Political Posts

[73 Reds]

6 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

Just watch old episodes of "All in the Family" and you'll see how divisive things were back then.  Also, many of the exact same problems that the left and right shout about today appear on the show. 

 

If it wasn't sad, it might be hilarious...humanity is the living essence of that saying about insanity...doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results!

 

Cheers!

But that's just it - "All in the Family" was hilarious because it was a PARODY on the issues of the day that were quickly changing for the better.  I was around back then and we are vastly more divided today.

[Onefoothurdles]

6 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

You're generalizing...what did George Harrison do?  Nutjobs will be nutjobs...killers will kill. Cheers!

You’re right — sometimes violence really is senseless and random. George Harrison’s stabbing was exactly that: a tragic encounter with a mentally ill intruder, not a political act. And we don’t even need to look that far back — Charlotte reminded us just days ago how random, senseless violence still happens. When someone is killed under horrific but non-political circumstances (like Iryna in Charlotte), the response is sadness and anger — not people saying “they deserved it” because of their opinions.

 

That’s why Charlie Kirk’s death sits in a different category. When people openly celebrate it as “street justice,” it shows they don’t see it as random. And sitting here in Australia, where much of the political sphere and media lean left, the reactions feel especially unhinged. The fact that his death is being celebrated because of his views shows we’ve stepped into a very different and troubling moral space.

[73 Reds]

1 minute ago, Onefoothurdles said:

You’re right — sometimes violence really is senseless and random. George Harrison’s stabbing was exactly that: a tragic encounter with a mentally ill intruder, not a political act. And we don’t even need to look that far back — Charlotte reminded us just days ago how random, senseless violence still happens. When someone is killed under horrific but non-political circumstances (like Iryna in Charlotte), the response is sadness and anger — not people saying “they deserved it” because of their opinions.

 

That’s why Charlie Kirk’s death sits in a different category. When people openly celebrate it as “street justice,” it shows they don’t see it as random. And sitting here in Australia, where much of the political sphere and media lean left, the reactions feel especially unhinged. The fact that his death is being celebrated because of his views shows we’ve stepped into a very different and troubling moral space.

Agreed - there is no justification and any attempt to justify his, or any other politically motivated murder is shameful.  And I didn't even particularly like Charlie Kirk.

[Castanza]

7 hours ago, LC said:

 

 

That's my point. Yet look at the political climate - people obviously are judging. By storming the capitol, shooting politicians and pundits...Trump and his squad have turned the temperature up, Kirk was a part of that. That much is plain as day, but some people I suppose would choose to remain willfully ignorant to that. Maybe it overlaps with religion and bible quotes, I don't know.

 

As much as cubs and I disagree on issues, I can at least respect that he doesn't pretend Trump and those in his slipstream are something other than sharks.

I don’t think it had anything to do with religion. Most Christians I know are pretty evenly distributed with who they voted for. I also think the term “religion” could be applied to many other groups. World view is a better representation of the segmentation we see at cultural levels. Most people latch on to one or two key issues and pick their candidate from there. Hardly an accurate representation of their overall views when we only ever get two picks. big reason I didn’t vote for either party this last election and the prior election. The sooner we get more options in the US that have an actual chance of winning an election; or a candidate that somehow bridges the gap between parties; the sooner we get out of this winner takes all mentality. Until then I don’t picture the US returning to normal.

[John Hjorth]

2 hours ago, Sweet said:

... When it comes to mocking, Obama roasted Trump for 5 mins at the correspondence dinner, and at that time Trump wasn't even in politics:

 

 

 

 

@Sweet,

 

Hopelessly uninformed as I am about American matters, I'm shocked by viewing and listening to the above video. 

 

A president's most important task is to unite and bring together the people of the nation, as the diametric opposite of dividing and creating discord.

 

The above video is a disgrace of bad form for a POTUS.

 

So, thank you for sharing it, @Sweet, thereby contributing to some balance in this topic.

[73 Reds]

8 minutes ago, Castanza said:

I don’t think it had anything to do with religion. Most Christians I know are pretty evenly distributed with who they voted for. I also think the term “religion” could be applied to many other groups. World view is a better representation of the segmentation we see at cultural levels. Most people latch on to one or two key issues and pick their candidate from there. Hardly an accurate representation of their overall views when we only ever get two picks. big reason I didn’t vote for either party this last election and the prior election. The sooner we get more options in the US that have an actual chance of winning an election; or a candidate that somehow bridges the gap between parties; the sooner we get out of this winner takes all mentality. Until then I don’t picture the US returning to normal.

You're right about people voting for certain issues they support.  But I think it is a mistake not to vote simply because you don't like either candidate.  A large percentage of voters (maybe even most?) probably didn't "like" either candidate but any informed individual could discern the difference between the major policies pushed by each candidate.  It is those policies that matter in day to day life; not the individual at the top who take the credit or the blame.

Edited September 12, 2025 by 73 Reds
words

[Castanza]

5 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

You're right about people voting for certain issues they support.  But I think it is a mistake not to vote simply because you don't like either candidate.  A large percentage of voters (maybe even most?) probably didn't "like" either candidate but any informed individual could discern the difference between the major policies pushed by each candidate.  It is those policies that matter in day to day life; not the individual at the top who take the credit or the blame.

I did vote but not for either of the two parties presidential candidates. I’m more involved with local politics and non-profits (mainly the latter) since they have much more bearing on my personal life. Neither Trump nor Kamala puts food on my table. I did vote for Trump in 2016….but post his stint in office it became increasingly difficult to look past his lack of Character. To me that’s important and I think Biden, Kamala, Hillary and Trump all lack severely in that area. Obviously every candidate has their “issues”. JFK and Reagan had affairs, Johnson pulled his dick out in an interview, etc. etc. One of my good friends was best friends with Mike Pences son growing up. He worked for him in the first administration and shared some personal anecdotes towards the end of Trumps first term and post term regarding Pence and the whole mess. Rubbed me the wrong way and his opinion is one I respect. 
 

Sometimes it’s good to step back and observe, evaluate, and reconvene in life. This election with the two parties felt like that to me. I find it fascinating how close most people are morally, and personally yet so far politically. 

[Gregmal]

6 hours ago, Eldad said:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/694835/image-capitalism-slips.aspx
 

Latest gallop poll 66% of Democrats view Socialism favorably while only 42% of Democrats view Capitalism favorably. 

This is the thing….ask liberals what they stand for…Because more often than not it’s some version of “against Trump”…and it’s still like ok, but what do you stand for. And then you still get some “against Trump” rhetoric. And then we go back to platform topics and it’s like do they really support violence? Theft of wages? Pure hatred of family values? Socialism? 
 

The overwhelming conclusion is that I think the majority are just quasi impoverished folks whom the system has failed, they don’t know any better. Then there’s a decent percent of ideological hacks, and then the core wealthy elitist who’s just super selfish and votes “against Trump” to satisfy their personal issues, whether it be a need to virtue signal or just some weird Trump fixation…knowing full well they won’t be affected by the stupidity their vote supports. 
 

That’s really the problem. 

[LC]

3 hours ago, whiskybravo said:

No harm no foul, BUT this is not the first time you have made an incorrect assumption about how I think based on some stereotypical judgment.

You're right, I think? You described (by proxy) those beliefs as disgusting and racist:

 

Who is the redacted name? Is it Nick Fuentes? Is so, Kirk described Fuentes as disgusting and a racist.

 

I simply assumed you would be critical of the person with disgusting and racist views. 

Not sure I am wholly following you here but I am trying to avoid misinterpreting you. Maybe something is being lost in translation so to speak.

 

[Sweet]

1 hour ago, John Hjorth said:

 

@Sweet,

 

Hopelessly uninformed as I am about American matters, I'm shocked by viewing and listening to the above video. 

 

A president's most important task is to unite and bring together the people of the nation, as the diametric opposite of dividing and creating discord.

 

The above video is a disgrace of bad form for a POTUS.

 

So, thank you for sharing it, @Sweet, thereby contributing to some balance in this topic.

 

No problem John.  Recently I have tuned out a lot of US stuff and this thread, although I felt something strong in the pit of my stomach when Kirk was murdered that I can't explain - killed in front his wife and kids and leaving two very young children with no father.  Truly evil.  Yeh that's moved me and I know already it's hardened my attitudes especially seeing the many celebrations.  Although some bright spots too, some good people on the left calling it out.  

 

On Obama mocking Trump, it was reported at the time that Trump was considering running for president, but he was undecided.  Some have speculated that Obama's joking and humiliating (whatever your view is) made up his mind and he decided to run.  Basically he couldn't let Obama have the last laugh.

 

[LC]

1 hour ago, Castanza said:

Most people latch on to one or two key issues and pick their candidate from there. Hardly an accurate representation of their overall views when we only ever get two picks. big reason I didn’t vote for either party this last election and the prior election. The sooner we get more options in the US that have an actual chance of winning an election; or a candidate that somehow bridges the gap between parties; the sooner we get out of this winner takes all mentality. Until then I don’t picture the US returning to normal.

 

Yeah I agree with you. And I think this is why Trump et al do whip up an emotional frenzy.  They realize once a voter has emotionally committed to an issue, you own that voter - they are hooked. 

 

The downside is sometimes, in some people, those emotions take over and you get things like Jan 6 and Charlie Kirk. 

 

Of course Trump, Kirk, and others don't care about this "side effect". 

[Sweet]

2 hours ago, John Hjorth said:

 

Reuters - Russian - Ukrainian war [September 12^th 2025] : Russia calls Danish plan to host Ukrainian long-range missile fuel production hostile.

 

Meanwhile, drones and missiles continue dropping down over Ukraine, like it was rain.

 

*shug* - Please try! ... so we can get this over with ... *holding my mouth - diden't say that! * 

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Reuters - Business [September 12^th 2025] : Denmark to buy $9 billion air defence systems as tensions with Russia grow

 

9 billion USD is a lot of money for tiny Denmark, with about 6 million citizens.

 

$1,500 per hear of population is lot!

[LC]

6 hours ago, Sweet said:

That’s what the coroner said and the USCP accepted the findings, LC.  There no splitting of hairs with this.  You’re just making stuff up.

I'm not disagreeing, but if I run a quadruple marathon and have a heart attack, then medically the cause of death is a heart attack, but it lacks context.

[Sweet]

2 hours ago, Onefoothurdles said:

You’re right — sometimes violence really is senseless and random. George Harrison’s stabbing was exactly that: a tragic encounter with a mentally ill intruder, not a political act. And we don’t even need to look that far back — Charlotte reminded us just days ago how random, senseless violence still happens. When someone is killed under horrific but non-political circumstances (like Iryna in Charlotte), the response is sadness and anger — not people saying “they deserved it” because of their opinions.

 

That’s why Charlie Kirk’s death sits in a different category. When people openly celebrate it as “street justice,” it shows they don’t see it as random. And sitting here in Australia, where much of the political sphere and media lean left, the reactions feel especially unhinged. The fact that his death is being celebrated because of his views shows we’ve stepped into a very different and troubling moral space.

 

All of this.  Well said.

[Sweet]

10 minutes ago, LC said:

I'm not disagreeing, but if I run a quadruple marathon and have a heart attack, then medically the cause of death is a heart attack, but it lacks context.

 

I'll give you correlation for sure, but I'm just noting that coroner found otherwise.  Would he be alive if he wasn't pepper sprayed - who knows?  I'm sure it provides no comfort for his loved ones in any case.

 

Edited September 12, 2025 by Sweet

[whiskybravo]

16 minutes ago, LC said:

You're right, I think? You described (by proxy) those beliefs as disgusting and racist:

 

Who is the redacted name? Is it Nick Fuentes? Is so, Kirk described Fuentes as disgusting and a racist.

 

I simply assumed you would be critical of the person with disgusting and racist views. 

Not sure I am wholly following you here but I am trying to avoid misinterpreting you. Maybe something is being lost in translation so to speak.

 

That “don’t meet your heroes” line made it sound like you were implying he was a hero of mine which isn’t the case. What I know of Charlie Kirk I’ve learned in the past two days.

Our politics may differ, but we cool.

[dealraker]

11 minutes ago, Sweet said:

 

All of this.  Well said.

I would counter by saying many people's deaths are celebrated in the US, that this man's is no different.  How many times do I hear "culling the herd" or similar as to anyone who isn't of our liking?

 

John Lennon was one of my favorite musicians and I was close enough to hear the gunshots when he was killed, walked immediately the the ribbons blocking the Dekota building area.  But even then in 1080 I thought to myself, "so many people are murdered, this is stupid" rather that "isn't it just awful that THIS man was killed."  I didn't think as a gun owner, "oh the 2nd amendment is worth it even with the deaths it brings."

 

Kirk preached the standard same-ole-thing that sells and sells over thousands of years - intensity of division - and he did justify the 2nd as it related to deaths...of course death of others, not himself.  

 

 

[Sweet]

1 minute ago, dealraker said:

I would counter by saying many people's deaths are celebrated in the US, that this man's is no different.  How many times do I hear "culling the herd" or similar as to anyone who isn't of our liking?

 

John Lennon was one of my favorite musicians and I was close enough to hear the gunshots when he was killed, walked immediately the the ribbons blocking the Dekota building area.  But even then in 1080 I thought to myself, "so many people are murdered, this is stupid" rather that "isn't it just awful that THIS man was killed."  I didn't think as a gun owner, "oh the 2nd amendment is worth it even with the deaths it brings."

 

Kirk preached the standard same-ole-thing that sells and sells over thousands of years - intensity of division - and he did justify the 2nd as it related to deaths...of course death of others, not himself.  

 

 

That's your framing of it.  I posted the fuller quote whereas you took a snippet.  He said there are costs with guns, which he felt were 'worth it', and he compared it with deaths from driving and that we obviously decide driving cars because we think it is worth it.  He didn't justify in the way you're framing it - he was saying this is the unfortunate cost.  And dealraker, you own a firearm, so obviously there is a part of you that agrees with.

 

Regarding people's death.  Are you talking about Osama Bin Laden?  That's a very obvious exception which I hope doesn't need unpacking.  Unless the person is actively killing other people (for example), how can anyone be happy at a person being murdered?  Anyone doing that is just evil to me.

 

 

[Sweet]

Tyler Robinson, 22, is identified as the man who killed the Kirk. 

 

He confessed to his father who turned him.  

 

Which adds another layer of tragedy, the father (Matt Robinson) who turned his son in could very well be handing his son over to die by capital punishment.  Just awful, I can't imagine being a father and doing that, what a man.  His son, the selfish little bastard, has ruined two families.

 

https://nypost.com/2025/09/12/us-news/we-have-him-trump-says-suspect-in-custody-for-charlie-kirk-assassination/

 

Edited September 12, 2025 by Sweet

[Castanza]

56 minutes ago, LC said:

 

Yeah I agree with you. And I think this is why Trump et al do whip up an emotional frenzy.  They realize once a voter has emotionally committed to an issue, you own that voter - they are hooked. 

 

The downside is sometimes, in some people, those emotions take over and you get things like Jan 6 and Charlie Kirk. 

 

Of course Trump, Kirk, and others don't care about this "side effect". 

 

Politics is entertainment...people care about "wins"

 

I mean look at the current situation.....Instead of everyone hoping this guy gets captured because assassinating political pudits based on opinions is unacceptable in a free society; we have everyone on the edge of their seats waiting to throw shit like chimps when they find out which side of the political spectrum this POS supported from a motive perspective. 

 

It's entertainment and tribalism at it's finest. You've got the head of the FBI saying "we got our guy!" on social media only to be wrong. wtf kind of professionalism is that? Do your job

Edited September 12, 2025 by Castanza

[Gregmal]

Man, imagine losing a family member all because they were brainwashed into thinking everyone, everywhere, is a fascist(without probably knowing what a fascist is to begin with)? Very sad this whole thing. 

[dealraker]

34 minutes ago, Sweet said:

 

That's your framing of it.  I posted the fuller quote whereas you took a snippet.  He said there are costs with guns, which he felt were 'worth it', and he compared it with deaths from driving and that we obviously decide driving cars because we think it is worth it.  He didn't justify in the way you're framing it - he was saying this is the unfortunate cost.  And dealraker, you own a firearm, so obviously there is a part of you that agrees with.

 

Regarding people's death.  Are you talking about Osama Bin Laden?  That's a very obvious exception which I hope doesn't need unpacking.  Unless the person is actively killing other people (for example), how can anyone be happy at a person being murdered?  Anyone doing that is just evil to me.

 

 

Sweet...Osama?   Really?  

[dwy000]

22 minutes ago, Castanza said:

 

Politics is entertainment...people care about "wins"

 

I mean look at the current situation.....Instead of everyone hoping this guy gets captured because assassinating political pudits based on opinions is unacceptable in a free society; we have everyone on the edge of their seats waiting to throw shit like chimps when they find out which side of the political spectrum this POS supported from a motive perspective. 

 

It's entertainment and tribalism at it's finest. You've got the head of the FBI saying "we got our guy!" on social media only to be wrong. wtf kind of professionalism is that? Do your job

This is absolutely correct. 

[Sweet]

17 minutes ago, dealraker said:

Sweet...Osama?   Really?  

I have no idea what you mean dealraker

[Eldad]

20 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Man, imagine losing a family member all because they were brainwashed into thinking everyone, everywhere, is a fascist(without probably knowing what a fascist is to begin with)? Very sad this whole thing. 

Yeah spent shell casing said “hey fascist catch” which puts it squarely on the MSM industrial complex. 
 

A relief that it appears to just be a mislead kid and not something people on the right can easily read conspiracy theories into. Hopefully we can de-escalate now.