Armed and dangerous Hispanics -- help wanted!

[midcan5]

"What happens to a Corporation in the United States if it takes the money its employees donated or were mandated to put in Corporate run retirement accounts and uses that money to RUN the Corporation?"

RGS, you are a living, breathing example of the power of propaganda, lies, and distortions. If you are interested in anything remotely close to the truth I recommend you check out Snopes. One wonders about the fate of America when nine tenths of what you hear from the Right is outright wrong.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/sschanges.asp

To answer your question above, most of the time nothing or a small fine. I'm sure a quick Google search would reveal many, but I have led you to enough water holes, time for you to drink up this knowledge.

 

[Doug]

MidCan: You said

I notice you often use genetic metaphors in your writing, have you ever read Mary Midgley. She and Dawkins had some interesting debates on this topic. Her, "The Myths We Live By" is excellent.

I have her book entitled Wickedness:A philosophical Essay, but have not got around to reading it yet. Have you? Is it worth pushing up towards the front of the queue? As I recall from the Dawkins/Midgley exchanges I read long ago, he wiped the floor with her. But I honestly could not now recall the content of either's arguments. If you have links to some particularly interesting ones, I would appreciate it.

I do think genetics, or more generally, biology, is critical. We are animals, products of evolution, after all. But I don't go for any reductionist reading of the evidence -- the human animal is a hell of a lot more complicated than just being a creature driven by a bundle of instincts -- we are not, in Dawkins' unfortunate phrase "great lumbering robots" whose actions are simpy explainable by our mission to replicate our DNA.

As for "socialism" -- I think you are using it in the modern European Social Democratic sense: using the state to spread around a little the wealth generated by the free market without making direct or deep incursions into the opeation of that market. And you are right -- American socialists are well-advised to drop the word.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

"What happens to a Corporation in the United States if it takes the money its employees donated or were mandated to put in Corporate run retirement accounts and uses that money to RUN the Corporation?"

RGS, you are a living, breathing example of the power of propaganda, lies, and distortions. If you are interested in anything remotely close to the truth I recommend you check out Snopes. One wonders about the fate of America when nine tenths of what you hear from the Right is outright wrong.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/sschanges.asp

To answer your question above, most of the time nothing or a small fine. I'm sure a quick Google search would reveal many, but I have led you to enough water holes, time for you to drink up this knowledge.

What? A fine? Then it must actually be against the law to do it? Yet Congress has done it since they created Social Security. Or are you now going to argue that Social Security funds are NOT general funds used in all calculations on what the Government has and used on any and all projects or commitments the Government has?

 

[midcan5]

RGS, you obviously didn't read the snopes piece, it is well organized and outlines the common myths so you can get to all the one you currently believe.

Doug, I think I may have that Midgley book in my pile of reads. I will need to live to be very old to read everything I want to and there will always be more. Not sure that book is related but what she argues is that symbolism and culture play important parts in how we behave and the simplicity of Dawkins doesn't really explain much. She makes a good argument.


"In Wickedness (1984), however, she remarks "the idea that if once we got rid of religion, all problems of this kind [i.e problems of wickedness] would vanish, seems wild. Whatever may have been its plausibility in the 18th Century it is surely just a distraction today. It is, however, one often used by those who do not want to think seriously on the subject, and who prefer a ritual warfare about the existence of God to an atrociously difficult psychological enquiry.""

http://www.threemonkeysonline.com/article_mary_midgley_interview.htm

"Genes cannot be selfish or unselfish, any more than atoms can be jealous, elephants abstract or biscuits teleological." Mary Midgley

 

[William Joyce]

Where William Joyce and his co-thinkers go wrong is here: while a racially-homogeneous nation might be desirable, if we were starting over, it is not possible, because we cannot start over..

It's not about the Instant White Homeland for me, Doug. I realize the impracticality of that. But how about some immigration control, some group consciousness, and some freedom of association? Nobody will get hurt, I swear. In any event, "we cannot start over" isn't really true. Time marches on. Changes happen. We were once homogenous, and we didn't become multicultural overnight. The reverse can happen gradually, too.

We have to live together.

No, we don't. And, we don't, in practice. Races remain as separate as possible when given the chance, as anyone can see. But beyond that, there is simply no moral obligation to "live together" whatsoever. If there is, let's hear it.

But loudly expressing the desire that what is approaching fifty percent of our nation should just vanish, is even worse.

First, nobody's really suggesting that half the population vanish. But I can assure that plenty of people do have this desire, and it's not immoral. Loudly expressing it is a good thing, to my mind. Desires are real. You can't kill them. Tipping others off is a good idea. I do a slow burn every time I see a parking lot filled with shitty-looking illegal Mexicans. Right now, they think we love them. We don't. Better to let them know they are not wanted.

And, in crude short-range pragmatic terms, the racialists simply hand over tens of millions of voters to the Left without a fight.

In fact, many Blacks and Hispanics are quite conservative on cultural issues -- there is actually a greater percentage of Black self-identified conservatives than Black liberals, or was the last time I checked the relevant poll.

Ah, yes. The "blacks and Hispanics should vote Republican" idea from Karl Rove. It's just wrong. They don't and they won't. Blacks aren't really "conservatives" in the sense that whites have. They don't like homosexuals, big deal. But I can think of very few social indices upon which you could base a finding that blacks are "conservative." They commit crime, don't stay married, have children out of wedlock, use drugs, avoid work and are quick to violence. These characteristics are inherent and won't change if you put them in suits and call them Republicans.

Bottom line: human races are far, far less compatible within the same political system as we think.

 

[Doug]

(1) Nothing could be more harmful to the cause of sensible control of immigration than to identify it as a "white-vs-non-white" issue.

(2) We do have to live together, on the same continent and in the same country. Within those limits, people should be free to associate with whom they choose. We may speculate about future migration patterns, including out-migration, but the world economy is working towards the knitting together of the peoples, not towards their separation.

(3) When talking about groups, it is always useful to put quantifiers on our adjectives: do whites live peaceful and lawabiding lives? Are Blacks violent drug-users? Put that way, the questions cannot be answered. No quantifier implies universal quantifier and sometimes this is valid -- "rattlesnakes are poisonous" will correctly be taken to mean "all rattlesnakesare poisonous" -- but sometimes can lead you into problems:the proposition "Americans live in the United States" is refuted by the guy typing this post. Better to quanitify the subject of that proposition with "Some, most, almost all".

So also with races.

I live in a nice little village in Southern England. Liberal-minded Social Engineers decided it would be a good idea to build some public housing in our midst -- not giant housing projects, by the way, but individual little brick houses, very nice -- and the welfare recipients moved in, the usual sluts and layabouts with their feral offspring.

Now the old people are afraid to go out at night. And the little scum who cause damage and steal things every week here are white, white, white.

We do have some -- just a sprinkling -- of Pakistanis, Chinese, and Africans. All middle class professionals or small business owners, plus one postman. (I tutored the son of a Kenyan barrister who lived a couple of hundred yards away -- he had taught himself C++ at 15 -- the full, object-oriented whack, not just the baby parts -- and was the brightest student I have ever had.)

I would fight like hell if they decided to settle 5000 West Indians from one of the great London estates here, because I know what they have done to inner London already. I would also resist strenuously an attempt to bring in 5000 Bradford Muslims, for similar but not identical reasons.

But the balance we have -- 95% white -- is fine. If I could arrange a Krystallnacht it wouldn't be against the "coloreds" in my village; I would want to have the mob visit the houses of the welfare-burglars and their vandalizing vermin offspring.

And following your separatist advice, my very modest academic career would have been even more mediocre: my only successfully-supervised PhD student was from St Lucia, and black as midnight. After getting his PhD in Computer Science he went off and got a law degree, while at the same time passing some advanced music examinations. I have traitorously (to the UK, not to whites) tried to persuade him to emigrate to the US, because he is an asset to whatever country he lives in. Your worldview doesn't allow for this sort of thing. And I think you would also drive out all our Jewish medical researchers and mathematicians and physicists -- I think we would lose about half or more of our Nobel Prizes in science.

The problem is, that at least 75% of the things you say are true, and they are truths that badly need saying. But your conclusions destroy any good practical effect your well-argued posts may have.

 

[midcan5]

Damn, Doug, talk about pussy footing around, you look like twinkle bell. William Joyce is a racist jackass, time to call a spade a spade. He represents a hatred of others that is un-American and despicable, plain and simple.

 

[Doug]

MidCan: No one is beyond hope. Why else would I and other saintlike patient conservatives here spend precious hours of our time, which could be devoted to doing Good Works among the poor, trying to force liberals and Lefties to look up towards the Light? We want to save souls.

Most overt racists have deep personal inadequacies, and are often of obvious low intelligence and social status. But this man is highly intelligent -- I hate to say this but he can whip most of the liberals on this board in debate while he's reading a book or playing cards -- and not obviously deranged.

And there is something interesting about people like him -- how the hell can he have those views? Just to find that out is worth something. I couldn't imagine intellectual life without Jews -- just watching them argue among themselves is an education. Yet he sees them as a unified conspiracy.

Also, people you may think are very wicked because of their horrible formal views on something may still be worth encountering. I am sorry to tell you that a couple of years ago in London I had a pleasant and interesting half-hour's discussion with Jared Taylor (who edits American Renaissance) -- hell, I even bought him a beer: so shoot me.

Whenever someone tells me I am not allowed to read a certain magazine, I fear I instantly check to see if I can afford a subscription. Die Gedanken sind frei..

And consider what Winston Churchill wrote in his History of the Second World War, apropos of the very correctly worded British declaration of war on Japan: "After all, if you are going to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite." Of course, I don't plan to kill anyone, unless they shoot first, but the sentiment is mine.

 

[trobinett]

MidCan: No one is beyond hope. Why else would I and other saintlike patient conservatives here spend precious hours of our time, which could be devoted to doing Good Works among the poor, trying to force liberals and Lefties to look up towards the Light? We want to save souls.

Most overt racists have deep personal inadequacies, and are often of obvious low intelligence and social status. But this man is highly intelligent -- I hate to say this but he can whip most of the liberals on this board in debate while he's reading a book or playing cards -- and not obviously deranged.

And there is something interesting about people like him -- how the hell can he have those views? Just to find that out is worth something. I couldn't imagine intellectual life without Jews -- just watching them argue among themselves is an education. Yet he sees them as a unified conspiracy.

Also, people you may think are very wicked because of their horrible formal views on something may still be worth encountering. I am sorry to tell you that a couple of years ago in London I had a pleasant and interesting half-hour's discussion with Jared Taylor (who edits American Renaissance) -- hell, I even bought him a beer: so shoot me.

Whenever someone tells me I am not allowed to read a certain magazine, I fear I instantly check to see if I can afford a subscription. Die Gedanken sind frei..

And consider what Winston Churchill wrote in his History of the Second World War, apropos of the very correctly worded British declaration of war on Japan: "After all, if you are going to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite." Of course, I don't plan to kill anyone, unless they shoot first, but the sentiment is mine.

Damn Doug, your good.

Not only THAT, but I mostly understood most everything you said.

Give 'em hell buddy......................

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Joyce is not suddenly going to wake up, slap his forehead and say "damn, your right, I am a racist" then change his ways. He already has the obvious intelligence to know better yet he spouts his racist crap left and right. Reason and facts are wasted on him. He already has the mind needed and the schooling required to know better. HE has chosen to be a bigoted racist. Not because of ignorance. It may be be partly because of upbringing, but we can not know that. And I can attest to the fact that upbringing does not give you a pass on this stuff. My family had a few bigots in it as well. They taught me to fight such idiotic mindless thoughts. To educate myself and be able to reason beyond the pack mentality.

 

[midcan5]

Doug,

I would have to disagree that he can be saved, if intelligent, it is an intelligence that needs no patronizing. And if he got this far and still posts such crap, his arguments have no moral validity. That he supposedly beats liberals reflects your own bias. I do agree that conversing with diverse individuals is interesting, such as you. LOL

I have always wondered over the WJ types as it seems intelligence is no sign of sense or reasonableness, would you be polite to the mass murderer who killed your children? They actually seem to be missing a component that makes us human, empathy maybe. They are tribal and it is tribalism that is at the root of so much evil. And while I hear where you are coming from, I refuse to allow stupidity to be discussed like it is not stupidity.

 

[Larkinn]

Bullshit. 911 reminded us we have enemies that COULD reach us even in America. I keep waiting for someone to list all the rights we have lost. No one can actually provide any real one. The Courts still protect us, we still have all our rights and we still have the vote and access to Government and the Courts. Hell even the non citizens captured in a foreign country fighting against us have access to our courts.

Right to a quick and speedy trial if accused of terrorism by the government.

 

[Doug]

Trobinett: Thank you for your kind comment. I, too, mostly understand everything I say, and I'm hopeful about some day understanding the other things.

MidCan, RetiredGySgt: If what William Joyce posts is self-evidently wrong, then it can be ignored. And if the person posting it is obviously gutterscum, likewise. But this is an intelligent man, make no mistake.

Much of what he says is true. It's the wrong stuff, which is not so immediaely obvious, by the way, which needs refuting. Just yelling at him and calling him names is useless. People who agree with some of what he says -- the true stuff -- will think, maybe his other stuff is also true.

That is, they may conclude from the high Black crime rate, that Blacks and whites cannot make a nation together. Or from the strength of AIPAC, that Jews form a worldwide age-old conspiracy.

So what he says must be untangled and the essence of his erroneous views taken on, calmly.

I don't get too worked up about racists, since most people in the world are "racists", and the operational definition of the word today is usually "someone who is winning an argument with a Lefty".

The Chinese are the most deeply racist people on the planet -- their racism is so deep that it is not even racism, more like species-ism -- and is covered up by their innate politeness. (You are kind to your dog, are you not?) But no one yells at them. The yelling is usually reserved for one particular kind of racist, namely, white ones.

And it's hard to make me feel guilty about this since I paid my dues as a Civil Rights worker in the South forty-five years ago.

Also I am personally curious as to how an intelligent person can believe the things he does about Jews -- it seems like a form of mental illness to me, but it obviously isn't.

If these people were a rising poltical force -- if this were Germany 1930 -- then it obviously would be inappropriate to politely fence with someone whose aim is to run you and your friends through dog food factories -- the weapon of criticism would be in the process of being replaced by the criticism of weapons. But today this kind of thinking is just an intellectual curiosity, like belief in the Illuminati or Scientology.

Also: although William Joyce is no conservative of any sort, yet it is true that his disdainful attitude, to put it no more strongly, towards non-whites (if not towards Jews, nowadays), is not absent from the ranks of the conservaive movement.

So it is useful to detail how one can be completely free from the lefty it's-the-white-man's-fault bs, and open about the dangers of losing cultural cohesion, and Black crime and self-destructive behavior, without being a racist.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Right to a quick and speedy trial if accused of terrorism by the government.

A right of citizens not enemies captured in foreign countries.

Further the two cases where that speed did not include days weeks or even months, I am waiting for an appeal on those grounds. Failure of such would mean the courts feel it was "speedy" enough.

 

[Larkinn]

A right of citizens not enemies captured in foreign countries.

Jose Padilla is a citizen who was arrested in Chicago.

Further the two cases where that speed did not include days weeks or even months, I am waiting for an appeal on those grounds. Failure of such would mean the courts feel it was "speedy" enough.

Ah...so 4 years is "speedy" enough?

And while the Supremes reversed it, I find it truly terrifying that the federal government felt that it could hold a US citizen with no trial, no due process, and no habeus corpus...no matter what circumstances they were in when arrested.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Jose Padilla is a citizen who was arrested in Chicago.



Ah...so 4 years is "speedy" enough?

And while the Supremes reversed it, I find it truly terrifying that the federal government felt that it could hold a US citizen with no trial, no due process, and no habeus corpus...no matter what circumstances they were in when arrested.

A war allows lots of leeway. And whether you like it or not we are in a war. Basicly your complaint is that even though the system works as intended you don't like it.

 

[trobinett]

Your misknowlege is more astute and astounding with every post.

Roosevelt set up something called old age pension, nearly 80 years ago Since then the ADMINISTRATIONS "ALL of them" have screwed arround with it, until we end up with the mishmash we presently have to contend with

Are you suggesting that the Democrats have been in power all that time? That is the only legitimate way you can blame the democrats for the mess

Ok, WHO are you, and what have you done with doniston?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Since the creation of Social Security with only a few 2 year periods here and there the Democrats had complete control of both the House and the Senate until 1994. Even after 1994 the Republicans did not have a working majority in the Senate. The same claim now by you dems that "those damn republicans can block us" applied during the years from 1994 to 2006 except it would be "those damn Democrats".

And as a point of order, from 1952 to 1994 the democrats controlled the House every year, And usually controlled the Senate as well.

 

[trobinett]

Since the creation of Social Security with only a few 2 year periods here and there the Democrats had complete control of both the House and the Senate until 1994. Even after 1994 the Republicans did not have a working majority in the Senate. The same claim now by you dems that "those damn republicans can block us" applied during the years from 1994 to 2006 except it would be "those damn Democrats".

And as a point of order, from 1952 to 1994 the democrats controlled the House every year, And usually controlled the Senate as well.

You can keep throwing FACTS at them till the cows come home RGS, but as any leftist will tell you, in a moment of weakness, facts don't change nothing!

 

[Larkinn]

A war allows lots of leeway. And whether you like it or not we are in a war. Basicly your complaint is that even though the system works as intended you don't like it.

A war should NOT allow a US citizen to be held for 4 years with no trial. And you asked which rights have disappeared, and I just told you.