American Politics

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2780012]Does it ever happen that the stuff the Right is compelled to spout in public is dangerous, incites riots, gets cops and civilians killed[/QUOTE]Imagine a leftist saying the above, when no less than "Vice President" Kamala Harris applauded the BLM / antifa rioters and looters during their rampages across America which cost billions in damages and tens of lives, telling them to keep going.

Leading leftists in politics and media actually started funds to bail their pet rioters out of jail, so they could go and attack more federal courthouses and burn more cities.

When leftist antifa rioters attacked the White House when the President was inside, the media mocked him because the Secret Service moved him to a secure bunker in the basement because of the threat.

When rightwing protesters walked through open doors into the Congress, the media had a meltdown about "insurrection", and the democrats, RINOs and deep state tried to do Soviet-style purges.

You can't have a sustainable country held together by such brazen lies and hypocrisy. The sooner we split, the better.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2780028]"those who are invited in. ".

I'm not going to look up the anti-trespassing laws that probably pertain to that company-owned town. Do I even need to?

Did the SCOTUS also rule that private property owners also had to open their doors to all comers, anyone and everyone who comes a'knockin', no discretion permitted? If so, it's hard to believe your side isn't more livid about that than the sad fact that you aren't welcome to openly incite and organize an America-hating, cop-killing Insurrection on Twitter and Facebook.

The owner of Twitter can say "Buh-Bye" to anyone who doesn't abide by its owner's rules.[/QUOTE]You clearly didn't read the post. Or perhaps you read it but didn't understand it.

The Supreme Court literally dismissed your exact argument about "it's like being forced to let people into my house."

"The state had attempted to analogize the town's rights to the rights of homeowners to regulate the conduct of guests in their home. The Court rejected that contention by noting that ownership "does not always mean absolute dominion." The court pointed out that the more an owner opens his property up to the public in general, the more his rights are circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who are invited in."

The anti-trespassing statute could not be used to prevent the exercise of First Amendment rights in the privately-owned town.

There are already laws against the direct, credible incitement to immediate violence. But that's not even what this is about. It is about political discourse; namely, denying people who oppose the leftist globohomo agenda their First Amendment rights in the public square.

Anyway, if you believe private businesses should be able to deny service to anyone who doesn't abide by their owners' arbitrary rules, why can't a private baker deny business to someone who doesn't abide by his rules of not promoting homosexual sodomy?

Of course, as we all know, it is hypocritical bullshit designed to further the leftist agenda. When it suits them to intervene against private business, IE by destroying a Christian baker, they do so gleefully; when it suits them to leave alone or indeed collude with private business, IE censorship under the previous owners of Twitter, they do so. There is no consistency other than what will best destroy America.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2780198]Here's what Repubs believe. You can't make me do something (make a website) because it offends my religion, but I can force you to do something (have a baby) because my religion says you have to.[/QUOTE]Here's what the dem doofuses believe. You can't express your opinion in the public square because it offends my religion (wokery), but I can force you to do something (bake a fag cake) because my religion (wokery) says you have to.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2780183]TK, this is just some blowhard talking down the USA and making no sense whatsoever. Neither China nor the West wanted this war as it meant higher energy and food prices, and in China's case, and this cannot be emphasized enough, loss of fertilizer. This loss of fertilizer may result in world and possibly Chinese famine. This war really came down to two people Biden but mostly Putin.

Jimmy Dore does a much better job than this guy taking on America's problems: open border to allow illegals to compete with American workers destroying the middle class, lack of vote on universal health care / public option, the latest ridiculous round of money printing driving home prices sky high, and money in politics.

At this point, it is dollars not voters who decide elections. The money thrown at Biden by China was far more important than the documents in his possession. In fact, American politics has been dominated by representing the moneyed interests so much so that the Dems moral compass has been taken over by China. Censorship? Sure, China does it.[/QUOTE]Elvis, I agree with most of what you write but not you assertion that the West didn't want this war.

Washington certainly did want this war, and has been pushing for it since the CIA organized the Ukraine coup in 2014.

Since then, the Kiev regime has been increasingly abusing the Russians who live in East Ukraine. Washington has been using the country for all kinds of black ops from money laundering to chemical weapons development (and most likely pe-do procurement). The CIA-installed regime then announced that they were going to apply for NATO membership. This would allow the US to have bases on Russia's border within striking distance of Moscow.

This is analogous to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Just as there was no way the US would allow Russian missiles a few miles from its shores in Cuba, there is no way Russia could allow US missiles on its border in Ukraine.

There was no need for any of this. The entire war could have been prevented by, first, the CIA not organizing the coup; but even after that, by a simple acceptance that Ukraine would not join NATO. Unfortunately, Washington had to keep pushing and pushing, and ultimately they got a reaction from Russia.

However, it is not going Washington's way. They thought they could economically collapse Russia, but it turns out the rest of the world is sick of Washington's violent globohomo bullshit and they have sided with Russia, to the extent that the ruble has actually increased in value as increased Russian exports to Asia have offset western sanctions.

It saddens me to say it, but we would be better off if the world was run by China instead of America.

The Chinese just want to do business. The Americans want to cut your son's dick off and have daily buttsex parades, put crazed man-hating feminists in charge of your country, force you to recognize Israel, and threaten to bomb the shit out of you if you don't comply.

No wonder most of the world is pivoting to China and Russia and away from America.

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2780298]Not a chance but keep dreaming, the average American voter agrees with the political perspective of Breitbart.

(born and raised in USA, Christian heteros that speak English as a native language).

Not some shit for brains media outlet like the anti American MSNBC I'm guessing you jerk off to 24/7.[/QUOTE][B]... "the average American voter agrees with the political perspective of Breitbart."[/B] If you had said that the average rightwing voter agrees with Breitbart's opinion, I'd agree with you.

The "average" American voter is relatively in the "center". In other words, they range from slightly left to slightly right. Evidently you forgot that Breitbart's former leader was Steve Bannon, one of Donnie the Dumbass' most ardent supporters and one of the idiots who urged the attack on the Capitol. [URL]https://www.npr.org/2017/03/14/520087884/researchers-examine-breitbart-s-influence-on-misleading-information[/URL] and [URL]https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/05/07/broad-agreement-in-u-s-even-among-partisans-on-which-news-outlets-are-part-of-the-mainstream-media/[/URL].

And, BTW, I am one of the "average American voters" of whom you speak. I am white, Christian, heterosexual and English is my first language. I am not a typical supporter of Donnie the Dumbass who are misogynistic and xenophopic and racist dummies with maybe a high-school education.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2780394]Will it really matter after he orders his 87,000 armed IRS terrorists to kick down your door to confiscate your gas oven, perform a sex change operation on you and force you to learn a whole bunch of new pronouns?[/QUOTE]Those are legitimate concerns.

The IRS has made life hell for some Americans.

Democratic politician Richard Trumka did say his agency, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, may ban gas stoves. A number of cities controlled by Democratic politicians have passed bans on gas hookups and / or gas appliances, particularly in new buildings and houses. They include New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington D. C. Democratic politicians have also prevented construction of natural gas pipelines. This has resulted in increased carbon emissions over what they would be otherwise, as natural gas when burned emits less carbon per BTU than coal or fuel oil. It also results in higher heating bills, especially this year when fuel oil prices are sky high.

But true, Democratic politicians will not be forcing sex change operations and new pronouns on people.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2780197]This is a perfect "self-own". In order to refute my statement that Repubs only believe rightwingnut sources, you post RIGHTWINGNUT SOURCES.[/QUOTE]I don't read Breitbart but I do listen to MSNBC. And compared to some of what I see there, the Marquis' recent links are downright reasonable. Maybe Swalwell shouldn't be on intelligence committees considering he was in a relationship with a Chinese spy. Having pre-op transvestites in the ladies showers at the YMCA doesn't sound like a good idea to me. And Schumer, like other politicians, does indeed pillory the opposition. Actually I wouldn't have thought that Breitbart would publish the Schumer article. It's unreasonably anti-Republican and pro-Democrat.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2780418]Did you really watch the entire video to the end?

Neither of the infectious disease scientists and doctors nor the host of your video come to the conclusion about masks that you have been "saying right at the start".

Far from it.[/QUOTE]Every time I hear about how masks are ineffective, I think of the "peeing" meme. I wasn't able to attach it but everybody with a brain can find it on the internet.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2780315]Finally some sense on masks!

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APGVQZdwBQc[/URL]

I was saying right at the start that all the best evidence was that masks do not work. I got shat on every time I opened my mouth. Fiinally some legitimate support, the official consenus is shifting. Another sign that we live in an unthinking time where our lives are contolled by authoritarian lies.

Everyone needs to wake up and understand that we are being lied to, that our rulers do NOT have our best interests at heart. The evidence is there. You just need to open your eyes. Don't be scared of the truth, be scared of our leaders. Get angry!!![/QUOTE]They do have good arguments against mask mandates, especially for children. However, one of the infectious disease experts said all her colleagues wear masks to some meetings. And another said masks give people a feeling of invulnerability so that they don't get vaccinated, stay home when sick, and install better air filtration systems. She believes those steps are more effective in preventing the spread of disease than masks.

I looked at several papers back in 2020 on masks and coronaviruses. In a medical setting, the data shows they prevent their spread. As the experts rightly said in the video, the data's not conclusive as to masks preventing the spread of influenza though.

I was the only person I saw wearing a mask at two indoor venues this weekend. There were several hundred people in one and several thousand in another. It's a KN95 mask and I wear it correctly, snugly against my face. Since COVID started, I've only had one common cold, nothing else. I used to have two or three colds a year. I have however gotten flu and COVID vaccines, and three COVID boosters, so I have protection from those against influenza and the coronavirus.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2780324]I can accept all that you wrote as your POV. But I take exception to the first comment. Why do you think this guy makes no sense whatsoever?[/QUOTE]Because he is not looking at the Chinese-US relationship right. They produced goods at a lower cost and that is why we consumed them for example. Once China no longer does that, then it is on to the next country which Mexico already is. Then there is the notion of Europe choosing between the US and China. China produces lower end goods. The US goes to the higher end.

The battles fought over who is #1 used to be over resources, and there are some items of scarcity like lithium but most of the previous wars were fought over oil and energy, and the US has plenty of that now. That is an old way of looking at the world. Yeah, Russia going down and being dumb hurt the world economy. If China goes down, the US is in a depression. It is a different dynamic than traditional rivalries. Say what you want but IMO the Chinese US relationship has benefitted and made both countries richer. I do not want China to fail but the issue with Biden and China is how is he representing our interests. This whole green energy thing where we go all green where China burns as much coal is they want is an issue more with Biden than China.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2780508]You clearly didn't read the post. Or perhaps you read it but didn't understand it.

The Supreme Court literally dismissed your exact argument about "it's like being forced to let people into my house."

[b]"The state had attempted to analogize the town's rights to the rights of homeowners to regulate the conduct of guests in their home. The Court rejected that contention by noting that ownership "does not always mean absolute dominion." The court pointed out that the more an owner opens his property up to the public in general, the more his rights are circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who are invited in."[/b]

The anti-trespassing statute could not be used to prevent the exercise of First Amendment rights in the privately-owned town.

There are already laws against the direct, credible incitement to immediate violence. But that's not even what this is about. It is about political discourse; namely, denying people who oppose the leftist globohomo agenda their First Amendment rights in the public square.

Anyway, if you believe private businesses should be able to deny service to anyone who doesn't abide by their owners' arbitrary rules, why can't a private baker deny business to someone who doesn't abide by his rules of not promoting homosexual sodomy?

Of course, as we all know, it is hypocritical bullshit designed to further the leftist agenda. When it suits them to intervene against private business, IE by destroying a Christian baker, they do so gleefully; when it suits them to leave alone or indeed collude with private business, IE censorship under the previous owners of Twitter, they do so. There is no consistency other than what will best destroy America.[/QUOTE]Then please quote the section of that ruling that states, "Oh, and at no point is the private property owner allowed to tell the guests whose behavior he disapproves of, such as passing out certain flyers, to get the fuck off his property and instead they must be welcome and allowed to stay there as long as they damn well please doing whatever the hell they want to do. ".

This ought to be good.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2780547]They do have good arguments against mask mandates, especially for children. However, one of the infectious disease experts said all her colleagues wear masks to some meetings. And another said masks give people a feeling of invulnerability so that they don't get vaccinated, stay home when sick, and install better air filtration systems. She believes those steps are more effective in preventing the spread of disease than masks.

I looked at several papers back in 2020 on masks and coronaviruses. In a medical setting, the data shows they prevent their spread. As the experts rightly said in the video, the data's not conclusive as to masks preventing the spread of influenza though.

I was the only person I saw wearing a mask at two indoor venues this weekend. There were several hundred people in one and several thousand in another. It's a KN95 mask and I wear it correctly, snugly against my face. Since COVID started, I've only had one common cold, nothing else. I used to have two or three colds a year. I have however gotten flu and COVID vaccines, and three COVID boosters, so I have protection from those against influenza and the coronavirus.[/QUOTE]To add to your refutation of JustTK's suggestion that the scientitsts in that link in any way supported his contention from the start that "masks don't work", they absolutely, positively did not say that wearing a quality mask, wearing it properly and consistently would "not work" to reduce the risk of acquiring or spreading coronavirus. Period.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2780543]Those are legitimate concerns.

The IRS has made life hell for some Americans.

Democratic politician Richard Trumka did say his agency, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, may ban gas stoves. A number of cities controlled by Democratic politicians have passed bans on gas hookups and / or gas appliances, particularly in new buildings and houses. They include New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington D. C. Democratic politicians have also prevented construction of natural gas pipelines. This has resulted in increased carbon emissions over what they would be otherwise, as natural gas when burned emits less carbon per BTU than coal or fuel oil. It also results in higher heating bills, especially this year when fuel oil prices are sky high.

But true, Democratic politicians will not be forcing sex change operations and new pronouns on people.[/QUOTE]Banning the further production of gas stoves and offering big cash incentives to buy new and better alternatives is not the same as kicking down your door to confiscate your gas stove.

Poor Donald Trump has been suffering through IRS audit "hell" for at least 6-7 years, or so he says, for lack of enough staff at the IRS to do it quicker for the poor feller. The same reason I have not yet received my tax refund, the first for me in decades, for 2021 even though I filed my return for it electronically in May 2022.

Of course, that is not to mention the "hell" the IRS is putting Poor Donald Trump through by not simply allowing him to skate without question on a $100+ Million tax debt that prompted his audit.

The idea that the 87,000 much needed new IRS staff are bad news for patriotic Americans rather than good news is as loony as the idea that the refugee border crossings that began under Trump were something Joe Biden "orchestrated for the oligarchs as payback for helping him rig 2020's election. ".

My first reply has failed to post. Let's try again.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2778972]Really? And just pretend that you didn't say the dumbest thing I've seen on this forum in a long time -- that people who come from money don't care about money.

First, admit that it was dumb as fuck. Then we'll address your next "concern."[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2779127][b]I didn't say that. Find the quote or shut up.[/b][/QUOTE]You didn't say that, huh?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2777829]Gaetz... doesn't need any money: he's from a super-rich family[/QUOTE]Anything else?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2780547]They do have good arguments against mask mandates, especially for children. However, one of the infectious disease experts said all her colleagues wear masks to some meetings. And another said masks give people a feeling of invulnerability so that they don't get vaccinated, stay home when sick, and install better air filtration systems. She believes those steps are more effective in preventing the spread of disease than masks.

I looked at several papers back in 2020 on masks and coronaviruses. In a medical setting, the data shows they prevent their spread. As the experts rightly said in the video, the data's not conclusive as to masks preventing the spread of influenza though.

I was the only person I saw wearing a mask at two indoor venues this weekend. There were several hundred people in one and several thousand in another. It's a KN95 mask and I wear it correctly, snugly against my face. Since COVID started, I've only had one common cold, nothing else. I used to have two or three colds a year. I have however gotten flu and COVID vaccines, and three COVID boosters, so I have protection from those against influenza and the coronavirus.[/QUOTE]Your last paragraph says it all. KN95 is the only mask to wear for real protection. Vaccine and boosters are part of the defense too and so far my only side effect is a new arm coming out of may back. I actually like being able to scratch my back easier though. Never really had a side effect but I may be done with shots and boosters for a while. Nice to see someone who does as he feels best for himself and doesn't go along with the crowd as you didn't do as others at the indoor venues. The experts BS'the everyone when they kept all the KN95's for healthcare workers and said any mask is good enough when the government should have mandated more manufacturing of the KN95's and also control the price.