White Nationalist Epithet Is A Smear

[Correll]

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

When regulations go bad, it's because what is Good For Some is Not Good For All.

The mortgage industry was about privatizing profit (good for some) and socializing risk (not good for all). If we only had laws that were good for all, there would be far fewer of them and we would live in a freer society. And by free, I do not mean anarchy. I mean within a proper Rule of Law in place of the Grift of the Connected.

White nationalist is not a ‘smear.’

It is an accurate and appropriate term assigned to a rightist whose speech and actions are that of a bigot, racist, nativist, and hatemonger – all of which is unpatriotic and un-American.

Conservatives who are not bigots, racists, nativists, or hatemongers are not referred to as white nationalists.

This isn’t difficult to understand.

It's a smear.

He knows that.


He just doesn't want to give up the Left's primary weapon.



Without it, they might have to defend their ideas and policies based on their merits.


That terrifies him.

 

[basquebromance]

“Nazi” is injected into Leftist talking points because the worn out & exhausted “racist” is over used & applied to everyone who lacks melanin & who fail to virtue signal at the requisite frequency & decibels.

But...Nazis were socialists & Leftists are socialists.

 

[bripat9643]

“Nazi” is injected into Leftist talking points because the worn out & exhausted “racist” is over used & applied to everyone who lacks melanin & who fail to virtue signal at the requisite frequency & decibels.

But...Nazis were socialists & Leftists are socialists.

I like how Trump put it: "They start calling you a racist when you're winning."

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

That's total fucking bullshit because until FDR there was absolutely zero regulation on the federal level. The Founding Fathers also never envisioned government programs that wrote checks to people for nothing in return. Wefare isn't an "investment" anymore than lighting money on fire is an investment.

Zero regulation? You sure about that genius?

He is telling you he misses the good old days when the elderly ate cat food.

You mean you allowed your mother to eat cat food? I didn't know there were people in this country like that.

 

[Slade3200]

Isn’t it crazy that millions of Americans want to harm themselves and their loved ones so they can support criminals? That must blow your mind

The progressives in question, put their idea of "fairness" ahead of the rights of American citizens.



They consider NATIONALISM to be a bad thing, and FAIRNESS, ie treating the "refugess" who have more need, generously at the expense of Americans who have so much more and are just being greedy in their desire to keep it.


They see NATIONALISM as the OPPOSITE of INTERNATIONALISM, or GLOBALISM,


and side with outsiders against their fellow Americans.

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

When you campaign and advocate for “America First” or call yourself a “Nationalist” in the way that some are now doing you mess up the necessary balance that I believe most people want which is the American value of compassion for all. When you operate under America first you shoot down proposals and efforts towards foreign aid and perpetuate the “all or nothing” team sport partisan games that Washington has devolved into.

 

[bripat9643]

The progressives in question, put their idea of "fairness" ahead of the rights of American citizens.



They consider NATIONALISM to be a bad thing, and FAIRNESS, ie treating the "refugess" who have more need, generously at the expense of Americans who have so much more and are just being greedy in their desire to keep it.


They see NATIONALISM as the OPPOSITE of INTERNATIONALISM, or GLOBALISM,


and side with outsiders against their fellow Americans.

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

Indeed. "Compassion" carried to far is just narcissistic virtue signaling.

Nothing performed as a result of compulsion can properly be called "compassion."

 

[Slade3200]

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

The only reason our system is "enormous" is the fact that unelected bureaucrats can make laws without a vote from the legislature. What we need is a much smaller system where the legislature has to vote on all votes and not pass on the responsibility to someone else.

Our system is enormous because we have 300 million people and a world leading military and economy.

 

[bripat9643]

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

The mortgage industry went South 10 years ago because of the dumbass regulations the Dims put in place that required banks to grant mortgages that couldn't pay them. The smartest change possible to our bureaucracy is to dismantle it one agency at a time.

 

[Slade3200]

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

The mortgage industry went South 10 years ago because of the dumbass regulations the Dims put in place that required banks to grant mortgages that couldn't pay them. The smartest change possible to our bureaucracy is to dismantle it one agency at a time.

Keep telling yourself that dude. I don’t have the time or patience to school you on this right now.

 

[bripat9643]

The progressives in question, put their idea of "fairness" ahead of the rights of American citizens.



They consider NATIONALISM to be a bad thing, and FAIRNESS, ie treating the "refugess" who have more need, generously at the expense of Americans who have so much more and are just being greedy in their desire to keep it.


They see NATIONALISM as the OPPOSITE of INTERNATIONALISM, or GLOBALISM,


and side with outsiders against their fellow Americans.

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

When you campaign and advocate for “America First” or call yourself a “Nationalist” in the way that some are now doing you mess up the necessary balance that I believe most people want which is the American value of compassion for all. When you operate under America first you shoot down proposals and efforts towards foreign aid and perpetuate the “all or nothing” team sport partisan games that Washington has devolved into.

Fuck the "America of compassion." Our government has no business playing good Samaritan in all these shit-hole countries. Taking care of Americans is a full time job.

If you want to donate your money to help foreigners, no one is stopping you. Have at it.

 

[bripat9643]

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

The only reason our system is "enormous" is the fact that unelected bureaucrats can make laws without a vote from the legislature. What we need is a much smaller system where the legislature has to vote on all votes and not pass on the responsibility to someone else.

Our system is enormous because we have 300 million people and a world leading military and economy.

Our government is enormous. It's 5 times bigger than it should be. Government had nothing to do with making our economy grow, other than staying the fuck out of the way.

 

[bripat9643]

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

The mortgage industry went South 10 years ago because of the dumbass regulations the Dims put in place that required banks to grant mortgages that couldn't pay them. The smartest change possible to our bureaucracy is to dismantle it one agency at a time.

Keep telling yourself that dude. I don’t have the time or patience to school you on this right now.

Save your delusions for someone gullible enough to swallow them.

 

[Correll]

The progressives in question, put their idea of "fairness" ahead of the rights of American citizens.



They consider NATIONALISM to be a bad thing, and FAIRNESS, ie treating the "refugess" who have more need, generously at the expense of Americans who have so much more and are just being greedy in their desire to keep it.


They see NATIONALISM as the OPPOSITE of INTERNATIONALISM, or GLOBALISM,


and side with outsiders against their fellow Americans.

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

When you campaign and advocate for “America First” or call yourself a “Nationalist” in the way that some are now doing you mess up the necessary balance that I believe most people want which is the American value of compassion for all. When you operate under America first you shoot down proposals and efforts towards foreign aid and perpetuate the “all or nothing” team sport partisan games that Washington has devolved into.

We have well over 20, if not over 30 million illegals living in this country, and people are called racist because they think that is a problem.


There is no balance here. We are completely out of balance and the status quo that Trump is slightly challenging, is "all for the other, and nothing for Americans".


BALANCE would be a Wall, a sealed border and massive deportation of 90 plus percent illegals. THAT would be balance.

 

[Slade3200]

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

When you campaign and advocate for “America First” or call yourself a “Nationalist” in the way that some are now doing you mess up the necessary balance that I believe most people want which is the American value of compassion for all. When you operate under America first you shoot down proposals and efforts towards foreign aid and perpetuate the “all or nothing” team sport partisan games that Washington has devolved into.

Fuck the "America of compassion." Our government has no business playing good Samaritan in all these shit-hole countries. Taking care of Americans is a full time job.

If you want to donate your money to help foreigners, no one is stopping you. Have at it.

You’re expressing one assholes opinion that’s it. Our system wouldn’t have evolved like it has without the support of the majority of people so your opinion doesn’t reflect the will of the people. Sorry

 

[Slade3200]

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

When you campaign and advocate for “America First” or call yourself a “Nationalist” in the way that some are now doing you mess up the necessary balance that I believe most people want which is the American value of compassion for all. When you operate under America first you shoot down proposals and efforts towards foreign aid and perpetuate the “all or nothing” team sport partisan games that Washington has devolved into.

We have well over 20, if not over 30 million illegals living in this country, and people are called racist because they think that is a problem.


There is no balance here. We are completely out of balance and the status quo that Trump is slightly challenging, is "all for the other, and nothing for Americans".


BALANCE would be a Wall, a sealed border and massive deportation of 90 plus percent illegals. THAT would be balance.

What makes you think it’s all for foreigners and nothing for Americans? In one breath I hear you complain that Dems don’t care about Americans and in the next I hear you complaining about how much money they want to spend on education healthcare and social programs.

 

[Correll]

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

When you campaign and advocate for “America First” or call yourself a “Nationalist” in the way that some are now doing you mess up the necessary balance that I believe most people want which is the American value of compassion for all. When you operate under America first you shoot down proposals and efforts towards foreign aid and perpetuate the “all or nothing” team sport partisan games that Washington has devolved into.

We have well over 20, if not over 30 million illegals living in this country, and people are called racist because they think that is a problem.


There is no balance here. We are completely out of balance and the status quo that Trump is slightly challenging, is "all for the other, and nothing for Americans".


BALANCE would be a Wall, a sealed border and massive deportation of 90 plus percent illegals. THAT would be balance.

What makes you think it’s all for foreigners and nothing for Americans? In one breath I hear you complain that Dems don’t care about Americans and in the next I hear you complaining about how much money they want to spend on education healthcare and social programs.

Depends on the context.


1. If the choice is between needy foreigners and Americans, you can see they choose the foreigners.

2. If the choice is between needy special needs children, and relatively well off middle class American students, then fuck the normal children, we have to show "compassion" for the kids with problems.

Every time, they choose the same way, and generally they have driven our policies.


And that is not a balance between loyalty to our group and compassion for outsiders. It is fucking US, to benefit others.


And if you disagree, then you are a terrible person, who needs to be vilified and fired, if not arrested for hate speech.

 

[bripat9643]

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

When you campaign and advocate for “America First” or call yourself a “Nationalist” in the way that some are now doing you mess up the necessary balance that I believe most people want which is the American value of compassion for all. When you operate under America first you shoot down proposals and efforts towards foreign aid and perpetuate the “all or nothing” team sport partisan games that Washington has devolved into.

We have well over 20, if not over 30 million illegals living in this country, and people are called racist because they think that is a problem.


There is no balance here. We are completely out of balance and the status quo that Trump is slightly challenging, is "all for the other, and nothing for Americans".


BALANCE would be a Wall, a sealed border and massive deportation of 90 plus percent illegals. THAT would be balance.

What makes you think it’s all for foreigners and nothing for Americans? In one breath I hear you complain that Dems don’t care about Americans and in the next I hear you complaining about how much money they want to spend on education healthcare and social programs.

Why should any of it be for foreigners? Please explain why the US government should spend one dime helping foreigners so long as we have children who can't get dental care or a good education?

 

[bripat9643]

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

When you campaign and advocate for “America First” or call yourself a “Nationalist” in the way that some are now doing you mess up the necessary balance that I believe most people want which is the American value of compassion for all. When you operate under America first you shoot down proposals and efforts towards foreign aid and perpetuate the “all or nothing” team sport partisan games that Washington has devolved into.

Fuck the "America of compassion." Our government has no business playing good Samaritan in all these shit-hole countries. Taking care of Americans is a full time job.

If you want to donate your money to help foreigners, no one is stopping you. Have at it.

You’re expressing one assholes opinion that’s it. Our system wouldn’t have evolved like it has without the support of the majority of people so your opinion doesn’t reflect the will of the people. Sorry

Your opinion that government can do whatever it likes was shared by the Nazis and the Communists. If you believe there are rules about what it's ethical for government to do, then the only discussion is about what those limits are. I can find no ethical principle that says government should take from Richard Roe so it can give the swag to John Doe. What ethical principle says government is acting morally when it takes my money to accomplish goals of another's choosing?

 

[boedicca]

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

That's total fucking bullshit because until FDR there was absolutely zero regulation on the federal level. The Founding Fathers also never envisioned government programs that wrote checks to people for nothing in return. Wefare isn't an "investment" anymore than lighting money on fire is an investment.

Zero regulation? You sure about that genius?

He is telling you he misses the good old days when the elderly ate cat food.

And you are missing the "good" old days when most people were slaves or serfs.

 

[boedicca]

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

When regulations go bad, it's because what is Good For Some is Not Good For All.

The mortgage industry was about privatizing profit (good for some) and socializing risk (not good for all). If we only had laws that were good for all, there would be far fewer of them and we would live in a freer society. And by free, I do not mean anarchy. I mean within a proper Rule of Law in place of the Grift of the Connected.

White nationalist is not a ‘smear.’

It is an accurate and appropriate term assigned to a rightist whose speech and actions are that of a bigot, racist, nativist, and hatemonger – all of which is unpatriotic and un-American.

Conservatives who are not bigots, racists, nativists, or hatemongers are not referred to as white nationalists.

This isn’t difficult to understand.

Well, here's a little story about that: The Left smears all conservative white people as White Nationalist Racist Segregationists. So, I don't believe you at all.