That's racist!

#14,629
#14,629
KB5252 said:
She may be the most consistent, intellectually honest politician in America right now. As an American who doesn't have a party, neither represent me well, I could support this woman for the highest American offices.
Click to expand...

I don’t agree with some of her social policies, but I agree. I could get behind her! She bodied Kamala Harris in the debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and dovervolz
#14,631
#14,631
KB5252 said:
She may be the most consistent, intellectually honest politician in America right now. As an American who doesn't have a party, neither represent me well, I could support this woman for the highest American offices.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with many of her positions but feel she's about the only one who would take the time to listen and consider alternatives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13, AM64, dovervolz and 2 others
#14,632
#14,632
KB5252 said:
She may be the most consistent, intellectually honest politician in America right now. As an American who doesn't have a party, neither represent me well, I could support this woman for the highest American offices.
Click to expand...
I like her principles. I don't like her ideology...at least what has been shared here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, AM64, volinbham and 2 others
#14,634
#14,634
utvolpj said:
I don't agree with many of her positions but feel she's about the only one who would take the time to listen and consider alternatives.
Click to expand...

I'd agree I think Tulsi is intellectually honest. That doesn't mean I don't have issues with some of her stances but intellectual honesty is pretty hard to come by in modern politics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, 508mikey and McDad
#14,635
#14,635
KB5252 said:
She may be the most consistent, intellectually honest politician in America right now. As an American who doesn't have a party, neither represent me well, I could support this woman for the highest American offices.
Click to expand...

I disagree and rather than make a duplicate post, refer you to my post under ‘Why Not Tulsi Gabbard’.
 
#14,636
#14,636
McDad said:
I don't know if Britain protects free speech; or if it protects speech equally.
Click to expand...

They do not. The UK, Europe, and '1st World' Western nations generally have subsumed speech protections, such as they existed, to the service of protecting classes of people that, in government's opinion, require extra protection or immunity to "discrimination". It has resulted in 'hate speech' legislations entirely at odds with free speech.

In the U.S., it took the form of "hate crime" as the acclimation doorway to condition us to penalizing thought and emotion; that is what hate crime does. It's disgraceful and we see the outgrowth in various forms which attack property, free association, and right to conduct business and earn income without government, social policy persecution. College campuses have been incubators of speech-fascists for decades.

Before the Trump presidency and subsequent election of Biden, I'd thought we might be 40-50 years behind Europe; now, I'd be surprised if it's more than 10-20. Currently, the 1stA prevents congress from directly violating speech. But, just as Marxo-fascists have always done, they leverage industry and media to do it for them. Leftists politicians openly prod big tech, print, radio and televised media to outright censor conservatives or otherwise dissenting voices.

In socialist governed countries such as China, S. Union, Cuba, NK, etc. government simply destroyed or placed proletariat-spouting technocrats in those entities to run them. In fascist countries, private ownership could retain ownership by compliance; "everything within the state, nothing against the state, and nothing outside the state." The corporatist model - the smiley-face fascist model - is to...encourage censorious action and advocacy according to party and ideology. This is what we're seeing in the U.S. To the rather small degree that media aren't already acting as Praetorian guard for the left, and industry to protect market hegemony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Impossible Girl, NurseGoodVol, Orangeburst and 2 others
#14,639
#14,639
508mikey said:
16 shot, 2 fatally, in 12 shooting incidents across Chicago | WGN-TV nobody in custody the article states - Police reform is working in Chicago - right JB Ptritzker ?
Click to expand...

Crushing it!

iu
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, 508mikey and AM64
#14,643
#14,643
NCFisher said:
They do not. The UK, Europe, and '1st World' Western nations generally have subsumed speech protections, such as they existed, to the service of protecting classes of people that, in government's opinion, require extra protection or immunity to "discrimination". It has resulted in 'hate speech' legislations entirely at odds with free speech.

In the U.S., it took the form of "hate crime" as the acclimation doorway to condition us to penalizing thought and emotion; that is what hate crime does. It's disgraceful and we see the outgrowth in various forms which attack property, free association, and right to conduct business and earn income without government, social policy persecution. College campuses have been incubators of speech-fascists for decades.

Before the Trump presidency and subsequent election of Biden, I'd thought we might be 40-50 years behind Europe; now, I'd be surprised if it's more than 10-20. Currently, the 1stA prevents congress from directly violating speech. But, just as Marxo-fascists have always done, they leverage industry and media to do it for them. Leftists politicians openly prod big tech, print, radio and televised media to outright censor conservatives or otherwise dissenting voices.

In socialist governed countries such as China, S. Union, Cuba, NK, etc. government simply destroyed or placed proletariat-spouting technocrats in those entities to run them. In fascist countries, private ownership could retain ownership by compliance; "everything within the state, nothing against the state, and nothing outside the state." The corporatist model - the smiley-face fascist model - is to...encourage censorious action and advocacy according to party and ideology. This is what we're seeing in the U.S. To the rather small degree that media aren't already acting as Praetorian guard for the left, and industry to protect market hegemony.
Click to expand...

Man I appreciate your posts. Boiling the frog.
 
#14,648
#14,648
  • Like
Reactions: Boca Vol
#14,649
#14,649
Orangeburst said:
Man I appreciate your posts. Boiling the frog.
Click to expand...

Thank you, kind of you to say.

Literally the only reason I post in political forums since the mid-90s is because I think conservatives have better positions, but often don’t argue them well. Most people lose debates due to bias or laziness; losers are often as intelligent but simply get outworked because they believe false things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002 and NurseGoodVol
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top