The SJW and equality movement
- Thread starter Wormwood
- Start date
People invented democracy so the strong couldn't oppress the weak. Evidently the Democrats didn't learn that in history class. They want to settle everything with violence so the powerful can always get what they want regardless of the needs and opinions of the weak. What an ignorant bunch of hypocrites.
LeBron never said that he condones or encourages violence against the police? He hasn't.
What twisted logic would attempt to discredit LeBron's speaking up regarding excessive police force against black people because he isn't putting up reward money for other causes such as violence against police? Why hasn't he offered all of his wealth to any number of society's scourges of violence such as domestic abuse, rape, child abuse, etc. This is an elementary logical fallacy.
Finally, the leadership of the LA Sheriff's department has been less than stellar. This is the same department that allowed a half dozen or so of its officers to use personal cell phone cameras to take and distribute pictures of the Koby Bryant (and its other victims) at the crash site. Shaming a celebrity should be the least of his priorities.
What twisted logic would attempt to discredit LeBron's speaking up regarding excessive police force against black people because he isn't putting up reward money for other causes such as violence against police? Why hasn't he offered all of his wealth to any number of society's scourges of violence such as domestic abuse, rape, child abuse, etc. This is an elementary logical fallacy.
Finally, the leadership of the LA Sheriff's department has been less than stellar. This is the same department that allowed a half dozen or so of its officers to use personal cell phone cameras to take and distribute pictures of the Koby Bryant (and its other victims) at the crash site. Shaming a celebrity should be the least of his priorities.
So I take it you think settling elections by force is a good thing?
By extension you approve of the Democrat approach to politics - use any strategy that might work - impeach a president for nothing impeachable, wine about Russia collusion until the investigation produces nothing, let ANTIFA prevent people you disagree with from speaking, let cities burn if you think it makes a political point, try to stir up racial tension for political reasons.
The Dems will lose the election badly unless they can fiddle enough postal ballots to 'win'.
David
By extension you approve of the Democrat approach to politics - use any strategy that might work - impeach a president for nothing impeachable, wine about Russia collusion until the investigation produces nothing, let ANTIFA prevent people you disagree with from speaking, let cities burn if you think it makes a political point, try to stir up racial tension for political reasons.
The Dems will lose the election badly unless they can fiddle enough postal ballots to 'win'.
David
There is zero difference between the dems and republicans when it comes to politics David. Drop the virtue signaling for one side.
You also completely missed the point, but whatever. There are millions of Americans who identify as Democrats and the vast majority are no more radical (i.e., the nonsense you put forth) or ignorant than their republican counter parts. Jim's labeling of them as ignorant just reflects poorly on him. Nothing new I guess.
You also completely missed the point, but whatever. There are millions of Americans who identify as Democrats and the vast majority are no more radical (i.e., the nonsense you put forth) or ignorant than their republican counter parts. Jim's labeling of them as ignorant just reflects poorly on him. Nothing new I guess.
The Department of Justice has identified New York City, Portland And Seattle as jurisdictions permitting violence and destruction of property, which is the first step in withholding federal money from those cities.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/depa...portland-and-seattle-jurisdictions-permitting
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presiden...anarchy-violence-destruction-american-cities/
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/depa...portland-and-seattle-jurisdictions-permitting
Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, September 21, 2020
Department Of Justice Identifies New York City, Portland And Seattle As Jurisdictions Permitting Violence And Destruction Of Property
Identification is Response to Presidential Memorandum Reviewing Federal Funding to State and Local Governments that are Permitting Anarchy, Violence, and Destruction in American Cities
The U.S. Department of Justice today identified the following three jurisdictions that have permitted violence and destruction of property to persist and have refused to undertake reasonable measures to counteract criminal activities: New York City; Portland, Oregon; and Seattle, Washington. The Department of Justice is continuing to work to identify jurisdictions that meet the criteria set out in the President’s Memorandum and will periodically update the list of selected jurisdictions as required therein.
This is the Presidential Memorandum:https://www.whitehouse.gov/presiden...anarchy-violence-destruction-american-cities/
PRESIDENTIAL MEMORANDA
Memorandum on Reviewing Funding to State and Local Government Recipients That Are Permitting Anarchy, Violence, and Destruction in American Cities
LAW & JUSTICE
Issued on: September 2, 2020
...
(a) Within 14 days of the date of this memorandum, and updated as appropriate but no less than every 6 months thereafter, the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of OMB, shall publish on the Department of Justice website a list identifying State and local jurisdictions that have permitted violence and the destruction of property to persist and have refused to undertake reasonable measures to counteract these criminal activities (anarchist jurisdictions).
...
(c) Within 30 days of the date of this memorandum, the Director of OMB shall issue guidance to the heads of agencies on restricting eligibility of or otherwise disfavoring, to the maximum extent permitted by law, anarchist jurisdictions in the receipt of Federal grants that the agency has sufficient lawful discretion to restrict or otherwise disfavor anarchist jurisdictions from receiving.
Kinda scary isn't it? Sure, for those who haven't stepped foot in those cities, I'd be curious to know on what basis they support this type of federal interdiction.
Message here seems to be: Don't do Trump's political bidding? He'll use the immense powers of the federal government to punish. Exactly what the founding fathers had in mind I guess.
Message here seems to be: Don't do Trump's political bidding? He'll use the immense powers of the federal government to punish. Exactly what the founding fathers had in mind I guess.
Well a fair few democrats have moved to the #Walkaway movement - for democrats who have had enough.
Look, I have voted Labour, Conservative, and UKIP at different times in my life. I am also still a member of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. I am not the right-wing nutter that you try to paint me as. The problem - as you must surely have noticed - is that left and right labels don't mean the same as they did 30 or 40 years ago.
David
Look, I have voted Labour, Conservative, and UKIP at different times in my life. I am also still a member of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. I am not the right-wing nutter that you try to paint me as. The problem - as you must surely have noticed - is that left and right labels don't mean the same as they did 30 or 40 years ago.
David
I would support a walkaway movement from both political parties. They are only creating more and more division and becoming more and more dualistic.
Division is purposely sown so that the elite can continue to extend their power. The net worth of the upper 0.1 percent has rapidly grown in comparison to the bottom 80 percent. Is this acceptable to the American people? Are we content to let our economy grow closer to the feudal system of medieval Europe? The only reason this is allowed because of the extreme polarization of our two political parties. As long as this division continues the wealth gap will get greater and greater until our democracy collapses and is replaced by a more authoritarian one to enforce more "law and order".
Instead of scapegoating the other side we need to see that both sides have valid points. We need to see the people on the other side as fellow human beings first and only after connecting with that basic humanity we share will we engage on differing viewpoints. Both sides want what is best for the American people (or whichever country you reside in) they only differ in how to get there.
I consider many of the people from both sides posting on this board to be perhaps a bit more "conscious" than your average Joe. Those that are more conscious have to lead the way in showing respect for the other side. This respect can slowly spread like rings in the water and a more compassionate, understanding dialog can begin amongst the general population. This seeing this basic humanity of the other side doesn't start with the other side it starts with us.
Division is purposely sown so that the elite can continue to extend their power. The net worth of the upper 0.1 percent has rapidly grown in comparison to the bottom 80 percent. Is this acceptable to the American people? Are we content to let our economy grow closer to the feudal system of medieval Europe? The only reason this is allowed because of the extreme polarization of our two political parties. As long as this division continues the wealth gap will get greater and greater until our democracy collapses and is replaced by a more authoritarian one to enforce more "law and order".
Instead of scapegoating the other side we need to see that both sides have valid points. We need to see the people on the other side as fellow human beings first and only after connecting with that basic humanity we share will we engage on differing viewpoints. Both sides want what is best for the American people (or whichever country you reside in) they only differ in how to get there.
I consider many of the people from both sides posting on this board to be perhaps a bit more "conscious" than your average Joe. Those that are more conscious have to lead the way in showing respect for the other side. This respect can slowly spread like rings in the water and a more compassionate, understanding dialog can begin amongst the general population. This seeing this basic humanity of the other side doesn't start with the other side it starts with us.
The mainstream media is more guilty of creating division that either of the main political parties are. I miss journalism. Real journalism, the kind that asked hard questions of both parties and actually presented the facts.
A free press should be there to keep the politicians in line. We've lost that.
A free press should be there to keep the politicians in line. We've lost that.
Republicans are not creating divisions, The media deliberately misreporting on Republicans and on many issues is creating divisions.
Democrats have been preaching identity politics and trying to silence opposition with political correctness for decades. That is one of the biggest sources of division. Trump won the Republican primary in 2016 because he is the only public figure in the country to stand up against political correctness and defend conservatives against the liars calling us all racists. Trump is only divisive if you 1) believe the false media reporting or 2) accept that opinions contradicting liberal ideology should be censored.
"Law and order"is not authoritarian. Rule of law was invented so that the same laws would apply to everyone both the powerful and the weak. Law and order is what protects us from authoritarianism which is rule by whim (the whim of judges, bureaucrats, presidents and mobs) - the alternative to rule of law.
Trump is not appointing judges who interpret the law according to conservative ideology, he is appointing judges who interpret the law according to its intended meaning when it was passed. That is a fair compromise between left and right but Democrats don't want a fair compromise, they don't want rule of law or democracy. Their acceptance of violent riots shows they want to go back to rule by violence where the strong can oppress the weak.
Democrats have been preaching identity politics and trying to silence opposition with political correctness for decades. That is one of the biggest sources of division. Trump won the Republican primary in 2016 because he is the only public figure in the country to stand up against political correctness and defend conservatives against the liars calling us all racists. Trump is only divisive if you 1) believe the false media reporting or 2) accept that opinions contradicting liberal ideology should be censored.
"Law and order"is not authoritarian. Rule of law was invented so that the same laws would apply to everyone both the powerful and the weak. Law and order is what protects us from authoritarianism which is rule by whim (the whim of judges, bureaucrats, presidents and mobs) - the alternative to rule of law.
Trump is not appointing judges who interpret the law according to conservative ideology, he is appointing judges who interpret the law according to its intended meaning when it was passed. That is a fair compromise between left and right but Democrats don't want a fair compromise, they don't want rule of law or democracy. Their acceptance of violent riots shows they want to go back to rule by violence where the strong can oppress the weak.
Last edited:
Agree: I miss journalism. A free press. Its tragic where we are presently.
Disagree: Trump's role IS as a servant to the people. While the press has been perverted by "for profit" motives from which it is owned, the POTUS should be above that and has one primary role: to serve the people and provide leadership. On the division notion, Trump's been at least as guilty as any one individual or group and IMO (yes, just as yours is) has been public enemy number one on this point. He's a train wreck in this regard. History will arbitrate this difference of position between us and I'm confident I've got it right.
Disagree: Trump's role IS as a servant to the people. While the press has been perverted by "for profit" motives from which it is owned, the POTUS should be above that and has one primary role: to serve the people and provide leadership. On the division notion, Trump's been at least as guilty as any one individual or group and IMO (yes, just as yours is) has been public enemy number one on this point. He's a train wreck in this regard. History will arbitrate this difference of position between us and I'm confident I've got it right.
Source? Or are you just continuing your personal opinion campaign?
Just drop it Jim. You've carved out your worldview here and have rigidly rejected any alternative view. Trump is a MASSIVE part of this problem and, again as I shared with K9, the prime mover/cause IMO.
Its almost shocking that any thinking person would make the statement you've made here. Its tone deaf.
Just drop it Jim. You've carved out your worldview here and have rigidly rejected any alternative view. Trump is a MASSIVE part of this problem and, again as I shared with K9, the prime mover/cause IMO.
Its almost shocking that any thinking person would make the statement you've made here. Its tone deaf.
Agree: I miss journalism. A free press. Its tragic where we are presently.
Disagree: Trump's role IS as a servant to the people. While the press has been perverted by "for profit" motives from which it is owned, the POTUS should be above that and has one primary role: to serve the people and provide leadership. On the division notion, Trump's been at least as guilty as any one individual or group and IMO (yes, just as yours is) has been public enemy number one on this point. He's a train wreck in this regard. History will arbitrate this difference of position between us and I'm confident I've got it right.
Disagree: Trump's role IS as a servant to the people. While the press has been perverted by "for profit" motives from which it is owned, the POTUS should be above that and has one primary role: to serve the people and provide leadership. On the division notion, Trump's been at least as guilty as any one individual or group and IMO (yes, just as yours is) has been public enemy number one on this point. He's a train wreck in this regard. History will arbitrate this difference of position between us and I'm confident I've got it right.
So the government is going to fix that for us? The broader point here is the traditional ask of conservative republicans for less regulation, smaller government. Trump is enacting a form of regulatory control, effectively, with this policy.
What's next, any private company with democratic leanings is to be banned from government contract work? Its a slope that might be slippery is all.
What's next, any private company with democratic leanings is to be banned from government contract work? Its a slope that might be slippery is all.
No, you're totally off. We already have a federal regulatory agency, the EEOC, which is ostensibly there to protect employees from discrimination based on a host of things including ideology. That agency is so backed up with claims it takes months or years to work through the process. All Trump did was to say "stop it" to things that are already illegal unfair infringements on people's rights.