Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Stuff I found on the internet


Recommended Posts

Quote

No, it didn't. First, all of it was borrowed money, which means their kids will have to pay for it. Second, the cut was temporary and will start rising again automatically this year. It was permanent only for corporations, and for the rich, like Trump, who now get to leave hundreds of millions to their kids without paying taxes.

I imagine your right about taxes going up in America soon. Most likely way up under the new regime. At least that's what they promised.

As to your opinion the working class didn't benefit under Trump that's an opinion and I'm not sure where it comes from.

Here's a different opinion and I'll give you a link.

Quote

Now that they have taken back Congress, Democrats on Capitol Hill are holding a hearing on Wednesday to “examine how the middle class is faring.” While they will undoubtedly use this hearing to score political points, the fact is the tax cuts have created unprecedented prosperity for the middle class in the form of higher wages, more take-home pay, more jobs and new employee benefits.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/trump-tax-cuts-and-the-middle-class-here-are-the-facts

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 283
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You're ignoring the entire basis of the argument, which is that freedom of speech should be respected as a value of our society. The appropriate response from Google to an idea they disagreed with was

A million species are going to die because of climate change! At least that's the blaring headline. But... a million? Really? Are there even a million species? And as this guy points out, there a

I hate equivalency shit like this. Because it excuses the behaviour of evil regimes like China's and North Korea and Russia and others. Instead of condemning them out of hand the hand-wringers look fo

Posted Images

Speaking of opinions. Apparently you have another one that says more blacks and latinos voted for the Republican candidate than was ever the case because they were misled?

Really? By who? It wasn't by the talking heads in the Corporate media. It wasn't by the Marxists at BLM or the community organizers. Who then and how? And why were they so much more persuasive than what had been so successful keeping them down on the "Voter Plantation" for so long?

As to your opinion courts considered the allegations of voting improprieties, illegalities and irregularities in open court as part of any trial, I'll tell you one more time that never happened and challenge you one more time to present evidence that it did happen. This the 3rd time I've presented that challenge and although I might have missed the first 2 (pretty sure I didn't, but I might have) I'm absolutely positive I didn't miss the third. In fact I taunted you repeatedly the 3rd time to produce evidence you said you have and I know you saw those taunts. So don't tell me you have evidence if you can't produce it.

Cases were dismissed on procedural grounds such as standing, or they were supposedly presented too early, or too late. Bits of evidence of voting irregularities might have been mentioned but all evidence was never presented for consideration in the course of a trial. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

I imagine your right about taxes going up in America soon. Most likely way up under the new regime. At least that's what they promised.

The bill which contained the 'tax cut' scheduled the tax raises this year and next and the next to bring them back up to where they were. But only for ordinary people. Not for the corporations. The Democrats don't have to do anything. It's automatic. Voted in by your glorious Republicans.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Over where? What are talking about? Do you mean you're attaching some sort of significance to the fact that Russia and Turkey are facing each other down in spots of northern Turkey?

I mean that Russia and Turkey have been battling ISIS while the US has done nothing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

As to your opinion courts considered the allegations of voting improprieties, illegalities and irregularities in open court as part of any trial, I'll tell you one more time that never happened and challenge you one more time to present evidence that it did happen.

Oh FFS. You've done this something like three or four times now and every time I've presented cites which directly showed the statements of judges on the lack of evidence you've ignored it. Are you some kind of retarded bot that can't remember anything beyond a day or two? And by the way, the first thing you do when you go to trial is present the judge with a summary of the evidence you're going to present which justifies a full trial, and it's at this stage multiple Republican judges have stated the evidence wouldn't convince anyone with more than half a brain and tossed them out on their asses.

That you dumbass Trumptards keep bringing this up like a band of wild-eyed religious zealots waving around your sacred relics while ignoring all the republican judges who said the evince was shit just shows what a bunch of fucking loonies you are.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Argus said:

Oh FFS. You've done this something like three or four times now and every time I've presented cites which directly showed the statements of judges on the lack of evidence you've ignored it.

It is 4 times now. I was willing to believe it was possible to believe I could have missed the first 2, but not the third. I made a point of watching for it. Show me where you posted it or I'll call you a liar on all 3 and now 4.

The third one wasn't that long ago. It should be easy for you to find in your profile by clicking the previous posts link. Find it and I'll give you an apology. Don't and I'll call you a liar.

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

It is 4 times now. I was willing to believe it was possible to believe I could have missed the first 2, but not the third. I made a point of watching for it. Show me where you posted it or I'll call you a liar on all 3 and now 4.

The third one wasn't that long ago. It should be easy for you to find in your profile by clicking the previous posts link. Find it and I'll give you an apology. Don't and I'll call you a liar.

https://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/25761-america-under-president-trump/?do=findComment&comment=1434264

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites

So that was not the third time where I taunted you to produce what you were calling evidence of trials where evidence was considered in open court. So no apology.

But it is good to finally know what you were talking about and as expected it is not what you claimed it would be.

Those were not considerations of evidence of allegations of voter fraud. They were denials of allowing the presentation of such evidence.

Considering the one you seem most proud of for example with the 3 republican appointed judges in Philadelphia:

Quote

The three-judge panel denied the president’s legal team’s request for oral arguments to present evidence of election irregularities they say denied the president a win in the Keystone State.

The President's legal team were however allowed to present evidence to the Pennsylvania legislature:

Quote

“The activist judicial machinery in Pennsylvania continues to cover up the allegations of massive fraud. We are very thankful to have had the opportunity to present proof and the facts to the PA state legislature. On to SCOTUS!” Ms. Ellis tweeted.

 

Ms. Ellis and Mr. Giuliani offered testimony from witnesses of election fraud and irregularities Wednesday during an informal hearing with Republican state lawmakers in Pennsylvania.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/nov/27/federal-appeals-court-rules-against-trump-pennsylv/

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

So that was not the third time where I taunted you to produce what you were calling evidence of trials where evidence was considered in open court. So no apology.

The cites directly quoted the judges referring to the evidence which had been presented, you loonie. 

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you big-mouthed, half-wit (seeing as you want to call names). They're telling you why they don't want to consider the evidence. They have some ideas as to what the evidence might be if they ever did consider it in a venue where it was allowed to be presented and considered. Then they imagine excuses they might find for discounting it. 

But the reason the Washington Time tells us the President's attorneys were denied their request to present evidence was because they were denied their request to present evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like this if they had actually allowed witnesses to come forward and present testimony as might be done in a trial they would have to consider that evidence and give a better rational than "the testimony would be nothing more than allegations." The testimony would be in the media each day as the trial proceeded. But they didn't have to consider the evidence because they discounted it before it could be presented.

Because, you see, if the judges just offer their "opinion" saying the evidence would amount to simple allegations they avoid the pressure of having to be the bad guys that have to overturn an election based on the evidence. 

Come to think of it, tell me why you couldn't make that claim about any witness testimony in any trial. That the witnesses testimony are nothing more than "simply allegations," therefore no trial is needed. Take that to the logical conclusion and there would be no trials and your hero judges would be out of jobs. But there was no logic in the "opinion" offered up by that judge so he doesn't have to worry.

The 3 judges were cowards for not considering the evidence and I don't care who appointed them.

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

No, you big-mouthed, half-wit (seeing as you want to call names).

I wasn't insulting you. I was describing you. Anyone who continues to believe this bullshit is a lunatic who, if he's not already heavily medicated, ought to be.

I'm pretty much done with you fucknuts who continue to postulate ridiculous reasons why all the 'obvious fraud' in the election was laughed out of the courts by Republican judges, including those appointed by Trump. Much like 911 truthers and other conspiratards there's no amount of information or logic which will sway your messed up little brains.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

Be glad I'm not a mod...lol.

Carry-on.

Why would I fucking be glad you're not a sonofabitching mod?

Fuckity fuck fuck shit crap piss.

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

I wasn't insulting you. I was describing you.

As I was you.

You do have a big mouth (even speaking digitally) and seem to base your bloviations on claims that seem to come directly out your butt. And even on the rare occasion you do offer something like support it doesn't say what you hope it does. Those who don't operate on half brain power don't do that. Half-wits do though.

As to you calling me "loonie," that lame attack is just an excuse for not having an argument and has been used by so many villains throughout history that it's become pretty much a compliment for its target in political debate.

No judge has considered the evidence of election fraud and illegalities and irregularities. Some have given reasons why they wouldn't consider them but that's about it.

And witness testimony is valid and considered in all courts and always has been no matter what that desperate sounding Philadelphia Trump appointed judge said. Some of the testimony the lawyers wanted to present were from witnesses like computer security experts.

 

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

You do have a big mouth (even speaking digitally) and seem to base your bloviations on claims that seem to come directly out your butt. And even on the rare occasion you do offer something like support it doesn't say what you hope it does. 

It says exactly what I think it does. If you weren't fucking retarded and your eyes weren't constantly bulging out of your head with the insanity rattling loose in your brain you'd be able to recognize the truth when you read it.

Alas for the sanity which departed you long ago.

7 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

No judge has considered the evidence of election fraud and illegalities and irregularities. 

You're full of shit. I've already posted several who have. You're just no more interested in truth than that fat fucking moron you whose picture you use to get the occasional erection.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Argus said:

You're full of shit. I've already posted several who have. 

No you didn't. I already showed you how your sources showed the judges didn't consider the evidence they just told you why they wouldn't.

The fact something as basic as that can't penetrate your hate diseased mind allows me to question which one of us is really having a problem with reality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just a sad tale of how radical race theories are destroying western universities, especially the higher level private liberal arts colleges in the United States. A white single mother with two kids gives up her $45k job at Smith College because she can't stand the racial animosity and hostility directed at her any more from the college and its racist policies.

I am writing to notify you that effective today, I am resigning from my position as Student Support Coordinator in the Department of Residence Life at Smith College. This has not been an easy decision, as I now face a deeply uncertain future. As a divorced mother of two, the economic uncertainty brought about by this resignation will impact my children as well. But I have no choice. The racially hostile environment that the college has subjected me to for the past two and a half years has left me physically and mentally debilitated. I can no longer work in this environment, nor can I remain silent about a matter so central to basic human dignity and freedom.

Every day, I watch my colleagues manage student conflict through the lens of race, projecting rigid assumptions and stereotypes on students, thereby reducing them to the color of their skin. I am asked to do the same, as well as to support a curriculum for students that teaches them to project those same stereotypes and assumptions onto themselves and others. I believe such a curriculum is dehumanizing, prevents authentic connection, and undermines the moral agency of young people who are just beginning to find their way in the world.

Although I have spoken to many staff and faculty at the college who are deeply troubled by all of this, they are too terrified to speak out about it. This illustrates the deeply hostile and fearful culture that pervades Smith College.

 

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/whistleblower-at-smith-college-resigns

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have environmental regulations caused income inequality to rise in the West?

One of the most important developments of the past decade has been an acknowledgement of the decline of relative incomes for the middle classes of North America and Europe over the past 30 years when globalization reigned supreme. Brexit, the yellow jackets of France, the Tea Party, Occupy Wall Street, BLM, and MAGA all happened in societies that have seen decades of stagnant and even negative household income among those groups between 20–80 percent of most-developed countries’ income distributions. While academics argue over the scale of this redistribution—shown graphically in the so-called “elephant graph”—there is little argument that it represents the “greatest reshuffling of individual incomes since the Industrial Revolution.”

Countries that have seen the most dramatic growth in political populism—France, the United States—are places where the manufacturing base has fallen the most. Economies like Germany and South Korea, where fewer manufacturing jobs have been lost, have not seen this uptick in populist unrest.

It turns out that “environmental-regulation privilege”—the kind that people unknowingly benefit from by working in parts of the economy least affected by environmental regulation, like the New Economy of digital technology—exists. And those who don’t have it—wage workers in fly-over Red States and up and down the Mid-Atlantic, New England, and California—suffer the consequences.

Because manufacturing, agricultural, and energy production jobs can be done as well (if not better) without the educational credentials typically desired in many New Economy industries, upward mobility in America starts with these types of jobs. Yet in one of the worst historical ironies in American history, the need for environmental protections by the 1970s began to eliminate the same jobs that were the workforce entry points for immigrants who successfully assimilated into industrializing American society in the 19th and early-20th centuries. Indeed, just as black Americans finally gained full legal access to the American labor markets, these jobs became increasingly scarce.

The disincentives of environmental regulations are real, and while they were justified on human health grounds during its first decades, they have achieved a law of diminishing returns. Since the 1990s, these policies have led inexorably to the generational trend of offshoring jobs that undermines the social stability and upward mobility of the working and underclass—the very groups the civil rights movement was most interested in helping.

https://quillette.com/2021/02/20/environmentalism-trumpism-and-the-working-class/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The loveliness of North Korea, where generations are kept as slaves working the mines run by Trump's best buddy, lil Kim.

Kim Hye-sook was told by guards that her grandfather went South during the war and that is why she was sent to work in the coal mine with her family as a teenager.

Her fate was determined by her "songbun" - or class, a judgement made on how loyal a family has been to the regime and how many are members of the Worker's Party of Korea.

Connections to South Korea automatically puts a person in the lowest class.

Ms Kim was just 16 when she started work in the mine. The NKHR report has accounts from survivors who said they started part-time work in the mine from age seven.

"When I first got assigned there were 23 people in my unit," she recalled. "But the mines would collapse and the wires that pulled the mine trolley would snap and kill the people behind it.

"People would die from explosions while digging the mines. There are different layers, in the mines, but sometimes a layer of water would burst and people could drown. So in the end only six remained alive of the initial 23."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-56178271

Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes, the riots continue, though not covered by the mainstream media. The cowardly local mayors and prosecutors are still refusing to do much about it in fear they'll be thought of as unsympathetic to their causes.

Rioters vandalized several buildings in downtown Portland, Ore., on Saturday night in one of the largest protests in weeks, according to reports.

Around 150 people marched through Portland’s Pearl District in what’s called a "direct action" event, smashing windows of businesses like Starbucks, Chipotle, Umpqua Bank and Urban Pantry and tagging them with graffiti, KION-TV in Portland reported. 

One vandal wrote "banks suck" on Umpqua Bank’s façade, a Portland Tribune reporter tweeted. 

The marchers were protesting the Biden administration’s immigration policy and the federal agency Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

https://www.foxnews.com/us/portland-anti-ice-rioters-smash-windows-spray-paint-businesses-downtown-merchants-frustrated?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about sheer incompetence. An inquiry into the Manchester bombing has heard it took fire service and paramedics two hours to arrive because police thought there was an active shooter at first and then never told senior fire service people when they realized there wasn't. So firemen and paramedics waited a mile away - for two hours. Nobody at the fire service ever checked back and there was no communication among them.

A fire officer has told an inquiry he "felt ashamed to be a firefighter" after being held back from responding to the Manchester Arena bombing.

The first fire engine did not arrive at the scene until two hours after the explosion that killed 22 people.

Duty command officer Alan Topping said firefighters felt "anger" about the decision and later turned their backs on a senior officer.

He said he felt they had "let the people of Greater Manchester down".

Twenty-two people were killed and hundreds more injured when Salman Abedi detonated a bomb at the end of an Ariana Grande concert on 22 May 2017.

On the night of the attack, Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service (GMFRS) crews were sent to a fire station a mile away from the scene of the bombing.

The public inquiry heard a crying paramedic asked firefighters why they were "stood around" instead of helping casualties at the arena.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-56241659

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

They're coming for your children. Indoctrination starts early if you want to turn humans into ideologues, and so even grade school children have to be taught that they must denounce and report any thought crimes they encounter.

Riverdale Country School is one of New York City’s — and therefore America’s — most elite private schools. Last June the school administration sent a memo to parents alerting them to curriculum changes that would reflect “the responsibility to use our privilege to fight for change.”

At the first assembly in September, instead of the school’s traditional pledge of allegiance and singing of “America the Beautiful,” students were shown a video in which the school mascot told students aged five to 11 to “check each other’s words and actions.” Families were encouraged to join school-organized “affinity” groups to bond with people of the same colour or ethnicity. One group is called POC for “parents of color.”

None of this sat well with Riverdale parent Bion Bartning, half Mexican and Yaqui (an Indigenous tribe native to the Mexican border region) and half Jewish, who defines himself as a “typical American.” Bartning’s wife is a refugee from the former Soviet Union where, as a child, her “group identity” was stamped in her passport, and children were encouraged to snitch on others, including family members, who expressed incorrect thoughts: exactly what her family came to America to escape.

This background is provided in Bartning’s recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, titled “Dividing by Race Comes to Grade School.” Probing the curriculum changes, the Bartnings found that Riverdale’s “racial literacy” guide teaches identity is coincident with skin colour, marginalizing people who “don’t place race at the heart of their identity.” When the couple voiced their objections, the school head wrote to them: “I wonder if this might be a good moment to think whether or not this is the best place for you and your family.”

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/barbara-kay-birth-of-a-new-resistance-parents-mobilize-to-tackle-woke-ideology

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Conrad Black gives a brief history of Canada's relationship with natives, and attempts to refute and deny the nonsensical findings of the so-called 'Truth and Reconciliation Commission."

Conrad Black: The truth about truth and reconciliation

It is shocking and dangerous that the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, published in 2015, has been so widely accepted as a full accounting of Native grievances and the basis for policy changes and reparations to accommodate those grievances. Almost the only serious critical analysis that has been given to this massive report is the excellent and very readable book, “From Truth Comes Reconciliation,” which was edited by Rodney Clifton and Mark Dewolf, and published by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. Every Canadian concerned with Canada’s relationship with its Aboriginal peoples, which forms the basis for the rampant but fraudulent truism that this country is rotten with ”systemic racism,” should read this book. There is general agreement, as there should be, that Aboriginal people have legitimate grievances, that the country’s policy in regard to them has been unsuccessful and that this is a serious policy challenge where we simply have to do better. Justice Murray Sinclair, who chaired the commission, promised to “provide Canadians with a permanent record that weaves all experiences, all perspectives into the fabric of truth.” He and his fellow commissioners, Chief Wilton Littlechild and Marie Wilson, fell grievously short of delivering on that promise.

 

Conrad Black: The truth about truth and reconciliation | National Post

 

Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...