Why do you think most protesters and rioters are Democrats?

[Inner Dirt]

This is a serious question and I am interested in honest answers and a polite discussion. My liberal girlfriend gave me her reasoning which I thought was rather unique. I will be curious if someone matches her thoughts. I blame the current chaos on just getting over having the "great divider" as president for 8 years and the liberal media fanning the flames. I didn't see millions of protesters in the streets when Obama was re-elected and I know plenty of people like me were as disgusted with him as Democrats are with Trump. What does everyone else think?

[TJDave]

This is a serious question and I am interested in honest answer and a polite discussion. My liberal girlfriend gave me her reasoning which I thought was rather unique. I will be curious if someone matches her thoughts. I blame the current chaos on just getting over having the "great divider" as president for 8 years and the liberal media fanning the flames. I didn't see millions of protesters in the streets when Obama was re-elected and I know plenty of people like me were as disgusted with him as Democrats are with Trump. What does everyone else think?

Get a new girlfriend.

[Marshall Bennett]

Most of the violent protestors are spoiled brats raised by liberal spoiled brats. They naturally go left where chances are way-way better of getting their way, getting hand-outs, and cry with others like them till they get it.
If all else fails, they turn to violence.
This isn't really rocket science, is it?

[davew]

the radicals follow saul alinsky's 'rules for radicals' which promotes revolution for change - I have no idea what they are trying to change it to - socialism/communism ?

[Inner Dirt]

Most of the violent protestors are spoiled brats raised by liberal spoiled brats. They naturally go left where chances are way-way better of getting their way, getting hand-outs, and cry with others like them till they get it.
If all else fails, they turn to violence.
This isn't really rocket science, is it?

Many of the hundreds of thousands of women marching in the million women march or whatever it was were probably grandmas. So not all the Anti Trump demonstrators are college age kids.

If someone agrees with my girlfriend about why Republican protesters are small in number I will acknowledge that, unfortunately there is no prize for the winner.:lol:

[Inner Dirt]

Get a new girlfriend.

That didn't take long.:lol: Most just express their condolences.

[boxcar]

This is a serious question and I am interested in honest answers and a polite discussion. My liberal girlfriend gave me her reasoning which I thought was rather unique. I will be curious if someone matches her thoughts. I blame the current chaos on just getting over having the "great divider" as president for 8 years and the liberal media fanning the flames. I didn't see millions of protesters in the streets when Obama was re-elected and I know plenty of people like me were as disgusted with him as Democrats are with Trump. What does everyone else think?

Ever hear the adage: "The squeaky wheel gets the most oil"? The leftists believe the more noise (ant that's all it is in the vast majority of cases) the more mainstream their views will be perceived by the spectators. Leftists are so deluded that they truly believe their leftist ideology is mainstream.

On this mainstream note for a moment...Chuckles Schumer when learning of Gorsuch's nomination to the SC made a remark to the effect that he will not support anyone who is not "in the mainstream" of America. When Schumer and other Dems were questioned on this "mainstream" standard -- and exactly what constituted the mainstream, not one of them gave a straight answer. They did not want to articulate what they consider to be mainstream.

But back to the topic: At the end of the day with lefties it's all about the noise level. If they can shout you down and infringe on your free speech rights, they're happy. If they can riot and destroy property, they think they will have proved to the world just how righteous their cause is. If they can create as much inconvenience to the law abiding citizens and create chaos, havoc and disruption for them, they will have proved how strongly they believe in their cause, and their is strong conviction proves how righteous it is.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Ever hear the adage: "The squeaky wheel gets the most oil"? The leftists believe the more noise (ant that's all it is in the vast majority of cases) the more mainstream their views will be perceived by the spectators. Leftists are so deluded that they truly believe their leftist ideology is mainstream.

On this mainstream note for a moment...Chuckles Schumer when learning of Gorsuch's nomination to the SC made a remark to the effect that he will not support anyone who is not "in the mainstream" of America. When Schumer and other Dems were questioned on this "mainstream" standard -- and exactly what constituted the mainstream, not one of them gave a straight answer. They did not want to articulate what they consider to be mainstream.

But back to the topic: At the end of the day with lefties it's all about the noise level. If they can shout you down and infringe on your free speech rights, they're happy. If they can riot and destroy property, they think they will have proved to the world just how righteous their cause is. If they can create as much inconvenience to the law abiding citizens and create chaos, havoc and disruption for them, they will have proved how strongly they believe in their cause, and their is strong conviction proves how righteous it is.

Great explanation boxcar. Like your quote at the bottom too. Both say a lot.

[Ocala Mike]

Simple - Republicans/Conservatives feel themselves to be creatures of privilege, either economically, socially, or whatever. As such, they tend to be happy with the status quo, and don't want to rock the boat (rise of the Tea Party an outlier event).

Dems/Libs are denizens of the world of "lack of privilege," whether real or imagined. As such, they feel obligated to protest everything to achieve what they call "a level playing field" (no such thing, of course).

[DSB]

the radicals follow saul alinsky's 'rules for radicals' which promotes revolution for change - I have no idea what they are trying to change it to - socialism/communism ?
Actually, the Alinskyites were in power for 8 years and would have completed a total takeover of America had their candidate - Hillary - won. Alinsky believed in implementing Marxism through legal and non-violent means, such as through the ballot box.

Those that are in the streets now are Marxist Leninists. Lenin opposed taking a legal route to gain power, instead preferring to gain control by force.

The Alinskyites had their day.

Now it's the Marxist Leninists' turn.

[boxcar]

Simple - Republicans/Conservatives feel themselves to be creatures of privilege, either economically, socially, or whatever. As such, they tend to be happy with the status quo, and don't want to rock the boat (rise of the Tea Party an outlier event).

Dems/Libs are denizens of the world of "lack of privilege," whether real or imagined. As such, they feel obligated to protest everything to achieve what they call "a level playing field" (no such thing, of course).

So, you don't think for a moment that "Republicans/Conservatives" believed their cherished status quo wasn't being seriously threatened by Obama who promised to "transform the face of America"?

[chadk66]

boxcar nailed it. then add to it that so many liberal dirt bags are unemployed and willing to get paid to protest. and they have lived so much off the govt. tit that they tend to protest anything that could cause loss of the tit.

[boxcar]

boxcar nailed it. then add to it that so many liberal dirt bags are unemployed and willing to get paid to protest. and they have lived so much off the govt. tit that they tend to protest anything that could cause loss of the tit.

And you hammered another nail in! :ThmbUp:

[Marshall Bennett]

Many of the hundreds of thousands of women marching in the million women march or whatever it was were probably grandmas. So not all the Anti Trump demonstrators are college age kids.

Read my post again, I said "violent protestors". From what I saw of the march, the non-violent protestors were mostly just a bunch of angry slobs.

[TJDave]

Actually, the Alinskyites were in power for 8 years and would have completed a total takeover of America had their candidate - Hillary - won. Alinsky believed in implementing Marxism through legal and non-violent means, such as through the ballot box.

Those that are in the streets now are Marxist Leninists. Lenin opposed taking a legal route to gain power, instead preferring to gain control by force.

The Alinskyites had their day.

Now it's the Marxist Leninists' turn.

:lol::lol:

You truly believe this stuff.

Amazing.

[ReplayRandall]

:lol::lol:

You truly believe this stuff.

Amazing.
You're really on a TROLL FLY roll, aren't you??

[NJ Stinks]

This is a serious question and I am interested in honest answers and a polite discussion. My liberal girlfriend gave me her reasoning which I thought was rather unique. I will be curious if someone matches her thoughts. I blame the current chaos on just getting over having the "great divider" as president for 8 years and the liberal media fanning the flames. I didn't see millions of protesters in the streets when Obama was re-elected and I know plenty of people like me were as disgusted with him as Democrats are with Trump. What does everyone else think?

First and foremost, Obama received almost 5 million votes more than Romney got in 2012. What could people protest about when somebody wins by that many votes? in 2016 Clinton wins by almost 3 million votes but Donny is magically crowned king. Of course, people are more pissed off. The country got screwed and the majority of Americans are already sick of listening to the real estate agent pitching his ridiculous proclamations. The guy is the proverbial House of Cards.

Secondly, your girlfriend sounds like a real fox! :ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

[magwell]

Why do you think most protesters and rioters are Democrats? It's a very simple answer and it's called a mental disorder....:rolleyes:

[thaskalos]

You're really on a TROLL FLY roll, aren't you??

Is it considered "bad taste" to troll the misinformed?

[letswastemoney]

The media encourages it.

Paint Trump supporters as Nazis, and if people believe it, it will be hard for them to feel bad if they burn down the car of a perceived far right-wing "Nazi."

[ReplayRandall]

Is it considered "bad taste" to troll the misinformed?
Why, I don't know......seems like everybody is misinformed, lately.

[Murph]

I didn't see millions of protesters in the streets when Obama was re-elected and I know plenty of people like me were as disgusted with him as Democrats are with Trump. What does everyone else think?

What I did and many others like me, was to go to work within the political system. In 2010 I ran unopposed for the republican precinct committeeman position in my district. I appointed a vice committeeman and we began running our polling place. I speak to my neighbors and make certain our conservative views are represented on city/county councils and commissions. My friends and I have worked very hard to prevent another Clinton presidency. It seems by recent voting results that millions of others have done much of the same things all over our country.

It is no wonder conservatives expended little energy protesting our previous fate, rather using our energy to make our voices heard again.

[boxcar]

:lol::lol:

You truly believe this stuff.

Amazing.

What is even more amazing is your naivete! Why would you think that the U.S. government is immune to a political or military coups? This is is precisely what we're witnessing with the radical left in and out of politics; and why they are so desperately and frantically trying to delegitimize Trump. They're scared to death that Trump will succeed in implementing his agenda and in so doing gain even more popularity in 2020 than he enjoys now. Plus the Dems are also frightened that they'll lose even more seats in the mid-terms, since they don't have a positive platform on which to run.

[thaskalos]

What is even more amazing is your naivete! Why would you think that the U.S. government is immune to a political or military coups? This is is precisely what we're witnessing with the radical left in and out of politics; and why they are so desperately and frantically trying to delegitimize Trump. They're scared to death that Trump will succeed in implementing his agenda and in so doing gain even more popularity in 2020 than he enjoys now. Plus the Dems are also frightened that they'll lose even more seats in the mid-terms, since they don't have a positive platform on which to run.

My feeling is that the democrats are counting on Trump's performance over the next 4 years to supply them with all the "platform" that they'll need for 2020. This strategy worked well for the republicans in 2016...NO? Not to mention the democrats in 2008.

[fast4522]

My feeling is that the democrats are counting on Trump's performance over the next 4 years to supply them with all the "platform" that they'll need for 2020. This strategy worked well for the republicans in 2016...NO? Not to mention the democrats in 2008.

Your sharper than half the liberals here because instead of a comeback loaded with puke, yours tend to have some flair or have some witty zing. The only fail is your scoring, like the fact liberals lost the last 3 cycles. So what the democrats are hoping to do is stop the bleeding. Now your smart enough to project the odds of them stopping the bleeding does not look promising, the question is if you will post what you project or just take time off?

[Tom]

Simple - Republicans/Conservatives feel themselves to be creatures of privilege, either economically, socially, or whatever. As such, they tend to be happy with the status quo, and don't want to rock the boat (rise of the Tea Party an outlier event).

Dems/Libs are denizens of the world of "lack of privilege," whether real or imagined. As such, they feel obligated to protest everything to achieve what they call "a level playing field" (no such thing, of course).

Maybe it's just because THEY LIVE IN LA LA LAND and have no tether to reality. And most don't know what it means to take care of themselves and rely on handout and coddling.

And mostly, because most of them are just not civilized.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

This is a serious question and I am interested in honest answers and a polite discussion. My liberal girlfriend gave me her reasoning which I thought was rather unique. I will be curious if someone matches her thoughts. I blame the current chaos on just getting over having the "great divider" as president for 8 years and the liberal media fanning the flames. I didn't see millions of protesters in the streets when Obama was re-elected and I know plenty of people like me were as disgusted with him as Democrats are with Trump. What does everyone else think?

Every revolution starts with those who are discontented and believe either the power structure is corrupt, impenetrable, or simply the vehicle for those on top to get richer and more powerful. Pick a revolution. Robin Hood. The French Proletariat. Red October. Newark, Detroit, Watts. The great student uprisings of the late 1960's and early 1970's. BLM. They are people who believe they would their agenda would never get implemented by the aristocracy. If they resort to a more violent means, it is based on a belief, right or wrong, that they don't have a real voice in the political system. They will not be listened to unless they act in extremes. They don't have the power of words on their side. It's comical to think that "the left" was in charge during the eight years Obama was president. The Democrats had two years where they were in charge. We got Obamacare and that pretty much shot the Dems wad. The other six years the Republicans brought the government to a crawl. Obama resorted to executive orders and the PA wing nuts went bananas. Things like shooting down Merrick Garland's nomination was proof to the left that they were, in their minds, powerless. It is also comical to think that mainstream Democrats represent the left. They are just the middle-class of the aristocracy. Other than Joe Biden who apparently couldn't figure out how to leave office a billionaire, they are just the rich guys who feel guilty about having all the money and want to share the government's money with the poor.

Did Prince John march against the Merry Men? Louis XVI march against the proletariat? Czar Nicholas march against the Bolsheviks? Richard Nixon march against the Yippies? The closest we've seen is the Tea Party, who were at least angry and demonstrative (c'mon, you remember the videos at the Town Hall meetings).

Those with the power and the money don't need to demonstrate, violently or otherwise. They need to pacify, maybe subjugate. Their ideal is the status quo. What the hell do they need to protest against?

Whey you ain't got nothin' you got nothin' to lose
Bob Dylan

[Tom]

You really have no clue, do you?
You think that gang of street turds out there will ever amount to anything?
You think conservatives are a bunch of rich people trying to protect their off-shore accounts?

Pity our educational system has failed so badly.

Hint - we just HAD a revolution, and guess who won it? :lol::lol::lol:
The street turds were bought and paid for by Soros, not repressed people looking to find justice.
The people looking for justice were deplorables.

But your attitude only makes me smile, because it show that the left still has no clue why they lost.

[davew]

My feeling is that the democrats are counting on Trump's performance over the next 4 years to supply them with all the "platform" that they'll need for 2020. This strategy worked well for the republicans in 2016...NO? Not to mention the democrats in 2008.

I don't think the dems can slow congress down enough down so that nothing gets accomplished - the only hope is if a couple (R) members in senate keep demmng their votes. The only chance is if the dems hate what is done so much, they get out 110% of their vote.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

You really have no clue, do you?
You think that gang of street turds out there will ever amount to anything?
You think conservatives are a bunch of rich people trying to protect their off-shore accounts?

Pity our educational system has failed so badly.

Hint - we just HAD a revolution, and guess who won it? :lol::lol::lol:
The street turds were bought and paid for by Soros, not repressed people looking to find justice.
The people looking for justice were deplorables.

But your attitude only makes me smile, because it show that the left still has no clue why they lost.

Had someone with an IQ above room temperature made those comments I might be concerned.

Had you thought about it a minute, your "revolution" had exactly the characteristics I mentioned. They were disaffected. Disconnected. Voiceless. Powerless. Pushed to the side. Donnie Dimburger gave them a voice, or at least they thought he did. You're not too sharp if you don't understand that the world is run by those with the power and the money. Look who your messiah appointed to his cabinet. More billionaires than attend Crown Prince Salman's birthday party. Who do you think benefits the most from Trump's infrastructure idea. The banks. Huge windfall for them since they'll be supplying a lot of the financing. Why do you think the immigration reforms aren't going to be what Trump sold you in the campaign? Because the people with the money don't like the idea, and the people with the money control the people who vote in the Congress. Talk about naive.

The "left" knows exactly why they lost and they know exactly why Trump won. They just think you jokers got taken as much as they did.

[elysiantraveller]

I often wonder how many people on here who comment on Alinsky, Marx, Lenin, etc. have actually ever read any of their works.

[Tom]

The "left" knows exactly why they lost and they know exactly why Trump won. They just think you jokers got taken as much as they did.

And you question my intelligence? :lol::lol::lol:
You want to point out the mobs of Trump people rioting in the streets?
Never mind, I forgot, you already put together a paragraph tonight.
You don't want to risk PESD.

Maybe Teach will make you some cocco.

[fast4522]

I often wonder how many people on here who comment on Alinsky, Marx, Lenin, etc. have actually ever read any of their works.

Their work is nothing more than diarrhea, what they have in common is that they are dead. They are waiting for George Soros with open arms, I can't wait for that piece of shit to join them.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

And you question my intelligence? :lol::lol::lol:
You want to point out the mobs of Trump people rioting in the streets?
Never mind, I forgot, you already put together a paragraph tonight.
You don't want to risk PESD.

Maybe Teach will make you some cocco.

There are no Trump people rioting in the streets because they won. The Trump people did their revolting at the campaign events. That was the equivalent of the proletariat marching in the streets.

If you remember the title of the thread, it had to do with why protesters and rioters were Democrat. I gave an answer that pointed out it is those who believe they don't have a real voice who will often take to the streets, and history confirms that. It is also often a rejection of power and wealth. From my perspective you didn't understand the response - no surprise - and you certainly didn't refute the premise. Instead, you do the only thing you are capable of - making fun of Democrats. Rather than offering an intelligent response to why the Democrats are marching, you call names - you know, they are mentally ill or evil. You're really somewhat sad.

The guy's been president a month. Give him some time. Let's see in a year if your hero hasn't bamboozled you all. If you aren't smart enough to figure out that the money always triumphs, there's little hope that you'll ever understand why things are the way they are.

What is PESD? Is that the ignorant version of PTSD?

What's cocco? Is that how the right spells cocoa?

[JustRalph]

Simple - Republicans/Conservatives feel themselves to be creatures of privilege, either economically, socially, or whatever. As such, they tend to be happy with the status quo, and don't want to rock the boat (rise of the Tea Party an outlier event).

Dems/Libs are denizens of the world of "lack of privilege," whether real or imagined. As such, they feel obligated to protest everything to achieve what they call "a level playing field" (no such thing, of course).

Mike, your first paragraph is quite possibly the weirdest/craziest thing you've ever expressed on this board. At least in my memory.

[JustRalph]

I often wonder how many people on here who comment on Alinsky, Marx, Lenin, etc. have actually ever read any of their works.

I've tried. It's boring, derivative and repetitive

[cj's dad]

[QUOTE=HalvOnHorseracing;2124468]Had someone with an IQ above room temperature made those comments I might be concerned. QUOTE]

I know Tom and he would probably make you into the turd he speaks of in previous posts ! Try to keep things civil !

Also, I see you are from Denver, the pot smoking capital of the West !

[Marshall Bennett]

Mike, your first paragraph is quite possibly the weirdest/craziest thing you've ever expressed on this board. At least in my memory.
I don't respond to many post such as his because if someone is this disconnected from reality, why would anything I say mean anything to them. It seems to be a real problem with liberals however and more like a horrible disease. In what world are their minds really working in?
Good for people with a sense of normalcy to get reminded occasionally how dysfunctional their counterpart's minds operate. :)

[JustRalph]

I don't respond to many post such as his because if someone is this disconnected from reality, why would anything I say mean anything to them. It seems to be a real problem with liberals however and more like a horrible disease. In what world are their minds really working in?
Good for people with a sense of normalcy to get reminded occasionally how dysfunctional their counterpart's minds operate. :)

Disconnected describes it perfectly. 👍

[incoming]

I came to Atlanta in the late 60's to finish my schooling. The "hippy movement" were heavily populated in mid-town where I lived. I think this is where the Democrat Party of today started. At least they act the same. It is popcorn time again.:popcorn::lol:

[Fager Fan]

First and foremost, Obama received almost 5 million votes more than Romney got in 2012. What could people protest about when somebody wins by that many votes? in 2016 Clinton wins by almost 3 million votes but Donny is magically crowned king. Of course, people are more pissed off. The country got screwed and the majority of Americans are already sick of listening to the real estate agent pitching his ridiculous proclamations. The guy is the proverbial House of Cards.

Secondly, your girlfriend sounds like a real fox! :ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

I see zero signs that this is about the "wrong" that someone can be elected without receiving the popular vote.

[Fager Fan]

The answer is that conservatives are doers while liberals are dreamers. Conservatives will be out making a living and doing whatever they need to do to get on with life and take care of their family. Liberals will be plotting how they reach Utopia. Conservatives care most about fiscal issues, while liberals care most about social issues. It's not in conservatives blood to go out and protest. Protesting makes liberals feel like they're doing something good and part of thei community. Liberals are very susceptible to peer pressure while conservatives are where you'll find the person who'll stand up for what they believe even if they do so all alone.

[xtb]

The "left" knows exactly why they lost and they know exactly why Trump won. They just think you jokers got taken as much as they did.

"Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right..."

[davew]

The "left" knows exactly why they lost and they know exactly why Trump won.

Are you part of the "left"? If so you know exactly why you lost. Could you explain it here?

Please answer the question better than this lady.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jx5WcJVSgc

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I know Tom and he would probably make you into the turd he speaks of in previous posts ! Try to keep things civil !

Also, I see you are from Denver, the pot smoking capital of the West !

I've stuck to a simple maxim. Wait until you are attacked until responding in kind. Tom generally makes it personal, so I wouldn't get self-righteous about pointing this out. He generally starts the ad hominem attacks. The fact that you and Tom have a totally one-sided philosophy certainly doesn't make you either right or objective.

Frankly, if you want to start a name calling back and forth, that's fine. You somehow think calling someone a turd, or inferring they are overly involved with pot is civil? I think that just gives me more data on the moronic way the wing nut brain works.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Are you part of the "left"? If so you know exactly why you lost. Could you explain it here?

Please answer the question better than this lady.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jx5WcJVSgc
I've answered it previously. First, the Democratic candidate was incredibly flawed. We spent more time listening to all the horrible things she did as a public servant than any of the good things she did. Second, she ran a particularly poor and non-strategic campaign. Third, there was a major undercurrent of discontent for people who believe their lives and the lives of their children have a bleaker future. Fourth, many of the boogeymen people believed were a problem - illegal immigration, jobs evaporating, a dysfunctional Washington, D.C., saying that America was no longer great - were directly addressed by Trump and not very well addressed by Hillary. Fifth, Trump was the outsider many people were looking for to drain the swamp. People didn't believe anyone else was up to that job.

Finally, everyone underestimated Trump and didn't take him as seriously as they should have.

Did you think there were different reasons?

[Ocala Mike]

If someone agrees with my girlfriend about why Republican protesters are small in number I will acknowledge that



So, this "disconnected" poster wants to know your girlfriend's reasoning and if anyone came close to it.

[Inner Dirt]

So, this "disconnected" poster wants to know your girlfriend's reasoning and if anyone came close to it.

She said it was due to the political demographics of how the population is dispersed. Densely populated areas in the inner cities are strongly Democrat while Republicans populate rural areas. She claims Republicans are too spread out to easily assemble in masses. I honestly am amazed at how she spins things to never paint a liberal cause or action in a negative light. Of course no one in here came close to her explanation.

Personally I think as a whole liberals love to make excuses for poor behavior. I see many of them going as far as condoning and explaining away the law breaking and violence that these protests lead to.

On the other hand the most despised extreme right wing organization in the USA, namely the KKK does not condone breaking the law in any manner. Let that sink in.

[NJ Stinks]

I see zero signs that this is about the "wrong" that someone can be elected without receiving the popular vote.

Why are people showing up in huge numbers at town hall meetings across the country and at protest marches? Do you think that these people protesting believe they are in the minority but want their voices to be heard? I don't. I think these people believe they are represent the majority of Americans. And they want the voices of the majority to be heard loud and clear.

It's understandable that Trump fans want to believe the above is fake news. Rejection is a tough cookie to digest.

[Ocala Mike]

Your girlfriend's reasoning is pretty good, I think. I'm with NJ Stinks - she's a keeper!

[Inner Dirt]

I see zero signs that this is about the "wrong" that someone can be elected without receiving the popular vote.

Fortunately I know very few liberals personally. None of them complain about Trump losing the popular vote and winning the electoral college. He used the system to his advantage not bothering to campaign in states he had no chance of winning. If the winner of the popular vote wins the presidency I am sure he would have campaigned differently.

Maybe they should have a protesters exit poll and see the breakdown of why people are protesting.

[VigorsTheGrey]

So what is it that the so- called liberal left wants...?
Do they actually want the USA to be a communist political system...?
If we had gotten Hillary for President, what would have been her agenda items to move forward on....?

[NJ Stinks]

Conservatives care most about fiscal issues, while liberals care most about social issues.

Bingo. For example, that's why it's mandatory that the GOP talk about is cutting taxes whenever they gather. Who cares who has health insurance and who doesn't if you already have good health insurance? Who cares about giving out food stamps if one does not need food stamps?

I could go on but why bother. The GOP represents people who are concerned with one issue - themselves and their family. The welfare of society as a whole is not their problem - financially at least. They may contribute to society if they feel like it but if they don't - tough s_ _ t for those in need.

I don't feel the need to share that philosophy. It's 2017 - not 1884 for crying out loud.

[Marshall Bennett]

in 2016 Clinton wins by almost 3 million votes but Donny is magically crowned king. Of course, people are more pissed off.
What are you implying? That the constitution should have been changed as soon as Trump won and the electoral college removed so that he'd lose and Hillary wins? You realize how dumb that sounds? Do you understand how ridiculous your statement even is? "Magically"?

[NJ Stinks]

What are you implying? That the constitution should have been changed as soon as Trump won and the electoral college removed so that he'd lose and Hillary wins? You realize how dumb that sounds? Do you understand how ridiculous your statement even is? "Magically"?

I'm not implying anything. I'm saying and have said numerous times since the election that anybody who loses the popular vote by almost 3M votes deserves to lose the presidential election. PERIOD.

Any other "result" is ridiculous. But I won't hold my breath waiting for Red States to do the right thing and vote to ditch the Electoral College process once and for all. :rolleyes:

[davew]

I've answered it previously. First, the Democratic candidate was incredibly flawed. We spent more time listening to all the horrible things she did as a public servant than any of the good things she did. Second, she ran a particularly poor and non-strategic campaign. Third, there was a major undercurrent of discontent for people who believe their lives and the lives of their children have a bleaker future. Fourth, many of the boogeymen people believed were a problem - illegal immigration, jobs evaporating, a dysfunctional Washington, D.C., saying that America was no longer great - were directly addressed by Trump and not very well addressed by Hillary. Fifth, Trump was the outsider many people were looking for to drain the swamp. People didn't believe anyone else was up to that job.

Finally, everyone underestimated Trump and didn't take him as seriously as they should have.

Did you think there were different reasons?

1) half of democrats are/were Bernie Sanders supporters and became disenfranchised after they saw the way the DNC screwed him. Many of those did not vote.

2) biased polls continually showed Hillary winning in a landslide. This kept some voters from voting and Hillary from an aggressive campaign during the last month.

3) major media was extremely biased in their views, the way they interviewed candidates, and questions during the debates. This kept many voters upset with the reporting. An example is George Stephanopolous -

4) Hillary kept talking out of both sides of her mouth. She was the most untrustworthy candidate in recent history.

[woodtoo]

I'm not implying anything. I'm saying and have said numerous times since the election that anybody who loses the popular vote by almost 3M votes deserves to lose the presidential election. PERIOD.

Any other "result" is ridiculous. But I won't hold my breath waiting for Red States to do the right thing and vote to ditch the Electoral College process once and for all. :rolleyes:

OMG it must be the water.

[Inner Dirt]

1) half of democrats are/were Bernie Sanders supporters and became disenfranchised after they saw the way the DNC screwed him. Many of those did not vote.

2) biased polls continually showed Hillary winning in a landslide. This kept some voters from voting and Hillary from an aggressive campaign during the last month.

3) major media was extremely biased in their views, the way they interviewed candidates, and questions during the debates. This kept many voters upset with the reporting. An example is George Stephanopolous -

4) Hillary kept talking out of both sides of her mouth. She was the most untrustworthy candidate in recent history.

I think #4 was the biggest reason for the results. As much as a lot of people didn't like Trump they viewed Hillary as 10 times more despicable.
In my own small world if Bernie wins the domination, he ends up president. I knew a good amount of people who never or rarely vote that would have voted in the general election if Bernie was the nominee, with the witch being the Democrat candidate they stayed home. Bernie seemed very honest for a politician while Hillary is the exact opposite, that appearance of honesty alone would have got him a lot of votes.

[pandy]

[/B]I think #4 was the biggest reason for the results. As much as a lot of people didn't like Trump they viewed Hillary as 10 times more despicable.
In my own small world if Bernie wins the domination, he ends up president. I knew a good amount of people who never or rarely vote that would have voted in the general election if Bernie was the nominee, with the witch being the Democrat candidate they stayed home. Bernie seemed very honest for a politician while Hillary is the exact opposite, that appearance of honesty alone would have got him a lot of votes.



If Bernie got the nomination, in order to become President, he would have had to do something that seems impossible, win without the support of black voters. He did horribly with black voters in the primaries. I don't see how he could have won.

[Inner Dirt]

If Bernie got the nomination, in order to become President, he would have had to do something that seems impossible, win without the support of black voters. He did horribly with black voters in the primaries. I don't see how he could have won.

Once again from what I heard and what I saw a lot of black voters stayed home. The county I live in is 1/3 black and my polling place was pretty crowded a good 100 or so people in line, yet probably only a dozen black folks. I think a lot of them despised Hillary.

I only missed voting in one presidential election since I was eligible in 1980 (Got my registration rejected when I moved here) . I always voted for the Republican except this year I wrote in a fictitious name. I honestly would have voted for Bernie if he made it, I appreciate his appearance of honesty and figured congress would keep him in check. I don't think I was alone in wanting to jump sides because of Trump, but would never vote for the witch.

[Fager Fan]

Why are people showing up in huge numbers at town hall meetings across the country and at protest marches? Do you think that these people protesting believe they are in the minority but want their voices to be heard? I don't. I think these people believe they are represent the majority of Americans. And they want the voices of the majority to be heard loud and clear.

It's understandable that Trump fans want to believe the above is fake news. Rejection is a tough cookie to digest.

Again, the popular vote only seems to be an unnecessary excuse for the protests. Have any protests actually been called a protest to of the electoral college and move to a popular vote? Not that I've seen.

In a population of 300+ million, a few million isn't a big percentage to claim speaking for a majority.

[JustRalph]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/liberals-brimming-with-selma-envy/article/2595028

Selma envy

[Fager Fan]

Bingo. For example, that's why it's mandatory that the GOP talk about is cutting taxes whenever they gather. Who cares who has health insurance and who doesn't if you already have good health insurance? Who cares about giving out food stamps if one does not need food stamps?

I could go on but why bother. The GOP represents people who are concerned with one issue - themselves and their family. The welfare of society as a whole is not their problem - financially at least. They may contribute to society if they feel like it but if they don't - tough s_ _ t for those in need.

I don't feel the need to share that philosophy. It's 2017 - not 1884 for crying out loud.

Wrong. Assuming more conservatives are religious, then the data shows that conservatives are more charitable than liberals. Liberals want to give away OTHER people's money.

Also, conservatives believe in the concepts of tough love and necessity being the mother of invention. Liberals believe they are being kind by enabling (again, with other people's money).

All who are of able body and mind should be required to work for government subsidies whether it's taking low wage or part time paying jobs or volunteer at non-profits. That helps push them along into the work force and work frame of mind. Zero should be received by those who are healthy and choose to not work.

[mostpost]

This is a serious question and I am interested in honest answers and a polite discussion. My liberal girlfriend gave me her reasoning which I thought was rather unique. I will be curious if someone matches her thoughts. I blame the current chaos on just getting over having the "great divider" as president for 8 years and the liberal media fanning the flames. I didn't see millions of protesters in the streets when Obama was re-elected and I know plenty of people like me were as disgusted with him as Democrats are with Trump. What does everyone else think?
Here is a list of the ten most significant protest movements in the United States as compiled by Time magazine.
1. Boston Tea Party
2. Civil Rights
3. Women's suffrage
4. Anti war
5. Gay rights
6. Labor Movement
7. Black power
8. Anti globalization
9. Tea Party
10. Occupy Wall Street.

And here is a similar list internationally as compiled by Live Science magazine.
1. Protestant Reformation.
2. Storming the Bastile
3. Ghandi's Salt March
4. Boston Tea Party
5. South Africa's National Day of Protest.
6. March on Washington.
7. Tiananmen Square.
8. Berlin Wall Protests.
9. Iraq War Protests
10. The Orange Revolution. (Kiev)

What all of these protests have in common is that the protesters felt marginalized and not in control of their own destiny. And that is why it is the Democrats who are most evident at these protests. Democrats/Liberals have always been at the forefront of social change. Democrats/Liberals have always carried about the downtrodden.

Of course you won't see any Democrats at present day Tea Party rallies. Those are an anomaly. Just a bunch of angry old white men who want to go back to the bad old days when blacks knew their place, gays stayed in the closet and
women were barefoot and pregnant.

[mostpost]

Simple - Republicans/Conservatives feel themselves to be creatures of privilege, either economically, socially, or whatever. As such, they tend to be happy with the status quo, and don't want to rock the boat (rise of the Tea Party an outlier event).

Dems/Libs are denizens of the world of "lack of privilege," whether real or imagined. As such, they feel obligated to protest everything to achieve what they call "a level playing field" (no such thing, of course).

A good and very true analysis.

[Ocala Mike]

But don't you know, I'm "disconnected."

Still say it has something to do with the tinkering going on with this site!

LOL

Actually, I do think Inner Dirt's g/f is pretty much spot on.

[ReplayRandall]

What all of these protests have in common is that the protesters felt marginalized and not in control of their own destiny. And that is why it is the Democrats who are most evident at these protests. Democrats/Liberals have always been at the forefront of social change. Democrats/Liberals have always carried about the downtrodden.

It's funny that these protestors show up NOW, but yet not one new law has been written or passed, not one law has been repealed, nothing. So, what has CHANGED in this country in the last month that causes these misguided individuals to take to the streets?.....Fake passion:pout:, fake outrage:rant:, fake protests...:puke:

[Ocala Mike]

So, what has CHANGED in this country in the last month that causes these misguided individuals to take to the streets?



http://search.aol.com/aol/image?q=image+for+President+Trump&s_it=img-ans&imgId=C7C186E46126E57834F4B3882F62997F21F4F973&v_t=keyword_rollover

[ReplayRandall]

http://search.aol.com/aol/image?q=image+for+President+Trump&s_it=img-ans&imgId=C7C186E46126E57834F4B3882F62997F21F4F973&v_t=keyword_rollover
And yet, NOTHING has changed, has it?....I'll keep waiting..:popcorn:

[no breathalyzer]

ignorance due to poor education and willingness to learn.. lazy misinformed individuals with no guidance that want the easy way out... should i go on?

[no breathalyzer]

Here is a list of the ten most significant protest movements in the United States as compiled by Time magazine.
1. Boston Tea Party
2. Civil Rights
3. Women's suffrage
4. Anti war
5. Gay rights
6. Labor Movement
7. Black power
8. Anti globalization
9. Tea Party
10. Occupy Wall Street.

And here is a similar list internationally as compiled by Live Science magazine.
1. Protestant Reformation.
2. Storming the Bastile
3. Ghandi's Salt March
4. Boston Tea Party
5. South Africa's National Day of Protest.
6. March on Washington.
7. Tiananmen Square.
8. Berlin Wall Protests.
9. Iraq War Protests
10. The Orange Revolution. (Kiev)

What all of these protests have in common is that the protesters felt marginalized and not in control of their own destiny. And that is why it is the Democrats who are most evident at these protests. Democrats/Liberals have always been at the forefront of social change. Democrats/Liberals have always carried about the downtrodden.

Of course you won't see any Democrats at present day Tea Party rallies. Those are an anomaly. Just a bunch of angry old white men who want to go back to the bad old days when blacks knew their place, gays stayed in the closet and
women were barefoot and pregnant.

:puke: really ? c'mon man

[mostpost]

Alinsky believed in implementing Marxism through legal and non-violent means, such as through the ballot box.
Where the heck do you get that from? Is it from this passage from "Rules for Radicals?" A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists.....(and ends with) the political paradise of capitalism. But immediately following that Alinsky says, "The Christians begin with their prime truth: the divinity of Christ and the tripartite nature of God." Does this mean Alinsky was a Christian? Pretty sure he was Jewish.

On Page four of "Rules for Radicals" Alinsky writes. "Dogma is the enemy of freedom. Dogma must be watched for and Apprehended at every turn and twist of the revolutionary movement."

Is there anything more dogmatic than communism; unless it is Christianity-or any religion?

On page nine of "Rules for Radicals" Alinsky writes, "We have permitted a suicidal situation to unfold wherein revolution and communism have become one. These pages are committed to splitting this political atom, separating this exclusive identification of communism with revolution."

Hardly the words of a Marxist.

[mostpost]

And you question my intelligence? :lol::lol::lol:
You want to point out the mobs of Trump people rioting in the streets?
Never mind, I forgot, you already put together a paragraph tonight.
You don't want to risk PESD.

Maybe Teach will make you some cocco.
We do not question your intelligence. We are completely aware of your lack thereof. And, it is COCOA.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

1) half of democrats are/were Bernie Sanders supporters and became disenfranchised after they saw the way the DNC screwed him. Many of those did not vote.

2) biased polls continually showed Hillary winning in a landslide. This kept some voters from voting and Hillary from an aggressive campaign during the last month.

3) major media was extremely biased in their views, the way they interviewed candidates, and questions during the debates. This kept many voters upset with the reporting. An example is George Stephanopolous -

4) Hillary kept talking out of both sides of her mouth. She was the most untrustworthy candidate in recent history.

I'd add one more. There were a lot of mainstream Republicans who didn't like Trump, but voted for him because of the Supreme Court vacancy.

I'd agree that Hillary didn't bring out the vote the way Obama did. But I think there were also Republican voters who stayed at home because they weren't Trump fans. I think that aspect may have cancelled each other out.

I don't think number three was a cause for Trump's victory or Hillary's loss. The people who were solidly Trump saw it your way, the people who were solidly Hillary thought the media was hitting the nail on the head. All the "biased" media did was reinforce the views of both sides. I don't think they changed many minds one way or the other.

Your number 4 is what I said when I called her extremely flawed. But, again, the Trump supporters were rabid in their hate of Hillary, while the Hillary supporters were not nearly as convinced of her prevarication. At the very best, Hillary would have been a continuation of the status quo, and with a Republican congress, no more effective than Obama was. She was the candidate of no real change.

Trump did a masterful job of sucking up all the available air during the campaign. He was on the news constantly. He was the un-candidate. He was the right person in the right place at the right time.

[mostpost]

She said it was due to the political demographics of how the population is dispersed. Densely populated areas in the inner cities are strongly Democrat while Republicans populate rural areas. She claims Republicans are too spread out to easily assemble in masses. I honestly am amazed at how she spins things to never paint a liberal cause or action in a negative light. Of course no one in here came close to her explanation.
I would not have thought of that as a compelling reason. While a lot of the less populated states are strongly Republican, there are certainly enough well populated Republican areas to support protests.

Personally I think as a whole liberals love to make excuses for poor behavior. I see many of them going as far as condoning and explaining away the law breaking and violence that these protests lead to.
I really hate the way you ignore the vast majority of peaceful protesters and concentrate on the miniscule number of violent incidents. Then again, that supports your agenda.

On the other hand the most despised extreme right wing organization in the USA, namely the KKK does not condone breaking the law in any manner. Let that sink in.
First of all, thank you for admitting that the KKK is a right wing organization.
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/crime.html?LEARN_Cat=Extremism
The above documents at least six instances of law breaking by KKK Members in the late 90s and early 2000s.

KKK is flat out lying when it says it does not condone breaking the law. Nobody believes that.

[mostpost]

:puke: really ? c'mon man
Yes really.

[mostpost]

It's funny that these protestors show up NOW, but yet not one new law has been written or passed, not one law has been repealed, nothing. So, what has CHANGED in this country in the last month that causes these misguided individuals to take to the streets?.....Fake passion:pout:, fake outrage:rant:, fake protests...:puke:
It's not about what has changed. It's about what will change. People unable to come to or return to this country because of their religion. Pollution of our air and water. Phony voter fraud stories. Minorities being disenfranchised. Lower wages. Unsafe work places. War mongering. Gay bashing.
ETA: I already hate that "puke" emoticon.

[MikeH]

The reality is, that the priorities of the moderates and conservatives are to spend their time working, earning a living, and raising their children to have a decent work ethic and concern for others, instead of the leftist-liberal-entertainment industry attitude of "do whatever feels good to you, regardless of what it does to others."

The moderates and conservatives don't have time to protest, and they don't have George Soros funding them.

[ReplayRandall]

It's about what will change.
Then when change actually happens, protest all you want......But until then, zip it....:sleeping::sleeping:

[HalvOnHorseracing]

She said it was due to the political demographics of how the population is dispersed. Densely populated areas in the inner cities are strongly Democrat while Republicans populate rural areas. She claims Republicans are too spread out to easily assemble in masses. I honestly am amazed at how she spins things to never paint a liberal cause or action in a negative light. Of course no one in here came close to her explanation.

Personally I think as a whole liberals love to make excuses for poor behavior. I see many of them going as far as condoning and explaining away the law breaking and violence that these protests lead to.

On the other hand the most despised extreme right wing organization in the USA, namely the KKK does not condone breaking the law in any manner. Let that sink in.

Even in California there are places (like Orange County) that are heavily Republican. In NY, the City is heavily Democratic, but neighboring Westchester and quite a bit of upstate NY is Republican. In Colorado, the city of Colorado Springs is concentrated Republican. The same is true in most of the reliably blue states. There are always concentrations of Republicans.

I would agree that rural residents (like farmers) are more likely conservative. But I wouldn't agree that there aren't concentrated suburban areas full of Republicans in most states.

You can't possibly be serious in defending the KKK. Surely you can't argue that incidents like that characterized in Mississippi Burning did anything but create divisiveness, and that those incidents defined the history of the KKK.

[Fager Fan]

First of all, thank you for admitting that the KKK is a right wing organization.
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/crime.html?LEARN_Cat=Extremism
The above documents at least six instances of law breaking by KKK Members in the late 90s and early 2000s.

KKK is flat out lying when it says it does not condone breaking the law. Nobody believes that.

The Hell's Angels used to have a terrible reputation not all that long ago for violence and bedlam. Things can change, and you had to go back 15+ years.

Why do people even bring up the KKK? They're more like the boogeyman under the bed than a real entity.

[Marshall Bennett]

ignorance due to poor education and willingness to learn.. lazy misinformed individuals with no guidance that want the easy way out... should i go on?
Individuals unwilling to accept defeat and resort to protest and/or violence when it happens. Individuals who in defeat call their opponents Nazis, racist, war mongers, just to name a few.
Ignorance and misinformed can be found in this thread, such as voting to abolish the electoral college after 250 years of use solely because their candidate lost the election....yeah I could go on and on too. :)

[reckless]

http://www.whatfinger.com/single-post/2017/02/20/BREAKING-Paris-Burning---Media-Blackout-Le-Pen-Brink-Of-Civil-War

The same idiots who call themselves Democrats, liberals and socialists is this country -- namely those who advocate unfettered illegal immigration and wide open borders for migrant Muslim haters are simply too stupid to see what happens to a society when a country is no longer a sovereign nation.

The above clip comes by way of Paris and is but a small view of what happens to such a society. Pay attention because you won't get this on NBC, CBS, BBC, MSNBC and the rest of the fake news crowd.

In time the great Marine Le Pen will become President of France and she'll get things started by turning back the Muslims and social democrat haters and make France great again.

Le Pen will have an ally in Donald Trump as he lead us and returns America to it's role as the unquestioned leader of the free world.

[Inner Dirt]

You can't possibly be serious in defending the KKK. Surely you can't argue that incidents like that characterized in Mississippi Burning did anything but create divisiveness, and that those incidents defined the history of the KKK.

Not defending the KKK at all, just pointing out that in many cases they won't stoop as low as some liberals. I have talked to many a liberal that has condoned violence for the cause or made excuses for it. What about the BLM supporters that thought shooting white cops was ok? You don't see the KKK advocating people to kill minorities.

[davew]

First of all, thank you for admitting that the KKK is a right wing organization.
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/crime.html?LEARN_Cat=Extremism
The above documents at least six instances of law breaking by KKK Members in the late 90s and early 2000s.

KKK is flat out lying when it says it does not condone breaking the law. Nobody believes that.

It is just like Black Lives Matter, and both started by democrats.

[riskman]

Maxine Waters called the Trump administration "scumbags" on the MSNBC Chris Hay's program.
Another example of the Dems atrocious behavior since Trump was sworn into office. Waters and Ashley Judd should team up to compare notes to determine which one is more obscene
And infantile.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

The same idiots who call themselves Democrats, liberals and socialists is this country -- namely those who advocate unfettered illegal immigration and wide open borders for migrant Muslim haters are simply too stupid to see what happens to a society when a country is no longer a sovereign nation.


I'll just point out that the PA can be rife with name calling, and the party doing the name calling is just as often the right wingers.

Where I shake my head is at statements like "those who advocate unfettered illegal immigration and wide open borders for migrant Muslim haters." I can't think of a kind word to describe anyone who actually believes that. I don't know everyone in the world, but I can honestly say of all the people I know not a single one would fall into that category. Of all the politicians and public figures in this country, not a single one has ever made that statement. Perhaps it is a French thing, but as far as I can tell it is not an American thing.

The hate here is often catchy. It becomes like a feeding frenzy where people of all persuasions try to out-hate the other, and no one seems immune.

[VigorsTheGrey]

First of all, thank you for admitting that the KKK is a right wing organization.
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/crime.html?LEARN_Cat=Extremism
The above documents at least six instances of law breaking by KKK Members in the late 90s and early 2000s.

KKK is flat out lying when it says it does not condone breaking the law. Nobody believes that.

What about Liberation Theology....a blend of Marxism and Jesuits designs....I can't figure out the Catholic church...are they liberal or conservative....? It seems that behind all the political theater...there is a Vatican-Moscow-Washington alliance.....

[Tom]

OMG it must be the water.

It's not the water.
The lousy libs have no use for the constitution.
They hate the electoral college they have free speech, they hate the right to own guns......they are just lousy haters wna ting to control everyone elses lives.

I would thing they would just leave if they hate this country so much.
I would help pay their way to Cuba, the great nation that it is.

See how Stinky is a typical lib - wanting some else to do his work for him
The lousy libs had the WH and both House and Senate for a time early in Obama's reign of terror, but did THEY do the right thing and fix it?

Of course not , lousy libs only whine and cry about things.
To do real work is not in their wheelhouse. :lol::lol::lol:

They are jokes - never forget that.

[Tom]

KKK is flat out lying when it says it does not condone breaking the law. Nobody believes that.

And the left respects the law so much.......you twit, two words for you - Sanctuary Cities.

Can't wait until Trump cuts off their $$$$.
Mayors of those cities should all be arrested and held in prison.

[Tom]

Maxine Waters called the Trump administration "scumbags" on the MSNBC Chris Hay's program.
Another example of the Dems atrocious behavior since Trump was sworn into office. Waters and Ashley Judd should team up to compare notes to determine which one is more obscene
And infantile.

Maxine Waters a lying moron.
she should aspire to raise herself to the level of scumbag.
Because she is a total 100% disgrace to the nation. Her and he ilk should be deported.

[Tom]

Why do people even bring up the KKK?

Because that is all they have...they are out of ammo.
They are jokes, all of them.

Watching them meltdown is so entertaining....:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[Tom]

[QUOTE=HalvOnHorseracing;2124468]Had someone with an IQ above room temperature made those comments I might be concerned. QUOTE]

I know Tom and he would probably make you into the turd he speaks of in previous posts ! Try to keep things civil !

Also, I see you are from Denver, the pot smoking capital of the West !

Denver is a disgrace.
They prefer to allow illegal alien who are members of murderous gangs to run free than top protect their own citizens.

A pile of cow shit is more American than Denver ever will be.
We should put a wall around it to keep those un-American losers inside.

MOSCOW is more American than Denver. Putin is a better man the mayor of Denver. And turds of all kinds smell better than Denver.

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/02/22/denver-murder-victim-joins-sanctuary-city-sacrificial-lambs

[VigorsTheGrey]

"Liberation theologians look at America and see a land of violence and oppression, gross poverty and neglect, a land whose basic structures and beliefs are morally questionable. Perhaps it is time they recognized that the cancer is within themselves."
Bill McIlhany (Liberation Theology
on the Move in the United States, article)

[elysiantraveller]

Where the heck do you get that from? Is it from this passage from "Rules for Radicals?" A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists.....(and ends with) the political paradise of capitalism. But immediately following that Alinsky says, "The Christians begin with their prime truth: the divinity of Christ and the tripartite nature of God." Does this mean Alinsky was a Christian? Pretty sure he was Jewish.

On Page four of "Rules for Radicals" Alinsky writes. "Dogma is the enemy of freedom. Dogma must be watched for and Apprehended at every turn and twist of the revolutionary movement."

Is there anything more dogmatic than communism; unless it is Christianity-or any religion?

On page nine of "Rules for Radicals" Alinsky writes, "We have permitted a suicidal situation to unfold wherein revolution and communism have become one. These pages are committed to splitting this political atom, separating this exclusive identification of communism with revolution."

Hardly the words of a Marxist.

... unbelievable...

We agree on something.

Have you actually read Alinsky though or are you just googling?

Fair write-up though. It's why I posed the question... most on this board have never even read the source material they are discussing.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

[QUOTE=CurtisontheBay;2124519]

Denver is a disgrace.
They prefer to allow illegal alien who are members of murderous gangs to run free than top protect their own citizens.

A pile of cow shit is more American than Denver ever will be.
We should put a wall around it to keep those un-American losers inside.

MOSCOW is more American than Denver. Putin is a better man the mayor of Denver. And turds of all kinds smell better than Denver.

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/02/22/denver-murder-victim-joins-sanctuary-city-sacrificial-lambs
I was wrong. You're not a moron. You're insane.

[davew]

... unbelievable...

We agree on something.

Have you actually read Alinsky though or are you just googling?

Fair write-up though. It's why I posed the question... most on this board have never even read the source material they are discussing.

The left libs worship that book.

[DSB]

... unbelievable...

We agree on something.

Have you actually read Alinsky though or are you just googling?

Fair write-up though. It's why I posed the question... most on this board have never even read the source material they are discussing.
And you know this..... how?

[elysiantraveller]

And you know this..... how?

Generally speaking because when they talk about they tend to demonstrate they have no real knowledge of it. So I just assume either 1) they haven't actually read it or 2) they have and just don't understand it.

I'm sure some have but they would certianly be the exception and not the rule.

[elysiantraveller]

The left libs worship that book.

No... they don't.

People in positions of power typically don't like that book. :cool:

To describe that book as a political agenda piece is not doing it justice. It isn't at all. It's a playbook.

[mostpost]

... unbelievable...

We agree on something.

Have you actually read Alinsky though or are you just googling?

Fair write-up though. It's why I posed the question... most on this board have never even read the source material they are discussing.

I did read it a few years ago, and I referred back to it today to answer the Marxist claims.
http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm
The website above uses select, carefully selected quotes from the book to advance the claim that Alinsky was a communist. A closer examination of all that he wrote proves this is not the case.

[JustRalph]

Fortunately I know very few liberals personally. None of them complain about Trump losing the popular vote and winning the electoral college. He used the system to his advantage not bothering to campaign in states he had no chance of winning. If the winner of the popular vote wins the presidency I am sure he would have campaigned differently.

Maybe they should have a protesters exit poll and see the breakdown of why people are protesting.


Fortunately? Now that's funny. I have Liberal friends. I still interact with them. There are some great people on this board that are Liberal. Well educated people that I find fun to be around. Although since I moved to Texas I haven't seen them for awhile. I think having different opinions in your circle is good for everyone.

[JustRalph]

But don't you know, I'm "disconnected."

Still say it has something to do with the tinkering going on with this site!

LOL

Actually, I do think Inner Dirt's g/f is pretty much spot on.

You are disconnected from reality if you believe that
"Privileged" bullshit. Here's a test. Mostie endorses your opine. That's the litmus test if I ever saw one.

[JustRalph]

It's funny that these protestors show up NOW, but yet not one new law has been written or passed, not one law has been repealed, nothing. So, what has CHANGED in this country in the last month that causes these misguided individuals to take to the streets?.....Fake passion:pout:, fake outrage:rant:, fake protests...:puke:

Some are getting paid to put their red asses on display.

[JustRalph]

The reality is, that the priorities of the moderates and conservatives are to spend their time working, earning a living, and raising their children to have a decent work ethic and concern for others, instead of the leftist-liberal-entertainment industry attitude of "do whatever feels good to you, regardless of what it does to others."

The moderates and conservatives don't have time to protest, and they don't have George Soros funding them.

Huge answer. Big part of it.

[reckless]

I'll just point out that the PA can be rife with name calling, and the party doing the name calling is just as often the right wingers.

Where I shake my head is at statements like "those who advocate unfettered illegal immigration and wide open borders for migrant Muslim haters."

Europe is being overun and destroyed thanks to unfettered immigration and wide open borders by Muslim haters and criminals, plain and simple. Just because countries gave them all a green light with their One Europe policy doesn't make these rioters right, do they? And you don't know this? See this? Have read about it? You must be kidding, feigning ignorance.

You could be in denial all you'd want to, Rich, but try and open your eyes for a change. And the reason the European Union is burning to the ground and their women are regularly being raped is because of these same haters -- they being Syrian and other Islamic 'migrants' that are over-running France, Belguim, Germany, and Sweden.


I can't think of a kind word to describe anyone who actually believes that. I don't know everyone in the world, but I can honestly say of all the people I know not a single one would fall into that category. Of all the politicians and public figures in this country, not a single one has ever made that statement. Perhaps it is a French thing, but as far as I can tell it is not an American thing.

I am not looking for any kind words, if truth be known. The Muslims and socialist activists feed on the weakness of people such as yourself, so I am not worried how people feel about me or my willingness to shed some light on the issue.

The free world is under assault and once more I say to you: open your eyes. Political figures here and especially in the EU not only ignore what is happening but will get tough with people who publicly call out what is really happening to their country.

You never mentioned the contents of the clip I posted. What do you think about the clip? Did you watch it?

[Robert Fischer]

ignorance is bliss!

[DSB]

I did read it a few years ago, and I referred back to it today to answer the Marxist claims.
http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm
The website above uses select, carefully selected quotes from the book to advance the claim that Alinsky was a communist. A closer examination of all that he wrote proves this is not the case.
Maybe you should research the path Alinsky took to arrive at his "Rules."

Alinsky never formally joined the communist party. In fact, he never joined any organization, even those he helped to found. However, he was undeniably inspired by the works of Marx and Lenin. He took terms that had been used by them and recycled them to brand them as his own:

Lenin and Marx talked of "the proletariat taking control from the bourgeoisie."

Alinsky championed the "have nots taking control from the haves."

Same thing in my book. Just different words for revolution in order to install a system of redistribution of wealth and power.

Lenin and Marx wanted revolution to implement socialism which would give way to a system of pure communism.

Alinsky didn't use those words. He - once again - recycled those words in order to make them sound as though they were his own. His words for "socialism" were "social justice." An examination of what he meant by social justice was basically taking from the haves and giving to the have nots.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... well, you know the rest.

Regardless of whether or not you admit that Alinsky's roots were in Marxist ideology, one thing is certain: his "rules," which was basically a recipe for bringing about change of the social and political orders, were adopted by the latter day Marxists to gain power.

The original premise of my post was to make a distinction between Marxism-Leninism and Alinskyite Marxism.

The point I made is that Alinskyite Marxists are more likely to follow his prescription of fomenting revolution through infiltrating existing power establishments, i.e. the ballot box, than through violent revolution which would be the domain of Marxist Leninists.

If you did some research, you'd know that Alinsky was a proponent of Antonio Gramsci's method of gradualism. Gramsci was an Italian communist who opposed violence to bring about the desired result, instead favoring a measured approach using existing institutions to slowly - over a period of years if not decades - to achieve revolution.

You cherry picked a couple of quotes in an attempt to make some point. You should proof read them before you cut and paste them.

Here's the real quote:

"A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage -- the political paradise of communism."

Also, you said that Alinsky was Jewish. Then how do you reconcile saying in the next breath:

"Alinsky writes. "Dogma is the enemy of freedom. Dogma must be watched for and Apprehended at every turn and twist of the revolutionary movement."

Is there anything more dogmatic than communism; unless it is Christianity-or any religion?"

I agree. So why does Alinsky disapprove of something as dogmatic as religion while maintaining his ties to Judaism?

Sounds hypocritical to me.

But then again, Marxism always has largely been "do as I say, not as I do."

[JustRalph]

http://www.whatfinger.com/single-post/2017/02/20/BREAKING-Paris-Burning---Media-Blackout-Le-Pen-Brink-Of-Civil-War

The same idiots who call themselves Democrats, liberals and socialists is this country -- namely those who advocate unfettered illegal immigration and wide open borders for migrant Muslim haters are simply too stupid to see what happens to a society when a country is no longer a sovereign nation.

The above clip comes by way of Paris and is but a small view of what happens to such a society. Pay attention because you won't get this on NBC, CBS, BBC, MSNBC and the rest of the fake news crowd.

In time the great Marine Le Pen will become President of France and she'll get things started by turning back the Muslims and social democrat haters and make France great again.

Le Pen will have an ally in Donald Trump as he lead us and returns America to it's role as the unquestioned leader of the free world.

Most of the violent protestors are spoiled brats raised by liberal spoiled brats. They naturally go left where chances are way-way better of getting their way, getting hand-outs, and cry with others like them till they get it.
If all else fails, they turn to violence.
This isn't really rocket science, is it?

Yep.......

[Inner Dirt]

Fortunately? Now that's funny. I have Liberal friends. I still interact with them. There are some great people on this board that are Liberal. Well educated people that I find fun to be around. Although since I moved to Texas I haven't seen them for awhile. I think having different opinions in your circle is good for everyone.


The few liberal friends I have went off the deep end since the election. They are pretty much unbearable to talk to, one is so far gone I told him a very dear friend of mine died that he also interacted with years ago and he just kept ranting about his bad day. After he stopped fuming he said "What else happened this week beside Lou dying?" My Aunt who lives in Mexico (The only relative I speak with) is liberal and she seems just fine, the other ones aren't.
Maybe your liberal friends are respectable like my Aunt, mine turned into condescending jerks.

[Inner Dirt]

Maxine Waters a lying moron.
she should aspire to raise herself to the level of scumbag.
Because she is a total 100% disgrace to the nation. Her and he ilk should be deported.


You mean the Maxine Waters that claimed the CIA smuggled cocaine into the inner cities and sold it to citizens. You really have to wonder how such a piece of trash keeps getting re-elected.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Europe is being overun and destroyed thanks to unfettered immigration and wide open borders by Muslim haters and criminals, plain and simple. Just because countries gave them all a green light with their One Europe policy doesn't make these rioters right, do they? And you don't know this? See this? Have read about it? You must be kidding, feigning ignorance.

You could be in denial all you'd want to, Rich, but try and open your eyes for a change. And the reason the European Union is burning to the ground and their women are regularly being raped is because of these same haters -- they being Syrian and other Islamic 'migrants' that are over-running France, Belguim, Germany, and Sweden.



I am not looking for any kind words, if truth be known. The Muslims and socialist activists feed on the weakness of people such as yourself, so I am not worried how people feel about me or my willingness to shed some light on the issue.

The free world is under assault and once more I say to you: open your eyes. Political figures here and especially in the EU not only ignore what is happening but will get tough with people who publicly call out what is really happening to their country.

You never mentioned the contents of the clip I posted. What do you think about the clip? Did you watch it?

I don't think it is a case of denial. The situation in Europe is different than it is in America, and I should have been clearer that I don't think any American group, politician or public figure has ever suggested the borders should be thrown open Euro style. Nobody has suggested that the current vetting process should be abbreviated for refugees. If the clip and the posting were meant as a warning, I don't know who needs reminding in this country.

I believe the situation in Europe is complicated. For one thing, they don't have the same vetting process we do. Except for Cubans, if you just show up you don't get into America. You simply can't let tens of thousands of people from a culturally very different place, without vetting, and not expect problems. Most of the refugees that have been resettled in America have been sponsored, often by church groups. I've been to France and I've seen what amount to ghettos where they have packed in people and made almost no effort to assimilate them. The unemployment is high, the prospects for those people bleak. My point is that Europe never adopted a system as we have.

There is no feigning ignorance. We're talking apples and oranges. The situation is Europe is not the situation in America, and my point was that there is no one in America arguing for open borders or allowing in hordes of refugees without any vetting and no plan to resettle them. Whatever mistakes Europe is making, America is not making them.

I simply don't buy your argument about weakness. I've said on a number of occasions that we should have secure borders. That we should have an effective vetting process for immigrants. That we should have sponsored resettlement plans Where we depart is that I'm fine with the humanitarian resettlement of refugees in America. As I said, I know of no political figure in this country who believes we should fling open the borders. Europe isn't burning to the ground nor is there a rape epidemic in places like Sweden, at least not if you believe the statistics. Let me say clearly that there are problems with immigrants in Europe, but a lot of the hyperbole comes from the alt-right and anti-immigrant press (like Breitbart). Ironically, I did open my eyes - in Europe.

While we can agree about the need to have a strong immigration process, we can still disagree on whether refugees from war-torn middle eastern counties should be allowed in after vetting. And while we can agree that there are issues in Europe, we are going to disagree about the hyperbolic characterization of rioting, crime and rape. Don't assume unless you are over the top you are naive or in denial. There are a lot of emotions at work, not the least of which is fear. I'm simply of the opinion there is a place for compassion. I get that you think letting anyone in is dangerous. I just don't think you are correct.

[Robert Fischer]

You mean the Maxine Waters that claimed the CIA smuggled cocaine into the inner cities and sold it to citizens. You really have to wonder how such a piece of trash keeps getting re-elected.

She sounds like a nutcase. Nothing like that has happened since the '80s...

[LottaKash]

There are a lot of emotions at work, not the least of which is fear. I'm simply of the opinion there is a place for compassion. I get that you think letting anyone in is dangerous. I just don't think you are correct.

American's Safety "first and foremost", then Compassion.....

Letting just anyone in, is not wise, and is very incorrect, and quite unsafe, imo....

If the government can't or won't protect us from our enemies, then who will protect us...?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

There are a lot of emotions at work, not the least of which is fear. I'm simply of the opinion there is a place for compassion. I get that you think letting anyone in is dangerous. I just don't think you are correct.

American's Safety "first and foremost", then Compassion.....

Letting just anyone in, is not wise, and is very incorrect, and quite unsafe, imo....

If the government can't or won't protect us from our enemies, then who will protect us...?

You misunderstood me. When I said "letting anyone in" I didn't mean just anyone. I was saying, "I get that you think letting a single Muslim in is dangerous." As in, you believe we shouldn't let anyone in at all.

I said a few times nobody should get in without proper vetting. That is the same as saying they shouldn't let just anyone in.

[cj's dad]

I was wrong. You're not a moron. You're insane.

Your girl lost, my guy won. Get over it before your head explodes ! BTW, been to Denver and it is the liberal bastion of the USA along with the rest of the Pacific Northwest

[barn32]

BTW, been to Denver and it is the liberal bastion of the USA along with the rest of the Pacific NorthwestSo what?

[cj's dad]

So what?

Not worthy of a reply !

[Tom]

Yesterday, as Rochester Ny spent the day in debating and then voting unanimously to continue to be a sanctuary city, within 6 hours:

7 people were shot
2 people were run over on purpose with a car

Same day i Chicago - 2 people shot.

I would say Rochester is a place you from sanctuary FROM, not IN.

Same mayor who is so concerned with illegals cannot protect her own US citizens, and last year, she bull dozed a camp of homeless and threw all of their belongings into an incinerator.

Mayor Lover Warren is a nazi and a POS.

People who support sanctuary cities are not filt to be Americans.
That is who should "mass rounded up" moved out.

Insane for call Denver what it it?
You should lead the line out of here.

Mile high toilet bowl.
Unflushed.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Your girl lost, my guy won. Get over it before your head explodes ! BTW, been to Denver and it is the liberal bastion of the USA along with the rest of the Pacific Northwest

I've noticed that having no realistic idea of what you are talking about doesn't seem to stop you from spewing any uninformed thing that escapes your brain and makes it to your mouth. You clearly know little about Denver, as well as geography. Denver is neither a bastion of liberal thought by any objective measure, nor is it geographically in the Pacific Northwest. It isn't even in the Pacific time zone. In fact, it is about the same distance from Denver to Cleveland as from Denver to Seattle. While Tom has moved to the completely bat-shit crazy category - and I say that as objectively and without malice as possible - you unfortunately still anchor the moron wing of PA. What I find most fascinating is how being clueless is often such a point of pride for you.

No surprise you think your guy won. Your perspective is so slanted it would take you light years just to migrate from the far, far right to the center.

[Tom]

No surprise you think your guy won.

And YOU call people insane or ignorant???
Brother, that ain't Hillary sleeping in the WH every night.

Mind if I watch your meltdown? :popcorn:

[HalvOnHorseracing]

People who support sanctuary cities are not filt to be Americans.
That is who should "mass rounded up" moved out.

Insane for call Denver what it it?
You should lead the line out of here.

Mile high toilet bowl.
Unflushed.
I'm not going to argue about sanctuary cities because frankly I don't care. I have a feeling you think it means something different than what it does. I believe you think it means the cities are willing to "hide" immigrants from the feds, which is nothing close to what it means. And I'm sure you have no clue that support for many sanctuary cities originates in the police departments who realize if they are seen as a threat to any group they have major policing problems.

No, I don't think you are insane because of your stance on Denver. One of us has lived in Western NY for a few years and lived in Denver and knows the difference between the two places, and it ain't you. As I've said, not having a clue certainly doesn't stop you from ranting. No, you earned the label after years and years of lunacy about pretty much every topic. You never find any middle ground, you never see more than one side of any issue, and anyone who disagrees gets an upchuck of abuse. And somehow you feel entitled to call for insane things like moving all Americans who support sanctuary cities to - I don't know where. Coming from a rational person it could be taken as hyperbole to make a point. But from you, I think you actually believe that. That is what puts you in the irrational camp. You might be the angriest, most hateful person I've ever run into.

[Tom]

Justify all your, want but I know exactly what a sanctuary city is, and I know a guy is dead because the worthless authorities in Denver refused to cooperate with ICE. Spin it any way you want, but sanctuary cities are dead wrong.

And those who support them belong in jail.
Trump would do well to send in the Army to take over those cites - martial law.

So go see what President Hillary has to say about it. :pound::pound::pound:

[LottaKash]

You misunderstood me.

." As in, you believe we shouldn't let anyone in at all.

.

Perhaps I did misunderstand you, my apology if that is necessary...

Tho, I have never said as you believe I do, that we shouldn't let anyone in at all...

Hey, as a believing Christian, I strongly advocate clothing and feeding anyone in this world that has this urgent need of such things... Send the goods, I say... Simply, just help, not adopt them...

HOH, modern day Islam is not their Father's Islam any longer, just in case that you hadn't notice, I would remind you of that...

Modern Day Islam has become so hateful, vengeful and evil....There are so many young restless people that have converted to these atrocities, as if that should, somehow, be ok with us....Bullcrap!

They hate us, want to kill us, chop our heads off because we are Christians, or that we won't submit to their insane ways.. but we shouldn't worry about that?....I do...

HOH, sometimes your long lasting posts have me wondering what stance or position you take in the serious matters of our safety....You, to me at least, seem to straddle the fence in many of your posts when it seems to suit your particular post....

And, I also find that you are often very condescending a bit, when you make statements to certain people here that offer often strong or emotional outtakes on their point of view...Calling people morons or insane just seems to be just plain too judgmental to me...

There are many dangerous persons out there that want to do harm here...We have much historical evidence in that regard lately... Like a lot, in recent times...

We have every right to know who these people are....

Heck, they even quarantine racehorses before they are let into this country to race....So, why not "potentially dangerous people....Vette the F... out of them...!!!

[PaceAdvantage]

While Tom has moved to the completely bat-shit crazy category - and I say that as objectively and without malice as possible - you unfortunately still anchor the moron wing of PA. What I find most fascinating is how being clueless is often such a point of pride for you.Yeah, no malice there at all. Maybe I missed it, but where did Curtis call you names like moron and clueless?

And you probably think you're open-minded, right?

[no breathalyzer]

It blows my mind the way some people think out there in the world ... information needs to be made more available and media needs to be held accountable ... ignorance is bliss .. and the people that have not have the slightest clue seem to be the most vocal and disruptive... I just wish politics would stay out of my music . sports , entertainment ect..... I'm so sick of politics in general.. people are stuck in their beliefs and no matter what people aren't going to change how they view the world.. It is a much divided world at the moment. with the media leading a very false narrative

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Perhaps I did misunderstand you, my apology if that is necessary...

Tho, I have never said as you believe I do, that we shouldn't let anyone in at all...

Hey, as a believing Christian, I strongly advocate clothing and feeding anyone in this world that has this urgent need of such things... Send the goods, I say... Simply, just help, not adopt them...

HOH, modern day Islam is not their Father's Islam any longer, just in case that you hadn't notice, I would remind you of that...

Modern Day Islam has become so hateful, vengeful and evil....There are so many young restless people that have converted to these atrocities, as if that should, somehow, be ok with us....Bullcrap!

They hate us, want to kill us, chop our heads off because we are Christians, or that we won't submit to their insane ways.. but we shouldn't worry about that?....I do...

HOH, sometimes your long lasting posts have me wondering what stance or position you take in the serious matters of our safety....You, to me at least, seem to straddle the fence in many of your posts when it seems to suit your particular post....

And, I also find that you are often very condescending a bit, when you make statements to certain people here that offer often strong or emotional outtakes on their point of view...Calling people morons or insane just seems to be just plain too judgmental to me...

There are many dangerous persons out there that want to do harm here...We have much historical evidence in that regard lately... Like a lot, in recent times...

We have every right to know who these people are....

Heck, they even quarantine racehorses before they are let into this country to race....So, why not "potentially dangerous people....Vette the F... out of them...!!!

I'm not sure how much clearer I could have been. Vet them thoroughly. No problem with that. It takes years currently. I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone could have come to the conclusion I wanted to just open the floodgates. I also said, I don't know anyone in this country who advocates for open borders, especially as it pertains to people from the Middle East.

I've also agreed that there is a clear faction of Muslims who are incorrigible people. I also have no problem not letting them settle here. But

Actually when I said something about not letting anyone in, it was in response to another poster, not you.

I can only tell you that in my community - not necessarily my neighborhood - there are a lot of people of Muslim faith who fled hellish situations in Africa and have been good citizens here. It tells me that there are immigrants who deserve the dream that America has represented from its inception. That's not closing my eyes to the problem of radicalized terrorists. That's a recognition that the best of America is far, far better than the best of ISIS or the Taliban. I don't care how you do it, but I'm fine with figuring out how to do it. I won't adopt the position that all, or even most Muslims are inherently interested in beheadings and killing Christians, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize those people exist.

[Tom]

If we let them in, then at least send them to Denver.

Ah, Curtis....you and me, we is deplorable!
But at least we know who won the election.
Halv and Stinkny haven't come to grips with that yet!

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Yeah, no malice there at all. Maybe I missed it, but where did Curtis call you names like moron and clueless?

And you probably think you're open-minded, right?

Curtis was personal in his posts. There was the rant about Denver (turd this and turd that). There was the taunt calling me a girl and suggesting Tom was the winner of the discussion. The fact that he didn't use the magic words doesn't reduce the enmity. I'm not sure what the correct word is for believing Denver is a liberal bastion and in the Pacific Northwest, but next time I'll spend more time trying to think of that word.

Actually, I'm not open-minded about people who aren't open minded.

Back in my working days I said, don't make it personal and I won't take it personal. I have no problem having civil discussions if someone wants to have civil discussions.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Justify all your, want but I know exactly what a sanctuary city is, and I know a guy is dead because the worthless authorities in Denver refused to cooperate with ICE. Spin it any way you want, but sanctuary cities are dead wrong.


That is not exactly what happened. The person you probably refer to, Ever Valles, was arrested last October on several charges, including possession of a weapon and vehicle theft. While in the Denver jail, agents with ICE asked jailers to notify them to be on hand for his release so they could take him into federal custody. The Sheriff's Department did that. Valles posted bond, and he was released before agents arrived. The reason? ICE didn't have a warrant and courts have prevented jails from holding immigrants in the absence of one. Valles subsequently killed a man during a robbery at a light rail station.

So once again you don't have the story right, most likely because you only read alt-right publications. ICE screwed that one up, not Denver.

And again, you don't understand what sanctuary city means. When an illegal is jailed, ICE is informed. They decide if they want to come pick up the illegal. Sanctuary city does NOT mean you don't tell ICE you have an illegal, and it doesn't mean you shield illegals. In Denver, as in most of the 200 sanctuary cities, it means local funds would not be allocated to enforce federal immigration law, not that they won't let the feds enforce federal law or cooperate with them by informing them when illegals are taken into custody.

[PaceAdvantage]

Curtis was personal in his posts. There was the rant about Denver (turd this and turd that). There was the taunt calling me a girl and suggesting Tom was the winner of the discussion. The fact that he didn't use the magic words doesn't reduce the enmity. I'm not sure what the correct word is for believing Denver is a liberal bastion and in the Pacific Northwest, but next time I'll spend more time trying to think of that word.

Actually, I'm not open-minded about people who aren't open minded.

Back in my working days I said, don't make it personal and I won't take it personal. I have no problem having civil discussions if someone wants to have civil discussions.Oh, well, he called you a girl...that's enough for me...carry on.

[cj's dad]

Oh, well, he called you a girl...that's enough for me...carry on.

No I did not. What I posted was "your girl (meaning Hilary) lost, and my guy won "

[PaceAdvantage]

No I did not. What I posted was "your girl (meaning Hilary) lost, and my guy won "Well, this changes everything then. What say you Halv?

[cj's dad]

[QUOTE=Tom;2124891]
I was wrong. You're not a moron. You're insane.

Re: post #96. I did not post that,. I do not know how that became attributed to me!

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Well, this changes everything then. What say you Halv?

Well now that he says it, it makes sense. Sometimes the medium creates issues with clarity. Had I gotten it right the first time, it would have all turned out differently. If I knew which one was he sheepish emoticon, I'd use it.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

[QUOTE=HalvOnHorseracing;2124944]

Re: post #96. I did not post that,. I do not know how that became attributed to me!

And another issue could have been avoided.

[Inner Dirt]

You never find any middle ground, you never see more than one side of any issue, and anyone who disagrees gets an upchuck of abuse. You might be the angriest, most hateful person I've ever run into.

You just described yourself. You have called me all kinds of nasty names directly and I have done no such thing to you. You are the pot calling the kettle black.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

You just described yourself. You have called me all kinds of nasty names directly and I have done no such thing to you. You are the pot calling the kettle black.

You haven't read my stuff closely enough then. I've taken the middle ground plenty of times. I'd be happy to list some if you missed them. The fact that you couch your attacks on "liberals" in general doesn't make you superior in my book. You are scornful and you essentially call them stupid and misguided. Whether you use the exact words or not, your meaning is unequivocal. Read some of the stuff you've sent and tell me the negative words weren't going through your head when you wrote the post.

[Inner Dirt]

You haven't read my stuff closely enough then. I've taken the middle ground plenty of times. I'd be happy to list some if you missed them. The fact that you couch your attacks on "liberals" in general doesn't make you superior in my book. You are scornful and you essentially call them stupid and misguided. Whether you use the exact words or not, your meaning is unequivocal. Read some of the stuff you've sent and tell me the negative words weren't going through your head when you wrote the post.

How long have you claimed to be a mind reader?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

How long have you claimed to be a mind reader?

Guess I was right.

[athisfinest]

because republicans normally win when everyone stays home..