International Oligarchy is not just a Russian phenomenon. It exists right here in the USA.

[SandisLL]

Historically there were 2 Fathers of right wing thought (kinda ghey lol). I never remember their names but this came about after the French Revolution. One of them was a monarchist whose argument was that it's not that monarchy was fundamentally wrong, it was just that France had the WRONG monarchs.

The other placed his faith in the concept of markets, and the notion that if you make everything favor markets, then the cream would naturally rise to the top and stay that way.

Modern centrist/center-right Democrats are kind of a blend of both. It's not that billionaire wealth-hoarders are bad, it's that we just have the wrong ones that won capitalism. I've said it before but they still believe in socio-economic heirarchies, they just kind of care how comfortable the lowest people on the totem pole are in their predestined roles, and also sell them the idea that they're but one good idea away from being wealthy. Unless the lowest get tired of them, at which point they're perfectly ok with handing the keys to the fascists, because they know the fascists will preserve the heirarchy also. They'll just separate out most of the minorities and immigrants they dont like.

With monarchy problem is that despite how good or bad monarch is, sooner or later he is surrounded by bunches of money hungry ass lickers...and ofc is getting older and older. Example maybe is Nicolas II of Russia. He managed to ensure impressive economic success 1906-1913...then get too much impact from ass lickers feodals working with him...too old and too ill. Until parasites turned rissia into parasha.
Most recent examples are Putin and Lukashenko with senile paranoia and idea to make big names for history.

 

[Sinister]

Huh? Biden and Clinton are both conservatives. Obama ran on progressive ideals but governed as a Bush type war monger.

Progressives seem to do well locally for Dems in elections, but nationally the progressive platform is poison.

Obama not only won on a progressive platform, it became the closest thing to an actual movement that worked in a very long time. However he still harbored some reservations that should have clued people in to how little change was actually going to come.

Harris tried to sound as conservative as she could WHILE trying to espouse a touch of economic populism, and it failed. Lost all momentum built by the hint of left populism that was going on earlier in the campaign. She shied away from separating herself from Biden, from questions of her race, from trans issues, from border policy reform, and it still didn't work. The Democrats line of "no really everything is fine" only ever works when people are upset at Republicans and that's been the strategy essentially my whole life. Let Republicans set fire to everything, advertise themselves as the Fire Department, rinse, repeat. Obama won on the idea of change, the next time the Democrats saw that kind of sh*t was Sanders, and perceived it as a threat.

Right this second dinosaur corporate Democrats and their chosen successors not only doing all they can to stymie anyone left of them, they'll do nothing when they get primaried...then blame the voters when they lose National elections. Its trash, and it has been for over 2 decades..

 

[Sinister]

With monarchy problem is that despite how good or bad monarch is, sooner or later he is surrounded by bunches of money hungry ass lickers...and ofc is getting older and older. Example maybe is Nicolas II of Russia. He managed to ensure impressive economic success 1906-1913...then get too much impact from ass lickers feodals working with him...too old and too ill. Until parasites turned rissia into parasha.
Most recent examples are Putin and Lukashenko with senile paranoia and idea to make big names for history.

Same thing happens to Presidents. Trump is purposely surrounding himself with those types because he IS that type..

 

[Islam Imamate]

It's fantastic how much you're being insulted called a sadist, nihilist, etc just for bringing up policy positions that would really help people. It's like people who are dead inside telling you not to feel alive.

It's like if someone made a movie where a bunch of people conspire to treat someone who was perfectly calm like that person was freaking out. It seems like it's made up sometimes the way people react to what you're saying. I wonder if they've even read what you're saying....

Idk about that, I've brought up policy positions that would really help people and that guy got livid and starting attacking me incessantly for it just because it didn't happen to be the policy slogans he supports. Not even saying you have to agree with my policy positions but people like @deviake will assume that if you disagree with them then you're really a sinister person who knows the best way forward but actively fights against it instead of having a different yet good faith understanding of what what the way forward might be.

 

[Islam Imamate]

With monarchy problem is that despite how good or bad monarch is, sooner or later he is surrounded by bunches of money hungry ass lickers...and ofc is getting older and older. Example maybe is Nicolas II of Russia. He managed to ensure impressive economic success 1906-1913...then get too much impact from ass lickers feodals working with him...too old and too ill. Until parasites turned rissia into parasha.
Most recent examples are Putin and Lukashenko with senile paranoia and idea to make big names for history.

Monarchy is arguably the best system but only if its being steered towards the ultimate goal of a "Crowned Republic" where the monarch has little practical power. Many of the more progressive societies that leftists fawn over are such societies, places like Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. A few still have or only recently got rid of their state churches too.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Idk about that, I've brought up policy positions that would really help people and that guy got livid and starting attacking me incessantly for it just because it didn't happen to be the policy slogans he supports. Not even saying you have to agree with my policy positions but people like @deviake will assume that if you disagree with them then you're really a sinister person who knows the best way forward but actively fights against it instead of having a different yet good faith understanding of what what the way forward might be.

Unless you call Jack out regularly every time he lies directly and intentionally and slanders and mis characterizes people's posts then I don't want to hear how bad @deviake is for standing up to four or five guys some who are lying and slandering about him (while the others like those posts) and practicing sophism against him by pretending he's unhinged for being alive and having an opinion that goes against the leftist cult.

It can be tiring sharing basic opinions that go against the grain and watching people get ganged up on about it and then told themselves to calm down. It's so unaware and so unconscious and so spiritually dead and it's projection and I think it's hilarious and sad at the same time how much it happens.

And it's interesting to me that among progressives this is one of the things that's being hotly debated seems like about half the progressives are willing to say "hey we are really hard on our own people for ever sharing any ideas outside of the norm and maybe the left (mainstream and progressive) f***** up this way and is losing elections because we turn on our own people for thinking independently.



I've mentioned this dangerous trend often here only to be castigated and shamed for not being a grown-up or for being unhinged etc. but I have watched serious minded left people turn on the left for being treated like s*** by left leaning people for having any opinions outside of the main the stream on social or economic issues.

And a friend of mine with a PhD in linguistics quit teaching at University over the same policing of thought and language by leftists. Online culture is known for this too and I've been the recipient of it many times for sharing any criticism of the Democratic party.

And my good friend who is 68, who protested in the '60s and has never missed an important Democratic protest in the country drove all the way to the black lives matters protests and his experience there was so terrible that his feelings for the left was quite stymied. Gone were the days when people wanted to discuss positions openly and have open-ended discussions share ideas in an open-minded way. Now it was just there's one way to think and if you don't think that way, you're the enemy and part of the problem. He said it was so radically different than any other protest he had ever been a part of that it was permanently off-putting to him.

His son took a rubber bullet to the eye from the police at that protest and his son is one of the people that has now turned to the right because of having the slightest different opinions (on the trans stuff) and being shamed and castigated by left people.. called a lunatic called a bigot etc.. just exactly what you see happening to deviake here.


You absolutely know Jack lies directly and I've pm'd you about it and told you to start paying attention. You have no excuse if you won't call him out regularly on it. It's terrible for the forum and it's terrible for the left and it's terrible for honest discussion. Jack is about as shining an example of the b******* the mainstream left is today as there is or that I have ever seen..

Recently your posts more and more seem to be written by him as if you have become his new disciple (not the first person to do this either) I look for the breakup that comes in the future because you're a much better person than he is, but you fall in for his b******* and I think it's a little sad to see.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Unless you call Jack out regularly every time he lies directly and intentionally and slanders and mis characterizes people's posts then I don't want to hear how bad @deviake is for standing up to four or five guys some who are lying and slandering about him (while the others like those posts) and practicing sophism against him by pretending he's unhinged for being alive and having an opinion that goes against the leftist cult.

It can be tiring sharing basic opinions that go against the grain and watching people get ganged up on about it and then told themselves to calm down. It's so unaware and so unconscious and so spiritually dead and it's projection and I think it's hilarious and sad at the same time how much it happens.

And it's interesting to me that among progressives this is one of the things that's being hotly debated seems like about half the progressives are willing to say "hey we are really hard on our own people for ever sharing any ideas outside of the norm and maybe the left (mainstream and progressive) f***** up this way and is losing elections because we turn on our own people for thinking independently.



I've mentioned this dangerous trend often here only to be castigated and shamed for not being a grown-up or for being unhinged etc. but I have watched serious minded left people turn on the left dor being treated like s*** by left leaning people for having any opinions outside of the Ming the stream on social or economic issues.

And a friend of mine with a PhD in linguistics quit teaching at University over the same policing of thought and language by seemingly insane leftists. Online culture is known for this too and I've been the recipient of it many times for sharing any criticism of the Democratic party.

And my good friend who is 68, who protested in the '60s and has never missed an important Democratic protest in the country drove all the way to the black lives matters protests and his experience there was so terrible that his feelings for the left was quite stymied. Gone were the days when people wanted to discuss positions openly and have open-ended discussions share ideas in an open-minded way. Now it was just there's one way to think and if you don't think that way, you're the enemy and part of the problem. He said it was so radically different than any other protest he had ever been a part of that. It was permanently off-putting to him.

His son took a rubber bullet to the eye from the police at that protest and his son is one of the people that has now turned to the right because of having the slightest different opinions (on the trans stuff) and being shamed and castigated by left people.. called a lunatic called a bigot etc.. just exactly what you see happening to deviaki here.


You absolutely know Jack lies directly and I've pm'd you about it and told you to start paying attention. You have no excuse if you won't call him out regularly on it. It's terrible for the forum and it's terrible for the left and it's terrible for honest discussion. Jack is about as shining an example of the b******* the mainstream left is today as there is or that I have ever seen..

Recently your posts more and more seem to be written by him as if you have become his new disciple (not the first person to do this either) I look for the breakup that comes in the future because you're a much better person than he is, but you fall in for his b******* and I think it's a little sad to see.

I agree that there's an issue on the left with attacking others on the left simply for having different positions but that's exactly what deviake did to me because I don't toe the progressive line on certain policy positions. Its fine to disagree with me of course but the issue is that instead of addressing my positions or agreeing to disagree he instead accuses me of "nuance trolling" to completely sidestep the substance of my posts and to accuse me of loving billionaires or something. He is exactly the kind of guy who turns your friend off from modern progressive spaces.

I'm not going to say JVS never lies but the supposed lie in that thread didn't strike me as a lie as much as it was a bad faith reading of his post, the same kind of bad faith reading that I feel I was subjected to by deviake.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

I agree that there's an issue on the left with attacking others on the left simply for having different positions but that's exactly what deviake did to me because I don't toe the progressive line on certain policy positions. Its fine to disagree with me of course but the issue is that instead of addressing my positions or agreeing to disagree he instead accuses me of "nuance trolling" to completely sidestep the substance of my posts and to accuse me of loving billionaires or something. He is exactly the kind of guy who turns your friend off from modern progressive spaces.

I'm not going to say JVS never lies but the supposed lie in that thread didn't strike me as a lie as much as it was a bad faith reading of his post, the same kind of bad faith reading that I feel I was subjected to by deviake.

That's fine but it doesn't change the basic thing I've told you which is that you give Jack a pass constantly and you're always calling other people out for the same things Jack does. Only Jack seems to be permanently positioned in this way.



Jack is one of the worst posters in this forum by far for lying l, for practicing sophism, and for obduscating with b*******.

A lot of your recent post could have been written by him ive noticed and I think you've become enamored by his intellect, which I think is a very foolish and unwise thing to do. Obviously you can't place intellect at the center of a value system and arrive anywhere good.


You are one of my favorite posters by the way. That's why it makes me sad to see you going down a road i've seen a number of other people go down with Jack only to realize later that it was a mistake followed by a breakup.

 

[Islam Imamate]

That's fine but it doesn't change the basic thing I've told you which is that you give Jack a pass constantly and you're always calling other people out for the same things Jack does. Only Jack seems to be permanently positioned in this way.



Jack is one of the worst posters in this forum by far for lying l, for practicing sophism, and for obduscating with b*******.

A lot of your recent post could have been written by him ive noticed and I think you've become enamored by his intellect, which I think is a very foolish and unwise thing to do. Obviously you can't place intellect at the center of a value system and arrive anywhere good.


You are one of my favorite posters by the way. That's why it makes me sad to see you going down a road i've seen a number of other people go down with Jack only to realize later that it was a mistake of a breakup.

On matters of spirituality I disagree a lot with JVS but I just don't like to discuss those matters here for a variety of reasons like my own lack of confidence in talking on such matters and how toxic that kind of discussion here gets. I'm sure you've seen that yourself.

On economics though I generally agree. Free trade and free markets are good and to help those who fall through the cracks under capitalism its better to redistribute taxes to the poor in the form of cash transfers rather than have complicated welfare systems like SNAP and Section 8 or try to organize the relations of production into a specific manner. In short, instead of strengthening unions so that people who otherwise would get fired don't, you strengthen unemployment benefits so that when they do get fired they have more of a safety net to help themget back on their feet.

Not saying you have to agree with me here, I just hope that you don't assume I hate the poor and workers and love billionaires and stuff like that. We can have reasonable disagreements here. For example even though I think SNAP and Section 8 are inefficient they tend to be less offensive to the moral sensibilities of the average American when compared to direct cash transfers. So someone could argue that while in theory cash transfers are better, programs like SNAP and Section 8 are more politically viable and thus preferable as part of the party's platform.

 

[Deleted member 592570]

Obama not only won on a progressive platform, it became the closest thing to an actual movement that worked in a very long time. However he still harbored some reservations that should have clued people in to how little change was actually going to come.

He literally bombed the fuck out of the middle east. If you think that's progressive, OK, I guess.

 

[deviake]

Idk about that, I've brought up policy positions that would really help people and that guy got livid and starting attacking me incessantly for it just because it didn't happen to be the policy slogans he supports. Not even saying you have to agree with my policy positions but people like @deviake will assume that if you disagree with them then you're really a sinister person who knows the best way forward but actively fights against it instead of having a different yet good faith understanding of what what the way forward might be.

You have strongly anti-labor positions - you're pro outsourcing and anti-union - so I called you anti-labor. I also said tax the wealthy "in every conceivable way" and you made it out l8ke I was against your tax ideas. I asked you if Jack lied multiple times and you won't answer and I said that hurts your credibility and no wonder you're boys, and this was after getting dog piled and told I was cynical, nihilistic, and my sanity was questioned. About half a dozen people of all political stripes who've posted here agree with me about Jack, not to mention his lies are right here to see.

You referred to people as "inputs"

You referred to workers displaced by outsourcing/corporate greed as, wtf did you say, "labor interruptions" - tgat wasnt it but something like that and ypu think the social safety net paying out due to outsourcing isn't somehow subsidizing corporate greed. Those are strongly anti-labor, anti-American positions, it just is what it is. The problem is you wanna be self righteous while holding these views. There's nothing to talk about no matter how much obfuscation and flowery language you use.

It's fine that you're anti-labor, we don't gotta talked about it, it's just that when you try to say "no actually" that I have a problem. Pretty sure you said a bunch of other disparaging things about me in the other thread, I only skimmed tho cuz I rolled my eyes pretty quickly

 

[Islam Imamate]

You have strongly anti-labor positions - you're pro outsourcing and anti-union - so I called you anti-labor. I also said tax the wealthy "in every conceivable way" and you made it out l8ke I was against your tax ideas. I asked you if Jack lied multiple times and you won't answer and I said that hurts your credibility and no wonder you're boys, and this was after getting dog piled and told I was cynical, nihilistic, and my sanity was questioned. About half a dozen people of all political stripes who've posted here agree with me about Jack, not to mention his lies are right here to see.

Well yeah if you think we should just impose any and all taxes willy nilly then we disagree. An estate tax is great for targeting the ultrawealthy but in general if you seriously want robust social programs you can't just tax the ultrawealthy, you need taxes on the middle class if mainly the upper middle class while also being mindful of the downsides to such taxes.

Again this is not because I love billionaires, its because the wrong set of taxes can kill the Golden Goose before it can lay enough eggs to fund the programs you want. Its about sustainability.

You referred to people as "inputs"

Yes in the context of a discussion about economics. Of course there's more to life than economics but that's not what we were talking about.

You referred to workers displaced by outsourcing/corporate greed as, wtf did you say, "labor interruptions" - tgat wasnt it but something like that and ypu think the social safety net paying out due to outsourcing isn't somehow subsidizing corporate greed. Those are strongly anti-labor, anti-American positions, it just is what it is. The problem is you wanna be self righteous while holding these views. There's nothing to talk about no matter how much obfuscation and flowery language you use.

Again you seem hung up on the semantics rather than the substance. I resent the accusation of being anti-American just because I have a different idea on how to organize the economy. I feel the way I do because I want the best for the country and I think free trade is better for the country than protectionism.

It's fine that you're anti-labor, we don't gotta talked about it, it's just that when you try to say "no actually" that I have a problem. Pretty sure you said a bunch of other disparaging things about me in the other thread, I only skimmed tho cuz I rolled my eyes pretty quickly

If by anti-labor you mean anti-union then that's not baseless but from my POV workers in general are better off with a strong labor market absent unions rather than benefitting a small slice of union employees at the expense of everyone else. You don't have to agree but I find it disagreeable that instead of arguing the substance of my post you instead want to find a label for my views that frames me as ontologically evil or something like that.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

On matters of spirituality I disagree a lot with JVS but I just don't like to discuss those matters here for a variety of reasons like my own lack of confidence in talking on such matters and how toxic that kind of discussion here gets. I'm sure you've seen that yourself.

On economics though I generally agree. Free trade and free markets are good and to help those who fall through the cracks under capitalism its better to redistribute taxes to the poor in the form of cash transfers rather than have complicated welfare systems like SNAP and Section 8 or try to organize the relations of production into a specific manner. In short, instead of strengthening unions so that people who otherwise would get fired don't, you strengthen unemployment benefits so that when they do get fired they have more of a safety net to help themget back on their feet.

Not saying you have to agree with me here, I just hope that you don't assume I hate the poor and workers and love billionaires and stuff like that. We can have reasonable disagreements here. For example even though I think SNAP and Section 8 are inefficient they tend to be less offensive to the moral sensibilities of the average American when compared to direct cash transfers. So someone could argue that while in theory cash transfers are better, programs like SNAP and Section 8 are more politically viable and thus preferable as part of the party's platform.

No man. I'm intentionally leaving genuine disagreements about policy aside.... I'm not even referencing this to genuine policy disagreements because I don't really care as much about those. I care more about watching tribal politics play out dissipating our energies and causing us to compromise our principles and cause us to be keenly insightful of the others faults and oftentimes completely oblivious to our own sides faults . I see this as the primary thing that is going wrong in our country today. The chief liar presently is Trump but Democrats aren't nearly as immune to that as they pretend to be.

I do disagree with you and I think you're deeply wrong in some of your economic positions. But I don't care about that. That's just another guy that thinks that way to me.

What I'm pointing out is that Jack lies through his teeth all the time and you seem to notice when other people do it and you never seem to notice when he does it.

He gets away with this because he's educated in the realm of economics and people enjoy some of his contributions and fear his retribution and for tribal reasons. But it's a black eye to the left to anybody who is actually seeing.

So if you're going to castigate @deviake... every single time you do, I would like to see you do it with Jack. Otherwise it's obvious there's a bias at play because Jack is a bigger liar than deviake has ever been in his entire life.

But all of this aside. I sure don't want to have ill will towards you man or even argue with you much.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

@Rob Battisti

When do the consequences of your bet with Jack come into play? I have to say I think it's unfortunate that he lost a bet to you and has to take 2 months off because he seems to be in the middle of a long slow meltdown where his true colors are shining through much more obviously and he's hiding his lies way less skillfully.

I'd hate to see him get 2 months to regroup and come back as a skillful liar again rather than the obvious liar that he's revealing himself to be lately.

 

[deviake]

Well yeah if you think we should just impose any and all taxes willy nilly then we disagree. An estate tax is great for targeting the ultrawealthy but in general if you seriously want robust social programs you can't just tax the ultrawealthy, you need taxes on the middle class if mainly the upper middle class while also being mindful of the downsides to such taxes.

Again this is not because I love billionaires, its because the wrong set of taxes can kill the Golden Goose before it can lay enough eggs to fund the programs you want. Its about sustainability.

Yes in the context of a discussion about economics. Of course there's more to life than economics but that's not what we were talking about.

Again you seem hung up on the semantics rather than the substance. I resent the accusation of being anti-American just because I have a different idea on how to organize the economy. I feel the way I do because I want the best for the country and I think free trade is better for the country than protectionism.

If by anti-labor you mean anti-union then that's not baseless but from my POV workers in general are better off with a strong labor market absent unions rather than benefitting a small slice of union employees at the expense of everyone else. You don't have to agree but I find it disagreeable that instead of arguing the substance of my post you instead want to find a label for my views that frames me as ontologically evil or something like that.

This is all bullshit. Just like you misrepresented me on taxes before, you do it again. I never said the middle class wouldn't have to have their taxes raised, in fact the opposite.

You're pro outsourcing and anti organized labor and refer to people in dehumanizing terms without realizing it.

I never said you're evil, YOU said that. This post just supported things I've already said 100x. You're only gonna Streisand Effect yourself at this point.

I don't care that you have the worldview you do, it's fine. I'm in a union and have participated in collective action, you're not gonna slide anything over on me.

We agree on other things but not this. It's fine

 

[Rob Battisti]

@Rob Battisti

When do the consequences of your bet with Jack come into play? I have to say I think it's unfortunate that he lost a bet to you and has to take 2 months off because he seems to be in the middle of a long slow meltdown where his true colors are shining through much more obviously and he's hiding his lies way less skillfully.

I'd hate to see him get 2 months to regroup and come back as a skillful liar again rather than the obvious liar that he's revealing himself to be lately.

He’s current out right now. It will be good for him.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

He’s current out right now. It will be good for him.

Good for him is not necessarily good for the forum though....

 

[Islam Imamate]

No man. I'm intentionally leaving genuine disagreements about policy aside.... I'm not even referencing this to genuine policy disagreements because I don't really care as much about those. I care more about watching tribal politics play out dissipating our energies and causing us to compromise our principles and cause us to be keenly insightful of the others faults and oftentimes completely oblivious to our own sides faults . I see this as the primary thing that is going wrong in our country today. The chief liar presently is Trump but Democrats aren't nearly as immune to that as they pretend to be.

I do disagree with you and I think you're deeply wrong in some of your economic positions. But I don't care about that. That's just another guy that thinks that way to me.

What I'm pointing out is that Jack lies through his teeth all the time and you seem to notice when other people do it and you never seem to notice when he does it.

He gets away with this because he's educated in the realm of economics and people enjoy some of his contributions and fear his retribution and for tribal reasons. But it's a black eye to the left to anybody who is actually seeing.

So if you're going to castigate @deviake... every single time you do, I would like to see you do it with Jack. Otherwise it's obvious there's a bias at play because Jack is a bigger liar than deviake has ever been in his entire life.

But all of this aside. I sure don't want to have ill will towards you man or even argue with you much.

I didn't come out of the gate castigating deviake, I tried to have a civil conversation and looked for common ground but he became livid and started castigating me which based on your likes in that thread you supported. In fact at some point I backed out of the thread and he tagged me at least once to confront me again. In this context you should be condemning him, not me.

This is all bullshit. Just like you misrepresented me on taxes before, you do it again. I never said the middle class wouldn't have to have their taxes raised, in fact the opposite.

You're pro outsourcing and anti organized labor and refer to people in dehumanizing terms without realizing it.

I never said you're evil, YOU said that. This post just supported things I've already said 100x. You're only gonna Streisand Effect yourself at this point.

I don't care that you have the worldview you do, it's fine. I'm in a union and have participated in collective action, you're not gonna slide anything over on me.

We agree on other things but not this. It's fine

Again you're hung up on semantics and slogans, not really interesting to me. You're also quite rude and not really well informed so as far as I'm concerned whatever we agree on is a happy accident, not some actual aligning of values.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

I didn't come out of the gate castigating deviake, I tried to have a civil conversation and looked for common ground but he became livid and started castigating me which based on your likes in that thread you supported. In fact at some point I backed out of the thread and he tagged me at least once to confront me again. In this context you should be condemning
him, not me.

Again you're hung up on semantics and slogans, not really interesting to me. You're also quite rude and not really well informed so as far as I'm concerned whatever we agree on is a happy accident, not some actual aligning of values.

My likes of his posts comes from the general observation that he gets gained up on if he says anything out outside of the mainstream by all the leftists who like each other's post, some of which are profound and direct lies.

And then politically I just think he's right in every single instance of debate with you or Jack or any of these other centrist Democrats who I think are a big part of the reason we lost the election to the worst candidate in history twice.

It's obvious now and pretty clear to everybody that Biden was unfit for a long time and is absolutely unfit right now. And you and many other centrist Democrats were the ones pretending not to see it or I'm afraid to say possibly ignorant enough not to see it when the rest of the world could.


The discussion going around deviake just to me highlights what's wrong with centrist left Democrats, the group think, the lying, the terrible policy positions, etc.


But I don't want to debate policy in any way for the most part, as it's so low on my list of priorities to be informed enough to debate that I am afraid I'm usually incapable of it.

 

[deviake]

I didn't come out of the gate castigating deviake, I tried to have a civil conversation and looked for common ground but he became livid and started castigating me which based on your likes in that thread you supported. In fact at some point I backed out of the thread and he tagged me at least once to confront me again. In this context you should be condemning
him, not me.

Again you're hung up on semantics and slogans, not really interesting to me. You're also quite rude and not really well informed so as far as I'm concerned whatever we agree on is a happy accident, not some actual aligning of values.

Pro outsourcing, anti union = anti-labor and anti-american and you misrepresented me multiple times. Those aren't opinions.