POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
And of course Snopes just had to fact check it. Can't be having conservatives spreading positive memes about Sanders. Seriously, I wouldn't put it past Snopes to fact check "Michelle Obama has a dick."White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders is one of the most admired women in America.
Snopes fact-checked a popular conservative meme being shared on Facebook that claimed that Sanders is in the top 10 of most admired women in the U.S.
The site rated the claim as “true.”
Like I said, ...as goofy as it ever was.
Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.---James Madison
Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.---James Madison
I think there is a lot of truth to this:
I think that when you limit your thinking to one country and identify one country as the source of all wisdom and development, then the fact that much of the rest of the world’s wealthy countries have more or less figured out health coverage doesn’t matter, doesn’t enter into the debate. Or that they’ve figured out gun violence. So we have these endless theoretical debates about what would happen if the police didn’t have guns, or if you had laws banning automatic weapons. And the fact that other countries have done it and you can observe what the results have been doesn’t enter into it. So the fact that the rest of the world has figured out better directions in terms of criminal punishment, moving away from mass incarceration and retributive justice, you know we’re impoverished.
We’re deprived of these sources of wisdom and these experiments in social advances by limiting our understanding to the United States. And the same thing deprives us of world history. You know, people in, kids in U.S. schools are taught almost entirely U.S. history, and as if it’s the only history that matters. We’re taught that, not just that the U.S., but we, identifying ourselves as the U.S. through eternity, we defeated the British in the revolution for freedom, as was necessary, without any mention of Canada, or Australia, or anywhere else that didn’t, and why it was better to have a war or not. We defeated slavery with a civil war, with no mention that much of the rest of the world defeated slavery without a civil war. And so we’re encouraged to support as having been right and necessary anything that the United States did, even if it was a much more mixed picture when you consider the rest of the world.
And so this habit of thinking then makes you prone to go along with whatever the U.S. government now says must be done is justified and necessary. And of course you’ve been trained, conditioned as a robotic little fascist to pledge your obedience to a flag, so that if somebody waves a flag, you are less able to see through what you might otherwise have been able to see through because they’re waving that flag at you.
David Swanson
I think that when you limit your thinking to one country and identify one country as the source of all wisdom and development, then the fact that much of the rest of the world’s wealthy countries have more or less figured out health coverage doesn’t matter, doesn’t enter into the debate. Or that they’ve figured out gun violence. So we have these endless theoretical debates about what would happen if the police didn’t have guns, or if you had laws banning automatic weapons. And the fact that other countries have done it and you can observe what the results have been doesn’t enter into it. So the fact that the rest of the world has figured out better directions in terms of criminal punishment, moving away from mass incarceration and retributive justice, you know we’re impoverished.
We’re deprived of these sources of wisdom and these experiments in social advances by limiting our understanding to the United States. And the same thing deprives us of world history. You know, people in, kids in U.S. schools are taught almost entirely U.S. history, and as if it’s the only history that matters. We’re taught that, not just that the U.S., but we, identifying ourselves as the U.S. through eternity, we defeated the British in the revolution for freedom, as was necessary, without any mention of Canada, or Australia, or anywhere else that didn’t, and why it was better to have a war or not. We defeated slavery with a civil war, with no mention that much of the rest of the world defeated slavery without a civil war. And so we’re encouraged to support as having been right and necessary anything that the United States did, even if it was a much more mixed picture when you consider the rest of the world.
And so this habit of thinking then makes you prone to go along with whatever the U.S. government now says must be done is justified and necessary. And of course you’ve been trained, conditioned as a robotic little fascist to pledge your obedience to a flag, so that if somebody waves a flag, you are less able to see through what you might otherwise have been able to see through because they’re waving that flag at you.
David Swanson
Liberal blathering. "
"When you allow your nationalism to fade you will loose everything you have attained by hard work and give it to those who think they deserve more but are not willing to put forth the blood, sweat, or tears required to make it happen."
Me.
Umm, a. You said there most be evidence first before an investigation.. youre now shifting the goal posts.
And 13 russian trolls and 10 year old crimes dont really require a special counsel which is ehat were discussing.
You try to come off as a lot smarter than you are.
And now the mental midget chirps in. Not only did I study civics, I also studied and learned history.
WC, please take a political history class. Pay special attention to groups like the Rockefeller Republicans, Goldwater Republicans, Dixiecrats, Boll weevils and Blue Dog Democrats. Please study the "Solid South" that voted "Democratic" in 23 straight elections between 1876 and 1964.
Please find where people like Strom Thurmond, George Wallace, et al are EVER described as liberals. Democrats yes, liberals...bite your tongue.
Who were the Dixiecrats? Are you aware that they were all "Dems" that split from the Democratic party in 1948 and ran Strom Thurmond for POTUS.
Their platform? States rights, Segregation and Social conservatism. Perhaps we should refer to them as DINOs...Democrats In Name Only.
Let's look at the vote on the Civil Rights act of 1964. Notice the great despair in votes between the Northern and Southern states? There was support and opposition from both sides but real ideological split was between north and south, not Democrats and Republicans.
The original House version:
- Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
- Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
- Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
- Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
- Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
- Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
- Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
- Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
Class dismissed.
http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/07/the-ugly-history-of-democratic-suppression-of-blacks/
In 1959, when Southern Democrats demanded that any who violated the new civil rights bill should be tried before all-white Southern juries, Republican Vice President Richard Nixon gave the deciding Senate vote to kill the Southern amendment. Southern Democrats who opposed desegregation included former KKK klansman Sen. Robert Byrd and Gov. George Wallace.
After the Birmingham Children’s Crusade Protest, where police dogs and fire hoses were used against African-Americans, President John F. Kennedy called for a bill emulating the Republican Civil Rights Act of 1875.
Southern Democrats fervently opposed it, as Democrat Sen. Richard Russell in 1964: “We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states.”
Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd filibustered the Civil Rights Bill for 14 hours and 13 minutes on June 10, 1964.
Democrat Sen. Strom Thurmond stated in 1964: “This so-called Civil Rights Proposals, which the President has sent to Capitol Hill for enactment into law, are unconstitutional, unnecessary, unwise and extend beyond the realm of reason. This is the worst civil-rights package ever presented to the Congress and is reminiscent of the Reconstruction proposals and actions of the radical Republican Congress.”
The phrase “the bribe or the bullet” refers to positive or negative human motivations, as generations of past parents who motivated children with a piece candy for obedience or a swat to the rear for disobedience.
From the Civil War to Lyndon Johnson, Southern Democrats were accused of engaging in negative motivation and intimidation tactics to keep African-Americans from voting.
As television and media coverage of these tactics grew, it resulted in bad press for the Democratic Party. Political strategists proposed a switch from “the bullet” to “the bribe,” from “intimidation” to “entitlement.”
In other words, if the African-American vote could no longer be suppressed, then maybe it could be manipulated and controlled through dependency on entitlement programs.
And here we are today.
https://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/politics/civil-rights-act-interesting-facts/index.html
More Republicans voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act than Democrats
lol, even CNN won’t lie about it.
In 1959, when Southern Democrats demanded that any who violated the new civil rights bill should be tried before all-white Southern juries, Republican Vice President Richard Nixon gave the deciding Senate vote to kill the Southern amendment. Southern Democrats who opposed desegregation included former KKK klansman Sen. Robert Byrd and Gov. George Wallace.
After the Birmingham Children’s Crusade Protest, where police dogs and fire hoses were used against African-Americans, President John F. Kennedy called for a bill emulating the Republican Civil Rights Act of 1875.
Southern Democrats fervently opposed it, as Democrat Sen. Richard Russell in 1964: “We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states.”
Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd filibustered the Civil Rights Bill for 14 hours and 13 minutes on June 10, 1964.
Democrat Sen. Strom Thurmond stated in 1964: “This so-called Civil Rights Proposals, which the President has sent to Capitol Hill for enactment into law, are unconstitutional, unnecessary, unwise and extend beyond the realm of reason. This is the worst civil-rights package ever presented to the Congress and is reminiscent of the Reconstruction proposals and actions of the radical Republican Congress.”
The phrase “the bribe or the bullet” refers to positive or negative human motivations, as generations of past parents who motivated children with a piece candy for obedience or a swat to the rear for disobedience.
From the Civil War to Lyndon Johnson, Southern Democrats were accused of engaging in negative motivation and intimidation tactics to keep African-Americans from voting.
As television and media coverage of these tactics grew, it resulted in bad press for the Democratic Party. Political strategists proposed a switch from “the bullet” to “the bribe,” from “intimidation” to “entitlement.”
In other words, if the African-American vote could no longer be suppressed, then maybe it could be manipulated and controlled through dependency on entitlement programs.
And here we are today.
https://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/politics/civil-rights-act-interesting-facts/index.html
More Republicans voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act than Democrats
lol, even CNN won’t lie about it.
Didn't shift a damn thing. There was plenty of evidence before the investigation began.
I'll just refer you to my posting directly above this one. Checkmate mutha****a!
So what are they waiting on? You act like the GOP doesn't control the executive and legislative branches of government. Why isn't Trump instructing his AG to go after Hillary and Obama? He said he would...just another lie you fell for.
No doubt there was a divide between the north and south. No denying that, but that doesn’t change their party affiliation. You act today as a liberal/Democrat is some fighter for the little guy. For the miniority. What changed from party affiliation not mattering in 1964 to party affiliation being everything in 2018?
You yourself said Dems were for all the blacks and conservatives weren’t, then in the next post claim it doesn’t matter what party they were in. Which is it?
It sounds like he's advocating for globalism, to be more like Europe, big government and less freedom. Everything America was founded against and meant not to be.
The healthcare argument is a false equivalency. Those countries who "have figured it out" don't have a population of +300 million. It's virtually impossible for the US to give free healthcare to everyone. If we ever do the service will be overwhelmed and atrocious. There are reasons a lot of them choose come here for the best healthcare instead of their own country who has "figured it out".
Here in America we have a constitutional, God given right to bear arms. Why should law abiding citizens suffer the consequences from the actions of criminals? Those countries approach to guns is an affront to freedom. A society who punishes and denies its citizens because of the actions of criminals is not a free society and definitely not one I'm interested in.
The dossier was the main evidence. Really the only evidence. It was also the catalyst for the FISA warrants. That's an undisputable fact. Know we all know the dossier is fake Clinton paid for Russian smear and lies. That's also an undisputable fact.
There was no crime fuzz, a special prosecutor was appointed without a crime.
The prior admin was spying on the incoming admin and using the info to damage it.
Think about that for a second, why would the Obama admin something so outlandish?
Friend dies...let me honor her and take a swipe at Trump.
What changed that Republicans started referring to themselves as Conservatives and not Republicans. That any GOP politician that doesn't walk the party line is referred to as a RINO?
Time changes things. What was true in 1964 with regard to political parties isn't necessarily true today. Where are the Rockefeller Republicans today? Where are the Blue Dog Democrats today?
There are no absolutes. Political parties change over time that's why only idiots try to put what happened in one party 60 years ago as being the same people that do something today. Today's GOP claims to be for states rights...Lincoln is the dude that imposed that the federal could overrule the state. We had a war over that stuff.
If all that goes over your head then maybe you should study history and understand a bit more before you chirp in.
Let me add... why did the KKK used to support Democrats and now supports Republicans/conservatives?
Last edited:
Take it up with your own party Bill, they obviously felt otherwise. Obama or Clinton didn't appoint the special prosecutor.
After you tell me more about the "plenty of evidence before the investigation began".Please tell us more.
The Cato Institute ( A conservative think tank) ranks the US 17th in the world in freedom. I see quite a few European nations ahead of us. So much for "less freedom".
The top 10 jurisdictions in order were Switzerland, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Ireland, Australia, Finland, Norway, Denmark, and, tied at 9th place, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Selected countries rank as follows: Canada (11), Sweden (13), Germany (16), the United States (17),
How many of those countries have banned guns, banned knives, have speech laws, throw people in jail for what they post on the Internet, etc, etc, etc?
I guess freedom must be entirely subjective. Maybe they're happy with being censored, denied and imprisoned for thoughts and speech. Seems like the type of society just waiting for a dictator to take hold.
Why does our population size mean we can't have healthcare? that is the absolutely dumbest argument you could ever make. Our GDP to population size ratio is better than any EU country. US GDP per capita is about 60k. EU GDP per capita is about 40k and they still manage to give everyone healthcare just fine. ****ing china has universal healthcare, their GDP per capita is like 15k. If we removed all the insurance companies and only charged people 60% in tax of what they were paying in premiums we could fund Healthcare for all of North and south america.
LoL, so you'll trade the entire Civil Rights era, back to segregation, Jim Crow, women's suffrage, legal discrimination, etc for getting rid of the Federal Reserve and income tax... let me guess, you're a white male?
Now we don't get to move forward from there because otherwise we just end up where we are today. That's the America that you want?
Vote for Bernie and see how that works out for you. Maybe you'll get your wish and we'll all have shitty third rate healthcare.
Your ignorance is showing. Stricter gun laws...yes. Free speech, right to assembly, etc... yep! Please tell me about all the political prisoners in Canada.
Except that so called "third rate healthcare" results in people living longer and overall more healthy.
You really need to get out and see the world.
Bill, you don't think there was any crime. You've simply chosen to pick a side and go with their story. How are we different?
My ignorance is showing? Canada and free speech don't belong in the same sentence. They're arresting people for speech and online postings.
After waiting months sometimes years for a procedure. If their's is so great then can stop coming here for healthcare.
So that's the dumbass gotcha in your hypothetical? No matter what date someone picks, you say we wouldn't be able to move forward from that date and you accuse them of wanting segregation?
Last time I try to actually answer one of your stupid questions.
I'd like to revise my answer and say I'd roll time back so I am a Roman emperor.
There's evidence of the crimes, illegal unmasking, illegal leaking and spying on his side. Your side has nothing but feelings and hate for Trump. No evidence of collusion.
Last edited:
the us already has shitty third rate healthcare.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy
http://thepatientfactor.com/canadia...zations-ranking-of-the-worlds-health-systems/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita
Japanese people literally work themselves to death but still live longer because their healthcare isn't about throwing pills at symptoms to a bunch of fatasses. They promote healthy eating and spend their money aggressively preventing bad health. The US spends enough money on healthcare to fun half the world economies. We spend 3.5 trillion a year on healthcare, 20% of GDP, $10k per capita. and for that we get subpar results and 15% of the population with zero coverage. and then another 20-30% with shitty coverage and 1 illness away from bankruptcy. Healthcare should never be a profit driven industry.
Speak for yourself. I have a great job with awesome insurance that provides me more than suitable healthcare. I guess you get what you pay for and when you're not paying and the government is they make you wait months and years then play God while holding you hostage in the hospital and condemning you to death.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Nate Ament cancels upcoming visit this week 8/28
- Latest: electricat2