Brett Kavanaugh

[Dark Matter]

DM would you consider yourself a nationalist?

Yes. No nationalism is tantamount to no nation.

[Eduk]

How does labelling and denegrating other countrymen support nationalism? It seems at odds with your definition?

[Dark Matter]

How does labelling and denegrating other countrymen support nationalism?

It doesn't, but that's what leftists are fond of doing and it's tearing the nation apart.

[/quote]It seems at odds with your definition?[/quote]

It's perfectly consistent with leftist modus operandi.

[Eduk]

It doesn't, but that's what leftists are fond of doing and it's tearing the nation apart.

Does the irony of that comment mean anything to you?

[Dark Matter]

It doesn't, but that's what leftists are fond of doing and it's tearing the nation apart.

Does the irony of that comment mean anything to you?

Get real. You sound like a political hack

[Dachshund]

In my experience, Dachshund's posts are generally either angry insults in capital letters or mindless verbatim copy-and-paste jobs from other sources. For example, this post:

viewtopic.php?p=323320#p323320

was copied word-for-word from here:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018 ... more-jobs/

(with only the change to the spelling of the word "Labor" to indicate that he might have actually read and thought about any of it.)

This post:

viewtopic.php?p=323088#p323088

was copied word-for-word from here:

https://ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/l ... 2/apes.htm

He has done this kind of unacknowledged word-for-word copying since he first came here about a year ago. He appears to me to be incapable of thinking rationally for himself. If you try to engage him in an argument in which he has to actually think for himself, without simply looking up what someone he regards as an ally says and block-quoting them, you'll find that he has little to offer in the way of thoughtful analysis and tends to just angrily assert himself to be objectively right. He usually does this with capital letters, because, as we know, if you say something in capital letters it makes it more right.











Steve ("Stephanie"),

Are you saying that posters are not allowed to source and present factual statistics from authoritative references in order to bolster their arguments? That is what I did in response to LuckyR's claim that the US economy under Trump was not performing as well as it did under Clinton and Obama's Democrat administrations. The statistical figures I quoted provided solid evidence that the economy under Trump is booming in a way it hasn't done for decades are matters of fact. The figures I posted were official US government statistics that had already been in the public domain for a number of days. They were readily-accessible objective matters of fact, that every major US media outlet had already reported at the time I sent my post.

As anyone who has written a formal academic paper will know, when it comes to making use of factual information in a thesis or dissertation, if the factual information one wishes to use is available in multiple standard reference works it is generally considered to be "in the public domain" and one is not required to cite a reference for it. And this was precisely the case with the economic statistics I used in my post to rebut LuckyR's grossly misleading/false claims re the performance of the US economy under Trump relative to its performance under previous Democrat administrations ( Clinton, Obama). The facts I listed about the performance of the US economy under Trump's administration are were, in short, already in the public domain. This being the case, I was not required to provide a citation for them.

Likewise the biological facts I cited regarding the gross anatomical features of African negros. The points I listed in my post are well-known matters of objective scientific fact. They are not matters of subjective opinion, they are not controversial. They were first recorded by British anthropologists in the 19th century and have been readily accessible in the public domain for generations to date. If you are suggesting that I am not at liberty to make use of objective scientific data that has been published the public domain in my posts unless I provide a citation? I'm afraid that's not true.

As to the view, I posted, that the various differences in gross anatomy between the African negro and the White European were so substantial that if they were observed in any other animal they would warrant its classification as a different species, because it could be said that such a statement is controversial, I did, in fact, provide a reference for this claim in the scientific literature; namely, "The Descent of Man", by Charles Darwin.

Darwin did not think that Australian aboriginals were anywhere near as intelligent as white Europeans. It seems to me that he was correct, moreover that the in deficit in intelligence is to a large extent genetic in origin. Let me point out, for example, that it is a very well-known fact the Australian aborigines were, when the English arrived in Australia in the late 18th century, a very primitive, stone-age race who were not as cognitively evolved as the English colonizers. And really, this is all you need to know to realise that the current measurements of native aboriginals' average IQ place it at around 64 points ( which , BTW, is consistent with mild mental retardation according to the official diagnostic criteria of modern Western psychiatry) represent the kind of dramatic disparity wrt average White Australian intelligence ( IQ =100 points) that must have be driven, at least a substantial degree, by innate biogenetic factors.

So let's hear your rational argument against this thesis, Steve. You claim to be an intelligent/rational independent thinker - let's see what you've got to say? The argument in the paragraph above BTW is purely my own view - you will not find it published anywhere in the academic literature, mainly because little bullies from the left (like you) have deemed such theorising taboo; even if it is the demonstrable truth one is prohibited from expressing it in the Western academy. So, tell us, wise one, where was it exactly that Charles Darwin got it so terribly wrong, and a half-arsed , little leftist windbag like you got it right?

According to a "genius" like you, Steve, when Charles Darwin said things like, "Negros and Australian aboriginals lack anything like the intelligence of White/Europeans" he was not just wrong and a bad scientist, but worst than that he was bad (immoral), because he was a racist/ White Supremacist / Nazi. That's where the left really gets it big thrills isn't it, Steve, by telling everyone who disagrees with them that they're bad people - that they're immoral/wicked. The post-modern ( neo-marxist) left reminds me of nothing so much as the archetypal "schoolyard bully", the nasty little tyrant who runs about threatening to brand others as racist or sexist or xenophobic or fascist if they they dare to think for themselves and criticize the prevailing neo-marxist/ liberal orthodoxy.

And that's the major difference between you and me Steve. I am not afraid to think for myself and draw my own conclusions. You, on the other hand are what Nietzsche would call a "herd animal", one who possess a "herd morality"; you are weak-willed and have allowed yourself to become a brainwashed by principles and dogma of the postmodern, left-leaning, liberalism that have poisoned mainstream society in the West over the past 50 years, namely: multiculturalism, political correctness, moral relativism, feminism, globalism. It is nothing less than neo-Marxism on the march; it is an evil movement and I regard anyone who supports it as being both a personal and a political enemy. The neo-Marxist orthodoxy doesn't like it when members of the public show any evidence of originality in their thinking , especially in the form of decisive dissent, critical of the prevailing leftist-liberal political ideology. That's why reading your posts is like listening to a speech from Obama or Hillary, there's lots of rational talk, but nothing is ever really SAID; there's a kind of hypnotic quality to the ongoing meaningless drone of their well-reasoned, well-prepared, clever-sounding oratory because it's all so intensely BLAND and BORING.

The upshot is that "herd animals" like you have no respect for your Anglo-Saxon cultural heritage as something exceptional and superior - no sense pride in the conception of England as an exclusively White Anglo-Saxon Nation. Even if you weren't brain-washed, you'd be too frightened to actually say anything along these lines publicly, because you'd be worried that "Big Brother" would punish you, (probably after some, gutless, "net-curtain nark" reported you to the British "Thought Police" for "racism" - does that ring a bell, BTW Stephanie?"). It is due to faint-hearted, leftist cowards like YOU that the English people no longer have the Right to Freedom of Speech, you have lost it forever. Why ? Because people like you , who could see what was happening failed to defend it. People like you were complicit in allowed the political left to betray your heritage. You and your craven crew are responsible for losing something so precious it had no price; something that was given to you in trust by your ancestors in the Magna Carta - the Right to Freedom of Speech. You disgust me. If push ever came to shove, ( like it did in 1939) you would not defend the English (Anglo-Saxon) Nation. You are a coward who would do nothing, a man who would offer no resistance while his own people and his own soil were over-run with immigrants from foreign non-Christian nations outside the Anglosphere. You would sit back and watch while the pearls of England's traditional values/traditions/institutions were trampled under hoof by hordes of "swine" flooding in from the Middle East, China, Black Africa, Hispanic States and so on... Isn't that right Steve?


Regards


Dachshund

[Sy Borg]

Are you saying that posters are not allowed to source and present factual statistics from authoritative references in order to bolster their arguments?

Example of Dachshund's "factual information" - in this case in reference to black people:

(2) They emit a peculiar offensive body odour similar to Apes.

[Dachshund]

Are you suggesting that Brett Kavanaugh was not the victim of a disgraceful Democrat smear campaign. I think the law should be changed st that women who are caught making false allegations of rape should be automatically jailed for life. What do you think?

[Burning ghost]

Greta -

I believe he was eferring to these stats:

The US economy is booming under Trump...

* Obama raised taxes, while Trump's administration has passed the biggest tax cuts in US history.

* Obama presided over the weakest economic expansion since the Great Depression. In 2016 when Trump took office the economy was growing by less
than 2%, now it is growing by over 4%.

*Trump and Congressional Republicans have created the strongest labour market in a generation.

*Although it is extremely rare for unemployment to fall below 4%, it currently sits at 3.7 %, and has averaged 3.9% throughout 2018.

*GDP hit 3.5% in the third quarter of 2018, marking the best back-to-back quarters of growth since 2014, and putting the US on track to hit 3% annual growth for the first time since 2005.

* The labour market has been strong under Trump adding 4 million jobs since he took office and consumer confidence reached nearly a two decade high in October.

* Minorities, especially young minorities, have experienced record low unemployment.

*Low income households are increasingly confident about their economic future as the economic recovery has begun to help all population groups.

* The US added 32,000 new manufacturing jobs in October, more than 1000 every day including holidays and weekends..

* October was a strong month for unemployment overall, with the economy adding 250,000 jobs, far exceeding expectations of 190,000

You want more, Lucky ? There's plenty. Just ask.



Regards

Dachshund

This is an example of what I mean in the other thread. You ca challenge the stats given or use deformation of character. You choose the later because it’s easier. Why?

The same goes for the racist remark (which may be Sausage Dog’s or may be Darwin’s; if the later he should’ve presented ref. to quote) which isn’t presented as a “fact” nor is it “statistical.”

He does show laziness though because statistics should be presented with references or I can easily assume it to be fabrication if I find them questionable compared to my own knowledge. Also, given that statisticsl data can easily be manipulated to back up any particular view point having a source would help me to determine this - I do believe others presented stats that show another picture.

[Burning ghost]

Are you suggesting that Brett Kavanaugh was not the victim of a disgraceful Democrat smear campaign. I think the law should be changed st that women who are caught making false allegations of rape should be automatically jailed for life. What do you think?

I think that’s a knee-jerk reaction to a complex problem. If that were the case then how likely would it be for innocent victims to come forward and excuse people of rape? This is a difficult problem.

I do believe in the law that proven false accusations do come with a heavy penalty? The best guard against this is to have a rigid judical system in which innocent people are protected as best they can be. There doesn’t seem to be an ideal solution so I would say that in a court of law (which this wasn’t) that those who can afford the best lawyers have an unfair advantage. That then leads to the problem of paying lawyers well enough in ordr to have the job done well.

It appears that some rich people have to suffer the occasional mishap in order to help protect the the innocent at the bottom of the monetary scale. It seems to me to be unfortunate, yet worthy, price to pay in order to give people the means to come forward without the threat of being accused themselves. It’s a tough problem for sure.

Going one way or the other towards an extreme is counterproductive imo.

[Steve3007]

Since this is (I think) the only topic here currently dealing with US politics: How about those midterm results eh? A mixed bag, by the look of it. The Democrats take the House and the Republicans increase their majority in the Senate. I've briefly read some articles speculating that the Democrats will now proceed with the effort to impeach Trump, but I presume that's not really going to happen. Apart from anything else, as I understand it, that would need a 2/3 majority in favour on impeachment in the Senate. Since the Democrats are now worse off there than they were before, I would guess they're going to forget about that.

[Steve3007]

A curious fact: An American colleague of mine who was keen to vote yesterday had to get our tech support guy to fix the fax machine so he could fax in his vote. Apparently that's the only form of information transfer that is trusted. I suppose I can see why.

[Eduk]

You still have a fax machine! Is it next to your VCR?

[Steve3007]

You still have a fax machine! Is it next to your VCR?

. I didn't get involved with this technical challenge personally, so I'm not sure, but I don't think it was an actual, old fashioned type of fax machine. I think it was possibly some kind of fax software. But I presume the rationale behind insisting on that medium for casting a vote is that it involves handwriting, rather than typed text, so is deemed to be harder for those pesky Russian hackers, of which we've all heard tell, to fake.

[Georgeanna]

Since this is (I think) the only topic here currently dealing with US politics: How about those midterm results eh? A mixed bag, by the look of it. The Democrats take the House and the Republicans increase their majority in the Senate. I've briefly read some articles speculating that the Democrats will now proceed with the effort to impeach Trump, but I presume that's not really going to happen. Apart from anything else, as I understand it, that would need a 2/3 majority in favour on impeachment in the Senate. Since the Democrats are now worse off there than they were before, I would guess they're going to forget about that.

If you wish, you could re- post the above in a new thread I started to discuss midterm results. I find it all fascinating...

viewtopic.php?f=5&p=323490#p323490