LaxPower Back-Up Stick

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 12:13 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 10:16 pm https://www.salon.com/2006/05/12/goldberg_14/

"Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism"
Across the United States, religious activists are organizing to establish an American theocracy. A frightening look inside the growing right-wing movement.

On November 13, 2003, Moore was removed from his position as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court after he defied a judge's order to remove the 2.6-ton Ten Commandments monument he'd installed in the Montgomery judicial building. On the coasts, he seemed a ridiculous figure, the latest in a line of grotesque Southern anachronisms. After all, Moore is a man who, in a 2002 court decision awarding custody of three children to their allegedly abusive father over their lesbian mother, called homosexuality "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature's God upon which this Nation and our laws are predicated," and argued, "The State carries the power of the sword, that is, the power to prohibit conduct with physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution. It must use that power to prevent the subversion of children toward this lifestyle, to not encourage a criminal lifestyle." He's a man who writes rhyming poetry decrying the teaching of evolution and who fought against the Alabama ballot measure to remove segregationist language from the state constitution.

Mainstream GOP in the year 2022

...that was 19 years ago. When's the next coming ?

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

NattyBohChamps04 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 9:58 pm

Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 9:03 pm Stewart Rhodes convicted of seditious conspiracy.

Give the guy some slack, he was shot in the face by a terrorist...

"Rhodes, who wears an eye patch after accidentally shooting himself in the face with his own gun, is one of the most prominent defendants of the roughly 900 charged so far in connection with the attack."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 31436.html

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 12:13 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 10:16 pm https://www.salon.com/2006/05/12/goldberg_14/

"Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism"
Across the United States, religious activists are organizing to establish an American theocracy. A frightening look inside the growing right-wing movement.

On November 13, 2003, Moore was removed from his position as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court after he defied a judge's order to remove the 2.6-ton Ten Commandments monument he'd installed in the Montgomery judicial building. On the coasts, he seemed a ridiculous figure, the latest in a line of grotesque Southern anachronisms. After all, Moore is a man who, in a 2002 court decision awarding custody of three children to their allegedly abusive father over their lesbian mother, called homosexuality "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature's God upon which this Nation and our laws are predicated," and argued, "The State carries the power of the sword, that is, the power to prohibit conduct with physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution. It must use that power to prevent the subversion of children toward this lifestyle, to not encourage a criminal lifestyle." He's a man who writes rhyming poetry decrying the teaching of evolution and who fought against the Alabama ballot measure to remove segregationist language from the state constitution.

Mainstream GOP in the year 2022

...that was 19 years ago. When's the next coming ?

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:44 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

So if my intention were to murder someone but I only cut them up and left them broken, bloodied with organ issues in the hospital it’s cool?

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:59 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

Amazing. So the stupid bank robbers who could not pull off the heist despite having a plan to rob the bank are not chargeable or guilty of trying to rob the bank??????????? and we shouldn't look any further to see who else might have been in on the plan?

dumb and dumber

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:00 am

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:44 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

So if my intention were to murder someone but I only cut them up and left them broken, bloodied with organ issues in the hospital it’s cool?

You have to come up with a better analogy than that. The intent that day was for the collective group of morons to have a march on the capital after their pep talk from trump. Even if your a bunch of right wing morons, you have every right to march in front of Congress and express your anger. That is of course a fundamental right all Americans have. What we are being told is that this was a part of scheme by the dumbest people in the Republican party to overturn an election. I believe that some of these morons thought they could make it happen. We all should be fortunate that is was a collective group of morons trying to achieve a result that didn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of succeeding. If a few disgruntled trump Republicans and a mob of a 1000 right wing morons have the power to overturn a US election then our nation has bigger problems than we could ever know.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:07 am You miss the point completely. Would it make you happier if the bank robbers were highly intelligent and commiting their robbery with such clock like precision that they get away with the crime? Where have I EVER suggested these ring leaders should not be tried and convicted for their conspiracy. FTR stupid criminals usually wind up behind bars because they are stupid criminals. It's the smart criminals you need to worry about.

? and we shouldn't look any further to see who else might have been in on the plan?

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:59 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

Amazing. So the stupid bank robbers who could not pull off the heist despite having a plan to rob the bank are not chargeable or guilty of trying to rob the bank??????????? and we shouldn't look any further to see who else might have been in on the plan?

Quack! Quack! It's an effing duck!

dumb and dumber

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:13 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:59 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

Amazing. So the stupid bank robbers who could not pull off the heist despite having a plan to rob the bank are not chargeable or guilty of trying to rob the bank??????????? and we shouldn't look any further to see who else might have been in on the plan?

Quack! Quack! It's an effing duck!

dumb and dumber

So here we go again. Law enforcement was made well aware of a potential security threat that might involve a large protest at the US Capital by a bunch of disgruntled Republican sore losers. How often does law enforcement get a day or 2 prior notice to the crooks trying to knock off the bank?

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:19 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:13 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:59 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

Amazing. So the stupid bank robbers who could not pull off the heist despite having a plan to rob the bank are not chargeable or guilty of trying to rob the bank??????????? and we shouldn't look any further to see who else might have been in on the plan?

Quack! Quack! It's an effing duck!

dumb and dumber

So here we go again. Law enforcement was made well aware of a potential security threat that might involve a large protest at the US Capital by a bunch of disgruntled Republican sore losers. How often does law enforcement get a day or 2 prior notice to the crooks trying to knock off the bank?

Ignorant and Ignorant-er.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:26 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:19 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:13 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:59 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

Amazing. So the stupid bank robbers who could not pull off the heist despite having a plan to rob the bank are not chargeable or guilty of trying to rob the bank??????????? and we shouldn't look any further to see who else might have been in on the plan?

Quack! Quack! It's an effing duck!

dumb and dumber

So here we go again. Law enforcement was made well aware of a potential security threat that might involve a large protest at the US Capital by a bunch of disgruntled Republican sore losers. How often does law enforcement get a day or 2 prior notice to the crooks trying to knock off the bank?

Ignorant and Ignorant-er.

Your being way too harsh on yourself. Your not ignorant.. your just dumb...

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Many of Tarrio's pals have already flipped to save their own sorry azzes. There will be many more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

Still, Pitcavage cautioned NPR that there is little evidence military veterans are more susceptible to extremist ideology than other groups of Americans.“Overall, our veteran population is largely reflective of our general population,” he said.

That’s true: because despite how many veterans have been arrested for storming the U.S. Capitol, there were also many fighting to keep them back. Their ranks include Air Force veteran and U.S. Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick, who was killed trying to hold back rioters from entering the building; Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) a former Army Ranger who helped his fellow lawmakers keep calm in the chaos; and Eugene Goodman, an Army veteran and Capitol Police Officer who lured a crowd of angry rioters away from the Senate chambers after they breached the Capitol building.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:28 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:26 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:19 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:13 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:59 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:32 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:21 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:03 am

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:28 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:51 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:46 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:41 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:35 pm But let's not pretend that the GOP, led by Trump, hasn't become dominated by the white nationalist, christian nationalist movement to tremendously ill effect. Election denialism has become a tool for this cult. And two-thirds of the GOP are on board...that ain't "all" but it's domination.

I don't think Trump is the sole problem, I think all the weasels who have bowed before him are fully complicit.

imho -- you are exaggerating any ill effect & misrepresenting the patriotism of millions of white christians.

As a white christian I can agree there are many of us who are fulsomely patriotic. and sure, there are millions like me.

But I ain't a christian nationalist nor a white nationalist, nor the overlap.
And I'm not an election denier, nor am I going to make up, repeat, support stupidly false arguments about voting insecurity.

I think all of that is gross and immensely damaging to the country I love.
And millions of white christians, like me, agree.

But we're not the MAGA cult.

That is one more place they apply the "wedge". It creates all sorts of points of fissure:

First, let's note that there are a lot of very good and reasonable people who are a) white, b) Christian, and c) love their nation.

Let's also acknowledge that there are (abhorrent) people who are "white nationalists" in the way that the left uses the term. Hateful bigots who promote an agenda based on race separation. I believe that these people represent a very, very small percentage of Americans, but I think there are more now than there were 20 years ago for a few reasons.

There are politicians on both sides of the aisle who benefit from racism. The ones who appeal to the bigots I described above and the ones who run around calling white men racists like a spurned pilgrim wife looking for witches in every woman that attracts her husband's eye.

But think about why the term nationalist is now being used as a slur? According to the New Oxford American dictionary nationalist means: i) a person who advocates political independence for a country; b) a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others. Seems pretty benign.

Undermining the meaning of words is a game marxists and post-modernists love to play as a way of chipping away at the foundation of society. It is done on purpose. The definition of nationalist generally strikes me as including good things - as long as the feelings of superiority don't become unreasonably aggressive - and this is where/how the post-modernists get you. If nationalism includes feelings of superiority, that could lead to wars, and everyone knows war is bad so nationalism must be bad. This is the self-flagellation that Europe has put itself through after two world wars. Rather than recognizing mankind's tendency toward violence and admitting to the need to harness those tendencies - Europe blames religion and nations - because surely if there neither existed there would be peace on Earth (give me a break). But on those types of premises, and slowly, through the manipulation of language, the post-modernists undermine the very things that tie our culture together.

The question is to what end?

Would be interested in your view of the alleged "patriots" who were convicted in DC court today for seditious conspiracy and obstruction of a federal proceeding? Nothing major, just the certification of a presidential election and a peaceful transfer of power. Lenin (the ultimate marxist) would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't uber-embalmed and on display in glass to this very day at the Kremlin.

Only 2 of the 5 Oath Keepers charged with Seditious Conspiracy were convicted.
What a disappointment for the most dangerous conspiracy in the history of our nation.
Better nail more Proud Boys than that.
What about the Willard war council ?

The rest got multiple convictions for obstruction and will serve serious time. The case for the Proud Boys is actually better and they will get theirs as well. Tarrio has already flipped to save his own sorry rump. There will be more flippers before this is over.

I just don't get your penchant for giving all these people a pass and to be so glib about what they were doing leading up to and during January 6. The point was to overturn a legitimate election and peaceful transfer of power. Even your pals at the WSJ don't share this view.
Is this what you served for?

The pathetic and honest truth about Jan.6 is not all that difficult to understand. A group of people on this forum caterwaul endlessly about intent while overlooking the ability to follow through with said intent. Who out there actually wants to raise your hand and declare these people would ever reach their objective? This was a collective group of right wing parasites who had a hissy fit for a few hours and vandalized and disgraced our nations capital. There was NO PLAN that day that ever actually threatened the peaceful transition of power. Had there actually been a PLAN a few thousand of those people that broke into the capital that day would have been heavily armed and dedicated to the cause. Then you folks would have a legitimate gripe. You folks think it was bad? How many of you folks can comprehend just how BAD it could have been?? What if a thousand or more of these folks had been armed to the teeth and willing to die for their cause?? What do you folks think would have happened if law enforcement was eventually forced to take back the capital by force? You all should thank your lucky stars that there was no PLAN on January 6. It was an embarrassment that should have never happened. IMO and I have been consistent with this since day one. The capital police had NO excuse for not being prepared. Their response to this riot is also a point of interest the January 6 committee should also be taking a very close look at. Who was in charge of security at the US Capital?? They had fair knowledge and were forewarned of an expected protest march to the capital. The obvious question that will explode a few heads on this forum.. why wasn't Nancy Pelosi required to testify about HER decision not to add extra security at the capital knowing a large protest was likely headed there? I don't say that to blame her for anything. It would be nice for her to explain her thought process for not authorizing extra security just as a precaution. The theory I have read is that Ms Pelosi had serious reservations about the optics of thousands of extra security personally surrounding the capital.

To open up another hypersensitive topic with some forum members... Ain't that the same sort of logic a former SoS used for keeping a bare bones security detail to protect a US ambassador stationed in one of most dangerous countries in the world at that time?? Optics is the new operative word we should all look at and understand its subtle meaning. It's how other countries judge us by what they see on TV. Dozens of security people surrounding a building used to support a US embassy in a foreign country just simply looks bad. Thousands of security people surrounding the US Capital also looks very bad on the nightly news.

Amazing. So the stupid bank robbers who could not pull off the heist despite having a plan to rob the bank are not chargeable or guilty of trying to rob the bank??????????? and we shouldn't look any further to see who else might have been in on the plan?

Quack! Quack! It's an effing duck!

dumb and dumber

So here we go again. Law enforcement was made well aware of a potential security threat that might involve a large protest at the US Capital by a bunch of disgruntled Republican sore losers. How often does law enforcement get a day or 2 prior notice to the crooks trying to knock off the bank?

Ignorant and Ignorant-er.

Your being way too harsh on yourself. Your not ignorant.. your just dumb...

I know you are but what am I?…..