Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[CGVT]

Police protection, fire services and snow plowing are all government services that are paid for by taxes collected from the citizens. The government is lawfully bound to provide these services.

They are not socialism. Socialism takes control of business functions like farms, factories and utilities and removes them from citizen control, and places control under the umbrella of the government.

After all, only the government can efficiently, safely, and fairly run anything and everything.

The obtaining of wealth is an evil act, and must be stopped and thoroughly punished. Unless you are a wealthy democrat.

My response to Talent address this and was the point of my posts.

Your side are the only ones talking about true socialism.

As I pointed out above, nobody wants true socialism. They want the social systems that are in place now. Obviously to all but the brain dead, the should include some strengthening.

The repubs scream "Socialism will destroy this country" "Venezuela!" every time a social program is discussed and it is bullshit. I know it and you know it, but it is the battle cry of the right.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Steelers are a bunch of white steel workers...probably racists bastards...that name must go...Cowboys...white racists who killed Indians and innocent buffalo...gotta go...Irish...buncha drunk white racists...

[iam416]

They want the social systems that are in place now. Obviously to all but the brain dead, the should include some strengthening.

This just really sums up CGVT. Agree with me or you're brain dead. I mean, that's it. Vote D, or you're brain dead.

And hence the endlessly awful and brazenly hypocritical attack on anything that looks like an R.

Agree with him, or you're brain dead.

[lineygoblue]

Your side are the only ones talking about true socialism.

Have you EVER listened to Bernie, Rashida or AOC?

Please start listening to those you support.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I personally think much of PDJT's foreign policy was actually fairly spot-on. I hope that Biden doesn't go with the kneejerk "PDJT BAD!!!" response and viscerally do the opposite. In fact, my hope for Biden is that he is measured. He may have to dress up his position or re-package it or co-opt it, but I think he'll carry on with at least some PDJT's foreign policy positions.

There has been some realignment of portions of Bush's Neo-Con group into the Dem Party.. But I think a lot was kneejerk "PDJT BAD" and NeoCons will soon find most of their new bedfellows aren't interested in proactive new wars (I hope). But on the other hand I think you've got to have some moral anchoring and I think Trump had virtually none. We've talked enough about his "transactional" style and don't need to get into that again...the recent deal cut with Morocco (which reportedly even Netanyahu wasn't terribly happy with) is kind of an example of that.

On the other stuff...I think part of CGVT's point is that every new Democrat-backed law or program for the past 50-60 years in America has been met with charges that it will turn America communist to do this or that. I don't think he's wrong on that. Reagan famously spoke out against Medicare leading to communism back in the early 60's. Pretty sure that goes back to the New Deal at least. I know there's lots of things Dems cry wolf about too but this is one of the Republicans' own guilty pleasures.

[CGVT]

This just really sums up CGVT. Agree with me or you're brain dead. I mean, that's it. Vote D, or you're brain dead.

And hence the endlessly awful and brazenly hypocritical attack on anything that looks like an R.

Agree with him, or you're brain dead.

Well, that’s a brain dead response

[iam416]

On the other stuff...I think part of CGVT's point is that every new Democrat-backed law or program for the past 50-60 years in America has been met with charges that it will turn America communist to do this or that. I don't think he's wrong on that. Reagan famously spoke out against Medicare leading to communism back in the early 60's. Pretty sure that goes back to the New Deal at least. I know there's lots of things Dems cry wolf about too but this is one of the Republicans' own guilty pleasures.

The point is rich with irony when juxtaposed against yesterday's "PDJT supporters will start a rebellion" bullshit.

Again, there are self-described Socialists in your party. Full fucking stop.

[iam416]

There has been some realignment of portions of Bush's Neo-Con group into the Dem Party.. But I think a lot was kneejerk "PDJT BAD" and NeoCons will soon find most of their new bedfellows aren't interested in proactive new wars (I hope). But on the other hand I think you've got to have some moral anchoring and I think Trump had virtually none. We've talked enough about his "transactional" style and don't need to get into that again...the recent deal cut with Morocco (which reportedly even Netanyahu wasn't terribly happy with) is kind of an example of that.

I shudder to think what "moral anchoring" means. My guess is it means Hamas Good; Israel Bad. Or, perhaps, it means China Fucking Evil -- Don't Deal With Them. I'm hoping for the latter. PDJT's strides in the Middle East are outstanding.

[Hannibal]

Moral "anchoring" means that the US becomes an open feeding trough for the rest of the world while we play World Police on behalf of the countries who hate us. Letting in 10X more unskilled and culturally incompatible refugees = "moral". Crafting immigration policy based on immigrants actually offering something of value to the country is "immortal". Sucking dicks at the UN = "moral". America First = "immoral". If you want to know what Joe Biden's foreign policy will be, just think of whatever makes the country worse off and you will be right 99% of the time. It's really that simple.

[lineygoblue]

If you want to know what Joe Biden's foreign policy will be, just think of whatever makes the country worse off and you will be right 99% of the time. It's really that simple.

This is further evidenced that both he and President Kamala are in favor of reinstating the Iran deal.

A-bombs for everyone!

[iam416]

Unfortunately, there's probably more truth in that, Hannibal, than not. Which is terrifying.

[Dr. Strangelove]

As for just simply switching team names, I don't disagree that it's virtue signaling. No one's life is actually being improved (or harmed) in any meaningful way by doing it. But it's because I think it's virtue-signaling that I can't be outraged over it either. It's frivolous.

Now I do think the name "Redskins" historically was used in a derogatory sense and not some kind of honorific. I don't think the name Chiefs or Braves are really comparable. But yeah, they went after the easiest targets first. Chief Wahoo. The name "Redskins". The old Illinois "mascot".

[Dr. Strangelove]

The point is rich with irony when juxtaposed against yesterday's "PDJT supporters will start a rebellion" bullshit.

Again, there are self-described Socialists in your party. Full fucking stop.

Yeah and they are essentially hold little power. You yourself have admitted that. Meanwhile at least 2 members of the QAnon cult just got elected as Republicans. Were they simply feigning belief in it to get elected? Possibly. But that's still not a sign that should encourage everyone. It's worth at least an inkling of concern, unless you really don't mind sharing a political party with people like that.

[iam416]

As for just simply switching team names, I don't disagree that it's virtue signaling. No one's life is actually being improved (or harmed) in any meaningful way by doing it. But it's because I think it's virtue-signaling that I can't be outraged over it either. It's frivolous.

Now I do think the name "Redskins" historically was used in a derogatory sense and not some kind of honorific. I don't think the name Chiefs or Braves are really comparable. But yeah, they went after the easiest targets first. Chief Wahoo. The name "Redskins". The old Illinois "mascot".

It's largely irrelevant. However, politicallly speaking, I think the Left's generally tyrannical seisure of language probably does you no favors.

I'm sure Hannibal can make the case that itt's another step down the primrose path, but I'm not of that mind. I just find it stupid.

[iam416]

Yeah and they are essentially hold little power. You yourself have admitted that. Meanwhile at least 2 members of the QAnon cult just got elected as Republicans. Were they simply feigning belief in it to get elected? Possibly. But that's still not a sign that should encourage everyone. It's worth at least an inkling of concern, unless you really don't mind sharing a political party with people like that.

The QAJons aren't great, but again, what are you saying. What standard are you applying. And does that standard apply to the self-described Socialists and the Democratic Party. I'm not even trying to create an equivalency here because I think the latter is far more entrenched than the former. I'm simply looking for the standard that ought to be applied to determine the influence and potential future influence of a minority wing of your party. That's all.

And then apply it across the board. I rather doubt you're going to come up with something that both suggests the QAJons are a threat to takeover the Rs and the Socialists are just an outlier group for the Ds.