You are a person of Wealth and Taste. You think every Cop is a Criminal … and all the Sinners Saints. I’d like to have some Sympathy, but what Puzzles me … is the nature of your Game.
Lol! A conservative seeking a heart! How unusual! My “Game” is to not be bated by your idiotic misrepresentations of moronic generalizations so pathetically inaccurate that even you do not believe that all liberals think all cops or criminals. And if you do actually believe that then I’m afraid I can’t teach you anything you failed to learn by high school.
In case you missed it, the beginning and ending of the OP was referenced from a song.
The song lyrics sung in the 1st person, was by a “man of wealth and taste”. That person also said in the lyrics, “Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name.” (Turns out, that man singing was, in the lyrics, “Satan”.)
Thus klinko is calling his fictional “Liberal” that man, aka “Satan”.
So klinko,
- Liberals are not Satan.
- Few if any Liberals think that ALL cops are criminals, but Liberals pretty much have the intellectual integrity to recognize that some cops ARE criminals.
- If by "the nature of the game" of Liberals, you mean you are confused as to their goals and motivations, their "game" is about confronting and ameliorating social and economic injustice and gross disparities.
@ steveklinko - So what is your game.
Does honesty have any place in steveklinko’s game?
Does integrity have any place in steveklinko’s game?
@ steveklinko - Are you capable of recognizing your own mistakes and learning from them?
I know some of the extremist liberals who do think all cops are criminals. They use the fallacy of going back in time, to when police were created, to round up slaves. It’s exactly as frustrating when Sam Harris says that the philosophy of delegating violence to the state is one of the most important improvements in society in history. Both of them are technically correct and both of them miss the point, the issues we need to be discussing, by a mile.
In case you missed it, the beginning and ending of the OP was referenced from a song.Glad you pointed that out. I was blown away by the poetic cadence of Klinko's post which was well-written. I was jealous.
If anyone wanted to honestly find out what the word “liberal” means or the word conservative" they should pick up a dictionary (because a dictionary is the only legitimate place where words are defined) and read their attached definitions. I challenge anyone who calls himself a conservative to do this. Most, after reading what these words actually mean would likely prefer to be called liberal rather than conservative. This will never happen with most “conservatives” because their brains are in lockdown mode. Most of them haven’t had a fresh insightful thought in decades.
The true irony is that Jesus was very liberal and the most conservative people are often Bible thumpers. The same is true of Reagan. He was pretty centrist, but say his name in the middle of hard-right conservatives and they start speaking in tongues.
I really don’t understand what it is about Reagan that makes conservatives so hard. Was it the failed economic policy that they keep trying over and over again to this day? Probably. I can’t imagine it was the Iran-Contra Affair. Or the fact that the coward let another man take the fall for it. Maybe it was his secret work to kill legislation to remove lead from gasoline AFTER it was shown to be having an impact on the health of the ENTIRE world. Or maybe it’s just because they saw him on TV before he was president. That does jive with more recent data. If he was on TV then he’s the greatest president EVER!
George Herbert Walker Bush (W’s father) was also a centrist. He was a good POTUS.
(His son was politically to his right. Far to the right, when you consider he was often a puppet of Cheney.)
But even W (who did screw our country over with the Great Recession and the Iraq war), would not have so ignorantly and so selfishly screwed our Nation over the way that the tRump has in this time of COVID.
All the window breakers … and all the building burners … will certainly vote for … can you guess his name? He would be pleased to meet you … and introduce himself … if he could only remember his name.
But even W (who did screw our country over with the Great Recession and the Iraq war...The pointless Iraq War, yes. But the Great Recession started right after the twin towers fell. And given that it's Congress who has the power of the purse, the president really doesn't have all that much power to affect the economy. So I would give him a pass on that one.
But the Great Recession started right after the twin towers fell.Rewrite history, anyone? No it was over 4 yrs later during W's 2nd term. As I recall W was an advocate for home ownership for all. Improper loans were made and corrupt financial players made out big time with insane financial practices going on under the administration's nose.
And given that it’s Congress who has the power of the purse, the president really doesn’t have all that much power to affect the economy.There were certainly laws that might have been passed that may have allowed us to avoid that Deep Recession of 2007-2009. But here's something that the administrative Feds could have done, IOW, "W" himself could have advocated that the Federal Reserve "stem the tide of toxic mortgages" before the bottom fell out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Recession
It took several years of toxic Republican economic practices to destroy the economy left to W by Bill C. There was indeed, a major blow to the stock market, briefly after 9/11. Perhaps another POTUS would not have missed the warning signs that 9/11 was coming. But even so, immediately after 9/11, “W” had an<b> 86% Approval Rating. </b>What do you think a POTUS can do with an 86% Approval Rating<b>?</b>
And the 9/11 economic blow (which was a tiny downward blip compared to the economic devastation of this year) was pretty much absorbed over 2002.
Anyway, I suggest that “W” was an integral factor in the later occurrence of the Great Recession.
All the window breakers … and all the building burners … will certainly vote for …I suspect that most of the minority people that broke windows and burned buildings are beyond believing in voting.
Now there may well have been some alt-rightist type extremists ALSO involved in instigating looting and destruction. (Did you not notice that the breaking of windows in a lot of businesses was started by individual white men?) Those fellows, I suspect, will vote for the tRump.
You should really vote for Joe Biden, klinko. If you want to steer clear of the candidate who is truly, cognitively unable to effectively lead our country through crises, that means VOTE Biden/Harris 2020. The guy in power now has brought us the violence that you pretend to be concerned about. The tRump has brought us a horridly divided nation. The tRump has presided over a monumental FAILURE with respect to dealing with COVID-19. The tRump, is “presiding” over this nation RIGHT NOW. The economy sucks for the common man, but is just fine for the filthy rich, right now, under the tRump. We have lost credibility around the world with other nations, due to the idiocies of the tRump.
It can all turn around if we have an overwhelming victory by Biden/Harris, in November.
Otherwise get ready for what will be the Divided States of the tRump Autocracy. No more USA. It will be more to the tune of DStRA.
If the tRump remains in power, I imagine there will be MUCH civil unrest, violent insurrections, Marshall Law, many deaths of protestors, mass incarcerations, requiring prison camps. And the tRump will try to arrange 4 or 8 more years beyond a 2nd term.
So I suggest that you vote for Biden/Harris 2020, cause Joe is not the Satan character in this story.
All the police assassins … and the death to police chanters … will certainly vote for … can you guess his name? He would be pleased to meet you and introduce himself … if only you answer his plea: What’s my name? #Trump #Biden #Election #Politics
All the police assassins … and the death to police chanters … will certainly vote for …Bullcrap! Those people will very likely NOT vote at all, because they have cynically given up on non-violence. They don't believe voting will bring justice.
But you, klinko, are being coy with your implied lies about Biden. A vote for Biden means LESS DEATH to police, because Biden accepts that there is a problem with cops killing people of color, unjustifiably. You change that and the violent ones have no more motivation for violence.
Deny it and vote for the tRump and the problem goes on.
Bullcrap! Those people will very likely NOT vote at all, because they have cynically given up on non-violence. They don’t believe voting will bring justice.But you, klinko, are being coy with your implied lies about Biden. A vote for Biden means LESS DEATH to police, because Biden accepts that there is a problem with cops killing people of color, unjustifiably. You change that and the violent ones have no more motivation for violence.
Deny it and vote for the tRump and the problem goes on.
Woo … Wooooo …
Woo … Wooooo …You don't say? How did you become so articulate? Listening to tRump hack speeches?
That song by the Rolling Stone was one of the worst efforts the band made, moronic twaddle leftover in Mickey’s scrambled mind from a nightmare LSD trip gone bad perhaps. They were a good rock band with some excellent tunes and their best was “Gimme Shelter”, a great antiwar song. "Sympathy for the Devil would be more humanely offered to listeners of this noise masquerading as a song I’d rather hear the sound of two elephants grunting and F----ing in a swamp all night long than one verse of this mindless piffle.
You change that and the violent ones have no more motivation for violence.This sounds like a threat. It won't work against folks who tamed the west.
This sounds like a threat. It won’t work against folks who tamed the west. -- SreeI keep thinking I've run out of things to be shocked by, but this one is really confusing, and it's not just Sree. Much more sane and intelligent people are having trouble with the concept of self defense.
It’s not the same as imminent threat, but if people in your group are under constant attack, there is a point where it is moral to defend yourself against the group that is attacking yours. Rules of engagement still apply, but putting up a fight is not a threat under those circumstances.