Americans who hate America

[Bokanovsky]

But as solid as the statistics Krugman provided might seem, we’re left with one glaring problem: States aren’t people. Could it be possible that liberals within conservative states are the ones taking the welfare dollars?

A survey by the Maxwell Poll on the political affiliation of those receiving government aid showed this to be the case.

Public Housing :Rep 12% Dem 81%

Medicaid :Rep 16% Dem 74%

Food Stamps :Rep 20% Dem 67%

Unemployment Compensation :Rep 21% Dem 66%

Disability (from Govt.) :Rep 25% Dem 64%

Welfare/Public Assistance :Rep 22% Dem 63%

http://rare.us/story/exploding-the-lefts-red-state-myths/

Embers = owned

 

[Mike32ct]

Jaylan, before blaming Republicans about how they handle immigration, look at it this way...

Shouldn't we seal the border with a continuous fence FIRST before granting amnesty to people already here?

Or just leave the borders open and let more people continue to pour in and grant a new amnesty every few years?

 

[Mike32ct]

Mike32ct: consider this: companies don't WANT the border enforced. The companies need cheap laborers to sustain its workforce.

Agreed. In fact, I will concede that some Republicans NEVER want to seal the border.

I guess I'm in the camp that the border should be sealed for national security. Then I would be fine with an amnesty to humanely treat people already here.

 

[logicallefty]

I guess I'm in the camp that the border should be sealed for national security. Then I would be fine with an amnesty to humanely treat people already here.

Agree on sealing the borders.

For those already here illegally, I think the hockey "offsides" rule should be enforced. Go back across the line out of our end of the ice, and then come back across it properly. If you do that you can stay.

 

[Jaylan]

Jaylan, before blaming Republicans about how they handle immigration, look at it this way...

Shouldn't we seal the border with a continuous fence FIRST before granting amnesty to people already here?

Or just leave the borders open and let more people continue to pour in and grant a new amnesty every few years?

I definitely feel the government has an obligation to its citizens and its borders long before foreigners. But it is what it is...people are already here, many of them minors...and many who have been here for years. While Id love to magically throw an impenetrable border along our south, and hope that Latin America thrives so its people arent constantly leaving to come here, I also see how terrible life is for people south of the border.

Its a complicated situation really. All I am pointing out, is that no matter how I personally feel about immigration, the Hispanic population and all minority populations continue to grow....and the GOP continues to alienate these populations.

No party will have any chance of holding onto political power in a future United States, if their voter base continues to be 90% white, according to exit polls for the GOP.

 

[Bible_Belt]

However sealed our borders become, it's not going to happen with a fence. The US/Mexico border is so vast that there isn't enough metal to build a fence that big, enough electricity to light it at night, or enough manpower to guard it.

Mini-drones are the future of border patrol. The dilemma now is how to use them to deliver non-lethal force, which is a lot more difficult than killing people from remote control. I could see something like spiderman's net shooting out of a drone to tie up a fleeing border crosser. Then the humans would have to come pick them up before they died in the desert heat.

 

[( . )( . )]

For a border to work, we need to stop worrying about whether the invader dies or not. This is the only true deterrent to invasion.

This. Plus massive crippling fines and jail time for any business owner caught paying them. It's really not a hard problem to fix. However that obviously conflicts with the endgame plan so you've probably got a better chance of pigs flying.

 

[Stagger Lee]

It's all pre-determined. The only reason people can call or write legislators or speak at some public meeting/hearing is to give them a chance to VENT.

That is the only reason. It does not change the outcome. I know some politicians who confirmed this to me privately.

No doubt that's the way politicians want it and feel it should be. But if millions of people for example told their congressman and opinion polls to stop immigration, I think the politicians would take notice. And if people would vote out politicians who did not, the things would change.

Collectively the people are getting the government they deserve to a large degree.

For example the newly elected Republican congress tried to pass provisions in the Dept of Homeland security funding bill to defund Obama's illegal alien amnesty and work permits for millions of illegals. But the Democrats are blocking it and Obama threatens to veto it even if it passed. But does the public support the republicans in this? Not really, they say stupid things like, "fix the 'broken' immigration" and blame Republicans for not 'compromising" (bending over for the Dems and Obama).

 

[Stagger Lee]

Fences and drones could at least minimize entry. And if they wanted to use them to keep them out, they'd pay to do it.

The question in my mind is, Why would a rich man want to keep them out? If I own a company that grows tomatoes, and I've got 6 luxury vehicles and a mansion to pay for, am I better off hiring Mexicans for a few dollars a day? Or hiring Americans for a few dollars an hour? Am I going to help pay for a fence or a drone and thereby prevent access to my cheap labor source? Or am I going to favor de-policing the border so as to allow the Mexicans to continue entering the country so that my profits will continue to flow?

What's in the best interest of the elite powerful business owner who prefers cheap, unskilled labor and high turnover?

I personally do not think that a rich man's financial prosperity involves a secured Mexican border. In fact, a secured Mexican border is a grave THREAT to many of the rich and powerful.

LOW wages=higher profits.

I believe it's not even just about money and power. I believe the wealthy, many of them white or jewish/white themselves, just want to screw over whites (competitors?). Bill Gates for example gives away billions of dollars to only benefit nonwhites. It's some kind of sickness probably rooted in jealousy and envy that most liberals have but even some conservatives.

The classism oppressing the majority of whites is not new. The majority of whites just broke free of it such as in medieval times, the Magna Carta and when the US was founded. What is new now is the use of women and nonwhites as a weapon to oppress whites. This seem to be primarily a liberal/Democrat/jewish/elitist/ marxism tactic but it's used by most of the wealthy and elitist.

 

[Embers84]

Don't be fooled, don't fall for the obvious lies.

This utter and complete DEBUNKING of the "blue state giver, red state taker" Horsesht has been brought to you as a PSA, LOL.

:crackup:.

Looks like you're trying to frantically spin your right wing rhetoric that doesn't compute when you are met with the facts. Red states are the poorest states in the country. They take and you believe the false lies on Faux and your right wing media.

Oh yeah, the leftists have no interest in taking away yours guns. Just ask the Brits, Europeans, Australians, Canadians...wait a second. What a crock of sh!t.

How many people lost "all their guns" under Clinton's assault weapon ban?

0

Embers = owned

:crackup:

I wasn't "owned". The "Maxwell Poll" he posted is a fake poll made up by a right wing blogger with no government data that nobody has ever heard of.

My links are actual data that is reported by the states fiscal income and from a Gallup Poll that is a real poll looked at by everyone for accurate data.

A nation without borders is not a nation.

Reagan, Bush, Bush Jr. allowed foreigners/illegals to come in by the millions not securing our borders. They also gave illegals amnesty.

A nation without enforced laws is anarchy.

The right wingers let the banks run wild under Bush's years with no enforced laws. Look at all the deregulation they let go on during that time that lead to the recession.

A nation with executive orders is a monarchy.

Looks like we have lived under a Monarchy since George Washington. Recent Republican Presidents weren't too shy about issuing Executive Orders themselves.

Number of Executive Orders by President


Dwight D. Eisenhower 484
Richard Nixon ............346
Gerald Ford ...............169
Ronald Reagan ..........346
George Bush .............166
George W Bush ..........291


Barack Obama 200


http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

Obama is barely over Bush SR. and Ford who only served 1 term and finished up for Nixon. They both issued more executive orders in their short term than Obama did in one term. Reagan has 146 more orders than Obama, and all these right wingers claim he is "trampling the Constitution". A bunch of liars and hypocrites indeed.

The country belongs to the legal citizens, NOT to the invaders, and NOT to the politicians and NOT to the corporations.

Not anymore it doesn't, the corporations own the country and have the politicians in their pocket to craft laws for them. They let the invaders roam free for their cheap labor and don't care. They just use "illegal aliens" as an issue to rile up right wingers to blame on Liberals to get votes at election time.

 

[Bokanovsky]

How many people lost "all their guns" under Clinton's assault weapon ban?

It's hard to tell if you are a leftist troll or a just an old-fashioned retard.

 

[( . )( . )]

It's hard to tell if you are a leftist troll or a just an old-fashioned retard.

I honestly think it could be a paid Sunstein shill. It's already well known there's quite a few floating around the manosphere, I don't think it's that far fetched of an idea that SS would get a few. You'll notice it also favors by default any and every policy which has the best long term chance at being the most harmful to white American taxpayers. On the very rare occasions it ventures onto the main discussion all it's really said is how great feminism and the gynocracy has been for America.

Even the handful of resident devout sh!tlibs we have here are instinctively aware on some level there's quite a few leftoid policies which are downright dangerous (to everyone) as is the nature of leftism anyway and will vocalize it, not this Embers character. Some next level sh!t is going on in my opinion.

 

[Tictac]

Your lefty credential are solid Embers.

You're just another partisan loudmouth that surrendered your ability to think or make a point other than those from your myopic corner.

Pathetic.

 

[Poon King]

Not even close (even as a temporary "majority"). I might also add taking 39.8% of the total gibsmedats when you only comprise of 12.6% of the population is fvcking disgusting no matter how you slice it. I doubt anybody with a pair of eyes would have bought your claim anyway but I don't think you can bullsh!t out of this one.

http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

Own it Poon king. OWN IT!! Show us that alphadom I'm continually defending. Personally I'd be happy as a jaylan with 2 *******s if I managed to cuck a race who I perceived as enemy number 1 out of it's majority tax dollars. I'd be rubbing it in. "How's that NASA program going whitey...Reaching for the stars? Pfffft try reaching for your wallets"

I think you missed the point Tits. Politicians and other people who want to stay in power profit from dividing people. And so... they make what is REALLY a class, culture and educational issue into a race issue.

Do you believe black people are inherently bad and white people are inherently good? If not.. then what are you arguing about?

Different social classes, cultures and education levels will behave differently. RACE has nothing to do with it. However, racism divides people. Divide and conquer.

See news reports stories about "Welfare Queens" abusing the system, and it is not hard to convince many white people (facing economic difficulties themselves) that these stories apply to ALL Black people. Ronald Reagan used this tactic in the 1980 election to defeat Jimmy Carter. But it would take another 20 years and a Democratic President (Bill Clinton) to see real Welfare Reform.

Fast-forward another 18 years, and the issue is being raised again. And again, the issue is fabricated from whole cloth.. that zillions of Black people are all getting Gub-Ment money, now that "one of them" is President. But it isn't true, of course.

 

[Poon King]

There have been a LOT of posts here on SS and other sites drawing parallels to the American and Roman declines.

And there are also a LOT of theories written about the Roman decline. Very few of which I fully understand. So I'm not convinced that America has declined in the same exact way of the Romans.

In my opinion, 99.99% of America's "own citizens" have no real power. Their beliefs and thoughts are insignificant. It really doesn't matter what the majority of average American citizens think or believe, unless it affects or threatens the profits of the oligarchy.

But the elite and powerful have done a masterful job of brainwashing people into thinking that the average man's happiness is derived through consumerism.

"Buy Clearasil and you'll get to fvuck the girl."
"Go into debt for this car and people will think you're important."

But how many American citizens believe right now that America's future is looking bright?

And does America's future, or the well being of its citizens, actually matter to guys like Phil Knight? Or Bill Gates? Not really. I don't think so. The labor and consumer base of power is shifting rapidly from West to East. They can hire people at low wage to sell computers (units) to millions of emerging consumers in China, India, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, etc. etc. etc.

The only thing that Phil Knight or Bill Gates cares about is the spendability of the average American consumer.

Which is better for companies like Nike and Microsoft? Low wages via 3rd-world sweatshops? Or higher wages to the bloated American worker and his nagging demands for health benefits and good wages?

Concern/agenda #1 for the American oligarchy is very similar to Wall Street: keep wages LOW and profits HIGH. If that means moving your company to China and building sweatshops with suicide nets installed (Google "Foxconn"), then so be it.

Most of us who know that American isn't worth saving think small, because we come from small. It's easier to adopt others' values than think for ourselves. So we buy into classic American falsehoods, like military troops are our "heroes"; that Mitt Romney sympathizes with minorities and the poor; that ANYONE who opposes America is a "terrorist."

Only a select few have a truly significant, vested interest in preserving the American Corporatocracy. There are a select few who aren't rich and/or privileged, who truly believe in the myth of championing the Middle Class, but they often pay the price with abject poverty, social ostracizing, even death.

Good points.

I totally agree for the most part. Another reason families are falling apart (besides feminism) is consumerism, plain and simple. We are training generations to believe that owning things is better than doing things, and that your family is a success if they own a lot of crap, not if they actually like each other. Consumerism in general is a passive activity, and the most passive part of it is television watching. We are a nation of choosers, not doers, anymore. Our greatest role in life is that of the customer, who is "always right" and whose greatest job is not creating wealth, but selecting which consumer product to consume.

I don't necessarily believe America isn't worth saving though. Its not like there is another country where things are much better. Some argue Japan. However, Japan is the most feminine beta b!tch country around.

 

[Bokanovsky]

I think you missed the point Tits. Politicians and other people who want to stay in power profit from dividing people. And so... they make what is REALLY a class, culture and educational issue into a race issue.

Politically incorrect as it may sound, culture and race an inextricably linked. That's why multi-racial societies simply do not work. The American "melting pot" theory is a crock of sh!t. The "melting pot" worked when all immigrants were European and white. They may have spoken different languages but they had the same religion and very similar cultural values. When you start introducing other races into the equation, it all goes to sh!t. And it's not because other races are "bad people" or inferior. They are just different, in very major ways. And differences lead to disharmony.

Blacks have been in America as free men for several generations now and they still have not integrated into mainstream society. Same thing is happening in Europe with muslim immigrants.

 

[dasein]

Looks like you're trying to frantically spin your right wing rhetoric that doesn't compute when you are met with the facts. Red states are the poorest states in the country. They take and you believe the false lies on Faux and your right wing media.

Don't really blame you for the above windfart, there's no rational refutation possible to Tits' and my posts utterly and completely debunking the old "red state socialism" canard... and for all here to see too. Awwwww, sucks to be you.

I wasn't "owned". The "Maxwell Poll" he posted is a fake poll made up by a right wing blogger with no government data that nobody has ever heard of.

So a poll by the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs (now apparently the Campbell Institute) at Syracuse University is a "RW blogger that no one has ever heard of?" How about the NPR Poll that got similar percentage responses as the Maxwell Poll, is NPR a "right wing blogger?" Just gets better and better. Do you have no shame at all with respect to what you post here?

 

[user43770]

I think you missed the point Tits. Politicians and other people who want to stay in power profit from dividing people. And so... they make what is REALLY a class, culture and educational issue into a race issue.

Do you believe black people are inherently bad and white people are inherently good? If not.. then what are you arguing about?

Different social classes, cultures and education levels will behave differently. RACE has nothing to do with it. However, racism divides people. Divide and conquer.

See news reports stories about "Welfare Queens" abusing the system, and it is not hard to convince many white people (facing economic difficulties themselves) that these stories apply to ALL Black people. Ronald Reagan used this tactic in the 1980 election to defeat Jimmy Carter. But it would take another 20 years and a Democratic President (Bill Clinton) to see real Welfare Reform.

Fast-forward another 18 years, and the issue is being raised again. And again, the issue is fabricated from whole cloth.. that zillions of Black people are all getting Gub-Ment money, now that "one of them" is President. But it isn't true, of course.

Black culture gives you an eagle eye view into what happens when you destroy the nuclear family - i.e. the patriarchy. White America is on the same path.

 

[Poon King]

Politically incorrect as it may sound, culture and race an inextricably linked. That's why multi-racial societies simply do not work. The American "melting pot" theory is a crock of sh!t. The "melting pot" worked when all immigrants were European and white. They may have spoken different languages but they had the same religion and very similar cultural values. When you start introducing other races into the equation, it all goes to sh!t. And it's not because other races are "bad people" or inferior. They are just different, in very major ways. And differences lead to disharmony.

Blacks have been in America as free men for several generations now and they still have not integrated into mainstream society. Same thing is happening in Europe with muslim immigrants.

Again.. you're making a cultural issue a racial issue. You're ignoring basic cause and effect.

Race is not the "cause" of a particular culture. Environment, education, upbringing and normative cues are what cause culture. They are only related because people of certain races are more likely to be born into and raised in particular environments by particular people.

So to correct your statement..."When you start introducing other [cultures that refuse to integrate] into the equation, it all goes to sh!t"

Also, blacks were segregated, denied opportunities for education and marginalized for 100 years after they were "freed".. which basically lead to them developing their own culture. Had the freed slaves been accepted into mainstream white society right away.. we might see a different America. Which is why African immigrants that come to the U.S. usually perform much better than their American counterparts.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Again.. you're making a cultural issue a racial issue. You're ignoring basic cause and effect.

Race is not the "cause" of a particular culture. Environment, education, upbringing and normative cues are what cause culture. They are only related because people of certain races are more likely to be born into and raised in particular environments by particular people.

So to correct your statement..."When you start introducing other [cultures that refuse to integrate] into the equation, it all goes to sh!t"

Also, blacks were segregated, denied opportunities for education and marginalized for 100 years after they were "freed".. which basically lead to them developing their own culture. Had the freed slaves been accepted into mainstream white society right away.. we might see a different America. Which is why African immigrants that come to the U.S. usually perform much better than their American counterparts.

The problem with your argument that race doesn't cause culture is you're blaming some other race for a race's culture. Europeans succeeded for 100's of years in the worst of conditions. While others left to their own devices have never been nothing but third world and never will be anything but that.

Your argument is basically a nature vs nurture or genetics vs environment, and you're arguing it's 100% environment. Much research has shown that behavior and personality is at least half genetic and certainly influence culture.

You've basically stated that other races and cultures can't be successful unless they form a parasitic relationship with whites. For example, if you segregated whites from other races, the whites would be better off in every way.