BookTalk.org

I agree with most of what you guys are posting but... I have a slightly different take away from the problem of PSfB and the 2020 election. Sometime back, Booktalk discussed J.D. Vance’ “Hillbilly Elegy”. Though I didn’t spend the time participating in the discussion (should have but really busy this past year) I did follow the discussion and I did read the book. I don’t think we can ignore at the present the political power that resides throughout the vast region that comprises Appalachia. PSfB made campaign promises to these people and for the most part he has kept or fought for those promises. It’s true that these hillbillies voted against their own interests but that’s just it with these people, they don’t understand their net interest just an at face value. Appalachia has its counter parts throughout the U.S. . PSfB understands his electorate and he’s using that knowledge to his advantage.

Personally I like Warren and Buttigieg, but I’ll vote for a turnip as long as there is a D next to it.

The trick for the Dems is to appeal to the women of Appalachia. Appalachian men, in their minds are benefiting from Trumps policies, nothing PSfB does or says is going to turn them from trump. It’s the single mothers that are truly hurt by the trump regimes policies. The Dems need to get these women to register if they’re not and then need to get them to vote ‘ in the single mothers interests’. If you follow the positions of the Dems you know well that there should be a natural confluence of the two. (Dem policy and single mother needs).

If the main article of impeachment against PSfB is extorting Ukraine to investigate Biden then impeachment fades as Biden fades during the primary season. Mark my words... Biden will not be the nominee.

I don’t agree that PSfB wants out of the White House and I do not agree that he will refuse to abdicate the presidency if he is voted out. Such notions are nonsensical. We the rational people cannot be pulled into the ridiculous, it is for us to point out the logical faults in such incoherent thinking.

It’s interesting in the most bazaar way to imagine...PSfB is not a joke but at the same time he is the biggest joke of all.

Just a few years ago Harry Reid was the biggest jackass in the Senate now its Moscow Mitch. Point is...it’s partisanship, and right now its this libertarian horseshit that is polluting the minds of a generation of politicians and as a result destroying the audacity of hope. What is that hope? . The twentieth century was the American century, the audacity of hope was to build on the shoulders of that great century. With PSfB and his libertarian enablers we’ve moved into a freak version of Thorstein Veblen’s leisure class theory. The problem is that people don’t get this. But there it is. I said PSfB would move the U.S. back to the nineteenth century and he has. Another problem for Dems is that the nineteenth century was a heyday for Appalachia. (man I’m starting to crack myself up)

I question whether PSfB’s tax breaks and taxdodge handouts to the ultra rich nor his trade wars will have much effect on his Appalachian devotees. PSfB’s base is solid, for them trump hasn’t governed in ways that are anyway more criminal than every other politician in history, in fact for many of them he’s quite honest. In a way their correct, PSfB is an open book...(one whose title is “Duh” . )

The common theme here seems to be that despite all the issues confronting PSfB, there appears to be whether by hook or crook, bigger issues confronting the Democrats overcoming PSfB which is...joke worthy, in a sad clownish way itself.

The Dems need to determine what level of libertarianism that they contain within themselves and purge it, then they must go on the attack against the failed test that has been forty years of demeaning Economic Social Darwinism that has brought the world to its current state of putrefaction. I don’t have libertarian sympathies and I have no iota of fear about there being a totalitarian government ever...in the U.S. . Ultimately we’re to honest...deluded?, maybe..Above all, rationality has to win the day.

Impeachment of PSfB should move forward, let it play out, its just another part of the pent-up freak show we fascinate ourselves with.

I’m starting to get cynical so for now “good night”

I recently saw a short video that addresses your concerns:

youtube.com/watch?v=Uv-jOV7iKlw&fea ... e=youtu.be

the US was on the verge of falling to the Communist Chinese. That's why conservatives voted against their economic interests. If Clinton had won, we would have surrendered all manufacturing and all advanced technology to the ChiComs. Hell, they have MIRV missiles because of her bitch of a husband. And Hillary would have delivered our coup de grace.

Nobody's 100% happy with Trump, but at least he's not a ChiCom enabler.

Here's another video. It is superb:

THIS IS WHAT THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT 2020
youtube.com/watch?v=jYprhhWwgMA&fea ... e=youtu.be

Democrats whine about "foreign interference" in elections while they work to give the vote to illegal aliens. Think about that.

KS wrote:THIS IS WHAT THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT 2020
youtube.com/watch?v=jYprhhWwgMA&fea ... e=youtu.be

Democrats whine about "foreign interference" in elections while they work to give the vote to illegal aliens. Think about that.

The garbage is mind-blowing. You need to stay off youtube, it's rotting your brain.

The specifics of that video are absolutely true. As far as the generality, that we’re fighting evil, yes, I believe that. Absolute evil exists, and if you don’t fight it, then you serve it.

Leftists tend to be moral relativists. They tend to think that morality is a relative thing and all peoples’ choices should be honored. But should all choices be honored?

Take AIDS/HIV for example. If you know you have the disease and deliberately infect an unsuspecting victim, is that an evil act? We’ve all seen the pictures of people wasting away to death from the disease, so would you be evil if you intentionally condemned somebody to that? If you say no, then you either have no moral compass or your compass is broken.

Moral relativism has been sold to us by people who are attempting to avoid judgement.

Bill Clinton killed thousands with HIV-tainted blood, by the way. That was when he was governor of Arkansas. Look up “Factor 8 scandal” and you’ll see a good example of evil. And look up “Bill Clinton Chinese technology” to see how he catapulted the ChiComs a quarter century ahead in their missile technology. Americans today are under an increased threat of Chinese nuclear attack because of Clinton. The Lewinsky impeachment was staged to divert our attention away from the man’s REAL crimes. He should have been fairly tried and executed long ago.

The Clintons are supremely evil people, as are the Bushes, the Obamas, the Bidens...so many. None of those leaders could have survived the kind of scrutiny that Trump’s been subjected to. Trump’s the most investigated president in history. Just think what the ones mentioned above would have had to answer for given the same type of scrutiny. I suspect that’s why they display such hostile animus toward Trump, because as president he’s in a position to expose their corruption. The current Ukrainian accusations against Trump came after his people began interviewing officials about Crowdstrike’s role in the 2016 election. An offshoot of that questioning was, “What did the Bidens do?” The Washington establishment went nuts in response. The elites are panicked because if just ONE CORNER of their corruption is lifted, then they’re in danger of having the whole scab ripped away. And they won’t survive. Hence the need to block Trump.

I voted against my economic interests when I voted for Trump. He presented his tax plan before the election, I reviewed it, and I voted for him even though it meant I would pay more in taxes. He outlined his tariff war against China, I saw that it would mean higher prices for me, and I voted for him anyway. The survival of the United States trumped pocketbook concerns in the 2016 election. And I think this is where the Democrats miscalculated. The moral relativists were shocked to learn that so many people still believe in something strongly enough to vote against their economic interests. We believe the country is worth preserving. Leftists want a country without borders, occupied by “residents” rather than “citizens.” They want to destroy the nation. Trump said he would do what he could to stop that, so we gave him his chance.

I feel sorry for leftists. Most of them have no religion and no belief in a higher authority aside from government. That would be fine if they understood that THEY are the government, but they don’t. They let the Clintons and Obamas do their intellectual heavy lifting and merely parrot the talking points. Like with the electoral college. Hillary Clinton says it should be abolished, so her parroting followers say it should be abolished. But the electoral college is all that stands between us and a direct democracy. In a direct democracy, 51% can vote to kill the %49. And Hillary Clinton wants that kind of government for America. Have any of you leftists asked yourselves WHY she wants that?

Bill Clinton And The Deadly Arkansas Tainted Blood Scandal
newswithviews.com/bill-clinton-and-the- ... d-scandal/

Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology
capitalresearch.org/article/flashback-b ... echnology/

Killing Ron Brown: A Clinton Crime Family Story
“Your life is in danger. At this moment, a Chinese nuclear warhead sits in a missile silo. Its guidance, if launched, instructs the warhead to detonate a mile or two above your home. And this was all made possible by extortion, murder, and illegal campaign contributions to Bill and Hillary Clinton....”
hennessysview.com/2016/10/02/killing-ro ... ron-brown/

Karl Marx: “Accuse Your Enemy Of What You Are Doing, As You Are Doing It To Create Confusion”
Hillary Clinton’s idol, Saul Alinsky, also preached this. The Clintons were involved with Russia. They sold 20% of America’s uranium to Russia. Then the Clinton-owned Democratic party accused Trump of being involved with Russia. Now the Dems are attempting to do the same with Ukraine, to cover the Obama/Biden/Clinton crimes in that country.
grandmageri422.me/2017/10/25/karl-marx- ... confusion/

Alinksy’s daughter: What the media won’t tell you about Hillary
“In 1993, the president of Wellesley College approved a new rule upon being contacted by Bill Clinton’s White House. The rule stated that all senior theses written by a president or first lady of the United States would be kept under lock and key. The rule was meant to keep the public ignorant about the radical ties of the first lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton, to the radical Marxist organizer, Saul Alinsky....”
conservativereview.com/news/alinskys-da ... -tell-you/

HIV-positive man who intentionally infected ‘thousands’ of partners turns himself in
“Police arrested David Dean Smith, 51, last week after he turned himself in -- and admitted he had unprotected sex with "thousands" of partners with the intention of killing them by infecting them with the virus....”
nydailynews.com/life-style/health/hiv-p ... e-1.999178

Governor Brown Decriminalizes Act of Knowingly Spreading HIV
This makes Jerry Brown a mass murderer.
independentsentinel.com/governor-brown- ... ading-hiv/

KS, Marx never said that. If I'm wrong, prove it.

Out of all of that, THAT'S what you seize on? Pretty sad.

Bill Clinton is a mass murderer. Hillary Clinton is a mass murderer. Jerry Brown is a mass murderer. If I'm wrong, prove it.

KS wrote:The specifics of that video are absolutely true. As far as the generality, that we’re fighting evil, yes, I believe that. Absolute evil exists, and if you don’t fight it, then you serve it.

The problem is you think you’re able to determine what’s evil.

That entire video is made up of weaponized memetics, tailored for emotional appeal. It feels good when your beliefs are reinforced, and very good when it’s very emotional. It takes a certain type of person to see this and act against it, to critically examine the information. These weaponized memes all point to implications that fall apart when looked at closely. Although intelligent, it seems you’re not that type of person.

Like the meme mentioning how women buy 50 shades of grey yet are upset at Trump’s language. Sure, the meme feels good for someone on team Red. But it’s utter garbage upon examination. I’ve heard the sort of “grab them by the p***y locker room talk in locker rooms a lot growing up. Not from everyone, of course. It’s usually from the bombastic blowhard asshole that makes friends by being a dick to everyone. And that’s the sort of person we elected leader of the free nation. I don’t give a crap about 50 shades of grey, the point is that Trump’s language shows how pathetic he is. A woman’s private BSDM fantasy does not in any way justify the crap that comes out of wig’s mouth.

Then there’s the idea that Russia supported Hillary through donations. Yet the swarm of weaponized memes I was bombarded with during the 2016 election were almost unanimously pro-Trump, anti-Hillary. They’re tailored specifically to ignite racism, nationalism, fear, and partisanship. And post hoc investigations show thousands upon thousands of them originating from Russia. It’s obvious they wanted Trump in office, so he could do dumb shit like backing out of Syria and opening the floodgates for Russian influence in the middle east.

You don’t recognize evil KindaScholarly. You promote it unwittingly, believing you’re on the right side of history. Harkening to the ancient wisdom that the lord of evil is the ultimate deceiver, you’re too arrogant to consider you might be deceived.

KindaSkolarly wrote:The specifics of that video are absolutely true. As far as the generality, that we’re fighting evil, yes, I believe that. Absolute evil exists, and if you don’t fight it, then you serve it.

Leftists tend to be moral relativists. They tend to think that morality is a relative thing and all peoples’ choices should be honored. But should all choices be honored?

I have to appreciate the "tend to" above. Do you implicitly acknowledge that rightists also can be moral relativists? Certainly if Donald Trump & Co. are currently representative of the right, the answer is "yes," because they have moral relativism written all over them. The acceptance of the murder and dismemberment of Khashoggi, for business reasons, is just one example of several.

Take AIDS/HIV for example. If you know you have the disease and deliberately infect an unsuspecting victim, is that an evil act? We’ve all seen the pictures of people wasting away to death from the disease, so would you be evil if you intentionally condemned somebody to that? If you say no, then you either have no moral compass or your compass is broken.

Yes, of course. But see Khashoggi above and note how easily we let our absolutes crumble under the influence of partisanship and self-interest. Strong Christian belief is supposed to lend one the "full armor of the Lord," but what good has it done Mike Pence?

Moral relativism has been sold to us by people who are attempting to avoid judgement.

Maybe you are in some way referring to "values clarification," which was an approach to moral teaching that came out many years ago and was condemned by conservatives. I haven't heard about it in ages. An honest approach would be to admit that moral relativism is engaged in by everyone, regardless of political persuasion. It's impossible to do moral reasoning without it. Only a small percentage of acts that have moral dimension qualify as absolutes (either as evil or as good). Below them is a scale on which we all apply our individual or tribal judgment. No one really agrees with the absolute of the Kantian imperative, under which it is wrong to lie, even to save someone's life. The 10 Commandments aren't effectively absolute, either, as generally sound as they are. "Thou shalt not kill?"

I voted against my economic interests when I voted for Trump. He presented his tax plan before the election, I reviewed it, and I voted for him even though it meant I would pay more in taxes.

If you could provide a link to this pre-election plan, I'd appreciate it. I don't recall any promise he made that ended up being similar to the plan the Republicans passed.

He outlined his tariff war against China, I saw that it would mean higher prices for me, and I voted for him anyway. The survival of the United States trumped pocketbook concerns in the 2016 election. And I think this is where the Democrats miscalculated. The moral relativists were shocked to learn that so many people still believe in something strongly enough to vote against their economic interests. We believe the country is worth preserving. Leftists want a country without borders, occupied by “residents” rather than “citizens.” They want to destroy the nation. Trump said he would do what he could to stop that, so we gave him his chance.

Well, economic interests are pretty important. Ask the formerly well-paid factory workers about that. They thought that Trump would help them get back their good jobs, and I can't blame them for grasping at straws. I disagree that the push for Trump was fueled by principle. That is rarely the case in politics.

It makes sense that you would emphasize--rather, over emphasize--absolutes, because absolutist thinking is black-and-white thinking. The problem with black and white thinking like yours is obvious: most people aren't going to buy it because in their life experience they've learned about distinctions, gradations, and nuance. Your attempts to paint the Clintons, Bushes, John McCain, and whoever as absolutely evil are futile. People would need to believe that none of these people did a single good thing--and the evidence to the contrary is staring us all in the face. Yours isn't an appeal that will work with the vast majority of grown-ups.

KindaSkolarly wrote:Out of all of that, THAT'S what you seize on? Pretty sad.

It's all I bothered to read.