Yes, it is that kind of day which deserves a second post on the Trump winning, albeit along a slightly different line. Remember when Democrats chastised Republicans for saying “Obama’s not my president”? This came after Democrats said that about George W. Bush for almost 8 years, but really starting about the time of the Iraq war. I myself proclaimed in 2011 that Obama was Not My President. But, now we get
Just woke up to a delicious fresh serving off butt-hurt with #HesNotMyPresident & #ImStillWithHer.
— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) November 9, 2016
Yeah, we do
Thank you @HillaryClinton, you fought the good fight, but hate won. I'm still with you. #HesNotMyPresident
— Lesley Abravanel ???? (@lesleyabravanel) November 9, 2016
Well we just solved #Immigration issues because who the F wants to come here now. #HesNotMyPresident
— CheriLH (@CLherlinger) November 9, 2016
#HesNotMyPresident because:
1) He does not speak for me.
2) His prejudice disgusts me.
3) His ignorance disturbs me.
4) I live in the UK.— Tony (@GodfreyElfwick) November 9, 2016
https://twitter.com/MorganMinko/status/796319157407072256
https://twitter.com/SheWhoVotes/status/796319136766775297
https://twitter.com/Annascgivens/status/796318773775110144
https://twitter.com/Hannah_Donahue3/status/796318598520328192
Um, OK. No one is silencing. If that was the case, you wouldn’t be able to Tweet.
https://twitter.com/normalol/status/796318390155612160
This keeps going and going and going. There are entirely too many to post.
Just imagine the butthurt on January 20.
https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/796309319906103296
And how many will stay home today, and possibly through the week?
Jeffrey wrote:
He did, about a million fewer. Trouble is, Mrs Clinton had about six million fewer than President Obama.
There, there little guy…
Good to see you’ve uncurled from your fetal position but…
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NeriJ13RSnA/WCO7YugEHfI/AAAAAAAAX90/VR7F6mvR0ukiBClfzlhB5-AzHBcBVR27ACLcB/s1600/Nov9-11.jpg
Jeffery this one’s for you.
https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder178/500x/46469178.jpg
That’s mighty white of you, little guy.
And yet she STILL LOST!!!! hahahahahahahahahaha
What happened Jeffery, you didn’t stuff enough ballot boxes? Even with your fraud votes she lost!
Klepto-Killary lost! hahahahahahahahahahaah
I think the GOP has to walk a tightrope here….
They just rode to all 3 branches on the coat tails of a very POPULIST MOVEMENT….if they roar back to office thinking that they have some kind of mandate to fuck half the people in this country….aka the Democrats then they are in for a rude awakening.
The right will be screaming for a balanced budget even if it means ending the military and closing the national parks…..The small government Tea party backed a big government candidate…..
I think a whole lot of people were so busy hating on HRC that they did not hear what Trump was saying. Defeat HRC at any cost….well they did and now they need to put the batteries back in their hearing aides and listen to what Trump was saying……
Get those rose colored glasses off and wake up righties….See this is why Im a moderate and decided to back trump….I listened to what he was saying and yes I despised HRC but I was willing to vote for HRC just so the Right could put themselves back together…..
But those on the right….you need to rethink what Trump has actually been saying because besides Repeal and replace obama care and immigration….most of his policy positions are much more left then the GOP is comfortable with….which is one reason why he got almost no support from them at all.
Not sure arguing semantics is helpful. Trump was judging someone, not based on the person, but on his ethnicity. The Republican Speaker of the House said that Trump’s language was racist. If you prefer, simply call it ethnic bigotry.
That makes little sense. Those who advocate a hierarchical society or preserving existing hierarchies are defined as being on the political right. Perhaps you could try an example.
Annual GDP in Mexico is only about $2 trillion. Presumably, some of that goes for food and shelter, education and medical care.
Good example. The Obama Administration has wanted infrastructure spending for years, but were always blocked by Republicans *because it was proposed by Democrats and would help Democrats*, essentially holding infrastructure (and most other progress) hostage.
Trump is actually going to get four years, and sometimes life can be surprising. Perhaps he will get a few things right along the way.
Donald Trump also received fewer votes than Hillary Clinton.
Yes, the Electoral College is a quaint vestige of the 18th century.
Call it anything you want.
Maybe because I didn’t write it.
As is the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Do y’all have a point?
That makes little sense. Those who advocate a hierarchical society or preserving existing hierarchies are defined as being on the political right. Perhaps you could try an example.
The Constitution has been updated many times, including, as you point out, with a Bill of Rights, which was not part of the original constitution. For instance, it wasn’t until the 14th Amendment that people were guaranteed equality under the law.
Annual GDP in Mexico is only about $2 trillion. Presumably, some of that goes for food and shelter, education and medical care.
If you read what I wrote instead of cherry picking quotes you would see how Mexico is easily going to pay for the wall.
Maybe to you because you appear to not want true equality.
They are ACCUSED of being on the right. They are in fact, on the left.
Perhaps you should look around.
Perhaps y’all could use an understandable term.
This is the third time y’all pasted this error.
Y’all are correct.
It was that “quaint vestige of the 18th century” that allowed that amendment.
Do y’all have a point to make?
About $23 billion is sent to Mexico from the U.S. each year. You said you need $3000 billion. Do the math.
It’s the standard definition of political right.
Well, that, and a bloody civil war. That was followed by generations of legalized oppression of the descendants of former slaves.
Yes. The Electoral College is a quaint vestige of the 18th century, before most people had the right to vote, and when it took a long time to travel from one end of the country to the other.
… in Wikipedia.
Some define the political right differently.
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2012/06/political-left-and-right-properly-defined/
And you can call a tail a leg, but it doesn’t make it one. Words are defined by convention and usage, and the political terms left and right have a long pedigree dating to the French Revolution.
Your “citation” essentially admits it is a redefinition, and the definition provided is not consistent with conventional or modern usage. In particular, there are authoritarians on the left and on the right. (On the authoritarian right, think of military dictators that used to be prevalent in Latin America.) There are libertarians on the left and on the right. (For the libertarian left, Noam Chomsky is a prominent example.) What ties the left together as an class is an advocacy of greater equality. The conservative right advocates preserving (conserving) existing hierarchies; or on the far or reactionary right, undoing modernity and returning a previous, more hierarchical period. Extremists on either the left or the right believe that the ends justify whatever means.
Mao, Stalin, Castro?
Advocates for “greater equality”?
Why does the right oppose “greater equality”?
The political left is right now calling for a lot of violence.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/people-have-to-die-anti-trump-protester-calls-for-violence-on-cnn/
Absolutely. Marxist communism is explicitly egalitarian, seeing history as moving from capitalism to socialism to communism, wherein everyone would be equal, governments would wither away, there would be no social classes, and private property would become obsolete.
The issue is that this utopian vision is impossible to achieve. When combined with extremism, that the ends are so important as to justify any means, it results in a tyranny seen as a necessary phase to achieve the goal of perfect equality.
There are extremists on the political left and on the political right.
It depends.
The movement of history since the end of the Middle Ages has been towards greater equality, starting with freedom of conscience instead of the Church deciding matters of faith; then the distribution of political power from the king to the barons and landowners then to popularly elected legislatures; and in modern times there has been a movement towards a more equitable distribution of economic resources. The next trend is equality between nations, but that is still very tentative, and the world is pulling back from that somewhat. It’s the three-step of history; two steps forward, one step back.
The conservative impulse is that changing traditional institutions will have unintended and often deleterious consequences, that these traditions have a purpose deeply rooted in human nature and history. If there must be reform, in this view, it is best that it be gradual and measured.
Someone on the right might want more of a meritocracy than what is common in modern technological society, seeing this as resulting in a more productive society, and may see competition as a good for humanity in its own right.
A extreme or reactionary rightist may want to unwind modernity completely to return to a more pure society, even a fanciful past, just as an extremists on the left may envision a fanciful future.
Bing-fucking-go!
Goddam, y’all are smart.
About $23 billion is sent to Mexico from the U.S. each year. You said you need $3000 billion. Do the math.
As of 2012 February 651 miles of fencing have been completed (source: US-Mexico Border Fence / Great Wall of Mexico).
At a cost of between 100,000 dollars and as much as 15 million per mile based on an average of $3.9 million per mile.
The US-Mexican border is 1951 miles [source: Mexico–United States barrier
wikipedia.org
Leaving 1300 miles of border to be finished…..1300×5 million rounded up because those figures are a few years old..equals……650 billion dollars not 3 trillion….I guess that will teach me to stop looking up information from a leftist website.
Absolutely. Marxist communism is explicitly egalitarian, seeing history as moving from capitalism to socialism to communism, wherein everyone would be equal, governments would wither away, there would be no social classes, and private property would become obsolete.
Clear to see we have another communist here in Zach…noticed how he spouted that crap with fluidity and ease….
Lenin to a tee……..scary that you people believe in this shit. Why dont you guys pull a Lee Harvey on us and round up your visa and go hang out in Russia for awhile…then report back on how that went.
It’s all fun and games until they take your stuff away.
Zach won’t start or be a part of the revolution by giving his stuff away to those who need it or who are less fortunate than he is. He just wants to take your things.
So in the communist countries that have and do exist everyone is equal? Tell us you believe that. Tell us you believe the lowest peasant in North Korea lives identically to Kim Jong Un. Tell us every soviet had a dacha. Show me the bank accounts of every Cuban to have a balance of 3 billion like Castro. Let’s see, Jack Ma in China has 20 billion, do all the Chinese?
You mean you didn’t know that before? Jeffery and Zach are commies and john is a cit (commie in training).
About $23 billion is sent to Mexico from the U.S. each year. You now say you need $650 billion. Do the math.
Quite the contrary. We reject communism, and other utopian visions not rooted in human nature. If you read more carefully, you would already know that.
While taxation is inevitable, we also recognize the importance of private property as fundamental to human rights. If you read more carefully, you would already know that.
Communists believe society has to pass through a dictatorship of the proletariat phase before achieving communism. However, because communism is an unattainable ideal not consistent with human nature, the result is tyranny. If you read more carefully, you would already know that.
About $23 billion is sent to Mexico from the U.S. each year. You now say you need $650 billion. Do the math.
They can make payments….and they will…they will be taxed….they will be levied, with new taxes on autos being shipped back to the USA via mexico by Ford and GM and Chrysler not to mention parts…..it wont take long to pay back the costs of the wall.
Do the math.
Quite the contrary. We reject communism, and other utopian visions not rooted in human nature. If you read more carefully, you would already know that.
Wrong. Denying you murdered someone or robbed a 7-11 does not make it a fact…..
While taxation is inevitable, we also recognize the importance of private property as fundamental to human rights. If you read more carefully, you would already know that.
Wrong again. The importance of private property as dictated by the left….You have a threshold of which too much is not acceptable and at that threshold then redistribution begins……Nice try Zach but its pretty clear in statements like these why HRC lost the election and why the nation turned red…..
Your side has taken and taken and taken and look at the results….a government CONTROLLED by BARAK OBAMA tries to convince us that the unemployment rate is 4.9 when Everyone knows better including Gallup which lists the real Unemployment daily of 9.7. That Inflation is 2 percent when the prices in grocery stores have doubled and tripled in the last 8 years. A new Car now costs 1/3 more then it did in 2007 and yet….Everything is just fine…Millions and millions are out of jobs and the left keeps right on believing their own spin that only their way is the right way for fairness and equality.
Voters gave the house, the senate, the White House….a huge majority of the governorships….even in blue states along with 69 of 99 state legislative bodies across this nation….
Forget the national vote which This is a vast and undeniable rejection of Obama and YOUR POLICIES…..The popular vote for the house and the senate and the 69 of 99 state legislative bodies was clearly won by the GOP…..Trump lost the national vote….this is true I will give you that….but then the Left lost that VAUNTED BLUE FIREWALL….they lost the rust belt…..they lost democrats who were and are tired of being lied to by career politicans…
A rejection…..I reject your vision….your vision is redistribution…..our vision is sharing the wealth….We want you to have a much as we do……you on the other hand want everyone to have an arbitrary set amount that YOU>>>>YOU feel is equitable and this is communism defined….
You can deny all day…but you are a communist…..the progressive movement is communism and that is why it was resoundly rejected except in huge POOR cities around the country and California which has been lost for decades now.
Communists believe society has to pass through a dictatorship of the proletariat phase before achieving communism.
The proletariat (/ËŒproÊŠlɪˈtɛəriËÉ™t/ from Latin proletarius) is a term for the class of wage-earners, in a capitalist society, whose only possession of significant material value is their labor-power (their ability to work);[1] a member of such a class is a proletarian.
However, because communism is an unattainable ideal not consistent with human nature, the result is tyranny.
the ways of thinking, feeling, and acting that are common to most people.
But yet you want to redistribute wealth based upon the fact that redistribution of wealth creates a more powerful proletariat and is against the values that human nature holds dearly. Which leads to tyranny. And tyranny leads to riots in the streets which leads to the collapse of the ruling Middle class
Zachriel, you keep saying “WE” Who the hell are “WE”? And you keep repeating over and over “If you read more carefully, you would already know that.” How much more “carefully” do the rest of us have to read? Obviously it is YOU who are not making yourself clear. So instead of repeating the same silly phrase over and over how about you clarify for us peons.
We don’t. We are all for equal opportunity. The outcomes, though, aren’t.
It’s like this: sports have rules. The rules should apply equally to all teams. The rules shouldn’t punish some teams/players for being better. And some teams will be better. Cleveland and New England operate under the same rules. Equal opportunity. But, the outcomes are different, are they not? Should the Patriots be punished for success?
You forgot to include the math. Let’s assume a 10% tax on transferred funds.
$650 billion / ($23 billion / 10) = 283 years.
That’s assuming zero interest. But if you want your wall today, and then invoice the Mexicans, the $2.3 billion per year won’t even cover a reasonable rate of interest. In other words, the Mexicans would go further and further into debt, never touching the principal. If you assume a very reasonable 2% interest, that would mean you would have to collect half of the funds being transferred, just to cover the interest, again without even touching the principal.
Let’s look again.
Z: Marxist communism is explicitly egalitarian, seeing history as moving from capitalism to socialism to communism, wherein everyone would be equal, governments would wither away, there would be no social classes, and private property would become obsolete.
Marxist communism sees history as a progression, with communism and absolute equality only being attained in the final stage of social development. The goal of equality is why communism is considered to be on the political left, consistent with the standard definition. So-called communist countries didn’t claim they had achieved communism, but were in the socialist stage of development.
Then your answer should have been “We do.” You advocate for equal opportunity, but not equal outcomes. That means there will be inherent economic and social inequality. There’s also the question how equal opportunity relates to inherited advantages unrelated to ability, such as the more well-to-do sending their children to college, and so on.
If y’all read more carefully, y’all would already know that… y’all should have ended y’alls sophomoric diatribe right there.
You seemingly agree that “this utopian vision {communism} is impossible to achieve.” Not sure what point you are trying to make.
If y’all read more carefully, y’all would already know that.
Absolutely not. Equal rights is not about outcome. It is about opportunity.
Once again, absolutely not. For example, if a person is hired to make widgets and is paid $10 a widget, there is no inequality that a person can make more widgets than they can. They are still being paid the same amount per widget.
There’s also the question how equal opportunity relates to inherited advantages unrelated to ability, such as the more well-to-do sending their children to college, and so on.
Are you trying to say that people can’t climb out of situations that their parents put them in? Statistically, that isn’t true. The same is true on the opposite side as well that parents being wealthy and going to college does not guarantee success.
It always baffles the hard working people of this country how those who don’t work or don’t do quality of work think they should have the same economic results. In fact, you destroy you own point by wanting to treat people differently in order to obtain some sort of “equal results.”
So while you extol “equality,” the fact is that you don’t believe in equality at all. You believe in looking at people, judging them, and then deciding how much you should take from them or give to them based upon your bias.
The little Snowflakes at GrubbHub had a hissy fit then immediately went into the “fascist mode” which they are famous for.
What o you think would be all over the news and what would happen if the owner of Chick-Fil-A sent out a Tweet saying: “If you agree with abortion and fags you have no place here”?
Listen Lefties, if we give Klepto Klinton a participation trophy will you get her to go away?
Price of bread
2010 $1.41
2015 $1.44
Price of eggs
2010 $1.47
2015 $2.09
Absolute total fuking lie
do you actually shop? Where I live a loaf of bread is minimum 2.99 and usually 3.49
Eggs are between 1.99 and 2.99….
At the equivalent of 2 percent inflation for 8 years…..that would be a 16 percent rise in price. No?
See your taking government stats and putting them out there as fact when Obama and his government have covered up the truth of the matter.
Beef is now selling for 5.99 lb…when in 2008 it was 1.99 lb…hardly a 16 percent increase….
Social security has gotten 2 raises in 8 years…..
Its now perfectly clear you are indeed a college student sitting in your momma basement and have never visitied the grocery store….
In reference to the Grubbhub memo.
Does this guy not realize that this is the very fascist attitude he is ascribing to Trumpers.
“We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team.â€
What a hateful attitude to have….Amazing that these people are capable of actually starting a business and keeping it running…..Just amazing. Well I guess i wont be using Grubflub anytime soon.
I hate to be Hoagie come lately but where the hell did you get this from, Zach?
Because that is total BS. I actually do the shopping and Arnolds bread on sale TODAY is $3.49. Eggs (and I use Jumbo about .20 more) are $3.19. 64OZ. Milk, $5.49. You better check you facts Zach. Obama ruined the economy. That’s why you a$$ kissers are eating a $hit sandwich today. Got milk?
The question wasn’t about “equal rights”, but about “greater equalityâ€? Equality can apply to many different aspects of the social condition, but if some people are poor and some people are rich — even in a perfect meritocracy —, then there are some aspects of inequality in society.
We’d be happy to look at your statistics concerning inflation over the last eight years.
From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011; 2015.
However, that is for selected cities, so it may not represent prices nationwide, but should give some idea of the rise in prices. On the other hand, if you have Prime Fresh from Amazon, you can buy Italian Bread for $1.60 per pound — delivered.
So greater equality would preclude equal rights.
Got it.
The fact of the matter seems to be that you want to take from those who have earned what they have gotten and give it to those who have not in order to support you vision of what is “equal.”
You want equal outcomes which means a minority female who works hard to become the best in her field would have the same resultant pay and outcome as the white male who sat on his couch drink PBR all day.
You would penalize the woman for being the best she can be and then call that “equal outcomes.”
We’d be happy to look at your statistics concerning inflation over the last eight years.
Join the real world Zach and come down from your pretend high perch….Your nobody…you live in your momma’s basement and you are trying to be something your not…..
One thing you are not is anyone with common sense…..you strike me as a college jr. or senior who believes they suddenly know everything and there is not a thing that they can be further taught…..
Stop with the Bureau of labor statistics which is an arm of the Obama administration whose sole purpose was to make Obama look good.
Then they are cherry picking their numbers as are you. I will repeat since you can’t read too well: I do the shopping in my household. I know the prices. I shop ON LINE at Peapod.com because they too deliver to my kitchen table! Log on and check the prices. The BLS and you are waaaay off. I also drop by my local Giant and peruse the isles for new products and menu ideas so I scope out the sales.
There’s no such thing as perfect equality for the very reason you state. There are tradeoffs involved: e.g. one person’s freedom ends where another person’s nose begins. Greater economic equality may entail restrictions on, say, the power to form monopolies.
We didn’t advocate anything. We pointed out that the meaning of social equality has a number of dimensions; religious, political, economic, national.
You forgot to provide your statistics concerning YOUR claim concerning inflation over the last eight years. An inadvertent omission, we’re sure.
You forgot to provide your statistics concerning YOUR claim concerning inflation over the last eight years. An inadvertent omission, we’re sure.
WE will see what the real prices are and what the real unemployment rate is when WE are in Charge of WE THE PEOPLE…..