Do you believe in "both sides - ism" ?

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  john-russell  •  3 weeks ago  •  198 comments

Do you believe in "both sides - ism"  ?
This is a bleak future for the country, at best.  If Trump was to be returned to office we would be led by someone who is demonstrably either mentally ill , or thoroughly evil.  Those are in reality the only two possibilities. 


I saw an article this morning that there are only two Republican office holders on a national level that have the guts to stand up to Trump,   -   Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. 

That sounds about right.

So, we have a party that is for all practical purposes in thrall to a megalomaniac who tried to steal the last election and lies about it virtually on a daily basis. 

This is a bleak future for the country, at best.  If Trump was to be returned to office we would be led by someone who is demonstrably either mentally ill , or thoroughly evil.  Those are in reality the only two possibilities. 

And yet, we continue to see people approach national politics as if "both sides" suffer from roughly equal levels of problematic behavior. 

There appear to be actual , relatively intelligent people who say that they would rather have Trump because Joe Biden occasionally repeats words and stumbles verbally. 

Joe Biden was seen riding a bicycle last week. How many people here would bet ten bucks that Donald Trump could ride a bicycle for a 100 yards, let alone a mile or two? 

-

We often see people approach politics from the "pox on both your houses" point of view.  "I dont like any of them", they say. 

The Republicans , under Trump's leadership are right now trying to set up state governments in a way that will allow them to challenge the results of any election that they lose. Trump is endorsing candidates for state offices that control election boards that will go along with his schemes in the future.  We can see in the recent results of the California recall vote and the Arizona election audit that Republicans are more than willing to not only claim that every election they lose is stolen, but continue on with it even after facts prove them completely wrong.  Tell me, is there a "both sides" aspect to this situation ? 

We see on Newstalkers how the right wing seeders lie and/or try to confuse the issues related to what I have brought up in this article.  What is the "both sides" element in this lying that appeals to moderates and independents that would lead them to say "both sides" are at fault? 

America is heading toward dark times. I really have a problem figuring how "both sides" ism or even worse, apathy,  is going to steer us through this incredibly turbulent path . 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  author  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

The internet and media are designed to play the "both sides" are at fault game. It is turning out to be disastrous for the country.   Let's say Trump doesnt run in 2024. One of his chosen few will be the nominee then. The Republican Party is no longer the party of the Bush's , Reagan's , Jack Kemp's or Bob Dole's. The base of the Republican Party is white grievance.   Who in their right mind thinks that will turn out well for the country? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago
The base of the Republican Party is white grievance.   

Who in their right mind believes that?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1    3 weeks ago

Everyone. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    3 weeks ago

Certainly not everyone. What a ridiculous claim!!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.3  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
Certainly not everyone. What a ridiculous claim!!

You are correct.  Everyone that looks at the facts with a clear and open mind, believes it.  Not just everyone.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

Believe the crap if you choose.

I am sure wiser heads will prevail.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.6  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.5    3 weeks ago
I am sure wiser heads will prevail.

Wiser heads DID prevail .  Can you say President Biden ???

drop-the-mic-mic-drop.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.6    3 weeks ago

believe whatever crap you choose--or is spoon-fed to you.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
1.1.8  bugsy  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.6    3 weeks ago

Most people that voted Biden did so because they don't like mean tweets and Biden was not Trump.

Now, we find that many of those people wish for mean tweets again and are asking themselves why they wasted their vote.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.1.9  CB   replied to  bugsy @1.1.8    3 weeks ago

80 million plus voters did not vote for Biden because of any damn tweet -mean or otherwise - by Artful Liar, Donald Trump. And I think you are telling a damn. . . untruth disguised with phrases like, "Many people say" . . . .

It is clear to me that "Many people say" dialed into as 80M plus voters did not a damn thing to persuade you let go of damn. . . untruths and your Artful Liar.

So we ain't falling for no "many people say" patty today!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
1.1.10  Jack_TX  replied to  bugsy @1.1.8    3 weeks ago
Most people that voted Biden did so because they don't like mean tweets and Biden was not Trump.

Much, much more the latter than the former, but yes.

Now, we find that many of those people wish for mean tweets again and are asking themselves why they wasted their vote.

I think that's a fantasy. That's simply what Trump fans want to think.  I've never heard any Biden voter ever say they regret the decision.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.11  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.7    2 weeks ago
believe whatever crap you choose

I BELIEVE Biden was elected POTUS.  Are you claiming otherwise???

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.12  Ozzwald  replied to  bugsy @1.1.8    2 weeks ago
Most people that voted Biden did so because they don't like mean tweets and Biden was not Trump.

So you are saying that Biden won because the vast majority of Americans hated Trump. 

I am saying that Trump lost because the vast majority of Americans hated Trump.

One way or another, the truth remains, Trump was the LOSER.

MindlessCompleteDunnart-size_restricted.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.11    2 weeks ago

being obtuse now won't cut it.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.14  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.13    2 weeks ago
being obtuse now won't cut it.

Denying Biden is POTUS won't help you.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.14    2 weeks ago

Congrats at making every post even more inane than the previous one.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
2  Ronin2    3 weeks ago

Or else we could be lead by a Democrat moronic, mentally deficient, lying, human fuck up machine that has done more to destroy the country in eight months than Trump did in 4 years.

The Democrat Party is no longer for US citizens. Open borders, amnesty, and special rights, privileges, and voting for all immigrants will be the law of the land.

A two tier justice system that is a revolving door for far left rioters; while seeking to bankrupt right wing rioters from Jan 6th who are guilty of the exact same crimes.

They seek a system that rewards based on race; not who is the most qualified. They are for equal outcomes not equal opportunities.

They seek to use the courts, and government agencies to illegally punish their opponents. They would love nothing more to turn the US into China. One party rule with reeducation camps for those that dare to disagree with them.

They are the party of the perpetually aggrieved. 

Who in their right mind thinks that have Democrats in charge will turn out well for this country? 

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
2.1  SteevieGee  replied to  Ronin2 @2    3 weeks ago

That sounds an awful lot like white grievance to me.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  SteevieGee @2.1    3 weeks ago
That sounds an awful lot like white grievance to me.

Is that the progressive liberal mantra now?

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Participates
2.1.2  GregTx  replied to  SteevieGee @2.1    3 weeks ago

Sounds an awful lot like political grievance to me. Perhaps you could point out what makes you think it's White grievance?

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
2.1.3  SteevieGee  replied to  GregTx @2.1.2    3 weeks ago
They seek a system that rewards based on race; not who is the most qualified. They are for equal outcomes not equal opportunities.

.

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Participates
2.1.4  GregTx  replied to  SteevieGee @2.1.3    3 weeks ago

So wanting fairness and equal opportunity are signs of white grievance?

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
2.2  Thomas  replied to  Ronin2 @2    3 weeks ago
A two tier justice system that is a revolving door for far left rioters; while seeking to bankrupt right wing rioters from Jan 6th who are guilty of the exact same crimes. (Emphasis mine.

Excellent example of false equivalence. Please show me when the US Capitol was attacked by a mob of far left people intent on altering the results of an election?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  Thomas @2.2    3 weeks ago

That's all he has - + projection, deflection, and denial.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.3  CB   replied to  Ronin2 @2    3 weeks ago
The Democrat Party is no longer for US citizens.

Repeat after me: I will not be a divider. I will not be a divider. I will not be a divider.  I will not . . . .

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
2.4  Jack_TX  replied to  Ronin2 @2    3 weeks ago
Or else we could be lead by a Democrat moronic, mentally deficient, lying, human fuck up machine that has done more to destroy the country in eight months than Trump did in 4 years.

I'll ask you the same question I've asked John for years about Trump and that he can never answer.

Before we get started, you have the same rules as John, which means fuck off with rants about immigration or open borders or "our standing in the world" or people he's appointed that don't affect you anyway or anything else that doesn't have a material impact on your daily life.

So here goes:

What has Joe Biden actually done that has made your daily life measurably worse than it was under Trump?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Ronin2 @2    3 weeks ago
"They would love nothing more to turn the US into China. One party rule with reeducation camps for those that dare to disagree with them."

No they wouldn't, because then nobody would have guns, there wouldn't be all those mass murders and gun violence on a daily basis, the incarceration rate would be so much less than in the USA, absolute poverty would not exist, plans for improving infrastructure and a moderately prosperous society would be made and realized without political rivalry blocking them for decades, the whole population would be happy to be vaccinated and minimal virus outbreaks quickly dealt with and controlled.  God forbid!!! 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
3  Greg Jones    3 weeks ago

Trump cannot win another national election. Biden won only because enough people were fed up with Trump and his never ending tweets. Right now he's just keeping the base fired up. This will become clear when the Republicans take back the House, and most likely the Senate in the midterms. Once this happens, challengers to Trump will appear. The most likely of those will be Abbott, DeSantis, and perhaps Haley. The party leaders and those Republicans in flyover country won't allow Trump to have another bite at the apple.

But yes, there are two sides at play here. The good and moral side, and then the bullshit being perpetrated upon us by the Democrats.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @3    3 weeks ago
Biden won only because enough people were fed up with Trump and his never ending tweets.

AND because people were fed up with Trump's racist, nepotistic, incompetent, administration.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
3.1.1  bugsy  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1    3 weeks ago
AND because people were fed up with Trump's racist, nepotistic, incompetent, administration.

How about some true examples of what you spew?

BTW...your feelings don't count.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.2  CB   replied to  bugsy @3.1.1    3 weeks ago

Why don't feelings count? Everybody has feelings. You can especially find feeling overwrought with Artful Liar. Donald Trump always carries a barely visible big sob cloth draped over his shoulder to wipe away his spewing tears! It is how he expresses shame. Of course, you do not present here to discuss Donald Trump's fartish attitude - @Trump-whipped.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.3  Ozzwald  replied to  bugsy @3.1.1    2 weeks ago
How about some true examples of what you spew?

web_extremist-files_stephen-miller-0720.jpg

You want another one?

200403-think-jared-kushner-se-436p.jpg

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
3.1.4  bugsy  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.3    2 weeks ago

So you only have pictures of people you don't like, but no truth in your post.

I asked you not to use your feelings...but you failed.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
3.1.5  bugsy  replied to  CB @3.1.2    2 weeks ago

What in God's name are you babbling about?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.6  CB   replied to  bugsy @3.1.5    2 weeks ago

Why bother invoking God as a pretense? God ain't in anything some conservatives are doing! Oh and feeling are all you have in your pocket and in your 'shopping cart' -because critical thinking or truth is lacking. You want to play stupid word games—in the words of George W. Bush, . . . well, RINO, you should remember what he said about times like this so I won't patronize you to share it!

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
3.1.7  bugsy  replied to  CB @3.1.6    2 weeks ago

I think the best example of lack of critical thinking resides in most of your posts. I really advise you to take a good, hard look at what you post.

It may be an eye opener.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.8  CB   replied to  bugsy @3.1.7    2 weeks ago

Keep some of what goes for 'advice' for yourself. I can get better informed from a so-called 'fortune cookie' than from a Trump-RINO.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  CB @3.1.8    2 weeks ago
I can get better informed from a so-called 'fortune cookie' than from a Trump-RINO.

Then why haven't you?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.10  CB   replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.9    2 weeks ago

Bye.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @3    3 weeks ago

Yeah, that was the only problem we had with whatshisname  - his tweets FFS

jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

The 'right' are the 'good and moral' side?

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.3  CB   replied to  Greg Jones @3    3 weeks ago

original   There you go again telling untruths to soothe bankrupt minds.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
3.4  Jack_TX  replied to  Greg Jones @3    3 weeks ago
Trump cannot win another national election.

I'd agree with that.

Biden won only because enough people were fed up with Trump and his never ending tweets.

But to be fair, Trump only won because people couldn't stand Hillary and her elitist bullshit.

Right now he's just keeping the base fired up. This will become clear when the Republicans take back the House, and most likely the Senate in the midterms. Once this happens, challengers to Trump will appear. The most likely of those will be Abbott, DeSantis, and perhaps Haley. The party leaders and those Republicans in flyover country won't allow Trump to have another bite at the apple.

I'm agreeing with this, too.  I think this is the rational stance.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.4.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @3.4    3 weeks ago

Trump will destroy Abbott, De Santis and Haley. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
3.4.2  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @3.4.1    3 weeks ago

Meh.  We'll see.

I've told you already how I think that is more likely to unfold, but it is far too early to tell.

If Trump wins again, he wins.  It's not the outcome I would want, but it's the end of the world, either.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.5  Sparty On  replied to  Greg Jones @3    2 weeks ago
Trump and his never ending tweets.

Prediction, if Trump runs in 2024 Twitter will "graciously" unlock his Twitter account.   I mean you know, in the interest of free speech and all ........ /S

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
4  Nerm_L    3 weeks ago

If you don't look at both sides then you have only been conditioned to drool when the bell rings.

Is Joe Biden really any different than Donald Trump?  Biden tells his supporters what they want to hear and then does whatever he wants to do.  Biden is actually more dangerous than Trump because Biden is driven by expediency.  Biden doesn't govern on any sort of principles other than benefiting the Democratic Party.  Biden certainly isn't whipping his party in line the way Trump did.  The Democratic Party certainly doesn't fear Biden the way the Republican Party fears Trump.  That's because the Democratic base won't fight for Biden; Biden doesn't represent any principles worth fighting for.

Biden's calls for national unity really is nationalism.  Biden's rhetoric about democracy really is pluralist populism.  And Biden's populist nationalism is based upon appeals to idealized cultural norms based on 'who we are as a people'.  Biden may not be an Adolf Hitler but Biden is utilizing the politics of the Nazi Party and governs for his party to obtain power just as the Nazi Party obtained power over Germany.  The Nazi Party wasn't only about Adolf Hitler.  The Nazi Party did not respect borders just as the Democratic Party does not respect borders.  The Nazi Party used German laws, courts, and government to obtain unchallenged authority over Germany the same way Democrats are using the Constitution, laws, courts, and government to obtain authority over the United States.

Joe Biden is a Party First politician and uses government authority to promote and advance the authoritarian control of his party over the United States.  But somehow that's not Fascism?

The bell has rung, are you drooling yet?

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
4.1  Hallux  replied to  Nerm_L @4    3 weeks ago

After 5 "nazis" and 2 "Hitlers" along with several other loaded terms it sounds like Skinner is taking Pavlov's woof hunting for squirrels.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
4.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Hallux @4.1    3 weeks ago
After 5 "nazis" and 2 "Hitlers" along with several other loaded terms it sounds like Skinner is taking Pavlov's woof hunting for squirrels.

I've only rung the bell and pointed at a squirrel.  Now it's up to Pavlov's dogs to decide what to do.  Will they follow their conditioning or think for themselves?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.2  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @4    3 weeks ago

The only things whatshisname did were to benefit himself and his already wealthy 'donors'.

Nazi party, fascists blah de fucking blah - that's what whatshisname wanted to be and the majority of his supporters are - white supremacists.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.3  CB   replied to  Nerm_L @4    3 weeks ago
Is Joe Biden really any different than Donald Trump?  Biden tells his supporters what they want to hear and then does whatever he wants to do. 

Yes Joe Biden is different from Donald Trump. If he was not, then you would have nothing to bitch and groan about in his presidency. You bitch and groan. . . so, there: You evidently see differences in the two men.

Second assertion: You just telling a damn. . . untruth.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.4  CB   replied to  Nerm_L @4    3 weeks ago
Biden certainly isn't whipping his party in line the way Trump did.

Is that what Trump is doing "whipping" freedom lovers into order? Hell no. Donald Trump is 'banging' the republican and conservative parties, plural, hard and both are going: YES! YES! MORE! MORE!!!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.5  CB   replied to  Nerm_L @4    3 weeks ago
Biden may not be an Adolf Hitler but Biden is utilizing the politics of the Nazi Party and governs for his party to obtain power just as the Nazi Party obtained power over Germany.  The

That is a damn. . . untruth. Until you prove it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5  author  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago
Once this happens, challengers to Trump will appear. The most likely of those will be Abbott, DeSantis, and perhaps Haley. The party leaders and those Republicans in flyover country won't allow Trump to have another bite at the apple.

This is entirely wishful thinking.  If and when he begins his "actual" campaign (in contrast to the preliminary campaign he is running now) Trump will destroy Abbott , De Santis and Haley and anyone else who runs. The reason for that is quite obvious. Trump wont fight fair. He will lie about his opponents, make up things about their past, and accuse them of being closet Democrats. And his base will believe him, and there is nothing anyone can do about it. If he runs, he will be the nominee. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
5.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @5    3 weeks ago

His supposed base is not that big or powerful. It's just the extremists and crazy outliers who are getting all the attention right now.

He won't be the nominee.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @5.1    3 weeks ago

Do you ever look at polls about this? Trump is overwhelmingly the choice of Republicans to be their 2024 candidate. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
5.1.2  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    3 weeks ago

I don't rely on biased polls this far out.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.1.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @5.1.2    3 weeks ago

No, you rely on your imagination. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
5.1.4  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.3    3 weeks ago

Wait and be educated.  You've consistently been proven wrong

 
 
 
JaneDoe
Sophomore Silent
6  JaneDoe    3 weeks ago

I firmly believe in it.

If one doesn’t realize there are liars, crooks and self serving idiots on both sides they just don’t want to see it. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JaneDoe @6    3 weeks ago

So Biden is JUST AS BAD as Trump?   Thank you for making comments that are an example of what is wrong with America today. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
6.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    3 weeks ago

Actually, Biden is much, much worse. He's bad for our country and tearing it apart.

It's thinking like yours that is what is wrong with America today. Thankfully, it is not all that wide spread.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @6.1.1    3 weeks ago

So you think Biden has done something specifically worse than Trump trying to steal the last election ? Please, tell us what that is ? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.1.3  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    3 weeks ago

That is not what she wrote.   She stated a common feature in both major political parties ("liars, crooks and self serving idiots on both sides") and that is demonstrably true.    She characterized the typical modern politician.   Just because someone uses the phrase "both sides" does not mean they are saying both parties are equivalent in all dimensions.   You should stop reading that into the words of others.

Specifically, she did not compare Trump with Biden.  (yet)

I will answer your question though:  no PotUS can compare with Trump who set the bar of disintegrity and shit character very high with his post-election con-job.    Trump is a distinguished stain on the presidency — an embarrassment to this nation who inexplicably voted him into office as our president in spite of his fundamental character flaws.   And then, worse, after his historical and disgusting post-election-loss con-job we still support this narcissistic liar as the leader of the R party.

 
 
 
JaneDoe
Sophomore Silent
6.1.4  JaneDoe  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.3    3 weeks ago
That is not what she wrote.

A somewhat common problem here. People twisting statements to fit their own narrative.

 
 
 
JaneDoe
Sophomore Silent
6.1.5  JaneDoe  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    3 weeks ago
making comments that are an example of what is wrong with America today. 

No John, I don’t. I leave that to the pros such as yourself!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.1.6  TᵢG  replied to  JaneDoe @6.1.4    3 weeks ago

Yup.   I replied because I have been accused of 'both side ism' multiple times.   It seems that finding similarity among parties means you think both parties are identical in all respects.   A crap tactic.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  JaneDoe @6.1.4    3 weeks ago

It is the nature of online forums.   It is also the nature of partisan politics.   Note that almost all of our political 'news' is spin.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.8  author  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.3    3 weeks ago

There is no Republican Party without Trump in 2021.  If he left to start a third party half of Republicans would go with him. 

But lets talk about Democrats being just as bad as Republicans. 

We essentially have "proof" that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election.  How many REPUBLICANS  have condemned him for that?  To be honest with you I cant find any. If you know of any current Republican officeholders who have condemned Trump for trying to steal the election please give me their names. 

How many Republicans condemned Trump for inciting the Jan 6 riot?  At first there were some, but their enthusiasm for the truth died out quickly, and now they  are all cowered. 

This is what it means to be a Republican today. Pretend that the head of your party is not rotten as hell. 

We have people here who seriously try to compare Bidens verbal miscues with 6 years of Trump lying his ass off every single day.  It is insanity. 

They disagree with Bidens policies so they say he is as bad as Trump. I didnt like many of Trumps policies, but his policies are not why he was the worst president in American history, his behavior and his mountainous personal corruption is. 

Republicans are very prone to believing lies and conspiracy theories, and our media is too weak and too corporate to call them out on it. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.9  author  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.7    3 weeks ago

You live in a fairy tale land where "non partisanship" is the only "rational" way to proceed. That is nice I suppose, but it is completely unrealistic. 

The Republicans are currently trying to set up state governments so they will be able to control the outcomes of future elections in a extra-legal way by using legislative committees and state officials to determine if there was "fraud".  This is the Trump plan. 

Where is the hook for "both sides ism" in that behavior? 

Is "non partisanship" going to solve the problem of Republicans trying to fix future elections? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.8    3 weeks ago
There is no Republican Party without Trump in 2021. 

Bury the GOP (again?!?!?) at your own peril, and simply ignore every poll and ignore the fact that despite Biden winning easily, Democrats barely retained their House majority, and EVERY indication is they will lose it in 2022.

Will you EVER learn from history or just keep right on making these bizarre statements about the GOP being basically dead?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.11  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.10    3 weeks ago

You couldnt debate your way out of a wet paper bag. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.11    3 weeks ago
You couldnt debate your way out of a wet paper bag.

Lucky for me then that I just have to debate YOU, then!

Easy-peasy!

P.S.

I'll tell the paper bag to go real easy on you.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
6.1.13  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.9    3 weeks ago
The Republicans are currently trying to set up state governments so they will be able to control the outcomes of future elections in a extra-legal way by using legislative committees and state officials to determine if there was "fraud".  This is the Trump plan.  Where is the hook for "both sides ism" in that behavior? 

What do you call what the Democrats are trying to do at the federal level to control state elections?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.1.14  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.8    3 weeks ago
There is no Republican Party without Trump in 2021. 

And that is tragic.

But lets talk about Democrats being just as bad as Republicans. 

Nobody made that specific claim.   But you should be able to tell from my comments that my position is that the R party has lost its way.   Thus, right now, the Rs are worse in terms of integrity than the Ds because of their support for Trump.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.15  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.12    3 weeks ago

I have lint on my shoulder that puts up a better fight than you do. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.1.16  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.9    3 weeks ago
You live in a fairy tale land where "non partisanship" is the only "rational" way to proceed. That is nice I suppose, but it is completely unrealistic.

I explained my position on partisanship to you a few weeks ago.   Have you forgotten what I wrote?   I wrote that there are (in my view) strategic partisans and comformist partisans.   The strategic partisans are those who believe their party is, as a whole, better for the nation than the other party.   Thus, even though they do not agree with every position held by their party, they work to have their party in the leadership positions.    Conformist partisans are those who largely adopt the positions of their party.   This is the irrational part:  holding as true and running with that which is merely stated by an authority.

I should not have to explain this to you every time.

Starting off with the personal  'fairy tale' crap is a great way to encourage people to rip into you.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.17  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.15    3 weeks ago

JR, your WHOLE argument about ANYTHING political always boils down to just three little words which you always attempt to hang your hat on:

Orange Man Bad.

There, I have summed up pretty accurately the vast majority of your posts and seeded articles over the last 5 years.

Debate with you?

What would be the point?

You have never once shown ANY possibility of anyone changing your mind regarding anything political that I have seen. Your mind is closed like a steel trap, ensuring the never ending mantra of Orange Man Bad spewing from your fingertips.

It's pitiful.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.15    3 weeks ago
I have lint on my shoulder

Have whoever dresses you remove it.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
6.1.19  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.17    3 weeks ago
You have never once shown ANY possibility of anyone changing your mind regarding anything political that I have seen. Your mind is closed like a steel trap, ensuring the never ending mantra of Orange Man Bad spewing from your fingertips.

How is that any different from what you wrote to Tig:

I meant that no matter what a Democrat does, it would always pale in comparison to the very LEAST of Trump's transgressions.

Because what you are basically saying is that there is not a decent Dem around. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.20  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.17    3 weeks ago

Unfortunately Newstalkers requires us to be polite. 

-----------------

Orange man bad? 

Damn straight. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.21  Texan1211  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.19    3 weeks ago
I meant that no matter what a Democrat does, it would always pale in comparison to the very LEAST of Trump's transgressions.

I am not going to debate whether you think that some Democrats give a pass to other Democrats or not. It isn't debatable to me. Members of the GOP do the same thing, which I am sure you would agree with.

My point was that SOME Democrats seem to think that whatever a Democrat does, it pales in comparison to the very least they accuse Trump of.

I said nothing about decency and Democrats, and am wondering where you read that at, or how you interpreted my comment in such a way as to be led to believe that.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.20    3 weeks ago
Orange man bad? 

Yep, summed all your posts up nicely AND accurately!

Thanks for confirming my exact point so well and so quickly.

No need for debate when you keep proving me right.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
6.1.23  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.21    3 weeks ago
I said nothing about decency and Democrats, and am wondering where you read that at, or how you interpreted my comment in such a way as to be led to believe that.

I said decent, not decency, which is two different things. What I was asking you is you found any democrat good enough for you.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.24  Texan1211  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.23    3 weeks ago

There are good Democrats.

I have never denied that.

That wasn't ever my point.

 
 
 
JaneDoe
Sophomore Silent
6.1.25  JaneDoe  replied to  TᵢG @6.1.6    3 weeks ago
A crap tactic.

Indeed it is.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
6.1.26  Trout Giggles  replied to  Snuffy @6.1.13    3 weeks ago

What are the Democrats doing at the federal level?

 
 
 
MonsterMash
Sophomore Participates
6.1.27  MonsterMash  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.15    3 weeks ago
I have lint on my shoulder

It's not lint on your shoulders, it's dandruff

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
6.1.28  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.11    3 weeks ago
You couldnt debate your way out of a wet paper bag. 

Looks to most of us he is handing you your ass.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.29  author  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @6.1.28    3 weeks ago

Of course you would think that, you are in the same boat he is. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
6.1.30  Dulay  replied to  Snuffy @6.1.13    3 weeks ago

What bill is that?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
6.1.31  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.29    2 weeks ago

Believe me...He did

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JaneDoe @6    3 weeks ago

Jane Doe, what has Biden done or said that is as bad as Trump trying to steal the 2020 election ?  Please be specific. 

 
 
 
JaneDoe
Sophomore Silent
6.2.1  JaneDoe  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2    3 weeks ago

Take off your blinders John. I didn’t compare Biden to Trump and don’t plan on debating anything of the sort with you. 
If you can’t see that both sides of the political spectrum are basically the same that’s on you. I’m talking about the parties and stand by what I said 100%!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.2.2  Texan1211  replied to  JaneDoe @6.2.1    3 weeks ago

To a select few, NO Democrat could ever do a single thing that would ever compare to the least of Trump's transgressions.

After lunch they will have a few Democrats walk on water, too!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.2.3  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.2    3 weeks ago
NO Democrat could ever do a single thing that would ever compare to the least of Trump's transgressions.

That reads as though you do not recognize that Trump is distinguished among presidents;  no PotUS has ever used the powers and influence of his office to engage in a con-job like what we saw after Trump lost the election.   And because so many R sycophants continue to support that lying sack of shit, he continues to have influence and continues to use it to keep alive this ridiculous fiction that he really won in 2020.

To not see the stark difference in publicly displayed abysmal character between Trump and every other PotUS is a glaring failure of objective analysis.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.3    3 weeks ago

Then you obviously misinterpreted my comment.

I meant that no matter what a Democrat does, it would always pale in comparison to the very LEAST of Trump's transgressions.

I am sorry, I thought my post was abundantly clear.

My mistake.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.2.5  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.4    3 weeks ago
Then you obviously misinterpreted my comment.

Here is what you wrote:

Texan @ 6.2.2 ☞ To a select few, NO Democrat could ever do a single thing that would ever compare to the least of Trump's transgressions.

The qualification "to a select few" means you think some Ds are so biased that they downplay every D transgression.

My reply points out that Trump's transgressions are so visibly large that no PotUS (D or otherwise) holds a candle to his publicly displayed abysmal character.

You were bashing the extreme D partisans.   My reply illustrated that it is not D partisanship that yields a distinguished Trump, it is what Trump actually did that distinguishes him as the worst PotUS (in our history) in terms of publicly displayed character and unpresidential behavior.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.5    3 weeks ago

Interpret MY words as you will, it really seems to be your thing.

Maybe one day you'll even get it right.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.2.7  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.6    3 weeks ago

I was not reinterpreting your words ... I stated how your words read (to me):

TiG @6.2.3 - That reads as though you do not recognize that Trump is distinguished among presidents;  ...

And what you actually meant is not really something I care to debate.    I accept whatever meaning you wish to declare for your words.

Instead I have chosen to make a point about Trump in consideration of this 'both sides' topic.  

My point is that one can easily show that the R party has the distinction of supporting the absolute worst PotUS in our history in terms of publicly displayed abysmal character and unpresidential behavior.

That is one key difference between the parties.   And I am so disgusted with the R party nowadays that I do not mind repeating this at every opportunity. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.2.8  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JaneDoe @6.2.1    3 weeks ago
If you can’t see that both sides of the political spectrum are basically the same that’s on you.

Anyone who thinks that both parties are the same today is out of their mind. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
6.2.9  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.8    3 weeks ago
  • Both parties contain politicians.  
  • Most politicians today are career politicians (vs. statespersons).
  • Both parties have leadership which uses coercion to influence the votes of the members.
  • Both parties are driven to secure campaign donations and are thus influenced by donors.
  • Both parties will bend the rules to their advantage in spite of the damage to the nation (and the CotUS).
  • ...

I think you could add plenty to this list John.   The point is that the D and R parties share many similarities.   They are equivalent in many ways.   They are NOT equivalent in ALL ways.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.2.10  author  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.9    3 weeks ago

Historically you are right.  We are not in Kansas anymore. 

 
 
 
JaneDoe
Sophomore Silent
6.2.11  JaneDoe  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2.8    3 weeks ago
Anyone who thinks that both parties are the same today is out of their mind

I tend to think that anyone who believes their parties shit doesn’t stink are out of their minds. 
On a side note, I am a little crazy just not in political terms! 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.2.12  CB   replied to  TᵢG @6.2.9    3 weeks ago

It is sad that politics and policies do intertwine and 'makes for strangebedfellows.' This is true. It seems another saying, "Don't talk about sex, religion, and politics" because of the passions raised holds too!

This is all the more reason, why we do not NEED politicians (and a public) who exacerbate issues, dilemmas, problems, and circumstance in every day life. The "needle" does skip from one side of the spectrum (democrat/republican/independent (as in Angus King)) touching in some common reference points to all involved!

I have seen it happen in this new administration.

Why? Because even a 'dastardly' president can have a period of clarity in policy-making. Before going down into the dark 'hole' of politics and deception again.

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
6.2.13  dennis smith  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.6    3 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.3  CB   replied to  JaneDoe @6    3 weeks ago

But, you have to pick your liars, crooks, and self-serving idiots in the moment and not by the lump! Or else your perspective will be skewed.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
7  r.t..b...    3 weeks ago

A timely post, JR.

This week will define the Biden administration going forward. The GOP is entrenched in its intransigence, the Dems are divided. The results will determine our course…sadly just a further circling the drain of dysfunction. 

We have had many conversations, you and I, as to ‘both-sidism’. In ideological terms, I appreciate your passions, as we find ourselves in line on most issues. As a realist, however, I contend that the morass in which we find ourselves is due to the fractious nature of defining what we as a nation are meant to be.

Perhaps it is time to separate the whys and wherefores of the daily news cycle and examine the schism that has divided us so deeply…to no benefit for any side one wishes to take.

To move forward, it will require ‘both sides’ to put aside the differences and focus on our commonalities. I’m afraid we are teetering on the brink of forgetting those things that bind in the rush to place blame. 

Peace, as always…

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  r.t..b... @7    3 weeks ago

I have said this many times, and I am completely convinced of it.  The Republican Party will no longer be reasonable. GOP voters are largely people in grievance because "their" country is being taken away from them. This grievance is nostalgia for the days when minorities knew their place. Both racial minorities and other types of minorities. 

I read an article this morning which opined that Republicans have no legislative goals whatsoever. All they do is obstruct , give tax breaks to the rich, and try to create a right wing judiciary.  That is it.  Oh, and bloat the military. 

The Democrats want to do things for working people and poor people. The Republicans, in the name of "freedom" , fight against that. 

We have an obstructionist party that only wants to rig the judiciary for the next generation, in order to forestall social change. And worship a criminal leader of their party who is planning to cheat his way back into office. 

America is in a lot of trouble, and very few people admit it. 

I really dont see the justification for "both sides" attitudes in the present circumstances. 

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.1  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1    3 weeks ago
The Democrats want to do things for working people and poor people.

What is the specific legislation, specific amounts and specific recipients that you are referring to?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.1    3 weeks ago

this article is not the place for that

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.3  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.2    3 weeks ago
this article is not the place for that

You made the claim.

I am sincerely unaware of any specific legislation that will benefit anyone except through a vast amount of trickle down where the top tier receives the vast amount of the money/benefit.  It all seems to be business as usual.

So I had hoped that there might actually be programs that work for the bottom instead of the top wanting a return on their investment.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.3    3 weeks ago

One party wants a national minimum wage of 15 dollars an hour and the other wants a minimum wage of zero. 

which side should low wage workers choose? 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
7.1.5  Greg Jones  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.3    3 weeks ago

He can't back up his opinions with facts

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.6  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.4    3 weeks ago
One party wants

Where's the legislation?

Wants or promises mean nothing, but serve as useful tools to line political pockets.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.4    3 weeks ago
and the other wants a minimum wage of zero. 

Why do you bother posting something so untrue?

Do you think any rational, thinking person would believe that shit?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.8  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.6    3 weeks ago

In our legislative system you have to have the votes. 60 votes in the senate. 

Without the filibuster in force I dare say we would have a minimum wage hike by now. 

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.9  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.8    3 weeks ago
In our legislative system you have to

As far as I know, in our legislative system you have to write the legislation in order for it to have any consideration.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.9    3 weeks ago

I believe that Democrats tried to shove it in a reconciliation bill that was disallowed.

Seems like they are unsure of what can be included in such bills.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.11  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.9    3 weeks ago
...

Jan 26, 2021  · The Raise the Wage Act of 2021 (H.R. 603) would gradually increase the federal minimum wage to $15 over five years. Thereafter, the federal minimum wage would be indexed to

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.12  mocowgirl  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.10    3 weeks ago
Seems like they are unsure of what can be included in such bills.

Then why are they in charge of writing them?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.11    3 weeks ago

here is what has happened with that piece of legislation thus far in the Democratic-controlled Congress:

Actions - S.53 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Raise the Wage Act of 2021 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

01/26/2021 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Action By: Senate

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.12    3 weeks ago
Then why are they in charge of writing them?

Because some of them think they are Constitutional scholars?

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Participates
7.1.15  GregTx  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.13    3 weeks ago
Prognosis 3% chance of being enacted according to Skopos Labs ( details )
 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.11    3 weeks ago

NINE months later, and what has the Democratic Party done to advance the bill?????

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.17  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.11    3 weeks ago
Raise the Wage Act of 2021 (H.R. 603)

Thank you for the reply. Your link came up as an error for me so I googled and went to government website for more info.

H.R.603 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Raise the Wage Act of 2021 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

I read the summary and the text.  It would probably be helpful if these bills were also published in a simple format that was easily readable and understandable by the voter.

In researching the above bill, I did find legislation that had passed, but no info on the costs or how the money was allocated by beneficiary.

Text - H.R.1319 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

I am sure that this has a very large price tag to the taxpayer.  If this bill had been explained in more detail by our representatives that wrote, sponsored and voted for it, then there might be more grassroots support for further legislation.  Of course, I doubt anyone could explain since it had 509 amendments before it was passed.  Sounds suspiciously like a lot of pork had to be added to get support.

If our reps want taxpayers/voters to trust them, then they need to start earning it instead of demanding it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.4    3 weeks ago
 
 
 
JaneDoe
Sophomore Silent
7.1.19  JaneDoe  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.18    3 weeks ago

Florida voted on this. The minimum wage here will increase yearly to be $15 hr by September 2026.

Our Federal government is way to busy slinging mud and fighting with each other to pass anything 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
7.1.20  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JaneDoe @7.1.19    3 weeks ago

Should be up to the states to begin with. It's like Obamacare was. Federal mandates don't work as states and localities needs are much different and cannot effectively be painted with a Fed defined broad brush.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.21  Texan1211  replied to  JaneDoe @7.1.19    3 weeks ago

I know!

the very idea of one party not wanting a minimum wage was so grossly untrue that I couldn't let something so blatantly false go unchallenged.

I hope the author of that fake claim learned something.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.22  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.18    3 weeks ago

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) unveiled a proposal on increasing the federal minimum wage to $10 by 2025.

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.23  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.22    3 weeks ago

When you get to the point that you can control your laughter, think maybe you could admit that your claim was FALSE, as I have now proven to you?

Expect to get called out for wild, hare-brained, idiotic, false, unsupported claims.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.24  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.23    3 weeks ago

I dont want to talk to you, [Deleted]

Do you think that a raise in the minimum wage to $ 10 an hour, FOUR YEARS FROM NOW , is sufficient, or is it "nothing" ? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.25  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.24    3 weeks ago
I dont want to talk to you, Removed for context - sandy

Then WHY the fuck do you respond?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Just admit you made an asinine, BOGUS claim and I set you straight with the real facts--not something invented.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.26  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.22    3 weeks ago
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR)

I haven't lived in UT, but I was raised in AR.  

Clinton fucked poor Arkansans more, or as much, as any politician in modern history.  This is a good example of "both sides ism" if anyone really cares.

If anyone is really interested, then they can do their own research.  I  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
7.1.27  Trout Giggles  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.26    3 weeks ago
Clinton fucked poor Arkansans more, or as much, as any politician in modern history. 

Yes, he did. The personal property tax was his brain child

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.28  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @7.1.5    3 weeks ago
He can't back up his opinions with facts

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
7.1.29  r.t..b...  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.24    3 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.30  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @7.1.29    3 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.31  mocowgirl  replied to  Trout Giggles @7.1.27    3 weeks ago

Throwing mothers and their children off welfare was another of Clinton's proud achievements.  Clinton bragged about lessening the welfare rolls and ignored the inevitable rise in poverty.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
7.1.32  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.30    3 weeks ago

So be it, tex.

Can you for one time respond without an l, me, us, or thus? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.33  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.31    3 weeks ago

Do you think you are going to accomplish anything positive by complaining about Democrats at this particular point in time?  The country is in a crisis created by the lunatic right. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.34  author  JohnRussell  replied to  r.t..b... @7.1.29    3 weeks ago
wakes up in the morning awaiting his version of combat

which is odd because he is completely defenseless. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.35  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @7.1.32    3 weeks ago
Can you for one time respond without an l, me, us, or thus? 

here it is.

Sure.

Happy now?

Congrats on growing a spine.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.36  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.34    3 weeks ago
which is odd because he is completely defenseless. 

odd, considering how I just proved your claim was false.

Why do you feel the need to invent things?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.37  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.36    3 weeks ago

You are not only defenseless [Deleted]

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.38  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.33    3 weeks ago
The country is in a crisis created by the lunatic right. 

Have you followed ALL of the legislation passed in the past 30 years - who wrote it, who voted for it, who enacted it, and who benefitted?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.39  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.38    3 weeks ago

Somewhat, and of course I agree the Democrats have not succeeded in passing a progressive agenda, but we have other problems right now. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.40  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.37    3 weeks ago
You are not only defenseless you are dense. 

Your petty personal attack on me won't change the fact that your claim was totally bogus as I proved to all who can read.

Claim some more bullshit theories and I will gladly shoot holes in them, too.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.41  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.40    3 weeks ago

Okey dokey. 

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.42  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.39    3 weeks ago
but we have other problems right now.

Democrats should continue to have problems as long as they are any part of the problem.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.43  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.41    3 weeks ago
Okey dokey. 

There you go!

Admission is the first step to recovery.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.44  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.42    3 weeks ago
Democrats should continue to have problems as long as they are any part of the problem.

And what should Republicans have? Do you want Trump back? You remind me of Susan Sarandon in 2016 who said she would rather have Trump than Hillary Clinton and then didnt say shit for the four years Trump was in office. 

Maybe we can thank people like Susan Sarandon for the three right wing Supreme Court justices Trump was able to appoint. 

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.45  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.44    3 weeks ago
And what should Republicans have?

The same.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.46  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.44    3 weeks ago
Maybe we can thank people like Susan Sarandon for the three right wing Supreme Court justices Trump was able to appoint

The only people responsible for Trump are the Democrats who did not nominate a mainstream candidate in 2016.  

To the best of my knowledge, Trump and Clinton were the two most disliked, distrusted candidates for POTUS in the nation's history.

I really expected better from the Democrats after Clinton almost splitting the party in 2008.  We all paid for the 2008 lesson that the Democrats refused to learn from.  We are continuing to pay because Biden is well past his sell by date.  

I realize it is next to impossible for the partisans to understand any of the above, but all I can do is communicate my perspective with the limited tools at my disposal.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.1.47  TᵢG  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.46    3 weeks ago

Well, to be fair, it was the R party that nominated Trump.   Had they nominated another candidate there would be no president Trump.

But we truly had miserable choices in the presidential generals of 2016 and 2020.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.48  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.46    3 weeks ago

Now Hillary Clinton was not a mainstream candidate? 

Hillary Clinton's unpopularity was largely the result of 25 years of attacks on her from the political right.  These are the people who ran NINE Benghazi investigations in Congress, dishonestly turned her use of private email into something on the level of the Rosenberg case , and posted fake news about her constantly during the 2016 election. 

I am no huge Hillary Clinton fan by any means, but if she had been president for the past four years the country would have been far better off than what we ended up with. 

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.49  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.48    3 weeks ago
Hillary Clinton's unpopularity was largely the result of 25 years of attacks on her from the political right.

It does not matter why she was unpopular.  Bottom line - she was next to dead last in unpopularity in our nation's history.  

I would really like an explanation why the head honchos of the Democratic party promoted and nominated Clinton in spite of knowing exactly how unpopular she was.

In 2020, the Democrats still did not have a worthy candidate to be our leader.

If I'm around in 2024, I am dreading who they will resurrect from the moth balls and prop up for candidate.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.50  mocowgirl  replied to  TᵢG @7.1.47    3 weeks ago
Well, to be fair, it was the R party that nominated Trump.

I did not care who the R party nominated.  I never considered voting for them and did not. 

It was the Democrats election to win or lose.....and they chose losing.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.51  author  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1.49    3 weeks ago
In 2020, the Democrats still did not have a worthy candidate to be our leader.

Rightfully so, they wanted the surest thing possible. Biden never trailed Trump in any meaningful poll.  The election was relatively close, but no more so than others we have seen in recent years. 

It would have been better to have Warren, or maybe Kloubuchar, but their chances against Trump would have been seen as considerably less likely. 

I think Biden may bow out before 2024, I suspect he will be tired of all the shit he is being put through right now , and 82 years old. 

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
7.1.52  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.51    3 weeks ago
Rightfully so, they wanted the surest thing possible.

There is no reason that Biden should have been the surest thing possible.  There should have been at least a half dozen candidates to bring voters to the polls instead of the polls having to seek out and go to the voters.

The Democrats are shunning mentoring and electing younger candidates.  Their candidates are looking like refugees from the seniors' center.  JFK and Obama wouldn't have had a chance with today's Democratic party.  

This is why I am dreading 2024.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.1.53  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @7.1    3 weeks ago
America is in a lot of trouble, and very few people admit it. 

I agree.

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
7.1.54  dennis smith  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.48    3 weeks ago
I am no huge Hillary Clinton fan by any means, but if she had been president for the past four years the country would have been far better off than what we ended up with. 

Key word in your comment is "IF". Opinion only.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
7.1.55  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @7.1.47    2 weeks ago
But we truly had miserable choices in the presidential generals of 2016 and 2020.

Something everyone should agree with and yet .... may here appear that they don't

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.1.56  TᵢG  replied to  dennis smith @7.1.54    2 weeks ago

The 'if' defined a hypothetical situation wherein Hillary had won the presidency.   Obviously Hillary did not win so the 'if' was semantically necessary.   And of course this is JR's opinion since it clearly cannot be fact given Hillary did not won. 

Basically your comment said nothing.   So what point were you trying to make?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.57  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @7.1.55    2 weeks ago

More "both sides" crap meant to justify the tenure of the worst, most dishonest,  most corrupt president in US history. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
7.1.58  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.57    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

[JR is not the topic]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.59  Texan1211  replied to  JaneDoe @7.1.19    2 weeks ago
Florida voted on this. The minimum wage here will increase yearly to be $15 hr by September 2

i didn't know Florida was a blue state now.

It must be, because someone has stated emphatically that one party doesn't want a minimum wage at all, so Democrats must run Florida now in order for his statement to be true.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8  Trout Giggles    3 weeks ago

There are crooks and liars in both parties, but my partisanship sees more of it on the conservative side. Believe me, there are liberals who are con artists, too.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.1  TᵢG  replied to  Trout Giggles @8    3 weeks ago

Nowadays I agree with you.   The R party has never been so low in my lifetime.   I continue to be amazed that so many continue to prop up Trump as their leader.   It is pathetic and damaging to both the R party and our nation.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
8.1.1  r.t..b...  replied to  TᵢG @8.1    3 weeks ago

“The R party has never been so low in my lifetime.”

Agree…as my father, Buckley, Reagan, et.al. spin in their graves. Conservatives all, yet in dismay how their voice and their platform has been compromised by a singular individual that has neither the understanding nor the gravitas to expound the conservative agenda.

If we have learned anything, it is that the conservatives need to address just what they stand for. Are you a ‘trumpist’ or are you a conservative?

We need you you to stand up, not kneel. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.1    3 weeks ago
Are you a ‘trumpist’ or are you a conservative?

Interesting question. I never thought the trumpists were true conservatives

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.1.3  TᵢG  replied to  Trout Giggles @8.1.2    3 weeks ago

I do not know what they are other than low-grade conformists.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
8.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.1    2 weeks ago

Labels like Trumpist are at best problematic and at worst completely off base.   It's not helpful to the conversation in the least

Admittedly, i'm not really 100% sure what you intend "Trumpist" to mean but one assumes it is intended to be a derogatory term for people who voted for Trump.   Lack of capitalization noted .....

Trump followed through on a the conservative platform much more than most Presidents of recent memory.   Do i believe that Trump is really conservative?   No i do not.   Do i know he followed through on his promised conservative platform?   Yes i do because for the most part he did.

I liken this to what i tell all my employees.   You don't have to like everyone you work with.   You just have to work with them and show them the same respect you expect to get from them.   If i had to like all politicians to vote for them, i'd be voting for a lot fewer politicians.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
8.1.5  r.t..b...  replied to  Sparty On @8.1.4    2 weeks ago

“…one assumes it is intended to be a derogatory term for people who voted for Trump.”

That would be incorrect. People can and should vote for anyone and anything that brings them to the polls…a good and important thing.

When I say ‘trumpist’ (lower case intentional), I refer to the apologists, the conspiracy adherents, and all those that continue to buy in to his ‘stop the steal’ movement going on a year now after the fact…all in a bald-faced attempt to undermine confidence in the lynchpin of our democracy…free, fair and confirmable elections.
 
Anyone who still doubts the outcome of this last presidential election is nothing but a ‘trumpist’ (derogatory term also intentional). 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
8.1.6  Sparty On  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.5    2 weeks ago
Anyone who still doubts the outcome of this last presidential election is nothing but a ‘trumpist’ (derogatory term also intentional). 

Opinions do vary.  

Like most people i know, Trump doesn't do our thinking for us.   We do it for ourselves.   What i do know is that there hasn't been a thorough, truly independent investigation into that election so i don't blame people for  questioning the outcome nor do i look down my nose at them or feel the need to label them with sophomoric, derogatory terms.   I leave that to the usual cast of characters who seem to derive some kind of perverse pleasure from spreading that bad karma whenever possible.

Emphasis intentional .....

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @8.1.6    2 weeks ago
Opinions do vary.  

WTF?   Do you doubt that Biden is the legitimate PotUS?

What i do know is that there hasn't been a thorough, truly independent investigation into that election ...

Unbelievable.    No evidence that would lead to a change in the results, countless lawsuits and recounts and you, even now, claim that this is not enough?   It would be different if there was some solid evidence justifying an investigation, but there is nothing.   It has been all bullshit emanating from Trump and hyped by his minions (e.g. Giuliani ):

Rachel summarized Giuliani's message this way: "I read some stuff — I think it was maybe on Facebook — I laid it out to the public as what we knew to be the facts, and no, I had no idea if it was true or not. I didn't even try to check. Why would I try to check? You wouldn't have a story then."
 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
8.1.8  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.7    2 weeks ago
WTF?   Do you doubt that Biden is the legitimate PotUS?

I accepted he was elected President long before Jan 6th.   The legitimacy of which is reasonably questionable as already noted.

 
Unbelievable.    No evidence that would lead to a change in the results, countless lawsuits and recounts and you, even now, claim that this is not enough?   It would be different if there was some solid evidence justifying an investigation, but there is nothing.   It has been all bullshit emanating from Trump and hyped by his minions (e.g. Giuliani ):

Nah, what is real BS though is how hard the left fights "truly independent investigations" into voting irregularities throughout the country.   Blah, blah, blah on how above board it was but when folks want to prove that out they whine like little bitches about not needing verification.    The sanctimonious crap coming from those same people that supported wasting billions of dollars of tax dollars investigating Trump endlessly, simply on a hatred of Trump is beyond the pale..

You act like you have some kind of high ground here and you've got nothing.   Nothing at all.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.1.9  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @8.1.8    2 weeks ago
You act like you have some kind of high ground here and you've got nothing.   Nothing at all.

And here you employ the tactic of merely claiming truth in hopes that it will stick.   Just after you claim that Trump does not do your thinking for you, you parrot  his modus operandi.

Nothing at all?   The USA presidential election process executed as it has done every four years since our founding.  But this time, per you, for the first time in history, the US system was compromised to the point of delivering the wrong results and without a trace of evidence / smoking gun??!  

The results were independently certified by the secretaries of state for each of the 50 states, their certified results were accepted as valid by Congress and Biden was officially deemed the president elect.   The lawsuits filed by Trump, et. al. have ALL failed to deliver anything that would have changed the results of the election in any state much less at a national level.   Countless recounts were made all failing to change the results.

And you say I have nothing?   Unbelievable Sparty.   You stand there without a shred of evidence and posit (even now) an entirely ridiculous claim that Biden might have not legitimately won the presidency and then project the absurdity to me.  

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
8.1.10  r.t..b...  replied to  Sparty On @8.1.8    2 weeks ago

“…what is real BS though is how hard the left fights "truly independent investigations" into voting irregularities…”

Cutting through the ‘real BS’…

How about those that still contend that self described ‘irregularities’ are worthy of audits, wasting millions and are the furthest thing from ‘truly independent’?

Show me just one and then you can utter the ‘sanctimonious crap’ line, until then you indeed have ‘nothing at all’. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
8.1.11  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.9    2 weeks ago
And here you employ the tactic of merely claiming truth in hopes that it will stick.   Just after you claim that Trump does not do your thinking for you, you parrot  his modus operandi.

Yeah, you got no high ground.   It's okay if you disagree.   I could care less what your opinion about it is.   Same goes for your opinion about Trump thinking for me.   100% off base once again there buddy.

The results were independently certified by the secretaries of state for each of the 50 states, their certified results were accepted as valid by Congress and Biden was officially deemed the president elect.   The lawsuits filed by Trump, et. al. have ALL failed to deliver anything that would have changed the results of the election in any state much less at a national level.   Countless recounts were made all failing to change the results.

Secretaries of State are not independent.   Far from it actually   They are responsible for the actual elections.   There is a reason "certified" audits don't use staff from the company/business/organization being audited.   Perhaps you prefer using the fox to count your hens in the hen house.   I don't for very obvious reasons.

And you say I have nothing?   Unbelievable Sparty.   You stand there without a shred of evidence and posit (even now) an entirely ridiculous claim that Biden might have not legitimately won the presidency and then project the absurdity to me. 

Yeah, i didn't stutter either time.   You've got no high ground on this one but again, i could really care less what your opinion is on the matter so you can keep rambling on if you want and make no mistake.   That is all you have is an opinion.   Nothing more.

 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
8.1.12  Sparty On  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.10    2 weeks ago

Show me some real "independent" audits, done by real "independent" auditors and i'll agree with you.   I know they have happened here and there but not in most places wher questions arose.   In most places the people doing the auditing are the same people who handled the election the first time.

That is the antithesis of independent.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.1.13  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @8.1.11    2 weeks ago
... you can keep rambling on ...

Irony.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.1.14  CB   replied to  TᵢG @8.1.9    2 weeks ago

Unbelievably believable. These people are intentionally rigging life for the rest of us: doing so in plain sight of everyone!  It would seem they are looking for "the fool born every day" stuck in the thicket of our society and social media. If they can get one new 'convert' a day to their way of thinking about 'America" it is a day well served!

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
8.1.15  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @8.1.8    2 weeks ago
Nah, what is real BS though is how hard the left fights "truly independent investigations" into voting irregularities throughout the country. 

Which "truly independent investigations" did the 'left' fight Sparty? Please cite the state and the organization. A link would be even better. 

Blah, blah, blah on how above board it was but when folks want to prove that out they whine like little bitches about not needing verification. 

AGAIN, which state failed to verify their election results to your standards? 

Hell Trump demanded and Abbott actually acquiesced to doing an audit in Texas where Trump WON. To what purpose? Does Trump want to win Texas by MORE to counter the findings in Arizona? 

The sanctimonious crap coming from those same people that supported wasting billions of dollars of tax dollars investigating Trump endlessly, simply on a hatred of Trump is beyond the pale..

Hyperbolic much? Unless you can support your 'billions' BS, just stop. 

Trump has Durham STILL investigating and we know that the DOJ investigated all of the bullshit 'voting fraud' accusation from Trump after the election. How much has that cost so far? 

You act like you have some kind of high ground here and you've got nothing.   Nothing at all.

Ditto. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
8.1.16  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.13    2 weeks ago
Irony.  

Projection

 
 
 
Kathleen
Professor Principal
9  Kathleen    3 weeks ago

I believe in what I believe in.

I just happen to agree with some things more on one of the sides. 

It all has to do with your values, the future you want and what you think what would be best for the country.

I don’t mind what others do when it comes to politics, unfortunately some do. They can pick a side or not. They have their reasons. 

What gets me are the ones that try to tell you what to do, you shouldn’t vote for this person, you shouldn’t believe in this..

They are the true jerks.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
10  r.t..b...    3 weeks ago

7+ hours and 130+ comments in and it is obvious that bi-partisanship is a non-starter.

That should satisfy those intent on keeping it such and further discourage those who hold out hope that we could at the very least, hold a discussion. (in full disclosure, already had a comment deleted on this thread, and I’m a ‘both sider ’…the subject is indeed inflammatory)

carrion, folks…just an observation. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
10.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  r.t..b... @10    3 weeks ago

How are we going to create non partisanship in the current environment? A very popular right wing nutbag has already filed articles of impeachment against Biden. This "impeachment " attempt is entirely based on information about Hunter Biden.  The Republican Party is captured by conspiracy nuts. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
10.1.1  r.t..b...  replied to  JohnRussell @10.1    3 weeks ago

“How are we going to create non partisanship in the current environment?”

Leadership, leadership, leadership…and only to come from a new generation. A generation that is tired of the dysfunction, the pettiness, the bullshit, and it is all bullshit in ‘the current environment’.
 
It may actually require the formation of a new party, one speaking to the issues, not to the all-consuming maintaining of power.

Sign me up. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
10.1.2  CB   replied to  r.t..b... @10.1.1    3 weeks ago

It is not new parties that are going to make our politics work (for the old templates will still be available to use and profit off); it is punching through the ill-will present in politics today ('evening out' the evil intent in people) that will make politics a 'noble' endeavor and work enterprise once more.

 
 
 
Kathleen
Professor Principal
10.2  Kathleen  replied to  r.t..b... @10    3 weeks ago

Really? 

Is there anything in my comment that you claim does that?

I have heard over the years on this site people being belittled for their political and religious beliefs. I don’t think I ever did that, just state my position on certain matters.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
10.2.1  Dulay  replied to  Kathleen @10.2    3 weeks ago

What lead you to the unfounded conclusion that his comment has anything to do with yours Kathleen? 

 
 
 
Kathleen
Professor Principal
10.2.2  Kathleen  replied to  Dulay @10.2.1    3 weeks ago

The first sentence of his comment was a generalization of the comments on this seed. That was my take on it. I felt that mine was not in that category. So there is your answer. If he feels different, then if he wishes, he can respond.  Other then that, that’s all have to say to you. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
10.2.3  r.t..b...  replied to  Kathleen @10.2.2    2 weeks ago

“…he can respond.”

Firstly, in no way was my comment directed to, nor in any context a response to yours. 
 
Secondly, my apologies if you construed my comments as an affront to yours. 
 
Lastly, I’m saddened that you would take it as an affront, as though we disagree politically, we have heretofore respected one another's opinion. 

I still do. Peace. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
Professor Principal
10.2.4  Kathleen  replied to  r.t..b... @10.2.3    2 weeks ago

My apologies to you r.t..b...

Peace to you as well.

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
12  Thomas    2 weeks ago

Do I believe in both-sides-ism? No. 

There are more than two ways to view many issues and there are more than two choices to any substantive issue. The will of any specific person can be behind any or several of answers to issues. People, in and of themselves are a smorgasbord of differences of opinion: A full color spectrum of possibilities, shades, hues and subtle nuance that takes time to understand and appreciate. 

Onto this glorious palette we try to superimpose the imprint of politics, in this instance, the "choice" between "R" and "D" as if one were consistently correct and right about whatever issues they and, by circular extension, we are considering to be important at any given moment in time. Hence, a dualistic theme further reduced to monochrome: Flat and lifeless. "You are either for us or against us!" I, for one, refuse to be reduced and confined by these artificial restrictions.

We should, as much as possible, divorce the issues that we care about from the tags that have been attached by politicians. Discuss the issues, not the people promoting them or telling us that R's or D's will bring about destruction of the world as we know it. I believe that if a person is of good moral character, they should be able to make prudent decisions on the present and future of the country regardless of political flavorings. This is why I am seriously disappointed in the current representation of the country at large. A third of Americans seem to have divorced themselves not from the politicians but from the issues and seem blind to enormous character flaws of their great Orange leader, so much so that they, and their political leaders, would follow him to hells gate for the promise of a cookie.

  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.1  CB   replied to  Thomas @12    2 weeks ago

Your assessments are correct. Our resident "conservatives" (they are really trump supporters and nothing much else) know what they are doing and they do it with glee. Red states and their voters are in agreement on every decision made. Thus, you can blame 'red staters' equally as their elected and caught red-handed elected officials.

Trump conservatives are hypocrites. They don't want people of color to know their place in society. Their simple-minded understanding of a "replacement theory" shows just how scared they are of becoming irrelevant. Moreover, its summary evidence of a notion that some Whites in our 'blended' country have only been faking unity; they see no interest or value in letting people of color, women, and homosexuals having equal slices of the "American Pie."

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Jasper2529
Hallux
Dulay


42 visitors