Something to consider.

[Ineeda SM]

This website is for Transgendered people to communicate in a community. But all people are welcomed here to participate and interact with each other as a much larger community.

Homosexual and transgendered lifestyles are a choice made by people with psychological illnesses. Sexual relations between people of the same sex is not normal. Those who have chosen this path have subjected themselves to imminent mental destruction. Their actions contaminate and threaten the family values of our society. Our children are exposed to this deviant abomination, which threatens the mental stability of our children and their families. Parents, churches, and schools must teach our children and each other the family values given to us all by God to sway victims away from the evil sins of the homosexual lifestyle before it is too late and they become lost forever.

That is the official policy of the republican party. The GOP in Montana wanted to take it one step further, and make homosexuality illegal. Google it for yourself and read the bill.

All people, no matter what your race, gender, lifestyle, religion, or political stand are welcomed openly. No one is condemned or influenced to be anything other than what and who you are. Human rights are for all people everywhere.

That is the official policy of the democratic party.

My simple concern is that if you are here on this website, you are certainly in support of the websites intentions, and the lifestyles of those who use it. So if you support this site's intentions and it's users, then how can you support the republicans who are against the very reason this website exist?

That is the very reason why when a small group of people praise and support every aspect of the republican party as if only they can be correct, and the democrats are totally wrong, I can only think that those GOP supporters must be trolls who are here to stir up their hate. How can they be in support of the gay and transgender people, and support the very party that thinks they are abominations and mentally ill? There are only 3 or 4 who do this with strong and forceful language. The rest either stay neutral or express viewpoints without force, or support the side that supports the people this website was intended for.

Can someone please explain this action so all of us can understand it? And please, no flames, fighting, name calling, or arguments. Just honest and sensible replies only. Let's make this a grown up discussion.

[Yvonne183]

I usually don't respond in politics cause as you say it gets rough and my posts also reflect that harshness, which upsets me cause I ain't evil.

I only speak for myself and not for anyone else. I like to think of myself as libertarian, there are ideas on both sides that I can agree on. I don't see things as black and white, democrat/republican. In your above statement it says that democrats are open for all lifestyles,, then why do I get arrested for prostitution in very liberal Baltimore and same in very liberal NYC? Why don't democrats embrace my lifestyle and not arrest me for it?

There are things I can say about republicans as well but they don't claim to embrace my lifestyle, but democrats and liberals are supposed to be on my side, then why don't they allow me to live my lifestyle?

I didn't call anyone any names,, and I only speak of this topic that concerns me so don't ask me about wars, the military, muslims, christians or the federal budget, I just never understood what I am doing that is wrong, who am I hurting?

[nonnonnon]

http://www.logcabin.org

[Ineeda SM]

I usually don't respond in politics cause as you say it gets rough and my posts also reflect that harshness, which upsets me cause I ain't evil.

I only speak for myself and not for anyone else. I like to think of myself as libertarian, there are ideas on both sides that I can agree on. I don't see things as black and white, democrat/republican. In your above statement it says that democrats are open for all lifestyles,, then why do I get arrested for prostitution in very liberal Baltimore and same in very liberal NYC? Why don't democrats embrace my lifestyle and not arrest me for it?

There are things I can say about republicans as well but they don't claim to embrace my lifestyle, but democrats and liberals are supposed to be on my side, then why don't they allow me to live my lifestyle?

I didn't call anyone any names,, and I only speak of this topic that concerns me so don't ask me about wars, the military, muslims, christians or the federal budget, I just never understood what I am doing that is wrong, who am I hurting?

Hi Yvonne.

You were not specific on one important aspect. Were you prostituting, or were you just arrested falsely for it? If you were actually prostituting, prostitution is not a lifestyle. It is a job where you earn money for the service, and it is illegal. I am not judging, I am just saying. Lifestyles like gay or transgender are not illegal.

If you were not prostitutiong and got arrested, then it was wrong for them to arrest you. But if they suspected you were prostituting, they were not following a political partyline. They were enforcing the law against prostitution which is agreed to by all parties and society in general.

[Ineeda SM]

http://www.logcabin.org

I commend the Log Cabin Republicans for what they do. I would bet that if they totally replaced the current republican party, they would do a much better job and act like humans. They prove they have hearts for people.

[Yvonne183]

I commend the Log Cabin Republicans for what they do. I would bet that if they totally replaced the current republican party, they would do a much better job and act like humans. They prove they have hearts for people.


Hi Yvonne.

You were not specific on one important aspect. Were you prostituting, or were you just arrested falsely for it? If you were actually prostituting, prostitution is not a lifestyle. It is a job where you earn money for the service, and it is illegal. I am not judging, I am just saying. Lifestyles like gay or transgender are not illegal.

If you were not prostitutiong and got arrested, then it was wrong for them to arrest you. But if they suspected you were prostituting, they were not following a political partyline. They were enforcing the law against prostitution which is agreed to by all parties and society in general.

I guess that's the way to not accept a lifestyle,, just don't recognize it as one. I wonder if the republicans were to say that they don't accept being gay a lifestyle then they too would be justified in not accepting it and may actually be in favor of arresting gay people for their lifestyle,, oh wait a minute,,, gays were at one time arrested for their lifestyle. i wonder if that justifies that gay is not a lifestyle cause they got arrested as do prostitutes today in liberal NYC and Baltimore. So by your reasoning gay is not a lifestyle cause they got arrested.

Just because there is a law, doesn't mean that it is a just law, whether the majority feels this way is of no importance. In times past the majority thought it was OK to own human beings.

Liberals or conservatives can not determine as a political group what is a valid lifestyle and what isn't, once they accept a group of people that have an alternative lifestyle as an accepted lifestyle then they have to accept all lifestyles, cause if being gay can be classified as being the norm then what is an abnormal lifestyle.

Just one note, I talk about consenting adults, nothing to do with underage people.


Yes I talk about actual prostitute and not being falsely arrested, being falsely arrested for anything is just wrong.

So far so good,, no name calling,,,,lol

Didn't Barr at one time run for president under the Libertarian banner?

[Ineeda SM]

I guess that's the way to not accept a lifestyle,, just don't recognize it as one. I wonder if the republicans were to say that they don't accept being gay a lifestyle then they too would be justified in not accepting it and may actually be in favor of arresting gay people for their lifestyle,, oh wait a minute,,, gays were at one time arrested for their lifestyle. i wonder if that justifies that gay is not a lifestyle cause they got arrested as do prostitutes today in liberal NYC and Baltimore. So by your reasoning gay is not a lifestyle cause they got arrested.

Yvonne, a lifestyle is exactly that. The style in which you conduct your life. Prostitution is not a lifestyle. It is an occupation and a business in which you sell sex for payment. It is also illegal. If I go 75MPH on a highway that is clearly posted with a 50MPH limit, I am willingly breaking the law. I know what I am doing is illegal, but I do it anyway. If I get caught and get a big ticket, I can not blame the law just because my own personal view is that the law is wrong. I have to pay the fine and move on.


Just because there is a law, doesn't mean that it is a just law, whether the majority feels this way is of no importance. In times past the majority thought it was OK to own human beings.

I agree with you. I think prostitution should be totally legal. In countries that have legal prostitution, there are very low sex crime rates, and far less health issues related to STD's. If a guy wants to pay someone to get laid, who cares? Who is it hurting? I am on your side Yvonne. But as I said, right or wrong, it is against the law here and now. You go at your own risk. And if you get arrested, you knew it could happen. Hopefully the laws will change someday and stop the stupidity


So far so good,, no name calling,,,,lol

Yes you are being a good girl. And thank you hun.:)

[Yvonne183]

OK, I understand what you say,, we kinda disagree with what is considered a lifestyle, that is OK. It's just that being gay was not considered a lifestyle by the majority in days past and gays did get arrested and the transgener fell in the same category as gay back then, they got arrested as well. I guess it all depends on who says what is a lifestyle and what isn't.

That's OK,, I had my say,, I'll move on now.

[Ineeda SM]

OK, I understand what you say,, we kinda disagree with what is considered a lifestyle, that is OK. It's just that being gay was not considered a lifestyle by the majority in days past and gays did get arrested and the transgener fell in the same category as gay back then, they got arrested as well. I guess it all depends on who says what is a lifestyle and what isn't.

That's OK,, I had my say,, I'll move on now.

LOL I guess it is a personal ideal. But always know this baby. There will always be extremist assholes who get some form of power over what THEY deem to be wrong. As long as people allow religion, and political parties to keep us divided, these problems are here to stay. And THAT is the biggest shame.

[onmyknees]

This website is for Transgendered people to communicate in a community. But all people are welcomed here to participate and interact with each other as a much larger community.

Homosexual and transgendered lifestyles are a choice made by people with psychological illnesses. Sexual relations between people of the same sex is not normal. Those who have chosen this path have subjected themselves to imminent mental destruction. Their actions contaminate and threaten the family values of our society. Our children are exposed to this deviant abomination, which threatens the mental stability of our children and their families. Parents, churches, and schools must teach our children and each other the family values given to us all by God to sway victims away from the evil sins of the homosexual lifestyle before it is too late and they become lost forever.

That is the official policy of the republican party. The GOP in Montana wanted to take it one step further, and make homosexuality illegal. Google it for yourself and read the bill.

All people, no matter what your race, gender, lifestyle, religion, or political stand are welcomed openly. No one is condemned or influenced to be anything other than what and who you are. Human rights are for all people everywhere.

That is the official policy of the democratic party.

My simple concern is that if you are here on this website, you are certainly in support of the websites intentions, and the lifestyles of those who use it. So if you support this site's intentions and it's users, then how can you support the republicans who are against the very reason this website exist?

That is the very reason why when a small group of people praise and support every aspect of the republican party as if only they can be correct, and the democrats are totally wrong, I can only think that those GOP supporters must be trolls who are here to stir up their hate. How can they be in support of the gay and transgender people, and support the very party that thinks they are abominations and mentally ill? There are only 3 or 4 who do this with strong and forceful language. The rest either stay neutral or express viewpoints without force, or support the side that supports the people this website was intended for.

Can someone please explain this action so all of us can understand it? And please, no flames, fighting, name calling, or arguments. Just honest and sensible replies only. Let's make this a grown up discussion.

I don't think you have one ounce of sincerity in you, so I'm not falling for it. You're a transparent troll, but even trolls deserve an explanation on ocassion...

So... let me get this straight.....you are willing to give up your right and privlidge to free speech to pacify some psychopaths in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and you're worried about the Republican Party platform written by some party lobbyists in a K Street office? LMAO...I think one of the most overused words on here is Troll ( espicially by you) but it seems quite appropriate here.

Your party defends partial birth abortion and it's in your party platform ( although they disguise it as woman's health issues)
There's a reason they call it that...( partial birth abortion) think about it.....or should I describe the actual medical proceedure for you? Your party becomes apoplectic when the issue is raised in discussion to limit this proceedure or outlaw it altogther, despite polls that show an overwhelming public distaste and distain for the proceedure. It's right there in your party's platform...of course they don't speak about it in straightforward terms ..... how could they?
So now that we know the party platforms are written by the extremes in both parties...what should we do about it? Nothing...It's meaningless. Move on...stop the feigned outrage. I'm not a Republican but there is not one current candidate for president that would identify with the views you've stated as "being the republican party position"

I don't know why that verbiage is in there....I'm not a party hack , but the vast majority of people I know that identify themselves as Republicans do not identify with that, just as the vast majority of people I know who identify themselves as democrats are repulsed with partial birth abortion. Two wrongs don't make a right. There's many things to fear in our world.... Net Neutrality, the Fairness Doctrine, war on 3 fronts, Islamic Terrorism, the price of gas, 10% unemployment, borrowing 4 billion dollars a week from foreign countries, the ending of QE2, poverty, and on and on we go...
Party platforms are not one of them. Listen to what the candidates say...not what how the party platforms read.

[Ineeda SM]

I don't think you have one ounce of sincerity in you, so I'm not falling for it. You're a transparent troll, but even trolls deserve an explanation on ocassion...

So... let me get this straight.....you are willing to give up your right and privlidge to free speech to pacify some psychopaths in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and you're worried about the Republican Party platform written by some party lobbyists in a K Street office? LMAO...I think one of the most overused words on here is Troll ( espicially by you) but it seems quite appropriate here.

Your party defends partial birth abortion and it's in your party platform ( although they disguise it as woman's health issues)
There's a reason they call it that...( partial birth abortion) think about it.....or should I describe the actual medical proceedure for you? Your party becomes apoplectic when the issue is raised in discussion to limit this proceedure or outlaw it altogther, despite polls that show an overwhelming public distaste and distain for the proceedure. It's right there in your party's platform...of course they don't speak about it in straightforward terms ..... how could they?
So now that we know the party platforms are written by the extremes in both parties...what should we do about it? Nothing...It's meaningless. Move on...stop the feigned outrage. I'm not a Republican but there is not one current candidate for president that would identify with the views you've stated as "being the republican party position"

I don't know why that verbiage is in there....I'm not a party hack , but the vast majority of people I know that identify themselves as Republicans do not identify with that, just as the vast majority of people I know who identify themselves as democrats are repulsed with partial birth abortion. Two wrongs don't make a right. There's many things to fear in our world.... Net Neutrality, the Fairness Doctrine, war on 3 fronts, Islamic Terrorism, the price of gas, 10% unemployment, borrowing 4 billion dollars a week from foreign countries, the ending of QE2, poverty, and on and on we go...
Party platforms are not one of them. Listen to what the candidates say...not what how the party platforms read.

You really need to use a dictionary. You spelled 8 words incorrectly. Oh and you saying I don't have one ounce of sincerity, coming from you is quite amusing, very ironic, and just what a troll with no defense does. He accuses his accuser of what he himself is guilty of. Another famous republican reaction.

I wondered how long it would take for you to troll your way into this thread and twist the truth to ruin it. You said, "So... let me get this straight.....you are willing to give up your right and privilege to free speech to pacify some psychopaths in Pakistan and Afghanistan..." No I never said that at all you troll. And you know I didn't say that. Using common sense and doing the right thing to save innocent lives is not pacifying anyone. But then again, common sense is something you have no clue about.

I started this thread for people exactly like you. The party you love and praise so highly, hates and despises everything this site stands for. You claim to be a TG which means they hate you too. You kiss the asses of those who hate you and think you are mentally ill and warping the minds of our children. Now there is only 2 possible reasons for you to do this.

1) You are just plain stupid...OR

2) You are not actually a TG and just some real right wing nut job here to stir the pot of hate and lots of that famous republican propaganda. Or in other words, A TROLL.

So far, everything you say and do proves the #2 choice to be accurate.

You say you are not a republican, yet all you do here is praise everything republican, and condemn everything democratic. If you don't think the people here see through your BS, then you are just blind or stupid or both. But then you knew that too. More proof you are a troll.

Gee I thought you were just going to ignore me. I knew you couldn't resist. Trolls can never resist. There are only 3 of you that do this here, so it doesn't bother me too much. The rest of us know it. I just think it is sad that you enjoy ruining threads for your personal enjoyment so much.

Those 2 official party platforms that I stated are the truth. It IS what they both stand for. And you know that too. I just asked a simple straight forward question, and you come here to distort every fact. Yet you have the audacity to call ME the troll. But a trolls duty is to dispute and distort the facts to promote your right wing lies and hate. So of course, here you are.

Now go away and let the adults get back to being adults.

[TJ347]

Listen to what the candidates say...not what how the party platforms read.

And that's the bottom line! Of course, when you think of everything in life as being black and white, this is the kind of illogic that results. Now he's apparently trying to register people to vote on behalf of Obama... It's better than being a troll though.

[Ineeda SM]

And that's the bottom line! Of course, when you think of everything in life as being black and white, this is the kind of illogic that results. Now he's apparently trying to register people to vote on behalf of Obama... It's better than being a troll though.

And our next contestant TROLL #2 shows up to ruin a good discussion. Exactly what trolls do. They don't know how to discuss anything like adults. They just come in to spread their hate and ruin it for everyone else.

Awwww you poor trolls. It is killing you to be so wrong all the time, isn't it. So you have no choice but to spread hate and lies to get even. There the proof of you being a troll. You just keep proving me to be correct.

[TJ347]

I only speak for myself and not for anyone else. I like to think of myself as libertarian, there are ideas on both sides that I can agree on. I don't see things as black and white, democrat/republican. In your above statement it says that democrats are open for all lifestyles,, then why do I get arrested for prostitution in very liberal Baltimore and same in very liberal NYC? Why don't democrats embrace my lifestyle and not arrest me for it?

There are things I can say about republicans as well but they don't claim to embrace my lifestyle, but democrats and liberals are supposed to be on my side, then why don't they allow me to live my lifestyle?


Firstly, you are correct in that neither the Democratic or Republican party are open to "alternative lifestyles". It was only after multiple states began to recognize gay marriage that Obama decided to stop enforcing DOMA. He could've done it from the start, but he didn't. That's one example where Democrats are concerned. As for Republican examples... How much time have you got? Individual Republican politicians seem to have different degrees to which they agree with the party position, but there is no doubt that the Republican party itself doesn't even pretend to accept LGBT individuals. Still, I think being right up front with your disapproval is better than appearing to be open to discussions yet having already made up your mind that you disapprove. So we agree on that, Yvonne.

However, contrary to what you said in another post, homosexuality is not viewed as "normal" now; it is accepted as a reality and no longer viewed as a mental disorder (by many, if not most people), but it is most certainly not regarded as normal by society at large. I can see how you would think so given that numerous states now recognize gay marriage, but this is a matter of political expediency (i.e. a play to secure the vote of the gay community), not actual acceptance. In that way, as has been said in various places, gay is the new black. As to the transgendered, only if they comprise a large enough voting bloc will politicians listen.

[robertlouis]

Move over to the UK, Yvonne. Both the people in general and the political climate are very much more tolerant.

[TJ347]

With all due respect, you don't know people "in general" here in the US to even make a statement like that. Let's not start jumping to conclusions based on what we take away from people we've spoken to on a transsexual porn forum...

And Yvonne spoke about prostitution. Exactly how tolerant are politicians in the UK on that issue, Robert?

[onmyknees]

Move over to the UK, Yvonne. Both the people in general and the political climate are very much more tolerant.


Sure they are...unless you're Catholic and live in the North of Ireland!

[onmyknees]

And our next contestant TROLL #2 shows up to ruin a good discussion. Exactly what trolls do. They don't know how to discuss anything like adults. They just come in to spread their hate and ruin it for everyone else.

Awwww you poor trolls. It is killing you to be so wrong all the time, isn't it. So you have no choice but to spread hate and lies to get even. There the proof of you being a troll. You just keep proving me to be correct.

Are you really that foolish as to believe after all your hissy fits, troll referrences, and imature ramblings, that we're to believe you suddenly want to discuss issues as a mature sincere adult? The way you framed the question speaks for itself. Any one with a modicum of sophistication could see what you were attempting to do. Your post should be entered into the urban dictionary as the defination of a troll. If you're truly curious about what libertarians or conservatives think...ask them, but do so without all the obvious ajenda.

[TJ347]

Is he still claiming to be a mature voice of reason around these parts while simultaneously tossing about the word "troll" and trying to get a rise out of people who can't even view his posts anymore? Comical.

[onmyknees]

Is he still claiming to be a mature voice of reason around these parts while simultaneously tossing about the word "troll" and trying to get a rise out of people who can't even view his posts anymore? Comical.

He's been quiet for a few days now...perhaps he enrolled in an after school political science class !! :dancing:

[yodajazz]

And our next contestant TROLL #2 shows up to ruin a good discussion. Exactly what trolls do. They don't know how to discuss anything like adults. They just come in to spread their hate and ruin it for everyone else.

Awwww you poor trolls. It is killing you to be so wrong all the time, isn't it. So you have no choice but to spread hate and lies to get even. There the proof of you being a troll. You just keep proving me to be correct.

I do agree with your initial question. However, it appears to me that people (you refer to as trolls), are addressing your question, with their own perspectives. I think there are enough specific issues, to discuss with resorting to name calling, on both sides here.


And that's the bottom line! Of course, when you think of everything in life as being black and white, this is the kind of illogic that results. Now he's apparently trying to register people to vote on behalf of Obama... It's better than being a troll though.

I dont believe this is about Obama. Its about the party that is openly against you/us. Perhaps Democrats fall short of their ideal of openess for everyone. The Republican ideal, is that you are a sick, perverted person. But it seems to me that lots of Republicans are against their own self interests, especially those here. That is, unless you make more than $250,000, a year. I'll let you in on a secret; I dont make that much.

[Faldur]

I do agree with your initial question. However, it appears to me that people (you refer to as trolls), are addressing your question, with their own perspectives. I think there are enough specific issues, to discuss with resorting to name calling, on both sides here.


:claps

[trish]

Well, okay...Faldur's not a troll. But he does troll quite a bit.

[Silcc69]

I think the democrats are the less evil of the 2 as it's not like they are beating the doors open for these rights in the first place. The republicans on the hand seemed to be either under hostage by the christian right or they are loading them up with money. I love when they that we should have less goverment intrusion (which is true) but when gay marriage comes up we all know how that goes with them most of the time. I thought this was a secular nation. But I can't go up to anybody and tell themhow to live there lives as long as they aren't going out killing people and such but I digress...

[TJ347]

I dont believe this is about Obama. Its about the party that is openly against you/us. Perhaps Democrats fall short of their ideal of openess for everyone. The Republican ideal, is that you are a sick, perverted person. But it seems to me that lots of Republicans are against their own self interests, especially those here. That is, unless you make more than $250,000, a year. I'll let you in on a secret; I dont make that much.

First off, the way in which you have defined Republicans and the Republican party, which is overly simplistic to say the least, initially made me decide against responding, but knowing that you are more reasonable than others who would make a similar assessment, I quickly changed my mind. To that end, let me explain my understanding of what you and a few other posters have said from where I stand politically.

I would begin by saying that contrary to what several of the more liberal posters here believe and would have others believe (and what you, at a minimum, strongly implied in your post as well), being a Republican does not necessarily mean that you are rich, white, anti-LGBT, or pro-offshore drilling any more than being a Democrat necessarily means the opposite. Simply by employing a minimum of logic one would have to conclude that there are a number of Democrats who are both racists and anti-gay marriage for instance, yet INeeda SM (for example, and among others) claims to seek open discussion while operating under the illusion that members of either political party are of a group mind on all issues, which is evident in virtually every single one of his posts. When you begin by taking an extreme and utterly illogical position such as all Republicans are idiots, irredeemable and/or evil incarnate, and continue to hold that position in light of all evidence to the contrary, the end is a thread that descends into childish name calling in short order and is thus of no worth whatsoever to anyone who wastes time reading it. Bottom line is, if we would simply label those who don't echo our sentiments "trolls", make comments insulting their intelligence for having the gall to espouse a differing opinion, and generally proceed under the assumption that any one political party has all the answers, then there is no value to even having this section of the forum and people with any sense will avoid commenting in it entirely going forward.

Moving on, you specifically mentioned people here being against their self-interests... The first thing that came to my mind was when Charles Barkley said something along the lines of "Poor black people have been voting Democratic for fifty years, and they're still poor". As most people I should think know, blacks vote Democratic overwhelmingly, and this despite unique circumstances that would incline a logical mind to expect otherwise. For example, whenever polled, the majority of black respondents oppose gay marriage, while at the same time supporting a political party that offers lukewarm support to gay marriage. Despite being more likely to be victims of violent crime and more likely to live in a high-crime area, black voters have overwhelmingly supported Chicago mayor Richard Daly, who has steadfastly attempted to prevent private citizens in that city from legally owning firearms with which they might defend themselves. Lastly, it is my personal experience that most blacks are entirely unaware that their right to vote, let alone the fact that they are recognized as fully human in these United States, is directly tied not to Democratic, but to Republican efforts. I could go on, but suffice it to say that these are a few clear examples of Democrats who act against their own self-interests, and it holds true here just as much as it does in the "real" world based on comments I've read in this part of the forum from black members.

Finally, I identify as a Republican because I am in favor of more things opposed by Democratic members of government than the reverse. That I consider myself a Republican despite Republican members of government not being friendly to the LGBT community does not mean I am against my self-interests... This is but one interest among many for me, and is hardly the most important. YMMV.

[onmyknees]

First off, the way in which you have defined Republicans and the Republican party, which is overly simplistic to say the least, initially made me decide against responding, but knowing that you are more reasonable than others who would make a similar assessment, I quickly changed my mind. To that end, let me explain my understanding of what you and a few other posters have said from where I stand politically.

I would begin by saying that contrary to what several of the more liberal posters here believe and would have others believe (and what you, at a minimum, strongly implied in your post as well), being a Republican does not necessarily mean that you are rich, white, anti-LGBT, or pro-offshore drilling any more than being a Democrat necessarily means the opposite. Simply by employing a minimum of logic one would have to conclude that there are a number of Democrats who are both racists and anti-gay marriage for instance, yet INeeda SM (for example, and among others) claims to seek open discussion while operating under the illusion that members of either political party are of a group mind on all issues, which is evident in virtually every single one of his posts. When you begin by taking an extreme and utterly illogical position such as all Republicans are idiots, irredeemable and/or evil incarnate, and continue to hold that position in light of all evidence to the contrary, the end is a thread that descends into childish name calling in short order and is thus of no worth whatsoever to anyone who wastes time reading it. Bottom line is, if we would simply label those who don't echo our sentiments "trolls", make comments insulting their intelligence for having the gall to espouse a differing opinion, and generally proceed under the assumption that any one political party has all the answers, then there is no value to even having this section of the forum and people with any sense will avoid commenting in it entirely going forward.

Moving on, you specifically mentioned people here being against their self-interests... The first thing that came to my mind was when Charles Barkley said something along the lines of "Poor black people have been voting Democratic for fifty years, and they're still poor". As most people I should think know, blacks vote Democratic overwhelmingly, and this despite unique circumstances that would incline a logical mind to expect otherwise. For example, whenever polled, the majority of black respondents oppose gay marriage, while at the same time supporting a political party that offers lukewarm support to gay marriage. Despite being more likely to be victims of violent crime and more likely to live in a high-crime area, black voters have overwhelmingly supported Chicago mayor Richard Daly, who has steadfastly attempted to prevent private citizens in that city from legally owning firearms with which they might defend themselves. Lastly, it is my personal experience that most blacks are entirely unaware that their right to vote, let alone the fact that they are recognized as fully human in these United States, is directly tied not to Democratic, but to Republican efforts. I could go on, but suffice it to say that these are a few clear examples of Democrats who act against their own self-interests, and it holds true here just as much as it does in the "real" world based on comments I've read in this part of the forum from black members.

Finally, I identify as a Republican because I am in favor of more things opposed by Democratic members of government than the reverse. That I consider myself a Republican despite Republican members of government not being friendly to the LGBT community does not mean I am against my self-interests... This is but one interest among many for me, and is hardly the most important. YMMV.


In an earlier incarnation Trish wrote some wonderfully worded essays, but this is worthy of George Will or Krauthammer.

Strangely, the more liberal and confrontational a person is...the more polar opposite I become if for nothing else to contrast the difference.

Great Read TJ.

[trish]

Strangely, the more liberal and confrontational a person is...the more polar opposite I become if for nothing else to contrast the difference.
I hadn't noticed. Has anyone else?

[Ineeda SM]

For what it's worth, I stopped replying because I didn't see any point in arguing with 2 specific worthless assholes anymore. It no longer made any sense.

TJ347: I know you did not put me on your ignore list. If you did, you wouldn't have found this thread because "I" started it. But you are here which proves you lied.

I have called TJ347 and ONMYKNEES trolls because they are. I have had many debates and discussions with others who lean to the right. And there have not been any problems between any of them and myself. I have never called anyone else here trolls because they are not. There was a 3rd person I called a troll, but that was solved like adults privately.

I have also never said that all republicans are racists, and are always wrong. TJ347 and ONMYKNEES do not post here to debate or discuss anything. They are here to spread hate and lies through arguments and name calling, and nothing more. They are the only 2 people on this website that are considered trolls. They are the only 2 people on the website that I have had any problems with. And they are the only 2 people here who just troll every thread they post in. They are the only 2 people who can argue against pure 100% facts and think it is funny and being clever. Sometimes I wonder if they are both the same person with different screen names.

I started this thread to ask a simple question. I posed the question in a friendly manner without calling anyone names or trying to hurt anyone. It was an honest question that I really wanted to understand. It was going well with good responses and like adults, until ONMYKNEES and TJ347 showed up with their trolling arguments to disrupt the original reason for the thread.

At that point, I just laughed my ass off at how stupid I am for trying to have a normal conversation in this political forum with 2 trolls who love to hate and disrupt what is normal for their enjoyment. I realized I was becoming an asshole by responding to assholes. That's when it hit me that I was wasting my time and it was no longer worth the effort. Because no matter what I or anyone else here said, or what facts were posted, that TJ347 and ONMYKNEES would just respond with a troll post to call everyone childish names and say how wrong they were.

Debates and discussions on politics are always more than one sided with extreme positions and viewpoints. And they can get heated and even a little nasty. I have no problem with that. In fact I like it. But when every fact is just called a lie for no other reason than personal entertainment, and to spread hate and promote the republican party as a bunch of "Leave It To Beaver" types, that is called trolling and no longer fun. It just isn't worth it.

I am sure that the 2 trolls will come back with the same old bull shit they have been shoveling. I expect it and I really don't give a damn anymore. It will give me a good laugh and convince me that ignoring them was a wise choice. I only made this post to vent and say what needed to be said. And you two fools can kiss each others ass and rejoice, because this is my very last post in the political threads. I really don't care what you 2 think or say, as your words are just that of trolls. That makes you and your words, meaningless and unimportant. I have a life beyond your bull shit. You 2 are just internet trolls and that is all you will ever be. It's all you know how to do.

To the rest of you, thanks for the debates and some good conversations. At least you acted like adults and knew the limits.

Take care everyone. Have fun. I know I will. See ya.

[TJ347]

In an earlier incarnation Trish wrote some wonderfully worded essays, but this is worthy of George Will or Krauthammer.

Thanks, but I think that was quite a ways off!

[yodajazz]

For what it's worth, I stopped replying because I didn't see any point in arguing with 2 specific worthless assholes anymore. It no longer made any sense.

TJ347: I know you did not put me on your ignore list. If you did, you wouldn't have found this thread because "I" started it. But you are here which proves you lied.

I have called TJ347 and ONMYKNEES trolls because they are. I have had many debates and discussions with others who lean to the right. And there have not been any problems between any of them and myself. I have never called anyone else here trolls because they are not. There was a 3rd person I called a troll, but that was solved like adults privately.

I have also never said that all republicans are racists, and are always wrong. TJ347 and ONMYKNEES do not post here to debate or discuss anything. They are here to spread hate and lies through arguments and name calling, and nothing more. They are the only 2 people on this website that are considered trolls. They are the only 2 people on the website that I have had any problems with. And they are the only 2 people here who just troll every thread they post in. They are the only 2 people who can argue against pure 100% facts and think it is funny and being clever. Sometimes I wonder if they are both the same person with different screen names.

I started this thread to ask a simple question. I posed the question in a friendly manner without calling anyone names or trying to hurt anyone. It was an honest question that I really wanted to understand. It was going well with good responses and like adults, until ONMYKNEES and TJ347 showed up with their trolling arguments to disrupt the original reason for the thread.

At that point, I just laughed my ass off at how stupid I am for trying to have a normal conversation in this political forum with 2 trolls who love to hate and disrupt what is normal for their enjoyment. I realized I was becoming an asshole by responding to assholes. That's when it hit me that I was wasting my time and it was no longer worth the effort. Because no matter what I or anyone else here said, or what facts were posted, that TJ347 and ONMYKNEES would just respond with a troll post to call everyone childish names and say how wrong they were.

Debates and discussions on politics are always more than one sided with extreme positions and viewpoints. And they can get heated and even a little nasty. I have no problem with that. In fact I like it. But when every fact is just called a lie for no other reason than personal entertainment, and to spread hate and promote the republican party as a bunch of "Leave It To Beaver" types, that is called trolling and no longer fun. It just isn't worth it.

I am sure that the 2 trolls will come back with the same old bull shit they have been shoveling. I expect it and I really don't give a damn anymore. It will give me a good laugh and convince me that ignoring them was a wise choice. I only made this post to vent and say what needed to be said. And you two fools can kiss each others ass and rejoice, because this is my very last post in the political threads. I really don't care what you 2 think or say, as your words are just that of trolls. That makes you and your words, meaningless and unimportant. I have a life beyond your bull shit. You 2 are just internet trolls and that is all you will ever be. It's all you know how to do.

To the rest of you, thanks for the debates and some good conversations. At least you acted like adults and knew the limits.

Take care everyone. Have fun. I know I will. See ya.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think you are better than this. I know you strongly disagree with things that they say. But if you believe their wrong, you can make specific points where they are wrong. You say they express hate. How about mentioning a specific areas? I think that most Republicans think that they are good people, so you saying they are hate-filled is a disconnect, unless you can address specific issues. I want to say certain things, about Republicans, but its better if you think them through for yourself. I have found that you gain strength the more difficult arguments that you have to deal with. It may make you have to find documentation, to support your arguments. And then that would be somthing you can continue to use. So in short, if you seek to understand their arguments, it makes you a better person. And perhaps you may get someone to concede a point, that makes them a better person.

All too often people only associate with those that agree with them, and they lose something. They lose a portion of truth, in the big picture. There are better ways to to look at things, that leave the doors open to communication. Instead of saying people are trolls, think of them as misguided. We all make decisions, based upon the facts we are given. And think about this forum as a microcosm of the world: We all have a lot in common, we are just choosing to discuss our differences at this time.

[yodajazz]

I think the democrats are the less evil of the 2 as it's not like they are beating the doors open for these rights in the first place. The republicans on the hand seemed to be either under hostage by the christian right or they are loading them up with money. I love when they that we should have less goverment intrusion (which is true) but when gay marriage comes up we all know how that goes with them most of the time. I thought this was a secular nation. But I can't go up to anybody and tell themhow to live there lives as long as they aren't going out killing people and such but I digress...

I agree with you. I see the Republican party as needing the Christian right for popular support in elections, and also religion is the best place for Satan to hide, and not be recognized. By Satan, I'm not talking some red two horned creature, but just the concept of negative forces within humanity. And I am specifically talking about Greed, or the love of money, among other things. Money is not evil, but to love money more than general humanity, is the 'sin'. We just lived through the biggest transfer of wealth, to the wealthy in human history. This is not an absolute, but I see money as paying off the Democrats to be quiet, and let them have their way. However I see Republicans as directly aiding the richest to get richer, and at the same time working to convince the less wealthy, that its for their own good, while they 'suck their blood'. They also work a promoting distractor issues, such as gay marriage, terrorism, and out right lies, in order to divert attention, so they can continue their plunder.

Deomocrats have to make some efforts on behalf of working and poorer people, because it's part of thier base. So they are the lesser of two evils.

[Faldur]

Yoda it just amazes me that you can see the world with such a distorted bias. You see the left as this holy, righteous, well meaning group of civil people holding hands singing kumbaya.

Every component you laid out in the conservative party is true. I will argue with you as to what degree. But EQUALLY, the same can be said of the progressive party.

I do not have the pompous position that my party's perfect and yours is screwed up. Both sides are EQUALLY fucked up. I will argue that my positions are better for our country in the long run. And I can only assume you would that your ideals are the ones we should follow. Lets get rid of this "your so screwed up" crap and "were so perfect" and debate the issues.

[Silcc69]

I'm not saying that Bush is racist's or anything but speaking at this University wasn't going to help you win over the minority votes.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/feb2000/bush-f08.shtml

I'm not sure of the details but blacks use to vote republican a long time ago and they ended up doing something that pissed blacks off so we vote democrat now. Even JC Watts has mentioned how republicans fail to reach out to minorities.

In 2008, Watts announced he was developing a cable news network (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/United_States_cable_news) with the help of Comcast (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Comcast), focusing on a black audience,[42] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-41) and that he considered voting for Barack Obama (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Barack_Obama), criticizing the Republican party for not practicing outreach to the black community.[43] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-42) Reports showed he contributed to John McCain (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/John_McCain), but not to Obama.[44] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-43)

[TJ347]

I'm not sure of the details but blacks use to vote republican a long time ago and they ended up doing something that pissed blacks off so we vote democrat now. Even JC Watts has mentioned how republicans fail to reach out to minorities.


The shift of the black vote to the Democratic party was largely the result of "Dixie" Democrats migrating to the Republican party around the time of desegregation. Prior to that and going back to Reconstruction, blacks who were able to exercise their right to vote tended to vote Republican.

JC Watts is 100% right in that the Republican party does next to nothing to reach out to minorities, or perhaps more accurately to any minority group outside of Latinos. However, I would argue that if an appreciable number of people belonging to a certain group cannot find their way to a party based on a belief in its platform, spending significant amounts of time and money to try to attract them would be a waste. There are a number of black Republicans and conservatives, but as a black voter you have to be more interested in politics than most to become a Republican, because no one is trying to recruit you. Otherwise, you tend to go with the herd and implicity accept that Republicans are anti-black and so on. This lack of political interest is, in my opinion, a major reason that black voters haven't migrated back to the Republican party in spite of largely agreeing with the party on certain issues.

[TJ347]

Yoda it just amazes me that you can see the world with such a distorted bias. You see the left as this holy, righteous, well meaning group of civil people holding hands singing kumbaya.

Every component you laid out in the conservative party is true. I will argue with you as to what degree. But EQUALLY, the same can be said of the progressive party.

I do not have the pompous position that my party's perfect and yours is screwed up. Both sides are EQUALLY fucked up. I will argue that my positions are better for our country in the long run. And I can only assume you would that your ideals are the ones we should follow. Lets get rid of this "your so screwed up" crap and "were so perfect" and debate the issues.

At this point, sadly, it seems apparent that getting rid of the implicit sense of self-righteousness you mention is not possible. You and I are either rich, and thus interested in preserving our wealth at the expense of the working class and poor, or we're working class and thus stupid because we support a party that exploits us. This is the starting point for the more "open" conversation we're supposed to have now, which is the same starting point that we had before, only repackaged in a more intelligence insulting form. As I said, there will be no worthwhile debate so long as this is where conversation begins, and as it appears that this is the only place several more liberal posters here are willing to begin, there is no point participating in any discussion so long as this continues to be the case.

Yoda, as Faldur already stated more or less, that you continue to be so locked into the mindset that Republicans embody all things wrong with this country is most unfortunate, and all the more so in my opinion because you are probably the most agreeable liberal on the board. If even you can't take a different posture then, what hope is there for the others? And so, we end up back where we started. Wonderful.

[Faldur]

Well said TJ, we sit around here calling each other names. In the next 60 minutes the US Government will borrow another $188 million. On the hour, every hour, 24 times a day.

[yodajazz]

I think its an important distinction. I did not say, or mean to say that Republicans embody all that is wrong. But they embody perhaps the most important wrong, of today. And that is caring more about money than our fellow man. When the US was attacked and entered WW II, people knew there would have to be sacrifices to win. The rich had a much higher tax rate. Even the poor, did things like saving the cooking grease, to contribute to making oil for the war, according to my parents. The rationing of certain goods, was something that affected everyday life for everyone.

You know where this is going. Bush II wars, with tax cuts for the wealthy, was one of many things. Lack of oversight of financial markets, including exempting risky practices which were once illegal (for like 90 years). Ignoring the job outosurcing issue. Indicators show that the wealthy are gaining a greater percentage of the wealth. So why cant they sacrifice and pay the tax rate, they had when the government was in its best financial condition, that is when Clinton left office. Probably everyone, needs to pay more, why cant the wealthiest lead the way, saying thanks for what the US lifestyle has allowed them to gain.

But along with this, is the attitude that the wealthiest deserve what they get, and suffering people dont matter. This is practically saying that they deserve to suffer. Fuck grandma, because she has to sell her home to pay medical bills, or give her home to relatives to avoid it. Meanwhile and CEO of a company, that required a government bailout funds gets a 116 million dollar severence package. Its the atttitude of caring about money, but not your fellow man that I see is the biggest issue of all.

[TJ347]

I think its an important distinction. I did not say, or mean to say that Republicans embody all that is wrong. But they embody perhaps the most important wrong, of today. And that is caring more about money than our fellow man.


Since I know that someone had to have made you aware of the fact that the rich already comprise a substantial part of this country's tax base some time ago, to say nothing of the fact that the tax burden on the middle class is due to the number of people in this country that pay no taxes at all, I won't restate that argument. I'll simply point out that you have just restated the very thing that you begin by saying you did not say.

You continue to present the same argument despite the fact that you have Republican members of this forum who don't fit into your definition of who they are or what they care about, and thus close any avenue for discussion that is of any merit whatsoever. If it's Republicans who care more about money than our fellow man, how do you explain Charlie Rangel and the millions he's "earned" despite having no legitimate means to explain such income? And that's just one example of a Democrat who is supposed to care about the poor demonstrating that his primary concern is making himself rich. By ignoring facts such as these that would discredit the entire premise you operate under, you insult the intelligence of every Republican or conservative who might otherwise have participated in this discussion, and with that said I will now move on, as we have reached an impasse.

[Silcc69]

TJ347, you seem to be level headed guy. I would like to know you opinion on these 2 events that happened with George Soros and Rush Limbaugh. They really don't relate to this thread but................

Sports

In 2005, Soros was a minority partner in a group that tried to buy the Washington Nationals (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Washington_Nationals), a Major League (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Major_League_Baseball) baseball team. Some Republican lawmakers suggested that they might move to revoke baseball's antitrust exemption if Soros bought the team.[42] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-41) In 2008, Soros' name was associated with AS Roma (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/AS_Roma), an Italian football team but the club was not sold. Soros was also a financial backer of Washington Soccer L.P., the group that owned the operating rights to Major League Soccer (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Major_League_Soccer) club D.C. United (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/D.C._United) when the league was founded in 1995, but the group lost these rights in 2000.[43] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-42)

[/URL]
NFL team ownership bid controversy

On October 6, 2009, Limbaugh announced that he was planning on bidding to buy the [URL="http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/St._Louis_Rams"]St. Louis Rams (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-42) of the National Football League (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/National_Football_League) along with current owner of the NHL's St. Louis Blues (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/St._Louis_Blues_%28ice_hockey%29), Dave Checketts. This was met with opposition by some players, and team owners.[144] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-143) NFL Players executive director DeMaurice Smith stated in his opposition that he had "spoken to the Commissioner [Roger Goodell (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Roger_Goodell)] and [he understood] that this ownership consideration is in the early stages. But sport in America is at its best when it unifies, gives all of us reason to cheer, and when it transcends. Our sport does exactly that when it overcomes division and rejects discrimination and hatred."[145] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-144) Limbaugh was eventually dropped from the group that was putting in the bid due to the distraction that came from his consideration.[146] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-145)

[TJ347]

TJ347, you seem to be level headed guy. I would like to know you opinion on these 2 events that happened with George Soros and Rush Limbaugh. They really don't relate to this thread but................

Sports

In 2005, Soros was a minority partner in a group that tried to buy the Washington Nationals (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Washington_Nationals), a Major League (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Major_League_Baseball) baseball team. Some Republican lawmakers suggested that they might move to revoke baseball's antitrust exemption if Soros bought the team.[42] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-41) In 2008, Soros' name was associated with AS Roma (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/AS_Roma), an Italian football team but the club was not sold. Soros was also a financial backer of Washington Soccer L.P., the group that owned the operating rights to Major League Soccer (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Major_League_Soccer) club D.C. United (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/D.C._United) when the league was founded in 1995, but the group lost these rights in 2000.[43] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-42)


NFL team ownership bid controversy

On October 6, 2009, Limbaugh announced that he was planning on bidding to buy the St. Louis Rams (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/St._Louis_Rams) of the National Football League (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/National_Football_League) along with current owner of the NHL's St. Louis Blues (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/St._Louis_Blues_%28ice_hockey%29), Dave Checketts. This was met with opposition by some players, and team owners.[144] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-143) NFL Players executive director DeMaurice Smith stated in his opposition that he had "spoken to the Commissioner [Roger Goodell (http://www.hungangels.com/wiki/Roger_Goodell)] and [he understood] that this ownership consideration is in the early stages. But sport in America is at its best when it unifies, gives all of us reason to cheer, and when it transcends. Our sport does exactly that when it overcomes division and rejects discrimination and hatred."[145] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-144) Limbaugh was eventually dropped from the group that was putting in the bid due to the distraction that came from his consideration.[146] (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#cite_note-145)

Politics at play in both cases, plain and simple. For many people it is impossible to separate a person's political beliefs from our overall view of them, but not all. For example, despite disagreeing with her politically, I think it'd be great fun to hang out with Rachel Maddow, where perhaps ironically to some, I wouldn't want to hang out with Ann Coulter, Rush, Glenn Beck or that imbecile Sean Hannity for a microsecond. Faldur and Knees might feel differently though... especially about Ann. :wiggle:


Oh, and about this...
TJ347: I know you did not put me on your ignore list. If you did, you wouldn't have found this thread because "I" started it. But you are here which proves you lied.

Ineeda SM, putting someone on ignore does not prevent you from seeing threads they have created or that they have posted; it simply prevents the actual post from being displayed. If not for Yodajazz quoting you, I wouldn't have been able to clear this up for you, so thanks for that, Yoda.

[Silcc69]

Politics at play in both cases, plain and simple. For many people it is impossible to separate a person's political beliefs from our overall view of them, but not all. For example, despite disagreeing with her politically, I think it'd be great fun to hang out with Rachel Maddow, where perhaps ironically to some, I wouldn't want to hang out with Ann Coulter, Rush, Glenn Beck or that imbecile Sean Hannity for a microsecond. Faldur and Knees might feel differently though... especially about Ann. :wiggle:

Well my thing from what I observed was that the Republicans got involved with Sorros while player's and a few others got at Rush. Who I heard was a great commentator until he started acting like a racist ahole on the air. As for as hanging out meh IDK but I had the biggest crush on Soledad O'Brien since 97 I never got to watch her show but it was before MSNBC became a news channel.

[TJ347]

On the one hand you have politicians playing politics, and on the other private citizens. It still comes down to people playing politics. Soros and Rush were looking to make an investment, but distaste for them from people of a different political opinion scuttled their hopes. That their political positions came into play here is pitiful, but I'm sure not surprising to most of us.

As for Soledad O'Brien... YES!

[TJ347]

Sorry... That was significantly bigger than I expected. Here we go...

[Silcc69]

Yes she is hot and fuckin Angela Mcglowan OMG!!!!!!!!!

[onmyknees]

Yoda it just amazes me that you can see the world with such a distorted bias. You see the left as this holy, righteous, well meaning group of civil people holding hands singing kumbaya.

Every component you laid out in the conservative party is true. I will argue with you as to what degree. But EQUALLY, the same can be said of the progressive party.

I do not have the pompous position that my party's perfect and yours is screwed up. Both sides are EQUALLY fucked up. I will argue that my positions are better for our country in the long run. And I can only assume you would that your ideals are the ones we should follow. Lets get rid of this "your so screwed up" crap and "were so perfect" and debate the issues.

some months ago I enjoyed Yoda's posts. We'll never agree on the worldwide Muslim problem, but he is entitled to his fantasies...but lately he sees the world and everyone in it as good versus evil. There are no shades of gray.. Nautrally he sees himself aligned with the good, or in his interpretation...liberal. The argumentis only marginally more sophisticated than the sleazy pols who he sees as good, like Chuck Schumer ( because he cares and wants more social welfare) who labels his loyal opposition as extreme because he was told to do so. Because of people like him, and Silcc we have now reached a point in this country that racist simply has no meaning anymore. It's a throw away line. It actually makes me chuckle...not the charge but the hustlers, political hacks and fools uttering it with such frequency. Dissent and criticism of a half black president no matter how fact based is seen as racist. Good versus evil. It astounds me that people like him can't see it for the heinous political tactic it is. Racial hustlers, demagogues, and pied pipers who have created a culture of locked in dependency have taken over his (good) party yet he laments about the Christian right (evil). I never thought of him as a party man, but that's what he's become. He fails to see that after 50 years of social welfare programs largely promoted and defended by liberals ( the good guys) that black America largely remains far behind other racial groups in everything from education to health to life expectancy, to the family unit.... It's like he sees benevolence (good) as a welfare check or a food stamp booklet and (evil) as anyone who sees the generational folly in that. Try to speak frankly about the reality that exists in every major city in this country and you'll feel the wrath. And what does he seek........apparently more of the same. I'm good because I care...you're evil because you don't. Complex social and racial problems reduced to this. Watch in the coming days as the birth certificate controversy wanes and the discussion turns to budgetary issues how this good versus evil narrative takes shape. Watch and listen and you'll see the same good versus evil arguments used by liberals here on a national scale, and Obama's the best there is at it...but he needn't worry about convincing poor black Americans that Republicans and conservatives are evil...he's already got their support in his pocket by 96% , so they'll vote for him and other liberals in mass, and remain beholden to a huge central government for their very sustenance. Good versus Evil. If only it was that simplistic. If only we all saw the world as Yoda and Silcc

[Silcc69]

some months ago I enjoyed Yoda's posts. We'll never agree on the worldwide Muslim problem, but he is entitled to his fantasies...but lately he sees the world and everyone in it as good versus evil. There are no shades of gray.. Nautrally he sees himself aligned with the good, or in his interpretation...liberal. The argumentis only marginally more sophisticated than the sleazy pols who he sees as good, like Chuck Schumer ( because he cares and wants more social welfare) who labels his loyal opposition as extreme because he was told to do so. Because of people like him, and Silcc we have now reached a point in this country that racist simply has no meaning anymore. It's a throw away line. It actually makes me chuckle...not the charge but the hustlers, political hacks and fools uttering it with such frequency. Dissent and criticism of a half black president no matter how fact based is seen as racist. Good versus evil. It astounds me that people like him can't see it for the heinous political tactic it is. Racial hustlers, demagogues, and pied pipers who have created a culture of locked in dependency have taken over his (good) party yet he laments about the Christian right (evil). I never thought of him as a party man, but that's what he's become. He fails to see that after 50 years of social welfare programs largely promoted and defended by liberals ( the good guys) that black America largely remains far behind other racial groups in everything from education to health to life expectancy, to the family unit.... It's like he sees benevolence (good) as a welfare check or a food stamp booklet and (evil) as anyone who sees the generational folly in that. Try to speak frankly about the reality that exists in every major city in this country and you'll feel the wrath. And what does he seek........apparently more of the same. I'm good because I care...you're evil because you don't. Complex social and racial problems reduced to this. Watch in the coming days as the birth certificate controversy wanes and the discussion turns to budgetary issues how this good versus evil narrative takes shape. Watch and listen and you'll see the same good versus evil arguments used by liberals here on a national scale, and Obama's the best there is at it...but he needn't worry about convincing poor black Americans that Republicans and conservatives are evil...he's already got their support in his pocket by 96% , so they'll vote for him and other liberals in mass, and remain beholden to a huge central government for their very sustenance. Good versus Evil. If only it was that simplistic. If only we all saw the world as Yoda and Silcc


:Bowdown::Bowdown::Bowdown::Bowdown:

[yodajazz]

Since I know that someone had to have made you aware of the fact that the rich already comprise a substantial part of this country's tax base some time ago, to say nothing of the fact that the tax burden on the middle class is due to the number of people in this country that pay no taxes at all, I won't restate that argument. I'll simply point out that you have just restated the very thing that you begin by saying you did not say.

You continue to present the same argument despite the fact that you have Republican members of this forum who don't fit into your definition of who they are or what they care about, and thus close any avenue for discussion that is of any merit whatsoever. If it's Republicans who care more about money than our fellow man, how do you explain Charlie Rangel and the millions he's "earned" despite having no legitimate means to explain such income? And that's just one example of a Democrat who is supposed to care about the poor demonstrating that his primary concern is making himself rich. By ignoring facts such as these that would discredit the entire premise you operate under, you insult the intelligence of every Republican or conservative who might otherwise have participated in this discussion, and with that said I will now move on, as we have reached an impasse.

I would have to be stupid to think that all Republicans feel and act one way, and Democrats another. You should understand we talk about general tendencies, not every person, who identifies with a party. Criticizing a Republican action, does not mean all Democrats are good. You consistently try to say that I am saying all Democrats are good, and conversely all Republicans are evil, when I, never said such things. I in fact agreed that the Democrats were the lesser of two evils. How does that translate into me saying that Democrats are all good? It seems to me that it’s your way of avoiding difficult questions.

I criticized financial policies of the Bush administration, and you avoid responding, by pointing to a Democrat, who appears to have dishonest dealings. This has nothing to do with the specific decision to cut taxes, while waging war. Nor does it have anything to do the general philosophy of not asking people to sacrifice, to solve problems, as was done in the past. Repealing the Financial Reform Act was a stated goal of some Republican Congressmen, I believe. I think that was a bad idea, given the seriousness of the world financial crisis, that was caused by the US financial system. This is about public policy, not about people here, who I know I share common interests with.

I do agree that there is not much productivity in discussing things here. I do see some general trends that I think are disturbing, and are hurting this nation, and I will continue to speak on my concerns.

[yodajazz]

some months ago I enjoyed Yoda's posts. We'll never agree on the worldwide Muslim problem, but he is entitled to his fantasies...but lately he sees the world and everyone in it as good versus evil. There are no shades of gray.. Nautrally he sees himself aligned with the good, or in his interpretation...liberal. The argumentis only marginally more sophisticated than the sleazy pols who he sees as good, like Chuck Schumer ( because he cares and wants more social welfare) who labels his loyal opposition as extreme because he was told to do so. Because of people like him, and Silcc we have now reached a point in this country that racist simply has no meaning anymore. It's a throw away line. It actually makes me chuckle...not the charge but the hustlers, political hacks and fools uttering it with such frequency. Dissent and criticism of a half black president no matter how fact based is seen as racist. Good versus evil. It astounds me that people like him can't see it for the heinous political tactic it is. Racial hustlers, demagogues, and pied pipers who have created a culture of locked in dependency have taken over his (good) party yet he laments about the Christian right (evil). I never thought of him as a party man, but that's what he's become. He fails to see that after 50 years of social welfare programs largely promoted and defended by liberals ( the good guys) that black America largely remains far behind other racial groups in everything from education to health to life expectancy, to the family unit.... It's like he sees benevolence (good) as a welfare check or a food stamp booklet and (evil) as anyone who sees the generational folly in that. Try to speak frankly about the reality that exists in every major city in this country and you'll feel the wrath. And what does he seek........apparently more of the same. I'm good because I care...you're evil because you don't. Complex social and racial problems reduced to this. Watch in the coming days as the birth certificate controversy wanes and the discussion turns to budgetary issues how this good versus evil narrative takes shape. Watch and listen and you'll see the same good versus evil arguments used by liberals here on a national scale, and Obama's the best there is at it...but he needn't worry about convincing poor black Americans that Republicans and conservatives are evil...he's already got their support in his pocket by 96% , so they'll vote for him and other liberals in mass, and remain beholden to a huge central government for their very sustenance. Good versus Evil. If only it was that simplistic. If only we all saw the world as Yoda and Silcc

I wont comment on your dissertation of my belief system, however thanks for caring. I just want to comment that if you want to be consistent about people being “beholding to a huge national government” you are including Goldman, Sachs who had their investment firm declared a bank, so monies of theirs would, be insured by the government; the financial industry in general, those that get to borrow money for 0.5% or whatever, the defense industry, Israel, energy companies, any group that pays lobbyists, to help influence government decision making, farmers, whose food is subject to government oversight, the transportation industry, state and local governments, and so forth. Also don’t forget our military.

Just so you don’t just think of people on food stamps, and forget about the rest of the people, whose livelihood is directly affected by the government.

But, I will comment too, by saying when I spoke of evil, I was specifically referring to the concept of Greed. It has been considered part of "the seven deadly sins" since early Christianity. I dont nescessarily place much importance on the concept of 'sin'. But I do see it in reality, as a code name for human failings which can take down, the mightiest.