USA Goes to War Against Iran

Here ya go... the House just passed a bill to integrate the US military with the Israeli military. That is, they are no longer a recipient of aid but they are a partner with the US, so the MOU that was set to expire in 2028, that Bibi was looking for a 20-year extension of, won't have to worry about it as the two militaries are forever twined.

Of course it needs to pass the Senate and the prez has to sign it, which is a lock for both happening.

I am accused of trolling while trying to make points which I find genuinely important.

Political discourse in the US has become highly polarized as the public has been herded into two camps of people who have been brainwashed to believe that they are good and the other side is bad.

The GOP side has been brainwashed around traditional conservative Christian values. They are trained to believe that leftists and muslims are evil. They embrace more traditional roles for men and women.

The Dem side has been brainwashed around notions of identity politics and political correctness. They have been brainwashed to believe that criticism of black and women politicians is inherently racist and sexist. They largely reject notions of traditional masculinity.

Both sides maintain an identity of moral superiority and regard the other side as the enemy.

I regard the concept of moral superiority as the enemy of all. It represents a wall between us and a barrier to cooperation in the matter of dozens of issues which the overwhelming majority agree upon. We are unwitting accomplices to Machiavellian divide and conquer.

Neither side makes perfect sense to me. So I'm interested in trying to reconcile the two sides and that begins with a willingness to back away from moral positions which are carved in stone.

Bro, just send us a link to your blog.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/285/p...

You have shown an inability to criticize black politicians without using racial slurs.

You are in favor of objectifying women which is the most sexist possible position.

Finding a man to be a good financial provider is also objectifying.

Any particular quality or collection of qualities can be said to be a subject of objectification.

Where is it written that female attractiveness is the only source of objectification ?

Dude is truly incapable of relenting an untenable position. “We are all objects” is peak. Great stuff, Nut Nut.

1) I'll ask again. What's the politically correct and concise way to say characterize a black politician who amplifies the status quo allegiance of a character like Uncle Tom to the general detriment of black people? I'm happy to switch to an alternative which doesn't sacrifice the intended understanding.

2) I am not in favor of objectification. I just accept it as natural and not exclusively male ==> female. I don't accept that male ==> female objectification is more sexist than female ==> male objectification. They are equally sexist and innate in evolution.

If you recall, the entire discussion started around why porn rots minds, hence why the objectification of females was brought up.

However, if a female, say Melania, only sees a male as a financial provider and nothing else, then she is objectifying him. Not sure why your derpy ass thinks I was claiming that only females can be objectified, but glad we've moved away from, "Listen up, the sun is an object..." 5th grade logic.

1. sellout
2. whatever

Being wrong isn't the problem. It's citing something as a fact that is demonstrably false is the problem.

Victor, for example, would be the most obvious refutation to your claim.

Two consistent statements:

1. Tommy Lasorda telling his pitcher to pitch to Jack Clark instead of intentionally walking him in a crucial moment in the 1985 NL Playoffs was one of the dumbest things a manager has ever done.

2. Tommy Lasorda was not a dumb person or manager.

That is, Lasorda was a great manager who, being human, sometimes (though rarely) did dumb things as a manager.

Now he got lag all wound up...

Tommy Lasordas greatest talent was sending Fernando Valenzuela to the mound.

I'm on a roll, baby!!

(Maybe I drank too much coffee this morning.)

That's the way the world seems to work to me.

Each of us has an identity and we tend to surround ourselves with people who validate that identity and exclude people who don't.

Over the last decade, I've had the opportunity to take in quite a few people living on the margins and try to help them develop some skills and heal from trauma. Some people, the inertia of their trauma is beyond my capacity to help and they are in misery loves company mode. If I can't help them, I move on relatively quickly. Four people have made it 6-18 months. Improved their resumes, completed school objectives, moved on from toxic relationships.

My identity involves a wish to make a meaningful contribution to other people's lives. Everyone who lives in my home is an object of that identity. If they have a chronic alcohol addiction, then I'll support someone taking the steps to address it. But I won't accept it on an ongoing basis.

Doesn't mean that I won't care about them or that they aren't inherently valuable. But it's a transactional connection. If they want to stay, they have to grow and not bring a lot of chaos with them.

It's not always emotionally easy work. The bias is so strong in favor of being able to make a difference and the serenity to accept the things I can't change is sometimes difficult. I'm not a savior. I'm someone who is able to help people who allow it. I take breaks in between candidates and that's where I'm at right now.

When I post an ad with an open room, the number of people who reply is a lot. It's like the job market where people are sending hundreds of resumes. Times are tough for many and they inform my politics and my disgust for the establishment which doesn't speak to the plight of the growing struggling class.

cool. I'm going to make an effort to try to stay on topic because I feel like a contributor to the nutsack blog issue.

Whatever you say midget brain.

https://www.lpaonline.org/the-m-word

are there any marginalized communities you don't refer to with slurs

edit: AS IT RELATES TO THE WAR IN IRAN, OBVIOUSLY

That's a good one.! I bet you and your buddies in 8th-grade homeroom laughed at that almost as much as the time someone farted in class.

I haven't referred to ANY marginalized communities with slurs.

I don't know of any marginalized presidents of members of Congress. The people I referred to are / were powerful and affluent.

The marginalized communities are the innocent victims.

Sorry to have to spell it out for you midget brain ..... Barack Obama is an individual, not a community. Do you grasp the distinction between an individual and a community? It's a one to many relationship.

On one hand I almost respect nutsack’s ability to have nothing useful to do with its life

Are you going to be calling your workers midget brains out on the field? Amp aligns more with you than most here and I am starting to think that I am not going to get that position as a Sea Captain.

UK says armed forces ready to defend country after Iran warning over US bombers

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/uk-...