The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)

[Prozac]

13 hours ago, Sim said:

🙄  Because senses distinguishes between illegal and citizens, right?  And that data is not used to redistribute house members..... 

Might want to look into enrolling in some continuing education:

[Sim]

17 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Yea man, because it’s mandated in the Constitution to count all free persons.

Free persons , not fucking illegals. CA has been stealing how many seats in the House due to this? 

 

But I know, lefts moto -  under any means necessary - you will lie, steal and cheat as long as your "interests" will be satisfied.  

@Prozac Suck a dick. 

[nsplayr]

Are illegal immigrants slaves or something? Because that’s not allowed anymore. If they are we seriously should take action, you’re right!

Free persons in the context of no slavery and no 3/5ths compromise = everyone who lives there, period.

I did not make up this rule nor is it impossible to change if you’d like, I’m just telling you that’s what is in the constitution & subsequent judicial rulings about the census.

[Prozac]

2 hours ago, Sim said:

@Prozac Suck a dick.

Wow, zinger bro. 

[brabus]

22 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Once again, the right wishing for a civil war.

Don’t paint with a broad brush - I’m willing to bet the number of people actually wanting a civil war are in the hundreds, e.g. not even a blip on the radar. 

[Disco_Nav963]

26 minutes ago, brabus said:

Don’t paint with a broad brush - I’m willing to bet the number of people actually wanting a civil war are in the hundreds, e.g. not even a blip on the radar. 

[DFRESH]

Admin note - Filthy_Liar went off the deep end. I was allowing most of his posts until they were all complete crazy-town, "shoot em' up", civil war nonsense. It's a tough line to draw because I'm all about letting folks post whatever they want, but there's definitely a limit, and Filthy_Liar exceeded it. My hope is that it was some kind of drunken keyboard warrior stuff... That said, I've tipped off the appropriate authorities. "Free speech" doesn't apply to shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, nor "I'm going to start shooting". 

[Biff_T]

Nothing discussed in this thread is worthing killing another human over.   Most of us are just a bunch of washed up military aviators with no more war to fight.  

Limited Government-Hooray.  My political view.  Dont harm the kids.  Make less laws instead of more.  

[FourFans]

As someone who's intimately familiar with going off the deep end, you gotta really go for it to get moderated.  Thanks @DFRESH for keeping it honest.

Edited June 11, 2023 by FourFans

[Trogdor]

On 6/9/2023 at 9:36 PM, brabus said:

Don’t paint with a broad brush - I’m willing to bet the number of people actually wanting a civil war are in the hundreds, e.g. not even a blip on the radar. 

I bet it's slightly larger. Maybe by a hundred or so...

All this talk about how great or terrible cities are... Don't forget that there are large swaths of this country that feel underrepresented. They feel that cities like SF, Seattle, Denver, or Chicago get to dictate what goes on in their states. The fact that things like Texit exists (actual state legislators signaling support) or rural counties voting to leave their state point to a much larger dissatisfaction with city-state politics.  I feel the addition of TQ+ to the LGB asking along with social media is only accelerating the issue. But I feel that was the goal even 20 years ago. So, now we have states voting in sweeping legislation one way or another, like MN or FL to name a few.

[Prozac]

11 minutes ago, Trogdor said:

I bet it's slightly larger. Maybe by a hundred or so...

All this talk about how great or terrible cities are... Don't forget that there are large swaths of this country that feel underrepresented. They feel that cities like SF, Seattle, Denver, or Chicago get to dictate what goes on in their states. The fact that things like Texit exists (actual state legislators signaling support) or rural counties voting to leave their state point to a much larger dissatisfaction with city-state politics.  I feel the addition of TQ+ to the LGB asking along with social media is only accelerating the issue. But I feel that was the goal even 20 years ago. So, now we have states voting in sweeping legislation one way or another, like MN or FL to name a few.

That sentiment goes both ways (sts). The majority of our population lives in metro areas and the majority of that group has decided that, even with all of the flaws so frequently noted by conservative commentators, Democrats are still preferable to Republican candidates. Why, you ask? They feel that the rural minority often gets to dictate to them what goes on in their communities. I.e. abortion bans, unencumbered gun rights, anti legal immigration, the electoral college, anti-gay rights, religious proselytizing, etc, are just a few of the issues that the urban population (you know, the majority of Americans) feel are being jammed down their throats by conservatives. 

[HeloDude]

7 minutes ago, Prozac said:

That sentiment goes both ways (sts). The majority of our population lives in metro areas and the majority of that group has decided that, even with all of the flaws so frequently noted by conservative commentators, Democrats are still preferable to Republican candidates. Why, you ask? They feel that the rural minority often gets to dictate to them what goes on in their communities. I.e. abortion bans, unencumbered gun rights, anti legal immigration, the electoral college, anti-gay rights, religious proselytizing, etc, are just a few of the issues that the urban population (you know, the majority of Americans) feel are being jammed down their throats by conservatives. 

Wait…you’re against the electoral college?  And why are “unencumbered gun rights” a bad thing?

[Prozac]

25 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

Wait…you’re against the electoral college?  And why are “unencumbered gun rights” a bad thing?

Not commenting on the merits or lack there of of any of these issues. Just highlighting that one party/segment of the population forcing its will on another is not the exclusive domain of liberals. 

[HeloDude]

9 minutes ago, Prozac said:

Not commenting on the merits or lack there of of any of these issues. Just highlighting that one party/segment of the population forcing its will on another is not the exclusive domain of liberals. 

I can’t disagree with you there.  But the electoral college and “unencumbered gun rights” has zero to do with one party/segment of the population forcing its will on another.  Unless you’re suggesting that the left doesn’t support the Constitution? 

[M2]

24 minutes ago, Prozac said:

Not commenting on the merits or lack there of of any of these issues. Just highlighting that one party/segment of the population forcing its will on another is not the exclusive domain of liberals. 

It's not the "exclusive domain of liberals," but they use it far more than the conservatives...

[M2]

To tell if a party has traits of fascism, here's the acid test.

- Are they attempting to disarm citizens?

- Are they attempting to control the flow of information?

- Are they trying to set up where the government controls your healthcare, housing, education, and welfare making you dependent on them?

- Do they balk when you suggest making elections more secure?

- Do they attempt to blame one racial group for the problems of the nation?

- Are they trying to control academia and the media?

- Are they wanting to pack the courts to suit themselves?

- Do they call for violence against those that disagree with them?

That tends to be your “real party of fascism!”

[Boomer6]

To pile on to M2’s last point, there may be discussion from some on the right about how the current divisions could spark a civil war. However, the number of ppl openly calling for the use of violence against members of the opposite party has been predominantly from voices on the left. It’s been almost commonplace these days to hear a media figure make a quip about the use of violence, read a tweet from a celebrity about using violence, or watch a political candidate speak at a rally organized by a group who endorses violent crime as a means of enforcing their politics.

The most concerning part is this violent rhetoric is accepted as being righteous. We have ppl getting canceled for their faith and people being celebrated for urging violence against members of the opposite party. 

Edited June 11, 2023 by Boomer6

[Biff_T]

If any queer looking Antifa "warriors" show up for a fight..... lol.   Really, how long would a teenager with a ski mask, skinny jeans and a Morrissey t-shirt last?  My impression of SJWs is they cant hold guns properly and they are always trying to find a way to live off of their parents a few more years.   Oh, and lots of mouth breathing.  

Edited June 11, 2023 by Biff_T
Edit: Let the sounds of Morrissey be our war cry lol

[Prozac]

1 hour ago, Boomer6 said:

To pile on to M2’s last point, there may be discussion from some on the right about how the current divisions could spark a civil war. However, the number of ppl openly calling for the use of violence against members of the opposite party has been predominantly from voices on the left. It’s been almost commonplace these days to hear a media figure make a quip about the use of violence, read a tweet from a celebrity about using violence, or watch a political candidate speak at a rally organized by a group who endorses violent crime as a means of enforcing their politics.

The most concerning part is this violent rhetoric is accepted as a being righteous. We have ppl getting canceled for their faith and people being celebrated for urging violence against members of the opposite party. 

I’ve not seen this (the notable exception being Kathy Griffin tastelessly parading around with Trump’s severed head a while back). Not necessarily disputing your analysis but can you provide some examples?

[Sua Sponte]

On 6/10/2023 at 9:37 AM, DFRESH said:

Admin note - Filthy_Liar went off the deep end. I was allowing most of his posts until they were all complete crazy-town, "shoot em' up", civil war nonsense. It's a tough line to draw because I'm all about letting folks post whatever they want, but there's definitely a limit, and Filthy_Liar exceeded it. My hope is that it was some kind of drunken keyboard warrior stuff... That said, I've tipped off the appropriate authorities. "Free speech" doesn't apply to shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, nor "I'm going to start shooting". 

The old “fuck around and find out.”

[Boomer6]

If you ignore who posted this video compilation and just watch the contents, there are a few examples of what I mentioned. This just happened to be the first link that showed up from google..

 

Edited June 11, 2023 by Boomer6

[Prozac]

2 hours ago, Boomer6 said:

If you ignore who posted this video compilation and just watch the contents, there are a few examples of what I mentioned. This just happened to be the first link that showed up from google..

 

Dude, that’s an awful lot of three second clips with zero context whatsoever. I could post dozens of similar montages that make the right seem unhinged as there’s plenty of the same garbage being passed around by lefties. I won’t because that kind of thing is garbage regardless of where it comes from and is disseminated with the sole purpose of fomenting anger and division. Again, not saying you’re necessarily wrong. We all have blind spots and I’m open to the prospect that I’ve missed Democratic leaders and pundits actually calling for violence. But the montage you posted is far from a smoking gun. 

[uhhello]

4 hours ago, Prozac said:

I’ve not seen this (the notable exception being Kathy Griffin tastelessly parading around with Trump’s severed head a while back). Not necessarily disputing your analysis but can you provide some examples?

You're actively avoiding them then.  Flip on twitter.  It's real simple.  

[Boomer6]

30 second google search turned these up. Let’s be honest though, I could drop link after link and you would argue against it. Meanwhile it only takes a single right leaning person on BO to mention their worry of a civil war and the prominent liberals on here immediately exclaim “Look the GOP wants a civil war!!” 

I think uhhello is right, political ppl see what they want to see and ignore what they don’t want to see. Just like the hardcore conservatives on here can claim to be conservative Christians and then explain away every single drastic character flaw Trump has. 

I prefer political hypocrisy to be balanced if nothing else.

[FourFans]

14 hours ago, Prozac said:

They feel that the rural minority often gets to dictate to them what goes on in their communities. ... the electoral college, ... are just a few of the issues that the urban population (you know, the majority of Americans) feel are being jammed down their throats by conservatives. 

I'm willing to ignore all the other items that feel are being rammed down your throat and that you feel you should, instead be able to ram a whole bunch of OTHER items the other way down conservative throats.  You've proven that you think you're right and should not consider other points of view that might force you to evaluate what you believe.  Hopefully someday you'll realize you can't fix hate with more hate.

Regardless, can we get back to this above quote?  Do you seriously disagree with the basic foundational civics of our republic, such as the electoral college?  You were asked once and obviously completely ignored it.  

Do you realize that without the electoral college, our country would not exist?  The city dwellers are 100% reliant on the country dwellers for their ability to live in a city.  That sparsely populated center section of our country that you appear to despise is THE ONLY REASON CITIES EXIST TODAY.  Urbanites who believe they can and should be able to exist and be compensated largely based on the intellectual products they create have clearly forgetten where their out of season avocados come from (try looking in the Columbia river valley or Mexico) for their all so important avocado toast.  It appears they don't realize just how dependent they are on things that come from outside the city.

If the cities didn't exist, the quality of farm life would be lower, but they'd survive...as they know how to make their own food and in general survive without much outside input.  If farms didn't exist.  Cities would disperse out of pure necessity. 

Without the electoral college, our country would be effectively a pure democracy where the 51% decide how everyone lives.  In every instance in history where that's happened, pure democracy leads to mob rule leads to dictatorship, and ruin.  Put another way, if the city dwellers are allowed to dictate how farmers live and work, farms would cease to function.  The USSR and China are fantastic examples.  The first forced non-farmers to become farmers.  The second now imports a huge section of it's needs.  Neither of those are sustainable in the future that's dawning right now.  In North America (and even some of south America, depending how we team up), we can exist largely separated from extra-hemispheric imports...IF and only IF we properly manage our natural resources.  That's a skill city dwellers claim to have, but in reality have demonstrated they largely lack.  Doubt that?  Go make your own tortilla from scratch with products made and produced only in a city.

The electoral college prevents the domination of one portion of society over the other.  The door swings both ways, for which you should be grateful.  You may scream for it to be gone now, but you probably not do so when republicans are in control.  Why is that?

That's basic civics.  Not politics.  CIVICS.  The thing all Americans should understand and appreciate. I highly urge you to re-examine your baseline understanding of our government and WHY it was framed the way it is. 

Stop calling for re-writes before you re-read. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by FourFans