Quote:
Synopsis from Wikipedia: "The Antifa movement is a conglomeration of autonomous, self-styled anti-fascist militant groups in the United States. The principal feature of antifa groups is their opposition to fascism through the use of direct action. They engage in militant protest tactics, which has included property damage and physical violence. They tend to be anti-capitalist and they are predominantly far-left and militant left, which includes anarchists, communists and socialists. Their stated focus is on fighting far-right and white supremacist ideologies directly, rather than politically." Their choice of name is ironic. They are more fascistic than many of those they attack or shut down. It's a shame that you use them as a foil to legitimize anti-capitalists, anarchists, communists, and socialists who destroy property, do physical violence, and shut down the speech of conservatives. Trump does not legitimize racism or white supremacism. Those allegations are propagandistic twisting of his words in order to demonize him. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I also mentioned brutal taxes in CT, I mentioned black fatherlessness, all directly related to liberalism. No harm there? None at all? "Regardless, you don't make policy over a single event like that." Agreed. I wasn't using that event as a reason to advocate for policy, I pointed to it as evidence that liberalism has adverse side effects. Any wide-ranging agenda will. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
What do you propose to do to stop the majority of the terrorist killings in this country? More have been done by angry white men than by any other ethnic group. Or are they not terrorists Was Vegas an accident Was Oklahoma City an accident Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
I was driving once, and I came around the corner, and right in the middle of the road, was a parked car. I hit it. It wasn't my fault, because whoever came around that curve next, was going to hit the car. It didn't matter who came next, they were going to hit the car. You're suggesting that the same logic applies to this gun. That might be the most absurd thing I have ever heard. 95% of us aren't that stupid or thoughtless that we'd fire a gun in an open, crowded place. Even in San Francisco, people aren't that stupid. |
Quote:
I don't know. Play offense abroad, play defense at home. Having open borders isn't the way I would go about it, I know that much. "More have been done by angry white men than by any other ethnic group" First, Islam isn't an ethnicity, it's a religion. Second, if you're suggesting that white, non-Muslim terrorists have killed more Americans than the number that died on 9/11, can you share the data that supports that? I'm skeptical...3,000 died on 9/11. "Was Vegas an accident " No. And we also don't know if the guy was a terrorist, do we? Was he a soldier for some cause? Or just a nut? Not every mass killer is a terrorist. A terrorist kills in the name of some cause. "Was Oklahoma City an accident" Nope. That was a white terrorist, as are most abortion clinic bombings. Last time I checked, the death toll from the instances you refer, are nowhere near 3,000. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I never, ever said, or even implied, that it was statistically significant, or credible enough to base public policy on. You asked what damage liberalism has ever done to anyone. I pointed to this. You go tell her father that the sanctuary city policy played no role in this one, specific, isolated event. While you're at it, stop dodging like a coward and tell us why taxes in CT, and black fatherless, also aren't hurting anybody. Because both are functions of liberalism. |
Last I knew nobody, with few exceptions, is required by the government to live anywhere in the USA. If the taxes in your state are too high or you feel something is wrong there you can get involved in politics, move or whine about it.
Blaming progressive political legislation for black fathers not being responsible for their children is interesting. Is this fathering while black? |
Terrorist: a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
What date would you suggest starting to count terrorist acts in the USA? If you start at 1500 you could start off with millions of natives, or you could start 9/12 and end up with a number. I guess you pick the date that suits your argument. |
Quote:
I am aware that CT residents can move. I asked if the taxes cause any suffering? Because Spence asked who has suffered at all, because of liberalism. I take care of my parents. If I moved to NH, I would pocket $900 more a month, every month, for the rest of my life. But my parents would be screwed, That that would cause them harm. Liberalism would cause them harm. I get it, we all get, it, you and Spence can never, under any circumstances, criticize liberalism. Pete, it's a yes/no question. Has liberalism in CT caused suffering to any of the citizens? Yes or no? You can't answer by saying "if you don't like it, move". That doesn't answer the question that was asked. And the question I asked, was an exact response to Spence's theory that liberalism never hurt anybody. I could also ask about babies who survive abortion I guess, and who suffer a lifetime of medical issues and limited opportunities. |
Quote:
The late great Daniel Patrick Moynihan, was a very liberal senator from NY. In the 1960s, he predicted that liberalism (most of which he supported) was going to cause a large-scale breakup of the black nuclear family, which would be a catastrophe for black culture. He was 100% right. |
Quote:
Moynihan did not just want to get rid of welfare, he wanted to replace it with a GAI of one type or another. This was proposed by Richard Nixon. If I remember correctly, the no father requirement was a give back to conservatives to be able to pass the enabling legislation. |
Quote:
It's called welfare, maybe you have heard of it, perhaps not given your responses here. It applies to everyone who is poor. Blacks are poor in much higher numbers, also partly because of liberalism, because liberals want poor people to become addicted to welfare, so that they'll vote for whoever promises them the most. Moynihan was a die-hard liberal who, unlike most diehard liberals, could still think rationally. That's why he has this one dire warning about liberalism, and no sane person would deny he was correct. "If I remember correctly, the no father requirement was a give back to conservatives to be able to pass the enabling legislation" I can't disprove that. I find it hard to believe the conservatives were asking for that, but I have no idea. |
It actually was not a dire warning about liberalism, but about the welfare system breaking up the nuclear family. He proposed along with other moderate politicians, of both parties, a Guaranteed Annual Income. This would make it so that if you were down and out, for whatever reason, you would be helped. But it would be advantageous to you financially to work. The current system penalizes recipients for working by it's all or nothing approach. Just more evil moderate stuff.
|
Jim, it's funny how conservative ideas don't always have the intended result and sometimes become the things they want to change.
Look at the history of the family based immigration for a good example. It was originally passed because the Supreme Court said that you could not exclude certain countries, and could not use quotas. So they passed new legislation with the theory that if we make it so people can have their relatives come here, most of the immigrants for the past 75 years have been Europeans. We can give them an advantage because we want them, but we can't say that. |
Quote:
Who was advocating for the welfare that broke up the black nuclear family? The Tea Party? The Amish? Or Democrats? For you and Spence, every post boils down to conservative=bad., liberal=good. Always, no exceptions. |
We've discussed DPM before. Jim has never done the homework.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
[QUOTE=Jim in CT;1141979]
Who was advocating for the welfare that broke up the black nuclear family? The Tea Party? The Amish? Or Democrats?[\QUOTE] That radical liberal democrat LBJ in concert with Congress and he did it without twitting by being a great negotiator. He was such a liberal guy you know. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
When the day comes that my worldview renders me completely unable to answer a question that simple, that's the day I change my worldview. I'm sure I took DPM out of context. I take it all back about welfare, Spence. Since most large urban cities are controlled by liberals, and clearly all cities (Detroit comes to mind, also Hartford and Bridgeport) are obviously far nicer today than they were 50 years ago, you are right, liberalism hasn't harmed anybody. Nope. |
But don't forget the democrats had control of the house and senate at that time and actually enacted legislation, unlike the current administration.
Now if that is good or bad is another story.:deadhorse: |
Jim
You made me look up Connecticut and see where it stands Highest per capita income Highest median income Highest Human development index, whatever that is I would assume it might have the highest taxes depending on how you look at the statistics And it's population is not shrinking, so what have the evil liberals have done to it? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:10 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com