Jump to content

The US Politics/Elections Thread 2.0


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

US foreign policy isn't based on any moral principle, it's based on the maintenance of an empire (and it is an empire) and whatever the big money donors who own both parties want. More people need to see it through realistic eyes and not the phony moral pretense we're given. And by the way, it's always been this way, this isn't a recent phenomenon.

Unfortunately you are completely correct

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 650
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's great that justice was served, but it shouldn't be a shock considering the event was literally filmed. Fuck that guy, hope he rots

Illegally bombing countries already huh?

Posted Images

4 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

US foreign policy isn't based on any moral principle, it's based on the maintenance of an empire (and it is an empire) and whatever the big money donors who own both parties want. More people need to see it through realistic eyes and not the phony moral pretense we're given. And by the way, it's always been this way, this isn't a recent phenomenon.

It seems to me to be just as much based on paranoia as it is protecting an empire. Paranoia of losing control. Which is inevitable for all empires.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ToonGuns said:

It seems to me to be just as much based on paranoia as it is protecting an empire. Paranoia of losing control. Which is inevitable for all empires.

I think paranoia is a risk when trying to maintain an empire. Elites of the empire can get paranoid about upstart powers and overreact with the use of force or ill thought out diplomacy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ZoSoRose said:

These were in response to American contractors being attacked right?

Yes and no.  Based on reports, there were three attacks launched within a week from this location that involved American contractors based in Iraqi-Kurd territory and the Green zone in Baghdad.  

16 hours ago, ZoSoRose said:

but have these groups been targeting civilians or Americans in the region?

Depends on what you view as a civilian.  If you view an American hired to shore up Iraq's defences and assist the Iraqi government as a civilian, then yes, these are civilians.  

16 hours ago, ZoSoRose said:

No one should die, the world is sick of these forever-wars, but if civilians are dying due to our airstrikes right now, it's fucked up 

What American air strikes?  These attacks under the Biden administration were in response to attacks launched from this specific location.

16 hours ago, ZoSoRose said:

These pepe have been through enough and just want to live. The USA has helped royally destabilize the entire region over the past several decades, and it sucks to see our continual involvement.

Agreed with the first sentiment.  But the reality is your country broke the region when Bush decided it was a good idea to invade Iraq with little consideration about how to salvage the situation once Saddam was gone.  I do believe that America owes Iraq and the region some level of of assistance and protection for the region with respect to security.  You can't just break a place and then walk away.  ISIS ran rough-shod over Iraq soon after America withdrew its military presence in the region in 2010/2011.  

16 hours ago, ZoSoRose said:

I am all for helping those in need, but that is not why we are there from what I can tell.

You're right.  This isn't why America is in Iraq and the region.  You're there under false pretences.  But as the old adage goes, you break it, you buy it.  You can't just walk away from the region at this point of time.  There's a responsibility by the US to provide some level of stability while governments in the region (particularly the Iraq) get their shit together.

16 hours ago, ZoSoRose said:

We sat by and watched horrors happen in Cambodia, Sudan, North Korea, Ethiopia, etc and did fuck all, but went all in with the Middle East because we have interests there.

All true.  I would throw Rwanda in there.  It was one of the worst examples of sitting on your assess as millions died.

But the fact of the matter is the mess that is now the Middle East is now the responsibility of the United States.  You can't spend eight years of direct military involvement without being accountable with with what happens afterwards.  Think about the fact that World War 2 only lasted 6 years but it resulted in the US having a military presence in Europe for over a half a century.  With Iraq, there are costs to such folly; costs that must be paid whether it be a Republican or Democrat President.

16 hours ago, ZoSoRose said:

It sucks that it is 2021 and the people there are still getting manipulated and used by Americans, Russians, and their own regimes

If it were that simple I would agree.  But it's not just a power play between American and Russia.  A lot of this has to do with Iran and ultimately the price of oil.  A middle east controlled by Iran would be an economic disaster or American and most of the rest of the world.  I believe this to be less of a problem as the world become less oil-dependent, but until such time, it's in the interest of everyone to keep Iran in check.  There's a reason why this issue receives bi-partisan support.   Doesn't matter whether you're a Harvard educated constitutional lawyer (Obama) or a reality tv star con-man (Trump), it's impossible to deny the importance of limiting Iran's influence to their own borders.  Granted, there are different avenues to keep Iran in check, but regardless of the means to which one achieves this end, the desired goal doesn't change.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Obama not going in guns blazing wasn't a major shift in the foreign policy status quo.

Sorry, but what?  

Were you not paying attention to the prior administration?  

I don't mean to be glib here, but come on.  W. Bush invaded two countries, unleashing the full fury of American military might, and you want to say that his predecessor's responses are one in the same. Come on.  

16 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

The Assad regime was still considered an enemy by the Obama admin

Yes, and why was that? 

Might have something to do with with using overt military action and chemical weapons to suppress peaceful protestors demanding an end to autocratic rule.  

16 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

And it's not like Trump did a full invasion there either.

No, in fact, Trump did worse by abandoning the Kurds who are largely responsible for mopping up ISIS in the region.  This move is shortly prior to Trump taking taking credit for the Kurds actions in ridding ISIS in Syria.

16 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Their Syria policies were actually quite similar.

Not at all.

16 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

My point is, we only get candidates who offer immaterial differences in foreign policy. Could you imagine us being allowed to vote in an administration that thought we should be allied to Iran instead of Saudi Arabia and Israel? It would be inconceivable, the media would destroy that person or people.

So your analogy is akin to suggesting that America adopting French as its official language and becoming a communist country.  Nobody but the most Ron Paul-supporting libertarians would ever support a wholesale revolution in American foreign policy since it would cripple the American economy.  

Look, I would love to see American about-face - move away from Saudi Arabia.  But it's naive to think America can just abruptly change course in such a dramatic fashion.  American foreign policy isn't a speed boat that can be turned on a dime.  It's a fucking ocean tanker that requires wide berth to change course.  We've already begun to see a change with the Biden administration away from Saudi-Arabia with its termination of military cooperation in Yemen and its most recent declassification of documents around Khashoggi and MBS's involvement.  This might not feel like a revolutionary change (and it's not), but it is a dramatic departure from historical precedent.  It's also a distant departure from the previous administration who did everything it could to defend and protect the House of Saud.  You cannot expect American foreign policy in the region to change overnight.  It's irresponsible and not feasible.  But Biden's most reason moves are a relative dramatic sea change for the region.  It's easy to play Monday-morning quarterback with respect to American policy in the region.  If you want the worst of Trumpism to stay on the sidelines, you have to accept (sadly) incremental changes to American foreign policy to the region.  Otherwise you risk massive spikes in energy costs for every-day Americans which would likely ensure another return to the worst impulses that are embodied by someone like Trump.

16 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

the policy we have is pretty much the only one the media and big money donors will allow.

I think that's a false assumption.  You might be right that American foreign policy is solely the product of the military industrial complex.  But there is another possibility.  That despite everything we wish to be, that the cold-hard reality of the situation (that bombing a target in Syria reduces civilian deaths in Iraq for both Americans and Iraqis) is the only course to take at this point.  Keep in mind that Biden is one of the biggest doves outside of Sanders and Rand Paul in federal government.  Had it been up to Biden in 2009/2010, America would have long exited Afghanistan almost a decade ago.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, 36 days passed before 1st bombing of foreign country... Guess Nobel for peace is prepared... 

Also that Saudi prince is still friend of a country...

2 things that prove any u.s. president is the same for us aroind the world - and prove the fact we are idiots when follow u.s. ellections as if they concern us. If u.s. see money in it - they'll bomb whoever they want no matter if president is stupid tweeting cunt, or beloved black person, or clown from Texas, or old senile guy...

Edited by -Jaro-
  • Like 2
  • GNFNR 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, downzy said:

I don't mean to be glib here, but come on.  W. Bush invaded two countries, unleashing the full fury of American military might, and you want to say that his predecessor's responses are one in the same. Come on.

Same enemies as other administrations, he just went full dumbass and put large amounts of ground troops in, which has given (rightfully so) American's Vietnam syndrome 2.0.  

15 hours ago, downzy said:

Yes, and why was that? 

Might have something to do with with using overt military action and chemical weapons to suppress peaceful protestors demanding an end to autocratic rule.  

Every time people bring this up, I'm just going to bring up what Saudi Arabia and Israel do and say morality has nothing to do with it.

15 hours ago, downzy said:

No, in fact, Trump did worse by abandoning the Kurds who are largely responsible for mopping up ISIS in the region.  This move is shortly prior to Trump taking taking credit for the Kurds actions in ridding ISIS in Syria.

You know who also fought ISIS? Assad's forces.

15 hours ago, downzy said:

Not at all.

So your analogy is akin to suggesting that America adopting French as its official language and becoming a communist country.  Nobody but the most Ron Paul-supporting libertarians would ever support a wholesale revolution in American foreign policy since it would cripple the American economy. 

I think you're underrating how sick of foreign policy adventurism most actual voters are. It's the donors who want this shit, not the man in the street.

15 hours ago, downzy said:

Look, I would love to see American about-face - move away from Saudi Arabia.  But it's naive to think America can just abruptly change course in such a dramatic fashion.  American foreign policy isn't a speed boat that can be turned on a dime.  It's a fucking ocean tanker that requires wide berth to change course.  We've already begun to see a change with the Biden administration away from Saudi-Arabia with its termination of military cooperation in Yemen and its most recent declassification of documents around Khashoggi and MBS's involvement.  This might not feel like a revolutionary change (and it's not), but it is a dramatic departure from historical precedent.  It's also a distant departure from the previous administration who did everything it could to defend and protect the House of Saud.  You cannot expect American foreign policy in the region to change overnight.  It's irresponsible and not feasible.  But Biden's most reason moves are a relative dramatic sea change for the region.  It's easy to play Monday-morning quarterback with respect to American policy in the region.  If you want the worst of Trumpism to stay on the sidelines, you have to accept (sadly) incremental changes to American foreign policy to the region.  Otherwise you risk massive spikes in energy costs for every-day Americans which would likely ensure another return to the worst impulses that are embodied by someone like Trump.

You're essentially making an economic growth is more important than morality argument. Which is much more honest than what the American Empire and it's media lackey's give us as arguments.

15 hours ago, downzy said:

I think that's a false assumption.  You might be right that American foreign policy is solely the product of the military industrial complex.  But there is another possibility.  That despite everything we wish to be, that the cold-hard reality of the situation (that bombing a target in Syria reduces civilian deaths in Iraq for both Americans and Iraqis) is the only course to take at this point.  Keep in mind that Biden is one of the biggest doves outside of Sanders and Rand Paul in federal government.  Had it been up to Biden in 2009/2010, America would have long exited Afghanistan almost a decade ago.

I'll believe the US empire cares about lives and real peace as soon as it puts Saudi Arabia on it's shitlist for it's war on Yemen. And there's plenty of other abuses Saudi Arabia and Israel could be punished for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@downzy

If a government or elements of that government were certain or at least pretty certain or at least pretended to be certain that drone striking your neighbourhood killing your wife and child was for the greater good, you'd be cool with it? If not why not?

Bottomline is America shouldn't be in those countries. If it can't survive without inflicting itself on others, does it deserve to survive?

That being said I'm all for the whole better the devil we know approach and continuing to back the USA cause I prefer them to the likes of China or Russia or Saudi Arabia. But let's not be too fervant and coy or glaze things over or put our heads in the sand - lest we muffle our leisurely warcries and communicate in such a way as to not revel in the nobility of the necessary sacrifices of human life being made for the sake of the American economy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/27/2021 at 6:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Same enemies as other administrations, he just went full dumbass and put large amounts of ground troops in, which has given (rightfully so) American's Vietnam syndrome 2.0.

Right...  We can either say that America's "enemies" pose a factual threat to the national interests of the US and stability of the region/globe or they're not.  Every administration since Carter has deemed Iran a threat to regional stability and hence a threat to American national interests (particularly around America's energy needs).  You're more than within your right to say that every administration has got it wrong; but you would think that if that were the case, at least one administration would have changed their overall attitude towards Iran.  Every administration has tried a different approach, with arguably Obama's yielding the greatest forward progress.  I would say it would be short-sighted to judge Biden's approach to Iran and the Middle East based solely on one military engagement.

On 2/27/2021 at 6:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Every time people bring this up, I'm just going to bring up what Saudi Arabia and Israel do and say morality has nothing to do with it.

I'm not defending either (since both are guilty of mass atrocities), but neither Saudi Arabia nor Israel have used chemical weapons on its own people.  You might see a distinction, but myself and others do. 

On 2/27/2021 at 6:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

You know who also fought ISIS? Assad's forces.

Not really.  Based on all the reporting from the region over the last four or five years, Assad's forces rarely, if ever, tangled with ISIS.  Most of his forces was targeted against fellow Syrians fighting for his removal.  

The bulk of fighting against ISIS was done by Iraqi and Syrian Kurds, along with military support by American-backed Iraqi forces.  The last couple of years has seen Turkey mop up what remained in Northern Syria, to the detriment of American-supported Kurds.

On 2/27/2021 at 6:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I think you're underrating how sick of foreign policy adventurism most actual voters are. It's the donors who want this shit, not the man in the street.

Maybe.  But they would probably feel different the minute they pulled up to the gas pump and gas prices have doubled or tripled.  America needs stability in the region to feed its oil diet.  Limiting Iran short of a full-fledged invasion isn't military adventurism and shouldn't be conflated with the hubris that preoccupied the Bush administration with respect to Iraq.

On 2/27/2021 at 6:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

You're essentially making an economic growth is more important than morality argument. Which is much more honest than what the American Empire and it's media lackey's give us as arguments.

Yes and no.  On the one hand, until America can move past its oil dependency, it's still heavily reliant on stability in the region to ensure both reliable delivery and stable prices.  If you think the glue that keeps America tethered is coming loose now, imagine how disrupted American society would be if oil shocks and shortages a la 1970s were to return.  On the other hand, the Middle East remains relatively peaceful (compared to a regional war between Israel, Iran, Saudi-Arabia, and other regional powers) because of America's military and economic might.   If the U.S. packed up and ended all financial and military assistance to the region you can be sure it wouldn't take too long before the regional powers take each other own.  That would likely result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands, potentially millions.  So there is a morality factor in why American involvement in the region is required.

On 2/27/2021 at 6:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I'll believe the US empire cares about lives and real peace as soon as it puts Saudi Arabia on it's shitlist for it's war on Yemen. And there's plenty of other abuses Saudi Arabia and Israel could be punished for.

That's not going to happen over night.  But tangible and material changes have occurred during Biden's first five to six weeks in office.  The US has already ceased all military cooperation with Saudi Arabia with respect to offensive operations in Yemen.  Biden declassified the US report that laid sole blame on MBS for WaPo's reporter Khashoghi.  Those recent developments may not feel like an earthquake, but it is a dramatic departure from US policy against Saudi Arabia in ways unseens for 40+ years.  As others have said, American foreign policy isn't a speed boat that can be nimbly turned around on a dime.  It's a tanker ship.  It takes a lot of work and thought to change course.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

If a government or elements of that government were certain or at least pretty certain or at least pretended to be certain that drone striking your neighbourhood killing your wife and child was for the greater good, you'd be cool with it? If not why not?

Of course not. 

But that's irrelevant with respect to the decisions a U.S. President must make. 

Foreign policy, or even domestic policy, requires making difficult decisions where often times you're choosing between only bad options and trying to pick the least bad one.  Leaders are making similar calculations with respect to the coronavirus pandemic.  The decision to lockdown businesses and keep millions at home have resulted in significantly higher suicides and overdoses.  But does that make the decision to implement them wrong? 

Similarly, a drone strike on a militant compound that was used as a launching pad for attacks on Iraqi and American targets could potentially and unfortunately kill civilians who happen to live in and around the facilities.  That is unfortunate.  But should that fact prevent American forces from responding, even if their failure to do so results in more deaths?  

4 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Bottomline is America shouldn't be in those countries. If it can't survive without inflicting itself on others, does it deserve to survive?

You seem to believe that American presence in places like Iraq, Saudia Arabia, and other middle east countries is imposed upon said countries.  It's not.  These nations (for the most part) welcome American financial and military assistance because they know it greatly reduces the chance of a regional war.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Here is a great takedown of the Republican opposition to the latest Covid relief bill. Typical Republicans having no messaging to appeal to voters who aren't hardcore libertarian GOP'ers.

 

The things that Republican politicians and conservative commentators oppose in the bill are not things that Republican citizens on the ground actually care about. They might agree that this feature or that feature is stupid, but it's very hard to sell your party when it's the one on record voting against free money for everyone.

In light of this, it's actually interesting that the GOP still has so much support. Their support is so much founded upon the things they oppose rather than the things they stand for. Republicans might want a $15 minimum wage...but you know what they want even more? To "own the libz." And that decides their vote. It's really sad.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of sad, the Kraken's last pathetic gasp was extinguished today:

Imagine how desperate and sad some must have been back in November and December to believe there was any chance of this sad sack of shit was going to prevail.

Just a reminder of how it started and where it's ended:

"The lawyer who vowed her “elite strike force” would once and for all expose the laughable claims of voter fraud relentlessly pushed by former President Donald Trump has failed in court on every single one of her so-called “kraken” lawsuits. She is now facing a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit from Dominion Voting Systems over her claims, and is also named as a defendant in a $2.7 billion defamation suit from Smartmatic, a competing voting machine company, for “inventing” a false narrative about the election."

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what sane, competent, and non-evil governance looks like:

https://www.axios.com/immigration-mayorkas-dhs-chlid-separation-1d363bd3-694d-4f12-8804-11b3724ba940.html

Prior to the absolute travesty that was Trump's response to the pandemic, the needless separation of children from their parents - that has become permanent separation for hundreds of kids and parents - was the most inhumane and indefensible period of Trump's Presidency.

It's nice to see the Biden administration waste zero time and devote resources to do what it can to reunite parents with their kids.  In a sane and just world these parents should be granted a temporary allowance to come and stay in America to be reunited with their kids while the government provides a pathway to stay here on a more permanent basis.  There needs to be some form or element of compensation for the horrors inflicted upon both the kids and parents. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jakey Styley said:

The things that Republican politicians and conservative commentators oppose in the bill are not things that Republican citizens on the ground actually care about. They might agree that this feature or that feature is stupid, but it's very hard to sell your party when it's the one on record voting against free money for everyone.

In light of this, it's actually interesting that the GOP still has so much support. Their support is so much founded upon the things they oppose rather than the things they stand for. Republicans might want a $15 minimum wage...but you know what they want even more? To "own the libz." And that decides their vote. It's really sad.

Call me crazy, but I think the average GOP voter would probably support a lot of democratic-socialist type policies if you just called it something else (like if you called Universal Health Care, 'Patriot-Care' for example) and Donald Trump gave it an endorsement. 

Edited by Basic_GnR_Fan
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a bit of an overstatement, but there's no doubt a corroborative link between Christian fundamentalism as practice in the US and the rise of autocratic fervor in the last ten to fifteen years:

https://walkertown.wordpress.com/2021/03/01/christian-school-confidential-or-none-dare-call-it-radicalization/

Christian School Confidential (or: “None Dare Call It Radicalization”)

 

January 6, 2021. The day the Capitol was sacked by fundamentalist Christians, cops, young guys who lived at home, some ex-military, and a vegan. It seemed humorous at first! I saw the mention on Facebook and just imagined a few supporters of 45 shouting a lot, but I was not prepared for the images of the mob invading the chamber of congress. Nor was I prepared for the marine who stood where the Speaker usually stands offering a word of prayer, and ratting out his conspirators, all at the same time by thanking God for the Capitol Police who let them in!

“Is this some kind of a religious activity?” I sarcastically thought. 

Investigations proved that is exactly what it was. A loose association between evangelical churches and fans of right wing radio hosts and podcasters, with a little help from social media, became responsible for the moment of mass lunacy that we are still dealing with.

 

Where did they come from? Who was behind it?

All obvious questions considering there wasn’t an invisible elephant to hide anymore. It was a very visible elephant in front of us. The elephant party has traded the Messiah on a White Horse landing on the Mount of Olives for the Boss Hogg Messiah on the Motorcycle! Yeah, that’s the guy who will drive out all the democrats and destroy the satanic elite pedophiles.

Evangelicals once scorned political involvement.

 

Rick Perlstein, in his book, Reaganland, talks about Jerry Falwell’s crusade to get fundamentalist Christians involved in politics. Reaganland begins with Jimmy Carter winning the election and the Republicans lost without a center. It’s matter of fact style reminds me of Joe Friday on Dragnet. Perlstein leads us through the seventies with illustrations sure to score high with nostalgia buffs. Everyone from Jim Jones to Anita Bryant to the girl who didn’t like Friday’s so she shot up her school makes an appearance.

Carter was President and Republicans were losing face with the public. It was Jerry Falwell and a loose association between fundamentalists and evangelical churches and Christian schools, who decided it was time for Christians to get involved in government. This came after years of believing it was wrong for religious leaders to involve themselves in politics.

Jerry Falwell once preached against ministers taking political stands. That sermon was directed toward Martin Luther King, Jr. Falwell changed his mind and called that moment a ‘false prophecy’. Christian fundamentalists shrugged it off.

Moral Majority, and other Christian conservative groups, began documenting abuses in the public school system. They frightened parents into sending their children to Christian Schools. Their goal appeared to be: defund the public schools until the only institutions left standing were Christian schools.

 

Christian schools had classes in Americanism Vs Communism, designed to keep the cold war going.  ‘None Dare Call It Treason’ was assigned reading in more than one Christian school.

 

Falwell put together a dog and pony show called ‘America, You’re To Young To Die’. It began with a slideshow of a girl saying the pledge of allegiance. It shifted to gay men kissing. A few seconds of aborted fetuses assaulted the senses before the Jerry Falwell dancers took the stage and did their number.

Okay, they weren’t ‘dancing’. We called them ‘stage movements’. We were taught how to rename and rationalize everything! 

Perlstein writes about the time Falwell came to Trinity Christian Academy in Jacksonville, Florida . After the big show, one of the teachers remarked that in his day they would have done something about the homosexuals. Or, as he called them, ‘faggots’. He revealed, in a classroom, that he and his friends beat up gays at Friendship Fountain, and, as Perlstein describes it:

“We knocked a guy’s head into the side of the fountain! He was bleeding like a squashed tomato.” When a student complained to another teacher about this un-Christlike behavior, the concern turned on him, not the teacher: “Are youthinking of turning gay, Dwayne? A gay person cannot be saved.” (Reaganland, p.722)

That student was me. 

It was the first time the fundamental truth dawned on me:  it’s okay to be hypocritical on some issues. Fundamentalists knew the theological loopholes. And I learned if you asked the wrong question, they can and will use that question against you.

Bob Gray, the founder of Trinity Christian Academy, would be arrested for multiple counts of child molestation in 2006. He apologized to the victims in private, but did that stop him from pleading ‘not guilty’ in a court of law? Not at all! We learned there are there are exceptions to the rule of law. It’s okay to disrespect the truth in public, or in a court of law, yet claim virtue in private.

We were raised to cut our leaders slack for the worst crimes! Is it any wonder many who grew up in evangelical households became supporters of an abusive, insurrectionist ex-president? We were trained to ignore the crimes of our spiritual leaders for years! Ignoring scandals of earthly leaders who are giving you the country is a piece of cake.

 

It isn’t such stretch to think of the education I received at Trinity Christian Academy as ‘radicalization’. I remember a few preachers who stomped and shouted, “I want you to be a radical for Jesus!” 

They appear to have succeeded.  We were steered away from praising democracy. America is not a democracy, we were taught. It is a constitutional republic. God led our founding fathers to establish this nation. They wanted white male property owners to vote. We can amend the constitution, but let’s not.

History was seen through a supernatural prism. Someone asked, “Why did Hitler kill all those people?”

I remember the teacher replying, “He was demon possessed. That’s the only explanation.”

Nothing about stereotypes, or bigotry, or scapegoats. That was their favorite tool after all! Nobody gave it up then. Nobody’s giving it up now.

We pledged allegiance to the American flag. Other Christian schools pledged allegiance to the Christian flag. Some pledged allegiance to the bible.  I heard Al Jennings preach at a Trinity bible conference, “When our forefathers talked about freedom of religion, they meant freedom of the Christian religion! Not Hindus or Muslims. Christian!

Many who engaged in the January 6 insurrection had ties to fundamentalist churches and schools. I now understand that Christian schools, intentionally or not, helped ignite and fan the flames that brought our nation to this moment. Perhaps we should investigate them with the same intensity they demonstrated when investigating and ‘exposing’ public schools?

Few call it radicalization, but none dare call it treason.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the damn stimulus package?

People are living in homes and apartments that were fucked up by the snow storm 2 weeks ago and are expected to pay their rent? What the fuck? I've seen their apartments and homes with water damage and walls and ceilings falling down and they have no place to go and the city is dragging their feet. This is just so damn wrong. I don't understand it? It's been almost 3 weeks since the snow and ice and these people are livinng in unsafe conditions and the inspectors come and tell them is't unsafe, but they can't get their place fixed or can't afford it. what are they expected to do?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dontdamnmeuyi2015 said:

Where is the damn stimulus package?

It’s being delayed because not one Republican supports the stimulus package. So Democrats have to run through procedural hurdles to pass it on a party-line vote. 

Republicans are the only reason why it’s taking longer to get additional assistance to Americans.  Probably has something to do with priorities (or lack thereof):

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Teachers unions across the country have been holding cities hostage, refusing to return to in school learning. It’s really sad and the students who are hurt the most are low income and minority students who the public school system is already failing. I wish Biden would take leadership on this issue, but the teachers unions own the hell out of him. California is basically bribing its schools to resume in person learning by offering them more money if they open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...