Ask Me Help Desk - The Face of Evil

Quote:

What puzzles me JL, is your constant diatribe of your personal commitment to help the least, yet you blast everyone else who doesn't, and the government that does. Seems to me you would be for any one helping the least, even the government, since they seem to do what volunteers and ordinary people cannot. Supplemented and collective efforts for the same goal should be a good thing that crosses political and religious lines, I would think.

I've never blasted anyone for not giving. My complaint is liberals who want to brag about their charitable impulses because they want to force someone else to help the poor but do so little themselves. The government helps no one. Taxpayers do that. The government buys votes by handing out money.

Quote:

I mean you have no problem with the dufus deficit funded tax cuts to the rich, no problem with the dufus charging the government for his golf vacations at his own property, which he does quite often, but balk at giving poor kids milk or a free lunch at school, or shelter? Don't understand that logic.

I think it is scandalous for Trump to take taxpayer funded vacations in the same way that it was scandalous for Obama to do it. You are critical of Trump but gave Obama a free pass because your objections are based upon your hatred of Trump and not any real ethical convictions. As for taxcuts, and to say this yet again, the top 20% pay more than 85% of the taxes. I would agree that figure is unfair to the wealthy, especially considering that the bottom half pay practically nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I've never blasted anyone for not giving. My complaint is liberals who want to brag about their charitable impulses because they want to force someone else to help the poor but do so little themselves. The government helps no one. Taxpayers do that. The government buys votes by handing out money.

You may be on to something except for the fact the congress has been run by conservative in both houses since 2012, and add the WH since 2016, so you aren't talking about liberals but conservatives.

Quote:

I think it is scandalous for Trump to take taxpayer funded vacations in the same way that it was scandalous for Obama to do it. You are critical of Trump but gave Obama a free pass because your objections are based upon your hatred of Trump and not any real ethical convictions. As for taxcuts, and to say this yet again, the top 20% pay more than 85% of the taxes. I would agree that figure is unfair to the wealthy, especially considering that the bottom half pay practically nothing.

No, my objection over the ways the dufus puts taxpayer money in his own pocket that Obama NEVER did. Seems the conservative hate for liberals blinds them to their own scandals and atrocities. Or else explain why conservatives can never clean up liberal MESSES, while liberals always clean up conservative messes. It's okay to hate liberals but not okay to hate conservatives? For the record I don't and never will because hate is a waste of time that breeds fear, and stops the flow of creative constructive solutions to the challenges of life.

Now that's not to say throwing rocks at conservatives for the things they say and do isn't fun, and some of my conservative friends say the same thing. Nothing personal mind you.

Quote:

You may be on to something except for the fact the congress has been run by conservative in both houses since 2012, and add the WH since 2016, so you aren't talking about liberals but conservatives.

Wake up. The dems took over the House in 2018, and Obama was pres from 12 to 16. There was only a two year window in which repubs controlled everything. They should have used that opportunity to do a lot more than they did.

Quote:

No, my objection over the ways the dufus puts taxpayer money in his own pocket that Obama NEVER did. Seems the conservative hate for liberals blinds them to their own scandals and atrocities. Or else explain why conservatives can never clean up liberal MESSES, while liberals always clean up conservative messes. It's okay to hate liberals but not okay to hate conservatives? For the record I don't and never will because hate is a waste of time that breeds fear, and stops the flow of creative constructive solutions to the challenges of life.

I would be all in favor of legislation controlling the number of weeks a pres can go on vacation and stating that he/she cannot go to a facility he/she owns. Completely agree there. Notice that the current dem House is too busy with an impeachment witch hunt to take care of anything really serious. Liberals clean up messes? When?

As to hatred, your utterly unreasonable refusal to give credit to Trump for ANYTHING and your incessant name calling directed at him indicate a level of hatred that is pretty high.

Moscow Mitch has plenty of stuff on his desk that the dem house has sent him since they took the House, and Obama had 6 years of a repub controlled congress. He done good. Maybe the dufus will get the same thing who knows but at least we agree on a few things even though you mistake my having fun chunking rocks at you guys as hatred.

Didn't you read the last paragraph JL? Nothing personal but no way do I credit a lying cheating stealing dufus for a dammed thing. That's not hate, that's PRINCIPLE, mine, just like you have yours, which I could say indicates a high level of hate, which could also be true in my opinion.

Quote:

but no way do I credit a lying cheating stealing dufus for a dammed thing.

Yeah. No hatred there!

The dufus has you to shill for the stuff he does wrong, he doesn't need me. You call me hateful for telling it like it is? The guy gets prayed for and he makes a mockery of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Yeah. No hatred there!

NOPE!

If what you express is a well-reasoned analysis, then I'd hate to see how you'd act if you really had hatred.

I still think it's hatred. I don't shill for Trump. I give him credit where he deserves it and criticism where it's warranted. I don't have the love and near-worship for him that you had for Obama where you could not bring yourself to say even the slightest negative comment.

Just because you weren't hear and didn't read it doesn't mean I didn't express it. Not in the habit of repeating myself, so just do your own homework why don't you. Let's not forget half the stuff you ask of me and others is subject to your denial, and criticism, while ducking dodging and weaving your way around the real issue, but you're right you wouldn't want me to express my hate as you do. It would probably be as ugly and unfounded as yours is for liberals, or anyone else that disagrees with you.

You can call me out on it anytime I express hate. Just do it at the time and not at some time in the dim, distant future when it has no specific target like you are doing now and just for the reason of making yourself feel better. Honestly, the one who is absolutely addicted to name calling seems to be the more guilty one to me.

One thing you know about me is I'm not at all shy about expressing myself 8D. You ain't either so there, share the donuts.

I prefer mine chocolate covered.

I prefer double chocolate, but I can see us rolling around over the chocolate covered, so we better plan on a DOZEN or so! You know just to keep down the conflict.

YOUR chocolate covered INDEED! 8O

Maybe two dozen. Stay on the safe side. Last thing we need is two old guys in jail for creating a public disturbance.

Hey Tal. Honest request. Listen to this 90 second clip from the leader of BLM and tell me what you think.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/black-...president-riot

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Hey Tal. Honest request. Listen to this 90 second clip from the leader of BLM and tell me what you think.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/black-...president-riot

jl, lawlessness is not ok, it elicits a violent response, and it will not result in victory. I know the history of your nation is bathed in blood, and these guys have signed on to that agenda, but it can only result in chaos, death, and destruction. The answers of 250 years ago, 150 years ago are not the answers today, surely Syria is a prime example of what happens when civilisation is abandoned

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

jl, lawlessness is not ok, it elicits a violent response

Lawlessness has been done. BLM suggests this response to make those who were/are lawless sit up and take notice.

Quote:

BLM suggests this response to make those who were/are lawless sit up and take notice.

So you're saying that an incitement to violence is a good thing? I'm surprised.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So you're saying that an incitement to violence is a good thing? I'm surprised.

They were the ones violated. Who incited those strong feelings in the first place?

Quote:

Who incited those strong feelings in the first place?

Who was it in Ferguson, Missouri? And I'm still beyond astonished that you would approve of this incitement to violence. It's always amazing where your absolute commitment to liberal dogma takes you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Who was it in Ferguson, Missouri? And I'm still beyond astonished that you would approve of this incitement to violence. It's always amazing where your absolute commitment to liberal dogma takes you.

I never said I approved. I'm trying to explain their rationale to you.

Try shopping while black. Try eating out while black. Try clothes shopping while black. Try driving while black.

Quote:

I never said I approved. I'm trying to explain their rationale to you.

And neither did you have the courage to oppose it. I just don't get you. You seem unwilling to ever say a word that might violate your liberal commitments. Honestly, it's really frustrating. If Trump had said something that outrageous, you'd be all over it, but let a liberal make an incitement to violence and you want to become Miss Understanding. I just don't get it.

Quote:

Try shopping while black. Try eating out while black. Try clothes shopping while black. Try driving while black.

Oh stop it. That's just worn out and beyond old. I haven't and neither have you. In our state, if you have the money to pay for what you want, you will be treated well. I have been in restaurants and stores where most of the customers were black. No one pays much attention to it. Maybe Chicago is the racism capital of the world. Down here, skin color is a minor issue.

And you didn't answer the question. Who did the provoking in Ferguson?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

And neither did you have the courage to oppose it.

I oppose any bullying (*cough*) and abhor violence. But then, O great peacemaker that you are, how should blacks respond to all the lawlessness and violence and hatred they've been subjected to?

Quote:

Oh stop it. That worn out nonsense is beyond old. I haven't and neither have you. In our state, if you have the money to pay for what you want, you will be treated well. I have been in restaurants and stores where most of the customers were black. No one pays much attention to it. Maybe Chicago is the racism capital of the world. Down here, skin color is a minor issue.

I'm from the South and remember how "darkies" were treated. Even in the Chicago suburbs where I have lived for many years there is incident after incident, most minor but some resulting in serious repercussions.

Quote:

And you didn't answer the question. Who did the provoking in Ferguson?

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Why were black people brought (unwillingly) to this country in the first place and by whom?

Quote:

I oppose any bullying (*cough*) and abhor violence. But then, O great peacemaker that you are, how should blacks respond to all the lawlessness and violence and hatred they've been subjected to?

The vast, vast majority of acts of violence committed against black people are committed by...other black people. It's just statistically true. How should they respond to that? Riots? And you cannot abhor violence but then try to be "understanding" about an incitement to rioting. That just won't work.

Quote:

Even in the Chicago suburbs where I lived for many years there is incident after incident, most minor but some resulting in serious repercussions.

Then I'm glad I live in Mississippi. We have learned how to get along. There are occasional problems. I've been poorly treated by black employees and I'm sure black people have been mistreated by white employees, but they are rare and not worth getting excited about. It's like I tell Tal. The greatest enemy of black Americans is the behavior of some black Americans. Reduce the out of wedlock birth rate, for example, from 70% to 10% and black people would soar to the top of the heap.

Quote:

"darkies"

Never used that term or heard it used. I've known some people who used the "n" word, but honestly can't think of a single person now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

I never said I approved. I'm trying to explain their rationale to you.

Try shopping while black. Try eating out while black. Try clothes shopping while black. Try driving while black.

So WG do you have first hand experience?

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

So WG do you have first hand experience?

Nope, but have been told about it by friends. Oh, and I see it happening.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Nope, but have been told about it by friends. Oh, and I see it happening.

so culturally there is a case for segregation?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Hey Tal. Honest request. Listen to this 90 second clip from the leader of BLM and tell me what you think.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/black-...president-riot

Seems the whole point of the interview revolved around one incidence in NY where there was violence, that Mr Newsome didn't explicitly condemn.

Newsome claimed that destructive protests are rare, but he did not condemn them.

I could easily make the case that you guys never condemn the dufus words and actions either. often you hold others to a much different standard than you hold yourselves.

What you fail to concieve in your targeted outrage is often these violent outcomes is the product of pent up rage felt by those that have been violated where there was NO outrage, so the question really becomes why are you surprised at the violence by some and IGNORE the root causes of the violence. NO, you rather be stuck on them not condemning the current acts of violence, while you didn't condemn the past violence against them.

If not for the violence in Ferguson, would we know the nefarious and oppressive tactics the city had been perpertrated aginst the black part of town for years? So the violence didn't start with the shooting of Micheal Brown, but at the exploitation of the black side of town.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

so culturally there is a case for segregation?

No culturally there is the case to nip the root cause of bad acts in the bud, before other bad acts follow.

Anybody find it odd that only 90 seconds of a longer interview was aired?

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

Anybody find it odd that only 90 seconds of a longer interview was aired?

No people have the attention span of a gnat these days, he probably lost his audience in the first 30 seconds

Hard core Fox Fans never stray to far from their favorite and only news source, and don't need but a few seconds to take up the right wing chant against the latest boogie man. That's just the nature of the American conservative beast Clete. Take a word, make a book out of it and sell it as the bible.

Only takes a minute, no FACTS necessary, especially to hock something to the fan based like the app/site they pushed to see the whole interview. What you missed the grabber headlines?

"Black Lives Matter leader justifies rioting in interview with Tomi Lahren: 'Riot is the language of the unheard"

How else can the attract a winger without a sensational headline and trailer?

Disappointing. A liberal makes a call for rioting, so it must be the fault of Fox News, trailers, and headlines? Left unanswered is the fact that the vast, vast majority of acts of violence carried out against black people are carried out, not by the police or white racists, but by other black people. Strangely, there are no calls for rioting about that. There are no replies by any of you about that. There is only the predictably disappointing mantra about how rioting and violence are regrettable, but it's all highly understandable considering the fact that slavery, after all, only ended 150 years ago, and the Jim Crow Laws (long gone), and a 70% out of wedlock birth rate (oops...that shouldn't have been slipped in there), and the comparatively rare acts of injustice committed by the police.

"JL, you just can't expect those of us who are committed to liberal politics to come out and condemn the statement of a BLM leader. We are too busy condemning Trump for saying things much less inflammatory. We just don't have the inclination."

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Disappointing. A liberal makes a call for rioting, so it must be the fault of Fox News, trailers, and headlines? Left unanswered is the fact that the vast, vast majority of acts of violence carried out against black people are carried out, not by the police or white racists, but by other black people. Strangely, there are no calls for rioting about that. There are no replies by any of you about that. There is only the predictably disappointing mantra about how rioting and violence are regrettable, but it's all highly understandable considering the fact that slavery, after all, only ended 150 years ago, and the Jim Crow Laws (long gone), and a 70% out of wedlock birth rate (oops...that shouldn't have been slipped in there), and the comparatively rare acts of injustice committed by the police.

"JL, you just can't expect those of us who are committed to liberal politics to come out and condemn the statement of a BLM leader. We are too busy condemning Trump for saying things much less inflammatory. We just don't have the inclination."

You are a card as a liberal makes a call for rioting, HE DIDN"T DO, and follow with, it must be the fault of Fox News, since I made no such claim just explained the sensationalistic ratings game that you decided to make your own ideological pet peeve and grievance rant. I commend you for getting so many into the paragraph even if they are not as accurate as you would want us to believe.

That last two line paragraph was a masterpiece, your best to date inane utterings of ridiculousness. I swear guy you have a great future at fox news and the make up artist can cover your shortcomings.

Quote:

You are a card as a liberal makes a call for rioting, HE DIDN"T DO, and follow with, it must be the fault of Fox News, since I made no such claim just explained the sensationalistic ratings game that you decided to make your own ideological pet peeve and grievance rant. I commend you for getting so many into the paragraph even if they are not as accurate as you would want us to believe.

I don't think you listened to the interview. He clearly endorsed violence.

What was not accurate about my post?

ANY call to violence by "organization" should be met with swift arrests, this is the only way that this kind of crap will be quelled and stopped. If you allow BLM to foment violence against another race or any other group, then they will continue to do that from now on and it will not stop. Facts are, if BLM calls for violence you can bet that, one day, they will be met with violence and it will be extreme: But, maybe that is their intention because they are "VICTOMHOOD" group and if they become victims of counter violence, then they can continue claiming VICTIMHOOD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I don't think you listened to the interview. He clearly endorsed violence.

You haven't been reading very carefully. Tal said it so well:

"What you fail to concieve in your targeted outrage is often these violent outcomes is the product of pent up rage felt by those that have been violated where there was NO outrage, so the question really becomes why are you surprised at the violence by some and IGNORE the root causes of the violence. NO, you rather be stuck on them not condemning the current acts of violence, while you didn't condemn the past violence against them."

Quote:

"What you fail to concieve in your targeted outrage is often these violent outcomes is the product of pent up rage felt by those that have been violated where there was NO outrage, so the question really becomes why are you surprised at the violence by some and IGNORE the root causes of the violence. NO, you rather be stuck on them not condemning the current acts of violence, while you didn't condemn the past violence against them."

I read it. I just don't accept it. It is never acceptable for me to burn down my neighbor's store just because I'm mad. In Ferguson, the city is a large majority black, so whatever government they have is what they voted in. If they're mad, they can only be mad at themselves, and yet rioters still went out and burned down businesses on the basis of a completely false narrative.

So what you and Tal should say, but won't say, is that rioting, looting, and destruction are never acceptable just because someone is mad. Your liberal doctrinal positions won't allow you to be that honest, however.

For Tal to suggest that I don't condemn the acts of violence committed against black in decades past is ridiculous. I condemn them most aggressively. I also condemn the relatively rare acts of racial violence committed against blacks or, for that matter, anyone. Do I, like the two of you, excuse violence against innocent people because someone is mad about it? No. And also unlike the two of you, I have great concern over the primary threat, by far, against black people today, and that is violence by other black people. It mystifies me why the two of you are so quick to just ignore that.

Why are they mad?

Quote:

Why are they mad?

In Ferguson, everyone was mad because they had been fed a false narrative about supposed police violence.

I still want to know why you are so quick to ignore black on black violence. Why does it not concern you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I still want to know why you are so quick to ignore black on black violence. Why does it not concern you?

I am speechless at your accusation.