Jump to content

US Politics Thread


Sharpshooter

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Petey O said:

Classifying things as "hate speech" that people were saying with impunity in much more orderely society even 50 years ago is a big reason why "the right" hates liberalism.

 

Liberalism and its attempts at censorship and social control have gone too far. If you can't see this, you are completely brainwashed and I don't think there's any way of saving you.

50 years ago you could refer to people who were only allowed to sit on the back of the bus as a certain word and now you can't.  Two men living each other were subject to as bad or worse 

 

How dare people refuse to accept a "more orderly society" in which certain races, orientations or beliefs could be segregated or outlawed for simply existing

  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Barnstorm said:

Regardless, the phrase has connotations and any speaker worth his salt would avoid it. 

How could it be misconstrued? The circumstances in which it was used was pretty clear, and it's a common phrase to say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Barnstorm said:

 


On July 8th , 5 days ago, Biden said it’s time to put a target on Trump. 
 

 

Hey, can we transpose this with all the times Trump said identical things?

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

50 years ago you could refer to people who were only allowed to sit on the back of the bus as a certain word and now you can't.  Two men living each other were subject to as bad or worse 

 

How dare people refuse to accept a "more orderly society" in which certain races, orientations or beliefs could be segregated or outlawed for simply existing


 

Ahhh…the good old days.

For some.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Satchmo said:

I'm far from wound up. I just disagree with your take on this.

My take was only that it was a stupid way to convey an idea.

 

You’ve jumped to the conclusion that I suggested Biden was threatening to have Trump shot. I just posted the quote and followed by saying it was a stupid expression to use. 
 

If you need to disagree with my opinion on that fill  your boots. I’ve got better things to be concerned about. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Petey O said:

1: Liberalism is the first of the three ideologies according to Dugin, not the last.

2: There's nothing wrong with a society in the hands of a person who loves his nation wholly and completely.

3: He's not wrong here.

4: This is natural and was natural for literally thousands of years before liberalism.

 

I've told you I'm not a Duginist. Eurasianism and his strategies for it are silly and overly idealistic. He's trying to force a square peg into a round hole. It's his execution and anti-North American attitudes that I oppose. Liberalism was forced on the west, and many of its policies were forced through without a vote in a so called 'democracy'; especially in Canada. Coincidentally under Justin's father, as well.

 

There's a balance that can be struck, and we are so far away from that balance that the scale is all out of whack.

 

 

 

1. Liberalism Dugin defines as the last ideology standing vs Communism and Fascism at the end of the 20th century. 

 

2. There is too much to unpack on this other than this goes against every ideal and wish that our forefathers have died for in the last two hundred years to achieve. 'Love' can take many forms, including abuse. And for someone who rejects Eurasianism, this viewpoint is not far from the relationship of the serfs and Tsars of old. 

 

3. You will find just as many, if not more vices in authoritarian regimes.  Domestic Violence, Rampant Alcoholism, Suicides, Corruption are the norm in authoritarian regimes. Indeed if I am to speak from Russia's standpoint. Corruption has been weaponized by the state as a political tool for Putin to play favorites.

 

4. The concept of a nation is only a few centuries old and nationalism's limitations and dangers have been proven already by WWI and WWII. And you are intentionally ignoring the heaps of progress we've made since the enlightenment. Human nature cannot be changed no, but we are always striving to be better.

 

You are not a duginist, as you claim, I don't buy it. It is perfectly within the realm of a believer in his theories to trash him while still endorsing his views, the firehouse of inconsistency and contradiction that makes others lose faith in debate is part of the foundations of Geopolitics playbook. No you don't buy his Eurasian concept, but you pretty much bought everything else.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by DSVII
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Petey O said:

It's funny that you think nationalist societies are anti-social programs, social rights, pro reprehensible employers taking advantage of people, being paid and taxed fairly, etc. A lot of the historic nationalist movements came out of the unions and economic left wing.

 

You honestly have no idea what you're talking about.

It's funny you think that you can disguise what you're really saying by blaming or insinuating that it's because of left wing beliefs.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chickenspear said:

How could it be misconstrued? The circumstances in which it was used was pretty clear, and it's a common phrase to say. 

Many people online are posting about and questioning his choice of words. Apparently people are choosing to construe it the way they see it. This is not black and white, there is no definitive answer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barnstorm said:

My take was only that it was a stupid way to convey an idea.

 

You’ve jumped to the conclusion that I suggested Biden was threatening to have Trump shot. I just posted the quote and followed by saying it was a stupid expression to use. 
 

If you need to disagree with my opinion on that fill  your boots. I’ve got better things to be concerned about. 
 

 

Nah, I don't really care.  I stated my case and you keep coming back to re-explain yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

50 years ago you could refer to people who were only allowed to sit on the back of the bus as a certain word and now you can't.  Two men living each other were subject to as bad or worse 

 

How dare people refuse to accept a "more orderly society" in which certain races, orientations or beliefs could be segregated or outlawed for simply existing

You should take a trip to literally anywhere else in the world but western+northern Europe, America and the former British colonies and you'll realize that calling something "hate speech" would have you laughed out of the country.


People aren't naturally liberal. Quite the opposite, actually. The overwhelming majority of the world AREN'T moral relativists. They believe morality is objective. They don't play your fancy word games. They don't respect "human rights".

 

Why is only 'the west' expected to make these concessions while the rest of the world can pick at the bones of decaying societies for financial gain?

 

You're so caught up in the liberal, atomized, western bubble, you really have no idea how the world works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Devil's Advocate to the Secret Service. They can't be EVERYWHERE. Maybe they need to trim a little off the Defense Budget and hire more Secret Service guys.

 

7 minutes ago, Barnstorm said:

That is hard to fathom. Attendees casually watching the shooter dialing in and SS no where to be seen. 

 

Not alot of great sniper spots judging by this & possible the most obvious one went unchecked.

 

Pretty bad

 

 

7 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Oh, dead Kennedys, ha ha. Hilarious.

 

The joke is it fits with CNN's dishonesty

 

Spoiler

Image

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Satchmo said:

Nah, I don't really care.  I stated my case and you keep coming back to re-explain yours.

Your knee jerk assumption as to my opinion on the subject has got you running in circles. Again, I did  not say what Biden meant, only that I thought it was a poor choice of words. 

  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

It's funny you think that you can disguise what you're really saying by blaming or insinuating that it's because of left wing beliefs.

Funny I've never considered democracy as a "liberal" idea.

Maybe if you are an absolute monarch, or a dictator.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyways, back to the topic at hand. It's simply too close to the event to come to any conclusion on the fallout of this. I'll wait a few days for us to have some breathing room and more facts come out. The biggest priority today is that the secret service is doing a postmortum of what went wrong on the security detail and that casualties are thankfully minimal.

 

I'm not looking forward to the next few weeks that's for sure with the potential violence this could unleash.

 

Politically speaking, today was a loss for Biden and a win for Trump. Fair or unfair, Trump now has an issue to flank Dems on the moral high ground and America is 1 for 2 in electing presidential candidates who survived an assassination attempt.

 

 

 

 

Edited by DSVII
  • Cheers 1
  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Chickenspear said:

Pretty sure that was about where the democratic party's focus was and wasn't. 

Sort of like "set your sites on".

 

Yeah, Trump's camp doesn't realize that words don't incite action. Storm the capital boys aren't bright enough to know when someone's using a figure of speech that should be not taken literally.

 

Take the piss out of

Kill two birds with one stone

Beat a dead horse

 

I can see them going out and doing all of the above....doesn't mean they're intended as such.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Petey O said:

You should take a trip to literally anywhere else in the world but western+northern Europe, America and the former British colonies and you'll realize that calling something "hate speech" would have you laughed out of the country.


People aren't naturally liberal. Quite the opposite, actually. The overwhelming majority of the world AREN'T moral relativists. They believe morality is objective. They don't play your fancy word games. They don't respect "human rights".

 

Why is only 'the west' expected to make these concessions while the rest of the world can pick at the bones of decaying societies for financial gain?

 

You're so caught up in the liberal, atomized, western bubble, you really have no idea how the world works.

That's a lot of words to disguise what you're really trying to say.

 

It's alright.  We get it 

 

"Those people" make you angry 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wild times. The bullet millimetres away from shooting Trump dead.

 

Probably for the best. The fallout would have likely been much more catastrophic. The ramifications much worse. 

 

Though it would have been preferable if no shot was fired at all. 

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...