America: Love It or Leave It

Aglaopheme said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-discrimination-cases/?utm_term=.ba98adeb3a8e

https://civilrights.org/trump-rollbacks/

Click to expand...

did you actually read this?

it shows nothing of the sort....

its mere policy differences....and NIGGER had the same policies

Trump hasnt rolled beck shit except the sanity of you and your elk

Wrong Element said:

In other words, her premise was not faulty: opposing what a Democratic president does is just patriotism; opposing what a Republican president does is "hating America."

Click to expand...

winna winna

What if the executive branch of the federal government imposed a new tax (not approved by the legislative branch), to be paid by the general population, on specific products of a foreign industry, in order to support a specific domestic industry? Then suppose the revenue from those taxes was distributed to a distinct population independent of the industry. Is that redistribution of income? Would that be considered socialism?

No, tariffs, together with royalties as the only revenue sources authorized by the constitution as originally adopted would not be socialism. Nor would it be redistribution of income. Consumers choose what to buy. If tariffs discourage a particular consumer choice, that's protectionism not socialism.

about_average said:

I'm assuming you'll provide an example of the four congresswomen disrespecting the flag.

I know the right does it all the time, Bush giving autographs on the flag, fitly tattered flags hanging off the back of their Trucks, Trump (and Sean Hannity) not standing and and facing the flag during Retreat, and Trump's cult members cheering him when he demonstrated his cluelessness about it.
The cheering part isn't unusual, most recently demonstrated when Trump started his latest tirade about congresswomen saying the US government is "...a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world".
His cult members are cheering him.

Click to expand...

Sounds like Trump’s base would all be happier on a one-way trip across the ocean.

phrodeau said:

Sounds like Trump’s base would all be happier on a one-way trip across the ocean.

Click to expand...

No. Trump's base would like America as contractually agreed to. Not the kind of writing that lives and breathes but the kind of writing that means exactly what was written as it meant when it was written, just like any other contract.

Anerica, as agreed to, is just fine.

America ruled by pen and phone or by unelected judges, not.

. . .and yes, that includes King Bush I, King Bush II, and High Potentate Trump.

Don't worry, people pay attention to you.


^^^Real Racist^^^

Que said:

"Leading racist?"

Coming from you that's quite a compliment. I don't think you idiots have any idea what you've done to the word racist. It doesn't mean a goddamn thing anymore.

No one even pays attention to actual racists anymore because you have so diminisher the term through overuse.

Sad!

Click to expand...

#DeportMelania was OK

but saying those that HATE America leave

ISNT?

i

agree

Que said:

No, tariffs, together with royalties as the only revenue sources authorized by the constitution as originally adopted would not be socialism. Nor would it be redistribution of income. Consumers choose what to buy. If tariffs discourage a particular consumer choice, that's protectionism not socialism.

Click to expand...

From a George Will column:

A more apt connection of current events to actual socialism was made by Sen. Ron Johnson, the Wisconsin Republican, when Donald Trump decided to validate the conservative axiom that government often is the disease for which it pretends to be the cure. When the president decided to give farmers a $12 billion bandage for the wound he inflicted on them with his splendid little (so far) trade war, and when other injured interests joined the clamor for comparable compensations, Johnson said, “This is becoming more and more like a Soviet type of economy here: Commissars deciding who’s going to be granted waivers, commissars in the administration figuring out how they’re going to sprinkle around benefits."

Que said:

No. Trump's base would like America as contractually agreed to. Not the kind of writing that lives and breathes but the kind of writing that means exactly what was written as it meant when it was written, just like any other contract.

Anerica, as agreed to, is just fine.

America ruled by pen and phone or by unelected judges, not.

. . .and yes, that includes King Bush I, King Bush II, and High Potentate Trump.

Click to expand...

Wait so you're literally opposed to any amendments to the constitution?

Really?

I mean... I didn't know you were getting this bad.

So you're cool with slavery and only white land-owning men being able to vote (if they passed the written test) and all that jazz. You wanna go back to the ideals of people who shit in a bucket wearing a grill of sheep teeth who didn't know what germs were?

We're not gonna do that. Like I thought y'all were bad but I didn't know your goal was actual sabotage. Like I didn't know that you hated this place so bad you were actively trying to take us out, I thought you were just misinformed.

Also, this doesn't even work by your own logic because the founding fathers understood that society would progress and set up a system to have a living document that could be changed with the times. So that we wouldn't get caught up in this kind of nonsense.

Que's out here wanting to be forced to let soldiers sleep at his house.

This is your life....today's episode...que


Que: we dont need Constitutional Amendments...we are good just as we are. Stick with following the Constitution.

Moderator: but que, the Constitution provides us w ways to amend itself...it is a living document.

Que: that is not what I said...learn to read.

BotanyBoy said:

No they're not, and it's not collective ownership.
You're simply wrong.

Click to expand...

Nope.
Collective ownership is one of several forms of socialism. I belong to several socialist organization, my electric coop, food coop and other coops, and I buy products of a socialist company, Land-of-Lakes.
One of the oldest and the most popular football team in the US is socialist, the Green Pay Packers.

Ok...so what would you call abolishing ICE/CBP/DHS and decriminalizing undocumented crossing into the USA between ports of entry?

Click to expand...

I thought you were a libertarian? The Cato Institute wants to abolish DHS.
ICE - They say they want something else in it's place. By your logic republicans wanting to end the ACA means he wants to end health care in the US.
I haven't seen where they want to eliminate the CBP.

Do you support them as politicians??

Click to expand...

I support their right to serve in congress.

Their political views??

Click to expand...

Like I feel about most politicians, i support some of their views, disagree with others.

Americans arguing about the other systems if government is fun to watch.

Paraphrased tweet:

Ironically, the same people who are telling those who don’t agree with our government to leave, are telling asylum seekers who want to come here to stay where they are and fix their broken government.

(Racists may just be the ultimate hypocrites.)

about_average said:

Nope.
Collective ownership is one of several forms of socialism. I belong to several socialist organization, my electric coop, food coop and other coops, and I buy products of a socialist company, Land-of-Lakes.
One of the oldest and the most popular football team in the US is socialist, the Green Pay Packers.

Click to expand...

Ahh so you're claiming to use the term as Mill defined it not in the modern political science and political use of the term as Marx defined it.

Unfortunately that's just called a co-op and they only really exist in a capitalist/liberal environment and not at all what anyone outside the political hobbyist/scientist community means when they use the term.

Certainly not when discussing the (D)'s who openly advocate nationalizing wide sectors if not the vast majority of the US economy.

about_average said:

I thought you were a libertarian?

Click to expand...

No, I recognize the concept of positive liberty and in a lot of cases support government authority used to provide the civil/public services needed to provide it.

I'm pretty right down the middle as far as R v L goes, I think a healthy society needs aspects of both.

In the authority v liberty scale though I'm way hard for liberty up until it's infringing on others.

about_average said:

The Cato Institute wants to abolish DHS.
ICE - They say they want something else in it's place.

Click to expand...

I don't give two pumps of rat shit what the Cato Institute wants LOL

about_average said:

By your logic

Click to expand...

By your ascription.....

about_average said:

republicans wanting to end the ACA means he wants to end health care in the US.

Click to expand...

No, by my logic Republicans wanting to end ACA means they want to end government abuse of authority to enable an insurance scam. Probably because it was theirs and if they can't have credit for it nobody can.

If the US government totally removed itself from the HC industry, HC would go on in the US. Just like eliminating public education? Wouldn't end education in the US.

I'm not a lefty, I don't conflate government programs/services with markets.

Personally I don't think the federal government has any authority, much less business becoming the HC industry or even involving itself and thus all 50 states into the issue.

It's just NOT a federal issue.

If Wyoming wants to keep their HC services 1880's cash only free market? Cool, let Wyoming do Wyoming.

If more moderate states want a public HC option for THEIR citizens and not just anyone who shows up?? By all means.

If California and NY want to provide a no ID needed universal HC for anyone who shows up asks for it?? Nothing stopping them. Fuckin' do it.

Adre said:

Paraphrased tweet:

Ironically, the same people who are telling those who don’t agree with our government to leave, are telling asylum seekers who want to come here to stay where they are and fix their broken government.

(Racists may just be the ultimate hypocrites.)

Click to expand...

There is nothing racist about wanting to control your borders and immigration.

That's just flagrant misuse of the term....to the point of overt dishonesty.

Carnal_Flower said:

Don't worry, people pay attention to you.


^^^Real Racist^^^

Click to expand...

I see you finally have the right face to go with your anti-American posture and corrupted name.

hey...

BoyNextDoor said:

Same shit from the 1960 and 1970s all over again. Every generation needs to confront the Anti-Americans among us who use this slogan and the demagogues that foment racism.

America is ideas, and ideals and a creed, not blood and soil.

Click to expand...

And lets take a look at the two major social opposing forces of the 60's and the 70's,

the hippies and THE MAN and lets see who is still a force?

I was there, I watched the hippies rise and I watched them as they fell out of favor and were re-assimilated into THE MAN's society. And just like the way the hippies made their quiet march into historical oblivion, I will watch as the rest of you join them in the pages of a the dust of a dead history.

BotanyBoy said:

There is nothing racist about wanting to control your borders and immigration.

That's just flagrant misuse of the term....to the point of overt dishonesty.

Click to expand...

There is something very racist about trying to deny asylum to all brown people. And we all know that is Trump’s and the very racist Miller’s goal.

The fact that Trump singled out only women of color makes it racist.

Racism as a political strategy is just about as low as you can go. And what it says about one’s base is pretty SAD.

DeluxAuto said:

The fact that Trump singled out only women of color makes it racist.

Click to expand...

It's not racist to disagree with someone who is haranguing you.

If I say something you object to and you, a woman of color, counter with your own oration, it's not "racist" to reply.

It IS "racist" to say that I'm being racist for replying because I'm "white".

Think about that.

HisArpy said:

It's not racist to disagree with someone who is haranguing you.

If I say something you object to and you, a woman of color, counter with your own oration, it's not "racist" to reply.

It IS "racist" to say that I'm being racist for replying because I'm "white".

Think about that.

Click to expand...

Why didn't he come down on the white members of Congress who are "haranguing" him? It is absolutely racist and his supporting the chants of his racist supporters prove his racism.