RKMBs


There's a shit-ton of messages crammed into this, though I'm not sure there'll be much agreement as to their meaning and import to the nation. Still, I figured it was at least worth a shot to see what anyone had to say about what Glover's doing here.
Hate his music...or rather I don't get it BUT I love all his other stuff. Especially Atlanta.

The video however is compelling in that I am compelled to watch in spite of it.
I liked him on "Community." I don't see him as Lando.
Beyond that, I don't really care much one way or another.
I don't know if it clearly gets it's message across. There is something about it that got me to watch it a couple of times. I can't imagine listening to just the song. It's an art piece.

Performance artist. The kind of guy who pisses into a cup on stage, then drinks it. Performance art.
This is how they did it in my day.
Do yourselves a favor, watch the Gambino video on mute, and listen to NWA Fuck the Police.
What was the main message? I liked him on Community but a little hip hop goes a long way for me.
I think the main message was that we are distracted from the chaos.
 Originally Posted By: Ultimate Jaburg53
I don't know if it clearly gets it's message across. There is something about it that got me to watch it a couple of times. I can't imagine listening to just the song. It's an art piece.

Performance artist. The kind of guy who pisses into a cup on stage, then drinks it. Performance art.


i.e., shock value.

Not impressed.
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
 Originally Posted By: Ultimate Jaburg53
I don't know if it clearly gets it's message across. There is something about it that got me to watch it a couple of times. I can't imagine listening to just the song. It's an art piece.

Performance artist. The kind of guy who pisses into a cup on stage, then drinks it. Performance art.


i.e., shock value.

Not impressed.


Yeah, fuck him for trying to express himself creatively.
I honestly didn't see him doing anything that a dozen other black musicians haven't already done. Taking shots at "white racist" America, and dwelling on a level of racism that is at least 50-plus years in the past, if it even still exists.

When 200 "alt-right" idiots tried to keep alive this kind of past racism in a Charlottesville show of force, they were basically laughed out of town by the very tens of thousands of whites in that city they were trying to rally.

How different is this guy's video from a million other cheap stunts in other black/rap/hiphop videos, such as Kanye West or whoever shooting Trump in effigy?
Whether it's shooting Trump, or shooting cops, or otherwise gesturing violently at white America, when that shock value is used over and over in black videos (the common denominator being black gangsta-types shooting at and raging on white America), at what point does it become cliché and dull, repetitive, banal. All it really does is confirm the stereotype of black thugs with guns shooting people. There is no clear message in the video beyond that.
I think all the violence in the video was black on black.
I don't think it was a racial message.


Uh...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_LIP7qguYw


...there certainly seem to be a lot of racial and Confederate references.
I think it's garbage regardless. And meaning not obvious to someone who doesn't extend themselves to look for it. But it is there.
I'm so glad we have Wondy here to defend the put-upon, downtrodden white men of America. The true silent victims of this travesty.


 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
I'm so glad we have Wondy here to defend the put-upon, downtrodden white men of America. The true silent victims of this travesty.


As we've discussed before, white America was 89% of the population in 1965, and in barely 50 years, that population has been slashed in half due to third-world immigration policy. It is increasingly fashionable to rage on white America for past racial injustices, when in truth we should be proud of how open and receptive our culture has become to other races and cultures, and how we have compensated for past injustices like no other culture. Throughout the 1970's, 1980's 1990's and early 2000's, I've always been proud of that.
Only at the point where racial grudge and conquest over white America has become the goal of liberal/minority policy have I come to see that as a threat. At some subtle point, it became clear that it was not about shared racial equality, but on crushing and displacing white America. And where we don't just share our culture with other races who would assimilate and become one with us, but increasingly are stoked to hate white America and replace us.

We are seeing the decline and replacement of white America through immigration policy, that admits only 18% European immigration annually. What other purpose is there for that policy, other than to demographically annihilate white America?

And California also shows the way of the future, where Mexican immigrants, who do not assimilate and remain poor across multiple generations, are given preferential treatment over U.S. taxpaying citizens. Impoverished aliens who demand ever higher taxes extorted out of white (and Asian) Americans to pay for the drain they put on California's government. "White flight" by smarter Californians (middle and upper class Californians fleeing CA and moving to other nearby states, in disgust for their being heavily taxed to subsidize illegal immigrants and other policy they have no control over, despite their being the ones expected to pay for it) is the result. But what happens when these illegals spread to the rest of the U.S., and there is no better place to leave your state to immigrate to?

I first became aware of this problem emerging in Western/European nations worldwide, ALL being overwhelmed by third-world immigrants, when I read DEATH OF THE WEST by Pat Buchanan. And that is precisely the plan of globalists, to crush nationalism as a step toward a North American union, and ultimately a global one-world government. And for the elites orchestrating it, from the G.H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations forward, their goal is the destruction of U.S. sovereignty. Black rage toward whites is stoked by white liberals, and this video is just another brick in the pyramid
of that mountain of propaganda. When they are done, the whole country will look like the burning business storefronts in Ferguson, Missouri.

But yeah, sure, Phil. Despite the statistical propensity for black-on-white violence (black on white violence is 50-to-1 of the reverse, remember?), blacks are the victims, and ohhhhh it's just paranoid to see whites as downtrodden, right?

But that is precisely where things are headed, and that has been the liberal/globalist plan for decades.

Cultural Marxism is where a small core of white Marxists stoke hatred of the white majority in non-whites, to rally minorities to their Marxist cause, and once the Cultural Marxists are in power, pay minorities off with wealth redistribution in the form of social spending (i.e., welfare benefits). This is a Marxist battle plan that has been replicated in Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia and many other places worldwide.
This allows the Democrats (oops! I mean Cultural Marxists!) to stay in power with a permanent election majority, until the whole thing comes crashing down. As Margaret Thatcher said, "The problem with socialism is at some point, you run out of other people's money."

lol!
\:lol\:
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy

 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
Remember, when you see the world through crazy-colored glasses, it's everyone else who's got it wrong.
 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
\:lol\:


 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy


I think Prometheus hacked Jaburg's password.

Sorry that my citing of statistical facts is "crazy" to you.

Cultural Marxism is a stated plan by the Left in this and other countries, a belief system that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ascribe to. Obama's core ideology is a combination of 1) Anti-colonialism 2) Liberation Theology, and 3) Cultural Marxism. Frau Hitlery is more influenced by Saul Alinsky. Although Obama taught Alinsky tactics to classrooms of "community organizer"/street agitators while he worked at ACORN.


And there are a number of books that confirm everything I said about third-world immigration to the U.S., including DEATH OF THE WEST and STATE OF EMERGENCY by Pat Buchanan, and LONDONISTAN by Melanie Phillips on the same problem in the U.K.
And ADIOS AMERICA by Ann Coulter.
And THE SHADOW PARTY by David Horowitz and Richard Poe.

Attempting to mock me with no facts to contest what I said doesn't make what I said any less true.





Cloward/Piven Strategy explained. A 1966 proposed leftist plan, to overwhelm the system with debt, to deliberately orchestrate a collapse of the economic system. And amid the restructuring during the crisis, to slip past the American public an enormous transfer of wealth that the chaos of the crisis provides cover for. The panic among a majority of the public means they would welcome ANY action that will end the crisis.

Which allows Cultural Marxists in government (Such as Obama and Hillary) to slip any transfer of wealth they want past the American public. To some degree Obama did this during the opening months of his presidency.

That previous one was the 5-minute version.


Here is Glenn Beck, who explains it much better. I know how much you guys love Glenn Beck. \:\)



Cloward/Piven strategy was tested and worked in 1975, when several years of Cloward/Piven strategy resulted in the city declaring bankruptcy.

In THE SHADOW PARTY, David Horowitz and Richard Poe spend the better part of a chapter detailing how that New York City bankruptcy was orchestrated by a pincer-movement of Marxist activist groups, in concert with Marxist bureaucrats in government. A standard practice of Leftist seizures of power, whether European or Latin American governments, or what occurred in New York City. Or rigging presidential elections by weaponizing government agencies against Republicans, or overwhelming the system with millions fraudulent votes so that a few hundred thousand can get through undetected, as Obama and his ACORN minions did in 2008 and 2012.
And as Obama and Hillary jointly did in 2016, with the further power-reach of weaponizing DOJ and FBI to get illegal FISA warrants to surveil the Trump campaign and incoming administration, and cripple it with manufactured allegations and a manufactured Meuller special investigation.
Note we now have a government controlled by republicans and they increased spending. Also if you tend to say things that Russian bots say it probably is okay
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Note we now have a government controlled by republicans and they increased spending. Also if you tend to say things that Russian bots say it probably is okay


Our government is controlled by lizard people, they put stuff in the water that turns the frogs gay.
The above was entertainment. Media-relevant. Wondy, if you can't stay on topic, maybe you should head back over to the politics forum where you're more easily contained. Welcome. I meant welcome.
 Originally Posted By: Ultimate Jaburg53
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Note we now have a government controlled by republicans and they increased spending. Also if you tend to say things that Russian bots say it probably is okay


Our government is controlled by lizard people, they put stuff in the water that turns the frogs gay.



AAAAAGH!
They got M E M!
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Note we now have a government controlled by republicans and they increased spending.


Because agreeing to $900 billion in social spending was the only way for Trump to get Democrats on board to pass a $700 billion defense budget, to re-build the military neglected and dangeroussly unprepared after 8 years of Obama.
I think Trump should have vetoed it and re-negotiated to pass another bill a week or two later, but I understand his concession to pass military spending and re-build a military that was destroyed under Obama. If there had been a shutdown, the liberal media would have blamed the shutdown entirely on Trump. But as I said at the time, I still would not have passed it. But don't lie to us, M E M, we all know that it was Schumer and Pelosi who pushed for the increased spending, and were giddy that they got away with getting it through.

 Originally Posted By: M E M
Also if you tend to say things that Russian bots say it probably is okay


That's too ambiguous for me to respond to. If you want it answered, clarify your meaning.

 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch



More of the inane crap that is typical of what you post, Phil.

Even when you have a serious point, your posts are filled with random half serious junk like this that blunts any serious point you try to make.


...EvEn WhEn YoU hAvE a SeRiOuS pOiNt, YoUr PoStS aRe FiLlEd WiTh RaNdOm HaLf SeRiOuS JuNk LiKe ThIs ThAt BlUnTs AnY sErIoUs PoInT yOu TrY tO mAkE...

I really ought to thank you, Wondy. Reading your posts wasn't the deciding factor in me leaving the Republican Party back in 2010, or me deciding I couldn't identify as an evangelical any longer a few years ago, but your elucidations certainly gave me a nudge in the right direction. For what it's worth, I haven't yet contributed anything to this thread beyond the initial post, but I still might. Besides giving us a brief laugh (which was largely Jaburg's doing), all you've contributed to this thread is the same threadbare "cultural Marxist"/New World Order conspiracy horseshit we've come to expect from you in damn near every post you make on these boards. At least Alex Jones makes it entertaining. As someone from a multiracial family, and an adherent of the faith being grievously misrepresented by both DJT's administration and his fan club, I personally exhausted my patience for these talking points years ago and find them positively abhorrent. I would greatly enjoy being able to interact with you personally on these boards, but given how impossible it's been so far to pull you away from your talking heads of choice, that's becoming more of a pain in the ass than I feel like pissing away my limited time on. So don't come at me for posting "inane crap" that "blunts any serious point" I try to make when you've basically branded yourself as that incorrigible conspiracy nut who Kramers on through the door of otherwise enjoyable threads and proceeds to hose down interesting topics with a steady stream of intellectual diarrhea. I started this thread, I'll post what I like in it. If you don't like it, ignore me.
 Originally Posted By: Sammitch
...all you've contributed to this thread is the same threadbare "cultural Marxist"/New World Order conspiracy horseshit we've come to expect from you.... BLA BLA BLA


Cultural Marxist/ new world order ideology that Obama, Clinton and many of those serving in their administrations have plainly stated are their core beliefs. Clinton was a personal friend of Saul Alinsky. Obama taught Saul Alinsky's RULES FOR RADICALS to classrooms full of street activists for ACORN during his time there. Obama has stated his clear allegiance to Marxists and other anti-American radicals, repeatedly over decades, and has never renounced that allegiance.

I really don't understand your immunity to logic on the fact these people have plainly stated their radicalism and Cultural Marxist goals. Say what you will about my opinions, but those are facts, and well documented in their own speeches and writings, in their videotaped interviews, and in their ACTIONS as public officials.

It seems to me that you passionately FEEL what you believe, and abandon all facts and logic to ascribe to those beliefs. And anything that you don't like you just opinionatedly dismiss as "conspiracy", "horseshit", or otherwise "racist" or "crazy", even as you blinders-on ignore the facts in front of you.

While Trump has some bombastic rhetoric and makes statements in factual error at times (as did Obama, as did W. Bush, as did Bill Clinton), sometimes in error, sometimes deliberate, you would have to argue long and hard to convince me he misrepresents Christians. I think Trump is not a "details" guy, and I seriously doubt he is a devout Christian. But he still has done more than any other president since Reagan in defense of Christian free speech. I don't think most of the Christian leaders in 40 years accurately represent Christianity, let alone Trump or those Christian leaders closest to Trump. I don't think either I or you represent the mainstream of Christianity. But regardless, I think we both have strong beliefs.

And regardless of whether Trump or his religious advisors are Christian, I think he levels the playing field for Christians to represent themselves in the public arena.

I posted to this topic because I found the initial video offensive and bad art, with supremely violent images, and, as much as a message can be discerned, another black rap artist lashing out unfairly at white America for racism that virtually all occurred over 50 years ago. Everything else I wrote here was in response to the attacks on me for simply dissenting.
I don't think "gangsta" posing, shooting people, rioting or otherwise threatening violence is a positive or "brilliant" way for black America to deliver its message. It is instead a confirmation of every negative black stereotype and fear. The 13% of America that's black commits 42% of the nation's crime, and 52% of the murders. That video plays exactly to those statistical facts, and the legitimate fears of everyone (not just whites) regarding black males between the ages of 15 and 45. Fears of young black males even stated by the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Sorry to confuse you with so many facts.


Discoverthenetworks, Barack Obama listing:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511


Discoverthenetworks, Hillary Clinton listing:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=18
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
*** You are ignoring this user ***
Toggle the display of this post


Now that's a good read!


Y'know Sammitch/Phil, pretty much my only communication with you is when you come out of the woodwork and take personal shots at me, and I respond in kind. And you call me paranoid and always wrong and of buying into a false narrative, without ever explaining how I was wrong (ignoring how your comments are entirely your opinion, while my view is clearly sourced from books, linked sources and federal statistics).

If you're actually putting me on ignore, great, fine, I'm delighted. You've never actually engaged me in honest dialogue in recent years, just occasional cheap shots, caricatured non-sequitur comparisons to welfare dependents on meds, and other assorted insults.

Two examples where you've trolled me, even as you bemoan my belligerence:



If you truly have me on IGNORE, great. But I suspect you'll take the coward's way, and still read my comments to periodically jump in on me and take cheap shots, as you have in the past.

 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
Taking shots at "white racist" America, and dwelling on a level of racism that is at least 50-plus years in the past, if it even still exists.



\:lol\:

Wow...
 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
The above was entertainment. Media-relevant. Wondy, if you can't stay on topic, maybe you should head back over to the politics forum ...


Isn't the whole point of that video to elicit a political reaction?
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
The above was entertainment. Media-relevant. Wondy, if you can't stay on topic, maybe you should head back over to the politics forum ...


Isn't the whole point of that video to elicit a political reaction?


I dunno, is it?
They only see what they want to see
 Originally Posted By: K-nutreturns
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
Taking shots at "white racist" America, and dwelling on a level of racism that is at least 50-plus years in the past, if it even still exists.



\:lol\:

Wow...



Last time I checked:

[] There weren't separate "white" and "colored" water fountains and bathrooms.

[] We had a black president for 8 years, two black secretaries of state, and blacks in every professional field.

[] Race-based discrimination was either a crime, a fire-able offense, or both.

I could cite other examples, but you get the idea. I didn't say racism no longer exists. But it certainly isn't even close to the days of Jim Crow or Emmett Till or Mississippi Burning. And as I've cited often, race-based black-on-white violence occurs at a rate of 50-to-1 of the reverse (U.S. Justice Department annual statistics). Racism is a two-way street.

 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
The above was entertainment. Media-relevant. Wondy, if you can't stay on topic, maybe you should head back over to the politics forum ...


Isn't the whole point of that video to elicit a political reaction?



Thank you.

Sammitch himself sees this message:

 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch


There's a shit-ton of messages crammed into this, though I'm not sure there'll be much agreement as to their meaning and import to the nation. Still, I figured it was at least worth a shot to see what anyone had to say about what Glover's doing here.


And then he had a hissy fit that I commented on those messages.

 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
The above was entertainment. Media-relevant. Wondy, if you can't stay on topic, maybe you should head back over to the politics forum ...


Isn't the whole point of that video to elicit a political reaction?


I dunno, is it?


Come on now:

  • Verse 1
    Verse one of “This Is America” is a combined effort of Gambino, Young Thug and 21 Savage.

    Gambino goes on talking about how police turns a bling eye towards the injustices happening, mostly because they, too, are responsible for a lot of it. He also speaks about the very lose rules and regulations being practised when it comes to gun control in the country. Most people are trying to glorify the owning of a gun. Slang such as being ‘strapped’ often soften the image of the real threat of guns.

    Getting ‘the bag’ could be a reference to getting a bag of money from rapping, and he says if he doesn’t, he will hit back to his pad and paper and continue writing until he cashes out.

    Refrain
    This section is a huge slap to the social injustice prevailing in the country.

    Black man has no way out of this oppression unless he makes himself a fortune and buys his respect. So, we hear Gambino screaming at the Black man to go make their money. However, the last two lines turn into an even worse cringe as “get your money” outcry transforms into “get your black man” chant. This is a very strong hint at the slavery memories upon which the country has been built on.

    Verse 2
    In verse 2 of “This Is America,” Childish Gambino says how easily people are manipulated and distracted by popular culture that they fail to see or completely ignore the real issues at hand. Some people geek out, some people focus on getting fit, a few others on luxury products, a lot more fixate on their looks, and a whole lot more focused on making it. So, artists such as Gambino and Kendrick Lamar try their best to not let these harsh realities bury down the dunes of time.

    Drugs, illegal weapons, and even human trafficking some of the things being sold to the highest bidder, oftentimes in open market as well.

    Outro
    The outro of this song is completely performed by Young Thug. This solemn cry is about being a Black man in white country and the harsh realities of it. You could probably be a big dog in the country, but there still will be a bigger dog biting you down.


Any more "political," and that video would end if a voter registration hotline number flashing on screen.

Don't be pretend naive and don't be a troll. Even if we accept every negative thing you have to say about Wondy above (and God knows WB is easy to bait), you chose to post a video that you knew would bait him on a board where he's practically the only regular poster left. You knew exactly what you were doing.

So let's not clutch our pearls and feign shock and dismay that someone started discussing politics in response to this video.
Oh, I'm being facetious as all shit. It's manifestly political as hell. I'm just not interested in hearing the same worn-out conspiracy horseshit from the Gary Busey-crazy schizocons propping up this shitshow of an administration.


Insults.

Vs. the facts right in front of you, that you refuse to process.


YouTube Is Now Censoring Criticism Of Childish Gambino’s ‘This Is America’ Music Video


The surest sign that the video has a leftist political message is the censorship of conservative criticism of it.

The ironies just pile up.


Private companies do have that right. Seeing anything with Alex Jones name on it makes me think whatever they've cut was probably just garbage anyway.
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Private companies do have that right.


Unless it's a wedding cake, then all hell breaks lose.
Lol, that would be your side. I'm fine with the law being applied equally.
You're too politically aware to not know what G-man meant, M E M.

He was referring to gays taking Christian bakers and photographers to court and forcing them against their beliefs to cater and photograph gay weddings.
yeah I know what he was trying to do but it's not the same thing. If you thought so than I would point out that your trying to have it both ways.
If Google started censoring pro-gay content, MEM's "they're a private company" position would change pretty quickly.
I'm sure they like YouTube have already cut offensive posts by gays too. Maybe g your trying to have it both ways?
My sincerest apologies to anyone who still frequents the Media forum on account of it not being the Politics forum.
dont be ridiculous phil. NOBODY frequents this place anymore
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy


YouTube Is Now Censoring Criticism Of Childish Gambino’s ‘This Is America’ Music Video


The surest sign that the video has a leftist political message is the censorship of conservative criticism of it.

The ironies just pile up.


 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
You're too politically aware to not know what G-man meant, M E M.

He was referring to gays taking Christian bakers and photographers to court and forcing them against their beliefs to cater and photograph gay weddings.


 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
yeah I know what he was trying to do but it's not the same thing. If you thought so than I would point out that your trying to have it both ways.


The point is, you believe in the right to discriminate and suppress free speech (deleting posts and accounts of conservative speech they don't like) by liberal companies like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

But conversely, you think conservatives don't have the same right to conduct their business in accordance with their beliefs, that they should be sued out of business if they refuse to bake a gay wedding cake, or photograph a gay wedding.

That, sir, is a hypocritical double-standard.
So you and g think companies shouldn't have control over their content?
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
So you and g think companies shouldn't have control over their content?


I just said what I think.

That the rule of law should apply one standard to everyone, Democrat or Republican.

Either both should be able to control business according to their beliefs, or both should not be able to discriminate against messages and beliefs they don't agree with. No double standards.
So strip out the protections against religion would be something you would be supportive of?
I think the boards are broken again. I clicked on the Media section but got taken to the Politics section.
IT'S ALL MY FAULT
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
So you and g think companies shouldn't have control over their content?


I just said what I think.

That the rule of law should apply one standard to everyone, Democrat or Republican.

Either both should be able to control business according to their beliefs, or both should not be able to discriminate against messages and beliefs they don't agree with. No double standards.


 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
So strip out the protections against religion would be something you would be supportive of?


That's rather ambiguous. And unless you have a specific factual argument, the protections of religion are in our founding documents, and I see no reason for the U.S. to set them aside. They were put in place because we are a republic founded on Biblical principles (primary of which is our U.S. Constitution, a contract between a government and its people, that mirrors the contract between God and Man in the Old and New Testaments).
In addition, the Bible teaches a moral standard that keeps us unified as a people (at least until the point in 1963 where Leftist forces began to increasingly push us away from that standard.)

 Quote:
Of all the dispositions and habits that lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indespensible supports. In vain would man claim the tribue of patriotism who should labor to subvert the great pillars of human happiness... True religion affords to government its surest support.
--George Washington

Our Constitution is made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.
--John Adams

Religion is deemed in other countries as incompatible with good government, and yet proved by our own experience as its best support.
--Thomas Jefferson



Presumably, the protections of the Church and religious freedom were to encourage them, to grow them, to encourage what was/is good for the health of our constitutional republic. And to encourage the community and charity that surround churches.

And:

 Quote:
A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous, they cannot be subdued; but when they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.
--Samuel Adams


That is precisely the Cultural Marxist plan that has been unfolding in the U.S. for over 50 years. And is the stated plan of the Frankfurt School that escaped Germany to the U.S. in the 1930's, their disciples who came of age in the 1960's, and their current progeny among the inner circles of Obama, Hillary, and the Democrat/Left. That is not conspiracy theory, that is precisely the battle plan plainly stated in the writings and public statements of 80 years of Cultural Marxists.
It is their plan to create doubts and splintering divisions in our western culture and topple the pillars of our culture (Christianity, family, and nationalism) so those pillars will no longer exist, and then a demoralized people will passively not resist the new socialist/globalist order.

The opening video to this topic is just one more drop in the ocean of liberal propaganda toward that end.


I was just seeing if you were applying your previous principle about applying one standard to everyone. Religious exceptions don't do that.

Asked and answered.
There are religious exceptions because they are not just another bakery or shoe manufacturer. They were recognized from the nation's beginning as something of unique benefit to the community and vital health of the nation, and therefore uniquely encouraged, since the nation's inception.
Yes but even with religious exceptions there are limits. While you and g reduce it to sides the principle of the law using one standard is important to everyone.

Respectfully, Christian church attendance is imploding and goes down several percentage points every time they do another Gallup poll on the subject (and I've linked many here in the past.)

Churches often have so few members that many no longer have their own buildings as they used to, and are instead renting space in strip shopping centers, or even local high schools.

That is often true in Catholic schools as well. Pat Buchanan cited in SUICIDE OF A SUPERPOWER that Catholic schools (he is Catholic, I am not) that Catholic schools have increasing trouble, and are often compelled by lack of applicants to hire non-Catholics, and even non-Christians, to teach in their schools, and how that renders Catholic education often questionable in its effectiveness in preserving the faith.

So I don't see how Christianity is much of a threat, let alone a rising threat. And whatever minor tax breaks churches have are far from the only tax exemptions.
If you want to demagogue a group for tax exemptions, corporate subsidies would be a far more valid target, since they reap billions in subsidies and tax breaks they don't even need in many cases. Under Obama, two examples are GE and Solyndra, whose subsidies were the equivalent of state-run capitalism as practiced in communist China, where the government picks what companies are winners and losers. And in Solyndra's case, wasting a lot of taxpayer dollars on something that didn't even work.

Even in the era of President George W. Bush, who was the most devout Christian in office since Ronald Reagan, Christian evangelicals said they felt betrayed and marginalized, despite their strong support of W. Bush.
And other nations give special tax status to churches. Canada, for example. I don't see that churches are great abusers of the system. Or again, any kind of a rising threat to the Left or anyone else. I would assume Jewish, Islamic, Hindu and even gay churches have the same exemptions.
 Originally Posted By: Son of Mxy
I think the boards are broken again. I clicked on the Media section but got taken to the Politics section.


Right? It's like every couple pages, I think I'm in the Media section for a moment, then, boom. Hard left into the ass-end of the Politics board.
© RKMBs