If we weren't so divided on social issues we wouldn't be slaves to the establishment

[Super_Lantern]

Just keepin' it real

Keepin' it 100

 

[TheOldSchool]

If the GOP wasn't in the grips of evangelical Christianity I'd probably be a republican. If Bernie Sanders somehow wins the Democrat nomination, it'll be the first time in my life that I decide not to vote.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So why do you think that corporate groups like the Ford Foundation fund all these controversial groups like La Raza and pro-abortion groups?

To divide us so the corporations can conquer.

 

[jwoodie]

Just keepin' it real

Keepin' it 100

The solution is to let people in individual States decide. If they don't like something, they can change it at the next election. Or move.

Why do we insist that these issues be decided at the federal level?

 

[Alan Stallion]

We're divided on a whole host of issues, whether they be "social" or "economical," which are the two main categories people try to pigeonhole issues, though often it's hard to separate the two (e.g., slavery was certainly an economical issue for those who benefited from it and had a competitive advantage, and a social issue for it deprived a group their unalienable rights and was a social movement for abolitionists).

Which begs the question, what qualifies as social issues and should people hold tight to social issue positions? The right to self-defense; the right of school choice; the right to free speech, press, religious affiliation, and other associations; the rights of people of particular races, genders, and of the pre-born; the right of refusal; and many other ideas I have not included here?

 

[jwoodie]

Constitutional rights are (and should be) specified in the Constitution (e.g., 14th Amendment. There would be much less division in our country if the other issues were settled at the State level.

For example, abortion was much less contentious before SCOTUS stuck its nose into the issue. Even Ruth "Buzzie" Ginsberg has said as much.

 

[NightFox]

The solution is to let people in individual States decide. If they don't like something, they can change it at the next election. Or move.

Can't have that, the gub'mint worshipers can't handle thinking that somebody on the other side of the country might not be as miserable as they are.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If the GOP wasn't in the grips of evangelical Christianity I'd probably be a republican.

You're a greed filled motherfucker who want's free shit at the expense of others.

You can ONLY be a democrat.

If Bernie Sanders somehow wins the Democrat nomination, it'll be the first time in my life that I decide not to vote.

It will offset the 20 votes you cast for Obama.

 

[TheOldSchool]

If the GOP wasn't in the grips of evangelical Christianity I'd probably be a republican.

You're a greed filled motherfucker who want's free shit at the expense of others.

You can ONLY be a democrat.

If Bernie Sanders somehow wins the Democrat nomination, it'll be the first time in my life that I decide not to vote.

It will offset the 20 votes you cast for Obama.

 

[easyt65]

Saul Alynski outlined how that keeping the nation so deeply divided along almost every boundary keeps people fighting among themselves, oblivious to what the real threat - politicians - are doing. As proven on this board, politicians have successfully perfected the art of keeping us so divided that we spend all of our time arguing over whose politicians are LESS CORRUPT instead of holding them all equally to the same standards.

Whoe wins this continued squabbling and fighting? Politicians.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Saul Alynski outlined how that keeping the nation so deeply divided along almost every boundary keeps people fighting among themselves, oblivious to what the real threat - politicians - are doing. As proven on this board, politicians have successfully perfected the art of keeping us so divided that we spend all of our time arguing over whose politicians are LESS CORRUPT instead of holding them all equally to the same standards.

Whoe wins this continued squabbling and fighting? Politicians.

And who owns the politicians? The corporations, so in the end the corporations once again win.

Corporations are amoral greedy bastards who are fully engaged in trying to suppress the American people with a flood of immigration, crime and lawyers.

Just a few examples
Philo Farnsworth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Farnsworth worked out the principle of the image dissector in the summer of 1921, not long before his fifteenth birthday, and demonstrated the first working version on September 7, 1927, having turned 21 the previous August. A farm boy, his inspiration for scanning an image as series of lines came from the back-and-forth motion used to plow a field.[50][51] In the course of a patent interference suit brought by RCA in 1934 and decided in February 1935, his high school chemistry teacher, Justin Tolman, produced a sketch he had made of a blackboard drawing Farnsworth had shown him in spring 1922. Farnsworth won the suit; RCA appealed the decision in 1936 and lost.[52] Although Farnsworth was paid royalties by RCA, he never became wealthy. The video camera tube that evolved from the combined work of Farnsworth, Zworykin and many others was used in all television cameras until the late 20th century, when alternate technologies such as charge-coupled devices started to appear.


Antonio Meucci - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 2002, on the initiative of U.S. Representative Vito Fossella (R-NY), in cooperation with an Italian-American deputation, the U.S. House of Representatives passed United States HRes. 269 on Antonio Meucci stating "that the life and achievements of Antonio Meucci should be recognized, and his work in the invention of the telephone should be acknowledged." Within its preamble it stated that: "if Meucci had been able to pay the $10 fee to maintain the caveat after 1874, no patent could have been issued to Bell."[60][61] The resolution's sponsor described it as "a message that rings loud and clear recognizing the true inventor of the telephone, Antonio Meucci."

Robert Kearns - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After winning a $10.2 million judgment from Ford, Kearns mostly acted as his own attorney in the subsequent suit against Chrysler, even questioning witnesses on the stand. The Chrysler verdict was decided in 1992, and was a victory for Kearns. Chrysler was ordered to pay Kearns US$18.7 million with interest.[7] Chrysler appealed the court decision, but the Federal Circuit let the judgment stand.[8] The Supreme Court declined to hear the case.[9] By 1995, after spending over US$ 10 million in legal fees,[10] Kearns received approximately US$ 30 million in compensation for Chrysler's patent infringement.[7]

Chrysler was represented by Harness Dickey and Pierce, one of the first firms Kearns went to when he contemplated suing Ford in the late 1970s. Indeed, according to his son Dennis Kearns, Kearns wanted Harness Dickey removed for conflict of interest, but was unable to convince his attorneys to make a motion to remove Harness Dickey. He then decided to manage the Chrysler litigation on his own with his family. However, this strategy did not seem to work out well in subsequent litigation against GM, Mercedes, and Japanese companies as he missed deadlines for filing papers and his cases were dismissed.

These bastard cheat, lie steal and lawyer up to defraud all of Middle Class America all of the time and for ANY reason, even just spite.