Trump Allies Target Journalists Over Coverage Deemed Hostile to White House

Didnt obama want power?

Doesnt every dem wacko running for president want power?

 

Dear Lord!!! An Iranian who understands the essence of America, and what we need to do, better than most Americans. How can that be?? (I suppose the answer is that your ancestors ran a very successful empire for a long time, admired by Alexander the Great among others, and the way you did it was: so long as the conquered nations paid their taxes, you let them do what they liked, worship what they liked, have whatever marriage customs they liked. I know you know all about this, but for others, here's the extent of territory of the first Persian Empire (think about how many different tribes it encompassed):

And here's what Wiki says about it:

[ SOURCE ] And this was while our British ancestors were too primitive to even have towns to live in.

So yeah, if only we could be as smart as your ancestors. But we can't. We sort of were, for a couple of centuries, but the stupid Slavocracy and their even more stupid segregationist descendants decided to make slavery, and then the opporession of the freed slaves, synonymous with "states' rights", which is what you're talking about. So for the last sixty years or so, we've been "nationalizing" human rights.

Of course your solution would be ideal. I've often argued it myself: Mississippi could make homosexuality illegal, California could make it compulsory, and if you didn't like it, you could move. But it's not to be. They won't let us.

Imagine the progress gay rights has made since I was a child. But as they say, "eating builds an appetite". So having achieved almost total equality before the law, in government hiring, even in private employment ... they find some poor fundamentalist Christian baker who is happy sell them his cakes, but who cannot, in good conscience, bake a special cake for a gay wedding. Big deal!!! The happy couple can go down the street. But no, they want to bankrupt him, even imprison him. Where's the humanity, where's the common sense? Would I ask a devout Muslim to bake a cake for Israeli Independence Day? Or a Jewish baker bake a cake with a swastika on it for Hitler's Birthday?

They want to force a total conformity on us. (I say "they" but there are some very eloquent gays, including a friend of mine, who think this is utterly wrong, and some have said so. But they don't drive the agenda.) The people leading the 'progressive' (it's not liberal) advance will not compromise. It will actually be easier for them, psychologically, to let us go, rather than to share a nation with people who might not allow boys to use the girls' bathrooms, or who might want to honor that slave-owner Thomas Jefferson, or who might want to have special high schools for any kid with an IQ over 140 to study science it.

We've gone too far. We have to make the case for peaceful separation. I know that logically, we could make the case for a return to 'extreme federalism', and I would envision the sort of peaceful separation I have in mind as incorporating a number of very close ties between the two descendants of the Old America, so that in many ways it would look like extreme federalism. But we've got to have sovereignty over our internal lives. And they will never allow this.

I don't in any sense whatsoever endorse or envisage violence accompanying this peaceful separation, so don't take the following quote literally, -- it's just metaphorical -- but we are like that fellow who noted
"I am in blood stepped in so far, that should I wade no more, returning were as tedious as go o'er." ,

We've got to go o'er.

 

Wrong.. " the people" refers to every individual not any collection of peoples.

 

feel free to educate thyself

 

It's actually deteriorating much faster than that. A generation is roughly 25 years. It gets worse almost every year. New York City has a brilliant program for very intelligent kids -- a couple of special high schools, like Bronx High School of Science, whose alumni have received eight Nobel Prizes. (Full Disclosure: Wife Number Two was a graduate.) But ... it's not very "diverse". So the Left wants to destroy it. And they will succeed, too. That's why we've got to get out.

 

Says every irrelevant fogey

We now teach that the Continental Army did NOT in fact storm the british airports

 

What kind of lib gibberish is that?

Is it the children or the teachers who are so uninformed about history as to mix airports and the Continental Army into the same timeline?

Even as an attempted sarcasm its pretty weak

 

That was my reaction too ... whaaaattt???
What we now teach, in many schools, is that the Revolution was just a clever maneuver by the rich and powerful to set up a system to more effectively exploit the masses. It was not, in this view, a Novus Ordo Seclorum, a 'New Order of the Ages', as it says on your dollar bill ... but a great con job. And this is taught to our children in the public schools, with your tax dollars. They are destroying the Republic from within.

We've got to get out.

 

First you teach the left to hate America

Then they will destroy the country without close supervision

 

Under the incorporation doctrine, applied and extended even to the 2nd Amendment in a case decided rather recently (in 2010), the 2nd Amendment now applies to the states as well. I was suggesting in my post that the whole incorporation doctrine (whether applied to rights held more sacred on the "left", e.g., 1st Amendment so-called separation of church and state, or the "right", the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms) was in my opinion misconceived.

As for the original meaning and purpose of the Bill of Rights, including the 2nd Amendment, I don't need to listen to an infomercial from groups like the NRA to know the issue. You can find the issue addressed rather clearly in both the preamble to the Bill of Rights -- and by John Marshall (who was no defender of state's rights).

John Marshall in Barron V. Baltimore, referring to the first 10 amendments (Bill of Rights):

 

It's your generation. Kids today have the benefit of modern education and can do mat, science and think independently. Society evolving

 

Kids spilling out of the education system are bulging with high self esteem

But depend on computers to do even simple math that previous generations did in their heads

 

He can feed his bank account and big ego.

I'm not on the left, so do I get a pass?

 

I taught high school math and you're full of it.

 

You are traveling with the left no matter how you prefer to label yourself

 

Translation:

Its not the students fault

They are underperforming as planned

 

Uh huh. How about them cutting of your Social Security and Medicare?

I'm not "defending them." The people you so dislike are acting within the law. If you try to punish them, you'll likely run afoul of the Constitution.

Non sequitur. I said I oppose trying to punish people obeying the law. One can be a Trump supporter without agreeing with what you want to do.

 

We don't pay enough to have math specialists teaching all math classes. Whose fault is that?

 

Yeah, sure. What leftwinger would propose this...?

Instead of a wall, we need a national ID modeled on the Nexus Pass that can be used to make sure employers only hire people entitled to work here, and that includes domestics and day labor. Anyone who hires an illegal gets fined, and lots of illegals get jail time. We can use physical barriers and other means as required, but the ID card is key. The ID can replaced the Social Security card.​

American workers shouldn't have to compete against illegal immigrants for jobs. I don't care if illegals have low crime rates (they do).​

Family reunification for legal immigrants? Yes--spouses and minor children as long as they don't have criminal records.​

Illegals here now? I'm inclined toward generosity providing we get the national ID and smart border barriers that no doubt include wall-like structures in some areas.​

Trump shouldn't get a dime until he puts forward a comprehensive border barrier plan. Then we should fund it if it makes sense. I'd like too see a comprehensive solution because the various parts of a complete program interact.​

 

Most of them cannot do simple math like making change

The computer in the cash register (or in some cases me if the computer system is broken dow)has to tell how much change to give the customer

 

Evidence, please. What about my point that we need math specialists teaching math?

 

[to @Mac-7] The wall will be less important if we make sure illegals don't work here. Bring in a national ID card that can double for a social security card and an electronic visa. You can have your hard border.

No ID, no job, no reason to be around here.

 

The Persian empire under the Achaemenids was the first true empire in history, where one nation ruled over a vast territory and many other nations. And the Persian quickly realized something that for some reason others on all the various sides of arguments on issues seem to forget: its best to rule an empire in a way that is least intrusive and most tolerant of local cultures and beliefs. That as long as the subjects accept certain basic principles, like making sure the "Laws of the Persians and the Medes [the two principal Iranian tribes at the helm of power in the Achaemenid period], disobey them not", and as long as those laws were mostly to preserve the authority of the empire and not meant to impose any particular set of beliefs or cultural practices, you will have an easier time ruling a far flung empire at a time when the distances between these places were covered by much longer travel than now.

This basic principle is something that I would like all those who seek governance to remember. A true federal structure, of a central government of limited and enumerated powers, as the founders of the American Republic envisioned, certainly gave the US a framework to practice this notion domestically. That this framework was subsequently ignored, albeit in part because the "local customs" in the South as it related to slavery and the whole issue of race were clearly abhorrent to any of the other notions that could underline the American experiment, doesn't mean that it should continue to be ignored.

I have the same attitude when it comes to my own country, Iran. I neither support those in Iran who want to impose "westernization" from the top, nor those who want to impose "Islamization" or even "Irancization". Instead, I have an idea that I hope one day will gain ground in Iran: of a new capital city comprised of 3 cities in one. One city would be guided by an Islamist spirit seeking a new Islamic renaissance and a new Golden Age for Islam. The residents of that city would be those who choose to live in accordance with such principles. Another city would be a "westernized haven" that would have replicas of all the best monuments and attractions in the West, and have its institutions for local governance, and where contours of cultural liberties would be in accordance with westernized "international standards". And then there would be "Iranshahr" - a city built with replicas of all the great monuments and architectural wonders of Irano-Islamic civilization as well as those from its pre-Islamic past, where the cultural practices aren't defined by any ideology but prevailing local standards. The administration of this city would be under the control of the elected Iranian government, while Iran's version of the Platonic guardian or philosopher-king, would have authority to both make sure his experiment with an Islamic renaissance is successful in his realm in the city that is to represent Islamic civilization. The westernized city I alluded to would, in the meantime, be administered locally by residents who are attracted to that culture, while overseen by the government. The competition from these 3 cities would then give the rest of the Iranian nation the choice of a model they would and could pick for themselves. Except, we would never allow a monopoly to emerge: the quest to chart an independent path would be subsidized in the cities I mentioned until a successful example had emerged, but its true success would show itself from genuine and open competition. Not by force, dicta or dogma.

 

Rather than assigning motives why not respond to what's actually being discussed? And your compassion is for whom?