A Letter From Rhino Times Reader Austin Morris
As another “Liberal” tries to use violence to overturn the democratic 2024 election – by murder, no less – so we see the true nature of the Left. They only believe in democracy when their preferred outcome prevails. Otherwise, like small children, they have temper tantrums and try to subvert the will of the people. And they’re not above using murderous violence.
Like Thomas Crooks before him, the attempted assassin at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner donated to the Leftist organization ActBlue, tagging his donation for Kamala Harris.
In an irony that will undoubtedly escape him, he will call himself a Democrat.
Even more incomprehensibly, Cole Allen will be a hero to some on the Left. For in the phrase coined by their fellow travelers in the National Socialist German Workers’ Party*, “The end justifies the means”.
Their unhinged hatred for Trump endorses any evil.
And after all, Allen was only recently awarded the “Teacher of the Month” award in December!
Maybe he’ll be featured on WGHP’s “What’s Right with Our Schools”.
– Austin Morris
* Often abbreviated in German and English to Nazi
.
Austin,
Very nice missive.
I’m anticipating someone will be start playing ‘I’m not a Nazi, you are’ game anytime soon.
Stay self-protected my friend.
———-
Thanks Patrick ! Protected I am (1911’s mostly).
Austin,
I knew there was something I liked about you
I recommend 230 grain Hydro-Shok
———-
Wow – we agree on that too, but I couldn’t find them for years, so I stopped looking. If anyone knows where to get Federal’s 230g Hydra-Shok Hollow Points, please speak up. If the stuff ever hits the fan, they will do the job.
Cheers Patrick!
Austin,Midway USA or SGAmmo sells them. You can find them on the internet
———–
Thanks, Reb !
I thot it was 45s…..
That is what I believe our President would like us to do…and Morris is very much doing in his letter. But I suggest it is a much broader problem yet with a very focused source given that accountability for the mood of the nation rests in one place and one place only.
im anticipating the inevitable comment from the One Who Shall Not Be Named referencing j6 as a counterpoint and acting like hes a genius as usual (spolier alert he isnt)
J/6 was horrible. Poop was smeared everywhere, even on Pelosi’s desk. Just awful.
But IMHO, Charlie Kirk’s widow wishes that the left had retaliated in kind by only pooping on his desk ….
More Baloney!! The left believes in the correctness of American Elections. This would-be assassin is bonkers. Funny the violence over elections have come from which side in the Wilmington coup d’etat , the January 6, 2021
insurrrection and the American Civil War?
Mr Morris is yet again claiming political violence is unique to the left with a hyper focus on the recent event while ignoring the all the violence against the political leaders on the left by radical people from the right over the last few years. Especially the actual murder of a Democrat State Representative. Not to mention attempted Kidnapping, attempted murder, and innumerable amount of violent threats against anyone in the political arena from voting officials, school board members and over 14,000 threats against members of congress in 2025 alone (the highest number in history).
Violence is not a tool of just the left or just the right. It is a broad social problem across the entire political spectrum, and I suggest it is time for conservatives to understand the impact of an administration that drives negativity and hate at the core of its messaging on a daily basis is one of the root causes of these growing issues in our society. Morris and my own exchanges here in the Rhino Times are a great example of the downhill nature of political hate and ugly language.
When you have a president whose Christmas message uses phrases such as ‘Radical left scum’ and ‘rot in hell’, or a Thanksgiving message where he attacks refugees and legal immigrants by falsely claiming “most of them are on welfare, from failed nations, or from prisons, mental institutions, gangs or drug cartels” and even called a Governor he didn’t like ‘retarded’ on Thanksgiving. Those are just the Holiday messages.
Hate and division is a key focus for the majority of his communications. For example, when he recently explicitly stated his contempt for Democrats, saying “I hate them, too, you know that? I hate them. He continually refers to people who disagree with him as ‘vermin’, ‘thugs’, ‘traitors’, ‘scum’, ‘vile animals’, ‘enemy within’. This type of hateful language from a national leader can only lead to broad hate and division among his followers and his detractors.
The greatest fear of the left is that this driving of hate and division is intentional as a means to justify the erosion of individual rights of the people of the United States. I hope I am wrong, but I fear I am not.
———–
I did NOT claim that political violence is unique to the Left.
The Professor’s first lie is in his first line.
I’m not bothering with the rest of his lies. As everyone agrees, he has no credibility.
Zero.
I implied by your words ‘so we see the true nature of the Left.’……as well as what you left out of your letter, ie that violence is just as common from the right.
By your denial of my read on your letter, do we agree this is not a left / right issue but an American issue and no way unique to only the left?
———–
Your English is gibberish and incomprehensible. And I’m actually trying to understand it. A new reader has no chance of comprehending your Pidgin English.
I began by trying to substitute “inferred” for “implied”, so that it made more sense, but the balance of your crap is known only to you, “Professor”.
JV is right to ask if you’ve had a cerebral infarction. Are you alright? You seem increasingly disturbed and unbalanced.
Seek help. For your own sake.
Ad Hominem
professor/Christian C Rice/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/Whatever,
“Ad Hominem”
I can say the same about you. Would you like me to post some examples?
I will give you a C for the clever attempt though.
Feel free to point anytime I do such a thing. Much appreciated.
.
“Moron”, “Hater’, “Bigot”, “Racist”, “Redneck”, “Tinfoil Hat wearer”, etc, etc…
The Professor has a very bad, and very selective memory. Truth is, he’s the guy who always starts the ad hominem personal insults.
Al Hare, an Ad Hominem is a type of deflection used in debates….just because someone uses a label or a funny name while actually address the point made isn’t an Ad hominem. Any examples you provide need context.
hope that helps.
—————
Careful Professor, your double standards are showing.
– “When I call you names, it’s not an ad hominem insult, but when you call me names, it is!”
And my original remark merely criticized your unintelligible language. No personal epithet or name calling was involved, although it can be inferred from your gibberish that you are unintelligent.
You miss understand the definition of an Ad Hominem then…..here let me help you understand.
Ad Hominem = a logical fallacy where an argument is countered by attacking the person’s character, motive, or personal attributes rather than addressing the substance of their argument
Key is the bit where it says “…rather than addressing the substance of their argument.”
If you address the substance of their argument and call them names while doing so, it isn’t an Ad Hominem. It’s just rude and ugly.
Not complicated. Glad to help.
————-
Gee, thanks for telling me what I ” miss understand”, Genius Boy !
Is that related to Mister Understand? LOL !
————–
The more you try to come off as educated and intelligent, the more stupid and patronizing you appear.
My God, you’re thick.
Oh, and your rebuttal is absurdly fallacious, Einstein. You’re a joke.
Another Ad Hominem
————-
The truth stings, huh ?
It’s not truth. Just a deflection.
————–
Oh, it’s truth alright.
But as you have demonstrated over and over again, you are unable to accept truths that prove you wrong, and you’re incapable of ever admitting that you’re wrong.
Anytime. On anything.
LOL, I give a counter argument or counter points, and you call me names…..THAT is an Ad Hominem and a deflection tactic used when you can’t counter my argument. A lot of conservatives use that approach when hit with facts, data or science that counters their point of view.
But you be you. Cheers.
————
No, that’s not true.
You tried to deny that you use ad hominem insults, but Al immediately provided all the insults you habitually hurl at us. So your claim was instantly proven to be a lie. You lie all the time.
YOU pollute this column with your rudeness and patronizing condescension. Nobody else. Just you.
Again, I will type slower.
If you respond with a counter point included in the response it isn’t an ad hominem even if you include insults.
Hope that helps.
————-
You’re so bloody rude and condescending, aren’t you?
“I will type slower…” Hey, F. U. buddy.
And if you really want to play the “I’m smarter than you are” game, you’re going to lose.
“I will type slower” is a solecism (look it up). The phrase requires an adverb, not an adjective.
It should be “I will type more slowly” at the very least, or to be perfectly correct, “I shall type more slowly” since the First Person demands “shall”, not “will”.
So, how smart are you feeling now, Einstein ?
You’re as thick as a brick… “Professor”.
professor/Christian C Rice/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/Whatever,
“The greatest fear of the left is that this driving of hate and division is intentional as a means to justify the erosion of individual rights of the people of the United States.”
‘The greatest fear of the LEFT…’? Who is responsible for the MAJORITY of violent mobs in the streets?
I am no fan of groups like the Proud Boys and other ‘groups’ like them. And while I’m sure they or some members of them have participated in violence, but I have NOT seen anything on the scale where there are HUNDREDS of their drones (Antifa, the radical wing of BLM and their offshoots are just two examples) disrupting/threatening peaceful gatherings, burning, looting, attacking en mass, (all documented), yet you want to try to make them appear to be innocent Little Red Riding Hoods. IMO that is the height of hypocrisy.
And before you go off on your usual demeaning, name calling, finger pointing rants like accusing people of being tin foil hat wearing kooks, talking down to them like they’re children, all the while using an ‘I’m better then you’ tone let me point out one of my personal core philosophical beliefs… I know I’m not perfect. The last perfect person was hung from a Cross.
But you go on following your own advice…you be you
When a group such as Proud Boys show up to a peaceful protest and violence occurs, is that the fault of the protestors or the Proud Boys and other groups of their kind? I suggest that is the fault and intent of groups such as the Proud Boys. Sure, the Left has similar groups of agitators. Some more and some less organized than Proud Boys but agitators they are all.
Personally, I believe finger pointing about who is worst is silly. I stand by the idea that rhetoric from the top leadership of our country sets the tone for all that engage in political debate, protest and conflict under him while he is in office….and Trump has served up the worst of this rhetoric of hate and division of any President in the history of the United States. I think THAT is where we need to focus on difference between the parties.
I also ask you not use my actual full name as the doxing of me is a type of political harassment that I would hope you would not want to be a part of. Go ahead make false claims about me posting using other names than Chris and Professor, but please do not use my full formal name. The recent doxing of me outside of Rhino Times is just another form of political violence even though it hasn’t yet become a physical threat. i stopped using my name for a reason as it appears some can take it as well as they dish it out. I hope Scott can help in this if possible.
Have you had a cerebral infarction?
———–
I hope the Professor is never ever subject to harassment because of his sincerely expressed beliefs, no matter how abhorrent I find them (and him).
This forum is a treasure in our locality because it permits free speech, and anonymous or veiled free speech is an essential pillar of freedom. I respect his wish to shield his identity. It is a decision I made myself before I ever made my first comment… but I believe he should choose his pseudonym and stick with it.
Austin, I found an old invoice. They are open 24/7. Good prices and fast shipping SGAmmo
Stillwater, Oklahoma
1-405-373-3500
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/Whatever,
“I also ask you not use my actual full name as the doxing of me is a type of political harassment that I would hope you would not want to be a part of.”
Our hand-to-hand instructor’s first lesson was “if you try to fight fair, you will get what you deserve. You fight for two reasons…to defend yourself and to defeat your enemy.” And as far as your ”…hope…” I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.
For the record, I went back in the Rhino archives and found numerous examples where someone else used your full name introducing your Letter to the Editor, but as you wish I will no longer use your full name, but do reserve the right to do so if sufficiently provoked. What that standard is I will let you figure out.
In fact, as a sign of the adult I am I will even speak to Alan when I see him again and ask him to also desist, but I make no promises. Knowing him as well as I do, it will be like urinating into a head wind. Unlike some, I do not try to intrude on people’s God given Constitutional rights.
On a different note…”Personally, I believe finger pointing about who is worst is silly.”
Seriously?
Thank you for not using my full name any longer. It is appreciated.
Alan is the one person I believe I am inappropriately rude with and am trying to stop with the personal insults towards. I have always just seen him as the perfect example of MAGA simple mindedness that I believe is the foundation of what has destroyed the value of truth and facts in political discourse.
Thanks again. While we are a dysfunctional community, it is important to exchange ideas with people you don’t agree with, understand, or even like. But threats on my family and livelihood are too much so I prefer to use an anonymous username going forward.
Professor I do believe that you yourself have used your full name before in the Rhino.Otherwise how would anyone on here know what it is. As Don would say
“Dummy”
I do regret using my real name given some recent threats against my livelihood and family from a rhino times reader. But this is the world we now live in….it won’t make me go away as I am a believe in free speech and find the conservative view on issues as a challenge and enjoy engaging on using facts, data, and science to counter many of the more negative points of view of conservatives.
But yeah, I was a dummy to trust this community with my real name.
“The recent doxing of me outside of Rhino Times…”
“…recent threats against my livelihood and family from a rhino times reader.”
Which is it, outside the RT or an RT reader? Or is it something else, or do you need more time to get your story straight?
Here I will type slower this time.
I was DOX’d outside of the Rhino Times (ie, someone contacted me via a means other than RT comment section) by a Rhino Times reader (ie I know this because they referenced a comment of mine from the Rhino Times)
Hope that helps.
So how do you characterize the actions of black people in 2020 during the blm when cities were robbed looted and burned causing millions of dollars of damage, then were labeled as peaceful protests
I characterized them the same as J6ers. Criminals who deserved jail.
You are confusing the 1000+ BLM protests that didnt turn into riots by aggitstors like ANTIFA activists or Proud Boy activits. BLM was a very large movement with 1000 or more protests. Not all turned into riots and not all people who attented rioted. But those that did deserved to be arrested most certainly.
Thanks professor for the “Mr.” In front of Austin’s name, I’m glad you recognize he deserves that measure of respect. The same as
President Donald J. Trump
Trump president for life
I don’t want anyone for life. Except the wife, of course.
She reads these things…….
Good save !
If anyone thinks that the Democratic Party cares about them, they live in a bubble.
Democratic Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) was asked by MSNBC in 2024 why Democrats aren’t pushing for a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, and Murphy replied. “So you are right that has been the Democratic strategy for 30 years, maybe, and it has failed to deliver for the people we care about the most, the undocumented Americans that are in this country.”
Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) wants American citizens to pay reparations to illegal aliens due to stress caused by ICE.
Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) opposes voter ID laws, calling them ‘voter suppression’ that could reduce voting rolls by 5–10%. This reveals Democrats’ preference for non-citizen votes over ensuring election integrity, raising concerns about their commitment to fair elections and national security
These ultra-progressive people believe in a mandated equality of results, achieved by radically high taxes on successful people and by transferring that money to unsuccessful people—an impossible dream.
Democrats are a party that cares about ALL people. So, if a family has lived in the US, raised a family and had kids that are US citizens for example, the party strongly supports the idea of a path for US citizenship versus straight deportation. Offering a path for these types of scenarios recognizes the contributions they have made by their work, paying taxes, and community involvement as well as having deep empathy for kids brought up by undocumented parents and the unwarranted emotional challenges they would face being forced from the country where they were born and raised.
Democrats have always believed that this offering be a one-time single event and that any bill offering this solution also involve improvements to existing immigration laws to better secure the border and manage large influxes of asylum seekers.
Sure, they ‘cheated’ to get here, but we allowed them to stay with lack enforcement of employers utilizing undocumented workers and allowing existing immigration law outdated with large holes in our border and immigration management.
Cruelty is ignoring the good a family has done for the community while solely focusing a desperate behavior we enabled years prior. I fully understand conservatives lack the compassion for these families because they ‘cheated / broke the law’, but I for one, believe in second chances and those families that have benefited their communities for many years deserve a path to citizenship.
Professor I’m going to defer to your first sentence “Democrats care about all people “. I say BS to that. A perfect example is skip and his merry band of minions. Skip doesn’t give a rats butt about White people. Never has and never will.
Just because he is very passionate about his pursuit of racial equity doesn’t mean he ‘hates’ white people or doesn’t care about them. The zero-sum argument you are making about people who pursue racial equity is a trope promoted by White Nationalist to support the lie about reverse racism.
Sure, there are such things as racist people of color but just because they support equity between races doesn’t make them racist. Other than his promoting of racial equity and overuse of the ‘race card’, what actions has Skip taken that defines him as a racist against White people?
To address the common misconception of democrats wanting to transfer wealth. I have many points that disagree with that characterization of democrats.
The idea is democrats only want the wealthy pay a fair share and the understanding that the current system allows the wealthy (especially the ultra-wealthy) to avoid paying a fair representation of their ‘income’ in taxes. The challenge with the wealthy is that they don’t just earn a paycheck with which to be taxed. For example, if you live off your savings outside of qualified plans, you only gain tax (15%) versus income tax 15%-25% . They are also able to afford to use tax deferral programs the average American can’t afford. Plus, they have access to many types of tax shelters that the average taxpayer does not.
With the ultra-wealthy it gets really creative how they can ‘borrow against assets’ versus selling those assets and having to pay gains taxes yet benefit from the massive (and untaxed) growth of those assets. This is how Musk can spend 100s of billions to buy Twitter but NOT have ever paid any tax on the growth of those assets.
You and I most likely are taxed on every bit of income we earn. The wealthier you are, the more ‘income’ you can hide, defer, or ignore since it is the wealthy people who have the ears and pockets of those writing the tax laws in congress.
I am not an expert on tax shelter strategies so don’t know how much income is hidden by the wealthy annually….but I do believe it is a great deal.
Happy to debate and discuss.
You should ask Pelosi or AOC
Ah, professor, I bet you write your opinions from a smartphone, tablet, or PC. Isn’t that wonderful?
Yet you want to tax those hard-working wealthy folks who made it possible for you to do this, like Steve Jobs, Michael Dell, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Al Gore, who invented the internet….plus many more
Yes, I want them to pay a fair share of taxes given they own a significant proportion of wealth thanks to both the government and the working class. Why should they be able to hide ‘income’ while we are taxed on every penny?
You’ve still never actually said specifically what that “fair share” is. No matter what the number you arbitrarily come up with, it is government spending on both sides that is the problem, not tax rates.
They should pay the same rate for their ‘income’ as you and I do (~35% – 37% for highest level of income or so)…..the key is they claim they do pay the same rate (or higher) but that doesn’t account for the hidden income of the high wealth individuals such as the examples I provided.
Recent Washington Post article discussed research that the top 1% of income earnings hide more than 20% of their income. In addition, the hidden income they hold $8.5 trillion in unrealized capital gains as well as $4 trillion overseas.
Note this doesn’t close the annual US budget gap even if fully taxed using current rates. But that is a different conversation of increased taxes and reduced spending.
They aren’t hiding it. They are using the laws as intended. You and I can use those same laws. But you haven’t earned enough money to effectively do so. That’s on you, not them. You are penalizing them for success.
You could take every dime from them and it would not help the national debt, and you can only do that once. We just need to spend less at every level of government. Address the problem at its source, which is spending. So dumb, dude.
Right. Change the laws. That is the point.
Don’t disagree closing the tax shelter loopholes won’t eliminate the debt by itself. It one of many changes we need to make.
—————–
Don is right. We don’t have a taxing problem; we have a spending problem.
The only change that must be made is for the government to spend less money than they bring in. It’s the same thing that every American is expected to do, so why can’t the government?
Balancing the budget by only cutting spending would require deep cuts to SS and Medicare. To balance the budget with cuts alone is 25% of all federal spending. If you leave SS and Medicare untouched, and cut all deacretionary spending (including 800B military spending), it wouldnt fully eliminates the deficite.
They days of cutting to balance spending are long gone after so many tax cuts by Republicans where they never bothered to balance with appropriate spending cuts.
False. Just because you thunk it doesn’t make it so, unless you are an expert in government spending, of course. You are just typing junk into your AI machine and going with whatever it tells you. There are entire swaths of government departments that could be trimmed or eliminated. “Tax the rich” is a slogan to win over weak minds, not a solution. So dumb.
Ok Don, I shared what I understand about what is required to balance the Federal budget. You claim it is wrong, so what would you cut that would sufficiently balance the budget without any revenue increase?
My numbers are correct by the way using 2025 budget figures and the current budget deficit which currently stands at 25% of the budget. My comment about ‘discretionary spending’ covers what you call “entire swaths of government departments”. Hint, there is no trimming when your deficit is 25% of the budget and the other 15% is interest on the loans to cover the prior budget deficits.
Go ahead give me your great wisdom on how to balance the budget. Or are you just a critic who has no actual answers because you didn’t bother to look up the figures yourself?
No, dummy. I don’t have the quick guide to government success in my pocket. My point is that neither do you. But the answer is not “tax the rich”.
For starters though: The government needs to divest itself of the myriad or non-essential junk that bogs it down. Elected officials should get no pay or benefits, be limited to a specified number of terms (it is not supposed to be a career), and should be expressly prohibited from adding anything to a bill other than what the bill’s stated purpose is. You have to start at the top of government and work your way down through the minutia, trimming the fat at every turn until you are left with a lean and efficient government that does only what the founding fathers intended and nothing more. Just that one simple paragraph is far better than your “pay your fair share rich guys!” plan. So dumb man. Get a clue.
I was discussing current budgets. Why are you now changing the subject to new legislation and how spending is added? I don’t disagree with you on that point by the way.
You can find as much detail as about the federal budget as you want as it is all online. My point is valid. Balancing the budget by only cutting spending would require deep cuts to SS and Medicare. To balance the budget with cuts alone is 25% of all federal spending. If you leave SS and Medicare untouched and cut all discretionary spending (including 800B military spending), it wouldn’t fully eliminate the deficit.
I get you don’t want to believe me, but unless you have other data or source, I am going to ignore you Na Uh.
Best wishes
P.S. Since you think we have a spending problem, do you like that the ‘free’ new ballroom is now going to cost US taxpayers $1.4 billion?
The idea of a secure, permanent venue is good. The cost seems exorbitant, but that is the problem with government that I refer to. They have a stupid bidding process that makes prices balloon. Like I said, start at the top and trim your way through the wasted money.
Neither you nor I have the resources to analyze the fine details of the federal budget. Nor does the deficit need to be clipped all in one go. But there are currently zero efforts to trim the government or reduce spending. Simply taxing more is in no way a solution. You will just be adding fuel to the government consumption fire.
Your “solution” amounts to giving a heroin addict more heroin. Not complicated and so dumb.
There was no bidding process for the ballroom. Drump just handed out the contracts to friends. Kinda his thing really.
I am glad you appreciate that Trump lied when he said he was going to cut the federal budget. What he has done is actually increase spending but only on those things he personally supports as congress is not holding him accountable at all.
I suggest it is far cheaper to have good security in the same manner we have for decades for formal governmental functions that it is to build a 1.4 billion ballroom. Amazing how Trump gets a pass from conservatives on wasteful spending that he funnels to his friends and family. The swamp is overflowing with grift and conservatives don’t care because their cult leader told them it was ‘ok’.
I hope you are not in that cult and see what he is doing for what it is….wasteful grift of your tax dollars.
I have already said in this very conversation that there is waste coming from both sides. You are the one that seems fixated only on the right and on Trump. American Government has a spending problem, yes on both sides, not a taxing problem, just as Austin stated. Wake up and stop giving the addict his drugs.
Yet you can’t even offer high level insight into how to balance the budget by spending cuts alone. Got it. Hint. You can’t.
I already did, idiot. Start at the top and work your way down, eliminating and streamlining as you go. It would be a long and complicated process. But it is doable, but not by me or you on the space of a chat. Get real and be serious. So dumb.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
One of your mantras is about how the talk that voter fraud is overblown. Since you seem to be in love with referencing news articles as rock hard proof of your points, here you go…
https://abc11.com/post/nc-board-elections-finds-34000-dead-people-voter-rolls/18982688/
By your standards, this source can’t be challenged.
No, I’m not saying all 34,000 dead people rose from the grave and voted. I am saying there is a good probability a much larger number then you constantly throw out did. Unlike you, I’m not saying it in a definite tone. I am saying, IMO, it is a problem and bigger then Democrats, you included, want to admit.
One line the Democrats (the (NS) Democrat Party as Alan refers to it) love to use over and over again the false argument that minorities (mostly black) are kept from voting, yet I’ve seen NO documented evidence of it. Talk is cheap, I would like to see solid evidence.
How can voter fraud be overblown….. like being a little bit pregnant…you commit voter fraud or you don’t
what if someone is pregnant with twins and one of them dies
From a single person point of view yes fraud is fraud. But on ‘the whole’ any fraud is statistically irrelevant given how infrequent it is….so why burden all for an insignificant few.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
“But on ‘the whole’ any fraud is statistically irrelevant given how infrequent it is….so why burden all for an insignificant few.”
Really? So you consider someone, oh say an older citizen, who loses everything to fraud “insignificant”? I thought Democrats cared for folks like that. So your attitude is ‘too bad, so sad, it’s your problem’. That individual is “..statistically irrelevant…”?
My professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever, how compassionate of you. Sounds like you are more of what you accuse Republicans of being then the Democrat you claim to be.
But hey…you be you
We were discussing the context of voter fraud. You are changing the subject. Wierd
But you be you.
#1 Scott,
Totally love the picture you’ve added. Oh for the days of $24.95 for a box of 50. (Are you old enough to remember that?)
#2 Mike Haley,
Truer words have never been spoken. Thank you.
#3 professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
Note I said DOCUMENTED evidence, not “someone told my Uncle George he was told about…”. Cite your reliable source.
How did we go from your false assumption of rolls not being purged of the dead being evidence of fraud to the statement that I never made that voting laws impact black people? I have said I support voter ID in general since in NC there are still valid ways to vote if you struggle to obtain an ID.
My most recent comments have been about the SAFE act which actually places a bigger burden on women. I also comment on how it places a bigger burden on low-income and rural people which doesn’t necessarily mean black people. There is no documented study of this as of yet because it hasn’t and should be allowed to happen.
Side note, there are indeed many studies indicating a negative impact to voter turnout from ID laws but then there are also many other studies that show only minimal impact….so clearly not yet conclusive. Although a more recent Michigan Study on the subject is worth a read. It used a novel means of the testing the impact of voter ID laws. Personally, I think the topic warrants more studies to validate the Michigan methodology as more states have initiated ID laws since it was last conducted.
The study of election turnout are complicated because of the fluctuation of turnout in general. The Michigan study uses something called the CCES which is a large sample of validated voters (50,000 or average state sample of 1,000). This avoid the flaw in most studies that are ‘self-reported’ which seems to over report actual turnout by 20+%.
Look it up as it is interesting.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
“How did we go from your false assumption of rolls not being purged of the dead being evidence of fraud to the statement that I never made that voting laws impact black people?”
Seriously? “…false assumption…”? https://abc11.com/post/nc-board-elections-finds-34000-dead-people-voter-rolls/18982688/ is a “false assumption? People are right, why do I bother even after using your favorite tactic.
Are you reading that article thinking 34000 dead people voted. Weird. Just because there are dead people on the rolls (there always will be) don’t mean anyone voted under those names. Have any examples of people voting using those names? Bet you don’t. Hence not an example of fraud.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
“Are you reading that article thinking 34000 dead people voted.”
Again you fall back on trying to twist peoples words and statements to salvage your lack of an effective counter-argument.
What I said was “No, I’m not saying all 34,000 dead people rose from the grave and voted.” Please show me where you can possibly get what you are implying (very similar to the word ‘lie’) that I said that.
Your grade slipped to a “C-“
You will notice the quote of mine you shared was a question….
Given your answer to that question, how does thst article point to fraud in our election systems…as I have noted, I dont see how it does.
scott yost what happened why is there a picture now? was it a glitch again
Austin Morris sent it in for me to post in the comments section due to a discussion below about ammo. I could not post in comments section so I posted it here.
ok understood. that is pretty funny
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Gentlemen, the greatest thing about the Rhino Times is that it permits real free speech. The Editor, Scott Yost, not only believes in free speech but practises it and enables it. Scott deserves great commendation for this, since so few “journalists” in positions of control actually permit it. He is a true libertarian. Thank you, Scott.
The corollary of this is that one never knows where any particular debate will go. In this case we began talking about bullets, a specific bullet actually.
Amazingly, Patrick Henry and Rebel also favour this pistol and cartridge, so I decided to dig around in my Ammo Box and found an old box of Federal Hydra-Shok 230g 45 ACP rounds – with about half left! I thought it would amuse my friends here to see the price for the box of 50 – $24.99.
It might be a few years since I bought them….
I doubted whether Scott could put up the photo I took, but he did, so you all can see it yourselves.
————
Thanks Scott, and thanks to Patrick and Rebel. I’ll be ordering some from SGAmmo Rebel – even if they’re no longer $25 a box. Thanks for the tip, Reb.
And I’m grateful that in this country we still have the right to self-defence. The Brits and Aussies and Kiwis have been disarmed.
God Bless America.
.
My sentiments exactly Austin. God Bless America, people like you, Scott, Alan, Patrick and all the other true believers on here. My driveway is about 300 yards long. Perfect long gun practice length. If you get that close my uncle Mr.Garand will be greeting you, get closer and my cousins Samuel and Dan will say hello. Like you Austin my favorite is my grandfathers 1911. Stay safe my fellow patriots.
———–
Please don’t shoot on sight, Rebel. It might only be a door-to-door salesman – like me!
———–
My favourite 1911 is my Colt Series 70 in nickel. It’s old but it shoots so sweet.
Cheers!
Austin Morris,
Mine is a Springfield Arms clone of the Army issued M1911. I carry a compact model for concealed carry. And you’re right…old but sweet
Progressive Democrats have embraced an agenda that goes beyond what’s politically, legally, and morally acceptable.
Democrats teach our kids that America was founded on racism and that our country is rotten.
Democrats insist that capitalism is evil, hate successful people, tout that hard work is for chumps, and merit is taboo.
Democrats insist that the nuclear family is tyrannical to women.
Democrats support people in Congress who believe there are six genders and think the climate crisis can be solved by eliminating cows with their flatulence, showing their detachment from reality.
Democrats think Dr. Seuss is racist, Mr. Potato Head is sexist, and children can change their genders at any time.
Democrats hate our immigration laws. They want criminal illegal aliens to roam free while ICE officers rot in jail, which should make our supporters feel a sense of urgency to defend our borders and safety.
Democrats allow gang members, drug traffickers, and terrorists to enter our country unchecked.
While Democrats performed their song-and-dance routine about the government shutdown, more than 100,000 DHS employees went without paychecks, and chaos unfolded at every airport in America.
But when a vote went to the Senate floor to withhold pay from senators during government shutdowns, Democrats blocked it. They were willing to use the paychecks of federal employees as a political pawn, but they weren’t willing to share in that sacrifice themselves.
The issue of illegal alien crime should be solved by making sure those illegal aliens aren’t allowed to remain in the country, and that they don’t illegally cross our border in the first place. Refusing to deport illegal aliens, or failing to stop them from entering the country entirely, is what the Democrats do best. They absolutely believe that illegal aliens have more rights than American citizens, and they refuse to protect us.
Everything you said Salt Life is 100% correct. Can’t wait to hear professors retort. He believes that any ILLEGAL crime no matter how heinous is just a one off thing.
I believe that every crime is representative of the individual who committed the crime, not presentative of the classification or race of that person.
More lies and misrepresentation from a conservative about what Democrats believe…..for the record as one of the few democrats on the site…..
“Democrats teach our kids that America was founded on racism and that our country is rotten”. – Nope. democrats teach that our country has a long history of racism that has had a lasting negative impact on people of color. They also teach that we have come a very long way in overcoming that racism but it still exists.
“Democrats insist that capitalism is evil, hate successful people, tout that hard work is for chumps, and merit is taboo” – Nope – democrats strongly support capitalism but believe it requires governance and regulation to avoid stepping on workers’ rights and environmental impacts in pursuit of profits
“Democrats insist that the nuclear family is tyrannical to women.” – Nope – Democrats strongly support nuclear families but also respect other types of family structures equally.
“Democrats support people in Congress who believe there are six genders and think the climate crisis can be solved by eliminating cows with their flatulence, showing their detachment from reality.” – Yes, because democrats now the difference between Sex and Gender. Yes cows add to the problem of climate but isn’t the leading problem. Just one of many things we need to consider if we want a future on the planet beyond the next couple 100 years.
“Democrats think Dr. Seuss is racist, Mr. Potato Head is sexist, and children can change their genders at any time.” – Nope. They think a book of Dr Seuss did contain racial stereotype of Asians that is today offensive but lover Sr Seuss books overall as great reading for children. Democrats don’t care about Mr Potato Head…maybe someone does but not the party itself…. No democrats don’t think children can change their gender anytime, only after careful engagement with medical professionals, parents and specialists.
“Democrats hate our immigration laws. They want criminal illegal aliens to roam free while ICE officers rot in jail, which should make our supporters feel a sense of urgency to defend our borders and safety” – Nope – Democrats think our immigrations laws are out of date and if followed allow asylum seekers too easy of access to the US and therefore we need to update immigration laws. – Nope – Democrats believe ICE agents should follow constitutional law as all other officers of the law are required. – Democrats strongly believe in strong border security and that we need to update our laws to better defend the border in a humane way.
“The issue of illegal alien crime should be solved by making sure those illegal aliens aren’t allowed to remain in the country” – Democrats strongly agree that any immigrant documented or undocumented should be deported if they commit any serious crime
Republicans blocked the democrats attempt to continue to pay airport security during the shutdown and ICE was still funded so the delay in pay sits on Republican shoulders.
Democrats only believe that long-term undocumented immigrants with a clean criminal record and a history of paying taxes deserve a path to citizenship. NOT all undocumented immigrants.
Happy to discuss any of these topics.
————
“The Prolix Professor” suffers from a chronic case of verbal diarrhea.
ad hominem
——————–
Yep !
You earned it.
“If the shoe fits… “
I understand I earned an Ad hominem from you given I gave a bunch of facts that you can’t counter effectively so you attack that messenger.
————-
You ” miss understand “.
Ha, ha, ha, ha….
Everything becomes less stable when running out of ethical standards and sound money. Our Christian nations was built on both of those, but we chose to leave those behind. Now we just have chaos and debt.
We weren’t built as a Christian nation; we were a country built on religious freedom. I suggest we are a nation founded on faith in God but not a specific religion.
—————–
We were indeed founded as a nation built on religious freedom, and the people of the inchoate USA freely chose Christianity. Not Hindusm. Not Islam. Not Buddhism. Not Sikhism.
Christianity.
Of all the World’s religious beliefs from Atheism to Zoroastrianism, the USA has always been a Christian country.
You are incorrect. You will note that not a single document developed by the people of the inchoate USA ever included the words Christian, Christianity, Jesus, etc… anywhere in those documents. That was very intentional.
The First Amendment of the Constitution begins with, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
The first sentence of the first amendment makes very clear that the US was NOT founded under a specific religious doctrine.
——————-
I didn’t say the US was founded under a specific religious doctrine, did I, you sly bastard?
I said it was founded as a nation built on religious freedom, and under that freedom the people chose Christianity (overwhelmingly).
This is not incorrect; it is obviously correct.
——————-
Why do you always misrepresent what other people say? Why are you so duplicitous and deceitful?
“USA has always been a Christian country”
This is a highly incorrect statemement as I noted above.
You clearly contradict yourself. How can we be a country founded on religous freedom yet choose a single religion above others? Hint, we haven’t.
Hope thst helps.
———————
[Deleted].
Everyone acknowledges and accepts that the US has always been a Christian country. like the rest of the Western World. You can deny it until you’re blue in the face, but that only demonstrates what an idiot you are.
And not big enough to admit it when you’re wrong.
Furthermore, there is OBVIOUSLY no problem with both being free and Christian. This is a free country and a Christian country.
Is this difficult for you?
You can’t claim the US is a ‘Christian’ country and also acknowledge how important freedom of religion is to the founding principles of the United States. The US is a secular country by design. Sure, Christianity is the majority religion, but the U.S. government is officially neutral on religion and does not recognize any faith as its official state religion.
—————-
OF COURSE the US Government is officially neutral on religion !
OF COURSE it does not recognize any faith as a specific state religion !!
So… ??
So….we are NOT a Christian nation.
—————–
The Professor is so wedded to government that he thinks the lack of formal government endorsement of Christianity means that the people are not Christian !
We don’t need a state ordained religion in order to be Christians, mate.
A country is indeed defined by it approach to governance. We are governed by a governement thst values freedom of religon and once you begin claiming the US is a Christian nation above other religons, you open up the idea of bringing religon into laws, governement, etc…. to the expense of non-Christians freedoms.
But you be you.
————–
Gibberish.
Ad Hominem
———-
No, that’s wrong Professor Poseur. I did not call you an imbecile or a moron, I pointed out that your comment is unintelligible because of its poor syntax and grammar.
That is a legitimate critique of a comment, not an ad hominem attack.
When your English is as garbled as Marklsparkl, no-one can understand you.
But I will take it one stage further. Pitiful, poor command of English is a reliable indicator of stupidity. There! Now you have your ad hominem.
You’re welcome.
No
That is a critic of my writing skills, not the point I made that is very clear even with a couple typos.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
I find I must, to some extent, agree with professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever. Initially founded by a group seeking to follow Christ and God in their own way with little to no exposure to any other beliefs we have evolved into a nation of (generally) religious freedom and tolerance.
You have the right to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster and, if it’s your desire, to worship it. It becomes a problem when you decide that I am a blasphemer and need to be made to see the error of my ways (by your standards). That is when you and I are going to have a throw down with you deciding the level. And speaking for myself I am prepared to always go one level higher then you.
Chris Quote: “Nope. democrats teach that our country has a long history of racism that has had a lasting negative impact on people of color.”
Okay, Chrissy, the Democratic Party supported the institution of slavery and wanted to expand slavery in the 1860s and beyond.
salt life,
You should know by now when you throw indisputable facts in professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whitewater’s face proving him wrong, he scurries off back to his corner and pretends it was never posted.
Ask him where the KKK originated.
————
It’s the only way to shut him up.
Pointing to party platform decades ago in no way has any relation to party platforms today. The partys have changed platforms numerous times in history. I prefer to discuss current party platforms as that is the relevant issue of today.
For example, it is Republican ralliess were you find Nazi flags flown next to Party flags most recently. Not democrat rallies.
Hope that helps.
The Democratic Party has changed dramatically to a Socialist Revolutionary Party, much like Russia was in the early 1900s. Their idea is that a social revolution is necessary to bring about structural change in American society. What happened to the party of JFK and Bill Clinton? Obama and Biden happened!
Again, you illustrate a lack of understanding of the term Socialist. At no time have democrats promoted the idea of State ownership or control of production. Democrats very much support capitalism but with regulations to ensure the projections of the working class (you and me) and the environment.
I understand it is fun to use scary words like ‘socialist and Marxist’ to scare up hatred of a group of people who have a core set of beliefs that are different than yours but really it says more about you than them given your lack of appreciation for the actual definition of those words.
NY Mayor Mamdani is a proud, card-carrying socialist who ran on a platform of “free” everything. Free bus rides. Free childcare. Free, free, free. The voters of New York City heard all of this and said, Yes, please, we’d like socialism. But do these free promises really add up?
Now, Mamdani is pleading for a bailout to cover a $6 billion budget shortfall from the NY State Capital. This begs the question: how sustainable are these “free” promises when the bill comes due?
So, hey, NY taxpayers, the bill is due for all that free stuff. Will that be cash or a credit card? This should make you feel the weight of paying for promises that weren’t free.
What about Bernie?
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
Please tell me YOUR definition of a Democratic Socialist.
I use the term Social Democracy for my own view of politics. Social democracy aims to reform capitalism using strong social safety nets (as seen in Nordic countries), while democratic socialism that advocates for establishing a socially owned economy and achieving social justice through democratic means, rather than authoritarian, top-down control in place of traditional capitalism and is only found at the extreme end of the liberal party.
Hope that help.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
“Democratic socialism is a political and economic ideology that advocates for a democratic, non-authoritarian society where the means of production are socially owned and controlled by the working class, rather than private corporations.”
“Key Principles and Goals
Democratic Control: Emphasis on making economic and social decisions through democratic processes, rather than top-down bureaucratic control or unregulated market forces.
Social Ownership: Advocates for collective, public, or worker ownership of major industries and essential services (e.g., healthcare, transportation, utilities).
Economic Equality: Aims to minimize wealth disparities through higher taxation on the wealthy, strong labor unions, and robust social safety nets, such as universal health care and free education.
Rejection of Authoritarianism: Explicitly distinguishes itself from authoritarian forms of socialism (like the Soviet model) by committing to political democracy, pluralism, and civil liberties.”
“Democratic socialism is a left-wing set of political philosophies that supports political democracy and some form of a socially owned economy, with a particular emphasis on economic democracy, workplace democracy, and workers’ self-management within a market socialist, decentralized planned, or democratic centrally planned socialist economy.”
To me this sounds like a version of wolf in sheep’s clothing.
It is as far left as one can go that is for sure. Frankly the ability to transition as most Democratic Socialist want isn’t viable in any way shape or form. NYC Mayor is a great example. Has big ideas to benefit the working class but hollow ideas to fund those ideas. I think that follows most Democratic Socialists. Lost cause in my eye, but not anything to fear as so many conservatives want to frame Democrats in general. Most democrats that support social reform are Social Democrats in my view although I wasn’t able to find any specific data on that point. The challenge is how many people really understand the difference in the labels versus the actual substance of one means over the other.
I suggest that if you find the growth in the income gap upsetting, you should consider at least some of the social democrats policies.
Professor or Chris isn’t NYC Mayor Mandani a proud card carrying socialist, who promised all the free things for everyone in NYC. How’s that working out for him. I also think he ran on the Democratic platform. Maybe this is one of those one off events you like to preach about.
He refers to himself as a Democratic Socialist which is certainly on the far-left side of liberalism, but he does not refer to himself as a Socialist and certainly not as a communist as many on the right claim. He does believe that our current system allows too great a separation of wealth between workers and corporate leadership as modern capitalism and US democracy favor the elites at the expense of the working class. While I personally agree with this, we do differ a good bit on how to address.
The left saw immigration as the answer to complete their socialist agendas. The “diversity” ideology peaked under Obama and Biden, and dictated that traditional America was still too white, traditional, Christian, unfairly successful, and too hostile to the Democratic socialist agenda. Democrats have rejected all moral principles.
Democrats support immigration as it helps drive our capitalist-based economy with an influx of skills, talent and labor. Yes, our immigration laws are outdated and grossly in need of updating to better control immigration, but Democrats lack a reliable partner in Republicans to pursue an actual solution to the challenge.
The right can only survive by misrepresenting the ideals of the left as they are unable to stand on their own beliefs as they are counter to growth, prosperity and stability. Just look as the chaos of the current administration.
But you be you
These ultra-progressive people believe in a mandated equality of results, achieved by radically high taxes on successful people and by transferring that money to unsuccessful people—an impossible dream.
Republicans are nowhere near perfect, but Democrats are actively promising to prioritize illegal aliens over American citizens. So that’s what the Democratic Party stands for. You can see it with open borders, no cash bail for evil crimes, with few indictments, and high crime rates.
We now have 53 million immigrants, legal and illegal, in the U.S. They do not assimilate or integrate like they used to. About 59% of the ungracious immigrants in the U.S. (legal & illegal) are on at least one welfare program, according to an analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies. But as NPR reported, “Immigrants come here to work. They contribute more than they take. They’re the backbone of the economy.”
In the 90s, Democrats supported closed borders, legal immigration only, and a strong national defense, values that kept America safe and balanced. Those days are gone, and now radical policies threaten our security.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
“Democrats support immigration…”, but they support and even encourage Illegal immigration.
Again, who was it that formed and encourage the KKK?
Democrats do not support illegal immigration. They support amnesty for those undocumented immigrants that have been in the US as responsible members of the community paying taxes for a number of years with no criminal convictions. But this needs to also be balanced with immigration reform that closes the asylum loophole that has required Presidents to ignore current immigration law to close the border to stem the overflow of immigrants into the US.
As US birthrates continue to decline, immigration will be critical to maintaining our economic stability and growth.
Using the claim of actions of a party that occurred decades ago and ignoring all of the changes that have led to the current structure and platforms of the party today shows a disingenuous view of the current state where nazi flags have been openly flown at Republican political rallies and events. I personally will pay more attention to the current state of the current parties versus things that have long ago changed over.
But you be you.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
I believe you mean ‘Democrats support ILLEGAL immigration…”
Just my opinion.
I disagree. Democrats desire a secure border as but want the laws to be fixed that allow the holes such as asylum requests to overwhelm the border during difficult economic times. Replying on the willingness of a President to violate the law to close the border is not a viable solution and can lead to inhumane practices.
Up to 600 communist groups and other radical organizations linked to the Democratic Party are mobilizing all over the country to demonstrate for May Day.
May Day is a network of communist, socialist, Marxist, and other far-left organizations, led by chapters of the Democratic Socialists of America. Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist. Didn’t he try to run for president?
————-
You’re right. And do you think it’s a coincidence that our “educators” chose May Day, the day of International Socialism – to go to Raleigh and demand more money?
Public Schools are Leftist incubators.
Mislabeling of Liberal groups as Communists is just more misinformation from those on the right to make the left seem more radical than they actually are in practice.
The Communist Party of the US is a completely different party than the Democratic Party as they have no affiliation and nor do they agree on how to improve the US governmental systems. FYI, the Communist Party of the US has currently .005% of votes in the US today isn’t really a thing given how few people are actual members of the party.
Claiming any linkage between Communists and Democrats is just more misinformation from Conservatives looking to further divide our country.
Democratic Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) was asked by MSNBC in 2024 why Democrats aren’t pushing for a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, and Murphy replied. “So you are right that has been the Democratic strategy for 30 years, maybe, and it has failed to deliver for the people we care about the most, the undocumented Americans that are in this country.”
Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) wants American citizens to pay reparations to illegal aliens due to stress caused by ICE.
Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) opposes voter ID laws, calling them ‘voter suppression’ that could reduce voting rolls by 5–10%. This reveals Democrats’ preference for non-citizen votes over ensuring election integrity, raising concerns about their commitment to fair elections and national security.
No where in your quotes does it say that any Democrat favor ‘non-citizen votes’. More misrepresentation of liberal views on a critical issue in a weak attempt to scare up conservatives and drive hate and division in our country.
The concern with voter ID laws, like the SAVE Act, is that the documentation for validating citizenship can be a heavy burden in many situations, such as married/divorced women for example. This has all been well studied and is indeed believed to reduce voter turnout by up to 10-15% after implementation.
Just look how long it took to implement the Real ID (20 years since the bill as actually signed) and it still only covers 60% of people and it isn’t nearly a strict on the paperwork as the SAVE act.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
“No where in your quotes does it say that any Democrat favor ‘non-citizen votes’. More misrepresentation of liberal views on a critical issue in a weak attempt to scare up conservatives and drive hate and division in our country.”
From LifeZette (just so you know I’m not talking out of my fourth point of contact)
“A proposal introduced by Los Angeles City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez would ask voters to grant the City Council authority to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections, including races for mayor, City Council, and the Los Angeles Board of Education.”
“San Francisco has allowed noncitizens to vote in school board elections.”
“Oakland voters approved a similar measure in 2022, though it has not yet been implemented, according to Ballotpedia.”
Hope that helps salt life.
My mistake. yes in local elections, some states have long allowed documented non-citizens to vote in local elections only, given the idea that those decisions impact their day to day lives just as it does citizens.
My apologies for the misunderstanding.
I take no issue with local elections involving non-citizens or excluding them. Either way works for me. I would never support non-citizens voting in federal elections and don’t believe any Democrats are pushing for this either unless you have different information.
professor/Cxxxxxxxx X Rxxx/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
“My apologies for the misunderstanding.”
“…misunderstanding.”? My God man(?), do you actually expect us to believe the Great and All Knowing professor “misunderstood” something? When I told Alan about your reply all he had to say was “I thought the All Knowing never made mistakes.”
I make mistakes all the time. We all do. In this case i misunderstood the context of your statement as Federal elections.
Just curious, do you two cuddle when you talk about me? 🙂
professor/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil/whatever,
Yes, we do. We chuckle and laugh while we hold one another.
Up until now I’ve shown you the modicum of respect I THOUGHT you should receive when you ask me to stop posting with your full name. Based on your past performance I should have known better.
Alan was right. Fool me once, shame me.
My bad, I thought you had a sense of humor given your continued conspiracy theory that I post as other people instead of the truth that i only changed my username.
Didn’t realize you were serious?
The Socialist Democratic Dream is that the government will steal what real Americans busted their butts to create, and give it to people who won’t get off their own butts.
Teachers across the country decided to ditch classes and force students out of school for May Day protests, just as they did during COVID. How did that work for our kids?
Just for your perusal, Chris: There’s no denying that Trump’s presidency will be recorded in history books as having major lasting effects around the world.
The actual term is Democratic Socialist or Social Democrats. There are very few if any Socialists active in the Democratic party today.
The goal is not to ‘support the lazy’ but to more fairly reward and compensate the working class….i.e. you and me. The belief is that due to the influence of money in politics, the wealthiest Americans (the 1%) overly benefit from a system that offers then exclusive advantages to maintain and hide their wealth in ways not available to the working class of Americans such as you and me.
It isn’t stealing to ask that the richest individuals and corporations pay a fair share in taxes to ensure a stable society. The wealth gap has grown tremendously while the working class face the implications of poor corporate behavior is aways protected from failure with large bailouts, weakening job markets, increased costs of living, destruction of our environment and natural resources, etc…
Time for change is clear given how the current administration has shown how favoring the wealthy only hurts the average American given all we have face in just the first year of an unrestrained Conservative approach to leading our country.
————————
WRONG !
Big difference between Social Democrats and Democratic Socialists. The latter see a collective communistic society as their ultimate goal, and they unrelentingly work towards that. Their handbook is The Communist Manifesto but they want to get there using peaceful democratic means, rather than the violent revolution Marx & Engels envisaged and advocated.
Social Democrats are a different animal entirely, accepting a largely Capitalist economy that is moderated with significant social infrastructure, relatively high taxation, and a generous welfare state.
The Scandinavian countries exemplify this model, whereas Democratic Socialists have prevailed in Allende’s Chile and Cuba (although that was through a revolution).
Democratic Socialist countries tend to collapse quickly, unless maintained with iron clad repression (like the DDR).
A “Professor: really ought not to conflate the two, you know, Chrissy?
I fully understand the difference between Social Democrats and Democratic Socialists. Just as I understand there are big differences between those two philosophies and Socialists.
Democratic Socialists do not see a collective communistic society as the ultimate goal. They see a democratic ownership of the economy as a replacement of capitalism. (which I don’t agree with personally). Unlike historical communist states, democratic socialism insists on maintaining political pluralism, free elections, and individual civil liberties as permanent features of society, not just temporary measures.
In addition, many democratic socialists envision a “market socialist” economy where essential services are public, but some market mechanisms still exist to distribute goods—a departure from the total abolition of markets and money found in “pure” communist theory.
FYI, neither Chile nor Cuba is considered a Democratic Socialist country. Chile is considered a representative democratic republic (which recent elections moving the country to the right) and Cuba is considered a single-party authoritarian socialist state. Claiming Cuba is democratic in any way is just silly and disingenuous given their totalitarian system of leadership.
Conservatives so want to tag liberals with the scary label of communist, but it just doesn’t fit. Typical lie by conservatives to try and push a false narrative to further divide this country.
——————
You’re such a bleedin’ idiot that I don’t know where to begin with your verbose, prolix BS.
ALLENDE’S Chile – you don’t even know what I’m talking about, do you?
This is where The Professor scurries off to A.I. to become “an expert” suddenly on 1970’s South America.
What a wanker.
Never claimed to be an expert. But sure, verifying information or looking up data to back an assumption is a good approach to critical thinking versus your take of doubling down even when presented with facts, data and science that counters your opinion.
Hope that helps.
LOL, my mistake, I was only concerned with modern examples. No, I had not heard of Allende’s Chile. Nor am I interested as I am not a supporter of Democratic Socialism as I don’t think the peaceful transition is viable long-term for a number of economic and political reasons. Last note I read about Allende is that the US helped support a coup so while it wasn’t the most successful form of government, we will never know how it would have ended without US meddling.
End of the day your characterization of democrats remains wholly inaccurate. Most that claim to value some of the ideals of socialism are social democrats and NOT democratic socialists except for those on the most extreme left. Like the Mayor of NYC. His policies will fail due to economic reasons as his ideas for funding his programs are flawed. But not evil or spooky or scary as so many conservatives try to frame democrats with false linkages to communism and Marxism. Just more BS from the right.
You are also dead wrong on Cuba. Like many authoritarians, they used the lie of socialism to gain power and run their country as authoritarians. They were never socialist countries.
———-
My “characterization of democrats” cannot be inaccurate because I made no characterization of democrats.
Just read the comments.
Buddy, you’re either very stupid or deliberately sly and deceptive.
—————
No, you are dead wrong on Cuba.
It is the apotheosis of socialism. All socialist societies devolve into poverty, squalor, despair and tyranny.
Nope. Cuba is an authoritarian government that promised socialism to rally a rebellion but never at any time had a true socualst goverment as by 76 they organized under their communist based constitution.
There are some very successful socialist economies. Vietnam is a really interesting economy for example. They ha e reduced poverty ro 5% of their population after the communist model failed.
————
Are you as much an expert on Vietnam as you are on Chile ?
Tosser.
Ad Hominem
———–
Yes, because your ignorance about Chile displays your pitiful overreach in erudition, Professor Poseur.
And because it was funny.
You’re a joke. [ Grasp your pearls! Another Ad Hominem ! ]
Austin,
Are you questioning the vast treasure trove of infinite knowledge of the All Knowing professor/Chris/Polly Pocket/Sybil?
Be careful, otherwise he may unleash his flying monkeys on you.
He is just deflecting with personsal attacks again because that is really all he is at his core. A mean ugly person.
——————–
How come I get the compliments, and you get the obloquy then Professor Poseur ?
Surely you are the odious one here?
——————–
And yes Patrick, this guy tries to present himself as omniscient and erudite, but he fails badly because flashes of his ignorance always break through.
In a previous debate it became clear that he thought Sri Lanka was in Africa! And even in this very column he professed knowledge about the South American nation of Chile – but had no idea who Salvador Allende was!
It must be a deep seated anxiety over his inadequacies and insecurities that make him try to convince people (including himself) that he’s some kind of intellectual giant.
He is, of course, a pitiful little loser with a mediocre intellect and serious psychological problems.
A conservative getting compliments from other conservatives on a site frequented by conservstives….paint me shocked.
Dey do.