to be a lot of “steps”"Trump is being practically coronated for the nomination for the GOP, with virtually no challengers. That says that most GOP are Trump people for me."
Were any of those choices really competitive against Trump, I mean really?
No, they weren't. Trump emerged as the selected candidate, despite the presence of numerous other options. In my opinion, several of them would have been equally qualified for the role. It's time for both sides to acknowledge that Trump enjoys support from a significant portion of American citizens. Each individual has their own unique reasons for backing him. We're witnessing a genuine phenomenon unfolding before us.
That is quite an interesting outlook.
I guess its a matter of perspective.
" either you accept multiethnic democracy " = Trump or RFK
or
" support a handmaiden tale world enforced by authoritarians and those that believe that they have the right to rule over a majority with their limited numbers " = Democrat/DEI/Equity current Administration
Isn't it funny how two people can see the SAME dire imminent threat to America's future, while identifying the complete opposite political option(s) as the threat?Yes, it is a matter of perspective where we are always going to disagree...
From a right winger, used in another context. It reminded me of the discussion you're having in this thread with some people from the right. I think the irony of his words is beautiful.
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/360 … ost4323922
*Sorry, that was an answer to your question..? (before the edit? I think. Weird.)I did check it out and found the source of the quote. The words may well be true, but the the appropriate reality will not be found through either Trump nor MAGA. These misbegotten described in the quote remind me of Trump and MAGA.
The flaw in this, from your perspective, is that you believe I am in the cave.
Information I offer sometimes threatens the perspectives, the beliefs and perceptions of others... and for some, it then becomes important to label me "rightwing", "racist", "conspiracy theorist"... because to do otherwise is to threaten the very pillars of their own beliefs.
Sometimes labels are used to discredit information people do not want to consider, or do not want others to consider.
We are all in our caves, that is part of the argument... which of us are willing to leave the Matrix and change our beliefs and perspectives?
I know I have left various caves, at times such acceptance of new realities has been quite painful... other times its just becoming more aware of something I never really considered.
You call them aberrations; I see them every day. The recent court case over university racial discrimination, for example, is hardly an "aberration" - most universities practice it in the name of "diversity".
San Fran streets before Xi's visit
San Fran streets for Xi's visit
Things that make you go hmmmmmmm....With jest in mind, I always made sure my room was clean before Dad came home from work. And, my store was spic-n-span before the owner was to make his monthly visit.
I'm an outsider. But my comment can be a welcome. Seriously, immigration should be control officially, and those with valid papers okayed. Excemption is political assylum and refugee.. In minor crimes, first offenders caution, and a repeat earn jail.
What is the aim of the democrat party?
First, the democrat party prefer people who break the law to law abiding citizens. They work to free criminals, ignore their crimes and set them loose on society as soon as possible. This scenario is something that is done is every democrat city in the United States. This is a fact.
Second, the democrat party prefers illegal aliens to American citizens or legal immigrants. The biden administration and democrat controlled states and cities have proven this time and time again. Senior citizens being evicted from buildings so it could be used to house illegal aliens, veterans being moved to make room for illegal aliens. Relaxing the enforcement of the border so tens of thousands of illegal aliens can illegally enter our country.
Third, the democrat party has no problem committing election interference. From the illegal laws passed in Pennsylvania to the Hunter Biden laptop story being buried, to the false claim 50 intelligence officers signing a document saying it was russian disinformation and later omitting it was false. Then there was the falsehood of russiagate. This list of democrat lies and distortions it too long to even begin to mention.
The aim of the democrat party is total control of every citizen's life. They want the ability to impose their beliefs on everyone and especially those who disagree with them.
The recent support of the democrat party members for Hamas speaks volumes about the aim of the democrat party.I'm not happy with new left woke imposing their Idealogies. The left thinks the Government should be really creative and is the envy of right or moderates. Don't think Governments should be creative, just take care of the small stuff. When ideas are not backed up with usually purpose, it often meaninglessness. Like Covidism, genderism carbonism, wars, censorship and so on.
.This is called Identity Politics, with an important focus on minority rights.
Its simple, you cannot be a criminal if you are an oppressed victim.
Just like you cannot be a terrorist if you are a victim of oppression.
If you had a good University education, this would be understood. The victims and oppressed are rising up, LGBTQ+ march with their oppressed Palestinian brothers and sisters, who march with their BLM brothers and sisters, united they will bring down the tyranny of the Patriarchal Western world.
This is racism and ignorance at its worst, again, a good University education would remediate these antiquated and prejudiced concepts.
Migration is a global reality. There are hundreds of millions of international migrants worldwide, the majority of which travel, live and work in a safe, orderly and regular manner.
The American government, President Obama and President Biden, both champion the Global Compact on Migration, Global Compact on Refugees and the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. These Global Compacts, present international cooperation frameworks as laid out in the New York Declaration.
It is International Law, UN Policy, and agreed to in other compacts, the US government whether through various non-profit organizations, NGOs or through foreign government efforts shall not only provide for all migrants that reach its borders, but shall facilitate to the best of their ability the means for all migrants to reach the US if that is their intent.
This is nonsense, Democrats champion protecting people from harmful speech, protecting victims and the oppressed, ensuring everyone gets an equal share of the benefits of society while fighting to undo the inherent injustice based on systemic racism and sexism.If your goal was to sound like a flaming leftist..mission accomplished.
There are people who actually believe what you wrote.Sounds about right, although there always a number of flaws I can say about the right.just not as many. As an mini anarchist, at least I'm living this apocalypse with some understanding with a wiggles through life. Rather than a struggleS like the majority.
"First, the democrat party prefer people who break the law to law abiding citizens. "
I've posted this information many times before. But since it bounces of some people, here it is again from Politifact:
"Recent administrations with the MOST criminal indictments:
Trump (Republican) — 215
Nixon (Republican) — 76
Reagan (Republican) — 26
"Recent administrations with the LEAST criminal indictments:
Obama (Democrat) — 0
Carter (Democrat) — 1
Clinton (Democrat) — 2Clinton had to give it all up over a blowjob.
How come they can't pin down Trump?
It all doesn't matter, a President is selected. About as opposite as a person I would want to be.I would say it was the democrat party that looked the other way during the George Floyd riots and let that happen. Recent documentary proves it. It was the democrat party that started the defund the police movement causing crime to skyrocket in democrat cities around the country. It is the democrat party that worked to elect George Soros backed prosecutors who are soft on crime around the country causing an increase in crime around the country. Then there is the "no bail" laws that have caused crime to increase dramatically.
All of this is evidence that the democrat party is more interested in serving criminals than serving law-abiding, tax paying citizens.A man who sexually assault a woman is a criminal. A man that committed fraud is a criimminal. I'm appling this scenario to Trump. He committed or incite insurrection as claim, and that's also criminal. Now, why can't the Dem like and serve Trump during and after his presidency todate?
This seems odd. No wonder the Dems are dirty diggers. Trump top the list of the Republicans? The Dems should go and dig more against Trump.
It represents how biased and weaponized the DOJ has become (particularly in NY)... it is a tool being used right now against Trump and his supporters, and then it will be turned on any and all who oppose the State as it becomes more draconian and tyrannical.
The DOJ is a pulbic service institution. Why weaponized it and made it a tool of drangon? It should be reform.
Been doing some thinking on this. The legalization of marijuana isn't the only freedom that the Democrats have worked hard to give the people of America. Think about the fact that we citizens, no matter what our religion or no religion at all, were still bound by laws that should have been unconstitutional under the First Amendment such as Blue Laws and no alcohol sales on Sunday. You younger folks think about what it was like not to be able to go to the mall after 5:00 if you needed to go get a new dress after work. Heck there weren't any malls in most places back then, and Main Street locked up its doors at 5:00 pm. No stores were open on Sunday because of the religious fanatical Blue Laws. When some of the larger stores, like discount stores, started opening on Sunday, there were certain items that couldn't be sold like paper towels, light bulbs and even baby diapers. (I remember asking one clerk "Why, babies pee on Sunday, too?") How would you like that? It took freedom minded people like Democrats to work to get these laws off the books. And then they succeeded in getting reproductive rights for women. Heaven forbid! (And now they are being taken away again. What's next?) Oh yeah, if people were going to get together at a neighbor's house to barbecue and watch the big game on a Sunday afternoon, they had to stock up on their beer and other "adult" beverages before midnight Saturday.
Sure Democrats have some liberal ideas that even I don't like, but I certainly don't want to return to the days of being told when I can and cannot buy something I need or not go somewhere I want to go just because somebody's religion claims that it's a sin. Think about it. We have it pretty good now, but THAT group is trying to take us back to the 1940s and 1950s. We are halfway there by having women's reproductive rights and other medical decisions taken away from us. I don't want to go back. Do you?"Democrats have worked hard to give the people of America."
I think this theory was destroyed during the pandemic when the democrat states had some of the most insane laws. Letting people protest in masse and punishing people who wanted have an church service outside. In Michigan they even prevented people from going to hardware stores and more.
The old democrats were tolerable. Today's democrats are nothing less than communist wannabes.This is what is not understood by older generation Democrats.
They do not realize their Party has been kidnapped by a cult, which believes just what I posted in my previous response.
Its interesting, to see the liberators and Rights activists of the past (the old Democrats) supporting the very opposite of what they spent their lives fighting to liberate America from, its just a different form of oppression and tyranny that will ultimately fail just like all others in history have failed when built on falsehoods and fabricated reality.If it's not based on good sense and biological, it looses it's merits. I can't even have a discussion with LGBT, snd they lack a sense humor. The next greatest scam is the carbonism, like a 100 trillion world cost to lower the temperature by 1 degree. When there is already 5% more plant life on earth than ever has before because of carbon. ZERO carbon will kill every living creature.
How about the Republican scam of trying to convince us that we should live under a theocratic dictatorship. Do you think that is better than putting up with a few trans, gays, and BLM? I'm not happy with some of that either, but I can turn the other cheek before I can live under a dictator supported by the "Christian" Taliban, that tries to take us back to the 1930s. No marijuana then either. Our Supreme Court for life has made one step in that direction and they are gunning for more. In fact, the dictator wannabee has already announced that he will fire and arrest government employees and voters who didn't support him. And his supporters think that taking away our freedoms is A-OK.
"How about the Republican scam of trying to convince us that we should live under a theocratic dictatorship."
What are you talking about?To your last para he can't because he wouldn't know them.
Wow! What a naive statement.You think not? You really don't understand how the U.S.A. works.
All public jobs are public records in the U.S. In fact, when I worked as a legal editor for the state where I live, my job title, grade and salary were public information. The only thing the media couldn't publish about me was my social security number. Political parties are public information, too. They just aren't allowed to make public how we voted, but that is all on record, too. And we have things called the media and social media here where people actually publish their opinions on politicians and the political atmosphere. My husband worries that there may be a government dossier on me because I visited a certain foreign country when I was in college. An American citizen can't hide behind a tree here.Miz, yea...I'm also a civil servant, but retired. And my records like yours are there in store for everyone to see. But who you or I vote vote for is not not made public. It must be a secret ballot. During the last general elections in Nigeria, I exercise my voting franchise. I was given a ballot paper paper. I thumb-impressed it with my right thumb, (and no one knows who the thumb impression-voting is for.
In my previous post, I wrote:
The legalization of marijuana isn't the only freedom that the Democrats have worked hard to give the people of America."
The sentence was shortened to: "Democrats have worked hard to give the people of America."
Mike, you took half of my sentence out of context with no ellipses, and no other indication that you were taking material out of context. First, the shortened version doesn't make sense. Second, taking it out of context changed the meaning of what I meant. A true journalist would not have done that. That is called Yellow Journalism. That is unethical. I'm sorry that you had to resort to that to get your point across. I do sometimes agree with you and enjoy what you have to say, but not this time."A true journalist would not have done that. That is called Yellow Journalism."
I'd like to remind you this is not a news reporting forum. It is an opinion forum. Therefore, there is NO journalism being conducted.
You may want to do some research on the history and actual meaning behind Yellow Journalism before you use it again. It has nothing to do with postings on opinion forums and everything to do with news reporting.
I hope you see the difference.I have two degrees in journalism, so I know all about yellow journalism. Okay, so you think it's all right to misquote people just because this is an opinion forum. It is unethical, and misquoting is about the same as lying. I can't agree with you.
Hear! Hear! Misquoting is the same as lying - even if it is your opinion - and should be challenged in any forum any where.
My thoughts are that it must be stopped before it completely destroys the country and every principle and value we hold. I think cracks are beginning to show, though, and believe that America can survive even the strongest leftist attacks.
It's given me concern. But I still have faith in the resiliency and strength of America and the majority of Her people to overcome the powers that wish to destroy it.You have to recognize what transpired for the 2020 election.
Then realize that none of those states have changed their 'Mail in Ballot" laws since the 2020 election, so, the same thing that occurred in 2020 will occur in 2024.
This is the reason why Biden has no real concern about what the polls say. Its not about who votes... its who is filling out and counting the 'Mail in Ballots' that matter. Research this well enough and you will find the facts.
Like him or hate him, regardless, ask yourself, was he wrong?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNlyxQSfDGI
Selective memory on display here big time. Confirms what I've believed for some time now. Republicans have been so wrong about so much for so long, their biggest fear is that someone else might be right.
There is a big difference between Republicans and democrats.
Sort of like the contrast between the failing of democrat/liberal California and the success of Republican/Conservative Florida or Texas?
Interesting how liberals tend to move to conservative states but it doesn't happen the other way around.Would rather move to Texas or Florida, it would make better business sense. Generally wouldn't move back to the states in the direction they are going. My girlfriend and I are tired of Canada turning communist also.
I don't think many Americans realize how Canada is slowly becoming communist.
What, in your opinion, is the worst things the Canadian government is doing to take away people's freedoms?
Readmikenow: I'm a Democrat who has lived in Georgia all my life except during my husband's Army career. Your generalizations are not always correct.
I'm a democrat who has lived in Arkansas most of my life except when I was married to a republican in Texas. My father was a democrat and so was his father. In fact, his father was a democrat politician in West Texas, and there was talk of his running for governor back in the 1950s. His father used to ask him, "where did you get those crazy ideas? You didn't learn them from your mother and me." We were married 10 years, but his republican misogyny was part of what killed our marriage.
A mail-in ballot gets scanned and tallied the same way your in-person voting machine ballot gets scanned and tallied.
I have seen people come into a place where stacks of mail-in ballots were located. Took stacks of them and then saw them in the parking lot in their car filling them out.
Why was this done?And the rest of the story is that people filling out and returning mail in ballots do not prove who they are, do not prove they have a right to vote or to vote at that precinct. There is no check on the number of ballots they fill out or where they got them.
Only that someone filled in the blanks and returned a ballot. All the rest is assumption.Wilderness: I don't know where you live, but in Georgia - Georgia for crying out loud - none of that is true. I attend every election board meeting in my county and follow the legislature closely, and there is no truth - in this Red, highly-audited and litigated state - to any of your complaints.
Just repeating something over and over again does not make it true.
Did you report it and was it investigated? I live in Georgia - the most audited election system in the country. Where do you live?
Funny how all of this angst comes only from Republicans after an adverse election cycle and they grasp for any other explanation rather than the simple fact that they lost and can lose again.
That is a fair point.
And now instead of still complaining about how the election was stolen by perhaps millions of Mail In Ballots that were counted multiple times, in multiple districts, the Republicans should have come up with some way of preventing it from happening again... or better yet, learning to play the game better than the Democrats... or being prepared this time to catch them red handed in the act with cameras rolling.
Of course, all that is VERY hard to do, if the people making these things happen in our elections are the FBI and other security agencies that are supposed to help ensure such fraud does not occur.
If the Fed is that corrupt (which it is) and untrustworthy, it is up to brave citizens to try and expose it (which a few did)... but in doing so, they must be willing to sacrifice everything they care about, including their own freedom.
Every single person who tried to whistle blow, every lawyer that tried to take up the election case(s) in Trump's behalf, aren't doing so well today."And now instead of still complaining about how the election was stolen by perhaps millions of Mail In Ballots that were counted multiple times"
That remains mere conjecture that Republicans can never prove and counts as just another conspiracy theory. Blaming federal agencies as complicit is also unsupported and unwarranted. I question if they are brave citizens or just sour grapes folks that cannot accept the fact that Trump lost. It has never occurred to you that Trump and his claims could be all wet? Perhaps, that is the reason they don't do well?
To answer, again, the title of this thread:
Liberal Elites Against Democracy
https://spectator.org/liberal-elites-against-democracy/
Excerpts of the linked article:
The anti-Trump criminal prosecutions and other unsavory lawfare tactics Democrats are also now weaponizing give the game away: Democrats hate democracy and harbor immense disdain for normal Americans’ beliefs.
Put simply, they don’t want to leave the country’s fate in our hands.
Hence, the current bizarre spectacle of Democrats ostentatiously bragging about the need to save “our democracy” while simultaneously pursuing some of the most anti-democratic stratagems in modern American history.
Liberal elites to Americans suffering the myriad consequences of a wide-open southern border: Drop dead.
That’s literally “drop dead,” actually, in the case of Laken Riley, the former nursing student tragically murdered two weeks ago by an illegal alien in Athens, Georgia. (Say her name, liberal media.) That’s literally “drop dead,” as well, for the majority of the 110,000-plus Americans who died of drug overdoses in 2022 — 70 percent of which were caused by fentanyl and other synthetic opioids trafficked across the border.
The reality is that during Joe Biden’s presidency, which has overseen the most illegal immigration and the most beleaguered southern border in American history, every town is a “border town.”
Those Americans who want their border secure, their communities safe, and their wages spared suppression by illegal alien labor are the “rubes” whom liberal elites are so passionate about denying from the democratic process that they will invert democracy itself to do so. Destroy democracy in order to save it — don’t you see?- This was a good quote:
"I recall someone stating that if given the chance, the majority would choose to ignore the new input and remain in the reality (the cave... the matrix) that they know, for them it is 'safe'.
To challenge their beliefs, their understanding of the world, with new information that undermines or demolishes their perception of the world and their part in it, is something the majority of people will fight against with every fiber of their being... even when an occurrence they are personally experiencing disproves their own beliefs."
Yes. Many are still inside the cave... Some with a foot out. "Slowly, please! I'm not ready to get out."That was a good quote. It fits the reality I see.
GAIn my view, challenging the notion of clinging solely to old beliefs and traditions while embracing new ones can be approached with a bit of understanding and empathy. It's important to acknowledge the value and significance that one's values, beliefs, and traditions hold in shaping their identity and providing a sense of belonging and continuity.
Is it not plausible we can present a positive perspective on keeping one's values, beliefs, and traditions intact while also embracing new attitudes and ideas? Is there not a grey area to be had?
I have found in my own life, that encouraging individuals to cherish their heritage and the wisdom passed down through generations fosters a sense of pride and connection to their roots. Old traditions often carry profound cultural significance and can serve as a source of strength and resilience in one's life.
Emphasize the idea that holding onto values and beliefs doesn't mean being resistant to change. Instead, it's about perhaps evolving in a way that honors the past while adapting to the present and future. I have found by remaining open-minded, I can integrate new perspectives into my existing mindset, without compromising my important core principles.
I think it promotes the concept of blending old and new attitudes to create a harmonious value system. This of course involves recognizing the value in diverse perspectives and finding common ground where traditional values can coexist with innovative ideas.
I also feel that encouraging individuals to view challenges to their beliefs as opportunities for personal growth and self-discovery rather than threats.
I have found open dialogue helps discuss differing viewpoints and navigate conflicting beliefs constructively. By just offering empathy, understanding, and mutual respect, communities might at some point bridge divides and build stronger connections based on shared values and aspirations for the future.
My thoughts -- Ultimately, our goal should not be concentrated on DISREGARDING old beliefs and traditions or BLINDLY accepting new ones but to engage critically with both, integrating the wisdom of the past with the insights of the present to shape a more enlightened future.Its more complex... especially in todays world.
Credence's perceptions and beliefs are 100% correct, from his perspective.
I have gone through (at one time) considerable effort to consider from where his beliefs come from.
However, I also recognize these beliefs are now being used, with intent to harm and deconstruct America, by forces that would subjugate it and its people to their will.
There are then two forces that side with Credence in his beliefs, those who are legitimately concerned with losing their rights and returning to a reality that harkens back to the 60s... ... and the nefarious elements that push DEI, Equity, Social Justice for the ultimate goals of transforming America into a land that no longer offers its citizens, Liberty, Justice, and Freedom for All.
Again... why I always ask those who read my posts, to familiarize themselves with who and what the WEF is... their joining with the UN... ... and what their goals are. Ultimately... they want to remove liberty, freedom, rights to own property, rights to travel freely, etc.
Understand the ultimate goals of immensely powerful and wealthy forces like the WEF and CCP... or else, be used as a tool by them to help foster the collapse of America into the Security State it is becoming.Understandably, Credence has his own beliefs and concerns about the direction of societal changes and the impact they may have on the fabric of a nation. As we do on the other side of the vast divide. However, should it not be somewhat crucial to approach these concerns with nuance and discernment?
While there may be legitimate worries about the erosion of certain rights or a perceived regression to a past era, for some citizens. I think both sides need to start realizing the importance of not conflating these concerns with a broader narrative that demonizes them.
Our great divide is getting worse, I see no mending, and you fully understand I read all of your posts very carefully, and admit they resonate with my ideas, and ears of where we are right now, and where we are unfortunately heading. I must admit I am very fearful of what I see. And more fearful that many are either not being attentive to what is going on, or have become apathetic. In the end do we not get what the majority settle for?I have to leave that to the likes of you and GA... you work from a more centered and accepted standpoint.
For my part I try to expose the worst element, to bring it to light, to try and show not where things are... but where they are going to be taken to.
For example... For almost two years now I have warned that the goal of our interference (support) in Ukraine was to lead up to our direct conflict with Russia.
This is very similar to an experience from our not so distant past:
Certain military Division Commanders knew that we were going to invade Iraq in November 2001.
It wasn't until Feb. 5, 2003 that Secretary of State Colin Powell sat in front of members of the U.N. Security Council to inform them of WMDs.
The actual invasion began around March 21, 2003.
Our conflict with Russia follows this same template.
The decision to directly engage with Russia was made a long time ago.
There may be internal struggles within the Pentagon and Administration to follow through with what I consider an insane plan, but rest assured there is a plan for it and those Divisions are ready to mobilize and execute it.
Its why it was a big deal when they deployed the 101st to Ukraine's border. Knowing that the 101st is typically the vanguard Division to any invasion, keeping an eye on what the Ranger Regiment is doing also helps to inform future intent.
I am willing to put forward the "extreme" or "extremist" position... because I've been there, I know how deceptive and dishonest our government can be, especially when it comes to foreign affairs.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-ne … s-romania/
https://www.globaldefensecorp.com/2022/ … o-ukraine/
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pent … eployment/
One of the things I did not expect, or hear about:
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your … -gaza-aid/
This Administration has so much going on, so much insanity, from flying in hundreds of thousands of migrants on flights our tax-debt is paying for... to deploying to Gaza... its getting kinda bad.Ken, as I've mentioned previously, I haven't encountered anyone who articulates their beliefs as effectively as you do, while also consistently seeing their predictions come true. Your research is truly remarkable. It's undeniable that our nation is currently facing a crisis comparable to that of the Civil War era. I fear that if we don't cleanse the "swamp" soon, the very essence of the great American experiment may be lost forever.
Some of my messaging aims to reach others and perhaps awaken some to the realization that our country is in grave trouble, and we're essentially all being manipulated. It's disheartening to feel that our voices have been silenced and that our votes may not carry the weight they once did. The pervasive corruption surrounding us can tempt one to give up entirely.
From my perspective, we've deviated from the patriotic ideals of old. Many seem content to be dictated to, finding it easier to adopt such a mindset. However, I do see a glimmer of hope if we can reintroduce a disruptor like Trump back into the White House. Otherwise, I fear little progress under the current administration.
We have two candidates, and I'll be casting my vote for Trump. His pragmatic yet somewhat radical viewpoints and agenda resonate with me at this juncture. I refuse to be apathetic and take a chance on four more years of Biden. I agree with you that it would be the ultimate setback.
Your links can't help but wake one up to the BS that is going on all around us. OMG, I hope some here will take the time and have a look at each one of the links you shared. We are being lied to right to our faces.It goes back to the Cave and Matrix examples... most people cannot change their perspectives, whether it be choice or inability.
The greatest threat today... is the Biden Administration... it has always been their intent to walk America into WWIII with Russia.
Despite my efforts to convince people of this, despite a whole lot of evidence of this for others to find... most people choose not to see it... they choose the lies, the shadows on the wall.
Biden said in 2001 that he wanted to avoid WWIII... a lie... but people wanted to believe it.
Biden, in comparison to what he was saying in 2001 and 2002 sounds much more like he is willing to engage Russia directly:
"What makes our moment rare is that freedom and democracy are under attack, both at home and overseas, at the very same time.
Today, we’ve made NATO stronger than ever.
We welcomed Finland to the Alliance last year, and just this morning, Sweden officially joined NATO, and their Prime Minister is here tonight.
Mr. Prime Minister, welcome to NATO, the strongest military alliance the world has ever known.
I say this to Congress: we must stand up to Putin.
History is watching.
If the United States walks away now, it will put Ukraine at risk.
Europe at risk. The free world at risk, emboldening others who wish to do us harm.
My message to President Putin is simple.
We will not walk away. We will not bow down. I will not bow down. "
Quotes from his State of the Union Address...
This is how it is done... it was planned all along...I have to admit, I'm not entirely sure about NATO's military strength without the substantial US presence. It's concerning to think that provoking Putin could lead to nuclear retaliation. Russia doesn't seem inclined to back down under any circumstances. Moreover, I'm skeptical about whether NATO countries are truly prepared for a global conflict.
I recently came across Biden's statement, "We will not walk away. We will not bow down. I will not bow down." However, I'm unsure if the American public would fully support such a war effort. If Biden were to escalate to a world war, I fear it could spell disaster for his political career. It's hard to envision Americans backing a war in Europe.
So far, Russia hasn't shown aggression towards NATO. Do you think NATO would attack a sovereign nation without being provoked? It's possible NATO's stance might change if Russia succeeds in Ukraine. I suspect NATO's support for Ukraine might wane, especially if the US loses interest in funding the conflict.
I am flattered that you take the effort to see what makes me tick in all of this.
Yes, we are concerned about the loss of rights. Trump and MAGA presents an authoritarian, antidemocratic alternative to the current system. Whenever this society has a threat to democracy, minorities, particularly Blacks, suffer first and the most. When it comes to this nations commitment to democracy and the rule of law, the black experience is the canary in the coal mine. The rule of law and a commitment to the democratic process is the only reason most of us are here, as you would found a way to have annihilate us all years ago. So, in the face of all that, there is no room for subtle nuance and small talk. That is a trade off that we simply are not going to chance. Especially when it comes to listening to any reactionary perspective, Trump and MAGA ,which has never been our friend.
From that NYTimes link: "The party has become a vessel for the fulfillment of Mr. Trump’s ambitions, and he will almost certainly be its standard-bearer for a third time.
This is a tragedy for the Republican Party and for the country it purports to serve.
In a healthy democracy, political parties are organizations devoted to electing politicians who share a set of values and policy goals. They operate part of the machinery of politics, working with elected officials and civil servants to make elections happen. Members air their differences within the party to strengthen and sharpen its positions. In America’s two-party democracy, Republicans and Democrats have regularly traded places in the White House and shared power in Congress in a system that has been stable for more than a century.
The Republican Party is forsaking all of those responsibilities and instead has become an organization whose goal is the election of one person at the expense of anything else, including integrity, principle, policy and patriotism. As an individual, Mr. Trump has demonstrated a contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law that makes him unfit to hold office. But when an entire political party, particularly one of the two main parties in a country as powerful as the United States, turns into an instrument of that person and his most dangerous ideas, the damage affects everyone."
BREAKING: Adam Schiff states the U.S. Intelligence Community will withhold intelligence briefings from Donald Trump, conceiling information, sources, and methods if he wins re-election this fall.
https://twitter.com/GeneralMCNews/statu … 3064952214
Deep State is such a conspiracy...Is this permissible under the law? It appears to be yet another instance of the present administration harnessing the US Intelligence Community for its own purposes -- weaponizing... The absurdity of the situation seems to escalate with each passing day. How much longer will citizens turn a blind eye to this style of governance, which borders on, dare I say it, communism?
It just shows how little they care about the People, the Constitution, or the very fact that they are sworn to SERVE the President... not the Deep State.
I think Adam should concentrate on his political problems. I would love to see him posted from the swamp, he is a very dishonest man in my view.
Steve Garvey
GOP
1,843,166
33.7%
Adam Schiff
DEM
1,655,589
30.3%
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-p … te-resultsIts because the Democrats, the establishment want to bring this here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTdJwm_OeLA"Demacrats are continually weaponizing any Government agencies."
But there's really never any evidence of that though? Now Jordan and Comer are another story.I have witnessed so much weaponization on both sides at this point, I could write a book. Most of the Washington talking heads weaponize on the tube whenever they can get air time. Adam Schiff's word as a rule needs to be carefully vetted. He has over and over proved himself to be untruthful.
I have great faith in the people- in many respects all in the end right itself.Just a regular day in Joe Biden's America
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/DRIwteXiqLM
"It appears to be yet another instance of the present administration harnessing the US Intelligence Community for its own purposes -- weaponizing... "
Or just another instance of disinformation.
X is pretty much a vast source for such these days.
That is IF Adam Schiff gets reelected and the democrats hold onto the Senate. If either of those two things don't happen, he will not be in charge of a committee and have little or no power to do such a thing.
Has this allegation been fact checked?
So it's actually a years-long tradition that major-party presidential candidates have been offered intel briefings during their respective campaigns since 1952. However, it is not a law as it is considered just a courtesy for presidential candidates.
Many question the notion Trump should have access to U.S. intelligence given his ongoing legal cases.
Schiff says he expects Trump will receive intelligence community briefings once he formally claims his party’s nomination.
Schiff...
"That is, they will give him no more information than absolutely necessary, nothing that will reveal sources or methods, because we can’t trust that he will do the right thing with the information,”
I cannot find a statement by Schiff that briefings will be denied at anytime before or after the election.
Your source states the following, which is pure disinformation.
"Adam Schiff states the U.S. Intelligence Community will withhold intelligence briefings from Donald Trump, conceiling information, sources, and methods if he wins re-election this fall."
When has Schiff stated that they will withhold briefings for Trump if and when he wins the election?Perhaps you should watch the video... where Schiff states just that.
The video does not state that briefings will be withheld from him if and when he is elected. Maybe you could give a direct quote?
I picked up this --- Just looks like Adam is trying to stay in the news. "Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the FORMER chair of the House intelligence committee, on Sunday said he EXCPECTS U.S. officials to “dumb down” any intelligence briefings provided to former President Donald Trump as part of a long-standing tradition extended to presidential nominees.
Candidates who earn their parties’ presidential nomination have been cleared to receive intelligence briefings to ensure a smooth transition of power, regardless of who wins the general election. But the customary briefings, which have been taking place since 1952, are not legally required."
Politico -- "By JOHN SAKELLARIADIS and ERIN BANCO
03/07/2024 01:12 PM EST
U.S. intelligence officials are planning to brief Donald Trump on national security matters if he secures the GOP nomination this summer — despite concerns about his handling of classified information.
The decision would be in keeping with a tradition that dates back to 1952, but it would mark the first time an administration has volunteered to share classified information with a candidate who is facing criminal charges related to the mishandling of classified documents."
The Biden administration intends to share intelligence with the former president no matter the outcome of his trial in Florida, according to a senior intelligence official and a second person with knowledge of internal conversations. They, like some others interviewed, were granted anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations.
The sit-down is not legally required, but for the last 72 years, incumbent administrations have tapped the spy agencies to read in the candidates of both major political parties on some of the most pressing threats to the country. While often this is just one meeting, sometimes candidates receive several briefings." https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/0 … p-00145651
I think Adam should concentrate on his political problems.
Steve Garvey
GOP
1,843,166
33.7%
Adam Schiff
DEM
1,655,589
30.3%
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-p … te-results"I think Adam should concentrate on his political problems."
That may be true but it doesn't change the fact that the following statement posted on this forum is patently false.
I think it's important to acknowledge when disinformation is being spread.
"Adam Schiff states the U.S. Intelligence Community will withhold intelligence briefings from Donald Trump, conceiling information, sources, and methods if he wins re-election this fall."
Not true.Remember Porter, a Democrat, got 16.8% - 921,061 of the vote. What ever that means is left to each to speculate.
Hey, off the top of my head, I would think --- The substantial support for Porter, a Democrat, receiving 16.8% of the vote (921,061 votes), suggests a significant portion of Californians may be seeking alternatives or expressing dissatisfaction with existing options. It could indicate a growing interest in exploring new directions or a candidate that offers something fresh to the landscape. One word refreshing.
I watched something that I think speaks volumes to the evil nature of our government and MSM... those controlling the narrative today:
I ask that you (and anyone else) give me your perspective on this:
Stephanopoulos for Leftist Hypocrisy (time set to appropriate spot)
https://youtu.be/cv19QlyPoqI?t=343
Smearing Nancy Mace While Defending George Stephanopoulos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cC_T_TeRI1QOMG, the videos made my blood boil. I think your request is a valid one. I will share my perspective. This blast from the past is so very relevant at this point. Ken, I think my reply needs to be well thought out, and yes, it will be very much my view, with any facts I can add. As I said the clips made my blood boil. I will take the challenge of offering my perspective. I hope others will too.... I will cool down, and work on presenting my
view.Ken,
I am back and cooled off... It's deeply troubling to witness the hypocrisy of some Democrats who are quick to condemn sexual abuse, alleged rape, or sexual misconduct when it involves individuals outside their party, yet look the other way or even belittle victims when it concerns their own politicians. The behavior of figures like Hillary Clinton, who dismissed or undermined the accusations against her husband's accusers, is particularly concerning. Such actions not only undermine the credibility of the movement against sexual violence but also perpetuate a culture of impunity for powerful individuals. All accusations of sexual misconduct must be taken seriously, regardless of the political affiliations of those involved, and victims deserve to be heard and supported without partisan bias.
In regards to Megyn Kelly's YouTube video, she delivered a truly honest and straightforward perspective that should resonate with many. Her thorough research and articulate presentation exposed the blatant hypocrisy of certain left-wing media figures, revealing them to be nothing short of repugnant, in my view.
In today's society, it's alarming to witness individuals with such poor judgment and a willingness to turn a blind eye to issues as serious as rape, sexual abuse, and sexual misconduct for their own convenience. This behavior, in my opinion, demonstrates a severe lack of integrity and moral clarity.
I echo the sentiment that Joe Biden's actions warrant serious scrutiny and support Tara Reade and others who have courageously shared their experiences of feeling sexually violated or made uncomfortable by him. However, it's disheartening to witness the multitude of excuses made for Biden's alleged sexual misconduct, providing him with a shield to hide behind. Individuals who exhibit this mindset disgust me deeply. In my view, they truly embody the term "deplorable," as Hillary Clinton famously coined it.
I don't think you will get many sharing their perspective on the videos. I mean the shield was removed, Kelly pulled it down, and pretty much exposed the slime, did she not? She was riveting, and such wonderful footage... one needs to respect her great research qualities.
I must say, someone said here on HP's a long time ago --- I won't make mention of the person, not sure they would want me to requote the sentence. However, it was a simple, yet so direct point -- "I am glad I am not one of them"... I always knew I would use it someday, and today is the day.
SharVery well stated.
As I said to my wife last night, I am not usually drawn into issues like this, but the way he attacked her was so offensive... to me... that I had to think most people would find it offensive (I am not the most sensitive guy around).
And then when Morning Joe and other Loony Left MSM shows went on to attack her and defend him... it was one of those, wow, they really are even sicker than I thought moments.
Thank you for putting it in much better context than I could.I refrained from commenting on "Stephanopoulos" because, honestly, I have zero respect for him. Never have, never will. In that interview, he just came off as downright foolish, totally outshined by Nancy Mace. And Morning Joe and his wife? Oh boy, where do I even start? Let's just say they're masters at making themselves look like clowns. They are revolting.
Now, Kelly, on the other hand, couldn't have done a better job at exposing the blatant hypocrisy of the Democrats. I admire her tenacity, always staying ahead of the game.
Yeah, or, they will migrate over to Schiff and vote the 'party line', which seems to be a tradition in these United States. We'll just have to watch and see.
Wait a minute --- In my view, independent voters could become more vocal and influential in the 2024 election cycle. There are a growing number of Independents, who do not align strictly with either major political party more than ever before. And may just play a crucial role in determining election outcomes, especially in closely contested races such as Schiffs. Many have become dissatisfied with the two parties, shifts in political ideologies, and the emergence of compelling independent candidates or third-party movements could contribute to increased vocalization and engagement among independent voters.
Keep in mind it is early, and key issues or events leading up to the election may galvanize independent voters, prompting them to speak out and advocate for their preferred candidates or policy positions. Overall, the level of vocalization among independent voters in the 2024 election cycle might be heard loud and clear. I know as a Republican I hope some of them swing our way, as I am sure Demacrats feel the same.What's with the 'What a minute' stuff? Hurmph!! I've got all day.
There were 27 candidates on the Calif Senate Primary. There were candidates from the Republican party, Democrat Party, and those who ran as independents.
In Calif a person who does not declare a party is known as a 'No Party Preference' voter. They are not allowed to vote on the Presidential primary, however they can vote on the Senate primary as I did.
The outcome of the senate race is . . .
9 Republican candidates = 38.9% of votes
11 Democrat candidates = 59.5% of votes
7 Independent candidates = 1.7%
The two front runners advancing to the Nov ballot are:
Schiff = 32.5% of votes
Garvey = 31.6% of votes
That means for the Nov ballot there are 35.9% of votes up for grabs using the data from the primary. Of course, some may choose not to vote the Nov ballot and some who didn't vote do vote in Nov.
Up for grabs is:
Those who voted for an independent candidate = 1.7%
Republicans who didn't vote for Garvey = 7.3%
Democrats who didn't vote for Schiff = 27%
Considerations for speculating are:
1/3 of voters don't vote
4 of 10 voters are independents
Only 7% of independents don't have a lean
Only 6% of voters crossed party lines - 2022 election
California Senate Primary Results 2024: Schiff, Garvey advance Note: Be sure to click on 'View all candidates' to see them all. NBC News (Updated Mar 11, 2024 at 10:45 pm)
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-p … te-results
1. Voter turnout, 2018-2022 Pew Research (Jul 12, 2023)
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/20 … 2018-2022/
6 facts about U.S. political independents by Pew Research (May 15, 2019)
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … ependents/
Study: Only 6% of voters crossed party lines in 2022 midterms by NBC News (Jul 12, 2023) Note: Info is from a Pew Research study.
https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/ … -rcna93900"What's with the 'What a minute' stuff? Hurmph!! I've got all day." (was meant to be light-hearted)
Got it, I will make my thoughts straightforward:
I've noticed that independents seem to be on the rise lately, which could make things interesting in the upcoming Senate race for Barbara Feinstein's seat. Polls suggest their numbers of independents are growing across the nation, but hey, I'm no expert on the matter. Just throwing in my two cents!Got it, let's keep it light and straightforward:
Just sharing a lighthearted observation here! I've noticed that independents seem to be on the rise lately, which could make things interesting in the upcoming Senate race for Barbara Feinstein's seat. Polls suggest their numbers are growing, but hey, I'm no expert on the matter. Just throwing in my two cents! In my view, independence will deeply affect upcoming US elections.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/548459/ind … w-low.aspx
Thanks for the link.
Yes, there are a lot of things to consider. For example, an independent voter in Calif may have let the Primary forgo participation because they can't vote for the presidential primaries. For instance, the only reason why I voted was to put my 2 cents in on Proposition 1, which is about homelessness and the mentally ill.
What is Prop. 1? Explaining California's ballot measure to tackle homelessness, mental health crisis by Eyewitness News ABC channel 7
https://abc7.com/california-what-is-pro … /14379453/So, do closed primaries, essentially deny independent voters the opportunity to directly influence the selection of candidates for the general election? I have always felt that excluding independents from participating in primary elections, it restricts their ability to have a say in the nomination process and effectively limits their political voice.
It would seem to reinforce a system where party members hold disproportionate power in candidate selection, potentially marginalizing the perspectives and preferences of independent voters who make up a significant portion of the electorate. In essence, it works to diminish the democratic rights of independent voters to fully engage in the political process and have their voices heard.
I fail to discern the difference between "withholding sources and methods" and "concealing sources or methods". In addition, I fail to discern any practical difference between "give him no more information than absolutely <in their opinion> and "concealing information". Can you explain the difference between "withholding" and "concealing" a little better than the quotes did?
The statement put forward was this...
"Adam Schiff states the U.S. Intelligence Community will withhold intelligence briefings from Donald Trump, conceiling information, sources, and methods if he wins re-election this fall."
This is patently false and insinuating that somehow the power of the presidency will be curbed. I can find no such statement by Adam Schiff.
He is going to get the courtesy, not required under law, briefing as all other nominees have gotten since 1952. Apparently it has never included much. No sources or methods.
"The candidate briefings are delivered orally and have not historically included the intelligence community’s most highly protected secrets — top secret and top secret/sensitive compartmented information."
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/0 … p-00145651Exactly. He was asked about CANDIDATE Trump. Also, he never said that is going to happen.
Schiff was asked about plans from the intelligence community to begin providing Trump with briefings once he officially secures the Republican nomination.
"Well, that is the practice," Schiff said. "But we've never had a situation where one of the candidates for president has been so criminally negligent when it comes to handling, if not worse, when it comes to handling classified information.
"So I have to hope, and knowing the intelligence community as I do, that they will dumb down the briefing for Donald Trump. That is, they will give him no more information than absolutely necessary. Nothing that would reveal sources or methods. Because we can't trust that he will do the right thing with that information, he's been so reckless. So yes, it does concern me; it is part of a long tradition. They will be wary of what they share with him, and they should."I watched it yesterday and have the same interpretation.
Lets keep in mind this is the same "intelligence" that went out of its way to lie about the need to spy on the Trump campaign back in 2015.
This is the same "intelligence" that worked with Twitter, facebook, etc. to bury the Hunter Biden laptop story, to ban or deplatform Trump supporters and Doctors warning about Covid Vaccine risks in 2020.
We could go back to how this "intelligence" helped Clinton bury her violations with an unsecure server. The same "intelligence" that today buries the violations with secret information by the current President and former VP.
Schiff said what they planned on doing... you can dismiss it... play word games...or you can wake up and recognize that our own Intelligence Agencies are working against the American people to the best of their ability... and probably have been since they assassinated JFK.FBI Act Likely Violated The First, Second, And Fourth Amendments All At Once
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiW6HjuW2oY
Robert Kennedy Jr. sees ‘overwhelming evidence’ CIA involved in JFK assassination
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing … ssination/
America: Now Kneel, take my hand and swear eternal loyalty to Donald J. Trump
"Republicans have built themselves a party whose sole purpose is to appease and gratify Donald Trump. In the process, they’re quickly losing appeal to anyone else in America, including some of the party’s most faithful warriors. Buck and Romney may be the first Republican leaders to walk out of Congress before being tossed, but they won’t be the last. " The Hill
To quote an adage: You reap what you sow. You reap after you sow. You reap more than you sow.Well, you ain't seen nothing yet. Have you seen the mess that Trump and his toadies that he put there are to make of the RNC? They are going to turn the budget set aside to promote their candidates across the ballot to a slush fund for Trump and his legal woes.
I don't blame Trump as much as I blame Republicans for allowing it to happen. So much like the imitation human zombies in "Invasion of the Body Snatchers",mindlessly carrying around and cultivating alien plant pods....While it's understandable to express concern about the direction of the RNC under Trump's influence, it's important to note that this attitude may not align with common sense. Republicans have indeed become more populous, as has been discussed here in recent days. But, this doesn't justify demeaning their significance. It may be worth recognizing that liberals have also shared populous views for quite some time. So, is populism only positive when shared by a liberal?
I have always viewed Populism as an approach to politics that views "the people" as being opposed to "the elite". Is this not part of some liberal's mindsets?
Rather than assigning blame solely to Trump or Republicans, it's crucial to maintain a balanced view and address issues constructively. I did enjoy your parallels to science fiction scenarios.“MAGA is now in control of the Republican Party!!” Trump ally Marjorie Taylor Greene cheered.
Is that really what you want, Sharlee, one man in control of everything, one man trusted to run it all?
-----
"Trump had made clear he wanted changes at the RNC even before he cleared the field of rivals for the Republican nomination. Trump had grown frustrated last year with McDaniel when she stuck by her pledge to remain neutral in the nomination fight and continued to sponsor primary debates long after Trump had made clear he would never participate. McDaniel called for the party to unite behind Trump after he won the New Hampshire primary in late January, but she was soon ousted."
Just how arrogant is this attitude taken by Trump?
---------
How about a little more. In order to ferret out the "deep state", which I suspect is nothing more than the aspects of Government that Trump does not like, he proposes his Agenda 2025.
Where does this "deep state" stuff come from anyway? Previous presidents seemed to be able to work within the system and give due respect to Executive Agencies. It strikes me as tyranny right out of the box. We had a Civil Service Act of 1883 that was to eliminate the spoils and patronage system in the Civil Service to be replaced by standards of competence and merit.
By making so much of the civil service to be subject to appointments based upon his pleasure and approval, he sends a chill through this entire cadre of professionals. The tentacles of these high ranking appointees will tend to make any hire first subject to some sort of loyalty to Trump.
Perhaps, that is how he will get back at the African American community who have enjoyed a considerable amount of equal opportunity and advancement within the Civil Service not found in the private sector, and who overwhelmingly don't support him politically.Trump threatens to bring all the demons of old back down on us again.
If this is his attitude about Government and the Presidency, my instincts are correct in my rather not seeing him there.
pS I am glad that you retain your sense of humor.....In my observation, the Federal Government is structured with three distinct branches: legislative, executive, and judicial, each empowered by the U.S. Constitution. While some may perceive the President as having considerable influence over these branches, I believe that Congress wields the greatest authority. I find it hard to envision how Trump could alter this longstanding framework. Nevertheless, his agenda and beliefs seem to provoke significant apprehension among many.
It's apparent that Trump tends to vilify those who oppose his "Make America Great Again" movement. Over time, I've noticed a shift within the Republican party, which appears to be evolving into something unfamiliar to longtime Republicans. Perhaps this evolution is a response to changing times, aiming to appeal to a broader base and younger demographics.
While I don't view Trump as a dictator, I do recognize him as a disruptor who has garnered substantial attention. I remain optimistic that our democracy will endure, and our three branches of government will continue to engage in constructive checks and balances. However, I'm concerned that media sensationalism is exacerbating societal divisions, hindering effective governance and the representation of our collective voices.
Ultimately, it's crucial for people to realize the importance of unity and constructive dialogue in addressing the challenges we face as a nation.
It's undeniable that Trump often highlights what he perceives as the country's challenges, likening them to returning demons. Indeed, many of these issues can be seen as deeply troubling. From ongoing conflicts to an influx of migrants, escalating living expenses, rampant drug-related fatalities, homelessness, a faltering education system, and inadequate healthcare, the list of societal concerns seems endless. The lack of effective solutions from Washington only adds to the mounting stressors that many find increasingly difficult to manage.
In my view, Trump's appeal lies in his outspokenness and his ability to articulate the frustrations and concerns shared by many. He boldly vocalizes what others may hesitate to express, offering a sense of validation to those grappling with pressing issues. He embodies an enigmatic figure, drawing support from those seeking a champion who pledges to address their grievances head-on. For some who placed their trust in him back in 2016, there's a belief that he made genuine efforts to enact positive change, and did a good job problem-solving.
I think today, there's a prevailing sentiment among numerous Americans that our nation is on a downward trajectory, the wrong path. This feeling may be what fuels the desire for change once again. Someone who underscores the urgency of addressing pressing problems. One might realize that what we get from the current administration is that all is well, we are doing great! This form of placating does not sit well with those who are feeling the many problems personally. So, for many, the choice is clear: seek out new avenues once again for change or risk further decline by remaining on the current course.I do envy you this, your "enemy" the embodiment of that which you are most concerned, is bundled up in one bad Orange man.
I would love it if all I were concerned about was embodied in Biden... to know that if Biden were swept away in the next election all the worst concerns I have would be dulled if not defeated.
I know you don't believe it, but the majority of Trump supporters are not KKK card carrying members... they just want to put a stop to this:
West Point deletes ‘duty, honor, country’ from mission statement
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 … or-countr/
Its such a minor thing, but it is changes like this, occurring everywhere, all the time, all our norms... all we were taught that was good, normal, honorable, constantly under attack.
It used to be shameful for men to be in women's locker rooms, now they shame women for not wanting men in their locker rooms.
It used to be a crime, punishable by death, to mutilate children, now they make it illegal for you to try to protect your child from being mutilated.
Everyday its something different... people are tired of it, they are tired of working harder and paying more for everything... even if they aren't paying attention to Ukraine, or Gaza, or China... they pay attention to things hitting close to home... and they choose Trump to oppose it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5WGiCuPo5s
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMm5HfxNXY4
And that's why its Trump.I agree with most of what you've said.
I didn't go to West Point but Duty, Honor, Country was still a big part of being in the Officer Corps.
I would add that the left has proven that TDS is a very real thing. Honest objectivity is now a foreign concept replaced with "AH, Ha...gotcha!" I'm right you're wrong and there is nothing else. IF you disagree with me you're part of a cult. All the world's woes are because of people like you and who think like you and I get to call you every bad word I can make up because of what you're doing. You are evil if I don't get what I want. I should never lose at anything ever because I am omnipotent and you are a low life. I get to lie, cheat, steal, be a hypocrite, have double standards and do whatever it takes to win because I'm saving the world.
TDS is a real thing.I see that with both factions at each others throats!!
The very very small minority of people supporting Trump, perhaps.
The very large majority of Trump supporters are average Americans.
The Establishment is abusing the DOJ to attack its opponents, to attack our foundations and norms.
It is an attack by the establishment, by the MSM, by the corporatocracy on its people... its not just going on in America, its in every "western" nation, from Canada to Germany.
A special investigative report by Beck that just came out explains a bit of it:
The Globalist Mass Migration Agenda
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWW8qH_y7jA
Beck has a tendency to meander and drone on at times, the opening few moments are informative, then I'd suggest jumping to 36:00 in the timeline.
You and Mike are put on notice the slight of hand Trumpers use to minimize Trumps crimes and against the country and make it all look like so much just a difference in politics, is being called out.
Here's more......
From my perspective MAGAism is a form of a cult.
Nikki Haley, in her determination and courage, battles against Trump and overwhelming odds to the very end. More important than her loss of the nomination to Trump is the weakness that her candidacy has revealed regarding the nature of Trump’s support. Trump losses among independent, moderately conservative voters has been exposed as a red flag with ill tidings for the general election. That is the soft underbelly that needs to be exploited by Democrats and the Left.
Trump fanatics have been “slipped a mickey” and are a lost cause as they will following him everywhere like a puppy. But reasonable people can be called upon to take a more reflective view. If the smelling salts are properly applied, they will wake up.
Let’s define the difference in regard to women’s reproductive rights. Since Roe vs Wade was overturned, the GOP, Trumpians included, have taken a draconian tack restricting abortion and ignoring a woman’s discretion in most of all Red States. While they now try to back away, moderate their stance as the Crimson Queen, Kari Lake of Arizona has recently, we wont let them. While they minimize, we will magnify. This disparity will always be kept front and center before the electorate. The plebiscite on this issue in certain red states show a vulnerability that we will exploit. Will reasonable people give up their reproductive rights and options in favor of the lies and false promises of a grifty-grafty huckster? That remains to be seen.
Also, we can separate the wheat from the chaff when reasonable people consider what a vote for Trump would mean. Can anyone in good conscience vote for a man that has spent the last 4 years promoting a lie that he has never proven and has split the country apart? Are we to believe that a man with 91 criminal charges and 4 indictments does not has culpability far beyond party politics as the Right would have us all believe? Some of these people might recall their grade school civics classes that spoke of Democracy and the Rule of Law as the American creed having intrinsic value in of itself. They might also recall when the President represented the highest standards in good citizenship, not the lowest. What do they tell their sons and daughters? The Right (Trumpians) are all to happy to trade all of this, swooning to the lies of a con man who says that in exchange, he will make the trains run on time. (and he really is not smart enough to do that.) But reasonable people are not so easily deceived, time to WAKE UP?
I could not fail to mention Trump comparing his legal woes to those experienced by the Black community. It was insulting as the utterance of a shallow, crass and stupid man, but the Anglos love him. Can you vote for anyone that disrespects you in so obvious a manner? That got a standing ovation at my neighborhood barber shop.
——
It is a shame that I had to call on British journalism ( The Guardian) to present an article that explains the allure of Trump and critical nature of the choice America has to make next November. I ask the conservatives, I get double talk and deflection. Mainstream media is timid and reticent and who knows who they ultimately are working for? Even liberals spend too much time dancing around the periphery rather than getting to the heart of the matter.
THIS article gets to the heart of the matter.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … -exception
We need to attack and attack viciously at the MAGA’s weakest points. Underestimating them is our greatest danger.
————-
I will leave you with a comment from a renown Social scientist, classic rightwing think.
“That's how it feeds on itself, and becomes a cycle. Conservatives are constantly being told that not only that cities are hellholes and places that are alien to your values, but also if you send your kids to college, which is the path to more economic opportunity for most people, that they are going to reject you and your values. That they're going to hear all these alien ideas and that's going to break up your family. And it is sometimes true that you go to college and you get exposed to all these different ideas. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're "woke" ideas, but there are things that you never thought about. A lot of kids do come home from college and say, "You know, Mom, Dad, I don't think you're right about this anymore." People don't like that.”
But is that not the very nature of life?
Thanks for your attention.There is nothing reasonable about the positions the Biden Administration are pushing.
There is nothing reasonable about men in women's locker rooms and competing in their sports.
There is nothing reasonable about mutilating children before they become adults and can make choices legally on their own.
There is nothing reasonable about Equity over Equality.
There is nothing reasonable about making it illegal for farmers to farm.
There is nothing reasonable about making it illegal to voice your opinion online.
There is nothing reasonable about the continued deconstruction of the West ongoing... they are determined to destroy Freedom, Liberty, Sovereignty, and they are doing a bang up job of it."There is nothing reasonable about men in women's locker rooms and competing in their sports."
For me, the focus should be on the increasing incidence of violence in our nation's school bathrooms. I'm hearing virtually nothing about it from our very shallow politicians.
Just last week..
"Video Shows Teens Beating Up Student in Bathroom in 'Targeted' Attack" (Wheaton IL)
"Santa Rosa police arrested a student at Montgomery High School Tuesday after she allegedly led a group assault on a 14-year-old girl in a restroom." (SANTA ROSA CALIFORNIA)
"WEYMOUTH, Mass. — It was a brutal and vicious assault captured on video inside the bathroom of a Weymouth school last month.
“It was deemed a preplanned random attack of violence,” said Stephen Finn, whose 7th-grade son was the victim."
'Barrage of videos shows brawling, brutal assaults at Beaumont school campus" BEAUMONT TEXAS
"New video circulating on social media shows students in White Plains High School slapping, punching and kicking a student in a bathroom."
White Plains NY School.
I could fill pages with reports of such instances. Many of these are happening, not in urban districts but very well off suburban ones.
It seems as several schools now are limiting access to the bathroom. Parents are encouraging their children not to drink any liquid. This is crazy?
And it's not getting the attention it deserves. Kids are telling their parents that they no longer feel safe using their school bathrooms. And politicians want me to be outraged about trans people?
Seems that far too many would rather focus on the more incendiary topic of the miniscule number of trans folks bathroom behavior when our heterosexual little monsters are beating the hell out of others in those same bathrooms. At this rate looks like no one's going to be able to get to use the bathroom...
https://www.newsweek.com/video-shows-te … om-1876682
https://www.boston25news.com/news/local … GCTS577GU/
https://www.theexaminer.com/news/barrag … ool-campus
Thanks for the article link! Great food for thought. Appreciated.
After reading, of course now pondering, I am focused on the concluding sentence:
"In that way, democracy itself has become a partisan issue. It’s a reality with which every lawmaker, every institution, every voter in America has to grapple honestly."You are welcome TSmog
Thanks....
I hope more will read think and ponder as you are doing as this will have made this all worth while.The only authoritarianism to be seen is coming from those in control today.
They force a lot of things on people, things people don't want to accept... but they will fire you from your jobs, arrest you, ban you, if you do not accept what I, what many, see as extremism.
That they can articulate it with many paragraphs, an effusive amount of words, that make it sound as if they are in the right, in articles like this means little... it doesn't change the efforts to force men into women's spaces, to make the mutilation of children acceptable, to make illegal things legal for non-citizens only, and so on, and so on...Thanks for the input, Ken! I appreciate what you shared and agree, except, in my view both the right and left have gone off the rails utilizing authoritarianism tools seeking both to disparage and recruit the like minded.
Maybe I am weird. Certainly a political bastard of sorts being an independent with both liberal and conservative views at play hopefully moderated with the classical liberalism of the founders.I am beginning to be concerned where this will lead.
The destruction and slaughter going on today, in places like Ukraine, Gaza, Syria...doesn't bode well.
The use of drones and smart-bombs, the willingness to destroy entire cities, sooner or later that could become the norm here... to fight the cartels along the border, and within our borders, to defeat "domestic terrorists".
Just a note for inquiring minds . . .
tsmog is my three initials combined with my nickname from work - og, and as moderator in a chat room back in the day when they were popular. It has years of history behind it.
I go by Tim mostly . . .
Og of course meant . . .
Old guy in some cases
Old gangsta' in other cases
With the automotive crowd in some cases old school
and then comes, original gangsterI have to giggle as I just posted a reply to your earlier comment sharing what tsmog means.
Call me anything you want. A former roommate for five years use to say frequently, Mitch, Mitch you son-of-a-bitch. My last name is Mitchell as seen at HP profile.
in order?
Related Discussions
- 98
The Democrat Party Change of Heart On Illigal Immigrants
by ga anderson 6 weeks ago
Then:Now:The point is not about Pres. Biden or which party's immigration goals are better. Or which president would be better on immigration? The point is about the change in the party's core values.GA
- 37
For Conservatives Only, Is the Democratic Party GOOD for America?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 13 months ago
The Democratic Party have institutionalized socioeconomic policies which are the detriment to America such as welfare & a governmental health program known as Obamacare. Because of the Democratic Party, we have generational welfare which the onus of tax is on the middle...
- 85
Why is Antisemitism so Prevalent in the Democrat Party?
by Readmikenow 7 weeks ago
Cheering terrorism: Democrats must deal with their far-left antisemitism problemIf we’re ever going to obtain peace in the Middle East, we’re going to have to confront the reality of rabid antisemitism, not only in the Muslim world, but also in the the Democratic Party and in the news and cultural...
- 70
Democrats Are Not Socialists
by Kathryn L Hill 4 years ago
Really? Prove it! What do democrats NOT agree with as far as socialism? What principles DO the democrats stand with?Wondering!
- 273
Is the Democrat Party dead?
by Brenda Durham 11 years ago
Where is it?and What is it?Is it now the Activist Party?The Homosexual Party?The Vengeance Party?The Obama Worshippers Party?There seems to be little semblance left of what it used to be. Before 2008, it still held to at least SOME core moral values and SOME sense of manners. ...
- 172
Has Donald Trump Killed the So-Called Republican Party?
by Scott Belford 7 weeks ago
In my opinion, yes - the Republican Party no-longer exists today even though Trump followers incorrectly refer to themselves as Republicans.Let me open this discussion with a short tutorial of the Republican Party (now keep in mind, the Party title has no bearing on the Party philosophy and any...