Trannies for Trump

[filghy2]

Ignore this - duplicate post by accident

[Gillian]

There's something rather sad about people flexing their intellect on a porn forum ...

[filghy2]

There's only so much time one can spend masturbating Gillian, and twice a day is usually enough for me. Anyway, I notice most of your posts are in the word association thread, so you're not much of a porn fiend either. We have a way to go before we match the 4563 pages in that thread, but I'm sure Nick Danger can get us there.

[Stavros]

But you are an idealist.
The thing about the USA is, yeah, we're the richest country in the world. But because of our income inequality, there's a lot of complaining from the lower end and even the middle of the income spectrum. Totally valid complaining I would say.

I don't consider myself to be an idealist, maybe the problem is that it is your Constitution that established an ideal form of democratic government, but Americans find it hard to meet its demands. That all Americans are equal may appear to be a basic Constitutional right, but it is not always met in practice, and I don't even need to give examples to prove this. Crucially, and this is not idealism, it is clear to me that when the President, or Congress or State legislatures vote or campaign to take rights away from American citizens, they might find a legal way of doing it, but are in fact acting against the Constitution they have sworn to protect. If you think the President's voters don't care, then what will they do when their rights are at risk?

Taking away the rights Transgendered Americans have to serve their country may be legally Un-Constitutional, it is definitely immoral, as it makes a judgement that Transgendered Americans are -because of their gender- inferior to every other American. I suspect there are many Disabled Americans who feel left out, marginalized and mostly ignored. The key to this with regard to the thread would be to suggest that 'trannies' have voted for a man who thinks they are inferior and useless, not someone who values them, and is going to make their life better.

As for the by-now well rehearsed arguments about income decline in the middle and working class, it is more than disappointing that few people follow through the relationship between change in American capitalism and that decline, and link it to the tax cutting folly of the Reagan era combined with the liberalization of capital movements globally that enabled Americas investors to make more money re-locating productive jobs in Asia than paying for them in Arkansas. No politician these days would consider imposing on business and individuals the levels of taxes Eisenhower did, yet in them days the USA was prosperous -and for many social groups less divided than the America that has developed since technology began shaving jobs out of reach, a process that began in the 1960s. The headline for Corporate taxes is high, the reality that with tax breaks and clever accounting most major corporations pay barely 10%.

That is the reality, to suggest justice as fairness in the distribution of wealth and opportunity is idealism ignores the history of the US when it was closer to reality, however imperfect its operation, discriminating of people due to their 'race' or gender. You have been let down by a generation of politicians and businessmen who put themselves before their country. And if you look at the billionaires and Wall St financiers that were once the designated components of 'the swamp', there are more of them before, and they are draining the wealth of the nation for their own benefit. It is only a matter of time before the President's voters realise they have been screwed. But I don't know how long that time is.

[Nick Danger]

I don't consider myself to be an idealist, maybe the problem is that it is your Constitution that established an ideal form of democratic government, but Americans find it hard to meet its demands. That all Americans are equal may appear to be a basic Constitutional right, but it is not always met in practice, and I don't even need to give examples to prove this. Crucially, and this is not idealism, it is clear to me that when the President, or Congress or State legislatures vote or campaign to take rights away from American citizens, they might find a legal way of doing it, but are in fact acting against the Constitution they have sworn to protect. If you think the President's voters don't care, then what will they do when their rights are at risk?

Taking away the rights Transgendered Americans have to serve their country may be legally Un-Constitutional, it is definitely immoral, as it makes a judgement that Transgendered Americans are -because of their gender- inferior to every other American. I suspect there are many Disabled Americans who feel left out, marginalized and mostly ignored. The key to this with regard to the thread would be to suggest that 'trannies' have voted for a man who thinks they are inferior and useless, not someone who values them, and is going to make their life better.

As for the by-now well rehearsed arguments about income decline in the middle and working class, it is more than disappointing that few people follow through the relationship between change in American capitalism and that decline, and link it to the tax cutting folly of the Reagan era combined with the liberalization of capital movements globally that enabled Americas investors to make more money re-locating productive jobs in Asia than paying for them in Arkansas. No politician these days would consider imposing on business and individuals the levels of taxes Eisenhower did, yet in them days the USA was prosperous -and for many social groups less divided than the America that has developed since technology began shaving jobs out of reach, a process that began in the 1960s. The headline for Corporate taxes is high, the reality that with tax breaks and clever accounting most major corporations pay barely 10%.

That is the reality, to suggest justice as fairness in the distribution of wealth and opportunity is idealism ignores the history of the US when it was closer to reality, however imperfect its operation, discriminating of people due to their 'race' or gender. You have been let down by a generation of politicians and businessmen who put themselves before their country. And if you look at the billionaires and Wall St financiers that were once the designated components of 'the swamp', there are more of them before, and they are draining the wealth of the nation for their own benefit. It is only a matter of time before the President's voters realise they have been screwed. But I don't know how long that time is.

It's always about self-interest, Stavros. That's why every now and then - as in the most recent election - the outcome shocks the pollsters and pundits.

If I were transgender I might not vote for Trump. I might say to myself it is against my best interests to do so. Then again, I might say, "Well, I don't want to join the Army, and I really don't care much where I can or can't piss in North Carolina, so maybe I'll go ahead and vote based on my overall beliefs rather than just transgender issues."

I don't always vote in my own best interest. Sometimes I feel a conservative administration would be the best choice but the conservative candidates are just too shaky for me to consider - that's what happened to me in '08 and '12, but thank God Obama wasn't Bernie or Hillary is all I can say.

But most people do, always, vote in their own best interests. That's how we find out what's what in this country, what's really most important to the most people.

Right now it's not transgender rights. Transgenders are still at the mercy of the Baby Boomer voting bloc, and they don't get it.

As for equality, we do have equality here, Stavros. Anyone with the proper motivation, intelligence, personal charisma, and other qualities that may be required can become anything they want in this country. All they have to do is choose the right path, work hard, and keep their nose clean.

Take any 18-year-old kid in this country who's just graduated high school with a clean criminal record, and he's in a position to do this: Go to college, complete with room and board, all paid for by government-backed loans. Doesn't need any help from his parents, the loans are available, and they're payable after graduation. This same kid can excel in college, graduate, and if he's been smart enough to study something that's in demand, he can write his own ticket. ANY kid can do this. Any kid of any color, religion, or gender, even transgender, can do this - if they've stayed on track up to that point.

You just can't create any more equality of opportunity than that, Stavros.

What people do with the the opportunities are up to them.

[filghy2]

I'm certainly not trying to educate any liberals, only the fence-sitters.

How is that converting of the unconverted going? I haven't seen any fence-sitters coming down from their fences. Even your faithful sidekick grew tired of thumbing up all of your posts.

[yodajazz]

It's always about self-interest, Stavros. That's why every now and then - as in the most recent election - the outcome shocks the pollsters and pundits.

If I were transgender I might not vote for Trump. I might say to myself it is against my best interests to do so. Then again, I might say, "Well, I don't want to join the Army, and I really don't care much where I can or can't piss in North Carolina, so maybe I'll go ahead and vote based on my overall beliefs rather than just transgender issues."

I don't always vote in my own best interest. Sometimes I feel a conservative administration would be the best choice but the conservative candidates are just too shaky for me to consider - that's what happened to me in '08 and '12, but thank God Obama wasn't Bernie or Hillary is all I can say.

But most people do, always, vote in their own best interests...

As for equality, we do have equality here, Stavros. Anyone with the proper motivation, intelligence, personal charisma, and other qualities that may be required can become anything they want in this count....

Take any 18-year-old kid in this country who's just graduated high school with a clean criminal record, and he's in a position to do this: Go to college, complete with room and board, all paid for by government-backed loans. Doesn't need any help from his parents, the loans are available, and they're payable after graduation. This same kid can excel in college, graduate, and if he's been smart enough to study something that's in demand, he can write his own ticket. ANY kid can do this. Any kid of any color, religion, or gender, even transgender, can do this - if they've stayed on track up to that point.

You just can't create any more equality of opportunity than that, Stavros.

What people do with the the opportunities are up to them.

We do not have equality in this country. In the 1930's, the federal govt created a program, The FHA to increase home ownership, with lower income loans, and guarantees for payment, by the govt. Blacks were specifically excluded, for many years. But what home ownership did, was provide people with property, that they could pass on to the next generation. Their homes were in areas, from which blacks were excluded. And the value of there properties, increased at a greater rate, than a black person, who was able to buy a home in a black area. Education: When it was legal to have separate schools, it was discovered that white scholar got more money per-capita, than black schools. And this was not just the deep south, this was true in places like New York City. Skilled labor unions, excluded Black, as well certain colleges. Saying that that they can no longer discriminate, does not necessarily make everything fair. Because most still have a preferential system in place, where those who came in under that system can recommend others who then get special consideration. Studies have shown that even in elementary schools, black boys tend to get harsher disciplines, than others, which tends to put on a different education track, at times, and they are more likely to be medicated.

Now I am not saying that people are not responsible for their own behaviors. It is true that any person could succeed, with talent. But I am saying that people are not always treated equally. We can't just assume that a poor person, is poor, because they didn't try hard enough, like some people say. A poor parent, may have to work longer to provide for their family, and have less quality time with their children, to pass on healthy values, etc.

One more thing, I want to mention is your view of college. You are entirely ignoring the college debt issue. Over the years, the government has back off cupporting college loans, leaving students to rack up personal debt. I see this generationm as practically being indentured servants. And now we have had these, for-profit schools, who often had students, rack up large debts, where as their diplomas were of much less value, on the market, as they promised, in advertisements. Trump University was among those, that have closed down in recent years. I'll leave you with a real life example. I got a four year degree that took me five years to get. I graduated with about 10 in debt. My daughter to college for only one year, and racked up 30k, and my degree was from a more reputable school. Her's went out of business, and she still owes the debt.

[Stavros]

It's always about self-interest, Stavros. That's why every now and then - as in the most recent election - the outcome shocks the pollsters and pundits.
If I were transgender I might not vote for Trump. I might say to myself it is against my best interests to do so. Then again, I might say, "Well, I don't want to join the Army, and I really don't care much where I can or can't piss in North Carolina, so maybe I'll go ahead and vote based on my overall beliefs rather than just transgender issues."
Right now it's not transgender rights. Transgenders are still at the mercy of the Baby Boomer voting bloc, and they don't get it.
As for equality, we do have equality here, Stavros. Anyone with the proper motivation, intelligence, personal charisma, and other qualities that may be required can become anything they want in this country. All they have to do is choose the right path, work hard, and keep their nose clean.

Yodajazz has dealt effectively with the fantasy that any American can simply take out a loan, go to college, get a degree and pay off their loan with a handsomely paid job.

People do not just vote in their self-interest, they vote and indeed, have voted for collective interest. Here, and now, the interests of one collective's interests not only threatens the Constitutional guarantee to separate the State and Religion, it targets -specifically- LGBTQPIA/B individuals.

I refer to Project Blitz which has already succeeded in forcing individual States to make official that State's fidelity to Christianity and 'Christian values', part of the campaign launched by the Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation [CPCF] which has seen 75 Bills in 20 States since 2017 introduced to bring Christianity as they define it into the public sphere. In five States the use of the slogan 'In God we Trust' can be carved onto public buildings and printed on State government buildings, but this is one of the core targets for the CPCF as listed in their 'playbook'-

...the Project Blitz playbook sees those largely symbolic bills as just the first stage on the way to more hardline laws. They are presented as measures to preserve religious liberty, but are intended to give businesses, pastors and childcare providers the right to discriminate against LGBT people in line with their “sincerely held religious beliefs”.

And this:
Category three bills will have the greatest impact but will be “the most hotly contested” the playbook says – they include resolutions in favour of “biblical values concerning marriage and sexuality”, such as “establishing public policy favoring adoption by intact heterosexual, marriage-based families” and “establishing public policy favoring intimate sexual relations only between married, heterosexual couples”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...eshape-america

As clear an example of one collective imposing its 'values' through legislation on the rest of the USA, and as clear an example as you can find that the intention is to not just take away rights from Americans, but to target Americans in order to discriminate against them.

I guess the question is, who cares? But the ease with which a relatively small group of people is targeted begs the question: who's next?

[Stavros]

I got a four year degree that took me five years to get. I graduated with about 10 in debt. My daughter to college for only one year, and racked up 30k, and my degree was from a more reputable school. Her's went out of business, and she still owes the debt.

$30,000 in one year? Mate, that's insane. And should be illegal.

[Nick Danger]

Yodajazz has dealt effectively with the fantasy that any American can simply take out a loan, go to college, get a degree and pay off their loan with a handsomely paid job.

People do not just vote in their self-interest, they vote and indeed, have voted for collective interest. Here, and now, the interests of one collective's interests not only threatens the Constitutional guarantee to separate the State and Religion, it targets -specifically- LGBTQPIA/B individuals.

I refer to Project Blitz which has already succeeded in forcing individual States to make official that State's fidelity to Christianity and 'Christian values', part of the campaign launched by the Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation [CPCF] which has seen 75 Bills in 20 States since 2017 introduced to bring Christianity as they define it into the public sphere. In five States the use of the slogan 'In God we Trust' can be carved onto public buildings and printed on State government buildings, but this is one of the core targets for the CPCF as listed in their 'playbook'-

...the Project Blitz playbook sees those largely symbolic bills as just the first stage on the way to more hardline laws. They are presented as measures to preserve religious liberty, but are intended to give businesses, pastors and childcare providers the right to discriminate against LGBT people in line with their “sincerely held religious beliefs”.

And this:
Category three bills will have the greatest impact but will be “the most hotly contested” the playbook says – they include resolutions in favour of “biblical values concerning marriage and sexuality”, such as “establishing public policy favoring adoption by intact heterosexual, marriage-based families” and “establishing public policy favoring intimate sexual relations only between married, heterosexual couples”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...eshape-america

As clear an example of one collective imposing its 'values' through legislation on the rest of the USA, and as clear an example as you can find that the intention is to not just take away rights from Americans, but to target Americans in order to discriminate against them.

I guess the question is, who cares? But the ease with which a relatively small group of people is targeted begs the question: who's next?

Your threshold for evidence is pretty low if you consider one guy who took 5 years to get a 4-year degree and can't seem to get a handle on 10k in student loan debt to "effectively" prove that capitalism is broken. I'm not sure what Yodajazz's problem is but I can guarantee you he's got more than one.

Regarding "Project Blitz" or whatever hell it is - I personally have never heard of it - I guess I can understand why a non-American might read about that and think it's a lot bigger deal than it actually is. Religion no longer sells in America. I mean yes, there is that huge Baby Boomer portion of the population, and a lot of them are Christians. But young people these days are pretty much taking a pass, and as go the young people, so goes the country.

Point being, as I'm sure any American would tell you, I wouldn't worry too much about "Project Blitz." It's pretty much under the radar here and no one REALLY cares how mixed up religion and politics gets on a local level, that's just different communities doing their own thing. I live in the middle of a bunch of Mormons. They're pretty serious about their religion. Around here, the police department is subsidized by the LDS Church. So don't tell me about oppressive religion. However, just as in practically every situation in the USA in which one's behavior might be called into question, if you're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about. I get pulled over by these cops around here on occasion, they know I'm from out of town and am not a Mormon. And by now, they also know that I have a valid driver's license, insurance, up-to-date registration, no drugs in the car, and I don't drink and drive. These days they usually wave and smile when they pass me.

But even aside from this, there are hundreds of communities in the USA that have laws and standards that might be shocking to some people. We've got Quakers and Mennonites, hippie communes, cult compounds, cities owned by one man who makes all the laws, some places have laws against alcohol on Sundays or alcohol sales past a certain time, other places don't, some places marijuana is legal now, most places it isn't. And the list goes on and on and on of different communities collectively imposing their values on people who want to live there.

To return to my own situation, you think I'd be so well-accepted around here if I wasn't a successful white male? Of course I wouldn't, I'd have been run out of town on a rail a long time ago if I was some drug-dealing creep or homeless bum. If I were a woman I'd be shunned, Mormons have no tolerance for single women until they become married women and start cranking out little Mormons.

Point being, as intolerant as Mormons are - and they are the most intolerant religion I've seen, they aren't even allowed coffee and they call those who fall away from the religion "apostates" - they are tolerant of me. Why? Because of choices I make every day - to pay my bills, to act respectfully, to obey the law, to work hard, to be nice to people, not to be a drunkard, not to wear offensive clothing, to shop locally, to tip well, and so on. I make the choice to behave within the parameters my community considers "civilized." Anyone can make that choice. It's the ones who don't who have problems, Stavros - the exceptions, not the rule. The rebels and the malcontents, the lazy and the dishonest; those people are always going to have problems in the USA, unless they get their shit together.

And hey, we've got our share of stupid people too, that's for damn sure. And I feel kinda bad for them, but what are you gonna do for people who just can't follow the program? I guess we have jobs out there that stupid people can do too. They don't pay very well, but it's probably for the best if our stupidest people don't have the resources to reproduce anyway.