Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9174 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,605 Year: 4,862/9,624 Month: 210/427 Week: 20/103 Day: 0/9 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who's the bigger offender: Conservatives or Liberals?
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(4)
Message 329 of 773 (887750)
08-21-2021 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by Phat
08-21-2021 12:45 PM


Re: Darker Future For USA
To echo ringo, did you read my post? You sure didn't respond to anything much I said. I sure wish I knew what happened to the Phat I used to know. Consumed by blood sugar, perhaps.
Are you suggesting that the Republican Party is a White Supremacist party?
No, I wasn't suggesting that, though it's certainly more true than not. When white supremacists, white nationalists, neo-Nazis, etc., choose a mainstream political party, it is invariably the Republican Party. What do you think we should conclude from that?
While we could well label some blatant favoritism among them, the label is far from appropriate in general. Just because a man wants the freedom (unhindered by excessive government regulation and taxation) into earning a living in no way paints him/her as a racist.
You know what the south insisted on talking about when the subject of slavery came up? States rights, or in other words, anything but slavery. You know what you want to talk about when the subject of racism comes up? Government or taxes or silver or anything but racism.
Again, since you ignored almost all of it, you've swallowed hook, line and sinker the Republican story that treating other races fairly means that you'll suffer, and besides that other races are lazy, immoral, thieves who will rob the public coffers dry and then out-reproduce you to vote into office people who will make your situation even worse.
The Republicans are preying upon your paranoia and inherent racist biases. Those of other races are people just like you, no better, no worse. Blacks of this country make less money and are locked up and murdered more often because of whites. Central Americans clambering at our southern border are people just like you born into less fortunate circumstances.
You have not the means to be materially generous to these people, but you might at least be politically generous and stop being such a selfish prick. The whole white supremacist movement is just one big "I got mine and you ain't gonna get any" party.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Phat, posted 08-21-2021 12:45 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(7)
Message 332 of 773 (887800)
08-22-2021 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 330 by dwise1
08-22-2021 2:57 AM


Re: Darker Future For USA
Another positive of food stamps is that improved nutrition leads to improved health, so food stamp recipients are better able to work and provide for their families. Poverty and poor health often go together because the cheapest foods provide a great deal of calories but not much in the way of nutrition.
We all, liberals, conservatives and the entire spectrum in between, want our nation to be strong and prosperous, which requires that the individuals making up our nation also be strong and prosperous. Wishing some portion of our citizens ill only makes the nation as a whole weaker.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by dwise1, posted 08-22-2021 2:57 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(1)
Message 361 of 773 (889493)
11-30-2021 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 355 by Phat
11-29-2021 11:51 AM


Re: s against us.Re: Darker Future For USA
You sound like a monster.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 355 by Phat, posted 11-29-2021 11:51 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(4)
Message 365 of 773 (889501)
12-01-2021 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 362 by Phat
11-30-2021 12:47 PM


Re: Mandatory Empathy and Government Control
Phat writes:
Being a businessman, Trump did nothing except delay the inevitable.
Delay what inevitable? Inflation? Supply chain delays? An unending pandemic? Destruction of American institutions, particularly trust in the integrity of our elections?
I never agreed with his personality or his diplomacy, but I did realize the divide in American politics that I never knew was so pervasive.
Trump amplified the divide begun by the Tea Party, and he put Republicans firmly on a path of non-cooperative obstructionism with Democrats. The Republican test of true Republicanism has become whether you put doing ill toward the Democrats ahead of what is good for the country.
I have always labeled myself as a political moderate though many here shove me firmly into the conservative camp.
Not counting those that are delusional, you have no moderate or liberal positions.
The world is sliding towards Cultural Marxism...
According to Wikipedia:
quote:
Cultural Marxism is a far-right antisemitic conspiracy theory which claims Western Marxism as the basis of continuing academic and intellectual efforts to subvert Western culture. The theory claims that an elite of Marxist theorists and Frankfurt School intellectuals are subverting Western society with a culture war that undermines the Christian values of traditionalist conservatism and promotes the cultural liberal values of the 1960s counterculture and multiculturalism, progressive politics and political correctness, misrepresented as identity politics created by critical theory.
With roots in the Nazi propaganda term “Cultural Bolshevism”, the conspiracy theory originated in the United States during the 1990s.  While originally found only on the far right political fringe, the term began to enter mainstream discourse in the 2010s and is now found globally. The conspiracy theory of a Marxist culture war is promoted by right-wing politicians, fundamentalist religious leaders, political commentators in mainstream print and television media, and white supremacist terrorists. Scholarly analysis of the conspiracy theory has concluded that it has no basis in fact.
So that's yet another right-wing conspiracy theory that you buy into.
...and it will end up being the death (the last and final days) of this planet.
Read the last sentence of the Wikipedia quote again: "No basis in fact."
The critics at EvC (despite some of them claiming to be true Christians)...
No one professes more anti-Christian attitudes than the conservative Christians here. I think you all follow WWJDTDTO: What would Jesus do, then do the opposite.
...know nothing about the existence and reality of God...
You know nothing about Him either, and you certainly don't follow his teachings (from the NT, not the OT - as a follower of the God of the Old Testament you're doing pretty good).
...nor do they understand that when you pump 11 trillion dollars into the US dollar it will inflate and decrease in overall purchasing power...
This is a pretty severe misrepresentation. We all understand that too much deficit spending puts inflationary pressure on the economy, and no one's said anything to the contrary.
And why are you worried about deficits now and not under Trump? Here's a graph of our annual deficit since 2001. Notice that the deficit increased each year under Trump, and especially in 2020, Trump's last year. The projected deficit for 2021, Biden's first year, is slightly lower:
About upcoming deficits, are you somehow imagining that the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill and the $1.75 trillion social programs and climate change bill are all going to be spent in one year so that next year our deficit will increase by $2.95 trillion? You do think that, don't you, so let me disabuse you of that misconception. The $1.2 trillion for infrastructure will be spent over five years, averaging $240 billion per year. The $1.75 trillion for social programs and climate change will be spent over ten years, averaging $175 billion per year. That's a total increase of $415 billion next year. Feel better now?
---effectively killing the US middle class.
I reiterate that you are delusional.
I have finally concluded that they do not care.
Add your concern about the deficits wiping out the middle class to the long list of fictional things that you're delusional about, and which for that reason we don't care about. Express a concern about something true and real and we'll listen.
They claim to have a heart for the welfare of the entire world and would rather see the privileged class that our early days of expansionism and freedom produced diminish.
Yes, exactly right, America is wealthy because of our past plunder of the world's resources and economic and political exploitation of those poorer and weaker than us. That we grew wealthy from ill-gotten gains is not something to take pride in. Probably no group has suffered more directly from our avarice (and is owed more, not that we'll ever make fair payment) than the American Indian. Instead of recognizing the evil that we're heir to you just clutch your loot tightly to your bosom while repeating, "Mine, mine, mine."
Trump befriended that class(as well as the 1% like himself, unfortunately) and postponed its inevitable demise.
The class Trump befriended is the worst among us: the racists, the bigots, the white supremacists, the protectionists, the uneducated, the rural poor, the easily fooled.
Ultimately, money itself will be taken from the people and made a part of a globalist system.
Again, you are delusional. The world is not moving toward a "globalist system," which is a synonym for yet another conspiracy theory that you subscribe to, the New World Order that imagines a totalitarian world government.
We won't be able to take ourselves out of the banking system nearly as easily without tax consequences.
I can't imagine what you're referring to unless you mean the International Monetary Fund, which is not a banking system. We contribute $117 billion to its funding each year.
To the progressive liberals, it is as it should be.
If you're referring again to our lack of concern about the delusional conspiracy theories you keep pushing, you are correct.
They claim that Christians are mostly far-right and mostly selfish.
Liberals are not calling Christians "far-right and mostly selfish." You do that yourself with your own words. Just look a few paragraphs above where you call yourself a privileged class built through expansionism at the expense of those less fortunate and with less might.
(We are not--we are individualistic rather than collectivists...
Here's yet another of your delusions, that liberals are collectivists.
...and mandatory do-gooders under the hand of a "benevolent" government.)
You're opposed to government doing good? Do you really favor a government that does no good? No public transportation? No highways? No public education? No farm bureau? No FDA to mandate iodine in our salt and vitamin D in our milk? No public health to make sure children are vaccinated and to handle epidemics and pandemics? The list of the good that government does is endless. That's one of the important reasons government exists, to provide for the public good.
Of course, none of them believe in original sin nor in a spiritual war.
Oh my God, I think I've got whiplash! Didn't see that coming. Of what possible relevance is this to anything you said before?
They challenge me to provide evidence and they point to the fact that it is I who am the monster and unloving towards the poor disenfranchised masses.
That you're a monster has nothing to do with God (or to the extent that it does is only between you and him). It has to do with the sentiments you expressed yourself in Message 355: "so-named victims" who "would never know what to do with a stimulus check or a reparations tax break if it were handed to them." They must first be "reeducated. This assistance is "lavish." We shouldn't help the rest of the world because they might "use our own weapons against us," as if we sent them food and they fired it back as missiles.
I will admit that I am not in favor of mandatory altruism nor of government control and regulation of MY assets which I earn.
If taxes being mandatory makes something the government spends money on as mandatory, then everything the government spends money on is mandatory, not just altruism (a sentiment you're apparently opposed to government expressing). All the taxes you pay are under "government control and regulation," not just the portion that you call altruistic.
You seem completely oblivious to how bad it sounds to be opposed to altruism just because it comes from government, but anyway, that's why you're a monster.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 362 by Phat, posted 11-30-2021 12:47 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 366 by Phat, posted 12-01-2021 3:30 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(2)
Message 369 of 773 (889505)
12-01-2021 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 366 by Phat
12-01-2021 3:30 PM


Re: Mandatory Empathy and Government Control
In Beautiful Mind John Nash says he trusted the ideas of his period of insanity because they came to him in the same way as those that had earlier made him one of the world's foremost mathematicians. You shouldn't be trusting the ideas that are coming to you right now.
I think you should take another more rational swing at practically everything you said.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 366 by Phat, posted 12-01-2021 3:30 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 389 of 773 (889526)
12-02-2021 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 366 by Phat
12-01-2021 3:30 PM


Re: Mandatory Empathy and Government Control
You didn't take another stab at this, I have a few minutes to spare right now, so I'll address your post.
Phat writes:
Disclaimer: Though I was on a great Lo-Carb Diet for close to all of November, I relapsed and had some bad carbs with high sugar the past 2 days...
You are hopeless. You remind me of the emphysema patients you sometimes see with an oxygen tube in one hand and a cigarette in the other.
1)Jar claims that the US *should* have helped rebuild Viet Nam and other places.
Vietnam is one word.
So to you installing a fiat government and tearing the country apart with years of war and death is okay, but helping them rebuild is not.
Does he not realize that by lifting up the trading partners there would be direct competition for the American worker?
You're confusing two completely different time periods. Jar was talking about helping rebuild Vietnam after the end of the war. It was a couple decades later before we began trading with Vietnam.
And the sad fact is, we cannot compete.
That their labor and material costs are lower than ours has nothing to do with whether it was right to a) interfere in their internal politics; b) force years of war upon them; and c) leave them to pick up the pieces after we admitted defeat having discovered that their desire for self-determination exceeded the ability of our military might to thwart it.
Jar's points in Message 367 were in two separate paragraphs and were about two completely different time periods. The first paragraph was about the Vietnam war where we destroyed the country and then provided no help in rebuilding it. The second paragraph noted that some of the products on your grocery store shelves come from the countries with lower costs that you're complaining about. Since you're hyper-worried about inflation, note that producing those products domestically would cause the prices in your grocery store to inflate.
Their work ethic and willingness to work harder for less would have beaten our own native populists and uneducated workers domestically. It is not mainly the altruism that I am opposed to. It is the lack of similar concern for our own first.
Nothing Jar said reflected a lack of concern for domestic workers. He didn't even comment on the topic in that message. When he has commented he has said the opposite.
You're opposed to the government doing good? Do you really favor a government that does no good? No public transportation? No highways? No public education? No farm bureau? No FDA to mandate iodine in our salt and vitamin D in our milk? No public health to make sure children are vaccinated and to handle epidemics and pandemics? The list of the good that government does is endless. That's one of the important reasons government exists, to provide for the public good.
Of course I'm not opposed to the FDA, the CDP, and other agencies that regulate public health and safety.
You're hopelessly unaware of your own contradictions, inconsistencies, confusions and lack of comprehension.
I'm opposed to mandatory control and implementation of taxes beyond domestic needs.
Since federal income taxes are mandatory, isn't everything you pay taxes for mandatory, whether or not it's altruistic? Aren't you mandated to pay your share of every single item in the federal budget? If you object to anything mandatory then isn't everything in the federal budget objectionable to you?
This point has been made by different people in different ways, but you're not getting it. For the most part you're not even acknowledging that people are finding fatal flaws in your position. You just continue merrily on repeating the same errors. We must all be crazy to keep explaining the same stuff to you while you repeatedly don't get it.
Jar himself mentions that *we* should have helped Viet Nam...and no doubt Iraq and Afghanistan, though the governments in place there are still hostile to American foreign policy.
Again, Vietnam, one word.
Vietnam and the US normalized relationships a quarter century ago. Looking it up, Vietnam is currently our 10th largest trading partner at $90 billion per year. Vietnam is not "still hostile to American foreign policy." So you're wrong.
According to the State Department, "The United States maintains vigorous and broad engagement with Iraq on diplomatic, political, economic, and security issues..." Iraq is not "still hostile to American foreign policy." So you're wrong again, unless perhaps you meant to say Iran.
The US/Afghanistan relationship is still in flux - what the Taliban will do and whether they'll abide by any agreements is anyone's guess.
China is taking over. Does anyone want the CCP running the planet? (The anti-Christian CCP, I might add)
Where is this coming from? Why did you say this? Do even you know?
A country's influence is a function of its economic and military power. China will have the world's largest economy by the early 2030's. China's military is the world's largest in terms of personnel, and one of the world's top three most powerful at least. We don't have any say in China's growing economic and military power. They're going to pass us whether we like it or not.
Wiki writes:
Collectivism is a value that is characterized by an emphasis on cohesiveness among individuals and prioritization of the group over the self. Individuals or groups that subscribe to a collectivist worldview tend to find common values and goals as particularly salient[1] and demonstrate greater orientation toward in-group than toward out-group.[2] The term "in-group" is thought to be more diffusely defined for collectivist individuals to include societal units ranging from the nuclear family to a religious or racial/ethnic group.
Nothing in your Wikipedia description of collectivism describes liberalism. The word "liberal" does not appear in the article, nor does any related word. Collectivism and liberalism are not synonyms: they have different meanings and refer to different things.
You've been told this many times, yet your answer is always to just say it again. What is wrong with you?
One example of collectivism in action is selectively only giving stimulus checks to "each according to their need." This is a blatant example of in-group thinking and mandatory under a government of, by, and for the in-group.
Unbelievable! You can't even remember last year. Both the first and second round of stimulus checks started going out under Trump - he signed both bills. Now Trump and the Republicans are collectivists, too? Who's left that's not a collectivist? (The third round was Biden's.)
The stimulus checks were not tailored to "each according to their need," which is communisim, by the way, not collectivism, as you would have been reminded had you read further in the Wikipedia article (Collectivism: Anarcho-collectivism). The stimulus payments had income limits, for example $99,000 ($198,000 married) for the first round with a gradual phase out. How is this collectivism?
Our progressive income tax rates are based on income, too. If you have an adjusted gross income of $10,000 then you're in the 10% bracket, while if $150,000 you're in the 24% tax bracket. Is the income tax collectivism to you?
And if you make too much money in retirement then your Medicare payments go up. This year most people on Medicare pay $148.50 per month, but married couples earning more than $182,000 per year pay $238 per month. If they earn more than $750,000 per year they pay $578 per month. Do these graduated income adjusted Medicare payments seem like collectivism to you?
If you want examples of government payments based on need then look to unemployment insurance, welfare, Medicaid and student aid. Do these seem like collectivism to you?
The questions I keep asking you are rhetorical, of course. They're an expression of my incredulity that you could be such a lunkhead, and an ostentatiously voluble one at that, on all this stuff. You have no apparent fear that what you're about to say might be incredibly ignorant, despite a host of people telling you that you've been saying incredibly ignorant things for a while now.
The only part of collectivism that I favor is the collective bargaining of a labor union.
I hope you're joking. A labor union is not collectivism.
As our wages go up in line with inflation, we will be accused of causing inflation by insisting on parity rather than biting the bullet and accepting less. Which is another reason I abhor anarchy. They steal theirs.
Yet another off-the-wall comment. I'll pass on this one.
Please try to understand this before replying.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Typos; improve clarity of short clause.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 366 by Phat, posted 12-01-2021 3:30 PM Phat has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(1)
Message 392 of 773 (889529)
12-02-2021 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 378 by Phat
12-02-2021 11:41 AM


Re: Mandatory Empathy and Government Control
Phat writes:
I am in favor of spreading the wealth equally among the people...
That would be redistribution of wealth. You won't find any conservatives in favor of this.
...rather than helping Blacks, Indians, and other marginalized groups.
Jesus:
Mark 10:21: "You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."
Phat:
"They will simply waste the money."
Either you're neither a conservative nor a follower of Jesus, or you're so confused you can't get either's philosophy straight.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 378 by Phat, posted 12-02-2021 11:41 AM Phat has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 393 of 773 (889531)
12-02-2021 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 390 by Phat
12-02-2021 7:49 PM


Re: Mandatory Empathy and Government Control
What is it that you think you're proving by presenting examples of misapplication of affirmative action.
I think I saw a couple movies about you the other day:
I don't think I've ever seen such a pronounced personality change. A year or two ago people would have called you one of the sweetest guys on the site. Now they might call you confused, lost, soulless. Here's hoping you find some Christian charity in your heart. Treat an Arapaho to dinner - after all, you're living on their land.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by Phat, posted 12-02-2021 7:49 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 397 by Phat, posted 12-03-2021 10:50 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(1)
Message 394 of 773 (889532)
12-02-2021 8:59 PM
Reply to: Message 391 by Tanypteryx
12-02-2021 8:07 PM


Re: Mandatory Empathy and Government Control
Tanypteryx writes:
You specifically said:
quote:
punished qualified employees in order to meet quotas for hiring minorities.
Not qualified applicants.
Plus quotas were ruled unconstitutional nearly twenty years ago. Affirmative action will remain necessary as long as there's racism.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 391 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-02-2021 8:07 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(3)
Message 400 of 773 (889539)
12-03-2021 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 372 by Phat
12-02-2021 10:30 AM


Re: Mandatory Empathy and Government Control
Phat writes:
The question is "which people"?
Go ahead and answer your own question. Would it be people like you and definitely not blacks, American indians and other minorities?
ALL of them?
Please tell us which groups you were planning to discriminate against through exclusion.
(Globalism writ LARGE)
Do even you know what this means? Is that like all of everything? The Earth rules the universe?
nwr writes:
Since you are so concerned about cultural Marxism, maybe you can explain what it is. I have tried a google lookup. But, as best I can tell, there's no such thing.
I am NOT referring to the conspiracy theory.
The Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory exists. Cultural Marxism does not. It is nothing except what you're making up as you type on your keyboard.
Note that a conspiracy by definition is:
Note that focus is on a conspiracy theory, not a conspiracy. A conspiracy theory is a set of spurious arguments for the existence of a conspiracy. Which is what Cultural Marxism is. Cultural Marxism has no actual existence in reality. It's just one of the many bugaboos of the right to keep the base active and agitated and sending in those donations.
<nonsense ignored>
My parents were far from aristocratic, however. They simply were benefactors of the aberration which jar has spoken of...the ramped up industrial capacity of the United States for twenty years or so after WWII.
Jar did comment in this topic area, but I don't think this accurately captures what he said. If I can add my own take on this, the industrial might of the the United States was a reality well before WWII. We became the world's largest economy by 1890. But the physical separation from the rest of the world by two oceans led to a more isolationistic foreign policy than much of the rest of the world, especially in military matters, that didn't end until WWII left much of the rest of the world in ashes and the US as the world's dominant power.
nwr writes:
And yet you belong to the evangelical Christian collective and you regularly vote for the Republican collective.
Not true. I voted for Biden over Trump in the last election, though I now regret it.
Trump possesses no qualities that the Phat of five years ago would have approved of.
The Democrats in power appear set to spend more money than Trump ever did.
You're saying this yet again just one day after I debunked it in Message 365, so I'll say it again:
quote:
And why are you worried about deficits now and not under Trump? Here's a graph of our annual deficit since 2001. Notice that the deficit increased each year under Trump, and especially in 2020, Trump's last year. The projected deficit for 2021, Biden's first year, is slightly lower:
About upcoming deficits, are you somehow imagining that the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill and the $1.75 trillion social programs and climate change bill are all going to be spent in one year so that next year our deficit will increase by $2.95 trillion? You do think that, don't you, so let me disabuse you of that misconception. The $1.2 trillion for infrastructure will be spent over five years, averaging $240 billion per year. The $1.75 trillion for social programs and climate change will be spent over ten years, averaging $175 billion per year. That's a total increase of $415 billion next year. Feel better now?
Do you get it now? Trump and the Republicans were the big deficit busters, not the Democrats.
Critics will say that this money is primarily earmarked to help the US, but statements such as the ones jar has made disturb me.
Jar said nothing disturbing. Investing is a good thing. This is still a free country, and Americans are still allowed to invest their dollars where they choose.
jar writes:
We should have accepted the democratically determined will of the people of Iran, Iraq, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, China, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Republic, ... the list goes on and on; and allowed those nations to determine their own forms of Government instead of stepping in and trying to force OUR desired government on them. We should have given them aid instead of guns.
FULL STOP. Do you mean to suggest that our tax dollars should have gone overseas?
Is there nothing so simple you can't misunderstand it? Jar is saying that tax dollars used to send military aid would have been better spent as economic aid. It's tempting to arm a country beset by enemies like Israel, but the result is the massive human rights abuses of Gaza and the West Bank. That's all on us.
Though I suppose that they already do indirectly through the BEAST that is the military-industrial complex!
Are you still responding to jar, because it sure doesn't seem like it since you're ignoring that you just quoted him arguing for, namely economic instead of military assistance.
This world is SCREWED UP!
Not that this isn't true, but so are you.
Note the comments by a left-leaning Christian by the name of John Pavlovitz:
Here's a link to what Mr. Pavlovitz said: Yes World, It’s That Bad Here in America—and Worse. Some of it is so pertinent and powerful that I'm going to quote it again:
quote:
It’s the face of family members whose newly revealed racism is regularly leveling us around the dinner table.
It’s the face of former church friends, who have completely abandoned the Jesus they claim faith in and chosen the vilest of idols.
It’s the face of once pleasant neighbors who casually regurgitate extremist propaganda in sidewalk conversations.
It’s the face of childhood friends spewing anti-immigrant filth on their social media profiles.
...
So yes, it’s the staggering cruelty of those holding the power here—but just as much it’s the people we know and live alongside who are so gladly empowering them.
Yes, it’s the complete bastardization of the rule of law and the systems of protections our forebears put in place to avoid putting our nation in such peril—but it’s our coworkers and uncles and classmates who don’t seem to give a damn about that.
Yes, it’s one political party’s sociopathic lack of empathy and their unrepentant viciousness—but it’s the people we’ve shared Thanksgiving dinner with and served on mission trips alongside, who share their venom and boost their signal.
Yes, it’s Republican politicians’ incessant attacks on LGBTQ people and immigrants and Muslims and the sick and the vulnerable—but it’s the once kind-hearted people we love, who have been so poisoned by partisan talking points and perverted Christian theology that they celebrate all of it.
...
We’re certainly losing the big things here: the integrity of our elections, the stability of our Republic, the faith in our systems, the illusion that our Republican leaders will put anything over power and party.
...
We’re wondering what happened to our nation—and to people we once loved and respected; to our parents, grandparents, siblings, neighbors, and best friends.
...
Yes, our Democracy is in peril, but our most treasured relationships with people are in tatters too.
He's talking about you, Phat. You're the person with the "newly revealed racism" who has "completely abandoned the Jesus they claim faith in and chosen the vilest of idols." You're the one who "casually regurgitates extremist propaganda" and is "spewing anti-immigrant filth." You're the one "empowering...staggering cruelty" and "the complete bastardization of the rule of law." It's you who is enabling "one politcal party's sociopathic lack of empathy and their unrepentant viciousness" and "incessant attacks on LGBTQ people and immigrants and Muslims and the sick and the vulnerable."
It's incredible that you're so clueless you quoted a spot-on self-portrait describing your heartlessness, cruelty and disregard for democracy. The people you criticize for denying Jesus have far more Christian spirit in one fingernail than you have in your entire body.
Because by and large, many liberals have dismissed the necessity (nevermind possibility) of surrendering to God as we understand Him and following His mandates and substituted allegiance to a progressive government and allowing "it" to set the mandates. Conservatives with a strong faith and a moral conscience are few and far between, but they get it. Without Jesus Christ, humans will never successfully create a workable consensus and a brave new world. The antitheists violently disagree. The makings of a spiritual war are all too evident.
You have surpassed Faith in lack of self-awareness. You've elevated belief in God and accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior as the sole qualification to goodness while spurning kindness and charity toward your fellow man. Your beliefs won't save you from the consequences of your heartlessness and cruelty.
I can just picture it as you approach the pearly gates. "I appreciate that you believed in me and accepted my son as Lord and Savior, but did you really write that blacks and Indians would just waste the money, and did you really argue against helping the poor and the descendants of those robbed of their land and freedom?"
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 372 by Phat, posted 12-02-2021 10:30 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(3)
Message 409 of 773 (889548)
12-03-2021 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 395 by Phat
12-03-2021 10:42 AM


Re: Darker Future For USA
You are again confused, but so is Psaki, and so are a lot of other people. Here are some facts:
  • We don't know why there's been a sudden spurt of group smash-and-grab robberies lately.
  • It isn't limited to California.
  • It isn't shoplifting.
  • It isn't caused by the pandemic.
  • Those apprehended won't face shoplifting charges. They'll face charges such as robbery, conspiracy, burglary, assault, possession of stolen property and weapons charges.
The most perplexing thing is how many people think this is shoplifting - the news calls it shoplifting all the time. But a shoplifter is a thief pretending to be a customer. Once you do anything like put on a mask or stuff items into bags or smash glass display cases you've dropped any pretense of being a customer. And the idea that increasing the felony threshold in California is responsible for something that's happened in multiple states and countries is absolutely ludicrous. But conservatives, or at least Fox News, repeats these tropes all day long. And, apparently, you swallow them whole without an ounce of critical thinking.
It's an interesting idea that if you overwhelm store security you can just take whatever you want and get away with it, but the more people involved the more likely some will be caught, and each perpetrator is responsible for everything stolen, not just what he stole individually. This makes this approach to stealing, which draws a great deal attention, seem like a bad idea that disappear as fast as it appeared. Take the Nordstrom case, for example, where about $200,000 merchandise was stolen. At least three were captured. They'll be charged with stealing $200,000, interviewed by detectives and prosecutors, and offered deals for identifying other participants who when apprehended will also be charged with stealing $200,000.
Phat writes:
Of course, a lot of you will say that Fox News portrays the ideological battle between conservatives and liberals in a clearly biased fashion.
The Fox Business story made all the factual errors I listed above. You should not cite any Fox story without independent confirmation. Also, recall what I've told you before, that you shouldn't be getting your information about the evils of one political party from the other political party. You keep repeating this mistake. Find multiple, reliable and independent sources of information. You're the only one of us coming in here and repeating lies about one of the political parties. I'd like to think it's because the rest of us are all fine upstanding intelligent people, but it could be because there's no liberal propaganda machine that takes its lead from a psychopathic liar.
Ringo will bray on about helping the "least of these" as if people committing criminal acts are simply victims of a racist society.
You have a nasty habit of misrepresenting what people say. Ringo hasn't said anything about leniency for perpetrators of crime sprees, but he's definitely against anger and vengeance, which seems to be where you're coming from.
California may be "woke"...
I think California is mostly only described as "woke" when described by conservatives. I've only heard the term used sarcastically or critically.
To be honest, I know that I am coming across as a heartless a*hole,...
You're not coming across as one - you're proving you are one.
...but my concerns regarding lawlessness and crime are not racist rants.
Sure they are. Just above you accused Ringo of defending criminals as victims of racism, so apparently you assumed the perpetrators were black. That's an example of your racism in action.
They are based on common sense values which this country now tiptoes around for fear of offending anybody.
You conservatives aren't doing any tiptoeing at all. You loudly express your racist attitudes in one breath, then claim it isn't racism in the next. You're not fooling anyone: you're racists.
What I am saying is that we the people are heading towards a lawless atheistic society,...
You should look things up before putting your fingers in gear. Here are crime statistics in several categories up through 2019:
Crime is down in multiple categories across the aboard. So you're wrong. Again.
...and that what you see as the solutions are nothing more than gasoline being thrown on a fire.
You believe crime is increasing because the conservative media is telling you lies. When are you going to wise up?
Reparations do not mean that people should look the other way when a crime is clearly being committed.
Again, you have a very nasty habit of misrepresenting what people say. Not a single person here has said anything like this.
What people *have* said is that we need to seek better approaches than the anger and vengeance you're preaching. For example, better to provide assistance to the poor to develop productive citizens than to just let them rot in rural or urban ghettos that breed crime.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 395 by Phat, posted 12-03-2021 10:42 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(2)
Message 412 of 773 (889551)
12-03-2021 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 401 by Phat
12-03-2021 11:01 AM


Re: Darker Future For USA
Phat writes:
jar writes:
Are the people that committed the mass smash & grabs being sought by the police?
Yes, thanks to modern technology some have been caught. I wish technology could catch all of them.
I didn't hear about this - what modern technology?
Have any of them been caught, tried, and found innocent because they were victims?
Not to my knowledge. Quit calling me an idiot just because I lean conservative at times.
If anyone thinks you an idiot it has nothing to do with conservatism. There's nothing wrong with conservatism. I'm half and half myself, a social liberal and a financial conservative.
But you're not really a conservative. If we call you a conservative it's only because you're on that side of the conservative/liberal divide, but more precisely you're a far right-wing conspiracy theory loving nut job.
You and others will find out soon enough that the progressives never will run everything and that there are two sides to every story.
Why do you keep accusing people here of having opinions they never express? You could only be hearing these opinions somewhere else, not here. You're probably getting them from the right-wing media you listen to, with the result that everything you think you know about liberalism is wrong.
Quit burying your heads in the sands of ideology and imagining that the world would be a better place if you got rid of the other side.
Good God, who here has ever said they want to get rid of conservatives? I guess we'd very much like the nut jobs on the right to go away, like those pushing the conspiracy theory that the election was stolen, or claiming our elections aren't fair and honest or that Q is an accurate source of information or that the January 6th insurrection was actually a false flag operation by liberals or that masks don't work or that vaccines cause more deaths than the virus and so on. There's a seemingly endless supplly of right wing nut job conspiracy theories.
I certainly realize that we need both conservatives and liberals.
Good to know.
Maybe you need to learn the same reality.
You are again attributing to us things we have never said.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 401 by Phat, posted 12-03-2021 11:01 AM Phat has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 415 of 773 (889554)
12-04-2021 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 410 by Phat
12-03-2021 4:37 PM


Re: Darker Future For USA
Adam Grant is an organizational psychologist and a professor at the Wharton School. In this 18 minute podcast he's interviewed by Manoush Zomorodi of NPR's Ted Radio Hour. This weekly program distills Ted Talk presentations through interviews with their presenters.
The subject of this one is changing your mind and its advantages. The main lesson is that we're better off if our minds are open to learning new things, including rethinking current views.
Facts underpin, or should, any discussion, and this Ted Talk style presentation, a bit more theoretical, is about what is a fact: Justin Lewis-Weber: What Makes a Fact? | TED Talk
Where I could find no help is for whatever is causing your many confusings, misaprehensions and misunderstandings. The number of times you've accused us of believing things we've never expressed is bewildering, as if you can't tell the difference between accusations against liberals from a video and what liberals actually say on an EvC Forum webpage. I could find no advice for fixing a brain that doesn't work right.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 410 by Phat, posted 12-03-2021 4:37 PM Phat has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(4)
Message 433 of 773 (889575)
12-05-2021 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 423 by marc9000
12-04-2021 10:33 PM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
marc9000 writes:
Do you know who Michael Byrd is? Probably not, most Americans don't, that name doesn't make the news. He's the black capital policeman who murdered a white woman, Ashli Babbitt, on January 6th. She was unarmed. There was no trial for him. He's still alive.
Hey, Marc, thank you for what, given your history, could only be an honest, accurate and complete report. After reading this I guess I can safely assume that Ms. Babbit was obeying the law and not behaving in any unusual or threatening manner when, out of the blue and unprovoked, Michael Byrd inexplicably chose her of all people to fire his weapon at.
A couple weeks before the insurrection Babbitt sent this heartwarming reply to Kamala Harris who had tweeted about masking up, distributing vaccines, and getting kids back in schools:
quote:
"No the fuck you will not!” Ashli Babbitt replied to Harris. “No masks, no you, no Biden the kid raper, no vaccines...sit your fraudulent ass down…we the ppl bitch!"
This clearly makes Babbitt out to be a calm and rational person who represented no threat as she tried to invade the House chambers by climbing through the smashed security glass of its doors. I bet Babbitt had cupcakes and soft drinks for House members in her backpack.
It must be a real disappointment for you that you cannot wreak vengeance upon Michael Byrd, but he continues living his idyllic life. Sure, he's in hiding after death threats and racist attacks from the far right (that would be people like you), but I'm sure his life is just great.
I wish police were trained to wound or first fire warning shots, not kill, but as a group they are broadly against such measures because the former risks being less effective and the latter risks potentially causing unintentional injury to innocent people. I recall a case a number of years ago where a teenager engaged in target practice at his home fired a round into the air and it descended into a packed football stadium a mile away and killed a spectator.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 423 by marc9000, posted 12-04-2021 10:33 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 440 by marc9000, posted 12-05-2021 5:30 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22610
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


(5)
Message 434 of 773 (889576)
12-05-2021 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 417 by Phat
12-04-2021 1:00 PM


Re: Racism Is Not A One Way Street
Phat writes:
I listen to Peter Schiff, whom Percy has already judged solely on the fact that Irwin Schiff was his father.
I see you're still a lying little shit. I lambasted all the shysters you were promoting over the summer, not just Schiff, because they were obvious used car salesmen playing on your gullibility to sell gold. I just happened to know that Schiff's father was also a shyster who spent time in prison, but that's not what makes his son a shyster. What makes Peter Schiff a shyster is that he makes up compelling stories so he can make money off suckers like you. Have you noticed that gold has trended downward since the summer? So Schiff is wrong. But at some point gold will go up again, and then Schiff will be right. And then it will go down and he'll be wrong again.
Don't you see what's going on here? All Schiff does is promote gold as an investment vehicle that has nowhere to go but up. Sometimes gold goes down and Schiff talks about something else. Sometimes gold goes up, and then Schiff brays (to use your word) about what a great forecaster he is. It's a schtick. Get a clue.
Schiff is knowledgeable about the economy and is usually right.
Back in 2009, and as recently as 2015, Schiff was forecasting that gold would rise to $5,000 within a few years? Would you say that 2021 is a few years after 2015? You would, right? Is gold anywhere near $5,000 right now? It's not, right? It's about three times less than that, right? Would you call being off by a factor of three an accurate prediction?
When Schiff first started talking about currency crises back in 2012 gold was around $1700. It spent most of the 2010's after that in the doldums around $1300, a loss of 25%, but now it's all the way up at $1767. That's an increase of 4% over ten years, or an annualized return of .39%. I know your thinking is cloudy these days, so I want to call attention to the decimal point. That is not a 39% annualized return but .39%, a hundred times smaller. That's a miniscule return.
If Schiff's so smart, why didn't he tell you to sell gold in 2012, then to start buying it again a couple years ago? But he didn't, did he. He's been telling people to buy gold for well over a decade. Why does he keep handing out this advice in both bull and bear markets for gold? Not because he has any special knowledge or insight, but because he makes money off of selling gold.
And where are those currency crises he was going on and on about a decade ago? We're still waiting. There are two secrets to becoming a successful market prognosticator. One is to make the same prediction about financial markets for years and years and years, because eventually you'll be right. The other is to make many different predictions, because some of them are bound to be right. Tout your successes and pretend your failures never happened. And just like that you'll become a successful market prognosticator.
On one of his podcasts from a couple of weeks ago, he addressed the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict and mentioned a few key observations regarding public reaction to it. <podcast not included>
For the umpteenth time, use your words and provide videos only as a reference. Explain Schiff's Rittenhouse verdict observations and why you think they're credible. I am not watching a video without seeing your summary of what it says along with your assessments, and even then only if you make sense.
  • Generation of entitled American socialists don’t think stealing is wrong.
  • You lying little shit. No liberals here nor as covered in the media have expressed this sentiment. Liberals think stealing is wrong. What they disagree with is your type of anger and vengeance approach to justice. Liberals want a system of justice that makes sincere efforts at rehabilitation that turns criminals into productive citizens. Instead, what many prisons do now is turn criminals into better criminals.
  • MSNBC promotes racism.
  • I can't wait to see the explanation for this one.
  • Law-abiding citizens don’t use cars or guns to kill people.
  • Law abiding citizens don't kill people. Period.
    Yes, this is some of the conservative "propaganda" which I listen to.
    He said, simultaneously both proud and ignorant.
  • The cries to buy gold and silver are being generated mainly by wealthy people. I conclude that the wealthy people are strongly against inflating the US Dollar as that action threatens their wealth.
  • How does inflation threaten the wealth of the wealthy? Do you think they keep their money in mattresses? Inflation is an inherent part of any modern economy, but it is a cause of concern and source of disruption when it rises too high. Expenses increase, wages increase, but not necessarily at the same time or at the same rate. But the wealthy with their investments in financial instruments and property that inflate along with everything else? They do fine. The wealthy are probably the group least threatened by inflation.
    The US Dollar competes directly with the historical discipline of precious metals, being the premier global reserve fiat currency.
    I'm sure no one has any idea what you're trying to say here. It sounds like you're calling precious metals a fiat currency, but that's dead wrong.
    The progressives see no problem as they actually want the wealthy to pay their "fair share" even though inflation is a "hidden tax" and will affect ALL of us.
    It's true inflation affects all of us, but not in the same way. Inflation makes some worse off, some not. It's a mixed bag. Some people are vulnerable to some cost increases but not others.
    Perhaps they (the progressives) see no other way to get blood out of a conservative turnip.
    I assume you're repeating a point from your video. No one's watching your stupid videos (or at least in my opinion no one should be watching them on your say so). Make the point in your own words. Even people who watch the video will likely have trouble recognizing what part of the video this is relevant to. You don't even bother to say something like, "About 5 minutes in where Schiff is discussing such-and-so," which is the minimal amount that you're required to say if you're trying to be comprehensible, which you're not, and which you haven't been able to be anyway for a while now.
    What jumped out at me from this episode, however, was the double standard regarding Kyle Rittenhouse (who happens to be white) vs the man who drove a car through a crowd several days later (who happens to be black). Schiff also touches on the California thefts and the double standard regarding the entitlement mentality of whites(like myself) and how it is addressed versus what he sees as an entitlement mentality against the progressive whites and people of color (which many see as justifiable reparations).
    Schiff commented on the Rittenhouse verdict at 41:05. (open transcript)
    Nice job on providing a time reference, but I'm still not watching your video until you give me an idea of what he said, which you do not do. What double standard? And your "California thefts" were not confined to California - you're still wrong about that. And what in the world are you talking about when you say "entitlement mentality against the progressive whites and people of color?"
    Of course, many progressives will claim that Schiff too is racist yet would defend the riots in Kenosha as justifiable. 42:00 onward
    Is this attitude about the Kenosha riots what you observe liberals saying, or is it what Schiff told you? Do you know any liberals who think rioting justifiable? You don't, do you. Neither does Schiff. That's because liberals don't think this. No large group is homogenous, but by and large liberals think the rioting a very unfortunate but predictable reaction to the Jacob Blake shooting.
    The progressive commentators saw the Rittenhouse verdict as a "victory for white people" and Schiff commented that was Fox News to say the same things against Black people that the commentators said about Rittenhouse they would have been fired.
    What saved Rittenhouse was that the 3 people whom he shot were white.
    So why was his verdict seen as racist?
    Because to gain a guilty verdict would only have required a change in the color of Rittenhouse's skin from white to black.
    --Percy

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 417 by Phat, posted 12-04-2021 1:00 PM Phat has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 441 by marc9000, posted 12-05-2021 5:32 PM Percy has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024