Donald Trump’s rhetoric emboldened the racists for a little while. He kinda spooked the herd and created a rather dangerously destructive stampede for a little while- all for personal agenda of fame and power. He himself has a Jewish son-in-law and a daughter who converted to Judaism and doesn’t care about this nonsense. He just played off of it a little but.Actually, what I said is entirely accurate. But what I hope that you will notice is that simply by stating a fact you implicate me in moral malevolence. And this is all that I wish to point out: the assignment of moral defectiveness. Your-plural essential argument, insofar as it is an argument, is in this. It begins in this and it reduces to this. And when you are seen as losing a bad argument, you turn really viscious.
That viciousness is present and visible all around us. And the Left-Progressives in the form of the American Democratic Party wield this viciousness in a destructive. acidic manner.
Now is it becoming clear to you? How many times must I drag you through the same rehearsals?!?
What I suggest is that you linger on this. Examine it. Think about it. Talk about it.
Turn the lens of examination around to focus on yourself.
But what I said was: "...up until 1965 the nation The United States of America was an Anglo-Saxon nation. This is not my word-choice. It was part of the lexicon of terms that were used to describe America by America."The talk of being Anglo-Saxon was mostly propaganda during WWII to express solidarity with the UK against Germany. Like all propaganda, it was not accurate of course, but only to serve a political purpose. Do you really think the majority ethnic group in the US during WWII was Anglo—Saxon? Not at all. It was actually only around 12%.
I am fully aware that simply by mentioning the area and the topic as I did that I am opening up examination into an area that is understood, viscerally and by all, as being exceedingly fraught and also morally dangerous. You can get into serious trouble if you have any social standing and you dare to speak on these topics.Donald Trump’s rhetoric emboldened the racists for a little while. He kinda spooked the herd and created a rather dangerously destructive stampede for a little while -- all for personal agenda of fame and power. He himself has a Jewish son-in-law and a daughter who converted to Judaism and doesn’t care about this nonsense. He just played off of it a little but.
Your fears and misunderstandings were played for a little while. Don’t get too excited. It’s not the beginning of anything. It’s the end. You are going to have to go back and brush up on those pesky social skills you learned back in kindergarten again: play nice, share, and don’t forget your p’s and q’s.
Psychopathic glee and narcissism are so 2016.
Exactly.The undocumented population > MAGA assholes. Ain’t even close.
This obviously points to a very definite seriousness in this political crisis. It also indicates that this is not simply something that will fade away. As I have said I have a very strong feeling -- intuition, a sense -- that we are now living in the outcome of an elaborate election fraud. The more that I think about it, the more that it seems likely. Put another way I'd say that it was understood as necessary that a fraud be perpetrated, in conjunction with all the underhanded actions of the Tech companies and the collusion between powerful interests to undermine Donald Trump (the Russian collusion scandal, etc.)Military Chiefs Remind Troops of Their Oath After Fallout From Assault on Capitol
The Joint Chiefs of Staff told the United States’ armed forces to defend the Constitution and reject extremism in a memo that condemned last week’s violence.
WASHINGTON — The military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff sent an unusual message to the entire American armed forces on Tuesday reminding them that their job was to support and defend the Constitution, and declaring that Joseph R. Biden Jr. would soon be their next commander in chief.
“As we have done throughout our history, the U.S. military will obey lawful orders from civilian leadership, support civil authorities to protect lives and property, ensure public safety in accordance with the law, and remain fully committed to protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” said the one-page memorandum signed by the eight senior officers who serve as the Joint Chiefs.
“As service members, we must embody the values and ideals of the nation,” the memo continued. “We support and defend the Constitution. Any act to disrupt the constitutional process is not only against our traditions, values and oath; it is against the law.”
That the chiefs, led by Gen. Mark A. Milley of the Army, found it necessary to remind their rank and file of their sworn oath to the country was extraordinary. But the memo came as federal law enforcement authorities were pursuing more than 150 suspects, including current or former service members, involved in the mob that stormed the Capitol last week.
It was also the latest example of an apolitical American military and its top leadership thrust into an awkward, even potentially dangerous, position of possibly having to weigh dubious orders from the president against their oath to uphold the Constitution.
Defense Department officials have expressed worries this week that some of the rioters who assaulted the Capitol are former military members. While the Pentagon has not announced a specific search for deployed National Guard troops with sympathies for the pro-Trump protesters, officials said they were reviewing photographs and videos from the siege.
Bullshit, absolute utter bullshit.[cont. from previous]
I want to comment on:
The Legacy Media has not in any sense offered a fair and realistic picture of those -- about 1/2 of the voting nation -- who favor and appreciate Trump. So right now they are working a very pointed angle of representing them in the worst possible light. This is a devious PR and propaganda effort and is related, of course, to the original description: the deplorables. [French déplorer, lament, regret, from Latin dēplōrāre : dē-, de- + plōrāre, to wail.]
What takes place here is that The Legacy Media through PR and propaganda techniques focuses your hatred and your virulent contempt into a hatred . . . for your own people. This is something -- a phenomenon -- that needs to be examined closely. You will betray your own people, but this also means your own selves, through some strange but very questionable moral manoeuvre. I simply want to say that though you are free to sell out your own people, and your own nation, I can definitely state that I will never go along with you. And as I say I will work 24/7/364 to expose you for what (I believe) you are.
That 'focused hatred' and 'hysterical rage' do interest me, I mean in the sense that it is a phenomenon worthy of objective study. I suppose I must confess that it is one of the reasons why I simply do not believe anything you say, nor anything the leaders of the Progressive-Left ideological regime through the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party says. This is why I wrote about their duplicitousness.
We are in no sense at the beginning of some *healing* process -- only an idiot could fall into such a ludicrous belief -- we are at the beginning of a long and protracted political and social struggle. "We are men of action. Lies do not become us".
So, in a nutshell, everyone who disagrees with you has to shut up and give you what you want.Republicans must:
Notice none of these bullet points require accepting policies you don’t agree with, polticians you don’t wish to vote for, etc. But if your expression of peace and unity is simply demanding no accountablity for the GOP while still telling us it was a rigged election and we’re all commies, and George Soros, blah blah nope. Nope.
- To a man and woman acknowledge the elections were legitimate, Biden won fairly, and Donald Trump’s fantastical claims of election rigging were just that. They must acknowledge the voter fraud hoax they used as a predicate for their campaigning.
- Those who incited the insurrection by backing these claims should resign. Cruz and Hawley have to go, for sure.
- Donald Trump must be impeached with strong bi-partisan support. Removal, should it come now or next congress, same. Both parties must speak with one voice where he is concerned.
- LEadership must ratchet way down the Rush Limbaification of their rhetoric. Stop using commie marxist socialist interchangably in response to virtually every policy proposal a Democratic politician makes (be adults, and stop with the dumb DEMOCRAT POL shit). Stop calling your voters “patriots” vs everyone else.
- Republican voters themselves need to take a breath and instead of demanding we listen to ”74m of us” stop to think there were 81m who disagreed, we are Americans too, and we should have a say as well. The idea that the 74m are the single most important group of humans in the country demanding all of our oxygen is an idea that needs to be put to bed.
Elections have consequences.
With this I disagree. I think that it was the Obama administration that put into motion many trends that have come to fruition in our present. And my argument is based on the understanding that Mr Obama himself was a trained Alinsky-style activist.Trump is the one who conditioned Americans to hate each other, that was his entire raison d'être.
Nope, and you just proved that you do not know the first thing about Saul Alinsky and you also don't know that the group that embraced him the most i recent times was the Tea Party. Dick Armey of FreedomWorks ordered EVERYONE to read Rules for Radicals from cover to cover.With this I disagree. I think that it was the Obama administration that put into motion many trends that have come to fruition in our present. And my argument is based on the understanding that Mr Obama himself was a trained Alinsky-style activist.
The entire purpose of Alinsky-style activism is to create situations of conflict that can then be exploited for purposes of political gain. But here is the important part: these Alinsky-style activists assume a mask or a costume of angel-pure righteousness. That is how they present themselves. They *sell* themselves, as it were, through these false appearances.
But when they achieve power -- and this is what we all are witnessing now, today -- they immediately demonstrate, with no ambiguity, what their real intentions are. Effectively that is the elimination of opposition and the marginalization of their enemies.
This is what we are facing today. You see, everything is upside-down!
The proof is in the pudding! These are the *apples* that fall not far from the tree. A tree is known by the *fruit* it produces. You catch my drift of course . . .
There has never been a time where there were no demographic shifts- in the US or Europe. Here in America, at first it was the American Indians. Then it was the protestant Anglo-Saxon with their African Americans. Then the Irish came. Then the Germans, and then the Poles, and then the Czechs, and then the Jews, and then the Catholics, and then the Chinese, and then the Greeks and Italians, and then... And there were always conflicts. Nothing is coming to a head. It has always been this way. It's just been handled in better and worse ways.Define the composition of America up to that point as as Anglo-American, or Anglo-Saxon, or Pan-Germanic, or South or North European, it doesn't alter the point I make: Social and political conflict are coming to a head in the country and the demographic shifts, in my view, play a significant part.
Lacking social skills and denying other people their humanity based on things they have no control over (height, weight, baldness or full head of hair, being too hairy or hairless, handicapped or disabled, skin tone, hair color, what religion or village the family they were born into happened to be, etc...) has never been acceptable. Wanting to be hurtful to others based on these things will usually draw visceral reactions. I am somewhat surprised your mom or kindergarten teacher never taught you that. Or maybe you have just forgotten.I am fully aware that simply by mentioning the area and the topic as I did that I am opening up examination into an area that is understood, viscerally and by all, as being exceedingly fraught and also morally dangerous. You can get into serious trouble if you have any social standing and you dare to speak on these topics.
You are aware of this as well, naturally, and seek to exploit the sentiments that are aroused. This is a forbidden zone and one is discouraged from broaching it and even perhaps from thinking about it.
But it suits me so well...You might want to drop the pedagogue bit.
I did read Alinky's Rules For Radicals. I was contemplating reading it again. When I read it I felt that I grasped it. Awhile ago now but I did expose myself to it. My formation has not been through PragerU. It began with Richard Weaver and Robert Bork.You have proven that everything you believe was taught to you by rote, probably from PragerU, I can smell a Prager devotee from fifty miles away, you all sound alike, you all argue alike and you all trot out the same tired and debunked tropes. Next I expect you will wax poetic on "Why America has never been a democracy", right?
Maybe you could read Al....no never mind, you'll just Google something and try to pretend you understand something that you had no intention of learning about in the first place. You think you're coming off as some kind of teacher. Do you know how many idiots on this forum are convinced they are "educating the ignorant?" It's about one third of the entire membership, and you think you've claimed the podium.
Exactly 57?Do you know how many idiots on this forum are convinced they are "educating the ignorant?"
You're pretty good at using as many words as possible to say as little as possible.There is a strange but interesting article in the NYTs today:
This obviously points to a very definite seriousness in this political crisis. It also indicates that this is not simply something that will fade away. As I have said I have a very strong feeling -- intuition, a sense -- that we are now living in the outcome of an elaborate election fraud. The more that I think about it, the more that it seems likely. Put another way I'd say that it was understood as necessary that a fraud be perpetrated, in conjunction with all the underhanded actions of the Tech companies and the collusion between powerful interests to undermine Donald Trump (the Russian collusion scandal, etc.)
There is an on-going effort, a very brazen and open, to turn back a tide that has been set in motion and which has popular roots. As I have said there is an ideological régime which is now making very concerted efforts to consolidate the power it has recently gotten or achieved. Yet what this power-faction intends, what they will do, is clearly evident as they start to silence the voices of their critics. Censorship, demonitization, no-fly lists, something equivalent to mediated 'show trials'. This indicates *who they really are* and this shows, beyond any question, where they intend to take things.
Now the really strange thing is that the Left-Progressives (whose face is the Democratic Party) is substantially supported by the most powerful Tech companies of the day, and these Tech companies have the capability of near-absolute control over the *flow of information* -- that which is said to be essential in a republican democracy. It extends to banking, CC processors, academic institutions, to gaining employment. They say 'We must protect our democracy' while they engage directly in actions understood by all to destroy functioning democracy. Oh what a Brave New World has such people in 't!
In my mind it is because they are doing this right now, because they reveal their hand, and because this is so obviously insidious by any conceivable measure, that this indicates that they would certainly have been capable of subverting an election! And that is the basis of my *intuited reasoning*.
That high military officials have to remind servicemen and women that they are subject to civilian authority indicates to me that they recognize that the validity of the civic authority is profoundly questioned right now. This points to a *loss of faith* in the System itself.
The Chinese 'blessing' -- or is it a curse -- applies here: May you live in interesting times!
But this does not have much bearing on what I have been alluding to.There has never been a time where there were no demographic shifts -- in the US or Europe.
The operative part in what you wrote is in the accusation of being a fascist. Again, this is what you-plural do. You don't have coherent arguments, you have emotional declarations that intend to vilify. That is your primary tool. When you locate your 'enemy' all you need to do is hurl the accusations. They do all the work for you. Except in my case. I am 99.5% immune.Have fun self-justifying fascism, though. Nobody gives a shit about your intuition. You're alleging the largest crime in the history of the country and you have absolutely no evidence to support it. What you really have is faith in a god you created for yourself.
Still, Alinsky is not a tool of guidance for leadership and, once the Tea Party Right had won, they should have dropped it and turned back to mentors like Goldwater, if they really wanted to restore conservatism.But it suits me so well...
I did read Alinky's Rules For Radicals. I was contemplating reading it again. When I read it I felt that I grasped it. Awhile ago now but I did expose myself to it. My formation has not been through PragerU. It began with Richard Weaver and Robert Bork.
In fact nothing was taught by *rote* as you say.
Despite any appearance to the contrary I respect your opinions and I always listen to what people say. I get your point, too. But I might refer to one 'Alinsky-tactic' that I think applies to the animus directed against Trump:Reaganism was ultimately a repudiation of the New Deal, and if you're in the mood to blow up the New Deal, I guess the way to do it is to call every social program socialism and communism and label anyone who is in favor of them divisive and radical.
I get the RW boilerplate, I know how it works. It is older than I am, and I am pretty old.
I also admit to having numerous contradictions. For example I think Reaganism did a great deal of damage to America's social fabric. And I also understand why you would advocate against *blowing up the New Deal*. I also acknowledge that people use the term 'communism' sloppily.“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.
As he OP explains, there can’t be unity without certain conditions met. GOP spent 2 months lying to its base, giving Trump’s false claims about the election oxygen.Who said I believe that? Why start a thread about unity, if you don't actually want to talk about unity?