Oh my goodness, look what I found from the left. >https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/democrats-mean-it-when-they-say-they-want-to-
defund-or-abolish-the-police/ar-BB1fCbLU

U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan is the latest to confirm that fact. >"Policing in our country is inherently & intentionally racist," she said in a >tweet, "No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. It can't be >reformed."

"The Squad" has been fairly vocal about defund being litteral. Other
folks, like posters here, want to soften that message to make us think that
no activists or elected officials actually mean that. But they have sure
said they mean it. Maybe just trying to get donations or buy votes, but
we have to take them for their word.

These people mentioned above are your people Jeff, I am very happy to say they are not mine.

Nor mine.

It's not. It's only synonymous in your delusional view of Democrat and Liberal ideologies.

Well it's not Republicans or Conservatives chopping at the bit for this.

Correct.

Yu misunderstand sanctuary cities. People are far mor likely to help with the investigation of crimes if they're not afraid that the police will ask about their immigration status. More crimes get solved.

Right and these same people that would go to a sanctuary cities, are also planning on reporting back to immigration court, right Jeff. You are either dreaming, or not thinking this through, if they go to a sanctuary city
why would they want or need to report to immigration court?

Well, they don't get asked about it unless they commit a crime, so you are likely correct. Sanctuary city means you can live there and never be questioned, which means you never have to go to court if you don't want to.


* SLMR 2.1a * Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 31 Oct 2021, Mike Powell said the following...

Yu misunderstand sanctuary cities. People are far mor likely to hel with the investigation of crimes if they're not afraid that the pol will ask about their immigration status. More crimes get solved.

Right and these same people that would go to a sanctuary cities, are als planning on reporting back to immigration court, right Jeff. You are eit dreaming, or not thinking this through, if they go to a sanctuary city why would they want or need to report to immigration court?

Well, they don't get asked about it unless they commit a crime, so you
are likely correct. Sanctuary city means you can live there and never be questioned, which means you never have to go to court if you don't want to.

Um, what you're describing here, Mike, is a sanctuary city. Even in sanctuary cities, immigration status does come up if the individual in question has committed a crime, so that's a red herring. The difference is in immigration status coming up when someone is a victim of a crime, a witness to a crime,
or has other information about a crime. If you support these people not
needing to fear deportation for reporting or providing informatio about a
crime that has been committed, then Congratulations! You support sanctuary cities!

Jeff.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken, who indeed was a racist thereby proving himself right.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

Well, they don't get asked about it unless they commit a crime, so you are likely correct. Sanctuary city means you can live there and never be
questioned, which means you never have to go to court if you don't want to.

Um, what you're describing here, Mike, is a sanctuary city. Even in sanctuary cities, immigration status does come up if the individual in question has committed a crime, so that's a red herring. The difference is in immigration status coming up when someone is a victim of a crime, a witness to a crime, or has other information about a crime. If you support these people not needing to fear deportation for reporting or providing informatio about a crime that has been committed, then Congratulations! You support sanctuary cities!

Many people can go through life without ever witnessing a crime, so that is also somewhat of a red herring.

Sanctuary city means they never get questioned about their status, whether
they ever witness a crime or not, which I do not support.


* SLMR 2.1a * Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 01 Nov 2021, Mike Powell said the following...

Well, they don't get asked about it unless they commit a crime, so are likely correct. Sanctuary city means you can live there and ne be
questioned, which means you never have to go to court if you don't to.

Um, what you're describing here, Mike, is a sanctuary city. Even in sanc cities, immigration status does come up if the individual in question ha committed a crime, so that's a red herring. The difference is in immigra status coming up when someone is a victim of a crime, a witness to a cri or has other information about a crime. If you support these people not needing to fear deportation for reporting or providing informatio about crime that has been committed, then Congratulations! You support sanctua cities!

Many people can go through life without ever witnessing a crime, so that is also somewhat of a red herring.

Nevertheless, some do witness crimes. Or worse, are victims of crimes. For example, victims of human trafficking, which you and Aaron seem particularly concerned about.

Sanctuary city means they never get questioned about their status,
whether they ever witness a crime or not, which I do not support.

Not true. Sanctuary cities do turn those who have committed serious crimes
over to the federal authorities.

Jeff.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken, who indeed was a racist thereby proving himself right.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

Not true. Sanctuary cities do turn those who have committed serious crimes over to the federal authorities.

We established this in the last message.


* SLMR 2.1a * Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Not true. Sanctuary cities do turn those who have committed serious
crimes over to the federal authorities.

"Sanctuary City" can mean different things in different cities. In Syracuse, nobody is going to be held there long enough for ICE to review fingerprints
and send officers. We have an instant-bail program. Illegal immigrants are
more than welcome to commit crimes, get arrested, get cashless bail the same day, and then leave the country if they feel like it. But there's no way the Sheriff's gonna turn them over to ICE. Especially now with all the holes in
the border. Who really cares if someone's an illegal immigrant? Thanks to you and Joe, we just have to live with it. Let's focus on properly giving these people (the world) full citizenship so that way they can start contributing to our society.

OR we can keep them crawling through crumbling tunnels, swimming through the ocean, wading through rivers, because I think that's how the Democrats get off.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: CompuBBS | Ashburn VA | cfbbs.scinet-ftn.org (1:275/99)

On 02 Nov 2021, Aaron Thomas said the following...

Not true. Sanctuary cities do turn those who have committed serious crimes over to the federal authorities.

"Sanctuary City" can mean different things in different cities. In Syracuse, nobody is going to be held there long enough for ICE to review fingerprints and send officers.

Nobody, you say?

We have an instant-bail program.

Which you repeatedly yet falsely equate to a guaranteed-bail program.

Illegal
immigrants are more than welcome to commit crimes, get arrested, get cashless bail the same day, and then leave the country if they feel like it. But there's no way the Sheriff's gonna turn them over to ICE.

Somehow I really doubt that's the case for serious crimes.

Especially now with all the holes in the border. Who really cares if someone's an illegal immigrant? Thanks to you and Joe, we just have to live with it. Let's focus on properly giving these people (the world)
full citizenship so that way they can start contributing to our society.

More "Replacement Theory" racist drivel.

OR we can keep them crawling through crumbling tunnels, swimming through the ocean, wading through rivers, because I think that's how the
Democrats get off.

Says the same guy who insists that if you don't like your job, you can always get a better one.

Jeff.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken, who indeed was a racist thereby proving himself right.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

it. But there's no way the Sheriff's gonna turn them over to ICE.

Somehow I really doubt that's the case for serious crimes.

It depends on how liberal they are. That's why you should start voting for conservative judges.

More "Replacement Theory" racist drivel.

Calling everything racist.. there's a phrase for that too I think.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: CompuBBS | Ashburn VA | cfbbs.scinet-ftn.org (1:275/99)

On 03 Nov 2021, Aaron Thomas said the following...

it. But there's no way the Sheriff's gonna turn them over to ICE

Somehow I really doubt that's the case for serious crimes.

It depends on how liberal they are. That's why you should start voting
for conservative judges.

Show me proof that someone's gotten cashless bail for murder.

More "Replacement Theory" racist drivel.

Calling everything racist.. there's a phrase for that too I think.

If you don't want to be called a racist, stop spouting racist drivel. The
idea that minority immigrants (it's always minorities, isn't it?) are being brought here to wrest political power from the (overwhelmingly white) Republican party is, and has been since its inception, racist.

Jeff.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken, who indeed was a racist thereby proving himself right.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

More "Replacement Theory" racist drivel.

Calling everything racist.. there's a phrase for that too I think.

Leftist is the word you seek.


* SLMR 2.1a * Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 05 Nov 2021, Mike Powell said the following...

More "Replacement Theory" racist drivel.

Calling everything racist.. there's a phrase for that too I think.

Leftist is the word you seek.

I think not. Die hard racists aren't leftists, they're consistent and
reliable rightists. See, for example, the "alt-right."

Jeff.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken, who indeed was a racist thereby proving himself right.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

More "Replacement Theory" racist drivel.

Calling everything racist.. there's a phrase for that too I think.

Leftist is the word you seek.

I think not. Die hard racists aren't leftists, they're consistent and reliable rightists. See, for example, the "alt-right."

"calling everything racists" = leftist

Geez, maybe it really is poor reading comprehension.


* SLMR 2.1a * "Mmmmmmmm.....pie pants."
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 06 Nov 2021, Mike Powell said the following...

More "Replacement Theory" racist drivel.

Calling everything racist.. there's a phrase for that too I think

Leftist is the word you seek.

I think not. Die hard racists aren't leftists, they're consistent and reliable rightists. See, for example, the "alt-right."

"calling everything racists" = leftist

Geez, maybe it really is poor reading comprehension.

"Calling everything racist" implies that 1) I actually call *everything* racist, which would include fellow liberals, and 2) that the things I *call* racist aren't actally racist.

The KKK, Neo-Nazis, Neo-Confederates, and white supremacist "militia" groups are indeed all racist and indeed all tend to be heavily, reliably, and consistenly conservative.

"Replacement Theory" has a well-documented history of being rooted in racist fears of a loss of power by white men.

Jeff.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken, who indeed was a racist thereby proving himself right.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

The KKK, Neo-Nazis, Neo-Confederates, and white supremacist "militia" groups are indeed all racist and indeed all tend to be heavily, reliably, and consistenly conservative.

I have never knowingly known anyone in any of those groups, but I have
known plenty of racists. They are very consistently:

(1) pro-government wealth redistribution -- their racism seems to
partially stem from their fear that a minority is going to take their
share;
(2) pro-union labor -- their racism seems to partially stem from their
fear that, that if there was no union, a minority might steal their jobs
(if they had jobs);
(3) pro-choice -- when asked about this one, their reasoning usually
involves a racist point of view... I will let you figure that one out on
your own.

Now, based on those three things, I don't see them as being reliably or consistently conservative, or Republican. "Vote Democrat" is the message I
get from them. I was actually very surprised in 2008. They did not
waver. Most of them were all for Obama, once he became their party's
nominee, because those three things I listed above were more important.

That didn't stop them from being racists, mind you, only from being racists when it came time to vote for the party that would most likely protect
their government handouts, their union labor, and their daughter's right to choose.


* SLMR 2.1a * Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 07 Nov 2021, Mike Powell said the following...

The KKK, Neo-Nazis, Neo-Confederates, and white supremacist "militia" gr are indeed all racist and indeed all tend to be heavily, reliably, and consistenly conservative.

I have never knowingly known anyone in any of those groups, but I have known plenty of racists. They are very consistently:
(1) pro-government wealth redistribution -- their racism seems to partially stem from their fear that a minority is going to take their share;

Why wold one support government wealth distribution if one was afraid of a minority taking one's share? That makes no sense.

(2) pro-union labor -- their racism seems to partially stem from their fear that, that if there was no union, a minority might steal their jobs (if they had jobs);

What's to preven minorities from joining the union? Again, this makes no
sense.

(3) pro-choice -- when asked about this one, their reasoning usually involves a racist point of view... I will let you figure that one out on your own.

That one is plausible in some cases.

Now, based on those three things, I don't see them as being reliably or consistently conservative, or Republican. "Vote Democrat" is the
message I get from them. I was actually very surprised in 2008. They
did not waver. Most of them were all for Obama, once he became their party's nominee, because those three things I listed above were more important.

What? You're saying that Obama overwhelmingly got the racist vote? You're saying that the KKK, Neo-Nazis, Neo-Confederates, white supremacists, etc., supported Obama? Are you off your rocker?

That didn't stop them from being racists, mind you, only from being racists when it came time to vote for the party that would most likely protect their government handouts, their union labor, and their
daughter's right to choose.

Explain the Unite the Right rally, then.

Jeff.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken, who indeed was a racist thereby proving himself right.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

Hello Mike,

The KKK, Neo-Nazis, Neo-Confederates, and white supremacist "militia"
groups
are indeed all racist and indeed all tend to be heavily, reliably, and
consistenly conservative.

I have never knowingly known anyone in any of those groups, but I have known plenty of racists. They are very consistently:

I have known many racists, and have met David Duke in person.
All of them are truly despicable, and capable of committing very
violent acts, including arson and murder. Yes, they are very
constistent with their views, and will never change their
views until the day they die.

--Lee

--
Nothing sucks like an Electrolux

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

(1) pro-government wealth redistribution -- their racism seems to partially stem from their fear that a minority is going to take their share;

Why wold one support government wealth distribution if one was afraid of a minority taking one's share? That makes no sense.

The racist is afraid of a minority taking the share that should go to the racist.

(2) pro-union labor -- their racism seems to partially stem from their fear that, that if there was no union, a minority might steal their jobs (if they had jobs);

What's to preven minorities from joining the union? Again, this makes no sense.

Joining and stealing their jobs. They are racists... why do you expect
them to make sense??????

What? You're saying that Obama overwhelmingly got the racist vote? You're saying that the KKK, Neo-Nazis, Neo-Confederates, white supremacists, etc., supported Obama? Are you off your rocker?

You apparently believe that all racists belong to groups (although them being involved with their local KKK would not have surprised me).

If they are like most racists I have known, who want their government to be pro-union, pro-wealth-redistribution, and pro-choice, yes they sure did. I am not off my rocker. They were open about who they voted for and they most certainly did claim to vote Obama.

Again, since they are racists, I don't expec them to make any sense. I am
a little surprised you do. Also a little surprised you think that someone
who hates like that might not hate Republicans even more than the idea of a black President.

I have also known Democrats who are gun owners and even NRA members. I
hope reading that didn't make your brain explode.


* SLMR 2.1a * "Did you open the Microwave door before the 'ding'"?
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 08 Nov 2021, Mike Powell said the following...

(1) pro-government wealth redistribution -- their racism seems to partially stem from their fear that a minority is going to take the share;

Why wold one support government wealth distribution if one was afraid of minority taking one's share? That makes no sense.

The racist is afraid of a minority taking the share that should go to the racist.

How exactly does government wealth redistribution solve this problem, from
the racist's point of view. People who oppose government wealth distribution typically also don't want something taken from them...

(2) pro-union labor -- their racism seems to partially stem from t fear that, that if there was no union, a minority might steal their (if they had jobs);

What's to preven minorities from joining the union? Again, this makes no sense.

Joining and stealing their jobs. They are racists... why do you expect them to make sense??????

Ok. Somehow I'd think they'd make more sense than that, though.

What? You're saying that Obama overwhelmingly got the racist vote? You'r saying that the KKK, Neo-Nazis, Neo-Confederates, white supremacists, et supported Obama? Are you off your rocker?

You apparently believe that all racists belong to groups (although them being involved with their local KKK would not have surprised me).

A lot of them do, yes.

If they are like most racists I have known, who want their government to be pro-union, pro-wealth-redistribution, and pro-choice, yes they sure did. I am not off my rocker. They were open about who they voted for
and they most certainly did claim to vote Obama.

All of the racists down here voted for Trump.

Again, since they are racists, I don't expec them to make any sense. I
am a little surprised you do. Also a little surprised you think that someone who hates like that might not hate Republicans even more than
the idea of a black President.

Why would they hate Republicans? Republicans are the ones blowing all of the right dog whistles.

I have also known Democrats who are gun owners and even NRA members. I hope reading that didn't make your brain explode.

Nope, so have I. The NRA used to be a much more honorable organization than
it has become in the last few decades.

Jeff.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken, who indeed was a racist thereby proving himself right.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Cold War Computing BBS (1:387/26)

ot hate Republicans even more than

the idea of a black President.

It doesn't surprise me one bit. "White Supremacy" is yet another boogey man that Left likes to trot out to scare the sheeple.

But it's getting a bit old since they Left keep having to manufacture racist problems (remember Jussie Smollett?).

I have also known Democrats who are gun owners and even NRA members.

But those are the "old Democrats", who are squarely in the Conservative area of the political range today.


... Shock me, say something intelligent!
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Win32
* Origin: Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 (1:275/89)

But it's getting a bit old since they Left keep having to manufacture racist problems (remember Jussie Smollett?).

Yes. I am also aware of the trial going on in Wisconsin right now.

I have also known Democrats who are gun owners and even NRA members.

But those are the "old Democrats", who are squarely in the Conservative area o
the political range today.

Yeah, although some of them are not "old" of age, but they are still like
the "old" Democrats. Progressive candidates who think all can be solved by taking their guns are not going to get their votes.


* SLMR 2.1a * Tell me, is something eluding you, Sunshine?
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Mike Powell wrote to RON LAUZON <=-

Yeah, although some of them are not "old" of age, but they are still
like the "old" Democrats. Progressive candidates who think all can be solved by taking their guns are not going to get their votes.

Ya, I doubt you'll see that again. A number of years ago, the Lefties tried to run on a "gun control" platform. That was disasterous for them. The next elections they deflected any question about gun control. They didn't want to out-right lie and say they were against gun control, but they didn't want to say they were for it either.

If you haven't noticed, gun control hasn't been in the news during in election year for quite some time now.


... Fools and their money become popular quickly.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Win32
* Origin: Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 (1:275/89)

If you haven't noticed, gun control hasn't been in the news during in election
year for quite some time now.

Yeah, they wait until after the election to bring it up now.

---
* SLMR 2.1a * "Get out & take your Sacagawea dollars with you!" - Moe
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)