Racism at its finest: Can't find a cross, burn a yard sign?

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by Swift-Bass

HughRuss, I just realized you never addressed this. I'm assuming then you don't feel it's relevant at all. Ok.

Well, I assumed had I retorted with something along the lines of
"well, this is a political forum "
Or
"this thread is about offensive and destructive behavior in regards to Obama "

You would have taken the disagreement to a different level, and/or strayed further off-topic. In order to preserve the logos of this thread, I decided not to address it, but rather to ignore it, addressing the points I did above. I then quit responding until you prodded me for an answer.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by JaJae

What does this have to do with Racism?

I've also heard reports of people vandalizing McCain/Palin signs/bumper stickers by writing KKK across them.

Burning things to intimidate black people or supporters of black people in the traditional south has a long history.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by JaJae

People burn flags all the time. Is that racist?

Not similar in any meaningful way.

[IminWonderland]

A friend told me, that in her community, which is the affluent, uber-conservative red Yorba Linda, that a house had a NO on 8 sign (gay marriage issue here) and someone wrote on it "NO ON GAYS!"

I wonder how the people who destroyed the sign felt doing that? Do you think they hated the people with the sign, or the issue the sign represented?



This is more than an election, its a paradigm shift. And the out come of these elections will change our world no matter who is getting elected, or what is being approved.

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

A friend told me, that in her community, which is the affluent, uber-conservative red Yorba Linda, that a house had a NO on 8 sign (gay marriage issue here) and someone wrote on it "NO ON GAYS!"

I wonder how the people who destroyed the sign felt doing that? Do you think they hated the people with the sign, or the issue the sign represented?



This is more than an election, its a paradigm shift. And the out come of these elections will change our world no matter who is getting elected, or what is being approved.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it a paradigm shift. Obama and the large portion of the Dem's views are consistent with their views from 10, 20, and almost 30 years ago.

A paradigm shift would be electing Nader, or, god forbid, Barr to office.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by HughRuss

I wouldn't go so far as to call it a paradigm shift. Obama and the large portion of the Dem's views are consistent with their views from 10, 20, and almost 30 years ago.

A paradigm shift would be electing Nader, or, god forbid, Barr to office.

I disagree. I think that we are in the middle of a shift, because it has been brewing since the 60s. Some might equate it to the shift that Marx talks about in the Manifesto, which he describes the failure of captalism and how a nation reacts to that, essentially predicting collapse. I am not saying that we are going to fall into Socialism or Communism, but we are at a point where the country will be in a position to accepts certain truths that will change mass perception of the world.

I think that the views are consisent with 1960s idealism, however, I think that what takes this a step further is that the whole world is watching us in real time. And there is going to be a judgement on this country, by the rest of the world, and the impact of this next election will be felt through most countries. So I think that the scope of everything is alot larger than it was in the 1960s.

[Photon1001]

I think he might have meant the general trend, the things we're voting on, like proposals regarding gay marriage, stem cells, and so on.

I'm really not surprised that McCain picked Palin, as she represents the old way, the witches ot yesteryear, if you like. Its not so scary though, as pointed out yourself, a+theism, meant without religion, comprises deism as well, which only rejects religion, or in other words, worry not fair, fellow, unGodless, we're only casting aside the religulous tyranny, not God, him(her/it)self.

[Photon1001]

Wonderland, just seen your post, yeah that too, I think we're coming to grips with the fact that true anarcho-capitalism is not the way to the future.

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

I disagree. I think that we are in the middle of a shift, because it has been brewing since the 60s. Some might equate it to the shift that Marx talks about in the Manifesto, which he describes the failure of captalism and how a nation reacts to that, essentially predicting collapse. I am not saying that we are going to fall into Socialism or Communism, but we are at a point where the country will be in a position to accepts certain truths that will change mass perception of the world.

I think that the views are consisent with 1960s idealism, however, I think that what takes this a step further is that the whole world is watching us in real time. And there is going to be a judgement on this country, by the rest of the world, and the impact of this next election will be felt through most countries. So I think that the scope of everything is alot larger than it was in the 1960s.

I think conflating this issue to that massive of proportions is pushing the envelope quite a bit. The same type of things were being said by marxo-communists, back before Nixon's first election.
The same type of things were being said at the end of Clinton's reign.

The world doesn't necessarily look to us anymore, especially with a good portion of other countries flexing their metaphorical foreign prowess.

Is the election important? Yes.
Is the election going to usher in a new world-view? No.

At the end of Obama's tenure, a neo-neo-conservative with views that hearken back to the groundings of conservatism will take the reigns.

I'm actually hoping to see more action from 3rd party candidates.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by Photon1001

Wonderland, just seen your post, yeah that too, I think we're coming to grips with the fact that true anarcho-capitalism is not the way to the future.

Well, and consider if all you know to be true is that the magic hand of the free market makes everyone sleep better at night. And it's the American way, and we should fight efforts to "socialize" our monies.

But the only way that works is with checks and balances. Even Greenspan was saying today that he didn't think that business would get so greedy.

My arguement against pure capatalism, since high school, is that it requires that the people who are at the top refrain from greed. And I think that people who have never bothered, or wanted (many a moms I know purposely stick their heads in the sand) to know how this country really works has been given electric shock therapy.

People I know are pure SCARED of this election because they've had no idea that anything has been going on for the past 7 or 8 years.

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by Photon1001

Wonderland, just seen your post, yeah that too, I think we're coming to grips with the fact that true anarcho-capitalism is not the way to the future.

We can hopefully now tell Ayn Rand fans to

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by HughRuss

I think conflating this issue to that massive of proportions is pushing the envelope quite a bit. The same type of things were being said by marxo-communists, back before Nixon's first election.
The same type of things were being said at the end of Clinton's reign.

The world doesn't necessarily look to us anymore, especially with a good portion of other countries flexing their metaphorical foreign prowess.

Is the election important? Yes.
Is the election going to usher in a new world-view? No.

At the end of Obama's tenure, a neo-neo-conservative with views that hearken back to the groundings of conservatism will take the reigns.

I'm actually hoping to see more action from 3rd party candidates.

I think the key that you say in his is that the world doesn't necessarily look to us anymore.

We've had an enormous paper tiger ego for a really long time. What does that do to the American psyche when we are outgunned, out monied, and out learned of other countries?

What kind of condition does that place on Americans?

[Photon1001]

At the end of Obama's tenure, a neo-neo-conservative with views that hearken back to the groundings of conservatism will take the reigns.

Now who's being nihilist.. Anyway, I really hope not. Remember that lightning bolt that hit the roof or whatnot when Giuliani was speaking at the GOP debate on abortion of all things? How many Christian conservatives might have took that as a message, I wonder? Giuliani won in Florida, iirc, and might be giving Obama a better run for his money right now.

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

I think the key that you say in his is that the world doesn't necessarily look to us anymore.

We've had an enormous paper tiger ego for a really long time. What does that do to the American psyche when we are outgunned, out monied, and out learned of other countries?

What kind of condition does that place on Americans?

Roughly in the same vein as your questions, upon learning of some of these startling statistics as a 13 year old, I somewhat sarcastically asked my mother
"Mommy, when I grow up, do I have to be an American?"

To answer your questions:
1. We're still better (typical American egotism)
2. In extension to the above point, it makes us puff out our chests even more. Interventionist policy is a popular one with people that rank on the IQ standard as being less than 120 (for a gauge, 100 is 'average,' or, street sweeper as I say).

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by Photon1001

Now who's being nihilist..

*shrug*
I prefer to see myself as existential (I exist to make meaning for myself), but nihilistic in some senses. Others may call this pessimistic.

Oh, and I wasn't really looking down upon the next hardcore Christian-Conservative to take control. I was merely commenting upon the paradox of American voting, which maligns a lot of the democratic party. My belief is that America votes --generally-- one party in for a length of time, then gives about the same equal time to the next party. This is generally why America is stricken with the 2-party polarization. If we had more, that'd require us to actually think about our votes, and god knows the majority (yes, the majority) doesn't want to have to do that.

I'd call that a fumble of the American education system.

[Photon1001]

^My gf's IQ is 97, and she thinks we Americans are imperialist assholes.

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by Photon1001

^My gf's IQ is 97, and she thinks we Americans are imperialist assholes.

Does your girlfriend also ask you to explain the difference between the "cheers and jeers" system in the TV guide book?

[Photon1001]

No, she doesn't read the TV Guide book, or much else, unfortunately. She also doesn't understand the difference between liberalism and socialism, and in fact, she still believes in God, and doesn't really even like black ppl all that much, and yet she's supporting Obama anyway, go figure.

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by Photon1001

No, she doesn't read the TV Guide book, or much else, unfortunately. She also doesn't understand the difference between liberalism and socialism, and in fact, she still believes in God, and doesn't really even like black ppl all that much, and yet she's supporting Obama anyway, go figure.

What is the color of her hair?

[Photon1001]

^Which part?