They are mostly Republicans, so yeah, there are wrong but noticeable because they are showing a minority view among my family and ethnic group, they are mentioned as examples of how one can be grossly wrong. I also do have a crazy cousin in Florida that sends me conservative and racist propaganda on Facebook, it does not matter if the ones that made that propaganda would like to see guys like him and his family removed from America. He is useful only to keep in mind the trash that many on the right think that it is “information”.
I need to paste this reply from him from another thread in his predictions thread:
As I pointed before I then expect him to not show up his weapon’s grade ignorance until after the election if Trump is the Republican candidate.
A for effort, but I doubt most Trump supporters have even heard of them. If you want to blame Dems, seems like it’d be easier to focus on their immigration policy and crapping on blue collar workers. Though both parties had a hand in it, which is why the Pub establishment is getting the pitchfork treatment.
Colbert was never really an ass to anyone that came on his show, whereas Stewart could sometimes cross that line. But that doesn’t mean that the referenced 6 minute clip was not pure satire, presented in the best way. He encouraged Dobbs to put his position out there, and then playfully tore it down multiple times by questioning the basic tenets and logic of Dobbs beliefs.
The fact that he did not resort to name calling or hectoring just shows that Colbert is a more decent human being than most talking heads of 24 hour news channel shows that deal with politics.
The fact that you don’t get this is rather astounding to me.
Oh, wait. No, it’s not.
“I teach Sunday School, motherfucker!”
May the Goddess hold him close to Her warm and bountiful bosom all the days of his life, amen.
Jesus fucking Christ, you can’t even TROLL well. No matter… plenty of folks here ready to feed you.
Hey! Could if I wanted to, I just don’t!
Wow. You’re right. It’s like the last two decades of sarcasm have created a gulf between people who realize it’s sarcasm, and people who want to believe it’s earnest (and IME put a lot of effort into avoiding anyone who disagrees with their political beliefs).
It’s the logical conclusion of Colbert’s 2006 White House Correspondents Dinner routine that President Bush didn’t like.
I am reminded of a conversation ca. 1992-3 with a conservative friend of mine. He’s a huge fan of actor/comic/musician Martin Mull.
I thought my friend would get a kick out of the first line uttered by Mull’s gay character Leon when he re-appeared in “Rosanne” (her former boss, he was now a health department restaurant inspector):
“Rosanne with her own restaurant?! What’s next? Me in the Army?!”
My friend glared and muttered, “With this president, who knows?!”
I’ve never taken seriously the right wing’s claim that the left is lacking a sense of humor.
But now, I’m wondering about the opposite.
Got a cite for that? It’s okay if it isn’t up to the level of a scientific census, I’ll settle for your identifying the racist demagogue leading in the polls by a mile in the Democratic primary.
It’s a longer-term thing than just GWB. It started under Reagan with his War on Drugs (which, btw, was during a period of declining drug use). Reagan played on racial fears and stereotypes to get elected (in a dog-whistly kind of way, I’m sure you could plausibly deny it if you tried hard enough), then started this crime crackdown which turned out to be massively focused on black people.
Clinton noticed that “tough on crime” wins elections, and made that a plank in his platform. The [del]Mass Incarceration of Black People[/del] War on Drugs continued, only worse. Clinton also signed huge cuts to Welfare, which at the time mostly affected a lot of poor black people. In Clinton’s defense, it could be argued that both moves were basically compromises with the Republicans. Once they became as powerful as they were under the Reagan administration, you pretty much had to play their game to win. And Clinton got concessions from the pubbies in return for the welfare cuts, it was something they really wanted. But still, pretty lame defense for being so hard on black people.
I honestly can’t think of examples of how HWB or GWB contributed to this trend, except to point out that the mass incarceration increased continuously under both, to world record levels under GWB. America incarcerated a larger percentage of its black population than South Africa did during the height of apartheid.
As for the destruction of the 4th Amendment, see Whren v. United States, from here:
You could say it started in 1968 with Terry v Ohio
Now, the excuses for stopping and frisking people multiplied over the years until it became a massive police intrusion, and gosh darn it, it seemed to happen mostly to black people even though that population did not use more drugs than other populations, though it did land a lot of them in jail. Nowadays the police can search just about anyone in the name of the War on Drugs, often resulting in the questionable seizure of property, whether or not the search target committed a crime.
It is almost as if the right to protection against unreasonable searches and seizures has ceased to exist. What aren’t right-wingers screaming their bloody heads off about the effective revocation of this Right? I think it is because black people are getting the short end of it, and so it’s a good thing to certain GOP types resembling Trump supporters. Remember, Trump tweeted false, inflated crime statistics (from a white supremacist site!) about black people’s crime statistics. It’s like he is fabricating a justification for cracking down on a black crime wave that doesn’t exist.
That seems to be what is generating all the excitement, but no, you’re right, he stands for other things, too. He’ll cut taxes for the wealthy, for instance. And push for a massive increase in military spending.
Ever notice how pubbies scream their heads off about the debt, but always increase it when they take the reins? That’s because they have only one solution to the debt- the destruction of Social Security and Medicare. Increasing the debt until the issue is forced seems to be their strategy, because killing Social Security and Medicare as a platform plank is never going to fly, even with the hard right. That’s why they have to make the campaign about brown people, or maybe religious pandering- you gotta do something to get the suckers to vote against their interests!
I have to add: you are a moron for blaming Trump on the Democrats. It is the GOP PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY, fer cryin’ out loud. What’s more Republican than that? :smack:
That’s actually a pretty smart OP, I guess.
I mean, certainly many of the Democrats who voted Obama in disagreed with all that xenophobia, but I have to admit that we haven’t always done a good job of countering such rhetoric, even in our own ranks. It can be tempting to downplay the immigration issue in the name of getting out the vote.
Liberals loved Pat Buchanan! Why, in Palm Beach County, he got massive support!
First of all this is just blatant concern trolling, since as pointed out by others in this thread, Democrats have neither the guts nor strategic sense to do this.
Secondly, even if true, Democrats have nothing to apologize for-politics is indeed run on the principle of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” and (as I’ve pointed out elsewhere) Trump’s success is vastly preferable to that of any “Establishment” Republican candidate. Does the OP have such a base opinion of rank and file Democrats that we are parodies of the ahistorical Menckenite caricatures of Puritans weeping and kvetching over the slightest wrong we might have done in the quest for power and make John Bunyan seem like a shameless sinner?
Lastly and as hinted above, this just proves adaher is the biggest concern troll conservative on this forum and possibly anywhere on the Interwebs. Nonetheless its quite obvious that his ideology is the most blandest and rehashed version of Establishment cuckservatism that makes public elementary school lunches or Miley Cyrus seem fresh and appetizing in comparison-the concern trolling about how Democrats are racist cause muh Dixiecrats and they might dare to support protectionism/reasonable restrictions on immigration, the pure economism that would make Marx or Rand blush, the complete neglect of the fact that tradition, nation, culture, community, heimat, or anything besides the $ might matter in society, the tired “fiscal conservative, socially liberal” mantra as if that represented any sort of improvement on right-wing ideology, being stuck in a time warp where its 2005 with the Democrats begging Joseph Lieberman or Mark Warner to run as the Great Moderate Hero cause Kerry had been too liberal, the endless old neoliberal spiel about globalization requiring a return to 19th Century Manchesterian capitalism as if the Crash of 2008 never happened, the endless parroting of the AEI/Weekly Standard/Wall Street Journal line, the pseudo-New Politics attacks on Hillary Clinton on Hillary Clinton as some sort of a corrupt machine politician as if she was the reincarnation of LBJ and now the Trump denialism. I’m honestly getting quite tired of seeing much less responding to this sort of repetitive, rehashed yesterday’s ideology on this forum and I’m quite glad that Stoneburg has chosen to this opportunity to begin sperging about his beloved Integral theory, offering me some fresh new targets. That said, do not imagine I have any personal feelings against adaher-like many Marxists, he is quite an intelligent observer of politics when not affected too much by his 19th Century ideology.
First of all, it’s nonsensical to imagine that any attention whatsoever should be paid to anything Lou Dobbs says. Is he supposed to be brighter than the average Republican in a drunk tank? Is the Democratic Party supposed to send representatives down to every drunk tank and call attention to every misstatement?
But more importantly, the GOP has turned itself into Frankenstein’s Monster … and the Democrats are to blame for that?? 
Because we didn’t call attention to their stupidities???
(A) I think rational thinkers are quite eager to point out stupidity; is it our fault that FauxNews, the White Aryan Society and Creationists ‘R’ Us don’t republish? (That’s where most of your ilk gets its info from.)
(B) The post-rational GOP bases many of its principles on whatever is the opposite of liberal thought. If the Democrats denounced Dobbs it would cause the Republiopaths to embrace him more strongly. On this point I call attention to the recent GOP debate: Unfortunately I don’t remember the topic, but one of the clowns espoused a policy and the Mod interpreted to say that that was unacceptable – it was Obama’s policy. :smack: The policy could not be debated on its merits – it was automatically wrong because it was Obama’s policy.
I’m still trying to figure adaher out. IIRC, he’s rooting for Christie, the man who, although an utter asshole, agrees with the Democrats on many issues. He admits that the present GOP has become Frankenstein’s Monster. Why not come over to the light side, adaher ?
Actually I have endorsed John Kasich, and I expect him to jump in the polls as a result at any moment.
I do like Christie, but he’s my #2 guy at this point.
Is it your own Adderall, or did a classmate hook you up?
And neither is a decent bet to be in the center ring for the next circus. Only 5 or 6 clowns will get the nod from Fox this time.
Me too, I’m sure he’ll break out soon (I hear he’s caught in traffic) 
I’m going to have to disagree with that. Yes, anti-brown is an element for some people, but I think it’s more pro-hate than it is anti-brown.
I have a friend who’s a big Trump supporter and he’s not a racist. However, he is a HUGE hater. Does that man ever love to hate. There’s this large section of his personality that’s filled with hate and anger and loves to spew the nastiest comments. And here’s this guy running for president who comes across as angry and gets away with spewing nasty comments. Of course my friend’s practically in love with him. Trump’s getting to do what he only dreams of getting to do.
I live in the Bible Belt, heart of conservatism. Lots of Trump supporters. I don’t think that most of them are anti-brown people. Anti-Muslim, yes. That’s the Bible Belt part of it. I don’t think they’d care what color the Muslim is. And I wonder how much of that is distance and not knowing a lot of Muslims? I ask that because I’m openly agnostic. From the polls I’ve seen, atheists/agnostics are disliked/distrusted. Yet I have often stated to some religious person, even ones I’m just meeting (because the subject of your religion tends to come up quickly around here) that I’m agnostic and I’ve never once met with any hostility face-to-face.
I can accept the correction of “pro-hate”.
So the more I hate Trump, the closer I am to voting for him?
Whoaaaaaa…