A frustrated radio show caller

[a351]

I'm sure the caller is a nice enough gal, but she was dimmer than a broken light bulb.

Also, this whole "Modern day slavery" meme just stinks. Really stinks. Put it to bed already.

 

[imagep]

I guess you missed this part: Urban sprawl - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Criticisms).

I read all that, but I didn't find any of it to be a negative.

I live in the 'burbs, I used to live in the city. I find that life in the 'burbs is far superior in every way. My neighborhood is safe, I often leave my doors unlocked. I have a very large yard (5 acres) that I can do with what I wish. Some of my neighbors have horses, one has a jack ass, another has goats. I have a large inground pool, a flock of turkeys which from time to times graces my yard, deer also, a groundhog, and a family of raccoons that I frequently find on my front porch eating my cats food. I have privacy like crazy in my neighborhood, can't even see my house from the road. If I choose exercise, then I have plenty of space to do it in, I actually have a rather large fitness room in my house, and even an indoor half pipe. It takes me 7 minutes to get to work. I live less than 2 miles from our local EMS/Fire station. From time to time I have grown gardens, I have a couple of apple trees, peach trees, plum trees, pear trees, thornless blackberry bushes and blueberry bushes - all in my back yard. I also have a small koi pond and a larger fishing pond. I can walk my dog in my neighborhood without fear and I can even let him run free. My child went to a safe school in the burbs (which is actually why I moved many years ago). There are two grocery stores between my work and my home, and lots and lots of other businesses that I can visit without having to make a special trip or go any out of my way. A few years ago when we were snowed in, we road our four wheel ATV's to the convienence store.

I can't think of a single reason that living in town is superior to living in the burbs.

 

[cpwill]

By design? Oh gimme a break. Cons are becoming more and more dishonest by the day.

I'm waiting for your comments to go full conservative whacko and claim Obama is a super secret Muslim too.

It is no less supported than your ridiculous claim that block-granting medicare is part of a secret plot to end nursing home care. At least the effects she describes have already occurred.

 

[Verax]

They pay per-kid here in Illinois... Yes a single adult will (or qualify) for 50 bucks a week, yet an individual who has dependents will get 100 + 100 per kid so they have kids until they "max out." I'm pretty sure that is 800-1,000 or 7-9 kids....That isn't counting food stamps or the "WIC card" - the money they get is just spending money..

Seven to nine kids? Holy ****. Maybe we should start neutering and spaying after two kids and no job.

 

[ecofarm]

I read all that, but I didn't find any of it to be a negative.

Urban sprawl is a major environmental problem, with many aspects. I suggest you further inform yourself before appearing trollishly ignorant IRL. Urban sprawl does not equal mere suburbs. There's more to it than that.




.02

 

[Mr.Nick]

I'm sure the caller is a nice enough gal, but she was dimmer than a broken light bulb.

Also, this whole "Modern day slavery" meme just stinks. Really stinks. Put it to bed already.

It's no damn meme - it's truth.... Everyone wants government to provide them with something except for a select few, so they will vote for those who will pander to their special interests.

IMO, 90% of US citizens of voting age are greedy...... I suppose the old saying is: "nothing is free."

 

[Mr.Nick]

Seven to nine kids? Holy ****. Maybe we should start neutering and spaying after two kids and no job.

Makes sense but at the same time that would be illegal and a violation of the Bill of Rights.

Sometimes issues can be a catch 22.

I believe the appropriate solution would be to make welfare a limited program..Then again you have the bleeding hearts that will say "what about the children" not to mention as a libertarian I fully support the Tenth Amendment and state welfare is a Tenth Amendment issue.

 

[Flyersfan314]

That is totally dishonest... The "democrat party" wasn't fighting for civil liberties until the early-mid 60's until they merged with the "progressive" party and their affiliates such ass the communists...

We can talk about the SDS and Weatherman later...

FDR's policies got many blacks, immigrants, and poor people to come to the party. Progressives joined the Democrat party because that is the party that they felt could and would best advocate and pass into legislation, their ideas, such as social security. Same as the Christian Coalition in the 80s that joined the GOP. Yes the Dems got civil rights legislation passed in the 1960s. I never said anything different. However the movement for civil rights started before that.

 

[a351]

It's no damn meme - it's truth....

IMO, 90% of US citizens of voting age are greedy...... I suppose the old saying is: "nothing is free."

One man's meme I suppose...

In any case, the phrase "modern day slavery", "democrat plantation", and other tidbits of useless jargon that are tossed around quite casually as of late are not only ill founded, but also serve as a giant backhand to just about any african american, let alone those with ancestors who endured actual slavery.

 

[cpwill]

FDR's policies got many blacks, immigrants, and poor people to come to the party. Progressives joined the Democrat party because that is the party that they felt could and would best advocate and pass into legislation, their ideas, such as social security. Same as the Christian Coalition in the 80s that joined the GOP. Yes the Dems got civil rights legislation passed in the 1960s. I never said anything different. However the movement for civil rights started before that.

Yeah. In the 1860s.

 

[Mr.Nick]

FDR's policies got many blacks, immigrants, and poor people to come to the party. Progressives joined the Democrat party because that is the party that they felt could and would best advocate and pass into legislation, their ideas, such as social security. Same as the Christian Coalition in the 80s that joined the GOP. Yes the Dems got civil rights legislation passed in the 1960s. I never said anything different. However the movement for civil rights started before that.

You mean the same guy that locked up Japanese, Italians and communists in camps?

FDR was a pos on all fronts...

FDR was no better than Stalin or Mao...

 

[a351]

FDR was no better than Stalin or Mao...

And the hole deepens..

 

[Flyersfan314]

You mean the same guy that locked up Japanese, Italians and communists in camps?

FDR was a pos on all fronts...

FDR was no better than Stalin or Mao...

So temporarily locking people in camps, while wrong is equivalent to murdering millions of people? Im calling you out now, you are a troll account. You only have 20 posts, most of them in this topic. Most of them not based on facts.

 

[Mr.Nick]

And the hole deepens..

He didn't murder people but he was certainly authoritarian enough to lock them up based on race or political ideology.

Stalin and Mao murdered up to 120,000,000 combined so what FDR did wasn't certainly as bad it was still wrong - especially in a so called free country.

 

[Mr.Nick]

So temporarily locking people in camps, while wrong is equivalent to murdering millions of people? Im calling you out now, you are a troll account. You only have 20 posts, most of them in this topic. Most of them not based on facts.

No and I pointed that out in my previous post..

Locking people up for no damn good reason is still authoritarian...... Both were obviously totalitarian, but what does that make FDR and his 3 terms?

I could argue FDR and his "New Deal" was a total failure - I could also argue it was quasi-socialist or pseudo-capitalist in nature.

 

[VoteRight]

So hispanics and asians only make up 9% of the population?

Nope. Census says 78.1% white, 13.1% black, 16.7% Hispanics and 5% Asian. It's a product of people reporting multiracial inheritance. Note that while Census says 78.1% are white, only 63.4% are White persons who are also not Hispanic.

While I report as Caucasian, I'm of German, Irish and English decent - 2/3 of me is always fighting with each other! I could have just as easily been black, Asian and Hispanic.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Nope. Census says 78.1% white, 13.1% black, 16.7% Hispanics and 5% Asian. It's a product of people reporting multiracial inheritance. Note that while Census says 78.1% are white, only 63.4% are White persons who are also not Hispanic.

While I report as Caucasian, I'm of German, Irish and English decent - 2/3 of me is always fighting with each other! I could have just as easily been black, Asian and Hispanic.

I'm half Sicilian, 1/4th Irish and 1/4th Swede but a lot of people I meet think I'm Mexican hahaha.... I'm actually Fraser clan bloodline (Simon Fraser)....

 

[VoteRight]

And just FYI, I have no black vs white argument.

Ah. So I guess I misunderstood your "Yep, the war on poverty was meant by design to keep the black person down, even though most welfare recipients are white." So should I have said "divisive 'white v. everyone else'" instead?

 

[Carleen]

So when racist people organized into nationwide organizations to keep the black man down, that was something other than a conspiracy?

That wasn't that long ago era, and I'm surprised that anyone would suggest that that whole group of people just disappeared. And I'm pretty sure that - given today's political climate - they're being much more secretive now than then and whatever they're up to today would be considered more conspiratorial than what they did back then.



The person who benefits economically from slavery benefits because he steals the products of other peoples' labor. I don't think it particularly matters to them where those riches come from. If a racist slaver is willing to steal from blacks, it is not that much harder to keep white people down and steal from them too. Perhaps they'll try to target blacks over whites, out of some weird sense of "brotherhood" with the people the same color as them . . . but if you're looking for these people to be shining examples of morality, you're in for disappointment.

Being on welfare guarantees at least a certain level of comfort, and if you have that guarantee, you are much less likely to try to improve your situation - no matter if you're black or white. It's just that, on a per capita basis, black people are far more likely to be trapped on the bottom.



Prejudice would be saying that blacks are incapable of understanding this. Simply saying that they don't however, is just calling it like it is.

Oh so by saying they are not "wise" enough means what?

 

[Flyersfan314]

I agree it was authoritarian and wrong. We are committing similar authoritarian act today, such as the War on Drugs. Just don't act like it was only a Democratic thing. This was an American thing, as evidence by President Coolidge's immigration act.

 

[rocket88]

No they were Democratic-Republicans...

The Whigs were just an offshoot...

Whig Party (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Democratic-Republican Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whigs were not Democrats any more than Dick Cheney is. The Whigs may have broken off from them, but they were the opposition, which is why they adopted the name from the English party that opposed the King. The Whigs fell apart in the 1850s over the issue of slavery, and one faction formed the Republican party that we know today.

Abraham Lincoln, who was in Congress for 2 years as a Whig, was one of them.

 

[rocket88]

No they were Democratic-Republicans...

The Whigs were just an offshoot...

Whig Party (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Democratic-Republican Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whigs were not Democrats any more than Dick Cheney is. The Whigs may have broken off from them, but they were the opposition, which is why they adopted the name from the English party that opposed the King. The Whigs fell apart in the 1850s over the issue of slavery, and one faction formed the Republican party that we know today.

Abraham Lincoln, who was in Congress for 2 years as a Whig, was one of them.

You should know this if you read your links, as everything I just said is right there in the history of the party.

 

[poweRob]

I absolutely believe this. What's been done to black communities and families has been done by design. Too bad they aren't wise enough to realize it.

Come on now... did you just say that 95% of the black community are unwise dupes merely because they don't vote like you?

 

[poweRob]

Also according to Census, there are 308 million people in the US of A. Of those: 78% (240 million) are white/non-Hispanic and 13% (40 million) are black.

That's interesting numbers because...

78% + 13% = 91%

So you are saying that 91% of the US of A population is either white or black, leaving 9% for the rest of the races here... Kind of impossible when the Latino/Hispanic population eclipsed the black population several years ago I do believe.

Hispanics or Latinos constitute 16.3% of the total United States population, or 50.5 million people,[1] forming the second largest ethnic group, after non-Hispanic White Americans (a group composed of dozens of sub-groups, as is Hispanic and Latino Americans).
linkypoo...​

 

[TurtleDude]

Oh I love rants like this. Yep, the war on poverty was meant by design to keep the black person down, even though most welfare recipients are white.

Keep on the revisionist history, it's all the dirty righties have left because they are ashamed that conservatism was the root of slavery and segregation. It was liberalism that ended slavery and segregation.

If conservatism means more freedom and liberalism means more centralized control it seems to me that slavery fits right in with your leftist mentality