Jump to content
Guests feel free to register and post ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS FEEL FREE TO REGISTER AND POST ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS ×

RHanson

Member
  • Posts

    1,448
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RHanson

  1. 1 hour ago, Mirabeau said:

     

    Don't know bigtex.

     

    Mirabeau and other landowners have had experience with a couple of different families who moved into Mirabeau's corner of the world from California.  They truly thought they were conservative, simply because they weren't as crazy as the members of the LA city council.  In fact, one can have the same philosophy as Fidel Castro and still be more conservative than the LA city council. 

     

    The fact is, they were liberals.

     

    They were not welcome, and we eventually "persuaded" them to get the hell on down the road.

     

    Our local real estate agents have been warned not to show properties to would-be immigrants from California, Oregon, Washington, New York, Minnesota or Massachusetts.

    I was born in Vermont and grew up in Massachusetts and have lived in Texas for a long time.  I married a native Texan and she is wonderful.  I would not even visit California, so much bigotry and hatred in that state.  I do, however, agree that the biggest problem with people emigrating from places like California and Massachusetts is that they bring their political perspective with them and seek to remake their destinations into the image of the places from which they fled instead of integrating into and adapting to the social conventions of their new environs. They have made their own lives miserable, they should fix their own states before moving to Texas.

  2. 4 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

    Nonsense!

    There are people in both parties that deal with people as members of groups  and others that deal with specific individuals.

    Trump thinks of Blacks as tokens he can point at and say, "look here is one of my Blacks!"  Have you noticed that Trump seems to regard Ben Carson as more a piece of furniture than an actual individual?

    Poor Ben Carson was not invited to join the infamous "Parade of the Lillywhite Photo Opportunists" on their stroll to practice masklessness and antisocial distancing, in which the President showed us that he was not skeert and he owned an actual Bible.

    Obviously parties are not monolithic, and yet it is the Republican party that emphasis individual liberty and individual responsibility and the Democratic party that consistently talks about groups of people, the rights of groups of people, the responsibilities of groups of people.

     

    I would like to personally thanks you for demonstrating yet again just how much of a bigot and racist you are in this post.

  3. 32 minutes ago, Taipan said:

     

    There are 24 Dem states.

    I propose that these states pay reparations to the BLM and 40 million blacks.  Dem money only.  No GOP money.   No Federal money.     Specifically, I want free housing for blacks--$1,000/mo.  housing allowance to each black.  Paid for by Dem states.   

    Taxes must be doubled, or maybe tripled.  That is not my problem.  I don't live in a Dem state(and I am not going to).

     

    Now, would all blacks in GOP states like to get on a Greyhound Bus and move to a Dem state and collect their housing allowance?

    That will be OK w/ me.   I just all them to be happy.                        😎

    States do not belong to political parties, only people.

     

    I would not be apposed to a 100k capitation tax on each Democrat to pay Democrats reparations for what Democrats did to themselves historically.  No need to actually send in the tax, each individual Democrat could simply fine himself 100k and then pay the 100k benefit back to himself.  No need to wait on the government for Justice.

     

    They all get their reparations from the people responsible for the harm in the most efficient manner possible.

    • Thumb up 1
  4. If I can show anyone a picture of a group of people and that person can tell me how diverse is that group, then they are a bigot unless they know the people in that group and can base their judgement on that information rather then on the race, or gender, or dress or other surface characteristics of the people in the picture.

     

    The greatest diversity is achieved only when we value each individual without regard to their race, religion, gender ..., in this way Republicans are far more diverse then Democrats as most Republicans look at people as unique individuals while most Democrats segregate individuals into groups.

     

    The Democratic party was historically, and still is, the party of racism and bigotry.

  5. 9 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

    I agree with this.

    Calling the police when someone is shooting in a public place is perfectly logical.

    The protest was about the murder of an innocent women when the police broke down the door and stormed her apartment.

    Not murder.   It is not hard to understand why it was not murder, only a killing.  This type of hyperbole gives rise to hatred and bigotry against the police.

     

    The protest was simply a manifestation of the widespread irrational hatred of the police.  This bigotry against the police is the wellspring of the BLM movement.

    • Thumb up 1
  6. 9 minutes ago, TBHWT said:

    Here here. The left have a misconception of the word racism, they only think in terms of blacks when the race word appears.

    Racism: refers to the separation of people through a process of social division into categories not necessarily related to races for purposes of differential treatment.

     Look at how they treat republicans.

    My preference is to use the term bigotry which is inclusive of racism rather then applying the term racism to bigotries that are not based on race.

     

    As an example Mexicans are a nationality and not a race, so a person that hates Mexicans is a bigot, but not a racist.

    Islam is a religion and not a race so people who hate Muslims just because they are Muslims are bigots, not racists.

    Police officers are members of a profession, so people who hate the police, mostly Democrats, are bigots instead of racists.

    People who blame all white people for slavery are both racists and stupid, including white people experiencing white guilt for something other white people did well over 100 years ago.

     

    I can not claim that all Democrats are bigots, but I have never personally met a Democrat who is not also a bigot, and often also a racist.  The vast majority of Democrats think of people, value people, as members of a group rather then as individuals.  This represents a systemic trend toward bigotry in the membership of the Democratic party.

     

    • Upvote 1
  7. 5 hours ago, Pastafarian said:

    I gave you examples of Republicans who’s ancestors were Dems. 
     

    From 1948 to 1984 more and more southern Dems became Republicans. You can see it in the electoral maps especially after the Civil Rights movement. 

    You can see a change in the numbers, but that is not the same a Democrats switching parties to become Republicans, those that did likely abandoned their racist past, the civil rights movement having created a crisis of conscience.

     

    The Democratic party has always been, sill is, the party of racism and bigotry, treating people as members of groups rather then as unique individual.

  8. 4 minutes ago, jerra- said:

     

    pretty much why i don't like no knock warrants.

     

    and doors are usually locked at night which means the police busted the door open.

    I am not anti - police, but neither am I a huge fan.  Any civil society must have some measure of law enforcement.

     

    Police, in general, should exhibit a profound respect for the rights of the people and it is just wrong that the police can use deception and yet it is a crime to lie to the police. 

     

    I am in favor of banning no knock warrens and making it a crime, and automatic termination, for any officer to lie to a member of the public.  This will make it harder to gain a confession from a criminal suspect, but it would go a long way to gaining the respect and cooperation of the public at large.

    • Upvote 2
  9.  

    9 minutes ago, jerra- said:

     

    what exactly do you not like about no knock warrants?

    The proper and reasonable response to someone breaking down your door in the middle of the night is to shoot them dead.

     

    Anyone can shout police as they enter.

     

    No knock warrants put both the public and police officers at significant risk, mostly the public, with often tragic results.

     

    People should have a reasonable opportunity to peacefully comply with a legal warrant.  That means that should be served the warrant and provided with a short period of time to inspect the same.

     

    • Thanks 1
  10. 22 minutes ago, Scout said:

    What the police did in Louisville  - murdering that sleeping woman in her bed - they should fire them all. 

    This is exactly what bigotry is, blaming an entire group for the alleged actions of a tiny minority.

     

    Breonna Tayler was killed but not murdered in an exchange of gunfire in her apartment where one of three police officers was shot as he entered the apartment with a valid search warrant.

     

    It was not the police, it was three police officers.

    The officers where never charged with a crime.

    The officers where fired upon first by Taylor's boyfriend.

     

    This was not a shinning moment in the history of policing but neither was it murder, and I am not a fan of no-knock warrants.

     

    When you shoot at the police, they are very likely to shoot back.

    • Upvote 1
  11. 20 hours ago, Squatchman said:

      The trumpvirus has killed over 125,000 Americans.

      

    And in the same six months about 1.4 million Americans died from other causes for the normal annual rate of 2.8 million. Nor would the two sets be exclusive as many of the Wuhan virus deaths are elderly and might have died anyway.  What an intelligent person would learn from these facts is that the Wuhan virus is not a significant threat to our way of life, and the government policies to mitigate the Wuhan virus have had a far more negative impact on our society then the virus itself.

     

  12. Just now, Pastafarian said:

    So it’s a hoax but it isn’t a hoax. 
     

    Got all the vases covered, huh?

    Nope ... he was speaking at a campaign event and enumerating Democratic a hoaxes and he suggested that this would be the next Democratic hoax and this statement is not in error as Democrats have consistently wielded the  Wuhan virus as a political weapon.

     

    It is not the virus itself that was the hoax, but rather how Democrats have used the virus as a political weapon.

     

    It should also be obvious that President Trump has consistently treated the Wuhan virus itself as a reality.

     

    The original post is participatory propaganda that takes a few worlds out of context and repeats them indefatigably until lots of people falsely accept them as a truth which, ironically,  demonstrates President Trumps original statement to be predictive of the behavior of Democrats with respect to the Wuhan virus.

    • Thumb up 1
  13. 2 minutes ago, Pastafarian said:

    If nothing can come from nothing then where did God come from?  Is there some kind of super god?  
     

    What prophecies have been fulfilled from scripture?

     

    Some of Nostradamus’ prophecies have been fulfilled. Should we refer to him as a prophet or a god?

    Your personal ignorance of the beginning neither necessitates  nor refutes the existence of a creative God.

  14. President trump never claimed that the Wuhan virus was a hoax, rather his statement was this was the next new Democratic hoax and this was before the U.S. had experienced any deaths from the Wuhan virus.

     

    With the subsequent spread of the virus, the President has certainly not maintained this type of public statement, rather he has continually, nearly daily, indicated the opposite.

     

    Your question at this late date is clearly intellectually dishonest.

    • Haha 1
  15. Just now, impartialobserver said:

    One can only judge/ascertain someone on an internet forum. Vegas is remarkably consistent in his scathing dislike...much of which is done in unsolicited fashion. That is hard to do if one is a fraud. 

    BLM is consistently maintaining the false  predicate of systemic racism in policing without any data to support this view.  I think many BLM people actually believe this to be true, but it is not objective reality.  This is but one example, but lots of people have no problem at all consistently maintaining a falsehood.

     

     

  16. 53 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

    Vegas has explicitly stated how he does not like liberals/progressives

    Not  dispositive, he could have been untruthful.

     

    Unless you can know his mind, read his mind, then at best you can do is offer a subjective opinion as to his thoughts.

    It is a fact that he has offered such statements,

    It is not a fact, only a subjective opinion, that those statements are truthful.

     

    I think it highly likely that your are correct and that he does not like leftists, but no one can know this as an objective fact except for Vegas unless you are claiming some mind reading ability.

     

     

     

  17. 4 minutes ago, Blue Devil said:

     

    That's what BLM and ANTIFA are for.

     

    The Article  V Convention of States - might expedite the process as well, w/ a Constitutional amendment here and there.

     

    Tear it down!

    Any such Amendment would explicitly require the consent of the states involved.

     

    Proposed Amendment:

    The State of California is to be removed from the Union of These United States.

     

    As such an Amendment would deprive California of it franchise in the Senate, it would require the consent of California.  You cant write an Amendment to force a State our of the Union or to force one or more States to join together.

     

    BLM, ANTIFA ... are have no power to affect such a change.

     

    • Upvote 1
  18. 3 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

    No.

     

    Still, I would not hold your breath in hopes of this happening in the next 100 years. They have tried to break California into smaller states and it has not come even close to fruition.

    Section 3

    1: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

     

    All the States involved must also consent to any such change as well as Congress.

×
×
  • Create New...