One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
New person here.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Jul 1, 2019 16:39:27   #
Fit2BTied Loc: Texas
 
dalethorn wrote:
I'm Dale, I'm generally conservative, but I have a few classic liberal leanings where those leanings have a long-term viability in the U.S., and are supported by the type of people who believe in the Bill of Rights - particularly the First and Second Amendments. We see both being attacked by liberal fascists and Democrats today.
It's good to have a viewpoint that cannot be defined. There are those of us here who may come off as hard right or hard left, but that's just us fighting to prove a point. The truth is that we all have nuances. I'm pro-life, but I would never argue to abolish abortion. Some of the more recent legislation on the topic is wrong on both sides. But that's a topic for another time. Welcome to you dalethorn and we hope you will be someone who will not be afraid to post your opinions and stand against those who would try to shut down your voice here.

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 16:59:22   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
no propaganda please wrote:
No, we did not need NeoNazi rallies because the behavior of the progressive Marxist who have taken over the Democrat party were very much in line with the beliefs of them so protest rallies were not necessary.




Did you hear Amy in her short 2 minutes on "face the Nation""?

She is such a favorite..



| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 17:02:20   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
dalethorn wrote:
So you don't understand the difference between facts and principles?

Maybe Plato, Aristotle, Jesus et al should have had to provide links? I think they had good documentation regardless.




If you wish to post opinion, that is fine, but make it clear and allow my opinion also..



| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 17:10:50   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
dalethorn wrote:
If any of that were true, what is the raíson d'etre for Black Lives Matter?



I was sure everyone knew that.. it is about the killing of blacks with no down side for the killer..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter

Black Lives Matter
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Formation July 13, 2013; 5 years ago
Founders
Alicia Garza
Patrisse Cullors
Opal Tometi
Type Social movement
Location
International
(mostly in the United States)
Key people
Shaun KingDeRay MckessonJohnetta ElzieTef PoeErica Garner
Website blacklivesmatter.com
Protesters lying down over rail tracks with a "Black Lives Matter" banner
Black Lives Matter die-in protesting alleged police brutality in Saint Paul, Minnesota, September 20, 2015
Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an international activist movement, originating in the African-American community, that campaigns against violence and systemic racism towards black people. BLM regularly holds protests speaking out against police killings of black people, and broader issues such as racial profiling, police brutality, and racial inequality in the United States criminal justice system.[1]

In 2013, the movement began with the use of the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter on social media after the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of African-American teen Trayvon Martin in February 2012. Black Lives Matter became nationally recognized for its street demonstrations following the 2014 deaths of two African Americans: Michael Brown—resulting in protests and unrest in Ferguson—and Eric Garner in New York City.[2][3] Since the Ferguson protests, participants in the movement have demonstrated against the deaths of numerous other African Americans by police actions or while in police custody. In the summer of 2015, Black Lives Matter activists became involved in the 2016 United States presidential election.[4] The originators of the hashtag and call to action, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi, expanded their project into a national network of over 30 local chapters between 2014 and 2016.[5] The overall Black Lives Matter movement, however, is a decentralized network and has no formal hierarchy.[6]

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 17:14:28   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
dalethorn wrote:
I know quite a bit. They're basically commies.



Very limited in your interpretations are you not.. did they tell you to echo that line??



| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 17:22:45   #
dalethorn
 
permafrost wrote:
If you wish to post opinion, that is fine, but make it clear and allow my opinion also..


What's an opinion? Maybe there's a misunderstanding. Principles are, for example, that Rights as understood by the founding fathers are inviolate, sacred, etc. When people see them as arbitrary, relative, malleable etc., then they're just privileges not Rights.

It's not some cosmic coincidence that God is on American coinage and paper currency. It's there to remind us that we humans don't grant real permanent Rights - only a higher power can do that. And you don't have to believe in God - just consider God to be the archetype of what's greater than all of us. Those things we don't want our corrupt congress critters taking from us go into the God bucket that they're not allowed to touch.

No less than a great man, John Kennedy explained this well.

Don't forget as well that the appointment of Commander In Chief is conditional in the Constitution ("....when called into service by the congress..."), whereas the 2nd Amendment is not conditional - the militia always exists, for the simple reason that the People must have the ability to use force when necessary. i.e., "When a long series of abuses and usurpations evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism."

The Declaration of Independence is not legally superior to the Constitution, but then, revolution is never legal anyway. But the Declaration does discern between "legal" and Right, as any child should learn in first grade.

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 17:24:25   #
dalethorn
 
permafrost wrote:
Very limited in your interpretations are you not.. did they tell you to echo that line??


Nonsense. Be logical.

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 17:25:49   #
Fit2BTied Loc: Texas
 
dalethorn wrote:
I'm Dale, I'm generally conservative, but I have a few classic liberal leanings where those leanings have a long-term viability in the U.S., and are supported by the type of people who believe in the Bill of Rights - particularly the First and Second Amendments. We see both being attacked by liberal fascists and Democrats today.
Just saw where permafrost carpet bombed this thread. There was a time when his posts were on point (his point) and not demeaning. Something seems to have happened in the past few months. The good news is he still finds some entertaining memes. Don't let his attempts to piss in your cornflakes ruin your stay here.

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 17:32:39   #
dalethorn
 
permafrost wrote:
I was sure everyone knew that.. it is about the killing of blacks with no down side for the killer..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter

Black Lives Matter
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Formation July 13, 2013; 5 years ago
Founders
Alicia Garza
Patrisse Cullors
Opal Tometi
Type Social movement
Location
International
(mostly in the United States)
Key people
Shaun KingDeRay MckessonJohnetta ElzieTef PoeErica Garner
Website blacklivesmatter.com
Protesters lying down over rail tracks with a "Black Lives Matter" banner
Black Lives Matter die-in protesting alleged police brutality in Saint Paul, Minnesota, September 20, 2015
Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an international activist movement, originating in the African-American community, that campaigns against violence and systemic racism towards black people. BLM regularly holds protests speaking out against police killings of black people, and broader issues such as racial profiling, police brutality, and racial inequality in the United States criminal justice system.[1]

In 2013, the movement began with the use of the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter on social media after the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of African-American teen Trayvon Martin in February 2012. Black Lives Matter became nationally recognized for its street demonstrations following the 2014 deaths of two African Americans: Michael Brown—resulting in protests and unrest in Ferguson—and Eric Garner in New York City.[2][3] Since the Ferguson protests, participants in the movement have demonstrated against the deaths of numerous other African Americans by police actions or while in police custody. In the summer of 2015, Black Lives Matter activists became involved in the 2016 United States presidential election.[4] The originators of the hashtag and call to action, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi, expanded their project into a national network of over 30 local chapters between 2014 and 2016.[5] The overall Black Lives Matter movement, however, is a decentralized network and has no formal hierarchy.[6]
I was sure everyone knew that.. it is about the ... (show quote)


These "leaders" of BLM can be seen in videos leading meetings calling for the murder of police. If our so-called leaders weren't such cowards, these BLM principals would be locked up.

Baltimore and Freddie Gray are perfect examples. The prosecutor and mayor were knowingly and falsely prosecuting several cops for "brave heart murder" of Freddie Grey, and subsequently the judge not only exonerated them, he lambasted the mayor and prosecutor for their actions.

I'll bet very few people understand how racist the officials are in California. Two years, 1992 and 1994, four trials, opposite 12-0 verdicts in those 4 trials, all decided by the race of the juries compared to the defendants. Why? Fear that certain members of the public might riot and ruin their beach blanket bingo.

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 17:34:53   #
dalethorn
 
Fit2BTied wrote:
Just saw where permafrost carpet bombed this thread. There was a time when his posts were on point (his point) and not demeaning. Something seems to have happened in the past few months. The good news is he still finds some entertaining memes. Don't let his attempts to piss in your cornflakes ruin your stay here.


It happens in every serious forum. It's about control of the public narrative.

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 18:46:18   #
eagleye13 Loc: Fl
 
dalethorn wrote:
I'm Dale, I'm generally conservative, but I have a few classic liberal leanings where those leanings have a long-term viability in the U.S., and are supported by the type of people who believe in the Bill of Rights - particularly the First and Second Amendments. We see both being attacked by liberal fascists and Democrats today.


I can identify with you.
Maybe this will clarify why there is crossover.

Hillary Clinton Frankly Reveals the CFR Is Running the USA ...
Hillary Clinton spills the beans at the inauguration of the new office for Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in Washington, D.C. Some have said it was simply a slip of the tongue but whatever the perception is Clinton frankly revealed who's running the show in these United States:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2T-5Pd3oYY
Zionist control of CFR: http://www.rense.com/general48/captiv.htm

Some Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Facts
The 3,000 seats of the CFR quickly filled with members of America's elite. Today, CFR members occupy key positions in government, the mass media, financial institutions, multinational corporations, the military, and the national security apparatus.
Since its inception, the CFR has served as an intermediary between high finance, big oil, corporate elitists and the U.S. government. The executive branch changes hands between Republican and Democratic administrations, but cabinet seats are always held by CFR members. It has been said by political commentators on the left and on the right that if you want to know what U.S. foreign policy will be next year, you should read Foreign Affairs this year.
The CFR's claim that "The Council has no affiliation with the U.S. government" is laughable. The justification for that statement is that funding comes from member dues, subscriptions to its Corporate Program, foundation grants, and so forth. All this really means is that the U.S. government does not exert any control over the CFR via the purse strings.
Since 1940, every U.S. secretary of state (except for Gov. James Byrnes of South Carolina, the sole exception) has been a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and/or its younger brother, the Trilateral Commission. Also since 1940, every secretary of war and every secretary of defense has been a CFR member. During most of its existence, the Central Intelligence Agency has been headed by CFR members, beginning with CFR founding member Allen Dulles. Virtually every key U.S. national security and foreign policy adviser has been a CFR member for the past seventy years.
Almost all White House cabinet positions are occupied by CFR members. President Clinton, himself a member of the CFR, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group, employs almost one hundred CFR members in his administration. Presidents come and go, but the CFR's power--and agenda--always remains.
The CFR's Shroud of Secrecy - On its web page, the CFR boasts that its magazine, Foreign Affairs, "is acclaimed for its analysis of recent international developments and for its forecasts of emerging trends." It's not much of a challenge to do so, though, when you play a part in determining what those emerging trends will be.
So are they predicting trends or creating them? The answer is fairly obvious to anyone who has earnestly reflected on the matter.
The CFR fancies itself to represent a diverse range cultural and political interests, but its members are predominantly wealthy males, and their policies reflect their elitist biases. The CFR attempts to maintain the charade of diversity via its Non-Attribution Rule, which allows members to engage in "a free, frank, and open exchange of ideas" without fear of having any of their statements attributed in public. The flip side of this, obviously, is a dark cloud of secrecy which envelopes the CFR's activities.
CFR meetings are usually held in secret and are restricted to members and very select guests. All members are free to express themselves at meetings unrestrained, because the Non-Attribution Rule guarantees that "others will not attribute or characterize their statements in public media forums or knowingly transmit them to persons who will," according to the Council on Foreign Relations' 1992 Annual Report.
The report goes on to forbid any meeting participant "to publish a speaker's statement in attributed form in any newspaper; to repeat it on television or radio, or on a speaker's platform, or in a classroom; or to go beyond a memo of limited circulation."
The end result is that the only information the public has on the CFR is the information they release for public consumption, which should send up red flags for anyone who understands the immense effect that CFR directives have on America's foreign policy. The public knows what the CFR wants the public to know about the CFR, and nothing more. There is one hole in the fog of secrecy, however: a book entitled Tragedy and Hope, written by an "insider" named Dr. Carroll Quigley, mentor of Bill Clinton.
Google: “Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral, Commission, Bilderberg Group”

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 18:52:16   #
eagleye13 Loc: Fl
 
permafrost wrote:
Very limited in your interpretations are you not.. did they tell you to echo that line??


https://static.onepoliticalplaza.com/upload/2019/7/1/t1-620608-1859_5989731295279793354_n.jpg

Perma; You have it bassacwards again.
Our kids have been getting "educated by liberal teachers for decades.
how can that be changed?
It takes parents to point out the indoctrination that their kids are taught in schools by a liberal dominated school system.

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 19:09:14   #
Hug
 
Arche, what happened with the dog, Buddy?

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 19:15:23   #
dalethorn
 
eagleye13 wrote:
I can identify with you.
Maybe this will clarify why there is crossover.

Hillary Clinton Frankly Reveals the CFR Is Running the USA ...
Hillary Clinton spills the beans at the inauguration of the new office for Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in Washington, D.C. Some have said it was simply a slip of the tongue but whatever the perception is Clinton frankly revealed who's running the show in these United States:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2T-5Pd3oYY
Zionist control of CFR: http://www.rense.com/general48/captiv.htm

Some Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Facts
The 3,000 seats of the CFR quickly filled with members of America's elite. Today, CFR members occupy key positions in government, the mass media, financial institutions, multinational corporations, the military, and the national security apparatus.
Since its inception, the CFR has served as an intermediary between high finance, big oil, corporate elitists and the U.S. government. The executive branch changes hands between Republican and Democratic administrations, but cabinet seats are always held by CFR members. It has been said by political commentators on the left and on the right that if you want to know what U.S. foreign policy will be next year, you should read Foreign Affairs this year.
The CFR's claim that "The Council has no affiliation with the U.S. government" is laughable. The justification for that statement is that funding comes from member dues, subscriptions to its Corporate Program, foundation grants, and so forth. All this really means is that the U.S. government does not exert any control over the CFR via the purse strings.
Since 1940, every U.S. secretary of state (except for Gov. James Byrnes of South Carolina, the sole exception) has been a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and/or its younger brother, the Trilateral Commission. Also since 1940, every secretary of war and every secretary of defense has been a CFR member. During most of its existence, the Central Intelligence Agency has been headed by CFR members, beginning with CFR founding member Allen Dulles. Virtually every key U.S. national security and foreign policy adviser has been a CFR member for the past seventy years.
Almost all White House cabinet positions are occupied by CFR members. President Clinton, himself a member of the CFR, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group, employs almost one hundred CFR members in his administration. Presidents come and go, but the CFR's power--and agenda--always remains.
The CFR's Shroud of Secrecy - On its web page, the CFR boasts that its magazine, Foreign Affairs, "is acclaimed for its analysis of recent international developments and for its forecasts of emerging trends." It's not much of a challenge to do so, though, when you play a part in determining what those emerging trends will be.
So are they predicting trends or creating them? The answer is fairly obvious to anyone who has earnestly reflected on the matter.
The CFR fancies itself to represent a diverse range cultural and political interests, but its members are predominantly wealthy males, and their policies reflect their elitist biases. The CFR attempts to maintain the charade of diversity via its Non-Attribution Rule, which allows members to engage in "a free, frank, and open exchange of ideas" without fear of having any of their statements attributed in public. The flip side of this, obviously, is a dark cloud of secrecy which envelopes the CFR's activities.
CFR meetings are usually held in secret and are restricted to members and very select guests. All members are free to express themselves at meetings unrestrained, because the Non-Attribution Rule guarantees that "others will not attribute or characterize their statements in public media forums or knowingly transmit them to persons who will," according to the Council on Foreign Relations' 1992 Annual Report.
The report goes on to forbid any meeting participant "to publish a speaker's statement in attributed form in any newspaper; to repeat it on television or radio, or on a speaker's platform, or in a classroom; or to go beyond a memo of limited circulation."
The end result is that the only information the public has on the CFR is the information they release for public consumption, which should send up red flags for anyone who understands the immense effect that CFR directives have on America's foreign policy. The public knows what the CFR wants the public to know about the CFR, and nothing more. There is one hole in the fog of secrecy, however: a book entitled Tragedy and Hope, written by an "insider" named Dr. Carroll Quigley, mentor of Bill Clinton.
Google: “Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral, Commission, Bilderberg Group”
I can identify with you. br Maybe this will clarif... (show quote)


That kind of power does assert itself, doesn't it? It's a funny thing about power and money - I read all about the American revolution in school, and I assumed when we declared independence and eventually won the war, that everything here then belonged to us. I have to wonder about the British investors and what they thought about giving up their investments, and especially the trillions of dollars of wealth (in modern money) those colonies represented.

In certain tourist cities, Charleston SC for example where I have relatives - you can get a tourist buggy ride and listen to the driver wax poetic about the glorious revolution and how the locals tried to thwart the enemy. Then another ride and the driver talks about the civil war, and now the locals are evil slave-owning baddies. Yet, it's the same guys.

The Clintons are very money-driven, and they take it from Russians as much as anyone.

Trump talked at length in his rallies about the trillions of dollars in unfair trade deals, and I asked myself - why would our leaders make unfair trade deals? Unless there were a skim, like the casino skims in the old days.

So anyway, to understand Trump better, I went back to the Wall Street speech by Gordon Gekko. Funny how everyone remembers the "greed is good" soliloquy at the end of the speech, but how few remember the meat of the speech. 1) "Our fiscal and trade deficits are at nightmare proportions". And 2) Gekko's description of the corruption in these corporations when bureaucracy takes over from innovation and work. All those vice-presidents doing nothing.

So then looking at numerous interviews of Trump on late night TV from 1987 through the 2000's - he's been saying the same thing all these years. Does anyone really wonder why the corporate and government bureaucrats hate him so much?

| Reply
Jul 1, 2019 19:27:32   #
Larai Loc: Fallon, NV
 
Smedley_buzkill wrote:
Welcome to OPP. Lord knows we need some new people commenting here. Remember to use the quote reply when you are posting so it will be directed properly. Jump in when you feel froggy. People here do care about issues and sometimes lose their tempers. It's better than apathy.


Hi there I'm new too as of today, Also, mostly conservative.. and yes a bit passionate!.. thanks for providing this forum!

Larai

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2020 IDF International Technologies, Inc.