We really need to start having a serious conversation about this....

[JohnRoberts]

Let's try to keep out of the left and right side ditches and stay up on the road.

There are lots of policy differences to talk about instead of wasting our energy trying to demonize each other.

JR

 

[hodad]

Let's try to keep out of

Fair enough. Reply to AP has been deleted.

 

[Matador]

ChatGPT can solve this argument and save everyone a ton of time.

Ultimately, it is up to each individual to decide which party they believe is worse. There is no right or wrong answer, and both parties have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Here are some specific examples of how Republicans and Democrats differ on issues:

• The environment: Republicans tend to be more supportive of fossil fuels and less supportive of environmental regulations. Democrats tend to be more supportive of renewable energy and environmental regulations.
• Social programs: Republicans tend to be more supportive of cuts to social programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Democrats tend to be more supportive of maintaining or expanding social programs.
• The rights of minorities: Republicans tend to be more supportive of policies that discriminate against minorities, such as voter ID laws and restrictions on abortion rights. Democrats tend to be more supportive of policies that protect the rights of minorities, such as same-sex marriage and affirmative action.
• The economy: Republicans tend to be more supportive of policies that favor the wealthy, such as tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation of the financial industry. Democrats tend to be more supportive of policies that favor the middle class, such as raising the minimum wage and expanding access to healthcare.
• Personal freedom: Republicans tend to be more supportive of policies that restrict personal freedom, such as book bans and restrictions on abortion rights. Democrats tend to be more supportive of policies that protect personal freedom, such as legalizing marijuana and same-sex marriage.

These are just some examples of how Republicans and Democrats differ on issues. There are many other issues that could be discussed, and both parties have their own unique perspectives on each issue.

 

[user 37518]

Neocons are big trouble.

Absolutely agree

 

[user 37518]

• The economy: Republicans tend to be more supportive of policies that favor the wealthy, such as tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation of the financial industry. Democrats tend to be more supportive of policies that favor the middle class, such as raising the minimum wage and expanding access to healthcare.
• Personal freedom: Republicans tend to be more supportive of policies that restrict personal freedom, such as book bans and restrictions on abortion rights. Democrats tend to be more supportive of policies that protect personal freedom, such as legalizing marijuana and same-sex marriage.

Calling "abortion rights" as personal freedom or human rights is an oxymoron, and very ironic. Also, what do you mean by book bans? Do you mean that Republicans want to ban books from school being read to 5 year old's on how to perform oral sex on a person of their same sex? or being read by a Drag queen about how Joey isn't really Joey but Susy? If so, again, I don't think that is a restriction to personal freedom but mere common sense, in fact is the opposite, it is the protection of personal freedom. But, as always, the leftist premise of "inversion" of reality holds, by making evil look good, and good evil.

Secondly, regarding the economy, I am not against public policies benefiting the poor, but the truth is that the people who generate the gross of the income are the rich, those are the ones with factories, the ones with the companies, etc... if they go, everyone goes. I've seen it in my country, the government gives the poor a bimonthly allowance of less than a couple hundred dollars, the poor are happy, but they are numb, they are just kept in line with a few scraps. On the other hand, programs that would benefit economic growth and progress are cut back, in order to accommodate for these hand outs. It is a lot easier and cheaper for the elites to give scraps to the population whilst still keeping them in poverty, than to really invest on what would benefit the entire country and actually take those outside of poverty.

However, the leftist inversion of reality wants to make us believe that the ones on the right only want to make rich people richer and that they have a disdain for the poor. In fact, is just the opposite, it is the left which have a disdain for the poor and just want to manipulate them. All the big leftists are travelling in jet planes and eating caviar, I don't see Bill Gates or George Soros actually doing something for the poor, that is, unless of course, if you consider "doing something for the poor" as opening abortion clinics in their neighborhoods or giving them birth control, just as Soros and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation does. Really, what does the poorest parts in Africa need most than anything in the world? Birth control apparently, at least according to Bill and his ex-wife. In fact, these are the people who want to cut-back on the population by getting rid of the poor whilst virtue signaling that it is the ones on the right that don't care.

 

[JohnRoberts]

at least this is almost about policy but using sweeping generalizations that are not very accurate.

The other day Gov DeSantis was being smeared as a book banner.... He shared a video of some of the books. post video

The content was so sexually graphic and inappropriate for children that the local news stations declined to air it all... these were the books being foist on immature school children.
==
There was another attack on DeSantis claiming that he refused to teach black history, he only removed the radical inflammatory polemics, keeping the actual history.

There is reportedly lots of fake news behind these attacks on DeSantis for obvious reasons, thats how modern politics is played.

JR

PS; Its actually against forum rules to post links to pornography I hope I don't get in trouble.

 

[hodad]

keeping the actual history.

"Actual" history. I live in the South. I know enough to know that a lot of white Southerners' idea of "actual history" ignores things like, umm, actual history. Like the actual words of people they seek to defend. Like actual events and the motivations that led to them. "Actual history" translates to "the story certain white people want to tell about the past because it makes them feel better about themselves. "

 

[Recording Engineer]

Do you mean that Republicans want to ban books from school being read to 5 year old's on how to perform oral sex on a person of their same sex?

WTF? Show me a single case where that is happening and a single Democrat or anyone from that community supporting this. THIS is a prime-example of a mainstream, out of thin-air BS defense of the EXTREMISM attack on that community, spouted every day by 24-hour “news”, and is now considered “fact” by the hungry, “feed me what I want to hear” audience. THIS is a MASSIVE F-ing problem!!!

 

[JohnRoberts]

We as a nation have centuries of unfortunate history. I'll see your Georgian Klu Klux Clan, and raise you Mississippian Freedom riders buried in an earthen dam in the early 60s.

There is a difference between a factual recognition of the actual history (even the ugly stuff), and idealogical political arguments used to divide us.

We don't need to teach students to hate each other based on skin color. I thought this was mostly settled, but the racial grievance industry is alive and growing stronger if anything. The reparations discussions going on in CA sounds cra cra... If Gov Newsome thinks that is his path to white house, he may be mistaken.

JR

 

[user 37518]

WTF? Show me a single case where that is happening and a single Democrat or anyone from that community supporting this. THIS is a prime-example of a mainstream, out of thin-air BS defense of the EXTREMISM attack on that community, spouted every day by 24-hour “news”, and is now considered “fact” by the hungry, “feed me what I want to hear” audience. THIS is a MASSIVE F-ing problem!!!

John already showed it! This is already happening. I am not saying Democrats are promoting it, I am saying that Republicans are accused of wanting to ban these books. What attack on that community? Children are being read this books, there is no denial of that. Are you saying that people promoting this, Democrats or not, are innocent and they are being unjustly attacked?

 

[Recording Engineer]

The reparations discussions going on in CA sounds cra cra...

I feel the same way; just as much as I feel other people think it’s been long-enough to catch-up.

 

[Recording Engineer]

John already showed it! This is already happening. I am not saying Democrats are promoting it, I am saying that Republicans are accused of wanting to ban these books.

That is NOT what you said and that is NOT what John showed. Again. Show me a single case of:

books from school being read to 5 year old's on how to perform oral sex on a person of their same sex?

DeSantis SAYING this actually happened (Did he? j haven’t seen that. Maybe I missed it.) and this actually happening are two different things. Even if it did, no one is supporting such a thing and it should be handled extremely-harsh, but such a massive political-movement would NOT be warranted.

 

[hodad]

There is a difference between a factual recognition of the actual history (even the ugly stuff),

That's the stuff that hasn't been taught--and generally still isn't. There's also a lot of garbage that has been/is being taught--the notion that slaves were treated well--like you'd treat a car, or a horse, I suppose--as some sort of rationalization that it was okay to own another human being. That was in the textbooks of my youth. My nephew got the "it wasn't about slavery, it was about states' rights" BS in his history class in the 2000s. That right there is the sort of propagandistic garbage that needs to be pulled from history books, but I don't hear anyone on the right complaining about the pro-white bias in history books, when it is quite clearly there.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I do not choose to litigate the civil war again over a century after the fact. There were multiple factors.

I don't hate you, don't hate me

JR

 

[living sounds]

Ok, here are some: abortion, immigration, prioritizing climate policies when many don't make any sense, crime (see California laws or lack thereof), and in general favoring most things woke just because they are woke, like the photo of the weirdo you mention.

Before Trump Republicans were very much in favour of immigration from Mexico, because it was good for business (cheap labour).

As for climate change, the insurance industry is now demanding cuts because those professional risk analysts see their bottom line on the line:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/insure...ssions-for-coverage-52251222?mod=hp_lead_pos3
"Woke" wasn't a thing back then, but even Barry Goldwater supported much of the civil rights legislation.

Abortion wasn't an issue of debate in 1960. There is no public policy statement on record by JFK on the issue.

Gross oversimplification of reality. You might note where the highest and lowest per-capita military recruitment is by scrolling down through this article. Now compare to an election result map.

https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/military-enlistment-rates-by-state-and-region/
Also polling of veterans and active military (all volunteers) indicates a skew to the right over all age groups. So tell me more about the greedy selfish right who don't serve their country.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/118684/military-veterans-ages-tend-republican.aspx

There are lies, damn lies and statistics. Military enlistment may be an expression of a feeling of patriotic duty, but it may also be an indicator of a lack of other employment opportunities.

 

[hodad]

I do not choose to litigate the civil war again over a century after the fact.

So white slavery-apologists get the last word, even though the actual history does not support their position? The facts are there--it was first and foremost a war about slavery. That's what the leaders of the Confederacy said, and I take them at their word. What does not interest me in the least is the "lost cause" mythology, or the justifications for slavery, or any of the other Southern white apologist nonsense.

We have matured and progressed as a nation in the past 150 years; perhaps it's a good idea to look at our old interpretations of history with fresh eyes. I'm not suggesting reinventing history, but simply seeing if the old interpretations stand the test of time--and from where I stand, they do not.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I'm done.. feel free to keep arguing

JR

 

[Matador]

This is awesome!
--------
The right to abortion is a personal freedom because it allows women to make decisions about their own bodies and their own lives. It is a fundamental human right that should be protected by law.

There are many reasons why women might choose to have an abortion. Some women may not be ready to be mothers, while others may have been raped or sexually assaulted. Some women may have medical conditions that make pregnancy or childbirth dangerous. Whatever the reason, abortion is a personal decision that should be made by the woman herself.

The right to abortion is also a public health issue. When women are denied access to safe and legal abortion, they are more likely to seek unsafe abortions, which can lead to serious health problems and even death. In addition, unwanted pregnancies can have a negative impact on women's lives, both economically and emotionally.

The right to abortion is a fundamental human right that should be protected by law. It is a personal freedom that allows women to make decisions about their own bodies and their own lives.

WRT Florida schools: Critical race theory (CRT) is a graduate-level academic discipline that examines the role of race and racism in American society. It is not taught in K-12 schools.

However, there have been some cases in Florida where teachers have discussed CRT concepts in their classrooms. For example, in one case, a teacher used a CRT-based curriculum to teach students about the history of racism in the United States. In another case, a teacher used a CRT-based curriculum to teach students about the concept of white privilege.

These cases have sparked controversy, with some parents and lawmakers arguing that CRT is being taught in Florida schools. However, the Florida Department of Education has denied these claims, stating that CRT is not part of the state's K-12 curriculum.

 

[Matador]

In a 3-2 vote on Monday, the Escambia County School Board, near Pensacola, deemed And Tango Makes Three unsuitable for students, overriding the recommendation of a district-mandated review committee made up of administrators, teachers, parents, and community members.
...
In the picture book, Richardson and Peter Parnell tell the true story of two male penguins at New York City’s Central Park zoo adopting an orphan female chick, demonstrating a nontraditional family dynamic. And Tango Makes Three was published in 2005 and has won, and been nominated for, a slew of children’s book awards.

However this is apparently ok:

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 “If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days."

Exodus 22:16-17 “If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride price for her and make her his wife. If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the bride price for virgins."

Isaiah 13:15-18 " Anyone who is found will be thrust through, And anyone who is captured will fall by the sword. Their little ones also will be dashed to pieces Before their eyes; Their houses will be plundered And their wives ravished. Behold, I am going to stir up the Medes against them, Who will not value silver or take pleasure in gold.

 

[Recording Engineer]

I do not choose to litigate the civil war again over a century after the fact. There were multiple factors.

I don’t think it’s the argument that there were multiple factors… It’s downplaying the slavery-aspect and the long-term on that group, then passed-down through generations with freedom, Jim Crow era, Civil Rights era, and the slow-recovery from all that, that people object to. You were alive during Civil Rights. That certainly means not enough time has gone by.