American Politics

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2785483]I own a couple of rifles and a shotgun. Those firearms can be useful for putting food on the table. And they kind of fit with the 2nd amendment concept of a "militia...being necessary to the security of a free State." Switzerland requires all young Swiss men to do military service, and they're issued with assault rifles they keep at home. As a result nobody's fucked with Switzerland in centuries. The homicide rate there is off the charts low.[/QUOTE]Indeed. Because Switzerland doesn't have any, shall we say, democrat-voting urban ghettos. Although it won't stay that way if George Soros and other Jewish financiers and NGO-funders get their way.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2785483]As long as they don't touch what I've got, I wouldn't give a flying f* if people had to give up their handguns, in the interest of reducing homicides and suicides. Now yes, that's a pretty selfish attitude on my part. I don't own handguns. Well, maybe some Democrats have a similar idea, only in reverse. They've got their handguns but no semiautomatic rifles, so they want to take away the rifles while sweeping the epidemic of deaths from handguns under the table.

As opposed to letting people in their own families, communities and states decide how they want to run their lives, many Democratic Politicians want a central government in Washington D.C. that will tell everyone what to do. And there's backlash against that, at least where I live. But there's "0" chance you'll see some kind of uprising, at least IMHO.

Anyway, maybe that fits in somehow with all this, why the threat from semiautomatic rifles and right wing militias and the like is way overblown. Maybe it's not just them trying to get a political advantage, which isn't hard to do given the media coverage of shootings with semiautomatic rifles. Maybe the paranoid among them think there's going to be some kind of uprising in red, rural America, so it's best to de-weaponize those they mistakenly believe are their enemies.[/QUOTE]The democrats and deep state in Washington don't just want to tell people what to do. They want to enforce an entirely different system to the Constitutional Republic we have enjoyed for so long.

Things are going to get much worse. We already have vast amounts of affirmative action, diversity quotas, and now this new idiocy of so-called "equity" or "racial justice", which has had the effect that as a non-Jewish white man it is very difficult to get university places, promotions (even get decent jobs in the first place), win contracts, etc.

Scott Adams (the Dilbert creator who has a daily show) talked about this: he quit Pac Bell because he was denied advancement due to his race and gender. And that was decades ago: the situation has got much worse since. Adams was lucky enough to have a comic which was taking off at the time, but most white men do not.

We are now seeing serious efforts in California to give every black person $250 k (to be paid for, of course, primarily by white people) The situation is ramping up at speed. It is entirely conceivable that there will soon be a "racial justice tax" imposed on white people, and then confiscation of their property in the name of "equity".

The left are letting in millions of illegals at the border. These are low IQ dregs, penniless and homeless. Many white Americans own property and have some savings. What is the solution?

Enforced confiscation of white assets and property (which they only possess because of "racism", right?) and redistribution to undocumented Americans (formerly known as illegals). That extended Guatemalan family is coming to live in your houses in your small town, gringo, and if you don't like it, you're a hate criminal.

Now, if the feds actually try to confiscate white peoples' assets en masse in the name of "racial justice / equity", there likely could be a genuine uprising in white rural / suburban America.

Which brings us back to the point about guns. That is why they are trying so hard to disarm us. That is why they ignore the over 90% of gun crime committed with handguns in urban ghettos and instead screech hysterically about law-abiding rural and suburban communities with AR-15's. Once they have our weapons, there is nothing to stop them taking everything else.

Far-fetched? Well, imagine telling someone 25 years ago that Bruce Jenner would be universally praised in the media and named "Woman of the Year" after cutting his dick off;.

Or that the (fraudulently installed, black-Indian, Hindu, multiple dicksucking female) Vice President of the USA would openly cheer on violent riots across the country;.

Or that California would be preparing to give handouts of $250 k to every black person in the state;.

Or that the federal debt would be $30 trillion and rising;.

Or that the official policy of the US government would be "equity" (enforcement of equality of outcome regardless or effort or talent).

Not so far-fetched all of a sudden.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2785148]Exactly, and the big wins are coming among the Hispanics which I think is the fastest growing demographic. The idea was that they would always vote Dem, but the Hispanics have gotten fed up with the high taxes, crime, gun restriction talk, woke crap, and border issues. Also, that abortion issue does not hurt much with that demographic as they are so pro-family.

Of all the dumb things I have read on this forum probably the worst were guys being critical of the woman I was seeing being a single mom. They were saying she was less value because of that and was stupid to have kept her kid. I responded, "So was your mother stupid to not have aborted you?" Shockingly, I did not get a response.

[b]Point is that if the Republicans would stop with their stupid shaming and your killing babies speech and elevate the good single moms as to having more value than the ones who had abortions they could actually turn this into a plus. In other words, embrace being pro-life and quit using that phrase as meaning anti-abortion.[/b]

Yeah, she hid that she was a single mom from early on but once I got to know the kid and saw what a good mother she was, her being a single mother was actually a plus for me.[/QUOTE]About the text in bold, that's an original and very good idea, almost in the same league with throwing money in the hallway in front of a hotel's security camera when you kick your sugar baby out of the room for attempted extortion.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785521]Indeed. Because Switzerland doesn't have any, shall we say, democrat-voting urban ghettos. Although it won't stay that way if George Soros and other Jewish financiers and NGO-funders get their way.

The democrats and deep state in Washington don't just want to tell people what to do. They want to enforce an entirely different system to the Constitutional Republic we have enjoyed for so long.

Things are going to get much worse. We already have vast amounts of affirmative action, diversity quotas, and now this new idiocy of so-called "equity" or "racial justice", which has had the effect that as a non-Jewish white man it is very difficult to get university places, promotions (even get decent jobs in the first place), win contracts, etc.[/QUOTE]Oh Chrissy, you worry too much.

Don't fret. Jews will not replace you.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2785492]Good question Tooms, except that you shouldn't characterize Democrats as lazy. Yes, rates of violent crime in cities with blue mayors is much higher. These kids show in 2019 that the overall rate of violent crime was 80% higher in the cities with blue mayors. Murder was 150% higher and robbery was 120% higher. This is for the 100 most populated cities:

[URL]https://www.jsr.org/index.php/path/article/download/1371/1108/7732[/URL]

So yes, there's a problem.

Now is it because Republican mayors are better at creating conditions that discourage crime and violence? Maybe so. I think that's part of the answer.

Another possibility, you'd think that cities with blue mayors have more Democrats than Republicans and vice versa. Maybe Democrats are just more prone to commit violent crimes:

Now most Democrats are good people. Misguided, but good. But there are going to be some bad apples in any large segment of the population, and perhaps there are just more among Democrats.[/QUOTE]You know, since Trump and other Repubs are "winning" so much more often than Dems are lately and especially "winning" among minority demographics, isn't it about time for Repubs to step up to the plate in those high crime Red state "Dem run cities", run for Mayor in those cities, rally support from those newly devoted minorities with their great ideas for how to solve all their problems and eliminate crime, "win" those elections like I hear they are doing so much more often than Dems have lately and get their butts moving to actually DO and ACCOMPLISH this perennial claim by Repubs?

Why so shy to try?

Come on. No better time to put up or shut up on this favorite Repub issue.

Whatsamatter? Too much actual work and effort for Deadbeat Know Nothing Do Nothing Repubs to handle? Got to leave the really difficult challenges and jobs, all the heavy lifting and political risk-taking to the Dems? On everything?

Your Repubs have no problem getting elected governor and Repub potus nominees have no problem "winning" those highest crime rate Red states. Time for Repubs to start seriously running for Mayor in those high crime rate Red state cities, too and show us all how it's done.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2785429]Once again, you choose to understand words in a way that fits your own ideology. And that is why you are dishonest bcos you twist everything for win.

"Keeps losing" - means losing on a regular basis. It does not claim that they lost the last election. So, far from refute my claim (whch is irreftuable), you twisted the claim dishonestly in to one that you know so well and that you can attack (stoeln election) . As you do so often.[/QUOTE]You mean "Keeps losing. On a regular basis" like Dems have won more votes than Repubs in all but one POTUS election since 1988, thirty-five years ago, except one and that one never would have squeaked into the Repub column either had it not been a blundering "Wartime President" who also lost the vote for his first term but was awarded the position by a Repub SCOTUS anyway?

I assume from your original whine that you were talking about Dems "losing" the actual support of Americans by their supposedly bad ideas and lack of connection with Americans and not just about "losing" due to an undemocratic Repub-advantaged rigged Electoral College system, right?

So please untwist my words and meaning and explain how Dems have "Kept losing" votes to Repubs "on a regular basis" since 1988. Or have you twisted the meaning of the words "losing" and "on a regular basis" to mean something more like "winning more than" and "way back before 1988"?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2785492]Good question Tooms, except that you shouldn't characterize Democrats as lazy. Yes, rates of violent crime in cities with blue mayors is much higher. These kids show in 2019 that the overall rate of violent crime was 80% higher in the cities with blue mayors. Murder was 150% higher and robbery was 120% higher. This is for the 100 most populated cities:
[URL]https://www.jsr.org/index.php/path/article/download/1371/1108/7732[/URL] [/QUOTE]Study is a fancy way of saying you have more big cities that have elected Democrat mayors than Republican mayors and with that said, more Democrat mayors than Repub mayors, have all the headaches, trails and tribulations that come with big cities. Welcome to big cities in the USA.

No doubt, similar percentages of violent crime results of 80%, would be found for red mayors in large rural towns, if the study was undertaken to find [B] Mayoral Party Affiliation and Violent Crime Rates in Americas Most Populated Rural Towns and Communities[/B]" . Why, because Repubs have more rural mayors than Dems.

Since when do mayors make gun control laws?

[B]Large metropolitan Areas are Safer:[/B]

[QUOTE] [b]Violent Crime in Rural Areas Rises Above U.S. Average[/b]
The violent-crime rate in rural areas rose above the national average for the first time in a decade, the Wall Street Journal reports. Though cities on average have a higher violent crime rate than rural areas, [u]large metropolitan areas are safer than they have been in decades[/u], while some small communities are getting more dangerous.

[URL] https://thecrimereport.org/2018/05/14/rural-violent-crime-rate-rises-above-u-s-average/[/URL] [/QUOTE]This study still doesn't tell me, or give me a breakdown of homicides by weapons, committed by a Dem vs. Repub, "in the world according" to Chris P. Where's that study / chart?

[QUOTE=Chris P;2785516]This post might not get past the mod, but the harsh reality is that it is a race issue. ... [/QUOTE]Is this your latest appeal, for a [b]"sympathetic ear" [/b]with regards to your hate speech, race bating and ugly rhetoric.

[QUOTE=Chris P;2785516] {....OTHER MINDLESS DRIVEL OF HATE SPEECH, not worth repeating ......} [/QUOTE]I'm sure your fellow comrades, are hearing the "dog whistles".

[QUOTE=Chris P;2785516] The only way to stop this is to have a hardline republican mayor like Giuliani in NYC, who completely backs the police to get tough with criminals...[/QUOTE] Guiliani? (....kkkk!)

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785398] The question now becomes why the democrats and the media largely ignore the vast majority of firearm crime, involving handguns in urban ghettos, and instead focus on a tiny minority of firearm crime involving AR-15's and suburban / rural white people? [/QUOTE]Question is why is the "heavy lifting" left up to the Dems?

A better, question is, what are the Repubs doing to for better gun control laws? Or is it really just about catering to their "gun-toting" base, why THEY (Repubs) haven't done squat?

BTW, homicides are up 25% in the rural areas. That must account for the aforementioned "Firearms, type not stated", used in rural areas.

[b]Murder Rates Soar in Rural America[/b]
[url]https://www.wsj.com/story/murder-rates-soar-in-rural-america-bb431022[/url]

[b]Violent Crime in Rural Areas Rises Above U.S. Average[/b]
[url]https://thecrimereport.org/2018/05/14/rural-violent-crime-rate-rises-above-u-s-average/[/url]

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2785558]Jews will not replace you.[/QUOTE]Why do you think so many wealthy and influential Jews and Jewish groups in media, hollywood, finance and politics push so strongly for open borders and mass immigration in the West (diversity is our strength, etc), yet also strongly support an ethnostate with literal huge border walls and an extremely strict, ethnically-restrictive immigration policy for their own people in Israel?

It's almost as if they don't really believe diversity is a strength after all.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2785629]Is this your latest appeal, for a [b]"sympathetic ear" [/b]with regards to your hate speech...[/QUOTE]Do you deny that black people, particularly black males aged 15 to 35, commit vastly more violent crime than other groups?

BTW if you're looking for "hate speech" try the anti-white diatribes by the MSNBC presenters. The only silver lining is that nobody watches their fake news shows.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2785634]Question is why is the "heavy lifting" left up to the Dems?

A better, question is, what are the Repubs doing to for better gun control laws? [/QUOTE]Exactly the same low-IQ obfuscation and failure to answer the question as PVMonger. This isn't about the Republicans. Most are strong supporters of the Second Amendment. It is about the democrats and their allied fake news and Washington alphabet agencies, who are not.

So, let's try again.

I asked why the democrats and media don't focus their anti-gun propaganda and weepy movies / ad campaigns on handguns in urban ghettos rather than AR-15's in suburbs and rural areas, given that crime and murder committed by the former vastly outstrips the latter.

Surely if the dems and media actually cared about gun casualties and actually wanted to reduce gun crime, they would focus their considerable efforts on the areas in which it was most heavily concentrated, ie urban ghettos and handguns? Unless of course the entire thing is a ruse, they don't care a damn about gun victims and are just using the issue to further attack rural and suburban white people and the Second Amendment.

Do you have a credible alternative explanation?

[B]Republican-controlled states have higher murder rates than Democratic ones: study [/B]
[URL]https://news.yahoo.com/republican-controlled-states-have-higher-murder-rates-than-democratic-ones-study-212137750.html[/URL]

The study data: [URL]https://thirdway.imgix.net/downloads/the-red-state-murder-problem/State-Murder-Rates-Data.xlsx[/URL].

Third wave found despite the media narrative and spin, it is the red states with a higher murder rate. "In 2020, per capita murder rates were 40% higher in states won by Donald Trump than those won by Joe Biden. " [URL]https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-red-state-murder-problem [/URL].

A year later a follow up report in, January of 2023, proving it wasn't just an anomaly, of couple of years and upward projection murder rate remained higher in red states.

So what are Republicans, doing about the murder problem in their states?

[QUOTE=Spidy;2785702][B]Republican-controlled states have higher murder rates than Democratic ones: study [/B]
[URL]https://news.yahoo.com/republican-controlled-states-have-higher-murder-rates-than-democratic-ones-study-212137750.html[/URL]

The study data: [URL]https://thirdway.imgix.net/downloads/the-red-state-murder-problem/State-Murder-Rates-Data.xlsx[/URL].

Third wave found despite the media narrative and spin, it is the red states with a higher murder rate. "In 2020, per capita murder rates were 40% higher in states won by Donald Trump than those won by Joe Biden. " [URL]https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-red-state-murder-problem [/URL].

A year later a follow up report in, January of 2023, proving it wasn't just an anomaly, of couple of years and upward projection murder rate remained higher in red states.

So what are Republicans, doing about the murder problem in their states?[/QUOTE]What they will do is say that it is the "Dem-run cities" that are the problem.

What they will [B]ignore[/B] is the fact that even if the murders from the "blue cities" in those "red states" are removed, the overall "gap" remained. In other words, if "red states" had a "murder rate problem", removing the murders from "blue cities" in those "red states" still showed that "red states" had higher murder rates than "blue states". "Over the course of the full 21 years between 2000 and 2020, the Red State murder rate was still 12% higher than the Blue State murder rate, even when murders in the largest cities in those red states were removed. And the murder rate was still higher in 18 of 21 years. " [URL]https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-two-decade-red-state-murder-problem[/URL].

Then, of course, they will disparage the link I posted because, well, that's what they do.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2785618]You know, since Trump and other Repubs are "winning" so much more often than Dems are lately and especially "winning" among minority demographics, isn't it about time for Repubs to step up to the plate in those high crime Red state "Dem run cities", run for Mayor in those cities, rally support from those newly devoted minorities with their great ideas for how to solve all their problems and eliminate crime, "win" those elections like I hear they are doing so much more often than Dems have lately and get their butts moving to actually DO and ACCOMPLISH this perennial claim by Repubs?

Why so shy to try?

Come on. No better time to put up or shut up on this favorite Repub issue.

Whatsamatter? Too much actual work and effort for Deadbeat Know Nothing Do Nothing Repubs to handle? Got to leave the really difficult challenges and jobs, all the heavy lifting and political risk-taking to the Dems? On everything?

Your Repubs have no problem getting elected governor and Repub potus nominees have no problem "winning" those highest crime rate Red states. Time for Repubs to start seriously running for Mayor in those high crime rate Red state cities, too and show us all how it's done.[/QUOTE]I agree Tooms. Republican governors of blue states have done a fine job, and have often been elected with large majorities. Larry Hogan, Charlie Baker, Chris Sununu, Mitt Romney and Gary Johnson are cases in point. I don't really follow government at the city level outside of where I live, but there must be similar success stories at the local level. The problem is that many of the voters have been brainwashed, like you, so they won't vote for Republicans under any circumstances.

[URL]https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full[/URL]

Compared with wearing no mask in the community studies only, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu like illness / COVID like illness (9 studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu / COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 13,919 people). Unwanted effects were rarely reported; discomfort was mentioned.

N95/ P2 respirators.

Four studies were in healthcare workers, and one small study was in the community. Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/ P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (5 studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu‐like illness (5 studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (3 studies; 7799 people). Unwanted effects were not well reported; discomfort was mentioned.

Following a hand hygiene programme may reduce the number of people who catch a respiratory or flu‐like illness, or have confirmed flu, compared with people not following such a programme (19 studies; 71,210 people), although this effect was not confirmed as statistically significant reduction when ILI and laboratory confirmed ILI were analysed separately. Few studies measured unwanted effects; skin irritation in people using hand sanitiser was mentioned.

This was referenced in the zero hedge article.

And a Tweet was referenced to a guy who is pushing all the right buttons on Covid and he asks:

[URL]https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1618321365089800192[/URL]

Nearly 60% of South Korea's population has now tested positive for COVID despite nearly three years of consistent universal masking with overwhelming compliance.

When will it be enough for "experts" to admit masks don't work?

As to why these studies are not being published, it is because news outlet and journals will not publish them:

[URL]https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/major-mask-study-rejected-multiple-journals-amid-rumors-it-shows-masks[/URL]

A major study out of Denmark that sought to examine the efficacy of face masks at limiting the spread of COVID-19 has reportedly been rejected by multiple academic journals amid hints that the study found face coverings are not effective in protecting individuals from the coronavirus.

And now more contrition from the lame stream media:

[URL]https://www.newsweek.com/its-time-scientific-community-admit-we-were-wrong-about-coivd-it-cost-lives-opinion-1776630[/URL]

It is time to admit we were wrong on Covid, and what is this all about? Here are some quotes.

"I was wrong. We in the scientific community were wrong. And it cost lives.

When former President Trump pointed out the downsides of intervention, he was dismissed publicly as a buffoon. And when Dr. Antony Fauci opposed Trump and became the hero of the public health community, we gave him our support to do and say what he wanted, even when he was wrong. ".

Oh, I see. So you people in the "scientific community" literally killed people just to prove Trump was wrong which means you assholes are not "scientists" but politicians.

And this was also backed by Sheri Markson when she wrote in her excellent book, What really happened in Wuhan. She wrote that no scientist wanted to agree with Trump which of course meant there were not scientists at all. With a real scientist, you measure data and are not influenced by political opinion.

And now that it is known how much of these preventative measures did not work but were harmful, and the real goal was political not saving lives, the Democratic douches have a great idea, let's forgive and forget.

[URL]https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/[/URL]

The title is LET'S DECLARE A PANDEMIC AMNESTY.

Let's acknowledge that we made complicated choices in the face of deep uncertainty, and then try to work together to build back and move forward.

LOL. Yeah, let's just forget the "scientific community" killed people, got political, and let them continue to dictate policy.

Apparently, the catalyst for these admissions was the Republicans winning the house and they are going to be conducting investigations on the lab leak and Covid in general.

And now back to the Newsweek article.

"Incomprehensible to us due to this class divide, we severely judged lockdown critics as lazy. We believed "misinformation" energized the ignorant, and we refused to accept that such people simply had a different, valid point of view. ".

This is classic Democratic douche behavior. Anyone who does not 100% agree with them is a complete idiot.

"Instead, we have witnessed a massive and ongoing loss of life in America due to distrust of vaccines and the healthcare system; a massive concentration in wealth by already wealthy elites; a rise in suicides and gun violence especially among the poor; a near-doubling of the rate of depression and anxiety disorders especially among the young; a catastrophic loss of educational attainment among already disadvantaged children; and among those most vulnerable, a massive loss of trust in healthcare, science, scientific authorities, and political leaders more broadly. ".

And what do the douches always do after they create these horrible conditions? They say never mind, let's just forget, or it was a confusing time for everyone. But they will go right back to their "scientific community" being right on issues like climate change. And that is why we cannot "just move on". It is the next fucking debacle you and your "scientific community" are going to create.

And the other amazing thing is so many people have only gotten the first memo about masks working, social distancing ETC and not the second where you douches admitted you screwed up and killed people. And until that happens, we the realists need to kick some ass.

I bet half the forum here STILL thinks masks work.