I do love my country very much and because of such
love I saw no problem with America First, you saw it as derogatory. My question is why?

So no problem turning the clock back a century, when women had no voting rights?

We all know that you already tries to turn the clock back half a century, when abortions, contraceptives and homosexuality was illegal.

Progressives: Want progress, moving forward into the future.

Liberals: Want liberty, even more freedom from government oppression.

Conservatives: Want things to remain the same, no progress. We're fine thank you very much.

Reactionaries: Want things the way it was back then. Make America Great *Again* .



--
United we are strong, we win. Divided we are weak, we lose.

..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On 11 Oct 2022, Bj”rn Felten said the following...

I do love my country very much and because of such
love I saw no problem with America First, you saw it as derogatory. M question is why?

So no problem turning the clock back a century, when women had no voting rights?
We all know that you already tries to turn the clock back half a century, when abortions, contraceptives and homosexuality was illegal.

[...]

Reactionaries: Want things the way it was back then. Make America
Great *Again* .

"Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
-- Winston Churchill

Jeff.

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

On 11 Oct 2022, Bj”rn Felten said the following...

So no problem turning the clock back a century, when women had no
voting rights?
We all know that you already tries to turn the clock back half a
century, when abortions, contraceptives and homosexuality was illegal. Progressives: Want progress, moving forward into the future.
Liberals: Want liberty, even more freedom from government oppression. Conservatives: Want things to remain the same, no progress. We're
fine thank you very much.

Reactionaries: Want things the way it was back then. Make America
Great *Again*

Socialists find them term "Make America Great Again" to be threating due to their socialist ideology. When it was really nothing more then putting a
end to the division that exists here in the U.S.A. and everyone to being prosperous and of course from that; promotes happiness. Even America First had nothing to do with rolling back the calendar or anything that considered to be derogatory. What people are forgetting is that even Bill Clinton used this term Make America Great, there was not a peep from any Socialist, Marxist or Liberal.

Every nation including Sweden should have some-kind of stance that states
- Make their country first.

. ______ ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿ ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿ ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿ ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
_[]_³³Äij³ ³ Fidonet ³ ³FSX Net³ ³ T R U M P ³ ³ Another Message ³
{ NET 267 ³ ³1:267/150³ ³21:1/127³ ³ 2 0 2 4 ³ ³ by Gregory ³
/ 00ÄÄÄÄ00'-¨€ÀÄ00ÄÄÄ00ÄÙ¨€ÀÄ00ÄÄ00ÄÙ¨€ÀÄ00ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ00ÄÙ¨€ÀÄÄ00ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ00ÄÄÄÙ

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Capital Station BBS * Telnet://csbbs.dyndns.org * (1:267/150)

On 11 Oct 2022, Gregory Deyss said the following...

So no problem turning the clock back a century, when women had no voting rights?
We all know that you already tries to turn the clock back half a century, when abortions, contraceptives and homosexuality was illegal Progressives: Want progress, moving forward into the future. Liberals: Want liberty, even more freedom from government oppression. Conservatives: Want things to remain the same, no progress. We're fine thank you very much.

Reactionaries: Want things the way it was back then. Make America Great *Again*

Socialists find them term "Make America Great Again" to be threating due to their socialist ideology. When it was really nothing more then
putting a end to the division that exists here in the U.S.A. and
everyone to being prosperous and of course from that; promotes
happiness. Even America First had nothing to do with rolling back the calendar or anything that considered to be derogatory. What people are forgetting is that even Bill Clinton used this term Make America Great, there was not a peep from any Socialist, Marxist or Liberal.

Absolute BS.

What's the difference between "Make America Great" and "Make America Great Again?" Look closely, can you spot it? That's right! The word "again!"

What does "again" mean though? In this context, it means "like it was before
at some unspecified point in the past." So we need to make America more like
it was before, but when?

Would this be before the civil rights era? Do you feel that Americans were
less divisive prior to the civil rights movement?

When exactly was America great before? What is this time that you want to go back to?

Jeff.

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

A lot of sources are saying that we are close to a nuclear disaster. We may
or may not be, depending on one man's whim. That seems like something to be
concerned about to me.

Imagine dying from a nuclear attack because an extra in the movie Home Alone II sold top secret documents to Putin. What irony...


--
United we are strong, we win. Divided we are weak, we lose.

..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

What's the difference between "Make America Great" and "Make America Great Again?" Look closely, can you spot it? That's right! The word "again!"

What does "again" mean though? In this context, it means "like it was before at some unspecified point in the past." So we need to make America more like it was before, but when?

Would this be before the civil rights era? Do you feel that Americans were less divisive prior to the civil rights movement?

When exactly was America great before? What is this time that you want to go back to?

For most, it was when we produced most of what we consumed, before jobs
were shipped elsewhere. For most, they were not looking to travel back in
time on everything... only an idiot would want to go back to a time to take away civil rights, and only an idiot would believe that a significant
number of people would want to. I suspect you don't really believe that
and only bring it up to make Aaron and other feel bad about wanting to see American be a producer again. I can only guess that producer scenario means that you wouldn't get whatever it is you want.

Right now, it could even be any point between when Carter was President and now... you know, when inflation was not at record levels?

I have seen some photos of MAGA folks with Confederate flags, but I have
never seen Trump campaign material that used it. I have seen Clinton-Gore
pins that used one as the motif. 1992 was supposedly long after the
"big shift" and, ironically, there were Democrats in 2008 and again in 2016 that thought an HRC Presidency would be a return to those Clinton-Gore
times.

It should make you wonder who is wanting to go back to what exactly, but I
bet it does not. I am not dumb enough to believe that any significant
number of them want to go back and strip away civil rights, either, but I am not the one that supposed that, so....

IIRC, "Make American Great Again," was borrowed (and only slightly changed) from a Bill Clinton campaign, either early 1992 or one of his runs for governor. Being a "D" I am sure he is above reproach for wanting to go
back to some unspecified period in history for whatever reason.


* SLMR 2.1a * GORBACHEX: Popular Russian Breakfast cereal
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 11 Oct 2022, Mike Powell said the following...

What's the difference between "Make America Great" and "Make America Gre Again?" Look closely, can you spot it? That's right! The word "again!" What does "again" mean though? In this context, it means "like it was be at some unspecified point in the past." So we need to make America more it was before, but when?
Would this be before the civil rights era? Do you feel that Americans we less divisive prior to the civil rights movement?
When exactly was America great before? What is this time that you want t back to?

For most, it was when we produced most of what we consumed, before jobs were shipped elsewhere. For most, they were not looking to travel back
in time on everything... only an idiot would want to go back to a time
to take away civil rights, and only an idiot would believe that a significant number of people would want to. I suspect you don't really believe that and only bring it up to make Aaron and other feel bad about wanting to see American be a producer again. I can only guess that producer scenario means that you wouldn't get whatever it is you want.

We already have such a movement; it's called "Made in America." Why dredge up old grievances when a perfectly suitable slogan with no such baggage already exists?

Right now, it could even be any point between when Carter was President and now... you know, when inflation was not at record levels?

Much of that is due to circumstances beyond Biden's (and Trump's) control. Eventually it will recede, but my bet is that you'll still be wishing for
some yesteryear.

I have seen some photos of MAGA folks with Confederate flags, but I have never seen Trump campaign material that used it. I have seen
Clinton-Gore pins that used one as the motif. 1992 was supposedly long after the "big shift" and, ironically, there were Democrats in 2008 and again in 2016 that thought an HRC Presidency would be a return to those Clinton-Gore times.

I have not seen anything from Trump with that, either. And those buttons were not produced by the Clinton-Gore campaign, which is obvious since they do not have union "bugs," a small mark somewhere on them to show that they were made in a union shop. (Which gets us back to "Made in America;" much of the
Trump campaign swag was made overseas.)

I haven't seen any Clinton or Biden campaign material with confederate flags, nor have I seen any Confederate flags at any of their speeches or rallies.
But Trump doesn't seem to mind them; certainly they know what people are bringing in with them.

It should make you wonder who is wanting to go back to what exactly, but
I bet it does not. I am not dumb enough to believe that any significant number of them want to go back and strip away civil rights, either, but
I am not the one that supposed that, so....

Clarence Thomas is ready to go after contraception, gay rights, and same-sex marriage.

When presented with the notion that Trump would win in 2020 if only men
voted, people started calling for the right of women to vote to be repealed. These were Trump supporters, and presumably they bought into his MAGA fantasy. https://time.com/4529800/donald-trump-women-voters-2/

IIRC, "Make American Great Again," was borrowed (and only slightly changed) from a Bill Clinton campaign, either early 1992 or one of his runs for governor. Being a "D" I am sure he is above reproach for
wanting to go back to some unspecified period in history for whatever reason.

The "Again" being the problematic part.

Jeff.

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

IIRC, "Make American Great Again," was borrowed (and only slightly changed) from a Bill Clinton campaign, either early 1992 or one of his runs for governor. Being a "D" I am sure he is above reproach for wanting to go back to some unspecified period in history for whatever reason.

The "Again" being the problematic part.

IIRC, the "Again" part was not the change. The change would have been
America or Arkansas.

I agree, if you believe that America has never been great at any point, as
you seem to, or if you believe that in order to make one part as good as
it used to be you have to bring everything bad back with it, there is no point in anyone expecting you to want to make it "Great Again" and probably not even to want to make it "great."


* SLMR 2.1a * Virus detected! P)our chicken soup on motherboard?
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 12 Oct 2022, Mike Powell said the following...

IIRC, "Make American Great Again," was borrowed (and only slightly changed) from a Bill Clinton campaign, either early 1992 or one of runs for governor. Being a "D" I am sure he is above reproach for wanting to go back to some unspecified period in history for whatev reason.

The "Again" being the problematic part.

IIRC, the "Again" part was not the change. The change would have been America or Arkansas.

Ah, according to Gregory, the "Again" part was the change. At any rate, Clinton's agenda for Arkansas was not nearly as regressive as Trump and the Republicans' agenda for America.

I agree, if you believe that America has never been great at any point,
as you seem to, or if you believe that in order to make one part as good as it used to be you have to bring everything bad back with it, there is no point in anyone expecting you to want to make it "Great Again" and probably not even to want to make it "great."

I just think one should do a bit better job of defining what metrics one
thinks defined America as Great instead of just issuing such a vague
statement. Issuing such a vague statement leaves the blanks to be filled in
by one's legislative agenda and that of one's party, and that, in this case, made the slogan look very regressive. I'm not going to sign on to a vague
"Make America Great Again" agenda without some details, and I'm pretty sure that many others aren't, either. Republicans will, though, because that's
their candidate.

I remember a John Oliver segment on the Daily Show, back when Jon Stewart was still hosting, and Oliver went out to interview people, asking them what
decade they thought that America was at its greatest. In a majority of cases, that decade was the decade in which the respondent was a child, before they became politically aware.

Jeff.

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

On 10-12-22 09:32, Gregory Deyss <=-
spoke to Jeff Thiele about Re: COVID Redux <=-

Coup sure did exist with Trump but not in the way that you think.
Curious would you still refer a "coup as tyranny" when there is tons
of data to suggest and to support the clear indication of a coup that
was and continuously developing against Trump?

What are you talking about? Trump lead an attempted and unsucessful
coup to prevent the transfer of the Presidency -- but what coup are you claiming was developed against Trump?

Dale Shipp
fido_261_1466 (at) verizon (dot) net
(1:261/1466)


... Shipwrecked in Silver Spring, Maryland. 00:18:23, 13 Oct 2022
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01
* Origin: Owl's Anchor (1:261/1466)

I remember a John Oliver segment on the Daily Show, back when Jon Stewart was still hosting, and Oliver went out to interview people, asking them what decade they thought that America was at its greatest. In a majority of cases, that decade was the decade in which the respondent was a child, before they became politically aware.

Becoming politically aware is one of the many realizations that makes one
less happy about life for most people.


* SLMR 2.1a * Skynet Softball >>>>>>>>>>>>> Catch it!!!
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 13 Oct 2022, Mike Powell said the following...

I remember a John Oliver segment on the Daily Show, back when Jon Stewar still hosting, and Oliver went out to interview people, asking them what decade they thought that America was at its greatest. In a majority of c that decade was the decade in which the respondent was a child, before t became politically aware.

Becoming politically aware is one of the many realizations that makes one less happy about life for most people.

I can't argue with that. Ignorance is bliss.

Jeff.

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

Mike Powell wrote to JEFF THIELE <=-

Becoming politically aware is one of the many realizations that makes
one less happy about life for most people.

The Ignorant Elitists have forced us to become more politically aware beause we realize now that our rights and lives are in danger unless we are more aware.

Once you have become politically aware, you can't undo it.

And this is something that we will **never** forgive them for.


... If you really want to know, you won't ask me.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

On 14 Oct 2022, Ron L. said the following...

Becoming politically aware is one of the many realizations that makes one less happy about life for most people.

The Ignorant Elitists have forced us to become more politically aware beause we realize now that our rights and lives are in danger unless we are more aware.
Once you have become politically aware, you can't undo it.
And this is something that we will **never** forgive them for.

Uhh.... I'm not sure you understand what "politically aware" means.

Jeff.

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

Becoming politically aware is one of the many realizations that makes one less happy about life for most people.

The Ignorant Elitists have forced us to become more politically aware beause w
realize now that our rights and lives are in danger unless we are more aware.

I cannot argue with that.

Once you have become politically aware, you can't undo it.

It is one of those things that makes you wonder if senility is all that bad.

And this is something that we will **never** forgive them for.

Indeed. The unaware are who they feed on.


* SLMR 2.1a * God must love the common man; He made so many of them.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

The Ignorant Elitists have forced us to become more politically aware beause we realize now that our rights and lives are in danger unless we are more aware.
Once you have become politically aware, you can't undo it.
And this is something that we will **never** forgive them for.

Uhh.... I'm not sure you understand what "politically aware" means.

Unfortunately, I think he does. We are not able to remain blissfully
ignorant or our rights will be eroded away. That is something that
actively happens... it is not like they get eroded by accident.
Politicians make sure of that.

Note that he said "elitists" and didn't make a distinction between from
which side.


* SLMR 2.1a * Art is I; Science is We.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 14 Oct 2022, Mike Powell said the following...

The Ignorant Elitists have forced us to become more politically awa beause we realize now that our rights and lives are in danger unles are more aware.
Once you have become politically aware, you can't undo it.
And this is something that we will **never** forgive them for.

Uhh.... I'm not sure you understand what "politically aware" means.

Unfortunately, I think he does. We are not able to remain blissfully ignorant or our rights will be eroded away. That is something that actively happens... it is not like they get eroded by accident. Politicians make sure of that.

Being politically aware, informed citizens is our duty and has been since the inception of this country. Our democracy is based on that duty, and depends
on it,

Jeff.

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

Mike Powell wrote to Dr. What <=-

Once you have become politically aware, you can't undo it.

It is one of those things that makes you wonder if senility is all that bad.

The old saying is that "ignorance is bliss", but seeing as how the Ignorant Elitists are so angry all the time, it looks like they broke that saying too.

And this is something that we will **never** forgive them for.

Indeed. The unaware are who they feed on.

Yup. I see that when listening to some of the Ignorant Elitists that I see on social media. It's obvious that they have never read any of the proposals on the ballot in my state. All they do is parrot the Narrative.


... I'd love to, but my uncle escaped again.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

Mike Powell wrote to JEFF THIELE <=-

Note that he said "elitists" and didn't make a distinction between from which side.

And I use the term "elitist" because the "Democrat vs. Republican" or "Right vs. Left", etc. distinctions are smoke screens.

The real fight is between the Ignorant Elitists who think that they should be our rulers, and everyone else.


... I am not 40, I'm 18 with 22 years experience
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

Uhh.... I'm not sure you understand what "politically aware" means.

Unfortunately, I think he does. We are not able to remain blissfully ignorant or our rights will be eroded away. That is something that actively happens... it is not like they get eroded by accident. Politicians make sure of that.

Being politically aware, informed citizens is our duty and has been since the inception of this country. Our democracy is based on that duty, and depends on it,

Being informed vs. having to constantly keep an eye on what folks who want
to erode freedoms and bring about "social change" (in the form of socialism
or worse) are different things. Democracy would not have to depend on the latter if those people Ron calls the "elite" were not actively participating
in such activities. But they are, as do many of their supporters, and that is the thing I am guess he would never forgive them for. As I do not hold most politicians, especially national level ones, in very high regard, I guess I also do not.


* SLMR 2.1a * Taglines - not just for messages anymore.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 17 Oct 2022, Mike Powell said the following...

Being politically aware, informed citizens is our duty and has been sinc inception of this country. Our democracy is based on that duty, and depe on it,

Being informed vs. having to constantly keep an eye on what folks who
want to erode freedoms and bring about "social change" (in the form of socialism or worse) are different things.

There have been no serious Socialist candidates for decades. What
conservatives decry as socialism in no such thing, and they're just trying to use scare tactics and dehimanize their opponents.

Democracy would not have to
depend on the latter if those people Ron calls the "elite" were not actively participating in such activities.

In other words, Ron's "elite" are socialists. I'll be sure to keep an eye out for any socialists.

But they are, as do many of
their supporters, and that is the thing I am guess he would never
forgive them for.

There have been no serious socialist candidates for decades.

As I do not hold most politicians, especially
national level ones, in very high regard, I guess I also do not.

Is it a possibility that the fact that some, most, or all politicians are untrustworthy be a reflection of the lack of political awareness among those who elected them?

Jeff.

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

Hello Jeff,

[..]

Being informed vs. having to constantly keep an eye on what folks who
want to erode freedoms and bring about "social change" (in the form of
socialism or worse) are different things.

There have been no serious Socialist candidates for decades.

Except for Bernie Sanders, who won as a socialist, still claims
to be a socialist, and remains an elected public official, now as
a US Senator from Vermont.

What conservatives decry as socialism in no such thing, and they're just trying to use scare tactics and dehimanize their opponents.

Conservatives love socialism, as long as the benefits are for
the wealthy.

For Life,
Lee

--
Food for the Fun of It

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On 20 Oct 2022, Lee Lofaso said the following...

There have been no serious Socialist candidates for decades.

Except for Bernie Sanders, who won as a socialist, still claims
to be a socialist, and remains an elected public official, now as
a US Senator from Vermont.

Bernie describes himself as a "Democratic Socialist." He's a far cry from,
say, Eugene Debs.

Conservatives love socialism, as long as the benefits are for
the wealthy.

Proper socialism advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. No one
that I know of supports this.

What conservatives mean by "socialism" is a government redistribution of wealth, and yes, they support it when it serves their purpose. But few
realize, or will admit, that tax cuts for the wealthy are also a government redistribution of wealth.

Jeff.

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

On 20 Oct 2022, Mike Powell said the following...

Being informed vs. having to constantly keep an eye on what folks w want to erode freedoms and bring about "social change" (in the form socialism or worse) are different things.

There have been no serious Socialist candidates for decades. What conservatives decry as socialism in no such thing, and they're just tryi use scare tactics and dehimanize their opponents.

That is a way of saying there is no threat when you know better. There have, to my knowledge, never been any serious Socialist candidates, but there are a lot of Democrats with socialist agendas.

A true socialist agenda would entail that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. No Democrat candidates are proposing this.

Democracy would not have to
depend on the latter if those people Ron calls the "elite" were not actively participating in such activities.

In other words, Ron's "elite" are socialists. I'll be sure to keep an ey for any socialists.

Not just socialists. You can probably think of a few "elites" on the GOP side that you think are up to no good, right?

Given that you defined these elite as doing things like socialism, no.

But they are, as do many of
their supporters, and that is the thing I am guess he would never forgive them for.

There have been no serious socialist candidates for decades.

But Democrats who are socialists include AOC and other members of "The Squad," as well as the soon to retire Democrat from Kentucky's House deligation, whose name suprisingly escapes me at the moment. They all
not only were candidates but managed to get elected, and multiple times.

A true socialist agenda would entail that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. No Democrat candidate is proposing this.

When you say "socialist," I think you mean "in favor of government redistribution of wealth, particularly from the wealthy to the poor." Our entire tax system is a government redistribution of wealth, and especially since Reagan took office it has been redistributing wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich.

As I do not hold most politicians, especially
national level ones, in very high regard, I guess I also do not.

Is it a possibility that the fact that some, most, or all politicians ar untrustworthy be a reflection of the lack of political awareness among t who elected them?

In some cases maybe but, in the majority of races, even in the primaries, you are stuck with multiple untrustworthy candidates. The trustworthy ones don't usually get any financial OR party backing and are also-rans
by the time the primary roles around.

Some are more trustworthy than others, though.

Jeff.

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

Being informed vs. having to constantly keep an eye on what folks who want to erode freedoms and bring about "social change" (in the form of socialism or worse) are different things.

There have been no serious Socialist candidates for decades. What conservatives decry as socialism in no such thing, and they're just trying to use scare tactics and dehimanize their opponents.

That is a way of saying there is no threat when you know better. There
have, to my knowledge, never been any serious Socialist candidates, but
there are a lot of Democrats with socialist agendas.

Democracy would not have to
depend on the latter if those people Ron calls the "elite" were not actively participating in such activities.

In other words, Ron's "elite" are socialists. I'll be sure to keep an eye out for any socialists.

Not just socialists. You can probably think of a few "elites" on the GOP
side that you think are up to no good, right?

But they are, as do many of
their supporters, and that is the thing I am guess he would never forgive them for.

There have been no serious socialist candidates for decades.

But Democrats who are socialists include AOC and other members of "The
Squad," as well as the soon to retire Democrat from Kentucky's House deligation, whose name suprisingly escapes me at the moment. They all not
only were candidates but managed to get elected, and multiple times.

As I do not hold most politicians, especially
national level ones, in very high regard, I guess I also do not.

Is it a possibility that the fact that some, most, or all politicians are untrustworthy be a reflection of the lack of political awareness among those who elected them?

In some cases maybe but, in the majority of races, even in the primaries,
you are stuck with multiple untrustworthy candidates. The trustworthy ones don't usually get any financial OR party backing and are also-rans by the time the primary roles around.


* SLMR 2.1a * Old Moderator: Burned out shell of a computer hobbyist.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Not just socialists. You can probably think of a few "elites" on the GOP
side that you think are up to no good, right?

Given that you defined these elite as doing things like socialism, no.

I said socialism or worse.

In some cases maybe but, in the majority of races, even in the primaries,
you are stuck with multiple untrustworthy candidates. The trustworthy ones don't usually get any financial OR party backing and are also-rans by the time the primary roles around.

Some are more trustworthy than others, though.

We have some on a more local level.


* SLMR 2.1a * Oxymoron: Arrogant Humility.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 21 Oct 2022, Mike Powell said the following...

Not just socialists. You can probably think of a few "elites" on t GOP
side that you think are up to no good, right?

Given that you defined these elite as doing things like socialism, no.

I said socialism or worse.

What's worse than socialism, in your book?

In some cases maybe but, in the majority of races, even in the primaries,
you are stuck with multiple untrustworthy candidates. The trustwor ones don't usually get any financial OR party backing and are also- by the time the primary roles around.

Some are more trustworthy than others, though.

We have some on a more local level.

We also have some on the national level. Cheney and Kinzinger spring to mind.

Jeff.

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

Hello Jeff,

There have been no serious Socialist candidates for decades.

Except for Bernie Sanders, who won as a socialist, still claims
to be a socialist, and remains an elected public official, now as
a US Senator from Vermont.

Bernie describes himself as a "Democratic Socialist." He's a far cry from, say, Eugene Debs.

Or Norman Thomas.

Conservatives love socialism, as long as the benefits are for
the wealthy.

Proper socialism advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. No one that I know of supports this.

Are you saying, or suggesting, that Jesus was a socialist?
And what about all those Christians who claim to worship him?
Are they also socialists? Just like Jesus?

What conservatives mean by "socialism" is a government redistribution of wealth, and yes, they support it when it serves their purpose. But few realize, or will admit, that tax cuts for the wealthy are also a government
redistribution of wealth.

So who pays for all the stuff we have today? Who pays for the bridges, highways, hospitals, schools, everything we enjoy and take for granted? Certainly none of it is free. Somebody has to pay for it. The poor do
not have any money, so they are forgiven. The rich do not have to pay
anything, so they are also exempt. So what does Congress do? It kicks
the can to the next generation. Let our kids, and grand kids, pay for everything. As we enjoy now what they will pay for.

Reagan tried to teach us.
So did GWB.
As well as Trump.

If you want to make money, you have to spend money. Preferably
other people's money.

For Life,
Lee

--
Hey hey! Ho ho! Donald Trump has got to go!

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)