calbear93 said:

---

Of course there are degrees, but restricting speech, restricting alternative medical coverage, restricting practice of religion in strict obedience to the government are definitely authoritarian. Sure, there are degrees, but how could you argue that bigger government with bigger entanglements and less options are not authoritarian?

---

You continually make these claims with no apparent irony. You complain about people accusing conservatives of racism but have no problem repeatedly accusing progressives of being anti-religion, except of course when you say that they are only in favor of Islam.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I would ask you to consider your views on the treatment of religion in this country compared to how you view treatment of race in this country. Maybe both sides could learn some empathy and understanding about how we are communicating on these important issue.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Of course there are degrees, but restricting speech, restricting alternative medical coverage, restricting practice of religion in strict obedience to the government are definitely authoritarian. Sure, there are degrees, but how could you argue that bigger government with bigger entanglements and less options are not authoritarian?

---

You continually make these claims with no apparent irony. You complain about people accusing conservatives of racism but have no problem repeatedly accusing progressives of being anti-religion, except of course when you say that they are only in favor of Islam.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I would ask you to consider your views on the treatment of religion in this country compared to how you view treatment of race in this country. Maybe both sides could learn some empathy and understanding about how we are communicating on these important issue.

---

Please educate me on how I view treatment of race in this country. I would love to learn what my views are.

Otherwise, your statement either makes no sense, or you are just making things up.

Here is how I view race. Every person, irrespective of color or ethnicity, should be judged based solely on their individual character and accomplishment. No one should be judged, preferred or stereotyped based on their color, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity or religion.

So, are you making things up because you ran out things to point to in order to delude yourself into thinking you are superior?

It would be like me stating with no basis that I wish your otherwise progressive viewpoints help you reconsider your misogynistic and homophobic tendencies. Please reconsider your bigotry against women and homosexuals. Does that further civil discussion?

sycasey said:

---

Well, here's my take on Trump. To me he seems like a guy with authoritarian leanings and who makes authoritarian noises but has thus far been unsuccessful at actually turning himself into an authoritarian leader. Some of that is the system constraining him and some of that is his own incompetence or laziness.

I don't see those kinds of leanings at all in The Squad. I don't think you can reasonably say they are responsible for the behavior of all their Twitter followers. (And yes, same with Trump. I don't think he is an authoritarian because of his Twitter followers being jerks.)

---

So, in other words, all of the talk about how we must stand against the impending rise of Nazi like authoritarian / fascist wave is a bit of chicken little behavior.

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Of course there are degrees, but restricting speech, restricting alternative medical coverage, restricting practice of religion in strict obedience to the government are definitely authoritarian. Sure, there are degrees, but how could you argue that bigger government with bigger entanglements and less options are not authoritarian?

---

You continually make these claims with no apparent irony. You complain about people accusing conservatives of racism but have no problem repeatedly accusing progressives of being anti-religion, except of course when you say that they are only in favor of Islam.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I would ask you to consider your views on the treatment of religion in this country compared to how you view treatment of race in this country. Maybe both sides could learn some empathy and understanding about how we are communicating on these important issue.

---

Please educate me on how I view treatment of race in this country. I would love to learn what my views are.

Otherwise, your statement either makes no sense, or you are just making things up.

Here is how I view race. Every person, irrespective of color or ethnicity, should be judged based solely on their individual character and accomplishment. No one should be judged, preferred or stereotyped based on their color, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity or religion.

Are you making things up because you ran out things to point to in order to delude yourself into thinking you are superior?

---

Your words speak for themselves, although I acknowledge that perhaps I am assuming too much from your interactions on this board or I've confused you with someone else. In addition to your criticism of criticism of racism by progressives you also have (memorably) complained about the oppression of "PC culture" (of course, you've never complained about the PC treatment that religious conservatives would like to impose on everyone else).

Here are some recent quotes.

The last one is my favorite because after that discussion you claimed to have put me on ignore and it's a shame that you didn't. Although I agree with much of what you say (particularly in the Beto thread) and support your ability to express your viewpoint even where I disagree on policy (particularly in the Beto thread), I don't think you have the appropriate mindset to engage in discussion on a board like this without raging out.

Quote:

---

Apparently political leanings, sexuality, ethnicity, mental capacity, and religion are now "race." Now I get why liberals throw the word racists around so much and why even Pelosi is painted as a potential racist.

---

Quote:

---

When someone throws racists allegation on something as innocuous as what Pelosi stated, the allegation even on truly racists statements loses weight.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, Republicans are infamous for setting PC traps. Oh, boy.

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Of course there are degrees, but restricting speech, restricting alternative medical coverage, restricting practice of religion in strict obedience to the government are definitely authoritarian. Sure, there are degrees, but how could you argue that bigger government with bigger entanglements and less options are not authoritarian?

---

You continually make these claims with no apparent irony. You complain about people accusing conservatives of racism but have no problem repeatedly accusing progressives of being anti-religion, except of course when you say that they are only in favor of Islam.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I would ask you to consider your views on the treatment of religion in this country compared to how you view treatment of race in this country. Maybe both sides could learn some empathy and understanding about how we are communicating on these important issue.

---

Please educate me on how I view treatment of race in this country. I would love to learn what my views are.

Otherwise, your statement either makes no sense, or you are just making things up.

Here is how I view race. Every person, irrespective of color or ethnicity, should be judged based solely on their individual character and accomplishment. No one should be judged, preferred or stereotyped based on their color, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity or religion.

Are you making things up because you ran out things to point to in order to delude yourself into thinking you are superior?

---

Your words speak for themselves, although I acknowledge that perhaps I am assuming too much from your interactions on this board or I've confused you with someone else. In addition to your criticism of criticism of racism by progressives you also have (memorably) complained about the oppression of "PC culture" (of course, you've never complained about the PC treatment that religious conservatives would like to impose on everyone else).

Here are some recent quotes.

The last one is my favorite because after that discussion you claimed to have put me on ignore and it's a shame that you didn't. Although I agree with much of what you say (particularly in the Beto thread) and support your ability to express your viewpoint even where I disagree on policy (particularly in the Beto thread), I don't think you have the appropriate mindset to engage in discussion on a board like this without raging out.

Quote:

---

Apparently political leanings, sexuality, ethnicity, mental capacity, and religion are now "race." Now I get why liberals throw the word racists around so much and why even Pelosi is painted as a potential racist.

---

Quote:

---

When someone throws racists allegation on something as innocuous as what Pelosi stated, the allegation even on truly racists statements loses weight.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, Republicans are infamous for setting PC traps. Oh, boy.

---

---

So, saying sexuality is not race means I am racist? Saying that Pelosi is not racist means I am racist? Saying the Republicans don't push for PC means I am racist? What the hell is wrong with you.

Maybe I mistook you for someone else and you really didn't apologize for abusive behavior against women but you did talk about Russia once so it's easy to mistake you for someone who engages in homophobia.

If you don't want people to rage out, stop calling people racist without basis.

If I state that you once apologized for abusing your wife, would you be calm? Anyone looking at the weak evidence you pulled up on your search shows how dishonest you are, especially when trying to paint someone as racist. Then you argue we shouldn't be offended. You need to go away.

golden sloth said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

Kurdish areas are being shelled and bombed as we speak. The Kurds are seeking protection at U.S. military bases that once had U.S. personnel. This freakin Idiot in Chief is so freaking out of his mind that he actually started discussing the Kurds not fighting with the U.S. at Normandy. The day that this big pile of steaming **** of a decision became known just happened to be Putin's birthday.

---

The only upshot is that the President's unilateral decision to allow the Kurds to be attacked, might actually break off a chunk of Republican support. No one has supported the decision anywhere, and as the reports of the violence spread (and probably get worse) it will put him under more scrutiny. Trump's support won't crater, it will simply go from that immovable 40% to 35%, but that 5% difference will be huge when the elections come. The only question is did this happen too soon to where the media and public no longer think about it in 13 months.

This may also give cover to the Republican lawmakers that want to get out from Trump's influence but don't want to 'be against' him in the impeachment - Abuse of Power scandal. They can now point to the Turkey - Syria decision as the reason to break from him, and try to sell that to their constituents rather than saying 'I agree he is a corrupt authoritarian that is destroying our institutions for personal gain'.

---

I don't think this is right and I actually think if it comes down to neocons clamoring for Syria regime change vs Trump, Trump would and should win and I think a country sick of Middle East adventures would agree

What he did do the Kurds is reprehensible and wrong but who actually authorized our troops in Syria other than the executive branch ? Did our congressional representatives vote on that? The answer is nobody. Who authorized our air strikes? Nobody. The Turks are now attacking the Kurds in concert with the Free Syrian Army. Who are they- they were the ones we supported to overthrow Assad until we stopped supporting them? Who authorized that? Nobody.

So now- and this is rich- a US ally, Turkey, in concert with an ex US ally, the Free Syrian Army is attaching a soon to be ex ally- the Kurds. Syria is the biggest s$it show in the world- ISIS, Iran, Russia, Israel, Saudis, Al Queda. Assad has won- deal with him. A butcher and a tyrant but par for the course.

calbear93 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Well, here's my take on Trump. To me he seems like a guy with authoritarian leanings and who makes authoritarian noises but has thus far been unsuccessful at actually turning himself into an authoritarian leader. Some of that is the system constraining him and some of that is his own incompetence or laziness.

I don't see those kinds of leanings at all in The Squad. I don't think you can reasonably say they are responsible for the behavior of all their Twitter followers. (And yes, same with Trump. I don't think he is an authoritarian because of his Twitter followers being jerks.)

---

So, in other words, all of the talk about how we must stand against the impending rise of Nazi like authoritarian / fascist wave is a bit of chicken little behavior.

---

We know that now. At the beginning of Trump's term, not so sure.

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Of course there are degrees, but restricting speech, restricting alternative medical coverage, restricting practice of religion in strict obedience to the government are definitely authoritarian. Sure, there are degrees, but how could you argue that bigger government with bigger entanglements and less options are not authoritarian?

---

You continually make these claims with no apparent irony. You complain about people accusing conservatives of racism but have no problem repeatedly accusing progressives of being anti-religion, except of course when you say that they are only in favor of Islam.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I would ask you to consider your views on the treatment of religion in this country compared to how you view treatment of race in this country. Maybe both sides could learn some empathy and understanding about how we are communicating on these important issue.

---

Please educate me on how I view treatment of race in this country. I would love to learn what my views are.

Otherwise, your statement either makes no sense, or you are just making things up.

Here is how I view race. Every person, irrespective of color or ethnicity, should be judged based solely on their individual character and accomplishment. No one should be judged, preferred or stereotyped based on their color, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity or religion.

Are you making things up because you ran out things to point to in order to delude yourself into thinking you are superior?

---

Your words speak for themselves, although I acknowledge that perhaps I am assuming too much from your interactions on this board or I've confused you with someone else. In addition to your criticism of criticism of racism by progressives you also have (memorably) complained about the oppression of "PC culture" (of course, you've never complained about the PC treatment that religious conservatives would like to impose on everyone else).

Here are some recent quotes.

The last one is my favorite because after that discussion you claimed to have put me on ignore and it's a shame that you didn't. Although I agree with much of what you say (particularly in the Beto thread) and support your ability to express your viewpoint even where I disagree on policy (particularly in the Beto thread), I don't think you have the appropriate mindset to engage in discussion on a board like this without raging out.

Quote:

---

Apparently political leanings, sexuality, ethnicity, mental capacity, and religion are now "race." Now I get why liberals throw the word racists around so much and why even Pelosi is painted as a potential racist.

---

Quote:

---

When someone throws racists allegation on something as innocuous as what Pelosi stated, the allegation even on truly racists statements loses weight.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, Republicans are infamous for setting PC traps. Oh, boy.

---

---

So, saying sexuality is not race means I am racist? Saying that Pelosi is not racist means I am racist? Saying the Republicans don't push for PC means I am racist? What the hell is wrong with you.

Maybe I mistook you for someone else and you really didn't apologize for abusive behavior against women but you did talk about Russia once so it's easy to mistake you for someone who engages in homophobia.

If you don't want people to rage out, stop calling people racist without basis.

If I state that you once apologized for abusing your wife, would you be calm? Anyone looking at the weak evidence you pulled up on your search shows how dishonest you are, especially when trying to paint someone as racist. Then you argue we shouldn't be offended. You need to go away.

---

You are raging out again. I didn't call you racist. Yt thanks for proving my point. Actually multiple points. Please put me on ignore or learn how to engage in adult discussions here.

sycasey said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Well, here's my take on Trump. To me he seems like a guy with authoritarian leanings and who makes authoritarian noises but has thus far been unsuccessful at actually turning himself into an authoritarian leader. Some of that is the system constraining him and some of that is his own incompetence or laziness.

I don't see those kinds of leanings at all in The Squad. I don't think you can reasonably say they are responsible for the behavior of all their Twitter followers. (And yes, same with Trump. I don't think he is an authoritarian because of his Twitter followers being jerks.)

---

So, in other words, all of the talk about how we must stand against the impending rise of Nazi like authoritarian / fascist wave is a bit of chicken little behavior.

---

We know that now. At the beginning of Trump's term, not so sure.

---

I mean the recent grandstanding on this board.

Despite your liberal tendencies, I trust you to be an honest broker, and we can once in awhile reach an agreement.

I, like you, think Trump would love to be an authoritarian, and he praises every single dictator he encounters. I just happen to believe that our form of government and the American people are immovable forces against any such attempt.

No, America will not be the next Nazi Germany.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Of course there are degrees, but restricting speech, restricting alternative medical coverage, restricting practice of religion in strict obedience to the government are definitely authoritarian. Sure, there are degrees, but how could you argue that bigger government with bigger entanglements and less options are not authoritarian?

---

You continually make these claims with no apparent irony. You complain about people accusing conservatives of racism but have no problem repeatedly accusing progressives of being anti-religion, except of course when you say that they are only in favor of Islam.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I would ask you to consider your views on the treatment of religion in this country compared to how you view treatment of race in this country. Maybe both sides could learn some empathy and understanding about how we are communicating on these important issue.

---

Please educate me on how I view treatment of race in this country. I would love to learn what my views are.

Otherwise, your statement either makes no sense, or you are just making things up.

Here is how I view race. Every person, irrespective of color or ethnicity, should be judged based solely on their individual character and accomplishment. No one should be judged, preferred or stereotyped based on their color, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity or religion.

Are you making things up because you ran out things to point to in order to delude yourself into thinking you are superior?

---

Your words speak for themselves, although I acknowledge that perhaps I am assuming too much from your interactions on this board or I've confused you with someone else. In addition to your criticism of criticism of racism by progressives you also have (memorably) complained about the oppression of "PC culture" (of course, you've never complained about the PC treatment that religious conservatives would like to impose on everyone else).

Here are some recent quotes.

The last one is my favorite because after that discussion you claimed to have put me on ignore and it's a shame that you didn't. Although I agree with much of what you say (particularly in the Beto thread) and support your ability to express your viewpoint even where I disagree on policy (particularly in the Beto thread), I don't think you have the appropriate mindset to engage in discussion on a board like this without raging out.

Quote:

---

Apparently political leanings, sexuality, ethnicity, mental capacity, and religion are now "race." Now I get why liberals throw the word racists around so much and why even Pelosi is painted as a potential racist.

---

Quote:

---

When someone throws racists allegation on something as innocuous as what Pelosi stated, the allegation even on truly racists statements loses weight.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, Republicans are infamous for setting PC traps. Oh, boy.

---

---

So, saying sexuality is not race means I am racist? Saying that Pelosi is not racist means I am racist? Saying the Republicans don't push for PC means I am racist? What the hell is wrong with you.

Maybe I mistook you for someone else and you really didn't apologize for abusive behavior against women but you did talk about Russia once so it's easy to mistake you for someone who engages in homophobia.

If you don't want people to rage out, stop calling people racist without basis.

If I state that you once apologized for abusing your wife, would you be calm? Anyone looking at the weak evidence you pulled up on your search shows how dishonest you are, especially when trying to paint someone as racist. Then you argue we shouldn't be offended. You need to go away.

---

You are raging out again. I didn't call you racist. Yt thanks for proving my point. Actually multiple points. Please put me on ignore or learn how to engage in adult discussions here.

---

The funny thing is you are the one who always responds to my posts that were not addressed to you. Seriously, I have learned a long time ago that you are as dishonest as they come, and I hope if we ever meet, I don't hold that against you. I'm sure you feel the same.

calbear93 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Well, here's my take on Trump. To me he seems like a guy with authoritarian leanings and who makes authoritarian noises but has thus far been unsuccessful at actually turning himself into an authoritarian leader. Some of that is the system constraining him and some of that is his own incompetence or laziness.

I don't see those kinds of leanings at all in The Squad. I don't think you can reasonably say they are responsible for the behavior of all their Twitter followers. (And yes, same with Trump. I don't think he is an authoritarian because of his Twitter followers being jerks.)

---

So, in other words, all of the talk about how we must stand against the impending rise of Nazi like authoritarian / fascist wave is a bit of chicken little behavior.

---

We know that now. At the beginning of Trump's term, not so sure.

---

I mean the recent grandstanding on this board.

---

I can't control everybody.

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Of course there are degrees, but restricting speech, restricting alternative medical coverage, restricting practice of religion in strict obedience to the government are definitely authoritarian. Sure, there are degrees, but how could you argue that bigger government with bigger entanglements and less options are not authoritarian?

---

You continually make these claims with no apparent irony. You complain about people accusing conservatives of racism but have no problem repeatedly accusing progressives of being anti-religion, except of course when you say that they are only in favor of Islam.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I would ask you to consider your views on the treatment of religion in this country compared to how you view treatment of race in this country. Maybe both sides could learn some empathy and understanding about how we are communicating on these important issue.

---

Please educate me on how I view treatment of race in this country. I would love to learn what my views are.

Otherwise, your statement either makes no sense, or you are just making things up.

Here is how I view race. Every person, irrespective of color or ethnicity, should be judged based solely on their individual character and accomplishment. No one should be judged, preferred or stereotyped based on their color, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity or religion.

Are you making things up because you ran out things to point to in order to delude yourself into thinking you are superior?

---

Your words speak for themselves, although I acknowledge that perhaps I am assuming too much from your interactions on this board or I've confused you with someone else. In addition to your criticism of criticism of racism by progressives you also have (memorably) complained about the oppression of "PC culture" (of course, you've never complained about the PC treatment that religious conservatives would like to impose on everyone else).

Here are some recent quotes.

The last one is my favorite because after that discussion you claimed to have put me on ignore and it's a shame that you didn't. Although I agree with much of what you say (particularly in the Beto thread) and support your ability to express your viewpoint even where I disagree on policy (particularly in the Beto thread), I don't think you have the appropriate mindset to engage in discussion on a board like this without raging out.

Quote:

---

Apparently political leanings, sexuality, ethnicity, mental capacity, and religion are now "race." Now I get why liberals throw the word racists around so much and why even Pelosi is painted as a potential racist.

---

Quote:

---

When someone throws racists allegation on something as innocuous as what Pelosi stated, the allegation even on truly racists statements loses weight.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, Republicans are infamous for setting PC traps. Oh, boy.

---

---

So, saying sexuality is not race means I am racist? Saying that Pelosi is not racist means I am racist? Saying the Republicans don't push for PC means I am racist? What the hell is wrong with you.

Maybe I mistook you for someone else and you really didn't apologize for abusive behavior against women but you did talk about Russia once so it's easy to mistake you for someone who engages in homophobia.

If you don't want people to rage out, stop calling people racist without basis.

If I state that you once apologized for abusing your wife, would you be calm? Anyone looking at the weak evidence you pulled up on your search shows how dishonest you are, especially when trying to paint someone as racist. Then you argue we shouldn't be offended. You need to go away.

---

You are raging out again. I didn't call you racist. Yt thanks for proving my point. Actually multiple points. Please put me on ignore or learn how to engage in adult discussions here.

---

The funny thing is you are the one who always responds to my posts that were not addressed to you. Seriously, I have learned a long time ago that you are as dishonest as they come, and I hope if we ever meet, I don't hold that against you. I'm sure you feel the same.

---

Apart from lying about putting me on ignore, I don't believe I've accused you or being dishonest.

As for my responding to your posts, that's how this internet thing works. We get to choose who to respond to. You can choose not to.

And for all we know we may have met in real life. I don't have any reason to believe your real person is as rage filled and intolerant of differing opinions as your BI persona. I rarely discuss politics in real life with anyone other than my close family.

Another Bear said:

---

Dubya is a war criminal. Trump is a mobster.

---

Yet only one is impeachable.

Anarchistbear said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

There is a special place in Hell for a man who betrays his long time ally and leaves them to be slaughtered.

---

Bush1 as well. Recall that after the first Iraqi war he called on Iraqis to rise up against Saddam. The Kurds did and were slaughtered. They should be used to it by now.

---

Abandoned yet again by a Republican President. The Kurds won't get fooled again. When we have to go back into these areas again because 12000 ISIS fighters are free will the Idiot in Chief accept responsibility for creating the new ISIS?

Maybe someday one of these Kurd freedom fighters will seduce a tRump Crime Family member like that Dutch hit woman in Spielberg's movie Munich.

Who are these people, like Kelly Craft, that go along with America's subjugation to Russia? Are they so ignorant of history? So impressed with fame?

I think the undying mystery for me of this era is that so many people willingly went along.

dajo9 said:

---

Who are these people, like Kelly Craft, that go along with America's subjugation to Russia? Are they so ignorant of history? So impressed with fame?

I think the undying mystery for me of this era is that so many people willingly went along.

---

Must be the money!!! Those checks probably have a lot of zeros

going4roses said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Who are these people, like Kelly Craft, that go along with America's subjugation to Russia? Are they so ignorant of history? So impressed with fame?

I think the undying mystery for me of this era is that so many people willingly went along.

---

Must be the money!!! Those checks probably have a lot of zeros

---

When you look at Penn State, the Catholic priest scandal, the gymnastics scandal, normal people have gone along with far worse without money at stake. It mystifies me too, but somehow people find a way to first normalize and then justify the abnormal. Some of it is Tim Gunn's theory of the monkey house. A guy walks into the monkey house and says man it stinks in here. After a few minutes he doesn't notice anymore. The next person walks in and says "Man it stinks in here. How can you stand it?"

Is this the same guy?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/nyregion/how-tim-gunn-of-project-runway-spends-his-sunday.amp.html

going4roses said:

---

Is this the same guy?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/nyregion/how-tim-gunn-of-project-runway-spends-his-sunday.amp.html

---

Yes. His was the "mentor" for years on Project Runway. His monkey house analogy is to designers who become tunnel vision on a project that they don't realize how far off the rails they've gone. I think he first said it to a designer who was determined to incorporate human hair onto his clothes.

Bloodied clothes and body bags: Kurds mourn dead in Syria

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/11/syria-turkey-conflict-kurds-border-fighting-trump-deaths?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

this how we manufacture enemies(terrorist) ...

OaktownBear said:

---

going4roses said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Who are these people, like Kelly Craft, that go along with America's subjugation to Russia? Are they so ignorant of history? So impressed with fame?

I think the undying mystery for me of this era is that so many people willingly went along.

---

Must be the money!!! Those checks probably have a lot of zeros

---

When you look at Penn State, the Catholic priest scandal, the gymnastics scandal, normal people have gone along with far worse without money at stake. It mystifies me too, but somehow people find a way to first normalize and then justify the abnormal. Some of it is Tim Gunn's theory of the monkey house. A guy walks into the monkey house and says man it stinks in here. After a few minutes he doesn't notice anymore. The next person walks in and says "Man it stinks in here. How can you stand it?"

---

I think, unless someone has a strong sense of personal integrity, it is easy to want to please one's boss and easy to want to avoid being expelled from the group.

I would love to say that I would always stand up for what I know to be right, but I can also understand the human frailty that allows us to rationalize and then wonder after the s-hit hits the fan how we allowed ourselves to lose our way.

It is easy to say we would not. Yet, even for something meaningless as this board, I see us being petty, personal (or even a bit b-itchy - myself included), tribal and mocking each other and calling each other out like little twits on a playground (myself included) without checking ourselves to see if we are behaving rightly. The reality is that if we cannot even show integrity and if we cannot be honest brokers on something this meaningless, how would we behave when something worthwhile is at risk?

That is not to justify the blind abandonment of integrity demonstrated by many in the administration, but I don't necessarily see better personal character from many of us on this board (again, including myself) that would translate to better behavior under the same circumstances. As such, it doesn't surprise me as much as it surprises you. Just human nature.

Professor Turgeson Bear said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Just because I also criticized the Squad, I am now racist who is offended that some "uppity female latino" tells me what to do?

---

For me, it's not just because you criticized the Squad. It's that you called them authoritarian without a good argument for why they are. Just speaking loudly about their politics and also having online fans who speak loudly is not good support for that claim. You may as well say that any popular political movement is authoritarian.

---

Because you are generally a reasonable person, I will take this as a reasonable request.

This is the definition of authoritarianism:

"Favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom"

---

Some examples of that.

Prohibition of abortion.
Prohibition of gay marriage
Prohibition of marijuana usage
Prohibition of the right to immigrate to this country.

I'm sure I could come up with more, if need be.

---

Yes, the extremes on both sides tend to be authoritarian, with condescending assumption that the government has to get into every facet of people's speech and behavior. Not limited to just one side.


As to your points:

Prohibition of abortion - depends entirely on when one thinks life starts. I would not be for allowing parents to kill their toddlers. If one thinks life starts at conception, I don't see this as unnecessary restriction just like I don't think prohibition against killing a 3 year old is unnecessary restriction.

Prohibition of gay marriage - this is just plain stupid. Let people marry who they want to marry.

Prohibition of marijuana usage - again, unnecessary as long as we prohibit aspects that are dangerous (e.g., age limit, not driving under the influence, etc.)

Prohibition of the right to immigrate to this country - I don't even know what you mean by this. Does this mean we have no standards or requirements for people to move into this country? What other country has no rules on immigration?

going4roses said:

---

this how we manufacture enemies(terrorist) ...

---

So in 5-10 years when some act of terror happens, Trump will not be blamed. It will be the Dem in office and it will be "unpatriotic" to have any discussion of the real cause of the act, or to assign blame to a past President and the millions of Americans who put him in office and stand by this stupidity and disastrous diplomacy. Instead it will be all anger at the religion and country of the terrorists and a call to war and patriotism without any looking in the mirror so that the cycle will be doomed to repeat.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-turkey-syria-prison-bombing-kurds-sdf-a9152536.html

Read this and at your next cocktail party you will be the drunken expert on the U.S./Turkey/Syria/Kurds/Iran/Russia Rubix Cube:

Turkey's War in Syria Was Not Inevitable

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/13/turkeys-war-in-northern-syria-was-not-inevitable/

Because of the Turks attacks on the Kurds, they have reached an agreement with Syrian troops to fight against the Turks. The Kurds also report that there are ISIS prisoners who have escaped detention as well as their family members from the camps. Because of the vacuum created by the U.S. by pulling out, Iran, Russia, and Syria have filled that vacuum. What is more incredible is that Russia has partnered with the Turks and has been a strong supporter of Syria and Assad in the Syrian conflict. They appear to be playing both sides of the conflict and now have a foothold in the middle east.

As I have said before the Idiot in Chief has guaranteed that if things get to hot in Syria and there is a threat to Israel, that U.S. boots on the ground will be required and we will find no one to partner with as this will be of our own doing. American lives will be lost as a direct result of the Idiot in Chief's actions. This scenario is not so far fetched given the betrayal of the Kurds, the influence that Iran has in that region, and the backing that Russia has offered the various players in the middle east. The direct result has been the earned perception that the U.S. is weak and cannot be trusted as an ally.

Now Congress wants to vote on placing sanctions on Turkey after the U.S. allowed the Turks and their Militias to kill Kurds who fought side by side with U.S. Special forces. This can never be made right and now the U.S. may have another enemy who was once a trusted ally. Meanwhile the Kurds are in a fight for their survival and ISIS fighters and their families have disappeared into the wind. How long before there is an uptick in bombings as a result?

https://www.theonion.com/jubilant-isis-prisoners-hail-american-liberators-1839033474