Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Many democrats seem ignorant of the reality that economics does play a role in a capitalist society, seem to think anyone making over $75 grand a year is rich and seem to love passing laws that tell you what you can and can't do....commonly called "micromanaging". They love social progress....but seem to relish in shoving it down your throat by fiat rather than letting it grow in a more natural fashion and just pushing it along occasionally.
Baloney! It may come as some surprise to many, but there are a lot of Democrats who work in the professions and make professional salaries. No one is saying an income of $75K is "rich". Is $250K? There's a thread about that; I'll refer you to it. If we had allowed civil rights to "grow in a more natural fashion and just pushing it along occasionally", there would still be lynchings going on. As it is, there is still the occasional cross burning
Straight people remind me that they are straight every day, even if they don't realise it. Just mentioning a husband/wife or boyfriend/girlfriend reminds me that they are straight. Hearing love songs directed at straight people. Seeing billboards, ads, tv shows and movies with straight "themes". Every single day.
But I still don't automatically think of their sex lives or sexual activities.
Yet some people ONLY seem to think about gay sex whenever the topic of gay people is mentioned. As if being gay or lesbian is only about sex.
I had two friends, let's call them Todd and Juan.
Todd was my partner in the investment group I helped found in college. Brilliant guy who was great to talk to about almost any topic. He was very much a gay rights activist as well, and very knowledgeable and well-spoken on the topic. He was in a committed relationship with his boyfriend and domestic partner of many years. He was crazy in love with that guy and talked about him a lot and brought him along a couple times and mentioned their travels and outings. But he wasn't "out there" about sex and appeared and spoke as any normal professional.
Juan was a co-worker for two years in a former job I had while I was at another college. Also a brilliant guy, he exposed me to Joseph Campbell, Wittgenstein, and Nietzsche, and we had some very interesting discussions. He was also active in gay rights areas. He was not so committed and had many boyfriends during the time I knew him. He would frequently (constantly, if we were out at a club as a group after work) make gay sex jokes and exaggerate his mannerisms, make fake come-ons, etc. I didn't mind it. But he was definitely "out there" about sex and appeared as someone who wanted to remind you as often as possible that he was different, that he had a feminine streak, and that he was proud.
Nothing wrong with either from my point of view, but Juan, not Todd is what I'm talking about.
And studies show that the more homophobic men are, the more likely they are to be closet homosexuals. Perhaps now they can finallly come out of the closet and get some therapy for their self-hatred instead of projecting it on others.
Todd was my partner in the investment group I helped found in college. Brilliant guy who was great to talk to about almost any topic. He was very much a gay rights activist as well, and very knowledgeable and well-spoken on the topic. He was in a committed relationship with his boyfriend and domestic partner of many years. He was crazy in love with that guy and talked about him a lot and brought him along a couple times and mentioned their travels and outings. But he wasn't "out there" about sex and appeared and spoke as any normal professional.
Juan was a co-worker for two years in a former job I had while I was at another college. Also a brilliant guy, he exposed me to Joseph Campbell, Wittgenstein, and Nietzsche, and we had some very interesting discussions. He was also active in gay rights areas. He was not so committed and had many boyfriends during the time I knew him. He would frequently (constantly, if we were out at a club as a group after work) make gay sex jokes and exaggerate his mannerisms, make fake come-ons, etc. I didn't mind it. But he was definitely "out there" about sex and appeared as someone who wanted to remind you as often as possible that he was different, that he had a feminine streak, and that he was proud.
Nothing wrong with either from my point of view, but Juan, not Todd is what I'm talking about.
Juan sounds not much different to many heterosexual males. Especially one in his late teens or 20's. All about sex, sex sex.
I consider myself an American citizen, which, by the way, has a Constitution at its heart. Therefore, I relate closely to the Tea Party principles of freedom.
I would allow a thirty year old who made a decision not to buy health insurance suffer the consequences of their decision.
That's called "freedom of choice", which the left agree with when it suits their pro-abortion agenda.
I would also cheer the fact that many people who were convicted of heinous crimes are put to death under the law of the land.
The left had no problem with "the law" when they supported starving Terri Schiavo to death.
As far as openly gay soldiers serving, I think "don't ask, don't tell" was Constitutional. No one has the right to ask your sexual orientation in order to accept or deny you anything.
Socialism isn't American.
The left is on the wrong side of history on this count.
Baloney! It may come as some surprise to many, but there are a lot of Democrats who work in the professions and make professional salaries. No one is saying an income of $75K is "rich". Is $250K? There's a thread about that; I'll refer you to it. If we had allowed civil rights to "grow in a more natural fashion and just pushing it along occasionally", there would still be lynchings going on. As it is, there is still the occasional cross burning
Katiana, while it's tempting to agree with you since you're correct in your observations, I just cannot do so.
Obviously there are well to do liberals who are doing very well under our economic system. I cannot prove my point that liberals think anyone making over 75 grand a year is rich....but I've had many of their constituents say so in conversations over the years. Fact is, "rich" is a floating relative standard. If you're struggling by on 35 grand a year......75 grand is rich. Given that many/most (not all certainly) people at the lower income scales are more likely to vote liberal....I'd assert that maybe the leadership doesn't think thats rich....but much of the rank and file do.
Cross burnings and racial hatred are caused by closed minded and ignorant people.....politics are irrelavant on this subject. I am not arguing against the intent of civil rights legislation....that was certainly good. Most of the people I know of back when I was young were not involved in such activities....and wouldn't have done so whether it was against the law or not.
My overall point is that passing laws such as affirmative action, racial quotas for colleges and a myriad of other similar laws actually can and do in many cases perpetuate racism rather than extinguish it. Remember the old saying that "a conservative is a liberal that just got mugged" ? Well "a racist can also created from a fellow that just lost his place in college or a job to a minority fellow due to a racial quota or set aside or perference".
Speed is not generally a natural thing. Evolution didn't happen overnight and we're all better off for that. Things that evolve slowly usually have a lot more depth and security to them. When we force things to happen overnight (or any other relatively short time frame) unintended negative consequences can and many times do result.
Katiana, while it's tempting to agree with you since you're correct in your observations, I just cannot do so.
Obviously there are well to do liberals who are doing very well under our economic system. I cannot prove my point that liberals think anyone making over 75 grand a year is rich....but I've had many of their constituents say so in conversations over the years. Fact is, "rich" is a floating relative standard. If you're struggling by on 35 grand a year......75 grand is rich. Given that many/most (not all certainly) people at the lower income scales are more likely to vote liberal....I'd assert that maybe the leadership doesn't think thats rich....but much of the rank and file do.
Cross burnings and racial hatred are caused by closed minded and ignorant people.....politics are irrelavant on this subject. I am not arguing against the intent of civil rights legislation....that was certainly good. Most of the people I know of back when I was young were not involved in such activities....and wouldn't have done so whether it was against the law or not.
My overall point is that passing laws such as affirmative action, racial quotas for colleges and a myriad of other similar laws actually can and do in many cases perpetuate racism rather than extinguish it. Remember the old saying that "a conservative is a liberal that just got mugged" ? Well "a racist can also created from a fellow that just lost his place in college or a job to a minority fellow due to a racial quota or set aside or perference".
Speed is not generally a natural thing. Evolution didn't happen overnight and we're all better off for that. Things that evolve slowly usually have a lot more depth and security to them. When we force things to happen overnight (or any other relatively short time frame) unintended negative consequences can and many times do result.
Re: the bold. Yes, maybe "over the years", e.g. 50 years ago, some Democrats thought people making $75K were rich.
People in the very lowest income brackets tend not to vote at all, and there's plenty of evidence that many lower-middle class people vote "R" agaisnt their own self interest.
Regarding race, you know, there are many people who felt as you did about slavery, that we should just "let it die". If we had taken that approach, we'd probably still have slavery in the US. Just about every advance in civil rights had to be accomplished through force of law, e.g. equal schools, equal pay for equal work, you name it.
Your cutsey little "proverbs" notwithstanding.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
