Kristallnacht is taking place as we speak, and the majority of the victims are Black. But thanks to obscenely hypocritical people like yourself, the casualties keep piling up, year after year, because the price of stopping the mayhem and misery would be too high: the admission that Democrat party politics have been a failure, before and after 1964.

Care to divulge which think-tank you work for? You are 21st Century Jingoists — vitriolic, corrupt, and saturated with contempt. That you have the audacity to wrap yourselves in Hiroshima-Nagasaki-angst (like our Hypocrite-in-Chief) just underscores your moral bankruptcy.

The hundred or so blog posts I made on his website are a matter of record, as is the ballot I photocopied before mailing it in here in Oregon. I put a link to it on another national memo “forum”, but I’m not going to bother proving it to you hypocrites.

Apropos… “acceptance and tolerance that are the mainstay of liberalism.”

Was that what you call it when you surround a candidate’s campaign venue, heap abuse and try to intimidate people who want to go in and hear what he has to say?

As for her (pisces63) reference to Kristallnacht, FYI, on that night and in many variations before and after, the Nazis encouraged “true Germans” to rampage through the streets, looting and destroying Jewish owned businesses. In April of 2015, Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake described her orders to police and said she wanted the rioters/looters to have “their space to destroy”. Watch it here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_5KQC7k8Lc

I guess if you happened to be one of the people that owned a business that got looted, or burned down, you might not agree that Liberalism is about “acceptance and tolerance”. Likewise, if you were one of the 100+ police officers who were hospitalized trying to contain the violence, you might question that characterization as well. And as an outsider, knowing that the only people who have been charged with a crime as a result of that rioting, looting, and vandalism, were six Baltimore police officers, three of whom were Black, I’m skeptical as well.

Liberals love to make references to unspecified numbers of “unarmed Black men killed by police”, and whenever an officer involved shooting occurs where a Black man is killed, even if the guy killed was a known felon, with multiple arrests for violent crimes, the media loves to give it global coverage. I wonder if you Libs who care so much about Black lives know how many police officers have been shot and killed so far this year while doing their jobs, protecting you and us from violent criminals? (I do.) I wonder if you know how many of those killed were Black men? (I do.)

The fact is, Liberalism as practiced in reality, here and now, is the most corrupt, self-serving perversion of it’s popularly promoted and utterly fraudulent stated values in the brief history of democratic republican government. In short, Liberalism, particularly here in the USA, is defined by it’s all-consuming hypocrisy.

Dominick: “You are entitled to your opinion, even when that opinion is based on distorted views of reality, and ignore the calls for violence articulated by Donald Trump. He incited violence when he stated that he would have punched a protester in the face, when he condoned and/encouraged the manhandling of peaceful protesters, and when he insulted entire ethnic groups and all members of a religion.”

You are entitled to draw whatever inferences you choose from the things he says. That in no way justifies condoning physical (and therefore violent) attempts to interfere with other citizens freedom of assembly and speech. As an American, I have a right to insult whoever I want to insult, and no one has the right to lawfully interfere with that right.

The fact is: Liberalism as practiced here and now in this country adheres to but one principle: the end justifies the means. If you people disapprove of anything anyone says or does, you presume the right to suppress or intimidate them in any way you choose. Case in point: Donald Trump.

Conversely, if someone belongs to a class of people you favor (or who’s interests coincide with yours), you presume the right to suspend the rule-of-law on their behalf. Cases in point: gang-bangers in Baltimore, illegal immigrants and drug traffickers from Mexico, or government bureaucrats.

Anyone can come up with a talking-point explanation for disregarding the Constitution, or the letter of the law. But just having an answer does not legitimize the disregard. As a former Republican, it became apparent to me that while principles of governance and the rule of law seem to matter a little more to those on the Republican side, the recognition that the difference between the two was so minimal, led me to believe endorsing either side was unconscionable.

Dominick: “I believe most police officers do an outstanding job, and I am grateful for the work they do in protecting my family, and my community. Unfortunately, there are rotten apples in some police departments, who often use excessive and unnecessary force to enforce the law, when other approaches can achieve the same goal.”

I’ve studied this subject in depth for about a year now. Indeed, there are a few (very few) ‘rotten apples’, those who’s temperament is incompatible with doing that job. There are more who are ill-prepared to deal with sudden exposure to unfamiliar circumstances, who need better training. All of them have one thing in common: they are private citizens who volunteer to do a job which requires them to risk their lives every working day, and make split-second decisions which will decide whether they live to work another day. If we as a society want to have the best people possible working in law-enforcement, we have no choice but to grant to them an enormous amount of slack when it comes to second-guessing them after the fact when a decision they make turns out to be wrong. If we aren’t willing to do that, we will end up with no choice but to hire people who are more likely to violate the rules, cover up mistakes, and act on impulse under pressure, to the detriment of all.

When I see people heckling cops, spitting on them, resisting arrest while hurling epithets in their faces, I can’t imagine why any decent person with a choice would continue to put up with all of that. By condoning this stuff — which the vast majority of Liberals do — you guarantee the deterioration of the police force, and by doing so, the erosion of the rule of law. This is already in evidence in gang-infested neighborhoods. We are reaching a tipping point where witness intimidation will make prosecution of violent offenders next to impossible. Case in point: the massacre of 5 (Black lives) having a barbecue in Wilkinsberg, PA. Still no suspects — and I don’t have to tell you why.

Dominick: “Liberals are not against the law, the police, and do not condon e riots. The fact that some elected officials opt to defuse a dangerous situation by letting criminal elements loot and destroy, instead of provoking an increase in violence, is a questionable strategy, but it does not constitute an endorsement of lawlessness. Personally, I would have opted for more robust police intervention when the riots in Baltimore took place, and I was shocked and disgusted by what I saw.”

The actions of the prosecutor in Baltimore were (and continue to be) unconscionable. It is a testament to the durability of the jury system that her rush to judgment and obvious bias has been effectively thwarted. I blame the voters for the malfeasance and incompetence of the Mayor.

Dominick: “I don’t have a problem with peaceful protests, and believe there are plenty of reasons to demonstrates against a justice system that often ignores the rights of some members of our society, and protects officers who are no better than the criminals they murder or abuse.”

I object to language like “…often ignores the rights of some member of society, and protects officers…”, particularly the use of the word ‘often’. Unless you’ve done the work to track down and validate actual cases (as I have), the use of that word is reckless and irresponsible. If you were actually interested in getting an honest picture of reality here, you could do what I did: spend the time looking for real cases, and thoroughly fact-checking them.

I’ve found cases that fall into a wide range of the stereotypical references Liberals make, and then attach words like ‘often’ or ‘many’ to them. Adding those words simplistically, and in most cases, illegitimately completes the puzzle by giving them the answer they wanted to find. I don’t start out focusing on a result I want to prove. I start out with a sincere desire to find factual evidence which, taken together, gives me some semblance of understanding the truth. The reason I make these posts in Liberal venues is to attempt to find people who are, like me, more interested in finding truth, than confirming their preferred beliefs.

Dominick: “The issue being discussed, however, deals more with the rise in violence, and the potential that it may degenerate into widespread social unrest as a results of the incendiary rhetoric we hear, and the propensity of some people to take the law into their own hands. Inciting violence is irresponsible, and unbecoming of a candidate running for President of the USA.”

This is the heart of the matter. Your allegation that Trump is inciting violence is, frankly, pure sophistry. On the other hand, we have a President who has made his career exploiting racial animus, and his single biggest achievement since taking office has been to dramatically turn up the heat on Black vs. White antagonism. In 2008, if I had spent more time researching his background, I might have recognized what some of his detractors back then were saying was true about him. Instead, I so wanted to believe the things he was saying he would do, I chose not to.

Most of the damage he has done (or from his point of view, his success in prosecuting this agenda item), has been a consequence of his silence and inaction on certain incidents and trends. Among the few comments he has made, this one stands apart as the single most revealing and consequential statement (July of 2013, text transcript of his remarks):

http://www.postmarks.com/obama/not_their_fault.htm

This 17 minute address has already cost thousands of casualties, and set in motion a tacit acceptance of Black-violence which is gaining momentum, and unless turned back reasonably soon, could have catastrophic consequences for this country. It is already manifesting itself by all but destroying the ability of teachers in predominantly Black public schools to maintain the secure and peaceful climate necessary for students to learn.

Of course I can hear the loud chorus of boos from the sycophant Liberals in this forum in response to this statement. Unfortunately, I have hundreds of video exhibits which demonstrate it’s truth. But, unless I can persuade some among them to take a look — with an honestly open mind — they will make no difference.

As this situation deteriorates, Democrat leaders, starting with Obama, but including Clinton and Sanders, are intent upon making it worse — in order to cover up their culpability for the situation in the first place, and re-up their (perceived) ‘lease’ on African American constituents. And let me be clear: I’m sure Clinton and Sanders have convinced themselves of the truth of what they are saying. Like all Liberals, they believe “job-retraining programs” and “affirmative action laws” and “a few hundred billion Dollars” spread around in the name of fixing the problem, will work — even though they’ve been saying the same thing for five decades now, and it has never worked.

In my view, this is the single biggest threat to our national security we face today. We know what the cause of the problem is: dysfunctional or non-existent parenting in low-income, predominantly Black neighborhoods all over the country. I’m not talking about just Chicago, SF, LA, and East Coast urban areas. It’s all over the midwest as well. About the only major city in the lower 48 which is still relatively free of this problem (and I emphasize the word ‘relatively’) happens to be my home town, Portland, Oregon. And even here, the problem is on an uptick.

I’m not a supporter of Donald Trump, but I am an opponent of anyone wedded to the malignant race-agenda of Barrack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. We should be working hard to salvage the lives and futures of young Black children in these distressed neighborhoods, by aggressively imposing the discipline in the schools, they are not getting at home — so the teachers we are paying to help them learn, can succeed in that. Unless we devise some other option for students who can’t comply with the rules necessary to maintain a peaceful learning environment, than simply handing them off to the criminal justice system, this problem will never be solved.

We could do that now, at minimal additional cost, if that were the real goal of our federal education policies. Instead, by blaming the problem on “White privilege” and “Systemic White racism”, we guarantee those lives, and those potentially peaceful and prosperous futures, will be lost to yet another generation of disadvantaged Black children.

Even if the cost of doing what I suggest were more than just ‘minimal’, I believe we still have to spend the money. The difference is: we must not throw the money at the same old failed, graft-ridden and ineffective strategies tried in the past.

Thanks Paul. I guess my theory is: if I present a reasonable case, based on facts, it may resonate with some un-decided passer-by. I do appreciate that you took the time to consider it.

So whatcha’ want from me? An argument? You need Many Many More supporters here! Where are they? When it comes to Lies & Disinformation, the Reich has supporters as thick as fly’s! Ans we know what they hover over!

Dom, we need to talk! is there a safe way to do so?

What is “The Race”? Are you of “The Race”? If so, say so. You’re still being a coward and evading the challenge put forth to you. Let me repeat so that you understand—I’ll try to keep it brief since a lengthy response tires you out.
1) Do you approve of the racist stance of Trump and the GOP?
2) Do you consider yourself apart from the human race—someone who is superior to those who don’t look like you?
3) And finally, to repeat the opening question: Are you of this so-called illusory concept “The Race”?

I hope these questions don’t pose to difficult a task for you. Even a community college student would comprehend the questions.

If you think you’re going to have carte blanche to set foot in this forum and in a cowardly manner post drivel and seek to hide what you truly feel, then you are sadly mistaken.

Some people are too stupid to understand your reference. You have to spell things out for Progressives…
The organization to which you have referred is called “La Raza” which translates to “The Race”.
See, the idiots who support La Raza never knew what it meant.

La Raza is not a racist organization. It is an organization that seeks to improve conditions for Latino Americans It is not racist if, as a member of a minority, you seek to better the lives of other members of that minority. Do you understand what racism really is?

Paul, our national history shows that when White people have joined together, they have done so to protect and further white supremacy. They have done so in army units to eliminate Black, Gay and female soldiers. They have done so on college campuses to limit the further education of Black, Jewish, and female students. They have done so in powerful civic clubs and country clubs.
That, Paul, is racism.
Providing information and resources to mostly impoverished Hispanic Americans is not.

Paul, your well thought out comments on this sub-thread are appreciated. That being said, I’m still face-palming over Joan’s assertion that an organization which calls itself “The Race,” is not rascist.

His remarks have been somewhat distorted. That’s politics.
He never said all Muslims should be deported, as some left-wing sites claim. He said there should be a moratorium on the people coming from the Middle East until we can be certain of our screening processes. Europe has made mistakes. We should be more cautious.
He also said illegal immigrants should be deported. That’s not practical anymore. It would have been years ago, but liberals have prevented immigration laws being enforced. Now there are people who never had the right to be here that have been here so long and have families here so deportation is not likely. But, unless something is done to stem the continued illegal immigration, it will never end.
Businesses may like having cheap labor, but American workers pay the price through unemployment.
He also said Mexico has sent us criminals. I don’t think Mexico actually sent them, but there have been many crimes committed by immigrants and those criminals are not deported or jailed.
I don’t agree with everything he says or the way he says them, but many people agree with the essence of his message.

You really need to listen to something besides liberal news sources. Immigrants built most of the houses in Arizona during the housing boon – because they work cheaper than American carpenters, electricians and roofers. These are jobs that helped build the middle class before immigrants turned them into minimum wage jobs.

I have no problem with an organization whose mission statement is to “Improve the Latino communities opportunities for success in achieving the American Dream.” I have no problem, not because I am a minority member but because I realize that their experience in American has been one of opportunities denied based solely on their race. Their goal seems aligned with yours, because we will not have a society where all people identify as human and nothing else until all people have the same opportunities for success in achieving the American Dream. When minorities are not denied jobs, housing and justice based on race then groups like La Raza, NAACP and others will no longer be needed; until then I live in the world that is, one that is filed with institutionalized racism and racist people.

I DID go to their web site, (duh) just how did you think I could quote their mission statement? I have also been a long term resident of AZ, TX and Fl. I am familiar with what the organization does in those states.