Does that make you feel any better MStem?

Look, when you respond to an involved explanation with... "When Johnny can't read." It's easy to recognize the cop out. If there was something specific that I "misread" it wouldn't have been difficult for the average person to point it out. But you didn't.

You may not realize how transparent these exchanges are... Your response was a clear indication that you either didn't read my post or you didn't understand it or you just can't come up with a counterpoint. In any case, you resorted to a baseless insult, which is fine, I'm not actually insulted. In fact, I see it as a sign of frustration, probably from not being able to argue my points. So it's kind of like scoring a point from my perspective.

I won't make any assumptions about your education because it doesn't matter and I'm not looking for a way to insult you. Your response has already said it all.

I never said anyone was helpless. Recognizing that opportunities are fewer and barriers are higher for people in the lower classes doesn't presume they are helpless.

Barack and Michelle Obama are both exceptional people. They did NOT have white privilege on their side, nor did they have the privileges that come with wealth. All that means is they had to work harder and they did. It's not fair that they had to work harder but they did anyway. They were straight "A" students that worked their way to college and eventually got their law degrees.

This is what made them so inspirational to so many Americans, especially black Americans that saw how they beat the odds that were are stacked against them.

Does that include all the innocent lives that were killed when Bush ordered the shelling of a major city in Iraq? I didn't hear any protests from conservatives when that was happening. How many times do you get accused of hypocrisy Marty?



I've read the Bible Marty and I take it for what I think it is, a collection of badly written stories with some good morals. I've also read part of the Koran, another collection of badly written stories with some good morals. I don't think either of them are the word of God but you go ahead and believe... Honestly, power to you! I know it helps a lot of people with their individual lives and I think that's great. But if you start using it as a form of authority over others, you're going to get my middle finger.

I have already described in a logical, fact-based manner how pro-choice is helping to minimize the suffering of the unborn. I have no tolerance for people using a damned book that they insist is "the word of God" to interfere with that effort.

Why do you doubt it? Is there some specific reason why it's so unlikely?

I sometimes wonder if people understand what these terms mean. There's been a lot of references on this thread to specific instances of where a white person didn't get his way as if that somehow debunks the idea of white privilege. White privilege doesn't have to mean a white person ALWAYS gets his way. It doesn't mean there's some social agreement either.

I believe earlier you said that when the hiring manager looks like you, you have a natural advantage. Well, for a white person that's about 80% of the time, for a black person it's about 10% of the time. That differential is sometimes referred to as white privilege. It's not a conspiracy or a guarantee, it's just the aggregate result of unbalanced demographics, but it's real nevertheless.

There is also the sad fact that upward mobility in America is very difficult because it's based on economic means in a system where the rich get richer and poor get poorer. In other words, it's largely perpetual. For instance for someone born into wealth, getting a degree is easy. Daddy pays tuition and Chad just goes to school where he can dedicate all his time to study and still have time left over to party. But for someone born into poverty daddy don't have the money. So you have to borrow and you won't have as much time to study either because you're probably working your way through. Once again, all these things add up in the aggregate. This doesn't stop the exceptional kid from making a beeline from the ghetto to a Ph.D, but it does have an impact on the average student and many of them have to drop out because they can't continue their education AND pay the bills at the same time.

The economy doesn't stop there... When people without degrees take what jobs are available to them, they often find themselves barely able to pay the bills and they can't save. If they suddenly need money, they have to borrow, the more you borrow the more you have to pay back plus interest and that door to the next level gets farther and farther away.

Of course none of this is racial... White people struggle with this system as much as black people and it's getting worse by the year. Just look at the wealth distribution over the past 20 years which basically illustrates my point.

Now, to tie all this up... looking at the trend charts for wealth distribution we can see that there was a time when it was far more equal. This is when upward mobility was more possible and people were saying that anyone can make it in America if they just work hard... Many white families ascended the steps of status this way, moved to the suburbs and sent their children to college. But for black people there was the added Jim Crow barrier. As a result far fewer black people were able to "move up to the Eastside".

Jim Crow laws did eventually subside but at the same time conservative governments began to make more room for the concentration of wealth which hardened the class structures making upward mobility more difficult and as a result the majority of black people got trapped in the lower-working class along with the white folks we sometimes refer to as trailer trash.

As a result, the white folks that made it to the upper-middle class looked down on them. If they see a black kid in their pristine neighborhood they assume they don't belong there. They assume they are there to steal stuff. A white kid would not be questioned.

That is also called white privilege. Again, not a conspiracy, not a policy... Just some human nature responding to the effects of misfortune.

I really don't understand the offense taken by white people every time white privilege is mentioned. There's no reason to be so defensive. It's like those people who succeed in life and refuse to accept the idea that luck had anything to do with it.

As a white person, I have no problem accepting the fact that being white DOES have it's advantages. I didn't ask for them but no one is blaming me for them either, so why all the seething?


On one hand, I agree with the spirit of your statement. As a universal law, individuals need to deal with unfairness and a positive attitude makes that easier. But at the same time, you are also prescribing a form of apathy that I strongly disagree with. Society CAN be blamed for a LOT of that unfairness so there is no reason why dealing with unfairness can't include efforts to change society. That's what our democracy is for.


(standing ovation) Very inspiring... but also naive. If you really look at our history will may notice that very little "positive change" has ever occurred without demands and threats. Women had to demand and threaten to earn their right to vote. Workers had to demand and threaten to get 8 hour days and living wages. Even the founders of this nation had to make demands and threats to break free of British oppression and if you remember, the Boston Tea Party was a clear example of destroying private property.

So, please stop telling Americans to accept their fate. I agree with your point about individuals dealing with unfairness I really do, just like I would try to tell a slave in chains to whistle if it makes his work easier but I would never tell him to accept his chains.

Hey Randy. You're not missing anything. (JFlorio is. ;))

As you know, my post was a response to someone else who had stated that blacks are the most "violent and lawbreakers" I don't know what that means exactly but I figured I'd offer another perspective. All these stats tell us is that most rapes in the U.S. are committed by white people, etc... I didn't mince words, so you can take that at face value.

I understand what you're saying. If you're trying to measure the criminality of a race, then per capita counts would be better, but that wasn't what I was doing. Besides, even with per capita counts you still need a level ground and I already explained why we don't have that... which is the point you didn't miss.

That it's not a black thing. It's an oppression thing. People can be forced into worlds of desperation and it happens all the time... probably the most horrendous current example are the Palestinians. They seem to have an affinity for acts of terrorism. 'Seems the Irish did too (only they get drunk and sing songs about it).

OK, so?

Too late pumpkin... I already told you how I got more money anyway by working my ass off and getting promoted. As for my arrogance, don't think for a minute that I'm insulted. It's the effect of talking to whiny racists that can't justify their hatred. I make no apologies.

You just don't seem to get it.

First of all, a black man isn't going to get away with crocodile tears like you did. A white man like me really isn't going to either, but I feel confident that the justice system will at least be fair to me, so I can relax. I've been there. I've told myself nothing bad is going to happen because I didn't do anything wrong. Obviously a black man can't feel the same way because there have been so many cases of black men being convicted of crimes they never committed that it's almost normal. So, I don't blame them for fighting back and my bet is that more times than not they were only panicking which may seem threatening to an officer and boom - it escalates.

You say that blacks are the most violent. Well here's a universal law for you. Throughout history and across the world violence is always highest among desperate people in the most impoverished sectors. Well, that's where we put the black people, isn't it? It has nothing to do with being black and everything to do with being desperate.

Black Americans are not the first people to be treated this way. The English used to treat the Irish this way and sure enough the Irish were always found in the ghettos and they were always the ones being arrested for violent crimes.

BTW, have another at the stats... I'm looking at the FBI site for nation-wide stats and I can see that most crimes are committed by white people, not black people...

There's a pattern in those stats where black people are more inclined to commit crimes for money such as robbery where white people are more inclined to commit crimes for other reasons such as rape or hate crime.

Here's one you'll like... "offenses against the family and children" (2017)
White : 46,926
Black : 20,106

Or how about this...? "Disorderly conduct" (2017)
White : 172,098
Black : 87,094

Here's another one... "Vandalism" (2017)
White : 99,818
Black : 40,861

You know why these patterns exist? Because you can't feed your family on vandalism or disorderly conduct or by hitting children. But you CAN feed your family on robbery.

And here it is.... "Robbery" (2017)
White : 32,128
Black : 40,024

Something tells me all this is will do is offend you. Well, that's not my intention, but I'm going to honest here... as an Anglo-Saxon myself, I am offended by other white people who make us look like a bunch of privileged, whiny-ass crybabies who jump up and down saying "me too, me too" everytime someone offers black people some recognition.

Maybe you just need to get over it. It's not like I've never run into the same thing... When I took a job at a healthcare provider I made a counter offer and they refused, I had to take what they offered or leave it. So I took it. I was hired in the same day as two others. One of which was a Hispanic woman who was assigned to my shift. One day, the checks came in and I grabbed mine to deposit it. I looked and thought I got a raise. Then I looked again and saw I had opened her check.

She was making more money than me. I didn't want to tell her that I made less, but weeks later I mentioned my counter-offer and she said she did that too. The difference is they accepted her counter-offer. She herself suggested that it was probably because she was Hispanic AND a woman so that's two check-boxes for the EEO company.

So I worked my ass off and I did eventually get promoted - she did not.

So it's not like I'm oblivious to these things, but Jesus dude - get a grip. You lost one opportunity way back when you were 19 and now you want everyone to cry for you? You actually think our situations compare to what black people deal with repeatedly throughout their life?

Sorry pumpkin, I just can't see the parallel. Here, have a tissue.

Go to their web site and find out. I know that when my daughter was working her way through college as a part-time bartender and my insurance no longer covered her, Planned Parenthood took care of her urinary infection when no one else would. That made me very happy 'cause I was having a hard time watching her writhe in pain. If left up to the rabid right - she would have just suffered.

Yes, they also perform abortions but if you read my previous rant you would know that I see that as a lesser evil. No one wants to say it's OK to kill an unborn human, I know I don't. But if it's going to happen anyway and it WILL whether it's legal or not (you can't avoid human nature no matter how deep in the sand you stick your head), I would rather it happen in clean environment with qualified medical professionals, equipment and counseling all of which help minimize the pain and suffering.

I also like that PP records enough information so that analysts can study patterns of pregnancy in the context of economic conditions, so that we can learn more ways of preventing unwanted pregnancies.

Honestly, in the fight against the brutal murder of unborn humans I see pro-choice fighting hard and all I see so-called "pro-life" doing is screaming at the only people who are actually helping.

Actually, I spent a lot of time looking into that. Most of that increase in the deficit under Obama was the result of paying interest on loans that Bush took out. This is how money works Marty... when you borrow a lot of money you spend years paying it off with interest. This is why the term "new spending" started to appear in the WSJ and similar rags... to differentiate between obligatory spending and elective spending. As it turns out Obama had a lower level of new spending than any of the last seven presidents.

Here's a chart produced by the Cato Institute that shows spending "changes" which gives us an idea of what new spending looks like.

https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/styles/pubs/public/2020-02/president%20spending.png?itok=xHnQh-OX

Here's a link to the article if you want to check it out.
https://www.cato.org/blog/trump-spending-soars-first-4-years

Keep in mind these numbers are relative to each other... We are looking at the increased rate of spending.

Notice Obama hasn't increased spending at all... Some will say that's because Congress put the brakes on Obama. I don't know enough detail to argue one way or another on that. But one thing is clear - the notion that Obama was a big spender is grossly inaccurate.

Now look at Trump - 10% increase overall. Only Carter and Dubbya increased spending more than Trump and I'm betting that more of his non-military spending went to his family and their opulent lifestyle than either Carter or Dubbya.

Hey eagle - long time.

We rarely agree but at least you provide a more to the conversation than juvenile pictures of poop and smiley faces.


I will agree to some extent with the idea that fascism and communism are both totalitarian. But I don't really see the NWO/Bilderberg agenda being defined by either of those systems especially communism because the Bilderbergs are defined by their private ownership of controlling assets, the antithesis of communism. And fascism is a militant extension of populism that simply cannot operate without being in your face with direct control over militia. Bilderberg is more about being the wizard behind the curtain that most people don't even see.

I noticed your wording though... you said they USE both systems... maybe.

I did use your suggested search argument on Google and I found this...
The True Story of the Bilderberg Group

Guess what I found in that article? The agenda for a 2019 Bilderberg meeting in Montreux. And guess who was in attendance? Jared Kushner and Mike Pompeo among others.

So are you sure Trump is the champion against the NWO that you once described him as? I told you even then that Trump is more likely part of the NWO agenda than opposed to it. It's kinda looking like I'm right about that.


No arguments here.


I believe the appropriate term here is plutocracy. It's an interesting word because it's basically the system that has always controlled our nation in spite of our claims to democracy. Even more interesting because it carries with it a certain taboo, as if Americans are discouraged from using the word. Plutocracy is simply a form of society controlled by the wealthy and judging by Trump's actions over the last 4 years it's pretty clear that Trump is supporting the plutocracy not the people.


Well yeah... we're pretty much talking about neoliberalism here which makes the whole NWO seem a little ridiculous. There's nothing new here... It's the same world order that underlies the American hegemony from 1945 to 2016.

As for ZB's statement... I expect that was all for show - he certainly wasn't suggesting any hard links between communism and their world order. He was simply suggesting that the U.S.S.R would eventually win the cold war because communism is the better system... it was a taunt if anything.


You don't need to tell me about the Federal Reserve. We already agree there. It's a stinker because it's not like we can just get rid of it. America has been made dependent on it. Say it with me bro... "As Americans were are dependant on getting screwed."


At least you admit it's not a partisan problem. I remember all those conservatives screaming and pissing about the increasing national debt under Obama. The national debt is still piling up under Trump but I don't hear a peep out of those conservatives now. Were any of them actually concerned about the national debt or were they just looking for poo to fling at the black president?


Lincoln had a civil war to give him carte-blanc on all matters, Jackson actually shut down the central bank and Kennedy was assassinated.


Yeah, I see you trying to hang your hat on that one, but it's a weak argument for supporting him. Trump himself wasn't "ordained" by the Bilderberg group but that doesn't mean much, other than their lack of confidence in his ability to do anything. They apparently don't see him as a threat either. They don't HAVE to have a guy occupying that office to continue with their agenda. Especially, now with American global dominance waning the way it is. In fact, a bumbling fool who constantly trips over himself might be the safest option for them. Another possible advantage for Bilderberg would be the distractions that Trump can't help but create. Either way, in the shadow of the Bilderberg Group and its members, Trump is a small fry trying to be accepted by the big leagues. The idea that he of all people could stand up to Bilderberg is absurd.

And... what "representatives"? Our representatives are in Congress. The president has zero influence on who gets installed in Congress. If the CFR has any influence over that, Trump would be powerless to affect it. Even then, I think Bilderberg has always got it's traction from the State Department, not Congress and as you can see Mike Pompeo is attending their meetings. Trump probably had no control over that either. Maybe that's why he sent his faggy little cabin boy, Jared to go with.

Sorry, I didn't realize you're illiterate.

Denial.

No effort to counterpoint, probably not even much comprehension. Just a quick denial of the whole thing. So Double meat with cheese - who do YOU hate?

He *said* he was going to drain the swamp. LOL

https://static.onepoliticalplaza.com/upload/2020/7/21/303149-mr_law_and_order.jpg

He *said* he was going to make America great. LOL

He *said* he has a plan for better healthcare. LOL

He *said* the he had a better deal for Iran. LOL

He *said* a lot of things but at this point it's pretty clear he's just a liar. We could just call him a failure and leave it at that. Lots of people make promises and try but fail to carry them out. But when someone suggests he is going to clear the White House of corruption and then proceeds to do the opposite - that's a little different.

But... there are still those people who swear by him. Do they really look at him and see an honorable person? I mean, I get politics - people are always divided on their opinions, but what happens when the evidence is so clear and abundant that it's simply not possible for him to be innocent and people STILL swear he is?

It's no less mind-boggling than the quantum physics Erwin Schrödinger tried to explain using his thought experiment with a cat that is both dead and alive at the same time. Almost like Trump is innocent and guilty at the same time. But alas, I give too much credit to those who continue to support him. I've listened to their arguments for years now and there is nothing concrete in ANY of their arguments. There's denial, distraction and fallacy, but never... NEVER a counterpoint.

So, there's no quantum superposition. There's no Schrödinger's Trump... We can see quite clearly that Trump is indeed a criminal president. So the support for Trump is clearly a matter of loyalty... The kind that will dismiss the truth entirely and I think it's all driven by hate.

I've heard people say that you can't support Trump unless your a racist. Well, before you Trump supporters start nit-picking what a racist is, I'm just going to broaden the accusation and say there is no such thing as a Trump supporter who is not a bigot in one form or another, whether it's an unfair hatred toward black people, Mexicans, women, immigrants or liberals. Each and every Trump supporter that I have had conversations with harbors one form of hate or another.

I don't expect anyone knows this more than Trump himself who has based his entire presidency on attacking an assortment of targets that he knows the bigots hate. I've never seen this kind of politics before, but I read about how this approach was used by the fascist regimes in the 1930s to shut down democracies and create tyranny.

Is that what we are witnessing now?