• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP Tyranny 1960s style...and the lie has been perpetuated straight through to the present day

Xelor

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
10,257
Reaction score
4,161
Location
Washington, D.C.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
We all know that many politicians are wont to lie with little, if any, compunction. Too often, one of the lies and the other swears to it. We hear them utter their fabrications and know it's total BS. Indeed, on countless occasions, I've asked myself, "Are they really so dumb as to believe that crap? Or do they really think we're too stupid to tell they're lying to our faces?"

Back in 1968, the Nixon Admin conceived and implemented one of the most opprobrious lies ever.

“The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
-- John Ehrlichman, 1994 Harper's​​

The social oppression of the poor -- no matter their race -- has been going on ever since, and it's funded by a $260B/year transfer of tax dollars to the prison system.
 
We all know that many politicians are wont to lie with little, if any, compunction. Too often, one of the lies and the other swears to it. We hear them utter their fabrications and know it's total BS. Indeed, on countless occasions, I've asked myself, "Are they really so dumb as to believe that crap? Or do they really think we're too stupid to tell they're lying to our faces?"

Back in 1968, the Nixon Admin conceived and implemented one of the most opprobrious lies ever.

“The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
-- John Ehrlichman, 1994 Harper's​​

The social oppression of the poor -- no matter their race -- has been going on ever since, and it's funded by a $260B/year transfer of tax dollars to the prison system.

The Truth:

 
Just goes to show you what politicians think about the American citizen.
 
We all know that many politicians are wont to lie with little, if any, compunction. Too often, one of the lies and the other swears to it. We hear them utter their fabrications and know it's total BS. Indeed, on countless occasions, I've asked myself, "Are they really so dumb as to believe that crap? Or do they really think we're too stupid to tell they're lying to our faces?"

Back in 1968, the Nixon Admin conceived and implemented one of the most opprobrious lies ever.

“The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
-- John Ehrlichman, 1994 Harper's​​

The social oppression of the poor -- no matter their race -- has been going on ever since, and it's funded by a $260B/year transfer of tax dollars to the prison system.
What a load.

Funny how you didnt mention this part of the article:

"Nixon’s invention of the war on drugs as a political tool was cynical, but every president since — Democrat and Republican alike — has found it equally useful for one reason or another."

Doesnt jive with your OP premise, so shuffle it aside, eh?

But while we are speaking of social oppression of the poor, strange how you failed to draw the parallels to LBJs DNC system, the new plantations system.
Star Parker - Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What You Can Do About It
 
there are a certain 'class' of politician in America that have the most contempt for Joe Six Pack America; the GOP.

not saying the Demorats are really any better, or much better but the GOP are like Satan on Beano.

I would trust a Republican politician just as far as I could kick his ass across a ****ing Ouija board & that aint very far ..............
 
What a load.

Funny how you didnt mention this part of the article:

"Nixon’s invention of the war on drugs as a political tool was cynical, but every president since — Democrat and Republican alike — has found it equally useful for one reason or another."

Doesnt jive with your OP premise, so shuffle it aside, eh?

But while we are speaking of social oppression of the poor, strange how you failed to draw the parallels to LBJs DNC system, the new plantations system.
Star Parker - Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What You Can Do About It

So several wrongs make a right?

So I can just do whatever somebody else did and you'll be OK with that?
 
there are a certain 'class' of politician in America that have the most contempt for Joe Six Pack America; the GOP.

not saying the Demorats are really any better, or much better but the GOP are like Satan on Beano.

I would trust a Republican politician just as far as I could kick his ass across a ****ing Ouija board & that aint very far ..............

The only real difference between the dems and reps is care and feeding of the livestock.

But they both consider us livestock.

And the only reason for that is the money that bcaks dems tends to come more from American paychecks.

Like car insurance companies like you to be able to afford a car.
 
So several wrongs make a right?

So I can just do whatever somebody else did and you'll be OK with that?

I am merely countering the OP, bro.

In debate one should not be solely looking to win (tho winning is not to be discounted), one should enter into it looking, seeking the truth as well as searching out solutions.

The poor and unjustly oppressed should be defended from all ill motivated comers. If a patient has two forms of terminal cancer the well intentioned healer should not focus on one to the exclusion of the other.

Ultimately results in a dead patient. Yano?
 
there are a certain 'class' of politician in America that have the most contempt for Joe Six Pack America; the GOP.

not saying the Demorats are really any better, or much better but the GOP are like Satan on Beano.

I would trust a Republican politician just as far as I could kick his ass across a ****ing Ouija board & that aint very far ..............

Yeah that certain class is 99.9% of all of them.
 
We all know that many politicians are wont to lie with little, if any, compunction. Too often, one of the lies and the other swears to it. We hear them utter their fabrications and know it's total BS. Indeed, on countless occasions, I've asked myself, "Are they really so dumb as to believe that crap? Or do they really think we're too stupid to tell they're lying to our faces?"

Back in 1968, the Nixon Admin conceived and implemented one of the most opprobrious lies ever.

“The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
-- John Ehrlichman, 1994 Harper's​​

The social oppression of the poor -- no matter their race -- has been going on ever since, and it's funded by a $260B/year transfer of tax dollars to the prison system.
What a load.

Funny how you didnt mention this part of the article:

"Nixon’s invention of the war on drugs as a political tool was cynical, but every president since — Democrat and Republican alike — has found it equally useful for one reason or another."

Doesnt jive with your OP premise, so shuffle it aside, eh?

But while we are speaking of social oppression of the poor, strange how you failed to draw the parallels to LBJs DNC system, the new plantations system.
Star Parker - Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What You Can Do About It

So several wrongs make a right?


So I can just do whatever somebody else did and you'll be OK with that?


I am merely countering the OP, bro.

Red:
Against my better judgment....Gaugingcatenate, I didn't respond to your post that remarked on what I didn't mention because seeing that you thought I didn't deal with the fact of each subsequent POTUS having perpetuated the strategy/tactic Nixon innovated told me that you didn't comprehend -- for whatever reason, perhaps even your not having read and thought about it -- the remark with which I concluded my OP.

For the most part, I don't dignify on-topic-yet-insipid remarks and questions by responding to them. I wouldn't be addressing it now but for having seen a contretemps of sorts potentially burgeoning as a result of your response to the other member, What if...?.


I concluded my OP with:
The social oppression of the poor -- no matter their race -- has been going on ever since, and it's funded by a $260B/year transfer of tax dollars to the prison system.​
Just how do you think that the social oppression of which Ehrlichman spoke could have persisted ever since without either the explicit or tacit approbation of every POTUS since Nixon? The idea you think I didn't address is implicit in the concluding remark of the OP.


Aside:
Certain members' objections expressed about the thoughts I express in web forums such as this befuddle the "eff" out of me.


  • [*=1]When I post very brief comments that necessarily imply "such and such," invariably someone will come along and complain about the fact that my exposition didn't spell out that which is necessarily implicit.
    [*=1]When I post a fully expositive set of remarks, invariably someone will come along and complain that I did spell out in "gory detail" the nature and extent of my thoughts on the matter I discussed. (To be sure, what constitutes "a lot" varies by person. My idea of a long essay is ~5000+ words and a short essay is anything under ~1500 words. "Not an essay," is for me any writing comprised of fewer than ~500 words.)
    [*=1]Of either type of post, as often as not, someone comes along and inaptly construes that "such and such" is necessarily implicit in what I wrote when it is not.
Generally, I don't respond to remarks in any of the three categories. Why would I? The person obviously didn't comprehend what I wrote and s/he didn't attest to not understanding and pose a request for clarification; thus I have little reason to think they're going to comprehend what I might subsequently say. Better for them and me that I leave them to their own devices.​
 
Back
Top Bottom