Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Civil Wrongs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

    No doubt this nation, American society, would be much better off if honesty, integrity, and basic traditional western morality was of value. Of course it has never been anywhere complete, practiced by all, but we do seem to cycle on how much of society embraces these things, and their value system then flows from that good foundation. In these times, honesty and integrity seems to be making a comeback in the millenials., but I am not at all sure about the common, basic morality issues. I know that my own generations, the baby boomers, suffered from a lack of honesty, integrity, and a western moral compass, so many of them. They are our politicians today. You know, I was born into an America in which the American people by and large trusted their gov't and thought gov't could help to make their lives better by intelligent, compassionate policy, but also by looking out for them, instead of the rich elites. And the reason we trusted them is because they were representing us in DC. Looking out for average citizens. There is probably a correlation between when our public servants stopped representing the People, and the rise of the mistrust, and disapproval ratings.

    A voter with honestly, integrity and a basic moral compass, would never vote for a candidate that exhibited none of these. For people with these good things, tend to expect them from others, especially one given a job that can literally affect your daily life. These things should be a means test for any man or woman who would be King. And the princes and princesses.

    IMO, and its just a personal opinion, one of the things that helped to create what America once was, were Judeochristian morality and values. This morality and values does not necessarily have to come from Judaism or Christianity, but it is just the fact that this is where American got these things. But even given that, the founders, learning from how the Church of England was deeply in politics, and the problems this created, gave us separation of church and state, to keep one denomination from abusing the others, by having gov't on its side, The founders who were not Christians, were Deists, and Deists share the same moral compass and value system as what Christ taught. That we have moved away from these moral and values has consequences and determines what kind of society you have to live in. The current society that I live in is night and day from the one I grew up in. And aside from a few positive changes, the negetives far outweigh the positives and we have seen a tremendous net loss. Much of what you see in society today is destructive, creates disorder, division. And it is celebrated, deepening the conditioning.
    As long as gov't officials can be bought, our gov't will always be corrupt. Our gov't will always make policy based not on morality or what is right or good for our country, but by opportunity to swell their pockets and gain status and power. And humans will always be able to be bought. Those who are purchase make policy and law, and policy and law is where many get their opinion of right and wrong, what is moral and what is not. "If it's legal, its right and moral."

    The only obvious chance that we have to end, or greatly reduce this countries decline, especially in morality, is to give our gov't officials nothing or less to sell, which will be by reducing what they own, which will be accomplished by reducing their authority in area's they have no business being in. Hence reducing size and preventing a gov't monopoly. Examples: Education, healthcare, etc.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #32
      Originally posted by msc View Post

      As long as gov't officials can be bought, our gov't will always be corrupt. Our gov't will always make policy based not on morality or what is right or good for our country, but by opportunity to swell their pockets and gain status and power. And humans will always be able to be bought. Those who are purchase make policy and law, and policy and law is where many get their opinion of right and wrong, what is moral and what is not. "If it's legal, its right and moral."

      The only obvious chance that we have to end, or greatly reduce this countries decline, especially in morality, is to give our gov't officials nothing or less to sell, which will be by reducing what they own, which will be accomplished by reducing their authority in area's they have no business being in. Hence reducing size and preventing a gov't monopoly. Examples: Education, healthcare, etc.
      The USSC back in the late 70s began the change in who finances campaigns for public servants. We tried to minimized the effect of the money of the rich upon gov't for all of our history, until the 70s. And if you look at what has happened in America since that time, no one could objectively say that its been good for a democratic republic, or good for the average American, his ability to thrive by the work of his hands or mind.

      As soon as you allow the rich to buy policy by their campaign financing, you sell out republic. For a rational brain can see historically the power of money, and how it can change things, and not always in a good way, but most time, to serve the interests of a small group of very rich people, who only want to be richer, like some kind of disease.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #33
        Originally posted by Commodore View Post

        So to end a situation where one person takes what another works for, we have to institutionalize a situation where one person takes what another works for. Brilliant.

        Here's an idea that has worked for thousands of years, why don't we try this again...

        We are moving into an economy where most jobs that provide manufacturing what is consumed and even service sector work will be done by robotics, computers and AI. Which will force modern societies into a guaranteed income, without work being involved. So your values will be like a fish out of water, and basically moot in the changing world. What will you do then? Looks to me like when a value system is not longer needed, you will have to change your values and beliefs, as they become obsolete. One wonders if the SHRINKS will see a growth in their business? Along with the pill companies who make drugs to allow the ideological driven brain, to live in a world it is in incoherence with.

        Where will this guaranteed income to all americans come from? It will end poverty, if the income is enough to not just survive on, but to thrive in a reasonable way. This will lead to property crimes sinking to levels not seen in civilization, and save mucho money. How will it affect society? Will it lead to personal creativity, with a basic minimal income giving economic security, or will it lead to Sodom and Gomorrah on meth? Will it be man's Golden Age, or will we smash the computers, robots and AI, like a proper Luddonite?

        One thing is certain, barring a huge rock hitting the earth, a nuclear war, or a super volcano taking humanity out. We will find out what a basic living income without work will produce. This would be new ground, if not for the experiement in that Canadian town, Which turned out in a way you might not like. What you thought would happen didn't. But did the real world change what you think about a basic income given without work? I would judge NO. So ideological beliefs that originate from values, are impervious to reality. And then people are proud of it. LOL. Looks like basic insanity to me. But I have always thought beliefs that reality contradicts is an illustration of insanity. And I do not think it is a mental affliction that pertains to my own mind. I would welcome to have my own incoherence pointed out with evidence to back it up. For I think I am in a rare group. A group who's thinking and beliefs is based upon reality, and lessons that history teaches in an objective fashion.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #34
          Originally posted by msc View Post

          The well revered Martin Luther King, did not fight for Blacks to be grouped in a separate but equal category. He fought to have black people considered as individuals and equal human beings without color defining their rights and abilities and potential. Not less rights because they are black, but not more either. King fought for a color blind society. No hand outs, not pity, but equal respect and "EQUAL" rights under the law, to work towards their individual goals without being oppressed. Sadly it has been decades and people are still being defined as black and white. Does anyone think this well and rightfully admired man had this in mind?
          Agreed, but he was murdered while standing up for a living wage for garbage collectors. He would have been a sanders supporter, not a Clinton supporter. Clinton supporters are anti working people, and only think the professional class matters. The upper 10 percent in society. The change in the democratic party dates back to the 70s, but got a shot of meth with bill Clinton. MLK would not have supported Clinton, Bill, and yet the hero of the black folks would not support the Clintons. LOL. This is some crazy stuff here. And it only makes sense if you have black idiots, in the older black democrats. The young blacks supported the FDR progressive, sanders. So there may finally be hope for the black americans, who like white working people have voted against their own best self interests for decades.

          Last edited by Blue Doggy; 06-16-2016, 01:13 PM.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #35
            Originally posted by JDJarvis View Post
            I think black folk have been seriously screwed over in the U.S. policies of agencies and banks have screwed them out of generations of wealth building property investmment. A lot of the problems that are seen among Black today is related to wealth, equally as financially disenfranchised commmmunities of other ethnicities do poorly as well. We are seeing a problem of wealth, education, and reduced opportunity presented because of previosuly enforced policies. Getting hung up on a nonexistant fairness and trying to make amends for bad policies of the past by imposing new unbalanced policies sure as heck doesn't look like it's worked .
            I think much of the problem is, exactly as stated in the opening post concerning so many of us being focused on, concerned with, activist about, supporters of, wanting "racial dialogue" etc etc etc people of this color or that color ... blacks hispanics whites reds whateverthehellothercolors we want to categorize ... it's ridiculous, pointless and divisive for no reason.

            There is no reason for any of it. "Race" ... B.S. - forget it, it's irrelevant - we're AMERICANS and we'd better start working together as Americans or were going to fall apart and destroy ourselves or ... there are plenty of people in the world that will happily assist us in our destruction/suicide. . . these people are quite active at this time if we're paying attention.

            We've allowed ourselves to be divided up by madmen and women "leaders." So divided we can no longer agree on how to speak to one another !!

            We must find our way around these things somehow or America will end.

            Race and "racial problems," hard to believe we haven't outgrown this . . . because we still listen to idealists, nuts and salesthieves who want us to "think about race" and "remember the past."

            The past is history . . . .only if we will let it be history.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #36
              Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

              Agreed, but he was murdered while standing up for a living wage for garbage collectors. He would have been a sanders supporter, not a Clinton supporter. Clinton supporters are anti working people, and only think the professional class matters. The upper 10 percent in society. The change in the democratic party dates back to the 70s, but got a shot of meth with bill Clinton. MLK would not have supported Clinton, Bill, and yet the hero of the black folks would not support the Clintons. LOL. This is some crazy stuff here. And it only makes sense if you have black idiots, in the older black democrats. The young blacks supported the FDR progressive, sanders. So there may finally be hope for the black americans, who like white working people have voted against their own best self interests for decades.
              Don't think he would have supported Sanders either.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #37
                Dialogue is good for people to understand what others are going through, but a dialogue has two sides and both in the conversation must try to understand and have compassion for the other, then learn how to see reality as it is today and work together to accommodate each other as individuals. It has not been a dialogue. It has been a one group spouting grievances. And the other being shut down if they attempt to express how THEY feel.

                No one in America today, except for some sickos, participated in or wants slavery or segregation. Is this grievance attached to a land or to a people? If everyone alive in America today picked up and left; blacks, whites, everyone, and all found a new land to settle on, then named the country something else, but with the same people and same constitution, No one would be able to say that black people have been treated unfairly in this new country.

                The history of a person starts when they are born. They are responsible for what they do on this earth. If there are people alive today that own abuse other human beings, then they are responsible for their own history. And we should all collectively, (black and white), be able to look back and see what THEY have done, without holding other people responsible for sins that are not part of an individual's history.

                So I've been classified as white. My grandparents came from Sicily and Poland. Even my family history has nothing to do with slavery. So how did I get in the middle of this, being ACCUSED of treating black people poorly because of my White history? Being called privileged.

                More than half of our country voted for a black man to be president. Twice. And those who didn't vote for him would vote for Carson if he were the republican nominee. White racists don't vote for black people to become the leader of their country. There is no way to calculate that this is a racist country or people are being oppressed simply because they are black.

                Anything offered or handed out to black people, simply because they are black is racism. It is acknowledging that black people don't have the same abilities to overcome adversity as white people do. Groups of "classified" white people have suffered persecution as well, yet get no special treatment due to the history of their persecuted group.





                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

                  Agreed, but he was murdered while standing up for a living wage for garbage collectors. He would have been a sanders supporter, not a Clinton supporter. Clinton supporters are anti working people, and only think the professional class matters. The upper 10 percent in society. The change in the democratic party dates back to the 70s, but got a shot of meth with bill Clinton. MLK would not have supported Clinton, Bill, and yet the hero of the black folks would not support the Clintons. LOL. This is some crazy stuff here. And it only makes sense if you have black idiots, in the older black democrats. The young blacks supported the FDR progressive, sanders. So there may finally be hope for the black americans, who like white working people have voted against their own best self interests for decades.
                  He was not standing up for living wages for garbage collectors. According to you, everything was rosy before Reagan. He was well before Reagan.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

                    He was not standing up for living wages for garbage collectors. According to you, everything was rosy before Reagan. He was well before Reagan.
                    We were both around back then. He went to Memphis to support the garbage workers, who were on strike. Now granted, I am relying upon memory, and have not looked it up. But that is the way I recall it.

                    Reagan began the dismantling of the economic model we had, under which the largest middle class in world history arose. I personally saw people move from the working poor into the middle class before Reagan, in the late 50s and 60s here in the south as we lagged behind the rest of the nation, and still do. I have seen the ladder up offshored and towns all over the south gutted of industry, lower middle class work. You may want to ignore that free trade originated, as his VP was working on it before Reagan left office, and it took Bush his one term to get it worked out, in secret, but he lost to Clinton for it was not quite ready, and the rest is history as they say.

                    Are you in denial that Reagan, and GOP neoliberalism dismantled the economy, the regulations, the policies the law, that business and banking operated under? When did the maximization of profits replace reasonable profits? When did we begin deregulating banks and capitalism? Granted, some of that began in the 70s, but nothing to the degree that would follow in the 80s. which continued onward. What has that done to the American worker? How much has it increased the wealth at the top, with the majority of economic growth going to the top? What caused this to happen? It could not have happened with the economic model we had prior to Reagan and the dismantling of the post great depression economy.

                    Compared to what came after Reagan, hell yes, it could be called rosy. You seem to forget that the American dream was alive and well, and more americans had something called security, and working for the same company for all of your life was common, which created that security. Part time jobs were for teens. You didn't see people working several part time jobs to support a family. You did not see a low paying service sector economy. You can live in denial, but I lived that America. And I saw what happened to towns when neoliberalism gutted America of living wage jobs. And the problems that has created has been monumental. It gave us, finally, this election cycle, and sanders and trump. The evidence of what neoliberalism that came back in force with Reagan is clearly visible, and what it has wrought. It failed working americans, as Perot knew well that it would, as it had already began to suck the jobs out of America during the 80s. And this was before nafta.

                    In the 1960s 'income creep" was the biggest perceived problem with working people. That is, your pay was going up and it put you in a higher tax bracket. And people were complaining about that. LOl. Compare that with the stagnation of wages as everything went up, reducing wages effectively, the opposite of income creep. I would say that income creep is rosy, compared to the gutting of American living wage jobs out of America, which Reagan had a helluva lot to do with. This guy started the treason on the American worker, by his mantra of, "gov't is the problem" Of course he was talking about regulated capitalism. And when it was deregulated, we got a capitalism changed into corporate capitalism, a capitalism that sent the income to the top, and no one had to worry about income creep anymore. People that lived and worked way before Reagan know very well workers were in much better shape back then. For they had security and the America dream. And all that was required to get it, was work and playing by the rules. That is no longer the case. Work is no longer valued, for work pays not even enough to live on. So we went from a job doing the essential things that society needs in order to operate smoothly, that paid enough to live on, to a place where that same work is not valued enough to pay wages high enough to live on. And you can thank Reagan for that, and every president that followed him, who embraced neoliberalism. Yes, if you worked in a locally owned clothing store, selling clothes, before Reagan, you could support a family on those wages. Try that selling clothing at walmart. They help you sign up for ebt cards. For you to deny these changes, for the worse, is of course what you must do to defend what the GOP brought back from the gilded age. I say these changes hurt working people, and working people had it much better under the economy Reagan began to dismantle. I think the facts are overwhelmingly on my side here. If facts even matter and far too often they simply do not matter.

                    In the interest of my grandkids, I would choose what came before Reagan, than what came with him and after him.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                      We are moving into an economy where most jobs that provide manufacturing what is consumed and even service sector work will be done by robotics, computers and AI. Which will force modern societies into a guaranteed income, without work being involved. So your values will be like a fish out of water, and basically moot in the changing world. What will you do then? Looks to me like when a value system is not longer needed, you will have to change your values and beliefs, as they become obsolete. One wonders if the SHRINKS will see a growth in their business? Along with the pill companies who make drugs to allow the ideological driven brain, to live in a world it is in incoherence with.
                      Situational values are no values at all.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Commodore View Post

                        So to end a situation where one person takes what another works for, we have to institutionalize a situation where one person takes what another works for. Brilliant.

                        Here's an idea that has worked for thousands of years, why don't we try this again...

                        Whenever someone is promoting gov't handouts outs, because of civil responsibility and compassion. This video should be played as response and rebuttal, with no other words. Over and Over, and Over again.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                          ...
                          The past is history . . . .only if we will let it be history.
                          We are the products of a shared history ignoring history is what "progressives" want in political-re-branding of language, the lesson of history must be learned and understood, the good and the bad. Folly lies in trying to dwell in the past instead of learning what has and hasn't worked.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Commodore View Post
                            Dismantling the family is part of the ideal for extreme progressives that believe traditional institutions leave us shackled to the past and unable to move "forward". Destruction of patriarchal structures is pretty darned damaging to the way the world has been, remove the authority of the father and it weakness the authority of parents and the state grows in power and gets to raise new generations of brainwashed citizens of the world.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by JDJarvis View Post

                              Dismantling the family is part of the ideal for extreme progressives that believe traditional institutions leave us shackled to the past and unable to move "forward". Destruction of patriarchal structures is pretty darned damaging to the way the world has been, remove the authority of the father and it weakness the authority of parents and the state grows in power and gets to raise new generations of brainwashed citizens of the world.
                              Excellent Summary!

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by JDJarvis View Post

                                Dismantling the family is part of the ideal for extreme progressives that believe traditional institutions leave us shackled to the past and unable to move "forward". Destruction of patriarchal structures is pretty darned damaging to the way the world has been, remove the authority of the father and it weakness the authority of parents and the state grows in power and gets to raise new generations of brainwashed citizens of the world.
                                Who are these progressives who believe in this? I do not know of any, unless its some nut case somewhere. To me this looks like a nightmare a conservative had, and then thought it was reality.

                                Really guys, some of these accusations seem to be pulled out of the air, with a hyper extrapolation involved. Progressivism is basically about evolving, but not evolving in such a fashion as you listed. One thing is certain, and that is change. If the change is the result of other change, and adjustment is needed, then that is progressive. But some things should be off the table, and breaking apart a family unit, intentionally, so that all becomes wards of the state is not progressive. It's absurdity. These are not progressives, if someone promotes this. They are idiots. Let's call them what they really are. Progressivism isn't pure, for many are conservative in some areas. Unlike conservatism, the modern kind, most of us progressives are not pure ideologically. The purists seem to be the modern liberal. Both modern cons and and modern libs are an aberration, with their demanded purity. That is how I see it anyways, as a FDR progressive. Not rocket science to understand that a strong nuclear family, and extended family, is what gives stability to society. Anyone who acts against this is guilty of stupidity. And destructive beliefs.

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X