The Glade 4.0

Tell me again how you're not bigoted and blind to your own flaws.

_________________
"If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me." - Alice R. Longworth

"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun." - Ash Williams

Whip out the big guns too many times, people stop noticing. Personally, it’s sounding more and more like the sound of desperation

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

I also think the racism accusations are super ridiculous at this point. Overt racism is completely dead, the racism that still exists is basically people using skin color as a convenient statistical indicator for other things, sometimes not even consciously. This turns detecting racism on an individual basis nto an exercise in mind reading.

Even amongst the alt right, with a few outlier exceptions like Richard Spencer the demand is for cultural homogeneity, not racial.

For the most part, I agree. Living in smaller town Missouri though, I have seen some forms of overt racism, or at least embracing of ideologies that include overt racism. The vast majority of interactions I've seen of white folk with black folk though have been completely respectful.

There is a group here called the Joplin Honkies that are white supremacists. I know a local biker gang makes sport of kicking their asses though. Oh, and I also saw a Nazi flag hanging up inside a trailer in a trailer park in Kirksville. I don't think they knew that the flag was visible to passersby because I heard quite a few people talk smack about them at the nearby Burger King.

_________________
The Dude abides.

"False equivalence" is not actually a thing.



Those are caricatures you impose on them. The people you disagree with are not, in fact, more ignorant than you (no, not even on "science", something you imagine yourself to know something about) and certainly no more intolerant. The left is dead set on manufacturing intolerance by constantly threatening people it does't like with having their way of life forcibly changed, then pearl-clutching and backlash and frightening minorities with hyperbole.



The only thing I goddamn well know is that they ARE the same. The left is not just as bad, it is worse. Your viewpoints are complete garbage; in the last several years the left has gone completely off the deep end. There is no need - indeed no excuse - for group-oriented politics in this country. It exists only to manufacture its own requirement. Complaining about racism is a form of being a racist; it is entirely oriented on justification of hypocrisy. The behavior of the left over the last two years has started to demonstrate that leftist politics are not compatible with a free society.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Actual racists are mostly ignorant losers who mostly like to ask the occasional visitor to their favorite hunky tonk their views on <racial slur here>. I know this because I have had this happen to me in the last several years. These people are completely lacking (thankfully) in any meaningful voice or political or economic power.

The unfortunate side effect of them is that the left continues to use them to pretend racism is an actual problem - one it will enver solve because it doesn't want to. What need is there for leftist outrage if there isn't any? How else will we keep black people voting Democrat?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Interesting, by the way, that the left is engaging in essentially brownshirt tactics now, being encouraged to do so by its own political and cultural leaders, then claiming that somehow enforcing the law in ways not all that different from Obama's approach is "Naziism."

Even former flag officers aren't immune to this. For a former general officer to compare detaining illegal immigrants to actual death camps is beyond appalling; its one thing for an idiot from Hollywood to do it, for the former CIA director to do it calls into question why we are promoting historical illiterates to the heights of military and government.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

The fact that you actually believe this crap terrifies me

That's because you're incredibly intellectually dishonest, and quite frankly, aren't a good person.

You're fomenting hate and division, and believe very strongly in keeping minorities in intellectual slavery in order that you're able to use them as a monolithic voting block to advance a political ideology which has murdered millions of people in the last hundred or so years.

You are the problem.

But here's the rub: you're going to get that civil war you've been begging for. And you won't like the outcome.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Oh no, you're terrified! Clearly I should rethink the opinions I've come to after immense amounts of reading, consideration, education and experience because of some self-righteous dude on the internet - especially one who is so **** lazy that he can't even put a period at the end of his one-line response. Just slinging around accusations of bigotry and then following up with "well you know goddamn well I'm right" as if your idiocy was self-evidently true is evidence that not only are you completely uninformed beyond seeking out leftist affirmation of what you already think, you don't even actually give a ****. You just want to say something snotty so you can pat yourself on the back that you spoke up to the mean ole conservatives.



Being terrified of the right is a frequent hobby of the left; any time you people don't get your way these days its some moral travesty. What's amazing is the speed and thoroughness with which you and your ilk have gone off the deep end; I thought it was silly in 2014 but recently its become truly alarming. Its become fairly obvious that the left is simply convincing itself that force is necessary to ensure that no opposition remains.

That's what this is really about, isn't it? This was supposed to be "40 more years!" where the left won because it was "Progressive" and therefore then other side obviously was against progress and progress is good right? We're progressive because our ideas represent progress which they must because the other side is obviously against progress.

I may have been mistaken over the last few years; I thought that life was too good (which it really is) in this country for this sort of thing, but apparently there's something endemic to leftism - the condition of the populace is an excuse for leftist ideas to be implemented; the ideas do not exist to further the human condition.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Actual Members of Congress. Even the Washington Post was alarmed today. She is stopping just short of advocating violence and riot - and by "just short" I mean that the niceties of her words are going to be the excuse when someone uses a gun at one of these "harassment" incidents - oh wait, I mean again. Since it already happened last year. Except now instead of rather muted condemnation we're getting between-the-lines advocacy of violence.

It's progressed with startling speed. For years, decades, leftist hypocrisy and media bias were annoyances, sources of frustration. We're seeing - in less than the past year - a shift. It was only campus whackos before, now it's out in the streets: the left is in the process of convincing itself that its failure to dominate the nation is evidence of nazi-fication and facism. It's not just hyperbolic veting; we've visibly passed some sort of critical mass of self-reassurance.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

It's not that clear cut, the issue at hand is a 2015 court ruling that prohibits illegal immigrant children from being held in detention camps. Holding illegal immigrants in such camps was the standard for decades, occasionally there was criticism in the media but as there were no family separations even Republicans didn't face a whole lot of ire over these camps. After the court ruling, Obama basically had to decide between simply letting illegal entrants go and hoping they'd show up for their immigration hearings, (catch and release) or doing what Trump is doing in order to manufacture the legal authority necessary to hold them. Obama obviously chose the former.

It's basically Congress' decades of inaction on this issue that has led to this narrative being possible. Simple illegal entry is a misdemeanor, it is that way because these laws were written in the 60s when close to 100% of illegals were men looking for work, nobody ever showed up with children. However, because it's just a misdemeanor, it makes it very hard for Trump to justify a zero tolerance policy and family seperations in order to enforce it. For comparison, imagine if Sessions declared an all out war and zero tolerance on even simple misdemeanor possession of marijuana, with no discretion allowed, EVERY marijuana related case with any evidence behind it takes priority and must be prosecuted, no matter what else has to be left by the wayside in order to do so. Or, say, illegal Internet gambling. Despite the fact that this is also "enforcing the law," it would rightfully be decried as tyrannical.

I don't think pot is anywhere near as important as border security but the misdemeanor status of the law makes the narrative possible, it's absolutely unprecedented for the DoJ to demand zero tolerance and 100% prosecution of a misdemeanor crime.

But the truly ridiculous thing is the way the left is playing their hand in this. Until a week ago, the line was that we can't separate the kids from their parents (despite the fact that they sued the government for not doing so). Then when executive order (sorta) tells them to keep kids with the parents, then the line is that kids are still in jail and we should let everybody go. Which of course points to their ultimate desire of having absolutely no enforcement for illegal immigration at all. To say nothing of the outright malfeasance in reporting on all this stuff (hello TIME magazine), the Democrats refuse to go along with any legislative solution that doesn't flat out give everyone a free pass.

Again, this all kinda comes back to the bullcrap (on both sides of the aisle) of legislating by executive order (and I think somewhat of the point you made). It allows Congress to get away with never doing their job and leaves an Executive to play loose with the rules until somebody sues over it. I, however, would much rather have the Executive properly executing enforcement and going after every crime so that we can quickly discover what the bad laws are and Congress can amend them. Apparently the current batch of Democrats would much rather posture and blame than come to a compromise on the issue. But they refuse to do that because walls don't work and ending chain migration is racist because it has the word "chain" in it, which only means slavery.

_________________
The Dude abides.

Honestly, while calling it "racist" is just flat out stupid, the right wing nationalist sentiment is pretty extreme. It's currently mostly directed outward at the rest of the world but there's no reason to think that might not change. The nationalist right currently views almost the entire rest of the world with contempt. With like a half dozen exceptions, the whole world is either the enemy, full of weak pussies, or might as well be Mordor and populated by actual orcs. Trump treats other world leaders like they're stupid children and his message to international bodies basically boils down to shut up and do as you're told. Did you know he actually told the WTO that they're not allowed to rule against the US anymore, and hell shut them down if they do?

Since the entire world is considered a dumpster fire, that means any insular group or group that doesn't act "American" is now suspect. Subversives and traitors are claimed to be everywhere and there's open calls for HUAAC style bodies to root them out. Being gay isn't bad because God says so anymore, It's bad because we can't afford "weakness" by suffering people that don't reproduce and letting the Muslims outbreed us. The European pussies are going to soon be overrun by the Orcish hordes and so will we if we don't get a wall and people with guns to stand on it.

I think you're missing the fact that this characterization of the rest of the world is largely true, and the only real basis for correction of the view is our sheer size in regard to the "pussies". Much of the world is populated by cultures that insist on retaining barbarism despite the example of not only the West, but even Russia and China and Japan - for all our disagreements with the first 2 I would not call either barbarians. They are, however, the enemies. As for our allies, with the notable exception of Poland and Britain, they skimp regularly on defense and they refuse to utilize what they do have effectively.

You're getting a bit carried away - actually more than a bit - about gay people. As for the Europeans, they might not get literally overrun as long as France has a deterrent but they face economic and political domination without us.

What pisses off European leaders is that they aren't in the driver's seat. Europeans regularly find that American leadership is suspect when it doesn't conform to their desires. Trump is treating them in accordance with their roll - specifically, their defense roll - and they don't like being reminded that they need American support to actually have the influence they feel they should. Europeans see the world as enemies and "orcs" too, they just like the idea that they can "nice" the enemies and orcs into compliance because the era when they could dominate them with battleships is over. The nationalist view is not extreme; it's just that Europeans hide it behind ideas about universal health care and hate speech laws they can only afford because we defend them.

Also, some of my rhetoric is overheated specifically to call attention to the rhetoric of the left. The left wants to be able to call the most minor misdemeanor of racism, and get death penalty sentencing for it - a minor off color comment and demands to be fired instantly arise. The only counter is to simply not tolerate it. The term "racism" (and many equivalents) are not required for intelligent discussion; they need to be rendered as unacceptable as racial slurs before debate can be meaningful. The left simply must give up the idea that it sets the standard for what is acceptable; that is an agreed-on standard. Until then, the right should simply assert its own standard by fiat like the left does.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Sessions is not enforcing simple possession laws. The actual amounts in any smuggling load that DOJ would even think about are far more than simple possession. There is notihng tyrannical about enforcing smuggling laws against marijuana; this is action against foreign organized crime.

As for the rest, if the portrayal of this situation was anything like what you just said, that would be an improvement. The unstated reality is that our immigration situation is the product of an intentional assault by countries that want rid of excess poor and foreign criminal organizations. We need to revise the law to deal with illegal crossers as a group, not as hundreds of thousands of individuals. The fundamental fact is that there is no humanitarian, political, or religious reason to shelter them and they need to be sent back with a stern message to their governments that they are expected to fix their ****. Allowing children to be used as entry chits by their parents (and don't pretend that the adult with a kid is their actual parent, or that the parents necessarily care about the kid if its inconvenient) and their governments to use us as a safety valve is perpetuating an unacceptable situation to feel good in the moment. We MUST treat some people harshly now to deal with this in the future.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

If you've read Atlas Shrugged we are at the scene where Galt is being tortured and James Taggert is about to have the self-realization that utterly destroys himself - this is where the left is as a societal construct. The slow cannibalization at the ends. White CIS Gays are no longer a minority and deserving to be heard (because they are accepted enough to come to their own conclusions ie they have left the plantation), and then White Women are Beckys, Straight Black Men are being called the 'white people of black people'. The self-destructive cycle is nearing its end and when they realize everything they accuse others of us exactly what they lust for yet are incapable of enacting and hence the giant masquerade...well...thats going to be a good night to stay home with a shotgun ready.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

It's all of those things, but it's also the end result of COINTEL propaganda.

Maxine Waters is voicing something she's being told to voice.

There is a real **** show coming down the pipe.

This is all being perpetrated on purpose to distract from what's coming. To protect the bad actors. This is so painfully Machavellian.

People with the power to rig elections using US intel and counter intel as direct operatives don't simply lay down and die. These people overthrow other governments and create false rogue states in their day to day.

We're in the ****.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Rats on a ship.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Europe is actually supremely pissed because they essentially handed total control of the global electronic financial system over to Obama under the assumption that it would remain in the hands of the establishment, not someone like Trump who is blatantly using it against them. Most international transactions are sent over SWIFTNet, the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. This network is headquartered in Belgium but uses USD as a reserve currency and before 2012 the US did not have access to transaction details. Obama asked for access in order to enforce the Iran sanctions in 2012 and they gave it to him, bypassing the Belgian constitution with an EU directive that required unanimous consent of member states.

Since SWIFTNet uses USD, the US now has the ability to simply seize almost any international funds transfer, even if the US is not a party to it. This allows Trump almost infinite sanction power, any country can simply be disconnected from all international trade at any time. This is how he's going to win in Iran, the sanctions proposed are literally starvation level as Trump can literally decree that no money can be transferred into Iran for any reason. The EU can't revoke access because that requires another unanimous consent decree, and at this point Hungary and Poland are going to vote to spite Merkel on literally everything. They're already refusing to allow Germany to cut trade barrier under the assumption that Trump will slap tariffs on them and wreck their economy.

I think that after Iran he might just handle Palestine the same way, disconnect the PLO from all funding and demand total capitulation or mass starvation.

So yeah, the EU is now in the position where Trump is demanding trade concessions that they arec structurally unable to comply with, but Trump can also enforce punitive measures for not meeting the concessions by simply helping himself to their own bank accounts.

LOL. Ah Diamondeye is here to school us on logical fallacies. You are, after all, the master. In what universe do you feel that False Equivalence is not a thing?


Though honestly I'm surprised you would make this argument. Its essentially the same as saying "A cop who shoots a criminal who's trying to shoot an innocent is just as guilty as the criminal."


But this brings me to the crux of what I've been TRYING to avoid. For the longest time I really tried to believe that the Left and the Right had differing opinions about how to go about improving the nation. That in the end, we had some sort of idealized version of the United States that we were working to.

Its become more and more clear that we have fundamentally different values. I'm not talking about how we get there or what policies need to be enacted or enforced to bring it about, but we want fundamentally different things for the world. The short version, my Utopia looks nothing like yours.




I side with the experts. When experts in climatology tell me something about weather patterns, I tend to believe them. When doctors tell me something about health I believe them. And though it may shock you to hear it, when you tell me something about law enforcement or military readiness, I tend to believe YOU. It works even better when you can provide data to back up your statements. You actually made me a believer on the shooting deaths of african american men in police confrontations. (The shooting rates are pretty constant across ethnicity) I go where the data goes. I change my position as the data and the experts prove.

The problem is you're not an expert in racism. You're not an expert in sociology. And I'm in regular communication with people who ARE. I read statistics that clearly demonstrate that institutional racism is very real. (for example, incarceration and sentencing rates) The fact of the matter is that more educated people are the more likely they are to vote democratic. The more of a minority someone is, the more they are likely to vote democratic.

Now you're right, certainly there are those in the DNC who seek to exploit racial/ethnic/religious/sexual tensions to get votes. We saw that clearly in some of the emails hacked from the DNC. That does NOT invalidate the cause though. The reason these groups favor the Left is that the Left enacts policies that are less harmful. You're projecting. Most of those people on the left vote the way they do because they have an honest bent to equality.

What I see is this narrative you're trying to spin that the left is 'whipping up trouble' just to get votes or cause some sort of conflict. And certainly they're trying to energize their base (In exactly the same way the ammosexuals claimed Obama was coming for their guns, or the Religious Right spouted off about how Obama was a Muslim going to impose Sharia). The difference of course, is that Trump has energized the racist parts of the Right.
(lets be clear, I've not ever claimed, nor would I, that everyone on the Right is racist) But you're sure as hell willing to be complicit in the rise to power of those who are.

Now you and several others have repeatedly claimed, but been unable to support, that calling someone Nazi/Fascist/Racist is racist. I genuinely want to hear how this argument goes, because it mainly seems like an "I'm rubber, you're glue" or "I know you are, but what am I?" sort of schoolyard argument.


Uh yeah. who's threatening anyone's way of life? That you MIGHT have to see a gay couple kissing? Or that its okay for blacks & whites to marry? You're not a plantation owner. So how is anyone threatening their way of life? You want me to feel sorry for people for not being allowed to oppress anyone anymore?



Yeah, you repeating the same argument again and again (and louder with more insults) does nothing to convince me. Show me the data. Your bald faced assertions that "disliking racism and racists"="racism" is just about the silliest thing you've tried to sell us.

In this one, where it's simply a bare assertion fallacy.




Which is simply an assertion. Just shouting "False equivalence!" at that ridiculous statement would show that one did not, in fact, have a reason beyond one's own say-so as to WHY it was not true. It is trivially easy to show a false equivalence in that case, but in most common uses of it, it is not only non-trivial but difficult beyond imagining because the equivalence in question is itself sourced in hyperbole.



It is evident that you haven't tried very hard, seeing as you resort to calling huge bulks of the population racist, sexist, etc. because it's too painful to admit that their views are as legitimate as yours.


That's because I don't have any utopia at all. In fact, I think the idea of an (earhtly) utopia is abhorrant; striving for it inevitably ends in horror.



I find it interesting that you pick the examples you do, because almost everyone believes doctors, and those who don't are not affiliated with any political spectrum. As for climatologists, the problem is not so much the climatologists themselves as the people who A) think the climatologists therefore should design the solution (they should not) and B) telling what is ACTUALLY coming from climatologists and not from people simply claiming to be scientifically literate because of what they learned on YouTube.

I could find some fault with the state of climate science in general, given its youth and the strong evidence that it is populated by people trying to prove, not disprove, their own ideas as required by the scientific method. In fact, climatology is an aggregate of a lot of different sciences and poses unique challenges due to the sheer number of variables it must account for. This a known problem in anything that relies heavily on modelling - the Bonini Paradox. This problem of the "state of the science" is not unique to climatology - pscyhology has had similar problems for years. In fact, "experts" have produced some utter garbage, such as the implicit bias test which cannot be credibly scientifically shown to be able to reliably reproduce results. It is very easy for experts to believe what they want to beleive and very easy to believe experts


Except that you aren't. In fact, the fact that you think incarceration and sentencing rates show such a thing indicates that either you are only thinking about the problem to the point you get the result you want, or else the "experts" you're in contact with are not - regardless of what credentials they may possess. Incarceration and sentencing rates are different by race because rates of crime, rates of recidivism, and the circumstances of those crimes are different across different races.

More educated people are more likely to vote Democrat because the educational institutions have become almost entirely tilted Democrat, and in fact the left has invented entire academic fields that are essentially its own talking points, such as basically anything that ends in "studies". A person with a PhD in ethnic studies or gender studies is not, in fact, an actual expert in anything at all because these are not real fields - they purport to describe the work of the world, as a science would, but they object loudly to being subject to scientific scrutiny. Many other majors are so overtly hostile to anyone of even moderate views that a person who is not a leftist would be insane to subject themselves to the education. Furthermore, the actual value of education these days is questionable, as both the cost of the education and the reward in job prospects outside of STEM are wildly out of proportion to each other. "More educated people vote Democrat" is a comment on the state of the academy; not at all on the merit of Democrat views.



The left does not enact less harmful policies; the left enacts policies that seem less harmful on a surface analysis but inevitably create worse ones through second and further order effects. Moreover, when progress is made on any social problem, regardless of who deserves credit, the left screeches in outrage at the idea that things are better out of the fear that if progress is admitted that somehow that will lead to backsliding.



The actual difference is that the more intellectual parts of the right, such as National Review, Ben Shapiro, George Will, and others will regularly call out the bad parts of the right for bad behavior - and will call out Trump for bad behavior (in George Will's case he won't even wait for actual bad behavior he's in such a snit). The left engages in nothing comparable. The left has put up with bigots like Keith Ellison and Maxine Waters in their Congressional delegation for years and only suddenly discovers there's a problem when they get truly out of control. Mainstream Democrat politicians fearmonger in essentially every election - Joe Biden is a popular example. Moreover, even when they do not do so themselves, the left avoids more than cursory condemnation of its extremists before turing to "illustrate the larger issue" or some nonsense, whereas writers on the right such as French, Williamson, Lowry, Will, or Shapiro will excoriate bad actors on the right at length.

Its a generalized version of the "all rape is true" crowd that fears questioning any allegations at all somehow calls all allegations into question. Then, when there's an incident like Duke or UVA they look foolish, but switch to announcing that there's a "larger truth" or else saying the falsehood doesn't matter because someone was "taught a valuable lesson" and they're "willing to pay the price" (which they aren't the ones to pay). The left engages in this writ large. Yes, both sides have bad actors, but we call ours out far more reliably, all the way back to the 1960s and William F. Buckley sending the John Birch Society packing.


No, you just claim that some unspecified, but obviously large group of Americans in general is racist and sexist and so forth. that's hardly better. As to the rise to power of those who are, the Democrat congressional delegation is replete with racists including every single black Democrat in Congress I can think of, some more so than others. Ellison is the king, but not the only one.



No, calling someone a nazi or a facist, or a racist or a sexist is no different than calling them a slur. It is simply name-calling; you are engaging in an ad hom attack designed to make them personally defensive and divert attention away from their arguments. You are declaring that becuase you have slapped the label of "racist" on them that further analysis is unwarranted, on no evidence whatsoever - evidence, in particular, as to why anyone should accept your idea of what is racist. No, the "Experts" you talk to are not a reason because there is no such thing as an expert on racism - racism cannot be discretely or rigorously defined sufficiently to permit expertise.



The fact that you actually think people with these views exist in numbers large enough to matter is strong evidence that you do not, in fact, actually care about facts at all - because they don't. ell me where to find people that actually give a **** about interracial marriage or gays kissing - as in actually care, not just trolling you.



You haven't shown any data, and you can't. You're hanging your hat on manufactured caricatures of people you disagree with. You actually think incarceration rates are evidence of racism - this is a 5th grade level of analysis at best, like the "77 cents on the dollar" pay gap that can be debunked by anyone capable of division.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I'd say that qualifies as "not in the driver seat." Interesting stuff, but... maybe they shouldn't have done that.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

The short version, huh? That's your anthem on this board. You don't lay out an argument, a plan, or an ideal to be held up to scrutiny. You're copping out. Honestly, I suspect that if you laid out what you "want... for the world," you'd find many here in agreement but different opinions on how to go about reaching them. Or we may actually be horrified about who you want wished out of existence to achieve the dream. We don't know. Because you don't make a case. You don't endorse or defend ideas; you talk smack.


When do you ever present any of this? Maybe instead of dropping *** all over a thread, you could post a science article. And for the record, you should always be critical of what doctors tell you. The amount of regulation they're subject to means endless paperwork and less time reading peer-reviewed journals. I've seen too many (though still not a large percentage of) doctors who are using practice guidelines 10 years out of date and only change when insurance companies stop reimbursing because of it. Doctors are burning out (and committing suicide) in record numbers and staying up to date usually means losing what little free time they get left. For your own benefit, and as a supposed scientist yourself, be critical of what they're telling you.


This is an appeal to authority. You read statistics? Great. Post some. Then let's go over the conclusion of those numbers and see if/where their logic falls apart. I've also read sociological studies and my experience is that if their methods were sound (usually they're suspect) then their interpretation of their data was inserting their own beliefs when they attempt to establish causality. As to your other point here, college educated people are voting more and more democratic because leftist professors are denigrating conservative thought without ever giving equal time for rebuttal. I saw this happen even in upper division physiology courses, not just social sciences. So students retreat to their rooms in conflict over what they learned from their parents (who always know nothing, right?) and this supposedly educated guy with a PhD that nobody contradicts (so he must be right?). Shall we also examine the amount of left vs right-leaning faculty at universities? There is a stranglehold on who is allowed into the club and it isn't based entirely on the quality of work being done. One paper I read had one right-leaning professor stating he fears he'd lose his job if he is ever outed for the sin of being conservative in academia. Or how about the conservative guest lecturers being banned from campus (or insidiously being priced out of coming due to security costs) because of their ideas? Supposedly the last bastion of free speech can't handle scrutiny of their ideas and just price student organizations out of the market. #tolerance


Here you just laid out exactly why a large percentage of people voted for Trump over Clinton. And the Left enacts policies less harmful to who?
Their taxation and regulation policy kept Americans out of work. Their healthcare policy put Americans out of work and priced more people out of affordable health care than were now able to qualify for affordable health care. The left likes to think their policies do good for an afflicted minority and completely ignore the damage done to the majority. But progress, baby.


Even stipulating that Trump is energizing these racists, where are they? What are they doing that is making the country go to hell in a handbasket and ruining "civil" discourse in this country? Are they showing up at counter-protests and beating people up? Okay, you had one alt-right protest where that happened? What else? They're energized, right? Aren't they doing something? Are they protesting outside of people's houses when people are trying to sleep? Are they showing up to protest guest lecturers and then beating the crap out of attendees? Are they shooting up baseball games? Are they making credible threats against person that government security now has to take seriously? Are they attempting to make government employees and their families fear for their safety by having their information published? Are they encouraging others to harass opposition in every facet of their life to show them they're not welcome anywhere? I mean, these sound like the kinds of things perpetrated against blacks in the South. But yet it's not those damned dirty racists that are out there doing these things.


I never claimed that you saying they're racist makes you racist, I just said you were an ******* for doing it. Because again, you never break down their argument and make an actual case for why a policy or statement or action was racist. The word is a retreat from rational argument with the intent to paint the target as subhuman and not worthy of consideration. It is an attempt to shift the topic of conversation to your opponent being forced to disprove that they are racist rather than you actually using your own intelligence to prove it your damn self.


Who's being oppressed here, exactly? I mean, at what other point in American history has it been better to be female, black, homosexual, or whatever group, than right now? Who is living in bondage? Who is being withheld the opportunity to achieve their goals? Or do you we just want to talk about Christian cake bakers?


Show you the data, huh? You could stand to do a little of that too. Look, nobody on this board likes racists. But show us what specifically is racist. Sometimes you sound like my crazy-ass aunt always railing about "THE JEEEEEEEEEEEWSSSSSSS!!!!!"

_________________
The Dude abides.

To be fair here, while I'd currently file it in the unlikely category there is a pretty significant chance a Trump Supreme Court walks gay marriage back. Kennedy's "right to dignity" that he based his opinion on is widely ridiculed by conservative jurists and several of Trump's picks are vocally opposed to Lawrence v. Texas on that basis, let alone Obergefell. There's not much nationwide support for banning gay marriage, but it doesn't need a lot of support, it just needs one deep red state to ban it again and force a court challenge. The Supreme Court might uphold it anyway simply out of respect for precedent but I wouldn't count on it. Homosexual conduct itself being rendered illegal again through overturning Lawrence is not totally out of the question either.