The Real timschochet

I challenge your implication that the threat of violence as a means to achieve political ends is an idea to be blamed on liberals as a group. Or conservatives as a group, for that matter. It’s not a question of liberal vs conservative ideology. It’s extremism and the majority of both liberals and conservatives in our country reject it unequivocally. That being said there are individuals on both sides who either excuse such actions or openly welcome them, and they deserve our condemnation. The most prominent of these, in recent years, is Donald Trump. If you want me to list Democrats as well I can do, starting with the repugnant Maxine Waters. But no Democrat that has done this has anywhere near the prominence of Trump, who is likely to be the Republican nominee for President.

I’m aware. And I’m not holding my breath.

Trump could gain a little of my respect this morning by immediately condemning this. Thats what anyone with even the slightest moral rectitude would do. Let’s see if he does.

Man what a total moron.

Damn I’d be silent too. All 3 questions are so stupid.

DeSantis vs Haley. Is anyone even watching it? Honestly I started it half the way through, I didn’t even realize it was on. And I’m a political junkie.

I was anticipating an endorsement of Haley but it didn’t happen. And it probably won’t since Christie said that anyone who says Trump is qualified are themselves unqualified (referring to when Haley raised her hand regarding this question.) I could see Christie, ultimately, endorsing Biden. Anyhow the speech was absolutely terrific, not only the takedown of Trump (devastating) but the words about immigration which were so inspiring and reminiscent of Ronald Reagan and the old Republican Party.

This is the best speech I have ever heard from Chris Christie.

Again I didn’t argue that you are racist and I have no reason to think you are.

I think people like yourself misunderstand what is meant by this. When I say “white privilege” I mean that white people have all sorts of privileges in our society that many minorities don’t. But I am NOT saying that any of these privileges are undeserved. I don’t want to take away any white privileges; I just want everyone else to have them too.

But that’s kind of my point, isn’t it? You wouldn’t. You would automatically assume she was qualified for her position, up until the day she proved she wasn’t. Here however your mind goes immediately to DEI and you question her true qualification. Don’t you see that as a problem? And BTW I get that this is a double edged sword. One of the problems with DEI, and affirmative action before it, is that it’s going to cause these sort of assumptions about minority hires all the time, and therefore actually might increase the very sort of racial bias it’s designed to eliminate. That’s the conservative argument, long made by Thomas Sowell and others, and it’s a good one. I’m not fully convinced of it but it’s a reasonable position to hold.

I don’t think you’re a racist. But I think your comments about Gay were problematic. If Gay were white and incompetent, would your thoughts have gone right to DEI? I’m guessing no, you just would have thought she was incompetent. Her skin color would not have played any factor into your thinking whatsoever. Is that fair?

Not really. Only two guys around here, @Cdub100 and @Casual Observer, have shown a proclivity for Jew hatred. The other conservatives have not, but most of them are silent on the issue, sadly, if the hatred comes from someone on “their side”. Incidentally this is one of my biggest issues with today’s conservatives: I don’t believe most of them are bigots, but they are willing to tolerate bigots in their midst. Beginning, of course, with the man they want to return to the White House.

Depends on the issue doesn’t it? On social issues (abortion, gay rights, trans rights, African-American issues, etc.) I suppose I’m pretty extreme compared to many other people. On immigration issues I’m extreme (though not leftist; my views on that stem from libertarianism.) But traditionally when one is described as liberal or conservative, the main concerns at play are economic: should government have more control on business or less? Should there be some sort of redistribution of wealth? Should taxes be lower in general or higher? Etc, On these issues I find myself in the center most times.

I really don’t think you’ve read much about Mao or Stalin or you couldn’t possibly write something so ridiculous. Mao and Stalin, two of the most evil mass murderers in history, ruled over totalitarian collectivist societies. They liquidated whole classes of people, and starved millions. Their rule, while they lived, was absolute. I invite you to demonstrate any American Democrat, no matter how extreme you think they are, who has ever said or done anything to indicate commonality with Mao or Stalin. I don’t believe you can. But please go ahead and provide examples to prove your assertion.

Part of Biden’s 2024 campaign will be against the do nothing Republican Congress. I think this will be somewhat effective.

You constantly accuse me of repeating whatever I read in the mainstream media. Actually that’s an accurate accusation, since I regard the MSM as a reasonably objective source of news. But you on the other hand seem to be willing to parrot whatever Donald Trump and his allies say without any question. Do you detect any irony in this?

Let’s parse this out: 1. Doxxing should be illegal. Anyone who does it should be spending a few days in jail, IMO. It’s no part of liberalism. There are some awful people on “my side” who do this. But I’m pretty sure there are also awful folks on “your side” who do it too. 2. I have no problem with cancelling so long as government isn’t involved. That is if someone turns out to be an abuser of women, a pedophile, a racist, a bigot, etc, I don’t mind people electing of their own free will not to see their movies, spend money on their products, etc. I don’t watch Mel Gibson or Woody Allen movies any longer for this reason: I have determined that both guys are awful human beings and they’re not going to get any more of my hard earned money: But I don’t have the right to speak for anyone else.

Wow. That is really bizarre. I guess the Rape of Nanking strikes you as typical liberal behavior? lol.

No. It depends on the tone and nature of the criticism.

Good question. It’s because the specific criticism of George Soros, as a wealthy mysterious man who behind the scenes pulls strings and influence events, plays into several long held anti-Semitic tropes. Leftist attacks against the late Sheldon Adelson were also anti-Semitic IMO.

The reasons that Epps received a lighter sentence are detailed here: https://apnews.com/article/ray-epps-conspiracy-theory-capitol-riot-fbbfca2fc1c13c439fca7d460237934c Basically it’s because he tried to stop the violence on the day of, and since then has expressed remorse. It has zero to do with any dumb conspiracy. The guy doesn’t work for the FBI.

My conversation with @supermike80 is on a different track. And he’s not an anti-Semite.

In the case of a public health crisis this is not a defensible position.

I agree. We need to regulate everyone who comes in if we can. And that’s why the decision by California to give undocumented immigrants free access to health care is a good one.