American Politics

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785664]Exactly the same low-IQ obfuscation ... [/QUOTE]Speaking of [B]people with low-IQ[/B], Chris P, since you know so much about low-IQ, it shouldn't come as any surprise to you, that the red states, have the highest illiteracy rates in the country. 12 out of the top 20 states are [B]illiterate red states.[/B] (Note: The others were 3-Blue, 4-Swing States, 1-Independent).

[B]Illiteracy Rate by State: In 2023, Red States continue to have the highest levels of illiteracy. [/b]
[URL]https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/illiteracy-rate-by-state/[/URL]

That's a massive difference of [b]75% of worst illiteracy[/b], found in [b]red states[/b] to those found in the blue states.

Here's a novel idea, perhaps QAnon/Repubs, you should try advocating for putting [B]more books[/B] (of higher learning) in the hands (and minds) of our youth and kids, instead of the newest "kiddy friendly" AR-15's, guns and firearms or the latest magazine edition of "Guns N' Ammo".

Oh, what's that you say now, Chris P, "...we're in the Ron DeSatan book banning era". Right!!! That's like, very 1933 Nazi book burning of him, don't you think?

[QUOTE=ChuchoLoco;2787256]Wrote a more detailed reply but I keep losing my sign-in and lose the reply so I'll keep this short. Like Ed Macman (spelling) used to tell Johnny Carson doing the Carsony skit, "You are correct sir".[/QUOTE]Sorry to hear that. I've had it happen to me in the past and so much like the ISG editor, it's as annoying as hell.

But that said, I now use either [b]MS Word, Notepad[/b] or some text editor facsimile, to markup/edit my long posts and then cut-in-paste to ISG, to avoid those dreaded errant premature "ISG sign-outs" and lost of long reports, while in the midst of writing. Now if we can only do something about the editor?

Hope that helps!

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2787376]Nothing was "fixed. " Hillary Clinton got at least 2. 5 million more votes than Bernie Sanders did in the primaries, fair and square, nothing to do with the Super Delegates.

[B]Does Clinton really have 2.5 million more votes than Sanders?[/B]

[URL]https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/apr/05/hillary-clinton/does-clinton-really-have-25-million-more-votes-san/[/URL]

Besides which, did you know that Bernie Sanders isn't even a a member of the Democratic Party? Nope, he isn't. Are you shocked? Maybe you just discovered this.

Bernie switched from being an Independent, what he might characterize as being a member of the Democratic Socialists of America Party to the Democratic Party just long enough to run as a Dem in the primaries, enjoy the DNC's debate schedule and media attention and then, sure enough, switched right out and back to his supposed Democratic Socialists of America Party as soon as the primaries were over.

Is there really any wonder why The Democratic Party, not talking about the DNC here that demonstrated no pro-Hillary Clinton, anti-Sanders bias, wasn"t falling all over itself to praise and tout someone who hadn't even been a member of the Democratic Party and everyone had every reason to suspect would dump the Party as soon as he got his nomination or not, which he did, but instead chose to side with a longtime, genuine Democrat?[/QUOTE]I'm not a Democrat or a member of the Democratic Socialists of America Party. This is not my monkey. Please take it up with venerable contributor ChuchoLoco.

Please note there were 712 superdelegates, all unpledged Democratic party insiders, and only 43 supported Sanders. Many of the superdelegates announced their support for Hillary when the winner was still in doubt. Support in primaries tends to coalesce around the candidate(s) who gets the most delegates early on.

Maybe before criticizing the electoral college Democrats should get their own house in order.

[QUOTE=Chris P;2786652] Like Switzerland, where every adult citizen has a rifle by law. No, wait.[/QUOTE]Is it any wonder, red states illiteracy rates are so high, when we have dudes (that supposedly don't have a "low-IQ) thinking, Switzerland, is a G7 country.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2787505]Sorry to hear that. I've had it happen to me in the past and so much like the ISG editor, it's as annoying as hell.

But that said, I now use either [b]MS Word, Notepad[/b] or some text editor facsimile, to markup/edit my long posts and then cut-in-paste to ISG, to avoid those dreaded errant premature "ISG sign-outs" and lost of long reports, while in the midst of writing. Now if we can only do something about the editor?

Hope that helps![/QUOTE]Yes it helps, Thanks!

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2787457]Well, OK, I'll weigh in again then. For some reason, you and Spidy refuse to accept that Chris' estimate of 10 deaths by handgun per death by long run is reasonable. And you apparently want to impose the same laws on Wyoming that you do on Washington D.C. I suspect many Democrats think similarly. Until they change their views, there will be no progress.

You overstate the threat of right wing terrorism greatly. However, if you start taking away peoples' shotguns and rifles in places like Texas and Wyoming, your worst fears may be realize. The only truly horrendous right wing terrorist incident in the USA was related to this issue. The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms decided it was going to take the guns away from the Branch Davidians. People died in Waco as a result. And that was the impetus for Timothy McVeigh to bomb the federal building in Oklahoma City. That's a precursor of what we'll be looking at if the Feds get overzealous about taking guns.

Going back to the UNODC data, for homicide rates by country, look at the top 30 countries. Of these, 15 are islands with restrictive gun laws. The USA Virgin Islands, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Anguilla, Saint Lucia, Saint Martin, Dominica, Montserrat, Duracao, St. Kitts and Nevis, the Bahamas, Puerto Rico, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, and Barbados. If gun laws aren't doing a good job of reducing homicides on islands, why would enforcing restrictive gun laws in places like Wyoming (homicide rate 2. 2 per 100,000) reduce homicides in a places like Washington D.C. (homicide rate 23.4)? In passing, please note gun laws are more restrictive in Washington D.C. than Wyoming..[/QUOTE]There you go again. Putting words in my mouth.

My post was talking about [B]handguns only[/B] not shotguns and long guns. I even said so.

What I also said was that any time the talk of control of any type of weapon comes up, the gun nuts say "2nd Amendment" and shut down. Any type of weapon.

SCOTUS has virtually ruled that no type of firearm can be restricted anywhere. They just ruled that crazy people have just as much right to own a firearm as anybody else does which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Your argument re: the Caribbean Islands is rather spurious. As is DC. It is, frankly, a code for "Black people commit most crime so let's restrict their access to handguns". As well, your contention that the Waco mess was caused because the Feds wanted to seize the Branch Davidian's guns is incorrect. The Feds suspected that the Branch Davidians were modifying AR-15's with M-16 lower assemblies in order to make the AR-15's fully automatic. They obtained a search warrant based upon those suspicions. [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege[/URL].

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2787487]
Repubs' classic tax cuts for the wealthy are "piddly" because they have yet to produce an economic boom, more often than not precipitate another Great Repub Recession and Massive Job Destruction and are often not even demanded by the wealthy because they barely notice a difference. Trump's latest utterly useless ones were permanent for corporations and the very wealthy and were set to sunset within a few years for everyone else. So it was a clever ruse for them to make those temporary ones look ok this time around. Just enough to get them past a couple of election cycles:

[B]Trump Tax Cuts Helped Billionaires Pay Less Taxes Than The Working Class In 2018[/B]

[URL]https://www.forbes.com/sites/camilomaldonado/2019/10/10/trump-tax-cuts-helped-billionaires-pay-less-taxes-than-the-working-class-in-2018/[/URL]

[B]Republicans Now Plan to Pass Permanent Tax Cuts for Corporations and Temporary Tax Cuts for Everybody Else[/B]

[URL]https://slate.com/business/2017/11/gop-tax-plan-permanent-cuts-for-corporations-temporary-for-everyone-else.html[/URL]

The extensions during Trump's Pandemic's worldwide economic disaster? Those were Democrat tax cuts that Repubs never intended to be given.[/QUOTE]Sigh.

I've read 47% of Saez and Zucman's "The Triumph of Injustice" according to my Kindle, which is what your Forbes link is all about. Saez and Zucman are French and like their colleague Thomas Piketty want to convert the USA into France. Maybe Saez and Zucman, who indoctrinate young minds at Berkeley, are French plants, part of a scheme to bring USA Standards of living down to the French level, which is about 25% to 30% lower based on GDP per capita adjusted for purchasing power.

Actually Francois Hollande tried to implement the Piketty / Saez / Zucman playbook, and had to back off because measures like their 75% supertax and wealth tax actually resulted in less government revenues, as the high income earners left France or just stopped realizing high income. Anyway, from what I've read so far in their book, the mother fuckers are full of shit.

I don't recall the particular passage from the book in question, or haven't gotten to it yet, but it most likely assumes income is really "increase in net worth." Thus, for example, Elon Musk back when Tesla stock was on the rise paid very little income tax compared to his increase in net worth. Saez and Zucman are advisors to Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Their solution to this great mass of alleged untaxed "income" is to impose a tax on wealth. Sanders would tax someone like Musk at a rate of close to 8% of his net worth. So Musk, and other extremely successful entrepreneurs, would constantly have to sell off parts of their businesses to pay their tax. So I guess that, indeed, America, which historically has created such great and innovative companies as Microsoft, Oracle, Google, Facebook, Walmart, could become just like France.

And to what avail? The government's going to get 40% of everything these people have when they die anyway, that they don't leave to charity, through the death tax. Apparently that's not enough for thieves like Saez, Zucman, Warren and Sanders.

These stupid shits also apparently believe that money paid to the Federal Government would do more good than the charities people like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Charles Koch leave their money too. The federal government flushes a huge part of what it spends down the toilet. Gates and Buffet, for example, do a lot of good with their giving.

Back to reality. Our tax system, including sales taxes, state taxes, property taxes, and the employees' share of payroll contributions, is highly progressive compared to other countries until you get to the top .01% of income earners. And the top .01% still pay at a higher rate than the middle class and upper middle class. Why? Well, the actual people in the top .01% of taxpayers must change a lot from year to year. I'd suspect a high percentage are people who sold very successful businesses, that they may have spent lifetimes building, and so pay at the 23.8% capital gains tax rate. If you indexed capital gains for inflation, their income would be considerably lower, so the 23.8% is misleading.

As to your second link, as you've said, the tax cuts for individuals were piddly. The federal corporate rate cut, from 35% to 21%, was not. With state income taxes, the average rate was around 40%. This was much higher than every other country in the developed world. The corporate rate needed to come down, and was accomplished with other tax reform measures like the GILTI tax that closed loopholes and made it more attractive, from a tax perspective, to do business and add jobs in the USA instead of foreign countries. I'd attribute part of the booming economy in 2019, with low unemployment and higher middle class wages, to improvement in business conditions that resulted from the corporate tax cut, which took effect at the first of 2018. During the Biden administration we're still benefitting from this, and even Biden's smart enough not to entirely kill the goose that laid the golden egg. His proposals would only bring the rate back up to 28%.

Your favorite politicians and media sources are pulling the wool over your eyes. You should learn to research and think for yourself.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2787499]Speaking of [B]people with low-IQ[/B], Chris P, since you know so much about low-IQ, it shouldn't come as any surprise to you, that the red states, have the highest illiteracy rates in the country. 12 out of the top 20 states are [B]illiterate red states.[/B] (Note: The others were 3-Blue, 4-Swing States, 1-Independent).

[B]Illiteracy Rate by State: In 2023, Red States continue to have the highest levels of illiteracy. [/b]
[URL]https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/illiteracy-rate-by-state/[/URL]

That's a massive difference of [b]75% of worst illiteracy[/b], found in [b]red states[/b] to those found in the blue states.

Here's a novel idea, perhaps QAnon/Repubs, you should try advocating for putting [B]more books[/B] (of higher learning) in the hands (and minds) of our youth and kids, instead of the newest "kiddy friendly" AR-15's, guns and firearms or the latest magazine edition of "Guns N' Ammo".

Oh, what's that you say now, Chris P, "...we're in the Ron DeSatan book banning era". Right!!! That's like, very 1933 Nazi book burning of him, don't you think?[/QUOTE]I don't get it. In your table, the top 10 for illiteracy include four blue states, five red states, and Georgia (purple). The bottom 10, the most literate states in America, include six blue states and four red states. That doesn't prove anything. There's no correlation.

I'll note that illiteracy is highest in three border states, New Mexico, California and Texas.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2787518]Is it any wonder, red states illiteracy rates are so high, when we have dudes (that supposedly don't have a "low-IQ) thinking, Switzerland, is a G7 country.[/QUOTE]Chris was simply noting that Switzerland, which is more prosperous and by some measures better developed than any of the G7, has a high level of gun ownership and a low homicide rate. Among the G7, only Japan's homicide rate is lower.

Here are the countries with the highest homicide rates, and their ownership of firearms per 100 people. For comparison, there are 120 guns in the USA for every 100 people.

1. USA Virgin Islands Unknown

2. Jamaica 9

3. Lesotho 5

4. Trinidad and Tobago 3

5. El Salvador 12

6. Venezuela 19

7. Honduras 14

8. South Africa 10

9. Mexico 13

10. Anguilla Unknown

11. Saint Lucia 3

12. Saint Martin 9

So say you go out and try to take the guns away from Americans. By some miracle, you get the number down from 120 per hundred people to 20. How much good will that do? Well, probably some. But not as much as you think. Trinidad has 1/40th the number of guns per person we do, and a homicide rate 6 X higher.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2787287]As anyone can see, I said [B]don't[/B] and you said [B]can't[/B].

Those are two different words with two different meanings. Please learn the difference.

Dems [B]do not[/B] "define" men and women because when we do, we get questions like "Then why can't you define them?[/QUOTE]Reread what you just wrote. It is incomprehensible gibberish even by your standards.

If you would define men and women, nobody would ask "Why can't you define them?" because you would have defined them.

But you haven't defined them, which is why I'm asking that question. So, please define them.

(For the record, the reality-based definitions are man: "adult human male", and woman: "adult human female". But you leftists are increasingly unhinged from reality, so no doubt you will disagree.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2787287]
making transphobic statements like "Trannies are mentally ill".[/QUOTE]Of course trannies are mentally ill. You are your body. The idea that someone can be entirely male from their toes to their hair and yet somehow some part of their brain grew female, but there is no scan or empirical test that can distinguish a supposedly "transgender" brain from a normal male brain, is obviously ridiculous.

The real tragedy is that instead of giving people with gender dysphoria treatment in the manner of other mental illnesses such as anorexia, they are promoted, encouraged and glorified by the disgusting fake news media, hollyweird and leftist governments, and rushed into mutilating their genitals.

It is the equivalent of glorifying and promoting anorexia, putting people who weigh 70 pounds in movies, TV shows and magazine covers, and offering them liposuction. Horrific. Satanic, even.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2787287]homophobic[/QUOTE]Faggots are bad for society, in terms of their diseases and their diddling of kids (which is how they reproduce more faggots, given that they can't do it the natural way). There is a reason that they were scorned for the vast majority of human history, and still are by the vast majority of people in the world today.

Remember how they just wanted to be left alone to have private relationships? Remember that? Cue 25 years later to homosexual sodomy parades in the streets, and open grooming and touching of children by homosexual men dressed as women.

Russia, China and elsewhere are smart for nipping it in the bud.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2787287]Or douches who continually post "opinions" and believe that they are facts.[/QUOTE]Hilarious that you wrote that, then the very next thing you wrote was a failed, fact-free rant against Tucker Carlson. You really don't have an internal monologue, do you? A true NPC.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2787287] don't understand that "heritage American" is a code-word for "white people".[/QUOTE]No, it means people who were here before the fraudulent 1965 Immigration Act, which was passed on false pretenses (promises that it would not alter the demographics of the country). That is to say, white people, black people, and Indians (feathers not dots, sorry Pajeet).

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2787287] afraid that an immigrant with a 6th grade education will somehow "steal" your job that requires a Master's degree". [/QUOTE]I'm not at all afraid of the above. The vast majority of turd world immigrants with an average IQ of around 80 would be literally incapable of doing my job, even if they could speak English.

What I am worried about is the transformation of my country into a third world shithole, replete with a vast, useless, criminal, democrat-voting underclass which would ensure permanent woke leftist rule; as well as increasing hatred of and discrimination against white people, which will likely soon turn to serious violence, encouraged by the likes of Kamala Harris.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2787287] Or douches who believe that the 2020 election was stolen[/QUOTE]Why do no serious democracies permit mass mail-in voting? Why were Republican observers barred from entering the count in democrat-controlled shithole cities in swing states? Are we expected to believe that the uninspiring figure of Sleepy Joe Biden drooling in his basement got 12 m more votes than Barack Obama in 2008 who certainly ran an inspiring campaign supported by glowing media coverage?

The fraud was clear and evident, even without taking into account the rigged fake news and big tech interference, with their ban on the Hunter Biden laptop corruption story. Trump won.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2787102]They're not stooges to the USA or some other imperialist power?[/QUOTE]Nope. Try again.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2787120]
Given that the main reason people purchase handguns is to be able to kill people, admittedly for self defense in most instances, I don't have a problem with that. Perhaps it makes sense to at least regulate handguns as strictly as cars. They are deadly weapons, and you do have a lot of yahoos out there who are emotional nut cases and don't know the first thing about gun safety. But I don't have a dog in this hunt as I don't own a handgun. You should take this up with Chris, Elvis or the Marquis. Ask them nicely and they most likely will respond in kind.[/QUOTE]If we lived in a homogeneous, high trust society, one could perhaps make the case for restricting certain rights to convicted violent urban felons. But of course, if we lived in a homogeneous, high-trust society we wouldn't have that problem in the first place.

However, we absolutely cannot trust the Washington deep state with any kind of restrictions, as they will clearly use it as a wedge to disarm rural and suburban white people.

This is an existential issue, because with mass turd world immigration as well as increasingly rabid anti-white hatred in media, politics and academia, and talk of so-called "reparations", there will likely soon be a campaign of serious and sustained violence against white people.

The police will be unlikely to help, given that they are being defunded and those that remain are terrified to arrest violent black criminals in case they end up getting Derek Chauvined. Therefore rural and suburban Americans will have to defend themselves from attacks and home invasions. If they are stripped of their firearms they will be unable to do so and will become sitting ducks, as is tragically the case in South Africa.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2787457]Well, OK, I'll weigh in again then. For some reason, you and Spidy refuse to accept that Chris' estimate of 10 deaths by handgun per death by long run is reasonable. [/QUOTE]Of course they do. It is called cognitive dissonance.

Leftists are increasingly detached from reality. They claim that men are women, that the border is secure, that there is a genocide of unarmed black men on the streets by white police officers, that Hunter Biden's laptop and the evidence of his family corruption therein was all a Russian fake, and much more.

When you show them factual evidence that they are mistaken, they simply ignore it, aided by the fact that the fake news media that they all still watch refuses to report anything that does not follow their agenda.

They are reminiscent of small children covering their eyes and thinking that nobody can see them.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2787496]Repeating
[/QUOTE]The reason I'm repeating the question is that you haven't answered it.

You clearly consider yourself a wise and knowledgeable person, so I'm sure you can stretch your considerable intellect to a simple yes / no question:

Do you deny that black people, particularly black males aged 15 to 35, commit vastly more violent crime than other groups?

If you can manage that and have any mental bandwidth remaining, you could try this one:

Why do leftists ignore the vast majority of gun crime (committed by, shall we say, democrat voters in urban democrat areas) to endlessly attack (via legislative efforts, hollyweird movies and shows, fake news reports and more) comparatively law-abiding people in suburbs and rural areas who own rifles and commit a tiny fraction of the total gun crime?

This is the 6th time I've asked, so let's see if you answer the question this time.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2787719]I don't get it. In your table, the top 10 for illiteracy include four blue states, five red states, and Georgia (purple). The bottom 10, the most literate states in America, include six blue states and four red states. That doesn't prove anything. There's no correlation.

I'll note that illiteracy is highest in three border states, New Mexico, California and Texas.[/QUOTE]LOL. I was going to point out the same but you beat me to it. It's quite funny how leftists love to screech "correlation isn't causation!" when you show them factual reality which doesn't correspond with the woke agenda, but this guy couldn't even find correlation to support his case.

Furthermore, the red states near the top for illiteracy are southern states such as Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana, of which a third of the population is black.

As we know, black educational attainment is far lower than that of whites, due to IQ issues, and blacks are massively overrepresented in illiteracy. Of course the limousine liberal 95% white shitlib states such as Vermont will have lower illiteracy.