What ground for compromise?

[HappyJoy]

Again sparky, I said that Title VII was dictated directly from Moscow, through their Agent traitor Ted.

Did you think that Title VII was the ONLY part of the Civil Rights act?

What is the reasoning on Moscow to do this?

Same reason Traitor Teddy had, to destroy America, to tear the nation apart into warring factions. to Balkanize us.

OK, makes perfect sense. Carry on.

Do you deny that Title VII has done irreparable damage in dividing the nation into factions? Do you deny that Ted Kennedy acted in coordination with hostile governments with malice to cause harm to this nation?

Yes, easily denied for the simple reason that Ted Kennedy didn’t pass the civil rights act alone. Congress and LBJ did. Y’all keep saying republicans passed it so if you’re gonna own it then own it.

Are you asking for continuity from one post to the next?

 

[Correll]

So, what about you personally? Are there any major issues, that you are able to respect your opponents opposition on?

I try and look at both sides of every argument and I think I respect both sides of most major subjects. The only one I am firm on is pro gay marriage and rights, but I think that issue is settled. The collaboration between liberals and conservatives is crucial and important as both bring necessary elements to policy. It’s a shame that both sides are pitted against each other in a war of dishonest demonization. Very bad for our country.

I agree that dishonest demonization is very bad for our country.

So, how about an example of a major subject that you can respect the opposite side on?

Pick any one you want... immigration, 2nd amendment, government spending, taxation. I’m pretty middle with most of them

So, do you respect those that want deport illegals and secure the border with a Wall? Or do you think they are hateful racists?

Sure I think there are some hateful racists that support the wall..... but not all of them. Many including myself believe that we should have a safe, secure and functional border. I don't support illegal immigration but I also don’t think it’s realistic to try and deport 10+ million people do a pathway to legal status and possibly citizenship with penalties should be opened up.

Can you state your respect without having to include the implication of racism?

 

[Slade3200]

What is the reasoning on Moscow to do this?

Same reason Traitor Teddy had, to destroy America, to tear the nation apart into warring factions. to Balkanize us.

OK, makes perfect sense. Carry on.

Do you deny that Title VII has done irreparable damage in dividing the nation into factions? Do you deny that Ted Kennedy acted in coordination with hostile governments with malice to cause harm to this nation?

Yes, easily denied for the simple reason that Ted Kennedy didn’t pass the civil rights act alone. Congress and LBJ did. Y’all keep saying republicans passed it so if you’re gonna own it then own it.

Are you asking for continuity from one post to the next?

I guess that’s too much to ask. I got no problem watching him dig his whole deeper. Funny to watch

 

[Slade3200]

I try and look at both sides of every argument and I think I respect both sides of most major subjects. The only one I am firm on is pro gay marriage and rights, but I think that issue is settled. The collaboration between liberals and conservatives is crucial and important as both bring necessary elements to policy. It’s a shame that both sides are pitted against each other in a war of dishonest demonization. Very bad for our country.

I agree that dishonest demonization is very bad for our country.

So, how about an example of a major subject that you can respect the opposite side on?

Pick any one you want... immigration, 2nd amendment, government spending, taxation. I’m pretty middle with most of them

So, do you respect those that want deport illegals and secure the border with a Wall? Or do you think they are hateful racists?

Sure I think there are some hateful racists that support the wall..... but not all of them. Many including myself believe that we should have a safe, secure and functional border. I don't support illegal immigration but I also don’t think it’s realistic to try and deport 10+ million people do a pathway to legal status and possibly citizenship with penalties should be opened up.

Can you state your respect without having to include the implication of racism?

Yes easily... I respect a US citizens right to have a sovereign country with safe and secure borders.

How’s that answer?

How about you?

 

[Correll]

I agree that dishonest demonization is very bad for our country.

So, how about an example of a major subject that you can respect the opposite side on?

Pick any one you want... immigration, 2nd amendment, government spending, taxation. I’m pretty middle with most of them

So, do you respect those that want deport illegals and secure the border with a Wall? Or do you think they are hateful racists?

Sure I think there are some hateful racists that support the wall..... but not all of them. Many including myself believe that we should have a safe, secure and functional border. I don't support illegal immigration but I also don’t think it’s realistic to try and deport 10+ million people do a pathway to legal status and possibly citizenship with penalties should be opened up.

Can you state your respect without having to include the implication of racism?

Yes easily... I respect a US citizens right to have a sovereign country with safe and secure borders.

How’s that?

How about you?

That was pretty good.

Me? I can respect those that think that we cannot deport all of them, or those that think that a Wall is not needed.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Again sparky, I said that Title VII was dictated directly from Moscow, through their Agent traitor Ted.

Did you think that Title VII was the ONLY part of the Civil Rights act?

What is the reasoning on Moscow to do this?

Same reason Traitor Teddy had, to destroy America, to tear the nation apart into warring factions. to Balkanize us.

OK, makes perfect sense. Carry on.

Do you deny that Title VII has done irreparable damage in dividing the nation into factions? Do you deny that Ted Kennedy acted in coordination with hostile governments with malice to cause harm to this nation?

Yes, easily denied for the simple reason that Ted Kennedy didn’t pass the civil rights act alone. Congress and LBJ did. Y’all keep saying republicans passed it so if you’re gonna own it then own it.

Yep, you're a hack alright.

Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit

 

[HappyJoy]

What is the reasoning on Moscow to do this?

Same reason Traitor Teddy had, to destroy America, to tear the nation apart into warring factions. to Balkanize us.

OK, makes perfect sense. Carry on.

Do you deny that Title VII has done irreparable damage in dividing the nation into factions? Do you deny that Ted Kennedy acted in coordination with hostile governments with malice to cause harm to this nation?

Yes, easily denied for the simple reason that Ted Kennedy didn’t pass the civil rights act alone. Congress and LBJ did. Y’all keep saying republicans passed it so if you’re gonna own it then own it.

Yep, you're a hack alright.

Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit

You didn't answer the question but just the same here is a counter link that references your Forbes article.

Fox News host cites Kennedy-KGB meeting that didn't happen

 

[georgephillip]

Ok, more and more I am noticing that every issue, has, at least in the minds of the Left, been framed as a matter of good vs evil, with no grounds for compromise or even discussion.


ANYTHING, even remotely touching on Race, and if you don't agree with them, you are a "racist", for one the biggest example.


Now they have decided that any form of Nationalism, is akin go Nazism, based on I'm not sure what, so if you are too nationalistic, you are a "nazi" or something.


My question here is twofold,


1. A challenge to put forth any major issue that is still just a matter of policy, where reasonable people can reasonably disagree,


or



2. To discuss how each issue is framed so that we can discuss this problem. ie give one other issue, that you see libs frame this way, and how they frame it.



Any liberals that deny that this is a thing, are welcome to explain what you think I got wrong. Or to defend the idea of why, left vs right has broken down to Good vs Evil.

ANYTHING, even remotely touching on Race, and if you don't agree with them, you are a "racist", for one the biggest example.


Now they have decided that any form of Nationalism, is akin go Nazism, based on I'm not sure what, so if you are too nationalistic, you are a "nazi" or something.

Do you think Americans who have benefited from two centuries of white nationalism are capable of recognizing "Evil" when they see it?

White supremacy - Wikipedia

"White supremacy has ideological foundations that date back to 17th-century scientific racism, the predominant paradigm of human variation that helped shape international relations and racial policy from the latter part of the Age of Enlightenment until the late 20th century (marked by decolonization and the abolition of apartheid in South Africa in 1991, followed by that country's first multiracial elections in 1994)."

 

[Correll]

Ok, more and more I am noticing that every issue, has, at least in the minds of the Left, been framed as a matter of good vs evil, with no grounds for compromise or even discussion.


ANYTHING, even remotely touching on Race, and if you don't agree with them, you are a "racist", for one the biggest example.


Now they have decided that any form of Nationalism, is akin go Nazism, based on I'm not sure what, so if you are too nationalistic, you are a "nazi" or something.


My question here is twofold,


1. A challenge to put forth any major issue that is still just a matter of policy, where reasonable people can reasonably disagree,


or



2. To discuss how each issue is framed so that we can discuss this problem. ie give one other issue, that you see libs frame this way, and how they frame it.



Any liberals that deny that this is a thing, are welcome to explain what you think I got wrong. Or to defend the idea of why, left vs right has broken down to Good vs Evil.

ANYTHING, even remotely touching on Race, and if you don't agree with them, you are a "racist", for one the biggest example.


Now they have decided that any form of Nationalism, is akin go Nazism, based on I'm not sure what, so if you are too nationalistic, you are a "nazi" or something.

Do you think Americans who have benefited from two centuries of white nationalism are capable of recognizing "Evil" when they see it?

White supremacy - Wikipedia

"White supremacy has ideological foundations that date back to 17th-century scientific racism, the predominant paradigm of human variation that helped shape international relations and racial policy from the latter part of the Age of Enlightenment until the late 20th century (marked by decolonization and the abolition of apartheid in South Africa in 1991, followed by that country's first multiracial elections in 1994)."

Got it. YOu cannot respect any opposition.

 

[22lcidw]

Again sparky, I said that Title VII was dictated directly from Moscow, through their Agent traitor Ted.

Did you think that Title VII was the ONLY part of the Civil Rights act?

What is the reasoning on Moscow to do this?

Same reason Traitor Teddy had, to destroy America, to tear the nation apart into warring factions. to Balkanize us.

OK, makes perfect sense. Carry on.

Do you deny that Title VII has done irreparable damage in dividing the nation into factions? Do you deny that Ted Kennedy acted in coordination with hostile governments with malice to cause harm to this nation?

Yes, easily denied for the simple reason that Ted Kennedy didn’t pass the civil rights act alone. Congress and LBJ did. Y’all keep saying republicans passed it so if you’re gonna own it then own it.

The assassination of JFK enabled all of that.

 

[Slade3200]

What is the reasoning on Moscow to do this?

Same reason Traitor Teddy had, to destroy America, to tear the nation apart into warring factions. to Balkanize us.

OK, makes perfect sense. Carry on.

Do you deny that Title VII has done irreparable damage in dividing the nation into factions? Do you deny that Ted Kennedy acted in coordination with hostile governments with malice to cause harm to this nation?

Yes, easily denied for the simple reason that Ted Kennedy didn’t pass the civil rights act alone. Congress and LBJ did. Y’all keep saying republicans passed it so if you’re gonna own it then own it.

Yep, you're a hack alright.

Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit

Why?

 

[georgephillip]

Ok, more and more I am noticing that every issue, has, at least in the minds of the Left, been framed as a matter of good vs evil, with no grounds for compromise or even discussion.


ANYTHING, even remotely touching on Race, and if you don't agree with them, you are a "racist", for one the biggest example.


Now they have decided that any form of Nationalism, is akin go Nazism, based on I'm not sure what, so if you are too nationalistic, you are a "nazi" or something.


My question here is twofold,


1. A challenge to put forth any major issue that is still just a matter of policy, where reasonable people can reasonably disagree,


or



2. To discuss how each issue is framed so that we can discuss this problem. ie give one other issue, that you see libs frame this way, and how they frame it.



Any liberals that deny that this is a thing, are welcome to explain what you think I got wrong. Or to defend the idea of why, left vs right has broken down to Good vs Evil.

ANYTHING, even remotely touching on Race, and if you don't agree with them, you are a "racist", for one the biggest example.


Now they have decided that any form of Nationalism, is akin go Nazism, based on I'm not sure what, so if you are too nationalistic, you are a "nazi" or something.

Do you think Americans who have benefited from two centuries of white nationalism are capable of recognizing "Evil" when they see it?

White supremacy - Wikipedia

"White supremacy has ideological foundations that date back to 17th-century scientific racism, the predominant paradigm of human variation that helped shape international relations and racial policy from the latter part of the Age of Enlightenment until the late 20th century (marked by decolonization and the abolition of apartheid in South Africa in 1991, followed by that country's first multiracial elections in 1994)."

Got it. YOu cannot respect any opposition.

Got it. YOu cannot respect any opposition

Jus sayin' those who were born with white skins in the USA are as oblivious to the effects of white supremacy as a fish is to water.

White supremacy - Wikipedia

"White supremacy was dominant in the United States both before and after the American Civil War, and it also persisted for decades after the Reconstruction Era.[4]

"In the antebellum South, this included the holding of African Americans in chattel slavery, in which four million of them were denied freedom.[5]

"The outbreak of the Civil War saw the desire to uphold white supremacy being cited as a cause for state secession[6]and the formation of the Confederate States of America.[7]

"In an editorial about Native Americans in 1890, author L. Frank Baum wrote: 'The Whites, by law of conquest, by justice of civilization, are masters of the American continent, and the best safety of the frontier settlements will be secured by the total annihilation of the few remaining Indians'""[8]

 

[Correll]

Ok, more and more I am noticing that every issue, has, at least in the minds of the Left, been framed as a matter of good vs evil, with no grounds for compromise or even discussion.


ANYTHING, even remotely touching on Race, and if you don't agree with them, you are a "racist", for one the biggest example.


Now they have decided that any form of Nationalism, is akin go Nazism, based on I'm not sure what, so if you are too nationalistic, you are a "nazi" or something.


My question here is twofold,


1. A challenge to put forth any major issue that is still just a matter of policy, where reasonable people can reasonably disagree,


or



2. To discuss how each issue is framed so that we can discuss this problem. ie give one other issue, that you see libs frame this way, and how they frame it.



Any liberals that deny that this is a thing, are welcome to explain what you think I got wrong. Or to defend the idea of why, left vs right has broken down to Good vs Evil.

ANYTHING, even remotely touching on Race, and if you don't agree with them, you are a "racist", for one the biggest example.


Now they have decided that any form of Nationalism, is akin go Nazism, based on I'm not sure what, so if you are too nationalistic, you are a "nazi" or something.

Do you think Americans who have benefited from two centuries of white nationalism are capable of recognizing "Evil" when they see it?

White supremacy - Wikipedia

"White supremacy has ideological foundations that date back to 17th-century scientific racism, the predominant paradigm of human variation that helped shape international relations and racial policy from the latter part of the Age of Enlightenment until the late 20th century (marked by decolonization and the abolition of apartheid in South Africa in 1991, followed by that country's first multiracial elections in 1994)."

Got it. YOu cannot respect any opposition.

Got it. YOu cannot respect any opposition

Jus sayin' those who were born with white skins in the USA are as oblivious to the effects of white supremacy as a fish is to water.
...]

And I'm just saying that this thread was started asking people if they are capable of respecting opposing viewpoints.

Your response, is to start raving about "white supremacy".

And that answers my question just fine, with a resounding "no".

YOu got nothing else to add, then dont' try to derail the thread.