dermdoc said:

---

It is permanent victimhood. And somebody else is always to blame for you being a victim.

---

Capybara said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Exactly. I see no popular movement to suppress non-Christian's at all, least of all among Republican christian office-seekers. The obvious answer would be that the OP is referencing Trump, whose family of course includes several prominent non-Christians (jews), and whose former staff included the first openly gay cabinet official (not exactly appealing to the stereotype of 'Christian nationalists').

This is pretty absurd, imho. If one is a christian, one should first and foremost, in my opinion, be opposed to the evil that is infanticide. Second, ending silly endless wars and the death and devastation they bring to people across the globe would be a good thing. That means rooting for a GOP loss this cycle would be…counter productive.

---

Unnecessary and ineffective ellipsis.

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Lol. Every modern political theory uses class analysis and has since the late 19th century. Marxian analysis is baked into the modern political system. Including for conservatives.

---

Jabin said:

---

Quote:

---

Marxian analysis is baked into the modern political system. Including for conservatives.

---

Can you elaborate on what you mean by those two statements? And provide examples?

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Just in case anybody forgot, Kamala is actually the daughter of an actual self identified Marxist.

I see a lot pearl clutching when the term Marxisim is brought up, but the DNC candidate for President is literally the daughter of a literal Marxist. A very prominent and well established one at that. Tenured Stanford professor and economic advisor to a nation, fwiw.

In fact, just as Modern Progressivism is the ideological child of neo Marxism and post modernism, I would imagine many modern progressives had parents who were at least closet marxists, if not out right one's like madam vice president's papa.

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

I'm sure you are a certified expert on Kamala and Donald's relationship, Sap. God knows you are an expert on everything ever.

She's been an adult for 42 years. She's been in politics for 35 years. One of her father's jobs is to advise governments on how to make their economies more Marxist.

But go ahead and try to hand wave that away with your "nu uhing." It's a really convincing argument.

---

nortex97 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Just in case anybody forgot, Kamala is actually the daughter of an actual self identified Marxist.

I see a lot pearl clutching when the term Marxisim is brought up, but the DNC candidate for President is literally the daughter of a literal Marxist. A very prominent and well established one at that. Tenured Stanford professor and economic advisor to a nation, fwiw.

In fact, just as Modern Progressivism is the ideological child of neo Marxism and post modernism, I would imagine many modern progressives had parents who were at least closet marxists, if not out right one's like madam vice president's papa.

---

You really want to go down this road? Assume an adult woman just parrots what her father believed, particularly when he had little part in her life after she was 7? Because a very, VERY large number of extremely influential postwar conservative figures were the children of communists or once communists themselves. And if we assume kids are just carbon copies of their parents… well… Fred Trump was a known racist and slumlord.

---

It's rather more enlightening she has not disavowed or distanced herself from a single word he wrote, and his invisibility in her campaigns imho. As well, the pastor who prayed at the dnc. Despicable people, imho.

---

Quote:

---

Kamala Harris put it more bluntly in a 2003 interview, one of the few times she's talked about the man publicly. "My father is a good guy," she told SF Weekly, "but we are not close."

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

First of all, you have 0 evidence to support the assertion he hasn't been in her life since she was 7. He was temporarily estranged from her childhood.

Second of all, the only one using terms like "carbon copy" is you. However, to suggest that her world view wasn't influenced by her father is an embarrassing amount of bull*****

Third of all, this has nothing to do with an ad hominem argument. You clearly dont understand what that means.

Let me slow this down for you. It was suggested, by a different poster that you undoubtedly starred, that it was "intellectually lazy" to bring up Marxism with regards to our current political climate. I countered that it's rather pertinent to bring up considering the DNC presidential nominee was raised by a promeninent Marxists.

Then you started screaming at the keyboard and posting nonsensical gibberish.

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

First of all, you have 0 evidence to support the assertion he hasn't been in her life since she was 7. He was temporarily estranged from her childhood.

Second of all, the only one using terms like "carbon copy" is you. However, to suggest that her world view wasn't influenced by her father is an embarrassing amount of bull*****

Third of all, this has nothing to do with an ad hominem argument. You clearly dont understand what that means.

Let me slow this down for you. It was suggested, by a different poster that you undoubtedly starred, that it was "intellectually lazy" to bring up Marxism with regards to our current political climate. I countered that it's rather pertinent to bring up considering the DNC presidential nominee was raised by a promeninent Marxists.

Then you started screaming at the keyboard and posting nonsensical gibberish.

---

"Screaming at the keyboard"? You have a much more interesting vision of my life than I do. It is intellectually lazy to bring up Marxism. There's no evidence at all that Harris is somehow a Marxist. Her father hasn't been in her life in any kind of consistent basis since she was 7 and you've shown no evidence to suggest otherwise. Even if he were, you've shown no evidence that she adopted his theoretical or ideological reasoning aside from the fact that she's a progressive and you seem to assume progressive is a synonym for Trotskyist.

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

First of all, you have 0 evidence to support the assertion he hasn't been in her life since she was 7. He was temporarily estranged from her childhood.

Second of all, the only one using terms like "carbon copy" is you. However, to suggest that her world view wasn't influenced by her father is an embarrassing amount of bull*****

Third of all, this has nothing to do with an ad hominem argument. You clearly dont understand what that means.

Let me slow this down for you. It was suggested, by a different poster that you undoubtedly starred, that it was "intellectually lazy" to bring up Marxism with regards to our current political climate. I countered that it's rather pertinent to bring up considering the DNC presidential nominee was raised by a promeninent Marxists.

Then you started screaming at the keyboard and posting nonsensical gibberish.

---

"Screaming at the keyboard"? You have a much more interesting vision of my life than I do. It is intellectually lazy to bring up Marxism. There's no evidence at all that Harris is somehow a Marxist. Her father hasn't been in her life in any kind of consistent basis since she was 7 and you've shown no evidence to suggest otherwise. Even if he were, you've shown no evidence that she adopted his theoretical or ideological reasoning aside from the fact that she's a progressive and you seem to assume progressive is a synonym for Trotskyist.

---

You have terrible tendency to completely misrepresent people in an attempt to make a point.

The modern progressive movement in American is strongly influenced by Marxism. Period. Arguing otherwise is merely displaying your ignorance.

Now, you can attempt to argue the degree of it's influence, but to completely ignore the reality is just plain obtuse. The venn diagram of ideals between the two has a **** load of overlap.


The fact that the DNC nominee was literally raised by a Marxist and a woman who, at the very least, was married to a Marxist is just the icing on the cake.

To pretend that a politically inclined and ambitious woman like Kamala wasn't influenced by her extremely prestigious father is completely delusional.

I can't possibly think of a reason why she would want to distance herself publicly from her devout Marxist father as she climbed the political ladder. It is quiet beyond my comprehension.

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

First of all, you have 0 evidence to support the assertion he hasn't been in her life since she was 7. He was temporarily estranged from her childhood.

Second of all, the only one using terms like "carbon copy" is you. However, to suggest that her world view wasn't influenced by her father is an embarrassing amount of bull*****

Third of all, this has nothing to do with an ad hominem argument. You clearly dont understand what that means.

Let me slow this down for you. It was suggested, by a different poster that you undoubtedly starred, that it was "intellectually lazy" to bring up Marxism with regards to our current political climate. I countered that it's rather pertinent to bring up considering the DNC presidential nominee was raised by a promeninent Marxists.

Then you started screaming at the keyboard and posting nonsensical gibberish.

---

"Screaming at the keyboard"? You have a much more interesting vision of my life than I do. It is intellectually lazy to bring up Marxism. There's no evidence at all that Harris is somehow a Marxist. Her father hasn't been in her life in any kind of consistent basis since she was 7 and you've shown no evidence to suggest otherwise. Even if he were, you've shown no evidence that she adopted his theoretical or ideological reasoning aside from the fact that she's a progressive and you seem to assume progressive is a synonym for Trotskyist.

---

You have terrible tendency to completely misrepresent people in an attempt to make a point.

The modern progressive movement in American is strongly influenced by Marxism. Period. Arguing otherwise is merely displaying your ignorance.

Now, you can attempt to argue the degree of it's influence, but to completely ignore the reality is just plain obtuse. The venn diagram of ideals between the two has a **** load of overlap.


The fact that the DNC nominee was literally raised by a Marxist and a woman who, at the very least, was married to a Marxist is just the icing on the cake.

To pretend that a politically inclined and ambitious woman like Kamala wasn't influenced by her extremely prestigious father is completely delusional.

I can't possibly think of a reason why she would want to distance herself publicly from her devout Marxist father as she climbed the political ladder. It is quiet beyond my comprehension.

---

You've yet to show a single ounce of proof aside from, "Her dad, whom she has not had a relationship with since she was 7, is a Marxist, therefore she MUST be deeply sympathetic to Marxism." And again, this EXACT SAME LOGIC means Donald Trump is a racist and every conservative in the postwar era who came from a leftist background (which is almost every big player outside of Buckley) was actually a Marxist bringing Marxism into conservatism. This is all bull**** all the way down because in your mind, an American progressive MUST secretly be a communist.

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

I think you defended your post enough, and enough is enough.
Sometimes people just have to agree to disagree.

As I posted earlier, I don't think Harris is a Communist,
but I do think she meets the Republican definition of Far Left.

---

Quote:

---

We have more single military-age illegal males in our Country than the active duty strength of our US Army. Definitely more than our US Marine Corps, which is at World War I levels.

We have lost 250K Americans to fentanyl poisoning in the past three and a half years. During the Vietnam War, we lost 58K, and during the Korean War, we lost 37K.

Yes, people are struggling to buy food, pay rent, buy a house, and put gas in their cars. Those are all results of the policies of the Biden-HARRIS administration. When the Biden-HARRIS administration took office, the inflation rate was 1.4%, and the GDP was near 6%. The new Boss, Kamala, wants to institute government food commodity price and rent controls. That's just an old tactic from the Marxist playbook that has never worked.

The Democrats talked a lot about women's reproductive rights, something I have yet to find in the U.S. Constitution. But what they are advocating for is infanticide, which Tim Walz has already instituted in Minnesota. Barack Hussein Obama, the one who promoted this idea as a State Senator and asserted that he would not punish his daughters with having a baby…invoked Republican President Abraham Lincoln, referring to the "better Angels of our nature."

---

Quote:

---

Marx considered recurring class conflicts as the driving force of human history as such conflicts have manifested as distinct transitional stages of development in Western Europe. Accordingly, Marx designated human history as encompassing four stages of development in relations of production:

[ol]

Primitive communism: cooperative tribal societies.

Slave society: development of tribal to city-state in which aristocracy is born.

Feudalism: aristocrats are the ruling class, while merchants evolve into the bourgeoisie.

Capitalism: capitalists are the ruling class who create and employ the proletariat.

[/ol]While historical materialism has been referred to as a materialist theory of history, Marx did not claim to have produced a master key to history and that the materialist conception of history is not "an historico-philosophic theory of the marche generale, imposed by fate upon every people, whatever the historic circumstances in which it finds itself."

---