• 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!

In America, talk turns to something unspoken for 150 years: Civil war

Before lynching the 35 to 45 percent of the American voters who routinely support Trump as Nazi saluting white nationalists, and Trump as using racial fear, why don't we engage in a few thought experiments ?

I'm curious:

Suppose a 13,000,000 illegal Canadians were a population that imported violent gangs into the US, including drug networks and murderers. Would it be "racist" to fear their illegal entry, and "racist" to prevent their illegal entry?

Suppose 13,000,000 illegal Canadians had a right to use American schools, drive legally, obtain some forms of social benefits, and competed against other unskilled Americans, including black and Hispanic Americans, for jobs (while lowering their wages) would it be "racist" to wish to deport them?

Suppose 13,000,000 illegal Canadians were illiterate and needy, and likely to spawn another generation of American citizens who will use welfare disproportionately, be only marginally better educated, and have 8 times the crime rate of the first generation of migrants, would it be racist to want to prevent it by securing the border and limiting immigration?

Finally, was it racist to have opposed Italian and/or Sicilian immigration, especially illegal immigration, because of fear of organized crime?

How does anyone KNOW that the primary motivation of Trumps supporters are racist, rather than naturally untrusting, xenophobic, class prejudicial, or simply deserved antipathy?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

So your opinion is that the illegals are all bad people. That sounds a bit racist since we all know that you are talking about Hispanics. And yes it would be racist to discriminate against a section (Italian/Sicilian) of immigrates just because a minority of them are criminals. Just as it was racist to single out Japanese American because of their race.
 
KKK was/is leftist.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

No; they were hardcore conservative, the descendants of —- and in many cases, actual soldiers of —- the Confederacy.
 
Hell the U.S. pulled this ****. Remember Poppy Bush pushing us into the Gulf War with "Saddam's troops are in Kuwait and taking babies out of incubators and throwing them onto the cold floor!"



On the other hand, Iraqi troops did commit numerous atrocities in Kuwait.....
 
I closing, the "cause" of this has been 30 years of 'get even' politics, punishing the out party only to be punished when the pendulum swings, and the fighting grows more intense

If only we could forget that "one side" was completely and utterly thrown overboard 30-some years ago.
For that reason I fail to see the "get even" quotient because from where I sit, one side's just trying to get back what they lost when they were tossed overboard.
I'm talking about the working class, the folks who used to be able to afford higher education, health care, a roof, a car or maybe even two, adequate food and clothing, job security and, in the end, maybe even a bit of upward mobility.

I see the other side manufacturing endless parades of boogeymen, liberals, godless liberals, the ga-heys, illegal aliens, Jews, blacks, environmentalists, anything that doesn't march in obedient lockstep with hidebound jingoistic ignorance to the Right.
 
Total nonsense and you know it. No one is confiscating anything. They didn't under Obama or under Clinton. So spare me. Our firearms are safe. You just have been had.


You are mistaken...or intentionally dishonest. In California, citizens are registering their guns as required by law. And law enforcement have used those registrations as a springboard to seize those guns. Registration leads to confiscation...and confiscation IS happening already.
 
Republicans were hyper-mad when they weren't in power. They were hyper-mad when the were in power and now they are hyper-mad about losing power. We wouldn't be here if they could control their hysterics.

I mean JFC they are talking like they are going to war all the goddamn time. One of the most obvious of these is whole pumped up "DEMS WANT INFANTICIDE" bull****. That's what countries scream about other countries that they want to go to war with.



Great call.

I agree. It starts with deep rooted resentments, usually with distorted logic, and escalates, the lexicon growing intensely more hostile.

Like the frog in hot water not noticing the water coming to a boil, the nation has not seen the emotional power increase, being fed with commentators and politicians alike. Here, we cringe at what you say about each other at election time; becomes increasingly difficult to see you all as neighbors of each other.

In the end they don't even talk policy, but rather push fear and hate. It is not surprising that nothing ever changes - you argue the same issues today as you did when I was in high school there in the 60's
 


You are mistaken...or intentionally dishonest. In California, citizens are registering their guns as required by law. And law enforcement have used those registrations as a springboard to seize those guns. Registration leads to confiscation...and confiscation IS happening already.


Yawn.

Confiscation is not a federal issue. This is a state issue. And California is notoriously anti-gun. Don't like it? LEave.

But don't tell me anyone is going to confiscate my guns like Gladio. total fear mongering nonsense.
 
No, there isn’t going to be a civil war. Americans are too comfortable for that nonsense. Any “civil war” will just come in the form of bitching on social media.

Patisnship is what is seperating this country. It has been that way since Clinton and Ginrich. What is the answer, throw the lot out, introduce term limits for both Houses of Congress. No one, and I mean no one has any buisness being in the Senate 30 years.

Trump campaigned on term limits for Congress, but not a peep since Nov 9, 2016, can a Rightie answer that one ?
 
That is total bunk. Background checks? You betcha. Do I want criminals or the mentally ill to legally obtain weapons? Hell no. I have guns, including an AR-15. I did Brady background checks to get them, and my AR-15 is registered. Do I feel threatened that the government is going to take my guns away? Not at all. Paranoia will destroy 'ya.



That should get post of the day.

May I ask, would you, in support of your rights walk down a major street with that AR-15 locked and loaded? There is a reason I ask - I am not baiting a gun nut, you seem to have the only level head on the matter.
But would you?
 
So your opinion is that the illegals are all bad people. That sounds a bit racist since we all know that you are talking about Hispanics. And yes it would be racist to discriminate against a section (Italian/Sicilian) of immigrates just because a minority of them are criminals. Just as it was racist to single out Japanese American because of their race.

Do you disagree with Australia's position on immigration?
 
Patisnship is what is seperating this country. It has been that way since Clinton and Ginrich. What is the answer, throw the lot out, introduce term limits for both Houses of Congress. No one, and I mean no one has any buisness being in the Senate 30 years.

Trump campaigned on term limits for Congress, but not a peep since Nov 9, 2016, can a Rightie answer that one ?

Yea, he realized no politician is going to vote for career suicide.
 
On the other hand, Iraqi troops did commit numerous atrocities in Kuwait.....

True. This lie wasn't needed. And of course we shouldn't have basically invited them to invade Kuwait when Saddam asked us if we'd be okay if he invaded them and we basically said go ahead, we have no problem with it.
 
Yawn.

Confiscation is not a federal issue. This is a state issue. And California is notoriously anti-gun. Don't like it? LEave.

But don't tell me anyone is going to confiscate my guns like Gladio. total fear mongering nonsense.
:lamo

typical. So you WERE being dishonest. You KNOW gun confiscation is happening...and approve of it. You just hide behind the state violating the 2nd Amendment. And you are good with that...right?
 
If only we could forget that "one side" was completely and utterly thrown overboard 30-some years ago.
For that reason I fail to see the "get even" quotient because from where I sit, one side's just trying to get back what they lost when they were tossed overboard.
I'm talking about the working class, the folks who used to be able to afford higher education, health care, a roof, a car or maybe even two, adequate food and clothing, job security and, in the end, maybe even a bit of upward mobility.

I see the other side manufacturing endless parades of boogeymen, liberals, godless liberals, the ga-heys, illegal aliens, Jews, blacks, environmentalists, anything that doesn't march in obedient lockstep with hidebound jingoistic ignorance to the Right.

I am in agreement with much of this, except I see the divide between the 99% and the 1%. We need another OCCUPY but this time don't let the Intel agencies infiltrate the command structure. And the sooner, the better.
/
 
If only we could forget that "one side" was completely and utterly thrown overboard 30-some years ago.
For that reason I fail to see the "get even" quotient because from where I sit, one side's just trying to get back what they lost when they were tossed overboard.
I'm talking about the working class, the folks who used to be able to afford higher education, health care, a roof, a car or maybe even two, adequate food and clothing, job security and, in the end, maybe even a bit of upward mobility.

I see the other side manufacturing endless parades of boogeymen, liberals, godless liberals, the ga-heys, illegal aliens, Jews, blacks, environmentalists, anything that doesn't march in obedient lockstep with hidebound jingoistic ignorance to the Right.


I tend to see things from both, or more sides. It's in my nature and 25 years training. I agree, the party of the right excessively creates fear a la Machiavellian sub plot. I agree they are the greater hypocrites and set in their ways.

Having said that, the left, or your left, played some serious get even politics in Obama's first two years, and the first four of the Clinton administration being mean spirited around the edges. As ONE glaring example of same level of morals - Obama knew months before that "you can keep your plan" was a lie. We can argue that Trump lies a lot more, but add the fact that Obama, like Clinton's lying under oath in part set the stage for Trump.

I have said since day one, that US presidents were declining and becoming devoid of the character needed by a president. I did not agree with much of Regan's act, but he used his charisma to bring a damaged nation back together. Carter was a fool, Ford a moron and Nixon tore the country in two, the last time I saw headlines with the words "civil" and "war" and a question mark in one headline. Having said that, had not been for Watergate we would be debating whether to use that last spot at Mount Rushmore for Tricky Dicky.
Trace back every president so say FDR and take a look at what they got away with. Each and any of those things merely empowered the next president, and of course each became more and more corrupt, ie Obama's attempted destruction of the constitution, the issuing of EO's is OK now.
 
Correct that last part to "the elitist haves and have-nots" and you have something there. But not the whole story.

Globalism in corporate clothing represents a plantation style 21st century form of soft fascism, a sort of "corporate cosmology" the kind which Arthur Jensen pushed on Howard Beale in his "You have meddled with the primal forces of NATURE" speech that he thundered to a frightened old television crackpot in the dimly lit boardroom in the movie "Network".

And in that case, in that instance, that war is already over and done with. The human side lost, the individuals lost.

All that remains is the class struggle to keep the despair quotient at bay, to retain or revive a small piece of upward mobility that is the right of every man or woman who works hard at their job every day, no matter what it might be.
That IS the liberal side, the left...the mainstream left.

We don't want to talk of nationalism, do we? What is nationalism? It's an attempt to position hatred against other nations, to justify death and destruction of others using defense of one's homeland as an excuse.
Ahhhh, nationalism, when simple love of country and ordinary red-blooded patriotism is NOT ENOUGH.
That is the extreme alt-Right, the Trumpian Republican right.

And what of the ordinary mainstream conservatives?
In today's America...they are and have been cut adrift for nearly a decade, only some of them won't admit it yet.
They were first given their walking papers in 2010 by the Tea Party.

CBS:

I'm not sure I understand the reasoning behind your suggested correction. Could you further explain? What are elitist have-nots? Mother Theresa or Vandana Shiva? I'm confused.

With almost everything else you posted I agree. However the following line gave me pause for concern:

And in that case, in that instance, that war is already over and done with. The human side lost, the individuals lost.

Arthur Jensen was always careful to say the primal forces "as they are today". What Jensen and his real-world ilk really fear is that the demos will awaken to a new tomorrow and dismantle the preferential status quo which the oligarchs have carefully constructed for themselves. A battle has been lost but the struggle (war?) between democracy and oligarchy continues unabated. You, me and others who speak publicly about this keep the struggle alive in our own and future generations despite indoctrination, deception, division and weapons of mass-distraction being deployed by the forces of oligarchy against us.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Totally agree. The thing that has always impressed me about this country is how we transition our power. The new president walks into the White House and the old president gets on Marine One and flies off. Our country's financial success is in large part due to the World's perception that the US is a stable government. This whole resistance thing and the attempt at impeachment is destructive to the country.

Impeachment is part of our legal process. It was tried once in my life-time and threatened successfully one other time in my life. It has been talked about, but not tried yet, but if it is, it will follow the same legal process it has the few times we've done it before. Right now, everyone knows there aren't 67 votes in the Senate to convict. That may change, but even if it does we will be transitioning to President Pence in a constitutional and legal way. Even if we were to go the 25th amendment route at some point it would be done in a constitutional and legal way. Given how long people are living and the potential effects of a stroke, I'd be surprised if it didn't happen at some point. We don't want these thing to happen very often, but they are one more check and balance designed into the Constitution.
 
No idea, and completely missed the point,

Good job.

Did you not say Trump can go and completely remove Nancy Pelosi from the House or not?
If you admit that you did, I would like for you to let us know the precise mechanism he uses.

You might consider it an insignificant aside. I don't.
What in Hell are you talking about, a President with the power to just "remove" an elected member of the House?
 
I think the embarrassment of how the right acted during the Obama years causes them to pretend they never happened.



Wow!

That is a very interesting take on things. I had not considered it, but there is truth in that. They have even changed names of programs so the reflect the "new regime", even NAFTA , which was a Regan win, has been changed to a new name, but only altered under 3%. Perhaps not intentionally but they are removing Obama's legacy at least in name.
 
Did you not say Trump can go and completely remove Nancy Pelosi from the House or not?
If you admit that you did, I would like for you to let us know the precise mechanism he uses.

You might consider it an insignificant aside. I don't.
What in Hell are you talking about, a President with the power to just "remove" an elected member of the House?

Seriously? You want to take a hypothetical hyperbole, and run with it like it's real, and completely escape the point that it was making?

Are you that dense?
 
Back
Top Bottom