"Slump" — used there by The Washington Post — sounds kind of mean. The first definition in the (unlinkable) OED is: "To fall or sink in or into a bog, swamp, muddy place, etc.; to fall in water with a dull splashing sound."
a1677 I. Barrow Serm. in Wks. (1686) III. 191 Young men..walk upon a bottomless quag, into which unawares they may slump....Also, " To slide off heavily; to plump down; to fall or collapse clumsily or heavily..."
1776 T. Twining in Country Clergyman of the 18th C. (1882) 31, I remember slumping on a sudden into the slough of despond, and closing my letter in the dumps....
1835 New Monthly Mag. 43 159 We dreaded to meet even a single sleigh, lest in turning out, the horses should ‘slump’ beyond their depth, in the untrodden drifts.
1884 J. Burroughs Pepacton 217 Its body slumps off, and rolls and spills down the hill.WaPo is talking about The Reproductive Choice of Women. How sexist to label this a sinking into a bog or a clumsy collapse. It's quite the opposite. I've been down there on the floor... No one's ever gonna keep me down again.... It is knowing, intelligent, and individualistic.
1889 ‘M. Twain’ Connecticut Yankee v. 63 Clarence had slumped to his knees before I had half finished....
Posts
365 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 365 of 365"So we will be around as long as you are, heh."
According the life expectancy charts I have seen, you most certainly will not be around as long as me.
Overweight alcoholics on the wrong side of 60 do not outlive healthy 30 year olds.
Tick tock.
That would be weird seeing a gray pube.
Don't join a gym.
Marshal said...
Democrats enact amnesty, FOXNEWS to blame.
What part of bipartisan gang of eight did you not get? How fucking stupid are you? You are getting sold down the river and you want to defend the pricks doing it?
I note you don't actually deny that FOX could kill this bill if they wanted.
AReasonableMan said...
The flux of cheap labor into the country is created by big business and agribusiness. They have to deal with this fait accompli.
If that concerned Democrats all they'd have to do is require EVerify for all businesses. But instead they called that racist. Is it too much to ask that you consider your assertions for two seconds before you comment? It's embarassing. Althouse deserves better.
It's a shame someone so Reasonable has to resort to childish insults and ignoring reality to support his policies. Maybe you should take a time out. Or switch to another handle.
My point is there are certain cultural attributes common to all Europeans other than the color of their skin
There was exactly one cultural attribute, other than skin color, that was common to all Europeans: they were all located in Europe. :)
Unreasonable bitch is really worked up about this. So 55 democrats and 5 republicans in the Senate is Fox New's fault.
Obamacare was almost as bi partisan as the amnesty bill by this retards logic.
The pretzels you leftards work in those tiny little brains of yours to deny reality must be exhausting.
What part of bipartisan gang of eight did you not get?
I see we've returned to the traditional definition of "bipartisan": any law supported overwhelmingly by Democrats plus at least one Republican. :)
After reading these comments I'm completely baffled as to why minorities hate the GOP.
Marshal said...
If that concerned Democrats all they'd have to do is require EVerify for all businesses.
Interesting dodge from a 'small government' proponent. It is the Democrats fault for not implementing a nationwide bureaucracy to check the employment status of literally everyone single person working in the country? This is your best shot? Try again or face up to reality. The flux of cheap labor into this country is driven by big business and agribusiness. Nothing you can say is going to change that fact.
AReasonableMan said...
Marshal said...
Democrats enact amnesty, FOXNEWS to blame.
What part of bipartisan gang of eight did you not get? How fucking stupid are you? You are getting sold down the river and you want to defend the pricks doing it?
I note you don't actually deny that FOX could kill this bill if they wanted.
Is that gang of eight going to pass the bill? Are you asserting the final vote will contain roughly equal levels of support from Dems and Reps? If not your comment is completely meaningless (But you are getting funnier by the minute).
I'm not defending Fox, I think their position is wrong and am hopeful amnesty will be defeated. On the other hand you are defending Democrats by blaming Fox for the Dems policy.
You should probably hand off to that other guy, the frother. You're ruining your credibility. Why have multiple handles if you aren't going to manage their branding?
After reading these comments I'm completely baffled as to why minorities hate the GOP. GM
Come back after you figure it out and tell us.
Bye.
President-Mom-Jeans said...
Unreasonable bitch is really worked up about this. So 55 democrats and 5 republicans in the Senate is Fox New's fault.
Another complete dummy confusing cause and effect. The princes at FOX and Republican HQ must just slap their foreheads over how easy this is.
garage mahal said...
After reading these comments I'm completely baffled as to why minorities hate the GOP.
It's a non-white thing. You probably wouldn't get it.
Let me look some more ... Hey, look at that: the houses are mostly of wood, tar shingles on the roofs, some plastic siding, big grass lawns, wild, un-pruned trees in the yards. Yup. Whites must live here.
... what?
There was exactly one cultural attribute, other than skin color, that was common to all Europeans: they were all located in Europe. :)
And through the union of the cultures, they created Western Civilization. If I'm not mistaken, Christianity was pretty wide spread and uniform until the reformation. Like for hundreds of years.
Marshal said...
I'm not defending Fox, I think their position is wrong and am hopeful amnesty will be defeated. On the other hand you are defending Democrats by blaming Fox for the Dems policy.
But, El Stupido, it is not Democrat policy to have a massive influx of cheap labor into the country. They are dealing with a reality created by big business and agribusiness. Are they doing this in the usual craven way, of course, but they are not the underlying problem, which you refuse to address, because it would undermine your entire world view. You are the very definition of a right wing sheeple.
Ann, you have done it again:
1.) You have defined the wrong word ("slump," the verb, rather than the noun, which would be correct.
2.) You have misstated the topic of the piece you quoted (the WaPo is writing about birthrates, a narrow statistical consideration, not the reproductive choices of women, a subject much broader in scope. So,
3.) In the face of such faulty textual analysis of basic English, a reader can only scratch his head and wonder...what sort of instruction are those poor law students getting in Madison in exchange for their parents' hard-earned money?
Normally, I tell myself that you don't really believe the half-baked howlers you post here and are just providing some decomposing carcasses of thought for your audience to tussle over. Once in a while, though, I really have to wonder.
AReasonableMan said...
Marshal said...
If that concerned Democrats all they'd have to do is require EVerify for all businesses.
Interesting dodge from a 'small government' proponent. It is the Democrats fault for not implementing a nationwide bureaucracy to check the employment status of literally everyone single person working in the country?
Employers are already required to gather proof of work eligibility. I'm only suggesting we make it function. I know actual facts don't matter much to you but others might be confused.
The flux of cheap labor into this country is driven by big business and agribusiness. Nothing you can say is going to change that fact.
An unwillingness to consider anything outside dognma is not the mark of A Reasonable Man.
... what? - Revenant
Let me help you:
1. Read the next sentence.
2. If that doesn't work, you must be right and I am wrong.
Why the fuck would anyone on the 'left' agree to have a pool of cheap non-citizen labor invade the fucking country?
I don't know, but they do. Like, the Golden God cracking down on repatriating illegals here. Like not building the fence.
I think the question is, why would they let an invasion of cheap non-citizen labor. Now you are getting to the meat of the problem. They wouldn't and they don't.
Since Republicans can get their cheap labor either way, what's it matter?
"1.) You have defined the wrong word ("slump," the verb, rather than the noun, which would be correct."
I acknowledge that I used the verb and not the noun. The older meaning is for the verb and the noun arose out of the verb. The language discussion is missing that acknowledgment. I considered adding it.
"2.) You have misstated the topic of the piece you quoted (the WaPo is writing about birthrates, a narrow statistical consideration, not the reproductive choices of women, a subject much broader in scope. So..."
Here's where YOU need to think a lot more. My statement is concise and intentionally provocative. I could go on and on about what I am saying there, but I'll just add that it's deliberate sarcasm, and now it's up to you to move forward.
Telling me I'm not explaining enough is weak. Step up! No wonder women don't want to breed.
AReasonableMan said...
But, El Stupido,
Rolling out the big guns are we? The wit! The Reasonableness!
it is not Democrat policy to have a massive influx of cheap labor into the country
It's not their first choice, but it's a byproduct of their priorities. They want Democratic voters, and they want to call Republicans racist. Concern about hurting those who work in the private sector? Eh, small potatoes. Christ, they might not even vote Democrat!
Marshal said...
The flux of cheap labor into this country is driven by big business and agribusiness. Nothing you can say is going to change that fact.
An unwillingness to consider anything outside dognma is not the mark of A Reasonable Man.
Refute it, or pack up your sad little propaganda show and go home. Where exactly does the economic impetus come from to create the conditions necessary for massive illegal immigration into this country?
Dante said...
I don't know, but they do.
Unlike Marshall you are actively engaged here but you didn't really address the question. Guest worker programs. other than at times of full employment, will inevitably suppress wages. Why would Democrats support such as system given their current concerns over wealth inequality? From the Dems point of view illegal aliens are a lesser evil since it doesn't institutionalize second class citizen status.
My main point is that a lot of people have swallowed a ridiculous line of propaganda that makes no sense when examined in even a very superficial way.
"No wonder women don't want to breed."
lol
The flux of cheap labor into this country is driven by big business and agribusiness. Nothing you can say is going to change that fact.
You have provided a reason why people HERE might want cheap labor, but not why people come here. Part of it is for jobs. Part of it is for welfare.
Democrats want illegals to swell the roles, since in general white democrats tend to die out. So they need a new source of voters. And it's always good to have a new grievance class.
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
A small slice of Rebs want cheap labor but are actively and vociferously opposed by the majority of the party. Meanwhile a wide swath of Dems, certainly a majority, want future voters and are opposed by a tiny minority of Dems whose opposition is theoretical but politically meaningless.
You keep telling yourself this comforting little fairy tale on those cold, cold nights when FOX News is selling your children's future earning power down the river.
Troll just describes Chuckie Schumer and his evil minions.
Now, if Bell&Howell could project like this, they'd still be in business.
FOX News could kill this bill any time they want
On the Bizarro World, maybe.
I'm sure those leftists who support amnesty believe the negative aspects will be offset by the additional government employment and welfare benefits they'll offer once the Dems have full political control.
Of course the Dem plan will bankrupt the country, but no one on the left is both economically literate and unselfish enough to care what American economic conditions will be in 50 years.
This is just FOX fantasyland propaganda. No one in the real world talks like this.
Unless they have actually thought it through. Troll is used to low info voters.
They'll swallow anything.
To come on here and parrot this stupid propaganda as if you are a sentient being is insulting to everyone involved. Read a fucking book, go and talk to some real people for a change, get out of the echo chamber and think for yourself.
Yes, you hear all the people on the blog screaming how insulted they are.
Troll goes into Ritmo mode when his blather doesn't fly.
And Troll's problem may be he's read a fucking book, but those are the only kind he's ever read.
Presumably, Troll thinks "talk to some real people for a change, get out of the echo chamber and think for yourself" means going back to Kos and getting his talking points
Marshal said...
It's not their first choice, but it's a byproduct of their priorities. They want Democratic voters, and they want to call Republicans racist. Concern about hurting those who work in the private sector? Eh, small potatoes. Christ, they might not even vote Democrat!
No sane thinking person believes nonsense like this. It's just a sad parodic echo of a Hannity rant. Grow up, think for yourself for a change. The world can't be defined solely by sound bites from FOX News.
AReasonableMan said...
Unlike Marshall you are actively engaged here
It's amazing the person with the least knowledge or ability to rationalize beyond "I hate them so they must be at fault" is lecturing others. Poll after poll shows Dem support at vastly higher levels of support for amnesty both generally and among elites. And yet he thinks the word bipartisan makes the issue not just evenly split but in fact the fault of FOXNEWS.
The lack of honesty and integrity is breathtaking, but hardly surprising. Just not a serious commenter.
ARM--don't know about how those miscreants you describe have made illegal immigration possible. Seems to me you have failed to acknowledge that it might have the plethora of government benefits that attract illegals to the US. They breed and their spawn get citizenship; the collect government benefits.
Frankly I am happy with illegals--they do my lawn work and other household tasks for cheap.
I have found that most illegals are hardworking and stay out of trouble. I would rather have them as my neighbors than such an ass as you. And yes--I speak Spanish.
Dante said...
You have provided a reason why people HERE might want cheap labor, but not why people come here. Part of it is for jobs. Part of it is for welfare.
It is only about jobs, they are generally extremely motivated and hard working people. The illegal immigrants are not eligible for most if not all welfare and would never be eligible if it wasn't for this amnesty bill, supported by Republicans and FOX News.
Democrats want illegals to swell the roles, since in general white democrats tend to die out. So they need a new source of voters. And it's always good to have a new grievance class.
This is just propaganda. It makes no sense.
A Reasonable Man yells:
FOX News! FOX News! FOX News! FOX News! FOX News! FOX News! FOX News! FOX News! FOX News! FOX News! FOX News!
And yet the dumb rethuglicans still cannot concede his reasonable argument.
Roger J. said...
ARM--don't know about how those miscreants you describe have made illegal immigration possible. Seems to me you have failed to acknowledge that it might have the plethora of government benefits that attract illegals to the US. They breed and their spawn get citizenship; the collect government benefits.
But they are not eligible for most government handouts and, as you so graciously acknowledge, they are in fact a very hard working and motivated group of people.
The illegal immigrants are not eligible for most if not all welfare and would never be eligible if it wasn't for this amnesty bill, supported by Republicans and FOX News.
Bullshit. Here in CA, a federal judge ruled CA had to provide its welfare benefits to illegals.
Why if people want to come here to work, do women sneak across the border to give birth in US hospitals?
Explain why Democrats did not build the fence.
Explain why Obama stopped repatriating illegals.
And insofar as Agribusiness, and the like, if there were a guest worker program, that would work out fine. But the current guest worker program is so full of "compassion" that it's cheaper to hire illegals.
Why would democrats destroy the guest worker program?
Troll has finally cracked.
La, la, la, la, la-a-a-a, I can't hear you.
Sad.
" Where exactly does the economic impetus come from to create the conditions necessary for massive illegal immigration into this country?"
Mexico sucks
The U.S. sucks less
We have better jobs, better education, better medicine, better police, better housing, better everything, and best of all lots of free stuff paid for by U.S. citizens who then blame themselves for us coming and taking it.
So much of the economic impetus also comes from U.S. taxpayers. Democrats survive off of the politics of transfers from taxpayers to whoever.
ARM--I was a head start administrator, and every family in the program were illegal--we were supposed to check for immigration status but that was never done.
You really have no fucking idea what you are talking about. An illegal immigrant, (and agree with you about their work ethics) will will get any number of government bennies.
Marshall, what is your fucking point? You are cluelessly incapable of responding to the several specific questions that I have asked. You simply plough on spewing now dated talking points helplessly unaware that the boat you sailed in on has already sunk.
What does the O.E.D. have to say about the word "reasonable"? Reading some of the comments posted here under that descriptor, "reasonable" apparently means something totally different than I had always assumed.
My friend Palladian raises a really interesting point (re "reasonable." have read numerous posts by numerous posters, I have come to regard "reasonable" and "rational" as markers for poseurs.
You [ARM] really have no fucking idea what you are talking about. -- Roger
Reality is a dish best served to someone who wants to eat it.
AReasonableMan observed, (6/13/13, 3:26 PM) "The obsessive drive for a constant flux of low cost labor into the county does not come from the 'left'."
Nor does an obsessive drive for a constant flux into the country of one-party-voting perpetually-aggrieved minorities with a sense of entitlement come from the 'right'.
The Twinkie is gone and lost forever.
Now it is only churros as far as the eye can see.
"Dante - what I'm saying is I'm proud to be bigoted against racists."
Ah, so you're a smug douche? Carry on.
Roger J. said...
ARM--I was a head start administrator, and every family in the program were illegal--we were supposed to check for immigration status but that was never done.
Well I am not really sure who is at fault here.
Let's be clear, if it is not already. Any country has the absolute right to control immigration in anyway it sees fit. In my view the first goal of any immigration policy is to maximize the overall good for the existing citizenry. It is unquestionably the case that the current large influx of cheap labor undermines the economic standing of a significant fraction of the existing citizenry. Given this fact, you then have to ask who benefits from this? The answer is obvious.
To monomaniacally blame this outcome on Democrats is both delusional and self-defeating. You know who the enemy is here but seem unwilling to address reality.
Palladian said...
What does the O.E.D. have to say about the word "reasonable"? Reading some of the comments posted here under that descriptor, "reasonable" apparently means something totally different than I had always assumed.
Do you have anything substantive to add or are you just a lot of empty hot air?
ReasonableMan said...
Marshall, what is your fucking point?
Lots of points. It's ok if you can't keep up, I knew it would be tough for you. Plus you have to pretend not to understand, otherwise you'd have to admit your arguments are weak. And let's face it: you just don't have the integrity to debate the issues with the adults.
You are cluelessly incapable of responding to the several specific questions that I have asked.
Newflash: (a) I'm not here to answer your questions, and (b) my responses are quite substantially more complete than your "Foxnews and Reps are solely at fault even though the Dems are the primary supporters of the bill" theory.
You simply plough on spewing now dated talking points helplessly unaware that the boat you sailed in on has already sunk.
I'm always amused by those who are so far behind they think they're ahead.
Now it is only churros as far as the eye can see.
I've got to admit I prefer churros to Twinkies, but Twinkies keep a lot longer ... and deep frying them is an option, not a requirement.
Marshal said...
Newflash: (a) I'm not here to answer your questions,
But you have nothing to say on your own volition that I couldn't have gotten from listening to FOX News six months ago. So the only way I have of eking out an original thought is by means of questions.
ARM--Let me tell you who was at fault--It was the Department of Health and Human Services who instructed us not to push the immigration information (and for your information, HHS runs head start, not the department of ed)
As for your comments about Palladian--he has been one of the most steadfast comments on this threat--I have never seen him take cheap shots. He is a self described libertarian anarchist--but the man always does good work
Unlike your drive.
AReasonableMan said...
But you have nothing to say on your own volition that I couldn't have gotten from listening to FOX News six months ago.
It's quite amusing you keep saying that.
1. Arguments stand or fall on their own merits. Attacking them as coming from elseshere is an admission you cannot refute the substance.
2. I don't watch Fox.
3. You just wrote 50 comments attacking Fox for having the exact opposite positions as mine. So you're claiming I'm a Fox puppet arguing against Fox.
Can't you tailor the insults to the circumstances? This is just embarassing, and I think Althouse deserves better quality trolls. You should probably stick with El Stupido and dummy. Sure they're unimaginitive and childish but with them at least you won't accidentally reveal you can't think straight.
.< It is unquestionably the case that the current large influx of cheap labor undermines the economic standing of a significant fraction of the existing citizenry.
Of course. And when the Feds were raiding business with illegals, it was the left that was in up in arms.
The idea that conservatives want amnesty is idiocy on steroids.
Lol. Clearly this is a topic that warrants 254 comments.
One consolation is how much closer we are to the day when this guy's demise catches up to the day's births.
Let me help you:
Sure. Start by explaining what kind of houses non-white Americans live in. Mud huts, or grass ones? :)
It is unquestionably the case that the current large influx of cheap labor undermines the economic standing of a significant fraction of the existing citizenry.
Sure, but it has happened before and we're still here. The real problem is the welfare state; absent that, the employment situation works itself out as the economy grows.
How about OSHA, and mine shaft safety laws, Rev? Clearly if we could lose more miners to deaths in unsafe mines, then the employment rate would skyrocket! Think of all those exploded miners we'd have to replace! Wondrous!
Why the fuck would anyone on the 'left' agree to have a pool of cheap non-citizen labor invade the fucking country?
Because few people on the left understand basic economics. They don't get the whole supply-and-demand thing at all.
For example, they think the problem of low wages can be solved by creating a minimum wage. Flood of illegals -> legalization -> minimum wage -> lots of Democrats earning "a living wage". Low wages, to them, aren't caused by an oversupply of labor -- they are caused by Big Mean Businessmen who haven't been properly whipped into shape by the government.
In reality, of course, wages are set by the market. All minimum wage laws do is determine who doesn't get (legally) hired at all, i.e. "people worth less than the minimum wage".
Most libertarians think the market will sort these problems out. In principle I agree, but in practice I think the state and federal governments have distorted the markets so badly that they can't handle handle a rapid influx of unskilled labor. I guess we'll find out if I'm right. :)
You gotta love how Ritmo and ARM take turns in shifts, huh Inga?
That's what working people do, Rayland.
I love a debate on labor by a bunch of sinecure holders who jerk off on Blogger all the work-day.
Shorter Revenant:
There is no such thing as entitlement and privilege in the free market. All favoritism, sinecures, unfairness and distortions were created by the government. Humanity did not know of these concepts until FDR.
As long time observer of this blog I demand that you two appear in the same place at the same time. Otherwise your "act" is just a huge distraction from the otherwise entertaining political theater.
I wouldn't know, why are you asking me Chickie?
How about OSHA, and mine shaft safety laws, Rev?
More danger or more unemployment; pick the lesser evil.
For progressives, the critical second step after deciding to avoid Evil #1 is to deny having anything to do with Evil #2. :)
Troop's a working guy.
Most of the rest of the gang here is just a bunch of Kim Kardashians.
It's good to see Rev admit that he's a part of the pro-death faction.
There is no such thing as entitlement and privilege in the free market.
Correction: in every nation, in every culture, in all of human history and all of humanity's future, there are people of wealth and privilege and they control the government.
"Government is the only protection against people of wealth and privilege" is thus one of the more blackly humorous beliefs of the political left. It isn't so much "hiring the fox to guard the henhouse" as it is "hiring your rapist to be your bodyguard".
Didn't you claim that my absence at another point couldn't have just coincided with Hitchens' death? I guess that complexity flatters me when you want it to. And in any event, what's even the point? I guess once 200 comments have piled up, there's so much that can be said about unpassionate people failing to reproduce at replacement level. So on to the next set-piece: How only European-descended Americans know how to work. I've been waiting to be enlightened on that talking point for quite some time.
Ho hum.
It's good to see Rev admit that he's a part of the pro-death faction
Did I? Read closely, now. :)
Correction: in every nation, in every culture, in all of human history and all of humanity's future, there are people of wealth and privilege and they control the government.
But never business. Lol.
Especially when that tail wag's the government's dog.
"Government is the only protection against people of wealth and privilege" is thus one of the more blackly humorous beliefs of the political left. It isn't so much "hiring the fox to guard the henhouse" as it is "hiring your rapist to be your bodyguard".
Nice self-fulfilling prophecy. You decided you wanted public servants to be lobbyists' servants, reversed the role of foxes and hens, and declared the problem solved!
Brilliant.
Read M.E. Thomas on the high proportion of sociopaths in business. Your problem is that you don't want to constrain power, at all, unabashedly revel in its abuses in the private sector, and lie to everyone about how tyranny only exists in the public's hands. Which must come as a shock to actual rapists and murderers when they are tried by the state.
I guess you think they should be tried by corporations instead, eh?
What an abomination of irrationality.
It is literally incredible to me that not one 'thinking' 'libertarian' poster here is willing to acknowledge that the right wing are getting sold down the river by the Repubs and FOX on this issue.
Doesn't anyone want to acknowledge that Hannity performed a perfect 180 on this issue once orders were received from on high? Doesn't this suggest to anyone that literally everything he has to say is pure bought and paid for propaganda?
Start by explaining what kind of houses non-white Americans live in. Mud huts, or grass ones?
If I moved to the African bush, I'd choose the mud hut, because of the predominant culture and my personal preference.
You can get as cute with the language as you want. We know it's not you who's advocating for safer workplaces. Or safer anything. GLibertarians always say that regulation is to blame for bad economies. They never have any other answer. Which doesn't mean that Democrats lack answers. They're just the kind of answers that economists actually endorse. And then they're blocked from implementing them by an opposition that wants nothing more than power for its own sake.
No wonder you identify with the latter.
This post is on track for 400 comments.
Can we get back to Neanderthal sex stories?
This post is on track for 400 comments.
Can we get back to Neanderthal sex stories?
Didn't you claim that my absence at another point couldn't have just coincided with Hitchens' death?
No? On the one hand I liked Hitchens, and on the other I seldom notice you when you're *present*, let alone when you're missing. :)
If I moved to the African bush, I'd choose the mud hut, because of the predominant culture and my personal preference.
Moving to the African bush to study Americans is, perhaps, not the smartest or most effective choice to make.
And yet, you almost never fail to respond to nearly every one of my comments. :)
:)
:) :)
:) :) :)
:) :) :) :)
:) :) :) :) :)
:) :) :) :) :) :)
:) :) :) :) :) :) :)
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
It was a comment Raylan had made, BTW.
I mean some of those Neanderthal chicks from are pretty hot!
I think we should take nominations for most actively self-deceptive commenter.
Whenever Revenant winks at me [ :) ] I get the impression I'm talking to a used-car salesman. I almost wait for a finger pointing at me and a smirk, combined with a claim of "You've got that killer instinct I'm looking for, Wilson!"
But never business. Lol.
When's the last time a poor person hired you to do something? Duh. :)
There's just no reason to care if a business is run by a wealthy person or not.
Anyway, bored now.
Sixties cavewomen beat all other cavewomen hands down.
You ever seen Clan of the Cave Bear?
So not hot.
But then, let's switch things up and just see what some old guys are capable of with young, not-so-troglodyte women.
A little somethin' to warm the hearts of my conservative friends as they get up in years.
:)
Whenever Revenant winks at me [ :) ] I get the impression I'm talking to a used-car salesman.
No, no. Not a used car salesman -- some of *them* are probably genuinely trying to convince you to buy something.
I, on the other hand, am just fucking with you for my own amusement. Thus the smiley. :)
When's the last time a poor person hired you to do something? Duh. :)
I didn't say poor people were in business. I said sociopaths are.
There's just no reason to care if a business is run by a wealthy person or not.
It's actually true, if you cared about it, that a decent business wants to know that you'll be able to gain the respect and cooperation of people who earn less than you (i.e. report to you) as well. Or as your kind call them, "peons". (Or maybe there's a more Randian term that you'd prefer).
Anyway, bored now.
Of course you are. You're arguing with yourself and answering your own questions.
:)
:) :)
:) :) :)
:) :) :) :)
:) :) :) :) :)
:) :) :) :) :) :)
:) :) :) :) :) :) :)
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
As for OSHA, I saw this humorous caricature called "Cowboy After OSHA" on the wall of my mechanic--a self-employed type. But you see, guys like Ritmo can't see that aspect of OSHA. So why do small businesses see it? Why is Obama considered at war with small business? These are very serious questions in today's economy.
I, on the other hand, am just fucking with you for my own amusement. Thus the smiley. :)
A used car salesman type's way of admitting his own fundamental dishonesty. Cushioning the blow of his love of lying with cute smirks and other assorted bullshit.
Anyway, it's all in reference to your own personal ideologies, so it's good to know that you're incapable of taking even that seriously.
Someone incapable of taking anything seriously should be screened for sociopathy. Seriously, they can only feel to be in two "modes": Endless, freely mendacious manipulation, and intense, even murderous rage.
It's interesting how far I tempt you to push the limits of the former in you.
Do a GOOGLE images search on "Ted Bundy Smile" and you'll come up with the characterless, exaggerated flatness of the Rev emoticon.
:)
Moving to the African bush to study Americans is, perhaps, not the smartest or most effective choice to make.
A little too busy amusing yourself, Rev. Try fucking around without an emoticon. It's harder. You have to actually be witty and make some sense.
Hopelly not too many white people die in Obama's new war in Syria.
Did Fox News make him do this too?
I guess when the scandals were getting a little hot, President Foodstamps decides to kill some sandy complexioned people.
Don't worry, they breed like rabbits unlike those evil white people.
Hopelly not too many white people die in Obama's new war in Syria.
Did Fox News make him do this too?
Very Kennedyesque of him to start with just advisors. I wonder if the other JFK advised him?
Living in L.A., I know a busload of illegal aliens. They are both hardworking AND benefit sucking. You can't blame them. If you could just walk across an imaginary line, and get a job paying 5 times what you made in Mexico, pay few taxes, have your kids go to much nicer schools where they would become much better off Americans than they ever could be Mexicans, have your wife and kids subsidized with food stamps, housing assistance, great medical care for free, and various types of cash assistance, why the hell would you not do it.
It's up to the U.S. to put it's citizens' money out of reach. You can't leave your wallet on a park bench with a sticky note that says "help yourself" and expect it to be there the next day.
Very Kennedyesque of him to start with just advisors.
At least we have al Qaeda on our side. How can we fail?
"At least we have al Qaeda on our side"
Well, it wouldn't be the first time we killed a shitload of the enemy only to end up allies with them afterward. We just need the Navy to go find and haul up Zombie Bin Laden, put him in a tux, sit him on a battleship deck, and get him to sign an unconditional surrender.
It is genuinely distressing to me that you idiots don't get this. A constant influx of cheap labor is not the dream of any leftist on this planet. Do you know anything about 'left' ideology? Literally anything at all? Where the fuck do you get these ideas?
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, is it ARM? Let's try this again. Pay attention to the bolded part of the following sentence.
The Republicans want the cheap labor, the Democrats want the future welfare voters.
Now where in the above sentence, AT ANY PART, did I say that a constant influx of cheap labor is what the LEFT wants? I attributed it ENTIRELY to the right, you blithering moron.
Fuck me.
I want to know about all your sex and I want it now.
Inga, when was the last time you got some?
Meade and Althouse do you actually have sex?
The rest of you oldies who have been married forever is porking still in the picture? And if it is, is it adventerous or mandatory or boring or what? Is it difficult for some of you older men to get an erection or to shoot a load? If so, what mechanisms to you have or ingest to make it happen? Do you require doing it in the dark with certain paremeters?
Let's talk about sex.
We just need the Navy to go find and haul up Zombie Bin Laden, put him in a tux, sit him on a battleship deck, and get him to sign an unconditional surrender.
As said, no problemo. This is literally and figuratively our road to Damascus. We're all Islamists now and the Islamists are neocons. Teamwork!
..and now in CO - illegals can have drivers licenses. Thanks, democrats.
You're welcome, April.
Now try caring about something that matters, for a change.
I Callahan said...
The Republicans want the cheap labor, the Democrats want the future welfare voters.
Now where in the above sentence, AT ANY PART, did I say that a constant influx of cheap labor is what the LEFT wants? I attributed it ENTIRELY to the right, you blithering moron.
OK. Finally a bit of passion, ill-directed but I'll take anything at this late stage. I was beginning to consider responding to Titus's posts.
We appear to be in complete agreement except possibly over the issue of ultimate causation. Democrats and Democrat policies do not cause illegal immigrants to enter the country. They enter the country because they know they can work illegally. They can only work illegally if someone is willing to provide illegal jobs. We all know who those someones are. By and large they are not Democrats though I have no doubt that many Democrats benefit from cheap maid and lawn services.
Now try caring about something that matters, for a change.
Like taxpayer subsidized car insurance for semi-undocumented, quasi-illegal, recently licensed drivers del los coches en el estado de Colorado! Si, se puede!
AprilApple said...
..and now in CO - illegals can have drivers licenses. Thanks, democrats.
You are confusing proximate and ultimate causality. Do Democrats pander to hispanics, of course they do. But why are these illegal immigrants here in the first place, to take jobs illegally provided by businesses owned by predominantly Republican leaning individuals.
How would the concept of penny-wise pound-foolishness mean anything if it weren't for grubbers like Nomennovum?
ARM, I'd like to see some links that support your belief that those illegal jobs are provided by mostly Republican owned businesses.
How would the concept of penny-wise pound-foolishness mean anything if it weren't for grubbers like Nomennovum?
You ask a question that cannot be answered, because it is a non sequitur. I only suggest the dire need to insure los pobres que ahora conducen coches.
You know there are plenty of Democrats who own businesses and love cheap labor too, probably pretty close to the number or Republicans and ever more than in places like California. Some of those business owners are even illegal aliens themselves. There are likewise lots of rightwing people who hate the influx of cheap labor and how it affects their pay and taxes. It's not just simple left and right. I would say it's more like people who are sticklers for rules versus squishy types. I'm both, and consequently quite torn.
I hate that some people can jump in line, or just take things they don't contribute to, or are not entitled to, but, I also know many of these people, and they are good people who would love to follow the rules. Most would be happy to give up the freebies in exchange for just being legal and do things like anyone else. It's hard for me to fault people who live in the hell that is much of Mexico today for taking the easy solution to most of their problems of poverty, violence, and hopelessness, especially if the the U.S. government is practically begging them to take advantage of it. I blame us as much as them, and it's mostly dems who push the benefits.
So half the those using the cheap labor are Dems, and 90% of those pushing the benefits are Dems, and most of the confidence illegals have that they may be legal someday comes from Dems' rhetoric and policies.
I'd say Dems are encouraging it more than Republicans who if nothing else, at least talk the talk of stopping it.
Meade: Those things have very little to do with white people. Western civ was created mostly by people who never thought of themselves as white but Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Jewish, Slavic, Latin, and other ethnic and linguistic groups.
Celts thought of themselves as Celts relative to Germanic people, and Germans to Latins, etc. When global contacts expanded and became more common, they had both smaller, tribal identities, and wider identities relative to people even farther afield - i.e.,as Europeans, relative to other broad global population groupings. And yeah, they thought of themselves as white people, pace Revenant's PC historical reconstructionism, and did it a long time previous to "80 years ago". (And sorry, Roughcoat, but nobody thought the Irish "weren't white" back in your great-grandparents' day. Sheesh, the nonsense people will swallow from academic clowns.)
People have nested identities. Duh. What's with this insane denial of the obvious? Do people here honestly believe that some Yorkshireman in 1600 really thought he was no more closely related to a Savoyard (culturally or racially) than he was to a Japanese or Chinese? (Or any Japanese thought that way, in the other direction?) That nobody with an ethnic identity in Europe thought of himself as belonging to a larger European civilization, distinct from other, non-European civilizations? Or for that matter, that white Americans 100 years ago didn't conceive of themselves as members of a white race (and not just relative to non-white Americans), or did not consciously consider themselves a part of European civilization - you know, that civilization made up of all the rest of the white people in the world? Really? And your basis for believing this wildly ahistorical fairy tale is that there were intra-white prejudices and rivalries?
Face palm, eye roll, snort...
Do these affiliations and identifications shift through history? Sure. (As always, it's a matter of mixing or isolation of breeding populations. A thousand years from now who knows what humanity will look like.) Does racial (i.e., genetic) identification always supersede other identifications? No. But that doesn't mean that it is meaningless or arbitrary, biologically as well as culturally.
But right now, there is such a thing as "white people", and they sure as hell aren't some arbitrary social construct. As a genetically identifiable group, whites are, what? about 8-10% of humans? Even without genetic tests, they tend to be distinguishable by the remarkably arrogant belief that their recently adopted, pious little beliefs about race really, really matter to the rest of the humans on the planet. Freakin' supremacists.
Meade: Those things have very little to do with white people. Western civ was created mostly by people who never thought of themselves as white but Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Jewish, Slavic, Latin, and other ethnic and linguistic groups.
Meade actually said this? Hilarious how close he gets to knocking on the door of a historical truth while ignoring the elephant right in the middle of the room. The distinction of "white" didn't start to matter until the Age of Discovery brought Europeans into more frequent contact with sub-Saharan Africans and then, interaction and engagement with their slave trade. Defining groups into "racial" categories came into vogue and was used to bolster social observations, i.e. "Why are we Europeans (white races) able to build huge ships and cities and they don't? Must be some sort of inherent difference that makes us better. And, oh yeah, it helps to divide them into the slaves and ourselves into their masters."
All the groups he mentions had a concept of self-nationhood or distinctiveness going back, in some cases, to two thousand years before this nonsense or more.
But of course, Meade is a bit naive or conservative or historically blind. "White" versus "black" versus hispanic are the salient categories today because four hundred years of North American and European history made it so. Maybe he might want to learn it. If it's not too much of a bother, of course.
You know there are plenty of Democrats who own businesses and love cheap labor too, probably pretty close to the number or Republicans and ever more than in places like California
CA has about 25% of the illegal population. And I don't think there are more than 3 conservatives in CA all told.
Also, as Ann Coulter pointed out, a lot of rich people in the country are Democrats. If they are the ownership class, why would they oppose illegal immigration? With all the forced spending by the state, their companies and companies they have interests benefit.
Meanwhile, I have to be careful. I do not blame the illegal, though things like "La Raza" and "ReConquista", the gangs, the dependence on welfare, the high out of wedlock birth-rate make me want to blame someone, because the end result is not pretty. CA is going down.
Regarding putting the wallet on the table, exactly. You can't have open borders and a huge welfare state for sure. But even simple things like hospitals have to provide life saving care is bad, as the hospitals merely pass on the costs. The whole government intervention things is broken.
And yeah, they thought of themselves as white people, pace Revenant's PC historical reconstructionism, and did it a long time previous to "80 years ago". (And sorry, Roughcoat, but nobody thought the Irish "weren't white" back in your great-grandparents' day. Sheesh, the nonsense people will swallow from academic clowns.)
Undoubtedly many things look like nonsense to those who have not learned to read. I never said nobody thought of white people as a group and never said the Irish weren't white.
I mocked the idea that people 80 years ago thought there was a "common white culture". Go read newspapers from the time -- in between all the "yellow peril" and anti-black/anti-Mexican hysteria is plenty of hysteria about dangerous alien cultures like... Germans. Jews. Italians. Russians.
Tell a WASP Baptist in 1933 that there's no cultural difference between him and a Russian Jew and he'll laugh in your face. After he's done kicking your ass. :)
CA has about 25% of the illegal population. And I don't think there are more than 3 conservatives in CA all told.
Then you're obviously unqualified to say anything about California. There are more conservatives in California -- in absolute numbers -- than there are in Texas.
Well duh. Over the last three score, white people love dey Pill. Unto oblivion. Being anti-natal is uniquely SWPL.
To monomaniacally blame this outcome on Democrats is both delusional and self-defeating. You know who the enemy is here but seem unwilling to address reality.
I agree with that. Bush could have done something about illegal immigration, but didn't. In fact, when it came to domestic policy, I thought Bush was more like a liberal. In fact, it seems like a lot of Republicans are.
My theory is it is almost impossible to get back to a system of individual self-reliance without a massive hit to the economy. Like what's happening in Greece, Italy, etc., with Austerity.
For some people who imagine themselves superior in duh history thingies, even ancient people were well aware that there were different races in the world. The Europeans didn't suddenly discover colored people during the age of discovery. The Egyptians knew, as did the ancient Greeks, the Arabs knew yellow to Black, and I'm sure someone mentioned it to Alexander the Great while he collected souvenirs through the middle east. The Romans conquered many "colorful" people. The Mongols certainly let the Europeans know they were not alone.
I bet white people knew they were white for quite a long time.
There are 3 main drivers of illegal immigration. Before anyone starts with the usual names I don't blame the people who come. I would and maybe will partake in some of the freebies too:
1. The men get paid more here. They are also appreciated by employers because the younger Hispanics work much harder than most male millennials in this country in the low skill fields. Most of the males in my and the younger generation coming out of our public education system are whiny metro bitches who don't know how to work. Good jobs and good money here, usually under the table and tax free.
2. The women come here to have kids and get food stamps and welfare. The Department of Agriculture has been advertising heavily in Mexico. I know a lot of families that get money both working and from handouts. They aren't bad people. I might be looking to get food stamps too.
3. Free school. Free Health Care. Relatively safe here. Mexico is a shit hole with well armed drug gangs Obama likes to sell guns to. Ransoms and kidnappings are epidemic down there. I know where I would go if I had a choice.
Then you're obviously unqualified to say anything about California. There are more conservatives in California -- in absolute numbers -- than there are in Texas.
You are right, I haven't lived here all my life and I have absolutely no idea what's going on.
That's why California has a super-majority of Conservatives in the assembly, and we elected an Ultra Conservative governor to lead the state, who would never do idiotic things such as push for a $100B HSR project (oh wait, it's now $66B not so fast train), nor mandate 25% of CA's energy will come from renewables by 2020 (excluding hydro and nucelar). Nor are their sanctuary cities.
That's why the enviro groups aren't aligning against fracking in Monterey county, with it's estimated 3 years of oil supply for the whole country.
That's why farmers in the valley get all the water they need, as opposed to being redistributed to some fish or other. And that's why CA is investing new water resources.
I must be thinking of TX, clearly =).
AReasonableMan said...
AprilApple said...
..and now in CO - illegals can have drivers licenses. Thanks, democrats.
You are confusing proximate and ultimate causality. Do Democrats pander to hispanics, of course they do. But why are these illegal immigrants here in the first place, to take jobs illegally provided by businesses owned by predominantly Republican leaning individuals.
6/13/13, 8:58 PM
Democrats want more poor people. They have turned the Black population into a permanent underclass that votes for them. They force them into shitty public schools. They make up for the shitty education with affirmative action which Black people become dependent on.
They are doing the same thing to Hispanics. Bilingual education really means "don't learn English so you can be stuck in low skill jobs."
Because they need affirmative action to make up for a lack of training due to the shitty education they are stuck in low paying jobs. Throw in some welfare and food stamps to cover the gap and keep them in poverty and dependent on the government. Add in the stupid party republican establishment as a foil and voila permanent majority for the democrats and a welfare state.
They didn't care about dividing up the bulk of their interactions based on great, big, overarching "racial" categories until they built big ships with which to explore and divvy up territory into much larger units to conquer such as "continents" - including two or three entirely new and undiscovered ones, you pseudo-industrialist poseur.
Meade's right. Before then, Romans, Jews, Greeks, Germans, etc., cared more about how they dealt with each other than how they could aggregate together into a "white" grouping over which to ponder their superiority over a supposedly inferior "dark" grouping. There was no white fuehrer of antiquity, you dope, preaching on about which group was biologically best. Or purer. That shit came later. The strongest empire up til then was Rome - a melting pot of sallow to heavily tanned pigmentation, which if anything saw the lighter blonde and ginger savages of the North as being at least as barbaric as sub-Saharans, and certainly more barbaric than their allied, politically related, dark bronze Ptolemaic Egyptians. Which is probably why honkey rednecks like you are descended from them, lol.
Can't argue with you Ritmo. You clearly have first hand knowledge of racism. It's almost like you feel it personally in a heartfelt way, while the rest of us can only read about - if we could read at all.
Nope. I just know history. And respect it.
But you might have a point. The Romans were much more civilized than you and apparently had good standing to fear the barbarism of the dead, frozen North. I guess you're just not proud enough of your raping and pillaging Viking roots to feel less insecure about that, though.
Come on, Bag. Take pride in all the rapes that resulted in your genetic legacy. Something biological has to account for your sociopathy, no?
You had no way of knowing it, but that's very offensive to me. My whole family was raped by a band of albino hermaphrodites...twice in one day. Despite that, I was taught not to hate them. After they climbed off my parents, Mom and Dad told me never to attack albinos or hermaphrodites, and not to talk about them like you do complete strangers, apparently for fun. Did you learn that in one them book things with the history stuff in it.
Hahahahaha! Yes, Bag O, it is best to laugh at your family's tragic history! Much better than crying!
Ain't the real tragedy that with all that money, you still haven't found a way to make brains available for sale?
Perhaps you could found your own medical institute, a la Howard Hughes, and fund research scientists to find a way to make room in your skull for one of those new fangled apparatuses that yer family called a functioning noggin'.
Hughes had good redneck stock, like you. Why can't you make yourself useful like he did? Don't worry, the OCD isn't contagious. Just don't rub too vigorously at the scars near the base of your neck where the bolts will go.
The last of the inbred Ptolemies was a red headed, Greek , White woman. Any look at her schnozola would confirm her hyper Saharan heritage.
The Germans overwhelmed most of Northern and Western Europe, including Iberia. Poor Romans, I wonder if they were subjected to "Nam Germanos, torcular II." before the end.
Oh ok, ampersand. And was she as fair as Christina Hendricks, too? They must have never let that bitch out into the hot, Egyptian sun. Didn't know you could discern skin color by nose size. Sammy Davis and Bill Cosby will be very pissed to know that.
Good thing those Romans never adopted Teutonic political norms.
Tanned skin doesn't change one's heritage.
It makes it more likely over time that the rulers of that land wouldn't have looked like sunburnt pussies, though.
Greeks are not very light-skinned people to begin with, you might have noticed. And living for several hundred years amongst others in different climes tends to do interesting things to the way people look.
She probably didn't look like Tutankhamun, but she was no Raggedy Ann either.
Modern Greeks\= Ancient Greeks.
Alexander was a blond. This woman didn't look like Tutankhamun either
Guess Democrats and Progressives will never give up racism and tribalism. Watching Ritmo go on and on about racial characteristics is sad. At least my kids will be able to claim Asian decent as my wife is from Hong Kong. Democrats hate asians though, especially black democrats. Maybe they will be able to claim some other aggrieved group. Democrats are always making up new victim groups.
You are right, I haven't lived here all my life and I have absolutely no idea what's going on.
At least one of those statements is true.
That's why California has a super-majority of Conservatives in the assembly
Please consult a dictionary to learn what the phrase "absolute numbers" means.
There are something like ten million conservatives in California. They are just heavily outnumbered. Saying illegal immigrants in California can't be employed by conservatives because there aren't enough conservatives here to do it is clearly retarded. This is especially true considering that the rural, agricultural regions that disproportionately employ the illegals skew Republican -- if you get away from the coasts, it is hard to tell you're NOT in Texas, culture-wise.
That being said, obviously there are plenty of left-wingers employing illegals here, too. It wouldn't be election season if at least a half-dozen candidates didn't get busted for having undocumented nannies.
Yo! Mr. Educated, self-appointed anti-racist (who obsesses on Nefertiti's alleged caucasian/asian? attributes):
It was that defender of the superiority of capitalists, Baggie, who said color-consciousness was important. I argued back, but as a connie I understand you might be terrible at what we tribalists refer to as "cause and effect".
Also, the original point, that of how nations weren't race-fixated until a few centuries ago, was Meade's. I was merely explaining, (while agreeing), why that is. Pretty remarkable that you'd object and see that as racist.
Actually, it's pretty astounding to see how much of any problem you'll project onto me. But then, as a connie, you don't see problems - just opportunities to exploit for your own personal gain.
Hopefully your kids will take better care of their spelling than you will stock of their "decent".
The flux of cheap labor into this country is driven by big business and agribusiness. Nothing you can say is going to change that fact.
A bold assertion. Can you back it up with facts?
The city o Chicago has the second highest urban hispanic population outside of L.A..
What do both cities have in common?
Keep in ind that Illinois always had a large seasonal hispanic population due to large agricultural businessses, but these were contract laborers. The same people year after year.
So what caused the huge influx of non contract hispanics into Chicago and Cook County?
Achilles @ 6/13/13, 10:37 PM and @
6/14/13, 12:28 AM is on the money regarding the intentional cultural isolation (soft segregation) of Hispanics, and other Democratic *plantation* occupants.
Give us a few more years of this note management crap and we, too, will be like the UK, France, and Sweden with their un-assimilated work forces...lighting cars afire means we have to build or import more cars, so its all good.
note = vote
Dang.
The only thing we have left is Honey Boo Boo.
Egad. Where can I get my skin dyed black?
"people ... had both smaller, tribal identities, and wider identities relative to people even farther afield..."
Like how upper-class Englishmen, back in the 1700's and 1800's, would embark on the "Grand Tour" of sites they viewed as foundational and seminal to their culture, places like Borobudur and Great Zimbabwe.
Please consult a dictionary to learn what the phrase "absolute numbers" means.
Lighten up. Please read the dictionary and learn what "hyperbole" is. And so far as absolute numbers is concerned, it doesn't matter, now does it? CA is a leftist state. Even the libertarians are leftist, aligning with stupid ideas like "Let all the immigrants in," never realizing you can't apply libertarian principles given the current state of the country.
Yet, they continue droning on and on, trying to make their ideas work in the disjointed system that has become the US.
Shocker. In excess of 300 comments on a post about the white population.
Tells something about nature of the community.
harrogate said...
Shocker. In excess of 300 comments on a post about the white population ... Tells something about nature of the community.
Speak for yourself. My first wife and my child are not white. And you?
"Tells something about nature of the community."
Don't repress your own nature - feel free to tell us what that something is, h.
harrogate said...
Shocker. In excess of 300 comments on a post about the white population.
I used to think harrogate had at least some itegrity and made an effort to be a decent person. Now we see he's devolved to garage's style of substanceless insults based on his own ignorance.
I can admit I was wrong.
Meade,
Not that you actually givea flying frog's ass about my thoughts on the matter, but in truth, I'm not entirely sure what it says, that regulars here invest so much in posts about whiteness.
But it is not without meaning.
harrogate said...
I'm not entirely sure what it says, that regulars here invest so much in posts about whiteness.
Of course most of the thread is not about whiteness but rather about immigration, politics, and economics. What does it say about a commenter who ignores facts in order to make inferences of racism? Everything anyone needs to know about that commenter.
"Of course most of the thread is not about whiteness but rather about immigration, politics, and economics."
Nice try but no. Most of the thread takes it as a matter of course that the relative health of the latter three is contingent upon their engagement with the former.
Liberals come to threads like this to confirm their prejudices, regardless of reality.
harrogate said...
Nice try but no. Most of the thread takes it as a matter of course that the relative health of the latter three is contingent upon their engagement with the former.
It's hard to believe anyone could honestly come to this conclusion. Some leftists derive so much of their self worth from the belief that right = racist they can't understand anything else.
Of course most of the thread is not about whiteness but rather about immigration, politics, and economics.
Any thoughts as to how the first topic transitioned into a discussion of the latter? Surely the fairest of moderators would have deleted such comments if they were completely unrelated.
Some leftists derive so much of their self worth from the belief that right = racist they can't understand anything else.
Oh come now. We know they're about more than just that. ;-)
"Any thoughts as to how the first topic transitioned into a discussion of the latter? Surely the fairest of moderators would have deleted such comments if they were completely unrelated."
Heh.
In truth any objective reader who saw the exchange between myself and Marshal, would go back to the post itself and then read about ten comments in and say "gee, Marshal's not looking too good so far," and then by the time they got to the end of the thread comments they would wonder what in hell Marshal was smoking.
As to Meade, what can one say? I have not yet seen him spar with a commenter and come out looking sensible.
Spar? Is that what we're supposed to be doing here? I guess I really do need to one of these days learn the rules.
As for investment in posts about whiteness, not to mention giving a flying frog's pompous ass, a casual review shows me we nearly all must bow to harrogate's humorless thoughts on the matter. What ho and pip pip!
harrogate said...
In truth any objective reader who saw the exchange between myself and Marshal, would go back to the post itself and then read about ten comments in and say "gee, Marshal's not looking too good so far,
I see you're still confusing life with the drum circle where the leftmost position wins by acclamation rather than evidence. You probably should just stay away from forums where people are capable of rational thought, they're not a good fit for you.
Really all you have to do is read the post and then the comments. It isn't so hard. Try it.
Meade, don't worry, there are no "rules" that insist you make sense. I'm sure you'll carry on just fine.
harrogate said...
Really all you have to do is read the post and then the comments. It isn't so hard. Try it.
It's a different process for those of us who don't simply assume everyone who disagrees with us is racist. I agree your method is easier. And that's good for you since evaluating evidence and maintaining a grip on reality is beyond your grasp.
"Spar? Is that what we're supposed to be doing here? I guess I really do need to one of these days learn the rules."
Think of it as a milder, gentler form of comment deletion.
It's a different process for those of us who don't simply assume everyone who disagrees with us is racist.
Is there any chance you wouldn't mind providing a view of yours that you feel is most likely to be labeled as racist, and why anyone challenging it as such is wrong?
Please don't feel afraid to pick the most controversial one. We are trying to get at "truth" here, and not just expedient or trendy political gains, right?
It seems to me that what women's birth choices are may only be a symptom of the problem whites face throughout the western world. It would, however, be fantastic to hear what young men's birth and marriage choices and trends are, which is strangely absent from the conversation. I'm sure an honest survey would find similarly devastating future implications for our community. It almost seems like a self imposed mass suicide. But it really is not self imposed.
Here's the thing. Our lives and our communities are being destroyed in this country by the decayed culture of exploitation and bigotry which comes from ruling class elites and multinational corporations; we suffer from being seduced into the lie of living a luxurious life (so we can intoxicate ourselves into the delusion that we, too, are members of the aristocracy or are celebrities); But, this is mere fantasy, and it is a life that could not possibly include children and marriage because we're told that it will just get in the way of our materialism and our deluded sense of freedom.
We are also told that our culture and communities are evil when in fact it is the culture of ruling class elites that is evil, sexist, racist, homophobic and the like, not that of people whose communities are characterized by grinding their lives away working to keep wealthy people wealthy. No, the only true division in this society is that between the ruling classes and everyone else. There is no other.
We live in a society and culture that is probably the most universally unnatural, inorganic, unhappy and toxic to the ends of multiplying and being fruitful with societal vibrancy than any I remember or that I've ever read about--and such an alarming, historically unprecedented statistic may well bear that out. I mean, when whole races of people are dying off, it does not mean they're doing well and are vibrant. They're not. Biologically, this would be considered the highest level of emergencies. We need to open our eyes to this reality and to exactly why is this happening.
In my view, every single social malady that effects our communities ultimately derives from the devastatingly corrupt culture of aristocrats and the ruling classes, not the communities of hard working people. History shows that the process of democratizing and opening up our society has essentially equated to the cultural transmission of elite culture, ideals and beliefs and practices from aristocrat society to the communities of "commoners." So, regular people slowly become exposed to the decadence and decay of that culture, progressively taking this culture on as their own and living a delusional life of celebrity, freedom and voracious bigotry. But this is not our bigotry! It is theirs.
As long as we continue to delude ourselves into thinking that their culture is out culture; that their battles are our battles: that their maladies, hatreds, sexism, bigotry and division are natural divisions within our communities, then not only have we been deceived in a historic and herculean way, but there will be no women's rights, no mean's rights; there will be no racial equality and our communities will continue to die off.
I think Americans and western people across the globe must realize that ruling class culture has poisoned our communities with all of their ailments, hatreds and exploitation. We've come to accept this evil as our own (and are often blamed for and made to pay for those evils), and we've allowed this plague culture to alienate us from one another. These are not our societal evils; they belong to the ruling classes who use these divisions as a way to control and dominate the population. This process is what is killing us.
Post a Comment