1 - 10 Next
Legitimate hero of the civil rights era…nah. The only "victory" John Lewis accomplished was to convince America’s voting majority of stereotype ridden racists, that there were only two problems with the past’s racial favoritism; it was called segregation instead of affirmative action/diversity and the wrong color was selected for politically imposed racial favoritism, as well as the corollary racial discrimination.
Too late, the Demagogue Party has moved on from using slavery to buy the bigot vote. The new stereotype is “privileged whites,” albeit, like the old stereotype of “racist, ex-slaving, white oppressors” it’s still designed to keep bigots voting for the Democrat’s election platform of racial favoritism/white discrimination. This new stereotype has the advantage of allowing the Demagogue Party to presume that all non-whites, not just blacks, are perpetually “oppressed” by the whites, thereby increasing Demagogue Party support where ever racist filth (liberals of every color) can be convinced that all minorities need political “protection” from the Democrat’s stereotype of perpetually evil, racist whites.
In response to:

Bill Gates Explains Capitalism vs. Charity

JR11 Wrote: Mar 17, 2014 11:04 AM
There is no conflict between the _voluntary_, mutually profitable, exchange based redistribution of capitalism and charity, both processes economically and socially beneficial to every participant, excluding from participation and profit, only tax besotted politicians, tax funded, regulation reliant, quasi private businesses and today’s tax sucking constituencies of welfare thieves. The actual conflict is between those who recognize socialism's government enforced redistribution as political exploitation vs. the greedy, self serving thieves who deceitfully proselytize socialism's enforced redistribution as “charity.” This propaganda of taxation-equals-charity is necessary, otherwise tax sucking thieves would receive nothing but public contempt, rather than today's effortless rewards of exploitation. Politicians can increase their own wealth and power only by exploitation, which is a process of ever increasing government control of private income and property. This power to exploit depends absolutely upon the acceptance of an indoctrinated majority of at least one lie, and often two, that _enforced_ redistribution (taxation or outright government ownership) is synonymous with charity and economic fairness, and that group favoritism (any group, doesn’t matter, racial, tribal, religious, the proletariat, ect.) results in equality. These are the two lies responsible for all exploitation, including the worst degrees of history, the Nazi holocaust and the USSR/ Red China communist massacres. There is no reason to believe that such savagery cannot happen in the USA, since the highly observable process currently governing America and supported by a majority is socialism's propaganda fueled, envious hate inspiring exploitative political confiscation of wealth, with its corollary increase of prosperity stifling government control of income and property. These are the political actions gradually destroying capitalism's nation building incentive for innovative efforts to cooperatively, voluntarily and profitably produce and exchange. The only real difference between the unrecognized exploitation inherent in the politics of today's America and history's tardy recognition of exploitation, is in degree, not substance.
Actually we do know what justice is…it is the use of empirical physical evidence of aggressive harm caused by an individual(s) to another individual(s) to validate a socially beneficial, violence-inhibiting penalty. Justice identifies the perpetrator(s) and the victim(s,) naming names and producing bodies, smoking guns, bloody knives…the physical evidence of harm done, by whom and to whom; when and where, down to the hour and the chalk outlines. Liberals prefer to obscure _all_ individual_ actions_, thereby rendering as irrelevant the evidence necessary to justice, on the presumption that liberal preferred racial and class stereotypes coupled to an arbitrarily selected history lesson, validates today’s liberal run oppression, also based on liberal preferred racial and class stereotypes. The true definition of justice contradicts the liberal’s stereotype driven agenda, a contradiction exposing the liberal’s “social justice” scam as a rabble rousing ploy to buy political support with the promise to satisfy stereotype inspired vengeance. And that is the reason liberals don’t want to discuss “justice;” because they would lose the debate.
In response to:

Betsy Ross, Meet Cinco de Mayo

JR11 Wrote: Mar 04, 2014 9:59 AM
The 9th circuit upheld the so called right to use the threat of violence to suppress freedom in America. This counterproductive ruling was originated by the liberal redefinition of “tolerance” as “anything goes,” a perspective that results in the liberal demand for tolerance of every form of human action, no matter how contemptible, while also causing the remarkably idiotic liberal intolerance for any and all beneficial suppression of socially destructive actions.
In response to:

Minority Student Needs

JR11 Wrote: Apr 03, 2013 8:08 PM
The Nazis were anti-liberal...that's hilarious, given that the Nazi agenda was the use of racial and class stereotypes to enforce the redistribution of income and property, which is precisely the liberal agenda, albeit the degree of enforced redistribution is not as extreme. (So far)The klan was big on race based redistribution, too. Try thinking about the political process of enforced redistribution and its universal validation scam, which is always based on class and/or racial stereotypes, instead of presuming that because the stereotypes are different, so must be the politics.
In response to:

The niggardly use of racial epithets

JR11 Wrote: Feb 08, 2013 9:29 AM
While the use of any racist epithet certainly damages credibility and intellectual competence, substituting the phrase “n-word” for the word “n.i.g.g.e.r” when discussing racism and the word’s impact, makes American journalists sound like kindergartners. This politically correct moratorium on _all_ use of the word “n.i.g.g.e.r” is, unlike, unified and socially beneficial protests against the public use of _all_ racial epithets, (of which there zero) is a resentment producing racist demand for submission, not for the mutual respect between equals necessary to social harmony.
In response to:

Diversity With Conceit

JR11 Wrote: Jan 25, 2013 2:22 PM
Obama’s election strategy is to buy the bigot vote with minority favoritism. That’s not “progress,” it’s “propaganda,” which has successfully redefined “civil rights” as white discrimination (as opposed to the equally racist propaganda of the past, that redefined civil rights as black discrimination.) That’s not “improvement,” that’s D.C. scum STILL buying votes with politically correct, forcibly imposed racial favoritism/discrimination. Those pictures of a “coming together” of different colors are not showing “diversity,” but similarity...that of racist fools celebrating successful racial discrimination in expectation of producing harmonious equality. Wrong means to that end, thus consequences will be the opposite (again.)
In response to:

Liberal Obsession With Race is Growing Old

JR11 Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 9:38 AM
The actual “difference” between the racism of today and that of the past is that the hate created by America’s perennial racial demagoguery targets whites, instead of minorities; a reversal of colors in unresolved racism, allowing the profitable purchase of the American majority bigot vote to continue, uncontested. And as long as the so called “opposition party” is too busy trying to buy this same bigot vote with affirmative action's politically correct, demagoguery “justified” minority favoritism/white discrimination to actually oppose this successful Democrat election platform, those opposed to racial favoritism (and its violent consequences) will remain the real and powerless minority, just as they were in the past.
...same position on illegal immigration as the Democrats. The only difference between the GOP and the Democrats is that Republican candidates promise that their own liberal agenda will be few million cheaper for tax payers. The GOP deserves this loss, because it is not freedom’s opposition to the American socialist welfare state; it is the cringing hypocrit’s me-too party of kinder, cheaper socialism.
1 - 10 Next