Well, you’ve got that just exactly backwards. Liberals gave Bush a chance. At the start of his term, it was, “Oh, well, the Pub stole the election, whatever, fresh blood, W doesn’t seem like he’s gonna do much of anything anyway, the country is thriving, maybe we just need a pleasant, stupid caretaker POTUS for a while.” And for the first months of his presidency it actually seemed it would work out that way. It took 9/11 and the W/Cheney Admin’s responses to it to start changing their minds. But to RWs, Obama was the America-hating Nazi Communist Muslim Antichrist before he even took office.
No. That appears to be what you are saying. I don’t think we should discriminate against anyone. For instance, colleges should accept candidates based on ability and background, not race.
I would continue to think this if all measurable criteria such as income were equal, or if it were not. So the rest of basically moot.
I don’t have to explain it.
First of all your premise isn’t even true. Asian men who are educated do very well as a group. Younger women are graduating college in higher numbers and doing better in many ways as a group than younger men.
It’s meaningless to try and explain why one group does better or worse than all other groups, especially based on race. The fact is that any person of any race will be successful in America if they get married before they have kids and if they get an education. The fact that certain groups do these things more often isn’t a reason to punish them by discriminating against them.
See post #57. And sleep with the lights on. 
Yes, but below post-graduate levels (e.g. among men with just high school diplomas, some college, or bachelor’s degrees), white men do better.
This is rather vague- young male college graduates make more money than young female college graduates.
I get that you don’t believe that government should do anything about the fact that white men earn more money on average than women, black men, or hispanic men with the same education and experience. I just disagree with you.
:rolleyes: That’s what you meant by that?! Whatever might be said against affirmative action, Debaser, it is not a form of “persecution” of white males.
Our government doesn’t show any signs of becoming tyrannical? Somebody let the Liberals know who have been whining about the Patriot act for almost a decade.
If the Jews were armed they would first need to be disarmed for the holocaust to happen. When the attempt to disarm occurs that would be a good sign it’s time to get out of the country.
Well this is quite different than the overly broad brush you used to make your point in the first place which is what I was responding to. Rather than moving the goalposts all over the field you should have just stated what you thought the first time around.
So if something doesn’t rise to the level of what’s happened to Jews it can’t be persecution?
The First Amendment states there should be no state sponsored religion, ie no official US government religion. It’s been interpreted in the most severe of ways to mean that there can be no mention or recognition of religion by government at all. It’s understandable for Christians to feel persecuted by the way they are treated in this country.
This is just such bullshit. The hatred for the left of Bush was just as hot as the far right’s hatred of Obama. In fact it was much worse.
It started from the moment he took office. There was no reserved judgement. You can’t even resist taking a shot at him “stealing” the election in your post where you are claiming Liberals gave him a chance. How very nice of you to prove yourself wrong and save me the trouble of finding a cite.
The Soviets lost millions of people to the Nazis despite their standing army, planes, and tanks. Small numbers of isolated Jews wielding pistols would be little more than target practice. And many Jews did try to get out and either couldn’t afford it, couldn’t get permission, and a whole shipful was returned after being denied entry in the US.
No, it’s not understandable for Christians to feel persecuted. Every single church observes Christmas, every public school is off for Christmas break. If Christians had as much trouble getting permission to build churches as Muslims do in getting mosques built, THEN you’d have something to whine about.
This is absurd. It might be reasonable to say that hatred from either extreme for Bush and Obama were similar, but what you said is ridiculous (especially the “much worse”- are you kidding?).
Bush had positive approval from most Democrats shortly after 9/11. Most Democratic lawmakers supported Bush’s agenda for the year or two after 9/11. Now Obama can’t even get half of Congressional Republicans to agree to pay for obligations that Congress already made.
When earlier waves of immigrants came onto our shores there was no social safety net to drain as there is now. Millions of Irish immigrants coming here didn’t drain our welfare state because there was no welfare to collect. They didn’t live in public housing because it didn’t exist. They didn’t collect welfare or get EBT cards because we didn’t hand out money to every free loader who managed to get onto our soil.
Compare that to Auntie Zeituni. She comes here illegally but has no problem with living in housing that’s provided for free, her meals and spending money coming from her EBT card. She’s never paid a dime into the system and shouldn’t even be here.
You don’t even live on the Earth with the blue sky, do you?!
:rolleyes: No, Debaser, it is not understandable or reasonable for Christians to feel “persecuted” by the principle that “there can be no mention or recognition of religion by government at all.” And most American Christians don’t. Most understand perfectly well that an atheist winning a lawsuit and getting the nativity scene taken off the courthouse lawn or the Ten Commandments plaque out of the lobby, however distasteful that outcome might be to them, is not an instance of Christians being persecuted. Christians know what persecution is, it’s what the early Roman Emperors did and what the early martyrs suffered, and, no, anything that does not rise to that level is probably not persecution.
Is this supposed to be a joke? Churches observe Christmas, therefore there can’t be any persecution of Christian’s in America?
You’ve got to be kidding.
Christmas is a federal holiday. Of course school is off for it. This proves nothing.
Despite being a federal holiday, the government does it’s best to ban the very word “Christmas” from the public square.
Tell me. Would this have gone better or worse for the Jews in the ghetto if they had more and better weapons?
Even with the meager arms they had they repulsed the first attempt of the Germans to enter the ghetto and gave them a good fight. Some of the resistance was able to fight their way out of the ghetto and joined the resistance against the Germans and survived the war.
Would there have been more or less of this if they had more guns?
That’s the impression I have, that both Bush and Obama were and are subject to a exceptional level of hateful rhetoric from leftist and rightist extremists, relative to that directed at other post-WWII presidents.
Bush was broadly supported for a while post 9/11, just as Obama would be in the event of another event with such galvanizing power.
This may be attributable to the proliferation of cable news networks in the later 90s, like Fox News (1996) and MSNBC (1996), and the communicative power of the Internet, which provide a locus for partisan feelings.
Do you honestly think the end result would have been any different? Perhaps they could have taken some Nazis down with them, but I can’t imagine someone going up to Hitler and telling him the Jews were offering armed resistance and Hitler saying “aw, fuck it. Let’s just leave them be.”
Your definition differs from that of the dictionary and that of anyone else. If you have such a high standard then of course no one in America is being persecuted.
You’ve put such a high standard on it as to make the term meaningless.
Yes. Of course. Do you honestly believe it would not?
Read the cite I posted. It’s got a list of names of people who survived because they armed themselves and fought their way free and joined the resistance.
That list would be longer if they had more guns.
Tell that to club Med.
I think the second amendment was put there because we didn’t have standing armies and we wanted a well regulated militia not because the founding fathers were building in the seeds of the next revolution.
My family has businesses like the ones you talk about and none of it gives you some sort of holistic sense of how the economy works. It gives you a very good sense of how your industry works and a general facility with cost benefit analysis and stuff like that but economists are much better trained to understand how businesses operate at a macro level. Giving people tax breaks doesn’t make them go out and hire people, taxing them more might have an effect on their hiring but the effect of more robust consumer demand is going to be much more dramatic.
If you have enough demand, you hire more people. I don’t know anyone that hires a bunch of people because they got a tax break. And anyone that fires people because their taxes went up 3% is an idiot.
There are two ways of getting constitutional rights. One is US citizenship and the other is presence in the US. These guys aren’t citizens so bringing them here would give them constitutional rights.
Not if you correct for education and geography. Sure the white male engineer in Boise makes less than the Asian engineer in Dallas but there is a cost of living difference as well.
Comparing apples to apples, white males make more than Asian males.
You haven’t proven the discrimination. In fact its pretty clear that discrimination goes the other way unless you are whining about affirmative action.
I agree (other than affirmative action for blacks and American Indians). You know what happens when you go race and gender blind (aside from affirmative action for blacks and American Indians), white males don’t improve their situation, it probably gets worse because while hispanics lose out a lot, they don’t lose out as much as Asians gain and the difference is absorbed by white, particularly white males.
So when white males succeed, its because they’re so fucking awseome but when women succeed, its because there is discrimination against while males?
Wait, weren’t you just complaining about discrimination against white males?
I have to call bullshit. The senate was majority Democrat until 2003 and they didn’t filibuster everything that Bush did. Not by a long shot. The difference in animosity coming out of the gate were not comparable.
I didn’t give a shit about the 2000 election but to be fair, it was really close and it smelled a bit funky.
And the list of dead may have been longer as well. The Nazis could have been so enraged at armed resistance that they would have been even more cruel than they were.