Fear of the Left . . .

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

by the way, in case anyone is interested in reality Puerto Rico is something like 80% percent White. It might just so happen that subgenius is White as the driven snow. Or not. How could I possibly know?

This is the standard alt-right tactic, by the way. The alt-right doesn't actually handle tough questions, but uses rhetoric, nonsense phrases, or other weasely methods to get out of answering any difficult questions. Subgenus inferring he's not White because he's ethnically Puerto Rican is retarded, but for some reason he thinks he has a clever angle on the subject of race.

Anyway. Watching him and other Trump types post I don't see reason or logic, just rhetoric and sarcasm and made up claims that make no sense and aren't even relevant in context.

Sadly these kind of tactics win followers. It exposes the fact that the Trump movement hasn't got a footing in the world of reason or intelligence, but people don't care. SAD.

- Doc

[_Chap]

Watching him and other Trump types post I don't see reason or logic, just rhetoric and sarcasm and made up claims that make no sense and aren't even relevant in context.

Yup. Because reason, logic, and attention to what is the case rather than to what one would wish to be the case, makes peoples' heads hurt, and is very elitist. Besides, Trump is the President and you aren't. End of.

... or is it?

[_subgenius]

No worries. Looks like we both enjoy the same relative privilege, then, seeing how PR residents have been free to come and go within the US, and move to any state at any time, since 1917.

Dude we covered this topic as nausea on another thread that I'm pretty sure you were a part of. But now you embarrass yourself pretending to know something about a topic you literally have no experience with. When my parent came to the States, Puerto Ricans were still required to be screened at immigration centers. In fact there were such increased immigration in 50s that a facility was opened in Chicago to process all these Puerto Ricans that were coming/going so freely. So, so spare yourself further embarassment.

For all of your mention of your parents having earned their right to stay, it sure helps to be born with that right in the first place, yes?

Actually, and according to fact, No. And its "parent"...my other parent , how you would say, betrayed their race.

Unless they're incredibly old, perhaps?

Or unless they lived a life based in fact, as opposed to your cursory Google effort above.

But, hey - keep up that other bit about the POC image you're pushing, while knocking other folks who actually have to deal with that. Your snowflake routine is pretty adorable. ; )

Many times on this board I have noted how my life has been much like a double absent when it comes to race. And my upbringing was sparse of the "diversity" you believe you want...and to be honest being non-white never really is a big issue...until some white guy wants to talk about it...and when there is a PoC in the group you guys always eventually want to talk about it.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Many times on this board I have noted how my life has been much like a double absent when it comes to race.

Speaking of nonsense phrases... Subgenius is Whiter than that crap ty bread you buy from the bakery section located between the other two brands of white bread. He'd have you believe his brand of white bread is ethnic because it sits a few feet away from the tortillas.

Anyway. His babbling aside I'd like Ceeboo to actually participate on his thread and answer some of the ideas that have been presented by Leftists who respected the topic enough to engage.

- Doc

[Guest]

.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hey Cam

Anyway. His babbling aside I'd like Ceeboo to actually participate on his thread and answer some of the ideas that have been presented by Leftists who respected the topic enough to engage.

- Doc

I thought I did participate - but I would be happy to participate further by offering my personal comments/opinions on any of the ideas that the leftists who respected the topic enough to have engaged.

Why don'y you point out the some of the posts that you would like to have me participate on and I will do my best.

Peace,
Ceeboo

Well, you can start here:

viewtopic.php?p=1129675#p1129675

And then actually argue your thread in good faith, addressing points in good faith, and actually put some effort into elaborating your position in good faith.

- Doc

[_Jersey Girl]

Universal Rule #3? Let's look at that:

Do not make mention of anything that allegedly transpired or is transpiring via the chat room or via private message that the source him- or herself has not overtly made public. People who communicate behind-the-scenes obviously intend their communications to remain behind-the-scenes. Any post on the board itself making reference to such things will be deleted.

Yeah, usually that's enforced when someone has publicly disclosed personal information about another poster that was gathered behind the scenes. All too often, though, it serves to protect people who actually harass and/or threaten a poster behind the scenes, from public scrutiny.

Go figure.

You do not state the conclusion that you think should be drawn. So what have you 'figured' here? Is it:

1. The rule was misapplied in this case?

I can't SEE this case, Chap. The post was edited. I have no idea if it was misapplied.

2. The rule should be abolished or modified?

Or what?

This isn't the first time I've mentioned this flaw with UR #3. I realized years ago when being harrassed behind the scenes that I wasn't permitted to talk about it publicly and therefore, the offender was protected by UR #3.

So what I did back then was to post MY portion of the exchanges. There was also a time, in the relative beginnings of MDB, where I did post PM content and accepted a suspension for it.

That said, one can easily see when someone is harassing or threatening someone on the board. They are consequenced by having their posts edited out by moderators and very often, they are heavily criticized by other posters. When someone is doing it behind the scenes, unless the recipient discloses it to Shades perhaps, there is no avenue by which we are able to draw public attention to what they are doing, except to issue a "Stay out of my PM's" statement much along the lines I my saying that to DCP in the past.

The thing is, is that some posters, although they are offending and attacking another poster publicly, are doing it openly and not skulking around behind the scenes doing it. Their cards are on the table so to speak in full view of everyone. There are also some posters who cannot function on a publicly leveled playing field and so they make moves behind the scenes (like the slimy cowards they are) to thwart a situation and no one is the wiser that they resorted to dealing from the bottom of the deck.

So, do I have a solution regarding UV #3? Nope. It is what it is. My above comment simply pointed out how it can be used in less than honorable ways.

[Guest]

/

[_honorentheos]

Conservatives across this awesome country have felt, in large measure and for some time now, that they have had little to no voice/representation.

it can't be that you feel the Democrats have been running things most of the last forty years. So...what DO you mean?

I wasn't talking about Democrats, at all. I was talking about Conservatives that have felt they had little voice/representation from Conservative politicians that have ran/won elections. Among other things, this played a gigantic role is in the reason why DJT won the Republican nomination.

Peace,
Ceeboo

But again, what does this mean, ceebs? During the tea party revolt I would have intuited you may have meant things like neither party really caring about government spending or intervention in peoples lives. Rather, both parties just do it in different ways. But the reality of the Trump presidency and full Republican control is a ballooning deficit. Before the astroturfing of the Tea Party by the Kochs and Fox News I would have viewed it as probably refering to politicians of all stripes being tied to lobbiests and placing the interests of corporations, banks, unions, and any other large organization over those of the common citizen. But the reality of the Trump administration and full Republican control has been a tax break that favors old money at the expense of innovation and middle/lower class tax payers. The swamp is thriving if one recognizes it as lobbiests, corporations, and moneyed interests.

That leaves three places where Trump seems to have made real changes I associate with conservatives.

First, the regulation of business, environmental protection, and worker's rights have been embattled and are being rolled back in significant ways. If it is broadly conservative to wish to see protection of the public interest reduced in favor of allowing private business interests to overide them, then ok. The past has been a mixed bag on these issues but there is a clear direction the Trump admin is taking things that I would recognize as neocon idealism. I think that is a bad thing, but I suppose that's part of why I'm not a conservative.

Second, society has been moving in the direction of greater freedom of choice and acceptance when it comes to social issues such as the use of recreational marijuana, gender and sex identity, the strengthening of pluralism over the dominance of Euro-Christian identity. And the courts have largely been rejecting laws as unconstitutional that tried to stop this movement while ruling in favor of challengers. Trump and his Attorney General have been pushing back hard on these issues with executive action and judicial nominations. Maybe this is what you were referring to?

Third, it's no secret that the Republican party was starting to move towards more inclusiveness after the Romney defeat and Trump represents a full reversal on this potential overhaul of the direction of the Republican party. Maybe this is what you mean?

[_ajax18]

Third, it's no secret that the Republican party was starting to move towards more inclusiveness after the Romney defeat and Trump represents a full reversal on this potential overhaul of the direction of the Republican party. Maybe this is what you mean?

I think Trump was plenty inclusive. He brought together a coalition of voters that no Republican before him could. How else did he break the blue wall? How much better did Romney and McCain do with Hispanics? DJT is actually a legal and law respecting hispanic citizens best friend. Their unemployment has hit all time lows during his presidency.