Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2020 15:40:22 GMT -8
Most of us can identify right-wingnut bulls%$t very easily. That kind of attitude surely won't cause any resentment from your political opponents at all.  Sad times we live in where people can't be bothered to even listen to one another.  |
|
|
|
Post by pitbeavs on Jun 19, 2020 16:17:22 GMT -8
Most of us can identify right-wingnut bulls%$t very easily. That kind of attitude surely won't cause any resentment from your political opponents at all. Sad times we live in where people can't be bothered to even listen to one another. There is right and there is wrong. Being a duck fan is wrong. Being a Beaver fan is right. Supporting fascism is wrong. Opposing it is right. Listening to fascism is wrong. Not listening to it is right. Thoughts by beaverclever are wrong. You get the idea. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jun 19, 2020 16:30:51 GMT -8
[Insert left-wing loons have moved the fulcrum so far TO the left of center that Stalin would be right of center today quip here.] Mussolini was an avowed anti-religious socialist and atheist (until near the end of his life). He sought universal suffrage, the creation of an eight-hour work day, a minimum wage, the reduction of retirement age to 55, increased taxes on the wealthy, and nationalization of the armaments industry. Both Hitler and Mussolini were big Friedrich Nietzsche fans and were thus generally opposed to Christianity and especially opposed to its tenants of humility, charity, and goodness. (Hitler actually gave Mussolini 24 Nietzsche books (the complete works of Neietzsche) for his 60th birthday.) Mussolini was pro-Italy, an Italy for Italians. However, his net was much bigger than Hitlers. He was much more tolerant of Jews and Muslims than Hitler. He also tended to be opposed to Slavs, though, just like Hitler. Hitler pretended to be left-wing until the Night of Long Knives. Mussolini was always left-wing but sold out to try and appeal as universally as he could (and then sold out further to appeal to Hitler). Stalin was always left-wing. This is why, at one time, Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin were all allied with one another, a group of left-wing totalitarian dictators. If you exclude military dictators, the worst dictators tend to come from the left. Where we place them after the fact obfuscates the lessons that we should be learning from history. As for "trumpets," a lot of Donald Trump is what has historically been called "right wing." A lot is not. Trump has sort of upset the apple cart with regards to the use of the term in my opinion. St. Ronny is right wing (at least as it was used before 2015).  In St. Ronny's acceptance speech at the 1980 Republican National Convention, he said, "For those without job opportunities, we’ll stimulate new opportunities, particularly in the inner cities where they live. For those who’ve abandoned hope, we’ll restore hope and we’ll welcome them into a great national crusade to make America great again." Can we say gaslight?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2020 16:31:49 GMT -8
That kind of attitude surely won't cause any resentment from your political opponents at all. Sad times we live in where people can't be bothered to even listen to one another. There is right and there is wrong. Being a duck fan is wrong. Being a Beaver fan is right. Supporting fascism is wrong. Opposing it is right. Listening to fascism is wrong. Not listening to it is right. Thoughts by beaverclever are wrong. You get the idea. Everyone you disagree with is a fascist. Info noted. That mentality sure is helpful. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Jun 19, 2020 17:48:38 GMT -8
Most of us can identify right-wingnut bulls%$t very easily. That kind of attitude surely won't cause any resentment from your political opponents at all. Sad times we live in where people can't be bothered to even listen to one another. Well, this is what our system has come down to. Years of Democrats and Republicans in Congress voting completely upon party lines without regard to what is right or wrong has created a populace that identifies more fully with their chosen party than with right or wrong. It’s sort of Orwellian. If they can keep the people divided, it works to their advantage. When Obama was in office, Republicans kept their constituents distracted with calls for his birth certificate or trying to stop his call for health care reform. With Trump in office, Democrats have kept their constituent distracted with his golf outings, his trips to Mar-a-Lago and the quid pro quo. It keeps us divided because Republicans “know” that Obama isn’t a real citizen, and Democrats “know” that Trump acted illegally. Meanwhile, the show continues and the rich get richer and the working men get upset about stuff that they want us to get upset about. Black Lives Matter is more organic than the others. (I know that some of you will disagree with this, but recognize that it has come from the people working together and it continues that way.) Orwell’s mistake in 1984 is not recognizing that we don’t need an external enemy to hate when the enemy is our fellow Americans. We’re still being played by the system. Trump, Obama, Bush. It doesn’t really matter. They want you on one side of the 49-51 split. Just my thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by pitbeavs on Jun 19, 2020 20:44:04 GMT -8
There is right and there is wrong. Being a duck fan is wrong. Being a Beaver fan is right. Supporting fascism is wrong. Opposing it is right. Listening to fascism is wrong. Not listening to it is right. Thoughts by beaverclever are wrong. You get the idea. Everyone you disagree with is a fascist. Info noted. That mentality sure is helpful. It's true that I disagree with fascists and fascists disagree with me. |
|
|
|
Post by pitbeavs on Jun 19, 2020 20:46:10 GMT -8
That kind of attitude surely won't cause any resentment from your political opponents at all. Sad times we live in where people can't be bothered to even listen to one another. Well, this is what our system has come down to. Years of Democrats and Republicans in Congress voting completely upon party lines without regard to what is right or wrong has created a populace that identifies more fully with their chosen party than with right or wrong. It’s sort of Orwellian. If they can keep the people divided, it works to their advantage. When Obama was in office, Republicans kept their constituents distracted with calls for his birth certificate or trying to stop his call for health care reform. With Trump in office, Democrats have kept their constituent distracted with his golf outings, his trips to Mar-a-Lago and the quid pro quo. It keeps us divided because Republicans “know” that Obama isn’t a real citizen, and Democrats “know” that Trump acted illegally. Meanwhile, the show continues and the rich get richer and the working men get upset about stuff that they want us to get upset about. Black Lives Matter is more organic than the others. (I know that some of you will disagree with this, but recognize that it has come from the people working together and it continues that way.) Orwell’s mistake in 1984 is not recognizing that we don’t need an external enemy to hate when the enemy is our fellow Americans. We’re still being played by the system. Trump, Obama, Bush. It doesn’t really matter. They want you on one side of the 49-51 split. Just my thoughts. That's not too far from the truth. Except recessions are legal robberies perpetrated by the one percent. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Jun 19, 2020 22:35:34 GMT -8
If you exclude military dictators, the worst dictators tend to come from the left. Where we place them after the fact obfuscates the lessons that we should be learning from history. Huh? There's good dictators and bad dictators? How are left dictators and right dictators different? Are there dictators from the far right that you don't consider military dictators? Ive got to tell you, that sentence and thought seem very strange.
|
|
|
|
Post by pitbeavs on Jun 20, 2020 8:10:53 GMT -8
If you exclude military dictators, the worst dictators tend to come from the left. Where we place them after the fact obfuscates the lessons that we should be learning from history. Huh? There's good dictators and bad dictators? How are left dictators and right dictators different? Are there dictators from the far right that you don't consider military dictators? Ive got to tell you, that sentence and thought seem very strange. Um, not entirely accurate, Jorge Rafael Videla in Argentina Pinocet in Chile Mobuto in Zaire The Military government of Sudan Saddam All from the right. There are more. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Jun 20, 2020 8:23:19 GMT -8
Maybe it was not clear. The first part of my post was from wikiiswhatever. I used the quote function but erased the majority of the volume of words. What I wrote starts with "huh."
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jun 20, 2020 9:04:20 GMT -8
We have elected a minority president in two of our last five presidential elections (2000, 2016). That's 40%. In every single other election in America, from school boards to the Senate, the candidate with the most votes wins.
It's past time to eliminate the EC and make every person's vote count the same in our presidential elections.
|
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Jun 20, 2020 9:24:47 GMT -8
If you exclude military dictators, the worst dictators tend to come from the left. Where we place them after the fact obfuscates the lessons that we should be learning from history. Huh? There's good dictators and bad dictators? How are left dictators and right dictators different? Are there dictators from the far right that you don't consider military dictators? Ive got to tell you, that sentence and thought seem very strange. Um, not entirely accurate, Jorge Rafael Videla in Argentina Pinocet in Chile Mobuto in Zaire The Military government of Sudan Saddam All from the right. There are more. Ah...I forgot about Mobuto. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jun 20, 2020 10:39:38 GMT -8
We have elected a minority president in two of our last five presidential elections (2000, 2016). That's 40%. In every single other election in America, from school boards to the Senate, the candidate with the most votes wins. It's past time to eliminate the EC and make every person's vote count the same in our presidential elections. The electoral college is the best system we've got all things considered. The US is a democratic republic, made up of States, each having their own constitution. It was never set up as a winner takes all free for all. Separation of powers is why we have the EC, a House of Representatives, a Senate, a Supreme Court, and a President. Eliminate one and you might as well start thinking of eliminating all of them and we can vote on a new dictator every 4 years (as long as the dictator in power allows it). The tyranny of the majority can be very real, and in an election where neither of the top two candidates picks up even 30% of eligible voters it is especially important to have an election system that give all States a say in who our elected leader shall be. Nobody won the majority of the vote this last Presidential election. They were both in the "minority", whether you look at it as percentage of eligible voters or percentage of actual vote. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Jun 20, 2020 10:42:35 GMT -8
And I still can’t figure out why we should disregard the military dictatorships. Oh, yeah, I guess they’d be on the right.
|
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Jun 20, 2020 11:00:49 GMT -8
We have elected a minority president in two of our last five presidential elections (2000, 2016). That's 40%. In every single other election in America, from school boards to the Senate, the candidate with the most votes wins. It's past time to eliminate the EC and make every person's vote count the same in our presidential elections. The electoral college is the best system we've got all things considered. The US is a democratic republic, made up of States, each having their own constitution. It was never set up as a winner takes all free for all. Separation of powers is why we have the EC, a House of Representatives, a Senate, a Supreme Court, and a President. Eliminate one and you might as well start thinking of eliminating all of them and we can vote on a new dictator every 4 years (as long as the dictator in power allows it). The tyranny of the majority can be very real, and in an election where neither of the top two candidates picks up even 30% of eligible voters it is especially important to have an election system that give all States a say in who our elected leader shall be. Nobody won the majority of the vote this last Presidential election. They were both in the "minority", whether you look at it as percentage of eligible voters or percentage of actual vote. Your defense of the EC makes sense. On paper. Population continues to grow in densely populated areas like California and New York. Unfortunately, in the breadbasket of the US, family farms have nearly disappeared and been replaced by sprawling corporate farms. This means population declines. So we are allowing small groups of people to hold back the needs and wishes of the majority. In other democratic nations, a majority of votes is all that is required to elect a new leader, but these people don’t become dictators. Why do you think they would here? |
|
Sad times we live in where people can't be bothered to even listen to one another.
