Progressives (Liberals)

A bunch of intentional bullshit.

You wouldn’t know a moral standard if it introduced itself.

I want people to stop dying because they don’t have enough money to pay for healthcare. If you don’t, you’re subhuman.

What a coincidence. That is exactly what both Trump and Putin have said is the reality. Everybody else, in the US and worldwide, is lying.

It goes without saying I want Hillary out, but I didn't need a Russian to tell me that. I went through a phase with PDiddie, before the 2016 primaries were even started and concluded with him that we will no longer vote the lesser of two evils. Hillary has to take the credit for ******* up her own chances. She did not want any progressive issues to prevail. She got Trump nominated by her machinations, and you're going to tell me the Russians got Sanders supporters to make her lose, like no other factors matter.

Biden is trading on sympathy for his son. It wears thin over the years.

That's part of the game being played. As I've detailed before, this is precisely what the GOP set out to accomplish in the Obama/McCain race as a means to divide and anger Dem voters.

And it has obvious functionality. Note that edgar is already convinced that the primaries will likely/certainly be rigged. If Sanders fails, this idea will be "proved" for quite a few Sanders supporters. Careful analysis will not be part of this conclusion. The succeeding candidate will be merely and only a Deep State/DNC/capitalist placeholder.

It's interesting, in light of that, to imagine what will happen if Sanders actually succeeds in the primaries.

I've never said that. Nor have any of the political observers/analysts I attend to. You keep reaching for black/white formulations and it isn't serving you well.

You claim to be astute following politics and yet claim to see no signs of rigging the primaries. I can't make you open your eyes.

You centrists hammer on it like it was a decisive thing that altered the result but slip away when it's put like that.

Do you. How nice. I'm sure you've got a good grip on this matter. Tell us, for example, how Hillary's initiative to establish such a system during Bill's first term was thwarted. This is a fairly well known history. Tell us what you know about that as I'm sure your thinking takes account of US history in this matter.

Centrists seem to be caught up in a Pollyannaish fantasy where the good guys prevail just by being there, and life will be like in a Disney movie. Which is apparently how the DNC wants it.

Gillibrand is out. 1 down: 37 to go...

I think you are the only person on earth, living or deceased, who has labeled me as a centrist.

Nobody I read (none I can recall) has said Russian influence was decisive. Her loss is far too complicated to make that assertion with certainty. But that it was a contributing factor (and may have been decisive) is not in any sense a stretch. As you know, the result was razor thin in three states and that turned the election.

But what is relevant now is that Russia (and allies of convenience) are doing the same thing again.

Evil in Plain Sight: Are Liberal Americans Becoming Increasingly Ignorant or Immoral?

Is Democrat on Democrat shade going mainstream? Probably not, but the Bill Maher/Rashida Tlaib feud is just the latest high-profile example of division within the ranks of the left, with potential ramifications involving the long-term loyalties of Jewish voters.

Have Jewish liberals, who count among their rank’s notable Americans including Sarah Silverman, Bette Midler, Seth Rogan, Jon Stewart and so many other outwardly anti-Trump individuals, allowed the blind hatred they feel over the president, who has been a great ally to Israel and American Jews, to take precedence over their religious values?

The issue inflaming tensions between Maher and Tlaib center around Tlaib’s support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement. Maher ripped the movement, which has been supported by not only Tlaib, but also her “Squad” sister Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN), as “a bulls**t purity test by people who want to appear woke and have actually slept through history class,” and added that BDS is “predicated on this notion that is very shallow thinking, that the Jews are in Israel are mostly white and the Palestinians are browner so they must be innocent and correct and the Jews must be wrong.”

Another issue that liberals have shown an unyielding passion for are so-called “reproductive rights” for women, which has become Democrat slang for “unrestrained abortion on demand.” It is a fact that legalized abortion, and particularly the Planned Parenthood business model, which is focused not on healthcare as it claims but on a reliance on abortions to keep their doors open has disproportionately affected population growth within the Black community in America.

According to a report released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in 2018, despite the fact that Black Americans only account for 13.4% of the U.S. population, they accounted for 36.0% (121,829 total) of the abortions executed in 2015. That number was almost identical to the percentage of abortions (36.9% or 124,893) that year among White Americans, who make up 76.6% of the population.

Those horrifying numbers have not prevented movements like the sickening #ShoutYourAbortion social media campaign that was started by activists Lindy West, Amelia Bonow, and Kimberly Morrison and profiled in a positive light in Oprah Winfrey’s O Magazine, a publication that its publishers estimate reaches 1 in 13 American Women.

It also hasn’t stopped perennial Trump hater and would be “sex strike” organizer Alyssa Milano from going so far as to referring to her 2 abortions as “something she needed,” and from falsely claiming that (if not for her abortion) “I would not have my career. I would not have the ability or platform I use to fight against oppression with all my heart.”

Milano also went as far as to knocking her religion and attempting to blame the so-called patriarchy when attempting to justify her decision to terminate her pregnancies, which she never has admitted had posed any threat to her health, when she said, “I was raised Catholic and was suddenly put in conflict with my faith. A faith I was coming to realize empowered only men to make every single decision about what was allowed and what was not allowed.”

Beth Baumann
Another immoral aspect of the left’s agenda is the sexualization of children. The Murrieta Public School District in California was recently exposed via a video released by conservative watchdog group Our Watch, that exposed how progressive sex education programs in California are now teaching elementary school aged children about oral sex, masturbation, role-playing, and other sex acts.

Furthermore, the California Board of Education has now gone so far as to allow the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to instruct California schoolteachers on how to help underaged children obtain abortions without parental consent.

With all these disheartening examples of the pervasiveness of the left, and so many more that I didn’t mention, the question becomes, “Are Liberals, that invest so much energy into demonizing conservatives, particularly President Trump, really so desperate to be seen as being in the right morally that they are willing to partner with any Liberal cause, no matter how depraved or unconscionable?”

Perhaps this is the final and most malignant symptom of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

https://townhall.com/columnists/juliorivera/2019/08/24/evil-in-plain-sight-are-liberal-americans-becoming-increasingly-ignorant-or-immoral-n2552123?utm_content=buffer9b720&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer&fbclid=IwAR0DEcoj0l2EuuwGeUsb-SPZE52DCvbytqY3hBK-WayqXnz1LjuwKj_ycKo

WATCH: Libraries Promoting Transgender Book That Describes A Six-Year-Old “Liking” Oral Sex

With the normalization of the LGBT+ movement comes the inevitable normalization of unimaginable depths of sexual perversion. There’s no way around it, and we are continually reminded of this fact with each sickening new headline we come across.

If there’s any benefit to the sordid secrets of the LGBT+ movement coming into the foreground, however, it’s that we can more easily call them out and stand up for their victims.

That’s exactly what has happened now that “Beyond Magenta: Transgender Teens Speak Out,” a hideously inappropriate book geared toward children as young as ninth grade, is being promoted by libraries in Australia.

According to an Amazon description, the book “profiles six transgender teens in both their own words and the author’s excellent photographs. The result is a strikingly in-depth examination of the sometimes clinical complexities of being transgender, even as Kuklin’s empathy-inducing pictures put a human face on the experience.”

“The profiles are evenly divided between FTM (female to male) and MTF (male to female) teens,” the description continues. “Also represented are a variety of races and ethnicities, and included are one teen who is intersex and another who regards themself as pansexual (several of the teens choose to identify themselves with the gender-neutral pronouns they, them, and their). Though their experiences differ, the teens often stress that, as Kuklin puts it, ‘Gender is one variable in a person’s identity, and sexual orientation is another variable. The two are not connected.’”

What sets “Beyond Magenta” apart from the usual hyper-sexualized drivel marketed for the young adult demographic is an anecdote of one of the six characters in which he describes enjoying oral sex, among other sexual antics, at just six years old.

Make sure you’re sitting down for this one, saints.

“From six up, I used to kiss other guys in my neighbourhood, make out with them, and perform oral sex on them. I liked it. I used to love oral,” reads an excerpt from the book. “And I touched their you-know-whats. We were really young but that’s what we did.”

When the book was released back in 2014, author Susan Kuklin was asked by CBS why she felt people were “afraid” of her book and didn’t want their children to read it. “This is dangerous knowledge,” Kuklin answered. “It’s scary to people because they don’t understand it. Once you get to understand it, it’s no longer frightening. But there’s that period before it happens, where there’s so much pushback and so much fear. And I think that’s what happened with my book.”

Anyone else eerily reminded of Genesis 3 by that statement? The sexual exploitation of children is truly demonic, yet people like Kuklin have eaten the apple and are proud to share a bite.

Kirralie Smith, director of Binary Australia, an organization dedicated to fighting gender-bending insanity in society, told the Daily Caller that the book “is in approximately 60 libraries in Australia. I found the book in my local library: Greater Taree Library — two copies in Taree and Wingham.”

“I know it is in the nest region in Port Macquarie as well,” Smith adds. “The book was on a promotional stand in Taree Library in the youth section.”

“These stories are being promoted to young people who may not have the capacity to judge whether this is good or bad behavior, Smith added in a statement on the vile book. “And despite the illicit nature of their accounts, each concludes by celebrating their transition.”



https://activistmommy.com/watch-libraries-promoting-transgender-book-that-describes-a-six-year-old-liking-oral-sex/?fbclid=IwAR2PV1Xnk9sSEWrp3ufcf7gMjoMV74G1Mi-NQdDRGVKGnOD8oxQ7gNXEJNA

you just might be a sick puppy.

Beware of WaPo, they are rabidely anti sanders, and may be the one deserving the pinocchios on this one.

I don't claim to be astute so maybe you'd explain to me how he primaries are being "rigged". Look, I'd prefer not to see Biden emerge as the Democratic candidate but, at this stage, he's apparently got a significant lead. If more people prefer one candidate does that mean the primaries are "rigged"? I contributed to Jay Insley's campaign — does the fact that he never polled very well and failed to meet the necessary threshold mean that the primaries are "rigged"? In a crowded field does the fact that Tulsi Gabbard has less support that Harris, Buttegieg, and Booker mean the primaries are "rigged"? If the "progressive" vote is split between Warren and Sanders does that mean the primaries are "rigged"? In the end, if more people support Biden does that mean the primaries are "rigged"?

Help me to understand the nature of this alleged "rigging" because I'm having a difficult time seeing how it could be done. It's basically a popularity contest and not everyone can be on top. Maybe it should be more like kindergarten or something, where everyone gets a prize and no one is a loser?

So, you’re Blatham’s sock puppet?

Am I blatham's "sock puppet"? Gee, I don't think so. Responses addressed to one person are often further discussed by other posters on this forum. I'm just curious to know how the primary process is being "rigged". Here's a case in point — I heard Gabbard declaring the need for more "transparency". But the process has been open for all to see — candidates who receive a certain amount of donations and polling percentages are qualified to participate in the debates and the field is winnowed according to the amount of support they are shown to have. How much more transparent can it get? In a crowded field some good candidates will fall by the wayside — it's inevitable.

I've neither attacked nor insulted any candidates nor any members; I'm simply asking for some clarification as to how the process is "rigged". I've heard the charge made repeatedly but have yet to see specific proof and I thought someone (the response was addressed to "edgarblythe" but anyone else can respond) who knows more about it than I do could help me out. Instead I get accused of being someone's "sock puppet". Why? Can't you just answer my question? Anybody?