American Politics

[Xeroxed]

The main criticism trump took from when he shut down flights to europe was over doing without letting anyone know. It was an unilateral decision that came from nowhere. In the end what matters here is whether politicians implement measures based on what actual scientists are saying regarding how to handle and contain disease. And that's not what has been happening here.

And yet Joe Biden and several other democrats comes out and claim that he did not shut it down soon enough.

True, Fauci did initially say not to wear masks. But the context there is that at the time there just wasn't information on how effective masks would be at containing this AND masks were scarce. So the priority was for medical professionals treating people to have access to them. Over time we learned how effective masks are and they also became less scarce. On this end at least there is no fault on fauci's part.

I dont think it is Faucis fault either. The point is I dont see how you can blame trump for something his health expert advised him to do.

And it is true that only governors can shut down the economy. But there was still plenty trump could do but didn't. He is still the leader of the republican party. If he along with actual medical professionals told governors to shut down to contain this at least the majority would have listened. His supporters, who for reasons beyond my understanding trust him more than actual medical professionals, would have likely listened if trump told them to stay home for their own good. As in, trump had an actual chance to do a full lockdown but didn't. I honestly don't think this would have been possible for obama for instance since there are republican party wings that would simply never listen to anything he has to say.

I think you are misunderstanding Trumps standing. Trump is loved by the conservative voters, but he is hated and feared by the party elite. He could tell his voters to shelter in place and protect themselves from the virus and they would listen. But there is no way that the republican governors that often secretly hates him would do as he say.

Whats worse is that the democrats often do the straight opposite of what trump want just to spite him. Remember when Trump shut down travel from china and wanted to quarantine recent arrivals. The democrats (Pelosi and more) not only called it racism and refused to obey. They even started big public welcome parties for the Chinese travelers so that they would feel welcome. In truth these anti-racist parties in NY were probably the main reason why that city got hit so insanely hard and fast by corona compared to the rest of the country. Well that and stuffing sick people in to old people homes.

Anyway. In truth I see it that the US have three political movements. 1: The populist right 2: the populist left and 3: The Power Party. The first two are genuine ideologies that hate and compete with one another. The last one is an alliance of vaguely liberal, globalist and corporatistic people who only care about power and money. As such they network and organize with one another to capture organisations and squeeze it for whatever they can take. The leadership of both the Democrats and the Republicans have long belonged to the Power Party and only pretended to have a left/right ideology. (They are also called the deep state sometimes) These people decides who gets on the various tickets and which people the voters get to chose between. Only in 2016 they got lazy and arrogant. They had decided internally that it was Hillary's turn to be president. So they rigged the democrat election by making every other democrat candidate bow out. Unfortunately it did not work on Bernie and their attempts to crush him soured the base against her.

They also rigged the republican primary in order to make sure that what they though was the weakest possible Republican would face Hillary in the election. To do that they made sure that Donald Trump got a lot of free positive coverage in the media and eventually he won the primary. The problem was just that the Donald was not a weak candidate at all and they had underestimated just how hated Hillary truly was among normal people. Trumps victory should have been impossible. Hillary spent 2.5 times as much money as he did on her campaign and she literally had 90% of the traditional news media behind her. (Even fox news was lukewarm about Trump.)

And yet he won and he won with a message that he would drain the swamp. Essentially to get rid of the power party. Every member of the elite hate and fear him because of this. Also, because he is so arrogant and prideful they cant scare him and he is rich enough that you can never hope to bribe him. Thus he is impossible for them to control. They will do anything to sabotage and get rid of him. Even leaning in to a communist left in the hopes that they can control them better than they can Trump.

I used to think that a perfect president would have completely different characteristics to Trump. But none of those perfect candidates could ever get elected. And if they did get elected they would be ground down by the Power party. A super prideful and arrogant guy like Trump is probably the best possible candidate that could realistically win.

But.. that bit about the CHAZ is irrelevant to the point. That was just a protest. Sure, it's impossible to do every thing every single protester wants, but that's not the point either. In the end what people wanted was meaningful police reform. Reduce police functions, demilitarization, longer and better training... But unfortunately a substantial part of the republican party (and trump) ultimately thinks the police is doing its job as it is supposed to, hence no meaningful reforms. A substantial part of the democrat party also thinks the police is kinda fine and just needs a few edges getting polished... Which is bad enough as well. I do think these protests have kinda opened a lot of people's eyes in regards to the police in the US being systematically underqualified for its job, needlessly violent and ultimately lacking the tools to police properly.

So you are saying that you hope that the majority of the protesters actually want the same thing you do? Fair enough. I would also like some reform. Like an end to no-knock raids and an end to the fact that Police in america can seize money and items that might be related to a crime and then never prosecute that crime and just keep the money. Thats just insane! Its legalized theft!

But I dont think the driving force behind BLM agrees with you. Seattle (or was it San Fran?) has already decided to cut its police budget in half and NY has cut the budget by a billion dollars. Some democrat congressional representatives like Alexzandria Ocasio Cortez from NY have demanded that the city defund them even more.

Less money for police will not allow police to get better training.

Federal authorities deal with federal crimes. And yeah, a federal courthouse is their turf. But mobilizing them without informing local authorities to deal with non federal crimes is simply not constitutional and not legal. Let alone arrests without probable cause...

And why is that relevant at all? They are dealing with protesters, not organized crime and mobsters. Add to that that the presence of those federal agents (and trump) has instigated violence...

I want to turn this back on you: Why are federal Police even necessary here? Where is the local police? Why are they not protecting the court house. There have barely been a single local cop present to protect it. If they did their job they would not have to bring in any federal cops.

Also what makes you think this is not organized crime? Its definitely organized and there is definitely crime. Even if not everyone is in on it. And what about it is not constitutional? The first amendment clearly states that the right of the people peaceably to assemble shall not be infringed. As soon as the protest stops being peaceful it stops being protected by the constitution.

--- Double Post Merged, Jul 24, 2020, Original Post Date: Jul 24, 2020 ---

This, i cannot disagree more. They are opposite in every aspect..
KKK is about racial superiorirty... BLM is about equality. Its about giving black people a fair chance in a system which is unjust. KKK literally think Jews operate like a mafia, have a history of violence and still defend lynching. BLM is a movement which is overwhelmingly peaceful... You cannot equate the two or even say there's no difference...

If BLM was about equality then why do they hate the phrase All Life Maters so much? https://www.zerohedge.com/political...er-young-white-mother-saying-all-lives-matter

I dare you to find something worse that KKK have done in the last couple of years. And if you look at statistics you will find that the KKK is also overwhelmingly peaceful. (Well, the remaining ones tend to live way out in the sticks, far away from other races.)

Also, this extreme intolerance is all bullshit. Most people are moderates in real life but left in social media. No one is leaving the state for that reason..

California just voted to remove discrimination protection from its constitution. (Well there must also be a public referendum on it first. But they try.) Mainly so that they can discriminate against whites.

Which is a must as Hollywood is apparently going all out in their discrimination of white males after the protests. Not to mention that most universities in California is discriminating against Asian students who have to score higher on SAT-tests in order to get in than does other races. Though that is true for most of the country.

 

[xi0]

If BLM was about equality then why do they hate the phrase All Life Maters so much? https://www.zerohedge.com/political...er-young-white-mother-saying-all-lives-matter

Because it's demonstrably apparent that all lives do not matter, at least not in the same way. People insisting on using that phrase as some sort of counterpoint are basically undermining the message, which is why it's met with hostility. All lives cannot matter unless black lives matter. I really can't explain the sort of indignation displayed by some people at this concept, other than blaming it on some sort of white fragility.

I dare you to find something worse that KKK have done in the last couple of years. And if you look at statistics you will find that the KKK is also overwhelmingly peaceful. (Well, the remaining ones tend to live way out in the sticks, far away from other races.)

They're "peaceful" because they mostly exist in silence or in places where they meet no opposition. Do not mischaracterize them as if their core tenets include anything about peace, that's certainly not the point of the organization...

 

[Sanity Check]

Do they? I don't know if you know any left-leaning people, but many I know are aware of the differences between each religion, and many are religious as well. Many also acknowledge how much damage religions have done, like how Christians used the BIble to justify racism and enslaving Black people.

Why are you conservatives so consistently off the mark? Like, what source do you use that keeps regurgitating these BS? Have they not talked to a leftist? Spoke with them?

Leftists stereotypically say things like this.

Leftist: "Why worship the christian God. Why not worship zeus or fairies instead."
Leftist: "If a religious person accepts one religion, they must accept all religions."

They treat all religions as if they were identical.

Slavery is far too weaponized and politicized a topic for most to have a clear perspective on.

I'm usually the person who turns out to be right about everything.

 

[xi0]

Leftist: "Why worship the christian God. Why not worship zeus or fairies instead."
Leftist: "If a religious person accepts one religion, they must accept all religions."

They treat all religions as if they were identical.

Every single religious person is an atheist when it comes to the god(s) they don't believe in.

That being said, I don't see Leftists going around saying that people must practice all faiths if they believe in one of them... There's plenty of religious leftists, especially those in the civil rights movement.

--- Double Post Merged, Jul 24, 2020, Original Post Date: Jul 24, 2020 ---

Slavery is far too weaponized and politicized a topic for most to have a clear perspective on.

In regards to what...

 

[Hakuteiken]

If BLM was about equality then why do they hate the phrase All Life Maters so much? https://www.zerohedge.com/political...er-young-white-mother-saying-all-lives-matter

It's a sad occasion, however, I guess you didn't read the article yourself.

"According to the woman's fiancée and confirmed by her father in a statement to Gateway Pundit's Cassandra Fairbanks, 24-year-old Jessica Doty Whitaker was out on a walk with her fiancée, Jose Ramirez and two friends near the Indianapolis Canal Walk on July 5 around 3 a.m., when one of them was overheard 'using a slang version of the n-word,' according to Fox 59."

"A group of strangers confronted Whitaker's group. Guns were drawn and an argument ensued in which someone in the suspect group shouted 'Black Lives Matter,' to which 'Whitaker or someone in her group replied that All Lives Matter.'"

The beginning of the argument had next to nothing with All Life Matters. They provoked people. It's a major stretch to say All Lives Matter is what led to this incident. Again, look at the article title and the sum up and tell me this is written from the perspective of equality and not white supremacy.
"We wonder if that would be the case if the races were reversed?"

 

[hokageji]

If BLM was about equality then why do they hate the phrase All Life Maters so much? https://www.zerohedge.com/political...er-young-white-mother-saying-all-lives-matter

I dare you to find something worse that KKK have done in the last couple of years. And if you look at statistics you will find that the KKK is also overwhelmingly peaceful. (Well, the remaining ones tend to live way out in the sticks, far away from other races.)

Wow, an article by Tyler Durden, must be legit..... jk

But what does this have to do with BLM? See the video, its 4 or 5 people vs a few, you dont hear the shot, you dont see anything but the victims are interviewed by far right medias after. Officially, the report doesn't say anything...
There's also belief that the victim group threw racial slurs..
But again, this has nothing to do with black lives matter.... It was just a few people, not an organized crowd protesting...

Again, i dont get how you are even defending KKK..... Its clever to push "past couple of years" in an argument to defend a group that has been hating for a century against a group that has risen strong in the past couple of months over an isolated incident in which they were not even present.

California just voted to remove discrimination protection from its constitution. (Well there must also be a public referendum on it first. But they try.) Mainly so that they can discriminate against whites.

Well i need to read more but that is lame... We'll know in November whent he people vote for it.. Besides, how does this prove that the left is intolerant? And you seriously think that this will lead to discrimination against whites?

Which is a must as Hollywood is apparently going all out in their discrimination of white males after the protests. Not to mention that most universities in California is discriminating against Asian students who have to score higher on SAT-tests in order to get in than does other races. Though that is true for most of the country.

Look,if you are trying to prove that Hollywood and majority of californians are not true liberals, i think i get your point. Specially Hollywood, cos everything they do has to do with what generates money.
And that is why other races are getting a chance. Hollywood makes decisions on what sells, and now they are more global than ever. Asians are getting more representation cos it sells and makes money well, to the point that Hollywood is catering Chinese market in their decisions.
They may be pseudo-liberal and that argument can hold some weight...

However, you are going on the other side of the spectrum, and claiming white males are being discriminated against... So hollywood won't cast Brad Pitt to play a chinese lead, they'd cast someone of chinese descent for that role. Jordan Peele's decision to not cast "white male" also has to do with the same thing, he makes movies with center plot-lines that aren't necessarily white culture oriented. But Jordan won't cast Michael B Jordan to play Bill Clinton in a biopic, he wont make one about Clinton... there's a differnece...

--- Double Post Merged, Jul 24, 2020, Original Post Date: Jul 24, 2020 ---

Leftist: "Why worship the christian God. Why not worship zeus or fairies instead."
Leftist: "If a religious person accepts one religion, they must accept all religions."

That argument is one made by secularists.... or Atheists.... And i agree with both...
Secularists will say everyone has equal right to follow every religion...

An athetists argument is, "if government can fund christian church, Mosques, temples, etc. in the name of religion, why should their be a distinction between them and someone who worships fairies", which i can get behind as well. Why should the government fund religious organizations?

--- Double Post Merged, Jul 24, 2020 ---

Every single religious person is an atheist when it comes to the god(s) they don't believe in.

love this statement.....

couldn't agree more.

That being said, I don't see Leftists going around saying that people must practice all faiths if they believe in one of them... There's plenty of religious leftists, especially those in the civil rights movement.

Also, i'd like to add that you can't put selective religious priinciple supporters on either bracket. You can find a lot of atheists on both, left and right side of politics.. at the end of the day, most common traits among the left would be fiscal and social issues with religion not necessarily prioritized.

 

[M3J]

Leftists stereotypically say things like this.

Leftist: "Why worship the christian God. Why not worship zeus or fairies instead."
Leftist: "If a religious person accepts one religion, they must accept all religions."

They treat all religions as if they were identical.

Slavery is far too weaponized and politicized a topic for most to have a clear perspective on.

I'm usually the person who turns out to be right about everything.

So far, almost every single post of yours in this section has been wrong. I'd love to see what you've been right about, as it seems you're very deluded like most right wingers.

For example: I've yet to see any leftist say this. Perhaps you're coming across right wingers pretending to be left and mocking them or trying to make them look bad? Or you're imagining things the left have never said. I don't know what's going on, but I do know none of what you've said is true. I also don't see why you have an issue with being tolerant towards all religion, especially if you expect people to be tolerant towards Christianity. And I'm sure even your imaginary leftists know not all religions are identical.

This makes no sense. You are aware slavery was real and still continues to this day, and that slavery despite being outlawed over a century and half ago still affect Black people today? Or are you like most right wingers and don't know actual history?

 

[Sanity Check]

For example: I've yet to see any leftist say this.

...

Leftist: "Why worship the christian God. Why not worship zeus or fairies instead."
Leftist: "If a religious person accepts one religion, they must accept all religions."

That argument is one made by secularists.... or Atheists.... And i agree with both...
Secularists will say everyone has equal right to follow every religion...

An atheists argument is, "if government can fund christian church, Mosques, temples, etc. in the name of religion, why should their be a distinction between them and someone who worships fairies", which i can get behind as well. Why should the government fund religious organizations?

Look there^. Now you've seen it. What an amazingly small world we live in, huh?

Do you really want me to comment on slavery. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings posting ignored or neglected facts in here.

If anyone wants to know the truth. Think about why the media pushes reparations for african americans, while ignoring reparations for native american indians and other persecuted minorities.

Think about the transatlantic slave trade being a global enterprise with every nation on earth buying and owning slaves. Yet somehow only the united states and the south is punished for it. Similar to how china is the most polluting and environmentally damaging nation on earth. Yet somehow only america is punished for climate change. Despite the US being one of the least polluting nations on earth (if you don't factor in emissions from the US military bases protecting many nations around the world).

The media tries to pretend its agenda on reparations and slavery are objective and unbiased. In reality they twist and misinform to push policies which are destructive to US job markets, business and the economy. If the US economy is punished for owning slaves during the transatlantic slave trade -- so should every other country on earth who also participated.

 

[M3J]

Not really.

No I don't, actually, because I know nothing you say will be fact, and you'll just share what you saw from silly memes or are lies that have been proven false over and over. You claim "facts," but you rarely ever back it up with anything but memes.

People have pushed reparations for Black people and indigenous people. I don't know about the media, but I know plenty of people who have. And boy, the actual reparations' cost would be astronomical given what they've gone through at the hands of white people.

If I recall correctly, US and the South did not get punished. The South started a war to keep slavery, so the loss was their fault. ANd not only that, but they were paid reparations for the end of slavery, I think about $300 each ($8000 adjusted for inflation), based on quick research. The South never got punished for slavery, they got punished for starting a war, and even then they still got something out of their loss. Sadly, since the North won, people forget that they weren't that innocent either.

US military bases aren't protecting many, and most countries in fact consider US military terrorists. AMerica isn't punished for climate change, and I"m not sure where you got that, but we are getting criticized because of the way Trump has reacted and because of his actions regarding the topic. Some sources say US is top 5 while China isn't, and one source said China is the top of the list, but they all have one thing in common: US is always top 5, so I'm not sure why you claim US is one of the least polluting nations.

You really should stop getting your info from InfoWars and Fox News and start doing your own research using several sources. Or stop believing memes you see on FB. It's embarrassing.

 

[Sanity Check]

People have pushed reparations for Black people and indigenous people.

Reparations are only pushed when it can be utilized to kill american jobs and destroy the american economy.

I'll give you one clear example of it.

Revealed: How atheist Richard Dawkins' family fortune came from the slave trade

Ancestors of secularist campaigner, Richard Dawkins, made their fortune from the slave trade, it has been revealed.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Ancestors of secularist campaigner Richard Dawkins made their fortune from the slave trade, it has been revealed.

The outspoken atheist, who once branded the Catholic Church 'evil', is the direct descendent of Henry Dawkins who owned 1,013 slaves in Jamaica until he died in 1744.

His 400-acre family estate, Over Norton Park near Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire, is believed to have been bought with money made through slave ownership hundreds of years ago.

When would slave owners of british or foreign ancestry like Richard Dawkins pay reparations for slavery?

Never.

Its never been about justice. Its never been about slavey, equality or elevating living standards for minorities.

Its about inventing irrational and historically inaccurate campaigns to attack america. That's the only time reparations or slavery are ever mentioned.

 

[xi0]

If anyone wants to know the truth. Think about why the media pushes reparations for african americans, while ignoring reparations for native american indians and other persecuted minorities.

Native Americans have "reparations" in the form of land trusts held by the federal government as well as mineral rights for their lands. Of course the tribes have to sue the federal government on a regular basis for any crumb of progress, but it's still more than nothing. They also pay no state income tax on anything earned on their reservations.

Honestly the reparations talk is shit floated by right-wingers to build outrage more than anything else, most of the people talking about current events just want cops to stop killing black people.

Think about the transatlantic slave trade being a global enterprise with every nation on earth buying and owning slaves. Yet somehow only the united states and the south is punished for it.

How are they punished for it? What have they been held to account for?

The media tries to pretend its agenda on reparations and slavery are objective and unbiased. In reality they twist and misinform to push policies which are destructive to US job markets, business and the economy. If the US economy is punished for owning slaves during the transatlantic slave trade -- so should every other country on earth who also participated.

It's not the US government's responsibility to "punish" other countries for their participation in it. They can only address their own participation in it. Unless you want to suggest that the US plays world police and forcibly does that too? That wouldn't be very conservative would it?

 

[Sanity Check]

Reparations are only pushed when it can be utilized to kill american jobs and destroy the american economy.

I'll give you one clear example of it.

Revealed: How atheist Richard Dawkins' family fortune came from the slave trade

Ancestors of secularist campaigner, Richard Dawkins, made their fortune from the slave trade, it has been revealed.

www.dailymail.co.uk

When would slave owners of british or foreign ancestry like Richard Dawkins pay reparations for slavery?

Never.

Its never been about justice. Its never been about slavey, equality or elevating living standards for minorities.

Its about inventing irrational and historically inaccurate campaigns to attack america. That's the only time reparations or slavery are ever mentioned.

Anyone else care to respond to the above?

Isn't it interesting how people in past eras were often encouraged to be curious and expose themselves to a variety of ideas and principles in order to become educated and informed.

While the common era trend leans more towards hiding from different perspectives and views to maintain the perspectives indoctrinated by government billionaire run schools and higher education.

Berkeley as a right wing institution was pro freedom of speech. Today as a left wing institution its the complete opposite. Perhaps there have been significant and fundamental shifts in ideology and politics which are going unnoticed.

 

[xi0]

I don't really see how the Dawkins thing is relevant. He was unequivocal in his rejection of slavery. Groups were calling for him to apologize for his family's past. The article mentions nothing else...

This free speech warrior nonsense is laughable. Yes, there are examples you could bring up, but right wing ideologues act like the first amendment should protect them from ridicule or any and all consequences. That's really not how the "marketplace of ideas" they keep talking about works at all.

 

[kkck]

Anyone else care to respond to the above?

Isn't it interesting how people in past eras were often encouraged to be curious and expose themselves to a variety of ideas and principles in order to become educated and informed.

While the common era trend leans more towards hiding from different perspectives and views to maintain the perspectives indoctrinated by government billionaire run schools and higher education.

Berkeley as a right wing institution was pro freedom of speech. Today as a left wing institution its the complete opposite. Perhaps there have been significant and fundamental shifts in ideology and politics which are going unnoticed.

So.... is your point that slave descendants in the UK should ask for reparations or that slave descendants in the US shouldn't ask for reparations because slave descendants at the UK aren't asking for any?

Free speech is about governments not telling people what they can't or can't say... As in, the government can't tell people what they can't or can't say. Independent Institutions, individuals, companies are perfectly free to have their own policies. It'd take a fairly extraordinary set of circumstances for individuals, independent institutions or companies to violate free speech related rights. There is plenty to question about cancel culture in general but the fact is that telling people to shut up or a crowd's reaction to things people say are also free speech.

 

[xi0]

There is plenty to question about cancel culture in general but the fact is that telling people to shut up or a crowd's reaction to things people say are also free speech.

"Cancel culture" isn't even a partisan thing in the first place either. People of all political alignments participate in it against anyone.

 

[M3J]

Does freedom of speech really exist though? The right claims to be about freedom of speech, but once someone says something they don't agree with, all of the sudden that freedom is nowhere to be found. Seems it's just a myth.

 

[xi0]

Late-stage capitalism in a nutshell, I guess...

 

[kkck]

Ah,yes, that's some terminal shit right there. At that stage you are simply incapable of ethical and coherent behavior...

 

[Sanity Check]

Late-stage capitalism in a nutshell, I guess...

...

Cold weather best illustrates what masks have the potential to contain.

...

You know anti intellectualism is in full swing.

When the fringe conservative is the only one making attempts to scientifically validate the health benefits of masks in a pandemic. ^

Lol

Next stop: global technology stone age.

 

[M3J]

Late-stage capitalism in a nutshell, I guess...

Would be a shame if they got all this money but got covid and either hit with a high hospital bills or died just because they didn't wear a mask.

You know anti intellectualism is in full swing.

When the fringe conservative is the only one making attempts to scientifically validate the health benefits of masks in a pandemic.

Yes, and you're the poster boy.

And you backed this up with a random GIF of someone playing Naruto without a mask on??