The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left

a reply to: Gryphon66

When did I say you called me a racist?

I don't believe I did, so NO, I did not lie.

I'd like to see honest critiques of the Democratic party. There are plenty.

As opposed to the absurdity we've seen so far, I'll share some of my top problems:

1. The Party tends toward corporatism. Donald Trump was well aware of this fact.

2. The Party is fiscally delusional about a great many things, primarily, government spending and government revenues.

3. The Party is far too colonial and interventionist for my tastes. I have no problem with a strong national defense. I'm even aware that we need a global presence to protect our interests. However, we do not have to meddle in every other country's internal affairs.

4. The Party is made up of long-term professional politicians.

What would I like to see from a party?

1. Realistic balance between national (State and local) infrastructural needs and revenue generation.

2. Term limits.

3. A return to regulatory controls on all large corporations, and more initiatives to help small, local businesses.

4. A massive scaling down of our international military presence by focusing on our own territories.

5. Support for a realistic "social safety net" which actually boosts people back into the workforce when possible.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Gryphon66

When did I say you called me a racist?

I don't believe I did, so NO, I did not lie.

For the record:

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Gryphon66

Let's see...you've said I am in a sad state, challenged my courage, and insinuated I am a racist. And that's just off the top of my head. I am sure there are a few other personal insults I've forgotten.

I haven't made this personal -- you have.

I just saw the bit of your post that says you're at a funeral. My condolences. Aside from that ...

a reply to: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Gryphon66

Let's see...you've said I am in a sad state, challenged my courage, and insinuated I am a racist. And that's just off the top of my head. I am sure there are a few other personal insults I've forgotten.

I haven't made this personal -- you have.

So ... I didn't call you a racist then? You lied about it?

For the record, you already responded to that comment with the above quoted statement, thereby acknowledging I was not accusing you of calling me a racist. I said you were insinuating it. You can't claim you have the exact opposite inference now.

Thanks for the condolences though.

Also, for the record, I DO believe I have prejudices I need to work on on. I would not characterize myself as a racist though.

EVERYONE could do better with their prejudices. Most refuse to admit it.

I admit I have room for improvement.

We all have prejudices; we all need to work on them. I'm at the top of that list.

We all have confirmation bias; we all need to work on that. I'm at the top of that one too.

I'm very much in favor of seeing REAL critiques of the Democrats; unfortunately, 99.99% of what gets espoused around here is simple dishonesty.

More critiques of Democrats:

1. Little party unity.

2. No charismatic leaders.

3. Diffusion of message.

4. Continual advancement of incompetent individuals.

5. Whining.

6. Lack of focus on the Constitution as the fundamental basis for all political actions in the US at the national level.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Straight white males don't get refused housing just because they are straight white males. But in some states, gay and trans people can legally be refused housing just because they are gay/trans. You obviously don't have a problem with that. I do.

Of course only straight white males are against gay and trans.

So you attack only straight white males and scoff at all else...ignoring how many black latino asian straight females think your movements are far over the top and now actually damaging your war for "equality".

Why exactly do you think that? Right, because the media tells you so...reminds me of the song.

Jesus loves me this i know, for the Bible tells me so........

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Straight white males don't get refused housing just because they are straight white males. But in some states, gay and trans people can legally be refused housing just because they are gay/trans. You obviously don't have a problem with that. I do.

LGBT can be fired for no reason. And of course, day by day, Republcian States are desperately trying to chip away at marriage equality.

There would be no need for Civil Rights Acts or protected classes if there wasn't discrimination. We see it here on a daily basis, racism, sexism, nativism, homophobia, etc. and usually from the VERY FOLKS who are so desperately trying to deny that there are any issues with discrimination for anyone EXCEPT White Straight Men.

It'd be funny if it weren't so sad.

ANYONE can be fired for no reason.

Why should every LGBT think they get fired for their sexuality?

Sounds like you think all LGBT should have more than equal rights to make up for all the suffering they go through so they can suck at their jobs.

Stop making up excuses for people looking and sounding like fools and then wondering why they get fired.

The ones who actually ACT equal do not have that problem.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Straight white males don't get refused housing just because they are straight white males. But in some states, gay and trans people can legally be refused housing just because they are gay/trans. You obviously don't have a problem with that. I do.

LGBT can be fired for no reason. And of course, day by day, Republcian States are desperately trying to chip away at marriage equality.

There would be no need for Civil Rights Acts or protected classes if there wasn't discrimination. We see it here on a daily basis, racism, sexism, nativism, homophobia, etc. and usually from the VERY FOLKS who are so desperately trying to deny that there are any issues with discrimination for anyone EXCEPT White Straight Men.

It'd be funny if it weren't so sad.

ANYONE can be fired for no reason.

Why should every LGBT think they get fired for their sexuality?

Sounds like you think all LGBT should have more than equal rights to make up for all the suffering they go through so they can suck at their jobs.

Stop making up excuses for people looking and sounding like fools and then wondering why they get fired.

The ones who actually ACT equal do not have that problem.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Dwight Eisenhower was the last classical Republican President.

The last class president PERIOD...OH flamer of the right who accuses everyone else of doing what he/she does.

originally posted by: ParasuvO

ANYONE can be fired for no reason.

Only in employment-at-will states, and there are exceptions even to that. However, anyone can be fired anywhere at any time merely for being LGBT, as those are not protected classes.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
Why should every LGBT think they get fired for their sexuality?

Well, first you'd have to prove that "every LGBT" thinks that ... but, I suppose that the thousands who have been fired for "being gay" would agree with you, at least in their own cases.

originally posted by: ParasuvO

Sounds like you think all LGBT should have more than equal rights to make up for all the suffering they go through so they can suck at their jobs.

Swing and a miss. LGBT should have the same protections all Americans have ... no more, no less.

originally posted by: ParasuvO

Stop making up excuses for people looking and sounding like fools and then wondering why they get fired.

Says the person making wild statements about millions with no direct knowledge of anything.

originally posted by: ParasuvO

The ones who actually ACT equal do not have that problem.

In fact, it's those of us that stand up for ourselves that drive those like you to distraction.

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Dwight Eisenhower was the last classical Republican President.

The last class president PERIOD...OH flamer of the right who accuses everyone else of doing what he/she does.

Let us know if you come up with anything relevant to the discussion.

a reply to: xuenchen

Right...and then this happened

a reply to: soberbacchus

You're troubling them with facts and rationality again, Bacchus.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Krazysh0t

He can't. We both know the ideology of the party's completely reversed roles as the nineteenth century become the twentieth and those rolls were solidified by actions in the fifties and sixties. They know the left stands for equality and acceptance and that the right stands for intolerance and preserving the status of citizens based on how light their skin is.

Man, that reads like a talking point off a cue card provided by ShareBlue.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Edumakated

Those people and their ideology are all dead.
Progress is the root word for progressive.

Until you're so progressive that you end up back where you started. Notice how self-segregation is a thing now?

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: xuenchen

Right...and then this happened

Cherry-Picking for the win!



1964 was a result of painting Goldwater as a racist because he didn't think the government should tell people who they could and could not cater to, even though he strongly supported civil rights in general and supported the removal of Jim Crow laws (notably put in place by Democrats).

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Edumakated

Those people and their ideology are all dead.
Progress is the root word for progressive.

So why are 'progressive' ideas so regressive?

Disarm the people, control speech, segregate the masses, government control of productivity, oppressive taxation...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No we didn't. The Revolutionary War was fought because a bunch of smugglers didn't want to pay taxes on corporate products they were forced to buy because they were sponsored by the British government. A good portion of the colonies didn't even want to fight the war until Franklin ran his propaganda campaign to unite the colonies, and even then they still had trouble drumming up support for the war.

Gonna call BS on your statement here because of your ignorance and general attitude to anybody who disagrees with you. The actual root of the Revolutionary War was not so much on smuggling as it was about the stamp for lumber that the British earmarked for building boats. Remember England is a island and very early on they exhausted their supply of lumber for ship building, as the main reason for colonization has always been for resources that the home country needs. Link

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: xuenchen

Right...and then this happened

Cherry-Picking for the win!

1964 was a result of painting Goldwater as a racist because he didn't think the government should tell people who they could and could not cater to, even though he strongly supported civil rights in general and supported the removal of Jim Crow laws (notably put in place by Democrats).

Holy crap no..

Go back as far as you like..

What is interesting about this electoral map?



let reality soak in...Not anomaly...Effen history!







The turn was civil rights.

Crazy how party affiliation can now retard brains and the ability to recognize factual history.

Good luck with your condition.