|
![Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating](curves/striped-bass-08.jpg) |
|
|
|
![Left Container](curves/c1_13.jpg) |
|
![Right Container](curves/c1_16.jpg) |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
05-01-2018, 05:20 PM
|
#61
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Yea, it's such a shame people would be motivated by anti-Nazi intentions. What are they thinking? How many violent Antifa events happened before Trump came to the political stage? Why is Trump using them as a foil to legitimize nationalists racist groups?
|
The speakers they shouted down or attacked on campuses are not Nazis. Nor does Antifa oppose only Nazis.
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.
Last edited by detbuch; 05-01-2018 at 05:29 PM..
|
|
|
|
05-01-2018, 05:32 PM
|
#62
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,188
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Trump does not legitimize racism or white supremacism. Those allegations are propagandistic twisting of his words in order to demonize him.
|
Sigh...
|
|
|
|
05-01-2018, 08:22 PM
|
#63
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Sigh...
|
săracul copil
|
|
|
|
05-01-2018, 08:58 PM
|
#64
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
But with a millions of variables you can't really say that's the case. While tragic her death was an extremely random event.
Regardless, you don't make policy over a single event like that.
|
You asked who has been harmed by progressive ideas. Kate Steinle's family was horribly hurt, thanks to the liberal policy of not cooperating with ICE.
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.
|
|
|
|
05-01-2018, 08:59 PM
|
#65
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
The gun was lying under the bench
A man picked it up
It fired
What does his immigration status have to do with a death, other than to be a focus point for authoritarian white christian conservatives
One could also say that if there were no guns this would not have happened
"Only a single particle of gunshot residue was found on the defendant’s hands, which seems to support his repeated claim that the gun was wrapped in some sort of fabric when he picked it up and caused it to fire. If he did not know the object was a gun, it is a stretch to claim that it was criminal negligence for him to pick it up."
|
I never said the guy intended to kill her. I said that if the city had cooperated with ICE, he would not have been there. I don't think it's a stretch to say it was an accident. But he shouldn't have been there to cause the accident. Is that going too fast for you?
|
|
|
|
05-01-2018, 09:47 PM
|
#66
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
I never said the guy intended to kill her. I said that if the city had cooperated with ICE, he would not have been there. I don't think it's a stretch to say it was an accident. But he shouldn't have been there to cause the accident. Is that going too fast for you?
|
I forgot guns don’t kill people. Illegals do
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
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 09:09 AM
|
#67
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
I forgot guns don’t kill people. Illegals do
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
|
Let's be very clear, OK? You're saying (and it sounds like Spence is saying) that if the shooter had been deported, it's reasonable to assume that someone else would have picked up the gun and similarly shot her in the back? Are you serious?
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.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 09:14 AM
|
#68
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
I forgot guns don’t kill people. Illegals do
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
|
"What do you propose to do to stop the majority of the terrorist killings in this country?"
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.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 09:16 AM
|
#69
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,188
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
Let's be very clear, OK? You're saying (and it sounds like Spence is saying) that if the shooter had been deported, it's reasonable to assume that someone else would have picked up the gun and similarly shot her in the back? Are you serious?
|
The point is that the randomness of the event makes it statistically insignificant from a policy perspective.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 09:23 AM
|
#70
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
The point is that the randomness of the event makes it statistically insignificant from a policy perspective.
|
Are you feeling OK?
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.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 10:16 AM
|
#71
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
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?
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 10:32 AM
|
#72
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
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.
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 11:12 AM
|
#73
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
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?
|
You guys cannot answer a direct question, can you?
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.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 11:16 AM
|
#74
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Blaming progressive political legislation for black fathers not being responsible for their children is interesting. Is this fathering while black?
|
Liberals came up with the idea of paying young girls to have babies, and the brilliant idea of paying them more to not marry. When you give someone a financial incentive to engage in a behavior, you will see an increase in that behavior.
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.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 11:43 AM
|
#75
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
Liberals came up with the idea of paying young girls to have babies, and the brilliant idea of paying them more to not marry. When you give someone a financial incentive to engage in a behavior, you will see an increase in that behavior.
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.
|
Interesting, I'll have to tell my daughters that they can get paid to have babies. Or is this payment only available if you are black?
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.
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 11:53 AM
|
#76
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Interesting, I'll have to tell my daughters that they can get paid to have babies. Or is this payment only available if you are black?
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.
|
"I'll have to tell my daughters that they can get paid to have babies. Or is this payment only available if you are black?"
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.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 12:26 PM
|
#77
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
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.
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 01:54 PM
|
#78
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
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.
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 01:56 PM
|
#79
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
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.
|
"It actually was not a dire warning about liberalism, but about the welfare system breaking up the nuclear family."
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.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 02:14 PM
|
#80
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,188
|
We've discussed DPM before. Jim has never done the homework.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 03:06 PM
|
#81
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
[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
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 03:11 PM
|
#82
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
We've discussed DPM before. Jim has never done the homework.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
How about CT taxes, Spence? No harm done to anyone?
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.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 03:12 PM
|
#83
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
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. ![Beating Dead Horse](http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/images/smilies/smiley_beatin_horse_ani.gif)
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 03:19 PM
|
#84
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,069
|
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?
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 03:48 PM
|
#85
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
I forgot guns don’t kill people. Illegals do
Duh! Illegals are people. Guns don't kill people. People kill people. You got a problem with that?
What do you propose to do to stop the majority of the terrorist killings in this country?
In the case of killings done by citizens, prosecute them. In the case of those done by illegals, crack down on illegal immigration and limit immigration to highly vetted people who have qualifications that are needed for our society and economy.
More have been done by angry white men than by any other ethnic group.
White men are not an ethnicity, white it is a race. Oh, I forgot, ethnicity, national origin, religion, and other stuff are all race. Every crime and anti-social behavior is racism . . . right . . . right . . . right. If my brother was born and raised in another country, we would not be of the same race.
Or are they not terrorists
Was Vegas an accident
Was Oklahoma City an accident
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Murders are not accidents.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 03:50 PM
|
#86
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
The point is that the randomness of the event makes it statistically insignificant from a policy perspective.
|
From a policy perspective, the illegal should not have been in this country.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 03:53 PM
|
#87
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Blaming progressive political legislation for black fathers not being responsible for their children is interesting. Is this fathering while black?
|
It's not-fathering while black.
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 04:04 PM
|
#88
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
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.
|
There was no USA in 1500. Ergo, you are considering international stats. If we start at 700 to 1500, internationally, Asians and Africans, and Arabs, I'm guessing, had the most unlawful (depending on who's "law" was being broken) killings meant to terrorize people in order to eliminate opposition to political (depending on your notion of politics) occupation or to submit populations to the political power of the invaders.
Last edited by detbuch; 05-02-2018 at 04:35 PM..
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 04:19 PM
|
#89
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Interesting, I'll have to tell my daughters that they can get paid to have babies. Or is this payment only available if you are black?
Progressives are equal opportunity employers of welfare meant to grow government dependence.
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.
GAI is welfare. It was tried before and failed. That's why Nixon backed off from the proposal.
If I remember correctly, the no father requirement was a give back to conservatives to be able to pass the enabling legislation.
|
Actually, Federal welfare is a giveback to Progressivism. There is actually no enumerated power in the Constitution to provide federal welfare income to anybody. Federal welfare began under the hyper-Progressive FDR administration.
Last edited by detbuch; 05-02-2018 at 04:36 PM..
|
|
|
|
05-02-2018, 04:27 PM
|
#90
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
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.
|
There is no, actual, constitutional restriction against Federal immigration policies which exclude immigrants or imposing quotas. Activist Judges legislated from the Bench.
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:08 PM.
|
| |