Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156447)

is george soros in that camp? or labor unions, or hollywood?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156448)

yes there is an incentive, because in most cases, employees can and will go elsewhere if they’re underpaid. businesses have every possible incentive to hold onto top employees. wveryone hates walmart, but everyone likes the low prices.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156340)

I think the fact that they can make millions off of this speaks volumes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156482)

Not really.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles (Post 1156458)

Invest early, we stress the importance of starting a retirement account at an early age to get a head start. It takes discipline but creates financial independence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156540)

well with all that logic, how can i disagree?

george soros doesn’t spent big $$ to shape and expand the democratic party? Really?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156545)

The Koch Bros have been working since the 1960s to shape US culture. I think Soros has been much more limited politically supporting some progressive causes over the last 15 years or so. Where he has been very active politically is donating to undermine communism in Eastern Europe. Fox News loves baselessly blaming him for just about everything though. They’re not quite the same.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156547)

you’re right, they’re
not the same. The Koch brothers aren’t unrepentant Nazi collaborators. As a teen, Soros helped the nazis to save himself, which no one can blame him for. the shicking part, was he gave an interview as an adult, and stated that he had no regrets over what he did. that makes him very special.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156552)

Jim, read up once in a while, none of this is even remotely true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156556)

none of it is true? so this 60 minutes interview, shows someone pretending to be george soros, admitting to helping the nazis seize property from fellow jews, and feeling no guilt?

have fun with that...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W8Id0-Lsyr0
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1156558)

I know a 14 year old should have willing went to the gas chambers .... than do what he did to survive ...

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156564)

Do your homework Jim.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156565)

when you’ve got
nothing and have been offered video evidence that something happened that you said
never happened....that’s the best you got? do my homework? i do
my homework, which is now i knew this happened.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156566)

Do more homework.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156562)

if you read what i posted
above, i said NO ONE COULD BLAME HIM for what he did. Anyone would expect a kid to do the same. But anyone who isn’t a sociopath, would feel bad about it, when they were an adult. True or false?

Spence said it never happened. You say it happened, but he didn’t do anything wrong. so which is it?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1156571)

(The Koch brothers aren’t unrepentant Nazi collaborators.)

posting of that was not even relevant to the topic ...

neither is this

Trump bragged he now had 'tallest building' in downtown Manhattan hours after World Trade Center collapsed
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8532891.html

Maybe lack of empathy is a required trait in the cut throat world of business ? or is just bad for SOROS ?

I am sure spencer if referring to you running with the Nazi collaborator line .... the false narrative running on every alt right website going about George Soros

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156568)

you first.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156580)

I have that’s why I know you’re wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156587)

did you watch the 60 minutes video? or are you saying that wasn’t actually George Soros?

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156624)

He was responding to accusations being made against him, read the snopes piece on it, it's quite detailed.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1156638)

Watch the whole interview, Not just the Dinesh D'Sousa BS.
That's about as bush league as Sarah Sanders clip of Jim Acosta.
https://ia801906.us.archive.org/27/i..._Interview.mp4

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156639)

i did. many times. he collaborated nazis ( who could blame him?) and saidhe feels no guilt about it. it’s not all that ambiguous.

in all seriousness, what are you people afraid will happen, if you admit that someone in the left is just a rotten person? what do you fear will happen to you if you admit that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1156642)

And you think that makes him rotten?
SAD

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156643)

not feeling bad, that he collaborated with Nazis, helping them harm fellow Hews? yes, i’d say that makes him a rather sociopathic person..as steve kroft said in 60 minutes, that experience would send most people to the psychiatrists couch.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1156425)

I don’t have a problem with charity, the issue people have with the Koch Bros is how they’ve also used their money to almost single handedly engineer, significantly a more radical Right.

I don’t see Gates or Buffet in this camp.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1156647)

You've worded this in an almost convincing way as to make it appear that you're actually pointing out what is objectively wrong with how the Koch's spend their money.

You start out with a magnanimous nod toward some general notion by saying you don't have a problem with charity. But in the same sentence you don't actually liken the Koch's donations to charity, but more as a "use" of money to create some form of, presumably harmful, radicalness.

But a careful reading which cuts through the phony self righteous high tone of what you say reveals, merely, that you don't like nor approve of what they do. Which elicits, in a rational mind, a "so what"?

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156637)

Kroft asked if he felt guilty. He said no.

why is reading someone’s spin on it, more revealing than listening to what Soros himself said?

You want me to ignore what Soros said, but listen to the liberal spin on what he said. No thanks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1156647)

You've worded this in an almost convincing way as to make it appear that you're actually pointing out what is objectively wrong with how the Koch's spend their money.

You start out with a magnanimous nod toward some general notion by saying you don't have a problem with charity. But in the same sentence you don't actually liken the Koch's donations to charity, but more as a "use" of money to create some form of, presumably harmful, radicalness.

But a careful reading which cuts through the phony self righteous high tone of what you say reveals, merely, that you don't like nor approve of what they do. Which elicits, in a rational mind, a "so what"?

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1156770)

to funny coming from the person who has no issues shooting people who throw rocks ..

Typical republican trying to project their version of morality on others

focusing on a 14 year olds actions (as if he had control) while completely ignoring everything that persons has done after that good and bad ....

Survivor’s guilt is something that people experience when they’ve survived a life-threatening situation and others might not have. It is commonly seen among Holocaust survivors, war veterans

In truth, it’s not logical for someone to feel responsible for another person’s fate, but guilt is not something we necessarily have any control over. However, survivor’s guilt is a normal response to loss. Not everyone experiences this type of guilt,

no where does it say people who are absent of guilt are bad people.. except you and other alt right figures who repost this evey election cycle .... But hea why should psychology offer any insight

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1156781)

"to funny coming from the person who has no issues shooting people who throw rocks "

I have an issue with shooting people who are skipping pebbles across a pond. If, on the other hand, you throw a rock at the head of a cop or soldier after being told not to, what happens next is your fault. I calls 'em like I sees 'em.

Did anybody who threw rocks, get shot? Don't think so.


"guilt is not something we necessarily have any control over"

That's correct. And there's a term for people who are incapable of feeling it, even after doing something that seriously hurts others - sociopath.

No only in your view of him


"focusing on a 14 year olds actions "

Lie. Why do you lie? I said TWICE, that no one could blame him for what he did at age 14. What is shocking, is that AS AN ADULT, he feels no guilt. Can you make that distinction, or is it too complicated for you? You seem to be unable to understand. I have no issue with what he did at age 14, none

(Why is that shocking he clearly states he took nothing from any one he was just there or did you miss that part of the interview?)


"it’s not logical for someone to feel responsible for another person’s fate"

Says who? Psychology

"no where does it say people who are absent of guilt are bad people"

No? Murderers who feel no remorse, aren't bad people? They aren't any different from murderers who sincerely regret what they did?

Wow. I mean wow. Anything, ANYTHING, to avoid admitting anyone on your side made a mistake.

(We are not taking about a murder are we .. what mistake did he make was it survival.Or not fitting into a response you approve of ... you are the one who refer to him as a nazi. Collaborator.. that has understood meaning )

Thank you for that brief journey into the Twilight Zone. I have to go now, I'm due back on the planet Earth.

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1156789)

I don’t want to question the 14-year-old,” Beck disingenuously stated during a series of broadcasts devoted to painting Soros as an evil “puppet-master” of the left. “I would have, however, liked to question the 80-year-old man who has never once said he regretted it,” he added.

Wow Jim sounds just like Glenn Beck . I would say it’s odd but it really isn’t
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1156771)

seems you think charitable donations and political donations are the same

No I don't think they are the same. But you're right in this case it appears that I did equate them. I misread Spence's post thinking he was doing the same. I missed the world "also" and made the wrong connection. He was speaking about political not charitable donations.

But my opinion, whether it was about charity or political donation, Spence's post amounted, as I said, to actually no more than he didn't like or approve of how or why the Kochs donate politically. His "they’ve also used their money to almost single handedly engineer, significantly a more radical Right" is an attempt to discredit the Kochs by using the dog whistle "radical." Just stick that word in a characterization and the little doggie ears perk up to the sound of something bad. So the Presidents that the Koch bros. helped to get elected were more radical right? Which one was "radical." I don't know if they actually helped Trump, but is he radical right?

Spence's idea of what is radical seems to be nothing more than what he doesn't approve of. I don't see any Republican politicians that are radical. Some want to actually return their party to the values that it supposedly represents. That would be a further distancing the party from the Progressive values that it has more and more supported. Spence, being a Progressive, would consider that "radical" because, well . . . I guess because for him Progressivism is the correct and proper center. So, I suppose, distancing from that center is radical. Well, until he comes up with some proof of that, it's just his opinion. And a logical response by someone not immersed in his opinion would be "So what?"

you tend to do that alot