I’ve always “gotten it,” which you obviously don’t get. I often disagree with you. I don’t consider you a lunatic, though, at least the majority of the time, although it can be a near thing. @dachuda86, however, has recently gone from being borderline unbearable to full on lunacy. I’ve posted that exchange between @dachuda86 and @BruceAndre before, and likely will again, because he posts here a great deal. It illustrates just how far @dachuda86 has fallen and just how bankrupt his positions have become. The other guy? I had to take him off ignore just to post the exchange. You have nothing to educate me about, with all due respect. Not politically. I’m a guy who remembers Whites Only signs at Houston public parks and swimming pools, and seeing Black Houstonians crammed into the back of Houston Metro buses in the late 1950’s. I’ve been avidly following politics since the early ‘60’s. I saw Eisenhower (there was a Republican) on TV give his “Military-industrial complex” speech. I watched the Kennedy/Nixon debate and saw Nixon sweat. I stood on a sidewalk on Broadway as Jack Kennedy was riding in an open convertible the day before he was murdered and could have thrown a rock and hit him with it, I was that close. I was at Rice Stadium earlier that year when he gave his “going to the Moon by the end of this decade” speech. I was watching live on TV when his younger brother Bobby was shot down after the speech he gave when he had won California in 1968, someone I liked more than Jack, and he was obviously going to take the nomination. It was around 3am and I cried. “Nuance” is a word dismissed around here by far too many. @dachuda86 used to possess a little, or at least pretended to. Now he’s tossed it into the dumpster. Since he posts here so much, I’ll point out the lies he’s repeating when I think it’s worth doing so. Others often already have before I see the “offending” post. I’ll also point out that I’m a Democrat and have been one for decades. I considered myself an “independent” during the ‘60’s and ‘70’s, still a popular term for those who like to take shots at the major political party that’s not a captive of donald trump. When Reagan became president, I decided to stop pretending that I wasn’t a Democrat. I leave that to others that like to pretend that they don’t vote Democratic the vast majority of the time, and are “open minded” and don’t want to be tagged with a party “label.” As I’ve said before, if I had everyone on ignore that posts what I consider utter crap, then for me, this forum could quickly turn into a place where there are only one or two Republicans of the kind that made up the bulk of the party for decades (and I’ve been around a while, long enough to have voted against Nixon), and the only other people left would be those I largely agree with, or disagree with on the “margins.” Am I supposed to spend all my time here going back and forth with @glynch? With all due respect to @glynch, that would likely become unbearable for both of us rather quickly. Now pardon me while I partake in something more interesting. Seeing what lunacy the Rockets are up to now.
So I backtracked to find this post and see the comments you had mentioned. Beyond belief. Grotesque. So that's the America these people want? I remember going to my sister's at Christmas. They had just made Christmas cookies. My nephew (maybe pre-teens at the time) was showing off the "Obama cookie" he had decorated, all dark brown and thick-lipped, as if he were seeking my approval, with my sister brightly smiling (so funny, right?) over the scene. Fundamentalist Christians, and racist to the core. And so many of them. And people like the posters you mention. And they all follow Trump the Pied Piper.
Some people seem to think we're still living in the Jim Crow south. We aren't. But they need to act like we are, for there to be a basis for their political positions.
I'll assume this is a sincere question, and answer it sincerely. I do watch a lot of Tim Pool. I watch a lot of Stefan Molyneaux. I don't agree with Molyneaux on everything, but I agree with a lot of what he says. I'm sure there are other news-oriented YT channels I watch, but it's escaping me right now. Other stuff tends to be more philosophical rather than news oriented.
Yeah, it's sad but at the same time eye opening. Trump has hypnotized those in his base to the point where they will do or accept anything if it means defending or supporting him. As easy as it would be to dismiss them, this is his base and they are ready to destroy democracy and basic freedoms to get what they want.
If you know anything about history, then you should know: the State Department did have a lot of communists within it. The Rosenburgs were spies that sold America's atomic secrets to the USSR. Other charges by McCarthy probably had a whole lot of credence to them. Moreover, look at all those who are advocating communism today: Obamacare, UBI, etc. Yes, McCarthy was a blowhard. That doesn't mean he was wrong. Yes, Trump is boorish. That doesn't mean he is wrong.
Perhaps to the litany of socialists and SJWs we don't. I know I can't convince the "true believers." My hope is that some sane lurkers are open to new and different interpretations of what is actually going on.
Sane lurkers don't think McCarthy or Antifa sympathizers have much to say that is worth listening to.
Care to provide some evidence of how he was wrong? See, this is what's "bad" about leftist argumentation. Something is "bad" just because it's "bad," mmmmmmkay? Emotional reasoning at it's finest.
