Issues of Race in the USA

[Ibrahim]

What we do about it is stop discrimination. The integration of the US armed forces and schools was probably the single biggest step forward in US race relations.

I think things are going pretty well overall. Even the rhetoric from contemporary white nationalists has a last-gasp, rearguard feel to it.

But if we could combat various forms of extremism we could prevent some of the violence which, although minuscule statistically, is tragic and at least somewhat avoidable.

[noddy]

Look at it this way: in the UK particularly but all over the world there are these extremist mosques, and they have these cartoon villain imams who preach hardcore hateful ideology. And when there have been Islamist terrorist attacks in Western countries it often turns out that the attacker was somehow affiliated with one of these extremist mosques. Does anybody really argue they should be shut down or at the very least closely monitored? Why wouldn't you want to do the same thing to people promoting other types of racial or religious hatred? The results are the same in both cases.

closely monitored yes, but more than that, no.

the real benefit of western law (in its original succesful form) is that you cant be done for prejudiced reasons, you must have actually committed the crime, with evidence - this means any attempt to move the line on laws towards "pre crime" is an abomination and ill politically fight it.

their is no obvious difference to the ignorant outsider between a fire and brimstone type (christian or muslim or progressive greenie) and the extremist hate crime committing one - one rants poetry and metaphor on what god (or nature) is going to do, but still believes hate the sin, not the sinner , the other is a danger to society.

the difference becomes real when the crime is committed, if we start indulging pre crime then all sorts of lavender is going to come out of the woodwork and all our prejudices will become weaponised.

so far so good my country is following this model, the fire and brimestone types are getting the extra eyeballs on them but they are not being punished for being ultra conservatives or ultra greenies (or whatever loonacy it is they believe in)

[Simple Minded]

their is no obvious difference to the ignorant outsider between a fire and brimstone type (christian or muslim or progressive greenie) and the extremist hate crime committing one - one rants poetry and metaphor on what god (or nature) is going to do, but still believes hate the sin, not the sinner , the other is a danger to society.

the difference becomes real when the crime is committed, if we start indulging pre crime then all sorts of lavender is going to come out of the woodwork and all our prejudices will become weaponised.

Yep. That's a yuge problem for people who aren't raised in a Western culture. They don't understand that repeatedly yelling "kill the ref!" is just part of the game.

For many non-Westerners, there is no game. They're like the mythical cowboys of the old west.
"Did yew call me yellar? draw you dirty skunk!"

I think in the interest of multiculturalism, if we could just get the western snowflakes to set themselves on fire any time they feel offended or that their safe space has been violated, it'll all work itself out pretty quickly.

"You just offended me! Now you're gonna watch me burn! Then you'll be sorry!"

[noddy]

their is no obvious difference to the ignorant outsider between a fire and brimstone type (christian or muslim or progressive greenie) and the extremist hate crime committing one - one rants poetry and metaphor on what god (or nature) is going to do, but still believes hate the sin, not the sinner , the other is a danger to society.

the difference becomes real when the crime is committed, if we start indulging pre crime then all sorts of lavender is going to come out of the woodwork and all our prejudices will become weaponised.

Yep. That's a yuge problem for people who aren't raised in a Western culture. They don't understand that repeatedly yelling "kill the ref!" is just part of the game.

For many non-Westerners, there is no game. They're like the mythical cowboys of the old west.
"Did yew call me yellar? draw you dirty skunk!"

I think in the interest of multiculturalism, if we could just get the western snowflakes to set themselves on fire any time they feel offended or that their safe space has been violated, it'll all work itself out pretty quickly.

"You just offended me! Now you're gonna watch me burn! Then you'll be sorry!"

my dads generation was a big believer in "hang em all" rants against politicians, im kinda glad they will miss out on the worst of our new record-all-the-things dystopia, they are already suffering for it.

[Simple Minded]

Its worse than any of us knew. there is so much white privilege in America, even black people have it!

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/c ... -hes-black

whoa! now that's cultural appropriation ain't it? I learned that trick from lefty.

[Parodite]

Look at it this way: in the UK particularly but all over the world there are these extremist mosques, and they have these cartoon villain imams who preach hardcore hateful ideology. And when there have been Islamist terrorist attacks in Western countries it often turns out that the attacker was somehow affiliated with one of these extremist mosques. Does anybody really argue they should be shut down or at the very least closely monitored? Why wouldn't you want to do the same thing to people promoting other types of racial or religious hatred? The results are the same in both cases.

closely monitored yes, but more than that, no.

the real benefit of western law (in its original succesful form) is that you cant be done for prejudiced reasons, you must have actually committed the crime, with evidence - this means any attempt to move the line on laws towards "pre crime" is an abomination and ill politically fight it.

their is no obvious difference to the ignorant outsider between a fire and brimstone type (christian or muslim or progressive greenie) and the extremist hate crime committing one - one rants poetry and metaphor on what god (or nature) is going to do, but still believes hate the sin, not the sinner , the other is a danger to society.

the difference becomes real when the crime is committed, if we start indulging pre crime then all sorts of lavender is going to come out of the woodwork and all our prejudices will become weaponised.

so far so good my country is following this model, the fire and brimestone types are getting the extra eyeballs on them but they are not being punished for being ultra conservatives or ultra greenies (or whatever loonacy it is they believe in)

Same model in my country. Monitoring yes, and only when a violent act is imminent and beyond reasonable doubt to happen... police acts. I also believe this is the only right way.

There is however more that can be done than just monitoring and law enforcement to act just before a violent act is to be committed. Undercover journalism, infiltration and exposure. Then public debate. A democratic process. Neo-nazis are near nonexistent here, but Wahhabi/Salafist/Muslim Bro-hood affiliated mosques are well filled with sharia lovers and anti-democratic preachers who wipe their ass with our church-state separated constitution. Funded either with Dutch tax-payer money and/or the usual suspects among the rich Gulf states, so these money supplies can be choked for starters.

[Ibrahim]

Look at it this way: in the UK particularly but all over the world there are these extremist mosques, and they have these cartoon villain imams who preach hardcore hateful ideology. And when there have been Islamist terrorist attacks in Western countries it often turns out that the attacker was somehow affiliated with one of these extremist mosques. Does anybody really argue they should be shut down or at the very least closely monitored? Why wouldn't you want to do the same thing to people promoting other types of racial or religious hatred? The results are the same in both cases.

closely monitored yes, but more than that, no.

the real benefit of western law (in its original succesful form) is that you cant be done for prejudiced reasons, you must have actually committed the crime, with evidence - this means any attempt to move the line on laws towards "pre crime" is an abomination and ill politically fight it.

their is no obvious difference to the ignorant outsider between a fire and brimstone type (christian or muslim or progressive greenie) and the extremist hate crime committing one - one rants poetry and metaphor on what god (or nature) is going to do, but still believes hate the sin, not the sinner , the other is a danger to society.

the difference becomes real when the crime is committed, if we start indulging pre crime then all sorts of lavender is going to come out of the woodwork and all our prejudices will become weaponised.

so far so good my country is following this model, the fire and brimestone types are getting the extra eyeballs on them but they are not being punished for being ultra conservatives or ultra greenies (or whatever loonacy it is they believe in)

Same model in my country. Monitoring yes, and only when a violent act is imminent and beyond reasonable doubt to happen... police acts. I also believe this is the only right way.

There is however more that can be done than just monitoring and law enforcement to act just before a violent act is to be committed. Undercover journalism, infiltration and exposure. Then public debate. A democratic process. Neo-nazis are near nonexistent here, but Wahhabi/Salafist/Muslim Bro-hood affiliated mosques are well filled with sharia lovers and anti-democratic preachers who wipe their ass with our church-state separated constitution. Funded either with Dutch tax-payer money and/or the usual suspects among the rich Gulf states, so these money supplies can be choked for starters.

No Dutch neo-nazis? That must be nice. Lets you really focus in on other anti-democratic elements.

[Ibrahim]

Look at it this way: in the UK particularly but all over the world there are these extremist mosques, and they have these cartoon villain imams who preach hardcore hateful ideology. And when there have been Islamist terrorist attacks in Western countries it often turns out that the attacker was somehow affiliated with one of these extremist mosques. Does anybody really argue they should be shut down or at the very least closely monitored? Why wouldn't you want to do the same thing to people promoting other types of racial or religious hatred? The results are the same in both cases.

closely monitored yes, but more than that, no.

the real benefit of western law (in its original succesful form) is that you cant be done for prejudiced reasons, you must have actually committed the crime, with evidence - this means any attempt to move the line on laws towards "pre crime" is an abomination and ill politically fight it.

their is no obvious difference to the ignorant outsider between a fire and brimstone type (christian or muslim or progressive greenie) and the extremist hate crime committing one - one rants poetry and metaphor on what god (or nature) is going to do, but still believes hate the sin, not the sinner , the other is a danger to society.

the difference becomes real when the crime is committed, if we start indulging pre crime then all sorts of lavender is going to come out of the woodwork and all our prejudices will become weaponised.

so far so good my country is following this model, the fire and brimestone types are getting the extra eyeballs on them but they are not being punished for being ultra conservatives or ultra greenies (or whatever loonacy it is they believe in)

I used to work in law, perhaps that's why I'm unsentimental about it. I don't know about "successful" but in "original" versions of Western law you could own people and so forth, probably good we updated that.

Weaponized prejudices sounds like a bad thing, like if for example I say "somebody needs to do something about the damn Swiss" until somebody is stupid/crazy enough to actually do something. That sounds like "weaponized" to me.

I do see your point, honestly. It just seems like, since people are already being killed, there isn't anywhere for the slippery slope argument to go. The nightmare scenario is that more people have their YouTube channels banned when we already have mass-murders taking place.

[noddy]

I used to work in law, perhaps that's why I'm unsentimental about it. I don't know about "successful" but in "original" versions of Western law you could own people and so forth, probably good we updated that.

slavery is an american thing, the rest of us never had it, so its an absurd statement plucked out of nowhere.

I didnt provide detail but I was thinking on simpler, innnocent until proven guilty levels, which was hardly perfect, but only got corrupted by police with prejudices against lower class and immigrants planting evidence.

now we have this huge class of middle class sheltered folks bringin in all sorts of paranoid laws against percieved risks in their life with guilty until proven innocent foundations., variations on stop and search all over the place.

all our communications and messages are recorded in case they want to use them against us later in life and now you want to strengthen the rules to take those sentances out of context and make them illegal.

sounds hideous to me.

Weaponized prejudices sounds like a bad thing, like if for example I say "somebody needs to do something about the damn Swiss" until somebody is stupid/crazy enough to actually do something. That sounds like "weaponized" to me.

I do see your point, honestly. It just seems like, since people are already being killed, there isn't anywhere for the slippery slope argument to go. The nightmare scenario is that more people have their YouTube channels banned when we already have mass-murders taking place.

all over the west "people being killed" is at record low numbers on a graph thats heading downwards , yet the paranoid middle class wants more protections, spouting fears and prejudices as a reason to increase the powers of the police to punish the types of folks they dont like.. yet this multiculturism thing requires people not to be paranoid about "the other".




the australian graph is simmilar and seeing as it spiked in the 70's when economic downturns happened and hate mongers on youtube didnt even exist, maybe you might want to think about what your saying.

maybe economic downturns are the real source of anger and resentment, not minor idiots on the internet.

Ive been having an ongoing argument with some fine sensible folks in australia, they think that if a statistic is more likeley to happen then the it requires more government intervention.

the logic on this is a 1 in 10 million occurence doesnt need to be policed in a society of 2 million but in a society of 20 milion its a problem.

this level of maths retardation scares me in a globalised world, the lowest common denominator of saving one life across 10 billion is living like a zoo animal.

[Ibrahim]

I used to work in law, perhaps that's why I'm unsentimental about it. I don't know about "successful" but in "original" versions of Western law you could own people and so forth, probably good we updated that.

slavery is an american thing, the rest of us never had it, so its an absurd statement plucked out of nowhere.

It was legal in Canada for a time, though it was ended before the US did, that's true. I don't know as much about the evolution of Australian law. If you find it a far flung example we can bring up some other legal classics, like the unequal legal status of women, the criminalization of homosexuality, the legal entrenchment of racism short of chattel slavery.

I didnt provide detail but I was thinking on simpler, innnocent until proven guilty levels, which was hardly perfect, but only got corrupted by police with prejudices against lower class and immigrants planting evidence.

now we have this huge class of middle class sheltered folks bringin in all sorts of paranoid laws against percieved risks in their life with guilty until proven innocent foundations., variations on stop and search all over the place.

What year would give as representing the ideal point in the evolution of Australian law? Having done so, can you think of any reasons that different people might not want to return to the laws of that time?

all our communications and messages are recorded in case they want to use them against us later in life and now you want to strengthen the rules to take those sentances out of context and make them illegal.

Yes but only if you're tacitly advocating ethnic cleansing. Granted, that's still about a third of YouTube, but we may save lives.

Weaponized prejudices sounds like a bad thing, like if for example I say "somebody needs to do something about the damn Swiss" until somebody is stupid/crazy enough to actually do something. That sounds like "weaponized" to me.

I do see your point, honestly. It just seems like, since people are already being killed, there isn't anywhere for the slippery slope argument to go. The nightmare scenario is that more people have their YouTube channels banned when we already have mass-murders taking place.

all over the west "people being killed" is at record low numbers on a graph thats heading downwards , yet the paranoid middle class wants more protections, spouting fears and prejudices as a reason to increase the powers of the police to punish the types of folks they dont like.. yet this multiculturism thing requires people not to be paranoid about "the other".

[graph]


the australian graph is simmilar and seeing as it spiked in the 70's when economic downturns happened and hate mongers on youtube didnt even exist, maybe you might want to think about what your saying.

maybe economic downturns are the real source of anger and resentment, not minor idiots on the internet.

Ive been having an ongoing argument with some fine sensible folks in australia, they think that if a statistic is more likeley to happen then the it requires more government intervention.

the logic on this is a 1 in 10 million occurence doesnt need to be policed in a society of 2 million but in a society of 20 milion its a problem.

this level of maths retardation scares me in a globalised world, the lowest common denominator of saving one life across 10 billion is living like a zoo animal.

It just seems like this stats-based approach isn't what people were saying when the mass-murderers were brown or had foreign-sounding names. Now that (at least some) of the shooters are neo-nazis not only are our hands tied, but the deaths are statistically insignificant anyway. Its just one itty bitty bible study class at a black church, don't be so paranoid.


Edit: maybe this really isn't an issue in Australia. I hope it stays that way. But its starting to happen more often in Canada and the US.

[noddy]

It just seems like this stats-based approach isn't what people were saying when the mass-murderers were brown or had foreign-sounding names. Now that (at least some) of the shooters are neo-nazis not only are our hands tied, but the deaths are statistically insignificant anyway. Its just one itty bitty bible study class at a black church, don't be so paranoid.

nice, an escalating race to the bottom of petty behaviour, that sounds like a good outcome.

Edit: maybe this really isn't an issue in Australia. I hope it stays that way. But its starting to happen more often in Canada and the US.

apparently its a problem in some parts of NSW which has high levels of raw immigrants and sub working class whites squabbling over bad outcomes for everyone, but most of us are a thousands of miles from that, quite literaly,

[Simple Minded]

apparently its a problem in some parts of NSW which has high levels of raw immigrants and sub working class whites squabbling over bad outcomes for everyone, but most of us are a thousands of miles from that, quite literaly,

Not sure how it works over there, but over here national solutions to zip code or neighborhood specific problems, that don't exist for 99+% of the country, generally aren't well received nor very effective problem solving techniques.

I think the Europeans are finding out the same with the EUtopian dictates.

[Parodite]

I used to work in law, perhaps that's why I'm unsentimental about it. I don't know about "successful" but in "original" versions of Western law you could own people and so forth, probably good we updated that.

slavery is an american thing, the rest of us never had it, so its an absurd statement plucked out of nowhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery

[Parodite]

No Dutch neo-nazis? That must be nice. Lets you really focus in on other anti-democratic elements.

Well, all stinky types should get the focus they deserve. Be exposed, ridiculed, criticized. With law and law enforcement keeping a focused eye on them. Fending off such well deserved focus neo-nazis usually just stand there talking and behaving ridiculously. Sharia lovers are way more sophisticated and cunning in their deflecting defense strategies. Playing the victim is almost rule no1 under all circumstances.

[Ibrahim]

No Dutch neo-nazis? That must be nice. Lets you really focus in on other anti-democratic elements.

Well, all stinky types should get the focus they deserve. Be exposed, ridiculed, criticized. With law and law enforcement keeping a focused eye on them. Fending off such well deserved focus neo-nazis usually just stand there talking and behaving ridiculously. Sharia lovers are way more sophisticated and cunning in their deflecting defense strategies. Playing the victim is almost rule no1 under all circumstances.

How does the neo-nazi or similar far-right in the Netherlands feel about Geert Wilders? For example, in Canada and the US all the neo-nazis and so forth absolutely love Trump, even though they recognize he's not a neo-nazi himself. It just seems like they best they can get that's politically viable. Is there a similar thing there?



I would say most Islamists and most neo-nazis spend most of their time standing around looking ridiculous. But there are always a few that take it further than that.

[Parodite]

There are anti-immigration hooligans who are willing to use intimidating violence against Muslim immigrants in refugee centers, mosques. I'm sure many of them love and vote Wilders even though Wilders rejects violence. They are a handful and there were some incidents.

The bulk of Wilders voters do want a full stop on Muslim immigration however and for that reason give hime the vote. Wilders is way more anti-Islam than Trump. To stop Muslim immigration is and always was his real mission. The rest of his program is center-left wing and anti-EU. Most of his voters are low-pay working class ex-socialist or ex-labour party people.

Anti-semitism almost exclusively comes from the extreme-left, from sharia loving Islamo-fascists and Muslim youth that just occasionally needs to pick a fight with them Jooz hooligan style.

[Simple Minded]

There are anti-immigration hooligans who are willing to use intimidating violence against Muslim immigrants in refugee centers, mosques. I'm sure many of them love and vote Wilders even though Wilders rejects violence. They are a handful and there were some incidents.

The bulk of Wilders voters do want a full stop on Muslim immigration however and for that reason give hime the vote. Wilders is way more anti-Islam than Trump. To stop Muslim immigration is and always was his real mission. The rest of his program is center-left wing and anti-EU. Most of his voters are low-pay working class ex-socialist or ex-labour party people.

Anti-semitism almost exclusively comes from the extreme-left, from sharia loving Islamo-fascists and Muslim youth that just occasionally needs to pick a fight with them Jooz hooligan style.

Thanks for the info Parodite. Merkin MSM does not give Wilders much coverage, and I don't believe much of what they say about anything anymore. So, Wilders is anti the "current anti-Western civilization chic," center left, and anti-EU? Sounds like the very definition of either common sense or radical hatred, as perceived by the bias of the observer.

Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of man? Only the shadow and internet bloggers sharing "their truth.".

Wilders sounds like he may the the man for the times. It will be interesting to see if his appeal rises or falls.

I think polling has lost almost all credibility in the US, but for many, it is better to adhere to a false religion than none at all. It is comforting to have a broken clock or compass, even when you suspect they may be broken. I would like to see a poll of who likes Trump just because he is an iconoclast, blunt, wise ass.

When both the Repub and Dem establishments both hate someone, it is hard not to think that they would make fine neighbors.

[noddy]

[Simple Minded]

sacrilegious, but funny.

[Parodite]

Thanks for the info Parodite. Merkin MSM does not give Wilders much coverage, and I don't believe much of what they say about anything anymore. So, Wilders is anti the "current anti-Western civilization chic," center left, and anti-EU? Sounds like the very definition of either common sense or radical hatred, as perceived by the bias of the observer.

As Scott Adams likes to remind, even if we all look at the same facts (which is rarely the case..) we still produce different movies that run in our unique individual brains. Unavoidable bias, but also a wonderful gift of nature to refuse to be perceived and self-perceived in only one way!

It can easily be tested by looking at yourself in the mirror or just self-reflect, reflect on anything for that matter. Try to see the same guy/girl non-stop, the same opinions about whatever non-stop and holding on to that final conclusion "after all the facts are in". Holy cow, all the facts are never in because new facts emerge and old facts disappear continuously!

Devils can be in the details..but also they morph and change. Different devils and different details. Sort of a peekaboo game. To appropriate some native American Indian wisdom: you can not capture the wind with your clenching fist.

Wilders btw sprays a lot of stuff in his hairdo to make it more sturdy and resilient to the winds of change (he also bleaches it for reasons unknown, but as a man of mixed caucasian-indonesian origins some suspect he wants to look more white-European) but he will be bold one day too, further down the road his remnants dispersed by water and wind. Only in death we may be equal and watch the same movie.

knows what evil lurks in the heart of man? Only the shadow and internet bloggers sharing "their truth.".

Wilders sounds like he may the the man for the times. It will be interesting to see if his appeal rises or falls.

He is a steady 2nd largest. (Partij voor de Vrijheid)

https://frontbencher.nl/peilingen/

I think polling has lost almost all credibility in the US, but for many, it is better to adhere to a false religion than none at all. It is comforting to have a broken clock or compass, even when you suspect they may be broken. I would like to see a poll of who likes Trump just because he is an iconoclast, blunt, wise ass.

When both the Repub and Dem establishments both hate someone, it is hard not to think that they would make fine neighbors.

Indeed. Good neighbors are meant to disagree and occupy different spaces.

[Simple Minded]

I think polling has lost almost all credibility in the US, but for many, it is better to adhere to a false religion than none at all. It is comforting to have a broken clock or compass, even when you suspect they may be broken. I would like to see a poll of who likes Trump just because he is an iconoclast, blunt, wise ass.

When both the Repub and Dem establishments both hate someone, it is hard not to think that they would make fine neighbors.

Indeed. Good neighbors are meant to disagree and occupy different spaces.

Good to know that while in Yurp, you have politicians trying to be whiter, In Merka, we have politicians like Boehner, Trump, and Obama trying to be less white.

In Merka, the D party has failed to save us from the R party, and the R party has failed to save us from the D party so often and so consistently, the only hope we have left are people who can piss off both parties.

Paraphrasing the ancient Arabic saying: "The person who raises the blood pressure of my enemy and causes my enemy to post nasty shite on the internet is my friend."

rage against any and all machines! long live the Schadenfreude Party!

[Simple Minded]

freedom of speech gets messy!

black Israelites telling native Americans that god took this country away from them cause they started worshipping totem poles?

This could take decades for woke experts to unpack this single protest!

UQyBHTTqb38

[Simple Minded]

https://quillette.com/2019/01/20/truth- ... dentities/

" In public discourse, an opponent’s identity and experience can matter more than their arguments. For instance, if you are a philosopher who supports the use of torture in a narrow set of circumstances on utilitarian grounds, you would not want to find yourself debating the ethics of such a position with a victim of torture. The optics of such a debate would be horrible, and in the minds of many observers they would place the philosopher at a decisive disadvantage no matter how careful or well defended his arguments happened to be. In the same way, whole groups of people consigned to the bottom of the identity politics grievance hierarchy are saddled with a similar handicap, often in situations far less contentious than the debate over torture.

On Saturday in Washington DC, a group of Catholic school kids fell victim to this presumptive logic. The progressive media ran with a story that confirmed their intersectional priors and, in the process, damaged their credibility, established an unsustainable precedent, and unwittingly affirmed President Trump’s demagogic “Fake News” mantra.

[Apollonius]

I read that article just about an hour ago. I'm really happy to see that you posted it.


As always at Quillette, lots of excellent comments (though the digression into the Kavanaugh affair was tedious and irrelevant-- you can safely skip those).


If I were to single out any one comment, this would be it:

My blindfold came off during the Damore incident. I started an article that linked to his memo, read the entire memo, and then finished the article…

There was no putting that blindfold back on after that.

Cable news media is sick. It’s dying. Stop watching or clicking on their links. Let them die.

Internet media is designed to maximize divisiveness for monetary gain. Companies have built online entities that encourage anonymous anger, outrage, and mindless virtued echoing (some of the worst qualities in mankind) with a dishonest veneer of “community” to benefit their bottom lines.

Our elected officials are complicit, ignorant, and/or negligent in this deceit. People need to start having public discourse about this topic.



Get off social media. Stop going to your favorite clickbait “news sites” and reinforcing your ideological worldview. It’s a calculatedly addictive and destructive tool built to perpetuate itself while the people using it divide into tribes bent on destroying each other. This is 100% by design. Thousands of the worlds best engineers designed these things. I have a hard time believing any of the results are by accident.

Try using your real name when and if you leave a comment somewhere. See if you still say the same things or if you begin to temper your views with a little more thought and empathy before you hit send. See if you still call that guy or gal you disagree with a dumbfuck, or POS.

We need to find things to unite around or we’re going to self destruct and no one will be able to claim innocence. Try family. Friends. Faith. Community. Country. Accomplishment. Success. Charity.

Maybe I’m wrong and this weeks fever pitch of MSM blunders and the chorus of easily influenced drones lining up to assault school kids and impeach politicians over easily refutable evidence is making it seem the process is hitting 4th gear.

[noddy]

I watched all the MAGA catholic kid thing play out across a few sites, it really hilighted the toxic nature of american media right now.