2016 American Presidential Campaign

[Droppersneck]

It isn't, the second amendment was put into place so states could arm and setup militias. The founding fathers where aware of the magna carters reason for arming the populace but they chose to keep the amendment vague rather than explicitly saying "everyone arm themselves to keep the government from tyranny" in fact George Washington was horrified when the Trump equivalent supporters of his day rose up he lead and army and crushed them himself.

The revisionist historian is typically politically motivated. I believe that to be the case here.

 

[alasdairm]

I agree with your overall sentiment with the constitution, but I sway more towards its set in stone.

unless it's something you have a problem with then all of a sudden nothing's set in stone and it's ok to change or even abolish amendments...

Nobody has anything against immigration.

your candidate trump sure does.

The Australian posters in BL virtually ruined the lounge subforum here...

one minute it's 'euro mods' then next it's 'australian posters'. make your mind up droppers!

one person's 'virtually ruined' is another's 'greatly improved'. if that ghost town of a sub. you run is the lounge you really wanted all along, i'd say you just vindicated what we did with the move to social.

let's go hillary!

alasdair

 

[noone1]

The revisionist historian is typically politically motivated. I believe that to be the case here.

oh, the irony.

Lets remind everyone of the amendment: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

"well regulated"

It doesn't say "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, being necessary to the security of a free state, shall not be infringed" no matter how much you want it to.

 

[socko]

The thing that's bothering me about the latest election news is that we're supposed to be outraged against Trump for groping women, but we're supposed to believe all the women Clinton harassed, groped, and raped are all liars and trash according to his wife.

 

[alasdairm]

^ only if you choose to take such a simplistic view.

alasdair

 

[socko]

^ only if you choose to take such a simplistic view.

alasdair

Would you please elaborate? That's the essence of it. One group of victims are all liars but the other group of victims are telling the truth.

 

[alasdairm]

again, i think that's a simplistic analysis. i don't think it's nearly that simple and, as ever, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle (in both cases).

but we're talking about the 2016 election. i just checked and bill's not running.

alasdair

 

[socko]

But the woman who defended him and tried to discredit his victims is running. And as with the 1990s, he will probably be co-president.

It's always complicated. They love it when it's complicated because it confuses the public. The truth might be somewhere in the middle, but as complicated as it is, all of them are guilty.

edit: I am not following this closely, but notice how both candidates are/were trying to discredit the victims. Both candidates are/ have attacked them. Both have used insults, have attacked their character, attacked their intelligence, attacked their personal background (including calling jenifer Flowers "Trailer Trash," accused them of being money hungry. They have both tried to psychologically destroy the victims. That's an old trick used by rapists (and the wives of rapists), clinical sociopaths, and domestic abusers.The fact that she defends him and stands by him is not only her way of saying she is OK with her her husband's abuse and crimes, but it makes her complicit. If she were the man, I can imagine that she would have raped too. Should a woman "stand by her man"even when he is a serial rapist? Only if she gets to be president. As long as the person in office has progressive policies, a few rapes are OK. Defending the raper and demonizing his victims is OK too. .

Why is Trump's sexual depravity wrong but Clinton's is okay?

On a side note, with one candidate being an alleged groper and the other an enabler of an alleged raper, does this mean feminism is backtracking?

 

[kong]

If she were the man, I can imagine that she would have raped too.

And if you had wheels you'd be wagon.

 

[socko]

And if you had wheels you'd be wagon.

Committing a crime is not a big step downward morally from enabling the crime, assuming it is true.

 

[kong]

Committing a crime is not a big step downward morally from enabling the crime, assuming it is true.

If your aunt had a dick she'd be your uncle.

 

[socko]

Why are you here?

 

[Escher's Waterfall]

Committing a crime is not a big step downward morally from enabling the crime, assuming it is true.

I concur. Lesser of two evils.

 

[kong]

Why are you here?

Why are you reduced to speculating that Hillary would rape people if she had a penis?

 

[JessFR]

The second amendment is the what keeps all the other amendments in place. History tells us that, but those with short attention spans or passionate/emotional/irrational political beliefs don't see this.
I agree with your overall sentiment with the constitution, but I sway more towards its set in stone.
Nobody has anything against immigration. Open borders means there is no barrier to entry, all people can move freely in and out. It is referenced as a fourth world country, in theory. It's progressive lunacy, promoted by the elite political class/ top .5%. I say we secure our borders and allow legal immigration, as we are supposed to per the law now.
Trump is such a terrible candidate, but I have no choice here. If the DNC had not stolen the election from Bernie sanders I may have considered him. I hold his judgement in picking justices well above clintons. Donna brazille was busted asking the Clinton camp what questions they wanted for the primary debates in the wiki leaks emails. That kind of collusion isn't right. He already had an uphill battle with the unfair super delegate process.
Australia, from what I have read, is a complete nanny state. Everything is banned and controls over the population seems to be very strict. The Australian posters in BL virtually ruined the lounge subforum here in favor of strict control over free speech/ thought. They seem to seek control over things that upset them, like words precieved as mean. I think this is a direct result of the countries over all environment though I could be wrong. Do you have any insight into this?

I can understand and appreciate why you feel you have to vote for trump. But I can never support a man like trump. Much as I hate Clinton, Trump is a disgusting pig of a man, and if trump gets in, this scandal won't just go away.

So we will simply have to agree to disagree. We both hate both candidates, it's just a question of what we think is the best of a bunch of terrible options. Sigh. You know who I really blame, the people who voted for trump in the republican nomination process. They've screwed themselves and everyone else along with them.

As for the Australian question. I can't deny I agree with you. Thing you gotta realize is though, the Australians will never see it that way. Something I hear in Australia a lot is that the right to free speech doesn't give you the right to offend people, or to say racist things, or this or that. I've heard more than once that Australia doesn't want American style freedom of speech. It used to infuriate me but over time I've come to accept that Australia simply has a different way of thinking about rights and freedoms than the American thinking about it. And maybe that way works for them, but it'll never be something I'm ok with. I'll never agree that people shouldn't be free to say whatever racist offensive shit they want. Shit that can get you sued in Australia. Now there are Australians who agree that free speech shouldn't be so constrained, but they are on the right wing side of Australian politics, and generally anyone you'll find online or in the cities is more of the left leaning side of this issue in Australian politics where freedoms are concerned.

And yes, I agree, it's cultural. In Australia, free speech doesn't mean the same thing as it does in the US. For that matter, rights don't mean the same thing either. There is no bill of rights here. And here right's don't have the same connotations of being absolute and protected by law rather than granted by law.

They will likely strongly disagree with my assessment here. But something else you need to understand. In America, nobody ever talks about Australia in day to day life, nobody really talks about other western allied countries at all. But in Australia, people talk about America and Americans every single day. There is more coverage of the US election in Australia right now than there is for many local Australian elections. And Australians do not understand how an election like what we face right now could ever come to be, because it would never happen in Australia. There is no real equivalent to the south and southern politics, or gun rights, or various other cultural beliefs that don't have an Australian equivalent. So in Australia it just seems inconceivably insane.

I was at my local methadone clinic the other day and as usual the US came up in the conversation people were having while waiting for their dose. It's happening more often because of the election coverage lately, but it happens all the time anyway. And a woman said "they can't seriously be thinking of voting for him? (trump)".

Australians talk about Americans and America all the time, and it's almost always negative unless they know there's an American (me) present. Often enough even knowing I'm there won't stop them from endlessly insulting the US and American politics.

Add it all together, and you have lots of Australians who are used to the way things are in Australia, and have zero respect for what might seem like an American perspective on any given issue. What few Australians who might support and like America as a country, would never dare say it around a group of Australians because they be ostracized.

And to the Australians reading this. Sorry, but I've lived here over a decade now and you try living in a country surrounded by people who mock and resent and insult where you come from, and feel absolutely no inclination to give the slightest of a shit about how YOU might feel about being surrounded about it, and not end up having some negative impressions from the experience.

Edit: One other thing id say. Australia does not have as a strong part of it's culture a sense of disagreeing with what someone said but defending their right to say it. I've found it tends more to be that Australians feel if someone says something that strongly offends them, then they really shouldn't be allowed to say it. I've repeatidly gotten the impression that as a culture Australians tend not to defend words or behaviors they don't like on freedom grounds, but rather tend to think it should be made illegal. And yes, there is a truly insane level of protecting people from themselves here. I've found Australians think that the public is too stupid to have freedoms that might result in them hurting themselves. They never think it of themselves of course, just of a nondescript general public. And tend to feel that those stupid people "ruin it for the rest of us".

For example say someone uses a freedom and winds up hurting themselves, the it makes the news and gets banned. They tend to blame those people for ruining that freedom for everyone else rather than thinking the government was wrong to ban it and that perhaps people should be allowed to hurt themselves.

The usual argument, is people have to be protected from themselves because the public tax payer funded health system will bare the cost of they don't.

They usually also absolutely despise the idea of americans suggesting their society should be any different or is in any way inferior however slight from American society, what with their little American obsession. Even though they banter about how American society should change to be like theirs ALL THE TIME and see nothing even slightly hypocritical about that.

So I expect my post here may elicit some very passionate condemnation from some of the Australian bluelighters. Meh, screw em. I'm far more qualified than most people to have seen the pros and cons of both cultures' and both systems. And there are some things I think are better about Australia than the US. But you asked me why they might, in general, behave the way you've observed and this is my experience on the subject.

 

[nuttynutskin]

 

[Droppersneck]

I can understand and appreciate why you feel you have to vote for trump. But I can never support a man like trump. Much as I hate Clinton, Trump is a disgusting pig of a man, and if trump gets in, this scandal won't just go away.

So we will simply have to agree to disagree. We both hate both candidates, it's just a question of what we think is the best of a bunch of terrible options. Sigh. You know who I really blame, the people who voted for trump in the republican nomination process. They've screwed themselves and everyone else along with them.

As for the Australian question. I can't deny I agree with you. Thing you gotta realize is though, the Australians will never see it that way. Something I hear in Australia a lot is that the right to free speech doesn't give you the right to offend people, or to say racist things, or this or that. I've heard more than once that Australia doesn't want American style freedom of speech. It used to infuriate me but over time I've come to accept that Australia simply has a different way of thinking about rights and freedoms than the American thinking about it. And maybe that way works for them, but it'll never be something I'm ok with. I'll never agree that people shouldn't be free to say whatever racist offensive shit they want. Shit that can get you sued in Australia. Now there are Australians who agree that free speech shouldn't be so constrained, but they are on the right wing side of Australian politics, and generally anyone you'll find online or in the cities is more of the left leaning side of this issue in Australian politics where freedoms are concerned.

And yes, I agree, it's cultural. In Australia, free speech doesn't mean the same thing as it does in the US. For that matter, rights don't mean the same thing either. There is no bill of rights here. And here right's don't have the same connotations of being absolute and protected by law rather than granted by law.

They will likely strongly disagree with my assessment here. But something else you need to understand. In America, nobody ever talks about Australia in day to day life, nobody really talks about other western allied countries at all. But in Australia, people talk about America and Americans every single day. There is more coverage of the US election in Australia right now than there is for many local Australian elections. And Australians do not understand how an election like what we face right now could ever come to be, because it would never happen in Australia. There is no real equivalent to the south and southern politics, or gun rights, or various other cultural beliefs that don't have an Australian equivalent. So in Australia it just seems inconceivably insane.

I was at my local methadone clinic the other day and as usual the US came up in the conversation people were having while waiting for their dose. It's happening more often because of the election coverage lately, but it happens all the time anyway. And a woman said "they can't seriously be thinking of voting for him? (trump)".

Australians talk about Americans and America all the time, and it's almost always negative unless they know there's an American (me) present. Often enough even knowing I'm there won't stop them from endlessly insulting the US and American politics.

Add it all together, and you have lots of Australians who are used to the way things are in Australia, and have zero respect for what might seem like an American perspective on any given issue. What few Australians who might support and like America as a country, would never dare say it around a group of Australians because they be ostracized.

And to the Australians reading this. Sorry, but I've lived here over a decade now and you try living in a country surrounded by people who mock and resent and insult where you come from, and feel absolutely no inclination to give the slightest of a shit about how YOU might feel about being surrounded about it, and not end up having some negative impressions from the experience.

Edit: One other thing id say. Australia does not have as a strong part of it's culture a sense of disagreeing with what someone said but defending their right to say it. I've found it tends more to be that Australians feel if someone says something that strongly offends them, then they really shouldn't be allowed to say it. I've repeatidly gotten the impression that as a culture Australians tend not to defend words or behaviors they don't like on freedom grounds, but rather tend to think it should be made illegal. And yes, there is a truly insane level of protecting people from themselves here. I've found Australians think that the public is too stupid to have freedoms that might result in them hurting themselves. They never think it of themselves of course, just of a nondescript general public. And tend to feel that those stupid people "ruin it for the rest of us".

For example say someone uses a freedom and winds up hurting themselves, the it makes the news and gets banned. They tend to blame those people for ruining that freedom for everyone else rather than thinking the government was wrong to ban it and that perhaps people should be allowed to hurt themselves.

The usual argument, is people have to be protected from themselves because the public tax payer funded health system will bare the cost of they don't.

They usually also absolutely despise the idea of americans suggesting their society should be any different or is in any way inferior however slight from American society, what with their little American obsession. Even though they banter about how American society should change to be like theirs ALL THE TIME and see nothing even slightly hypocritical about that.

So I expect my post here may elicit some very passionate condemnation from some of the Australian bluelighters. Meh, screw em. I'm far more qualified than most people to have seen the pros and cons of both cultures' and both systems. And there are some things I think are better about Australia than the US. But you asked me why they might, in general, behave the way you've observed and this is my experience on the subject.

Wow, that is pretty much exactly what I pictured. I don't get how you do it bc the lack of freedom and people talking smack would wear on me quick. I noticed they seem a bit obsessed with us even on Bluelight. And it gets them miffed when they realize all we really know about Aussie is todo and Steve Irwin. Why do you live out there? Have you considered coming home.

I for one couldn't live somewhere without the freedom of speech and the freedom to protect your family. We have had some similar situations with people protesting against freedom of speech in the states. It's mainly coming from college campuses and the far left. They want 'safe spaces' and 'trigger warnings'. It's all pretty pathetic stuff.

 

[alasdairm]

I don't get...

the substantive phrase. you struggle with a lot of issues on bluelight because you have a problem with perspective and you have an insular, american attitude. i also find that you struggle to understand issues when they don't fit you're very rigid worldview.

it's really not that hard to understand that, in terms of day to day coming and going, australians feel perfectly free. probably as free as you do. the country made a decision that living life with a significantly reduced chance of being shot was worth more to them than the right to own guns. you disagree? sure. it's a simple difference of opinion and it seems odd that anybody would struggle to 'get' it. it's quite straightforward.

nice post, jessfr.

alasdair

 

[Droppersneck]

the substantive phrase. you struggle with a lot of issues on bluelight because you have a problem with perspective and you have an insular, american attitude. i also find that you struggle to understand issues when they don't fit you're very rigid worldview.

it's really not that hard to understand that, in terms of day to day coming and going, australians feel perfectly free. probably as free as you do. the country made a decision that living life with a significantly reduced chance of being shot was worth more to them than the right to own guns. you disagree? sure. it's a simple difference of opinion and it seems odd that anybody would struggle to 'get' it. it's quite straightforward.

nice post, jessfr.

alasdair

They may feel they are just as free, but that simply isn't the case. Australia Having a similar sentiment towards regulating speech that is deemed mean or controversial, much like this bl administration. Jess confirmed everything I have previously voiced about the nanny state and how they feel about their governments role. Do you disagree with Jess's opinion? I sense some disdain.

All I'll say about guns is the fact that they are not experiencing greater freedom by banning personal firearm ownership. Their violent crime rates are just as high, but they have less violent gun crime. If they truly did choose, as a country, to ban guns then that is their pejorative. Though I'm not certain they even voted on it.

 

[alasdairm]

They may feel they are just as free, but that simply isn't the case.

i'd lean towards respecting australians' right to decide for themselves how free they are over your opinion.

...they are not experiencing greater freedom by banning personal firearm ownership.

maybe they feel freer because they value the freedom of not being shot more highly than the freedom to own a gun.

Their violent crime rates are just as high...

can you substantiate that with some back up, please?

alasdair