Randy and Mr Lahey of US political, joined at the hip or the one big nut!! I should expect even a Canadian to recognize the co in my profile means Colorado and not district of Columbia! I got a thousand miles to drive by morning so work it out between yourself.
Your posts of the last few months are leaving the distinct impression that you are a moron struggling to understand the world around you. It might serve you better to not join the idiot brigade like OP on this thread and try to do more critical thinking about the world. Scat--- is clearly nuts and often racist in nature. You don't want to be associated with that type of person; his ideas need to be condemned and marginalized regardless of your overall political beliefs.
Ok, you convinced me. Your manipulative characterization of my situation and intelligence did it. My opinion of your post quality has declined in the past year. You seem to reason less and emote more. Perhaps you are watching too much TV. I challenge you to do your own independent research on the issues. You also seem to need to develop critical reasoning skills. If you are not sure where to begin, ask a librarian to help you. Then, and only then, will you have a more balanced perspective. Trump is not the enemy. While Trump has quite a few chartacer flaws, He sincerely appears to want to address the problems facing the United States as corroborated by many polls over the decades showing voters concerns over the direction of our country and Congress. For decades, politicians talk about hope and change, yet most voters don’t feel like they are being represented by them. Trump is clearly a political outsider as shown by attacks by establishmenr politicians in his own party. Establishment politicians have a lot to lose should Trump follow through with his promise of “Draining the Swamp”. If Trump fails in his mission, corruption may never be rooted out of DC short of revolution. Trump seems unique in his ability to perform well, if not thrive in hostile environments as imposed by the media, some in his own party, and unjustified investigations. He are lucky to have Trump as President and if he fails in his mission, the poor and working class are going the feel it the most through loss of Civil Rights and economic opportunity, not the rich. I have described the process of how Far Left policies over the long term result in loss of Rights and economic collapse in earlier posts. Liberal media, Democratic politicians, and some of ET’s Liberal posters seem to have confusion over racism and rights. Below are accepted and reasonable definition of key terms. Internalizing these terms will hopefully open your eyes to what is really going on in not just US politics, but Canadian politics as well. From wikipedia.org: Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The term "freedom of expression" is sometimes used synonymously but includes any act of seeking, receiving, and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. Prejudice[1] is an affective feeling towards a person or group member based often on that person's group membership (tribal behavior). The word is often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavourable, feelings towards people or a person because of their political affiliation, sex, gender, beliefs, values, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race/ethnicity, language, nationality, beauty, occupation, education, criminality, sport team affiliation or other personal characteristics. In this case, it refers to a positive or negative evaluation of another person based on that person's perceived group membership.[2] Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity. The use of the term "racism" does not easily fall under a single definition.[1] The ideology underlying racism often includes the idea that humans can be subdivided into distinct groups that are different due to their social behavior and their innate capacities, as well as the idea that they can be ranked as inferior or superior.[2] Historical examples of institutional racism include the Holocaust, the apartheid regime in South Africa, slavery and segregation in the United States, and slavery in Latin America. Racism was also an aspect of the social organization of many colonial states and empires. In human social behavior, discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction towards, a person based on the group, class, or category to which the person is perceived to belong. These include age, colour, criminal record, height, disability, ethnicity, family status, gender identity, generation, genetic characteristics, marital status, nationality, race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation. Discrimination consists of treatment of an individual or group, based on their actual or perceived membership in a certain group or social category, "in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated".[1] It involves the group's initial reaction or interaction going on to influence the individual's actual behavior towards the group leader or the group, restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on illogical or irrational decision making.[2] The term identity politics in common usage refers to a tendency of people sharing a particular racial, religious, ethnic, social, or cultural identity to form exclusive political alliances, instead of engaging in traditional broad-based party politics,[1] or promote their particular interests without regard for interests of a larger political group.[2] In academic usage, the term has been used to refer to a wide range of political activities and theoretical analysis rooted in experiences of injustice shared by different social groups. In this usage, identity politics typically aim to reclaim greater self-determination and political freedom for marginalized groups through understanding their distinctive nature and challenging externally imposed characterizations, instead of organizing solely around belief systems or party affiliations.[3] Identity is used as a tool to articulate political claims, promote political ideologies, and guide political action with the aim of asserting group distinctiveness and gaining power and recognition in the context of perceived inequality or injustice.[4] Did you carefully read and consider the above definitions? Or did you just skim over them? What is your emotional state right now? How do you feel? Democrats used to fight hard for Civil Rights including Freedom of Speech. This is the Democratic Party that I believed in, protested for, gathered signatures for, and donated money to. Since the hard Left turn of the Democratic Party, they have attempted to limit Freedom of Speech to their narrative. Dissension is not tolerated as shown by use of airhorns against Conservative speakers on college campuses or social media algorithms as seen with Facebook. If Radical Leftist ideas are so good, why do they feel the need to censor Conservatives? Sounds like a what a totalitarian regime in Sovier Union Russia or China would do. Identity politics are associated with Democratic Party political strategy. Would it be unfair to characterize this strategy as being racist? Again, if you just skimmed over the definitions above, please read them now in order to sincerely consider my question. If you disagree with any of the definitions above, please state what you think appropiate definitions should be. I use a reasoned approach to politics. I have been critical of Trump several times because the evidence supported it. I am also critical of the Democratic Party under its current leadership and believe their agenda is ultimately destructive to Civil Rights and economic security because the evidence support it. Overwhelmingly supports it. I hope you will consider taking a reasoned approach when discussing political issues in the future. Scataphagos will be Scataphagos.
putting things the way he thinks smarter people say them is never going to make a darn bit of difference to his success in life. I have read the fellas trading log and it ends as it had to by a failure of confidence brought about thru losses. imagined talent met the real world and the real world won. he is so obnoxious nobody would take him to school. off to my bed, the only thing I would swap with this young man is my ass bones after a thousand mile drive.
Interesting, though, that I seem to have your attention given my “imagined talent”. I have given you unusal latitude for your interesting, yet weak posts. I have offered several intellectual challenges that you’ve not answered thus far. You are a weak character who may not fully know why they post in a political forum. If you have a substance abuse issue, take this post as a wake up call and get help to save yourself further deterioration.
You both now have permission to do a 180 https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/29/alex-azar-trump-vaccines-1291897 Alex Azar praises Trump for public shift on vaccines
I don't really follow you mister money... I run a farm, we vaccinate everything and everyone. should I be an antivaxer now?
This should only offend those that fit the description: Happens to spineless, follow-the-leader, follow-the-crowd, living-vicariously, 'yes men' everywhere (politics, at-work, family, church); and regularly. I'm sure 'yes men' everywhere are well-trained and practiced in doing the 180 while still remaining firmly entrenched and fully attached to their hero's sphincter. That said, I would love to hear from those that toed the Trump line prior to his signature move: the flip-flop.