Agenda 47

[taxme]

17 hours ago, Black Dog said:

lmao

LMAO

Is English not your first language?

It must be pretty tough for a Marxist like yourself to have to admit that he is a Marxist. LMAO. 

At least Deluge shows clear signs of intelligence. But with you? Well, that is up for debate. LMAO.

 

[Black Dog]

1 hour ago, taxme said:

It must be pretty tough for a Marxist like yourself to have to admit that he is a Marxist. LMAO. 

Believe me if I were a Marxist, i'd admit it. i'm more of a Democratic Socialist. 

Quote

At least Deluge shows clear signs of intelligence. But with you? Well, that is up for debate. LMAO.

Aw look @Deluge, the racist antisemite is a fan of yours!

[Deluge]

2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

So to be clear: you don't see anything antisemitic or racist about a post about a global "Zionist" conspiracy to replace white people?

How can I say whether that is racist when I don't have all the facts? 

For all I know, global zionists DO want white people replaced.

Do you have evidence that there aren't global zionists trying to replace white people?  

[Rebound]

3 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Is your user name a reference to all the tears you shed? You're a pu$$y.

Terror and terrorism are different words though?

Terrorism: the systematic use of terror 

So you see, we can all play ridiculous word games, and talk about the root meanings of words and quote Chaucer... we can say that words have no meaning because they are just a bunch of letters, right? OR we can admit that words have meaning, and using words with the intention of inciting violence or advocating violence or warfare is not protected speech. 

I believe that using words with the intention of inciting or advocating violence or warfare is not protected, and that screaming "We want Palestinian Intifada Now" over and over through a megaphone is an intention of inciting or advocating terrorism and it cannot be anything else.

Edited March 22, 2024 by Rebound

[Black Dog]

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

How can I say whether that is racist when I don't have all the facts? 

For all I know, global zionists DO want white people replaced.

Do you have evidence that there aren't global zionists trying to replace white people?  

Pretty telling you can't even bring yourself to take a stand on one of the oldest antisemitic conspiracies in the world, wild stuff.

59 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Terrorism: the systematic use of terror 

So you see, we can all play ridiculous word games, and talk about the root meanings of words and quote Chaucer... we can say that words have no meaning because they are just a bunch of letters, right? OR we can admit that words have meaning, and using words with the intention of inciting violence or advocating violence or warfare is not protected speech. 

I believe that using words with the intention of inciting or advocating violence or warfare is not protected, and that screaming "We want Palestinian Intifada Now" over and over through a megaphone is an intention of inciting or advocating terrorism and it cannot be anything else.

That's just like your opinion man.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Pretty telling you can't even bring yourself to take a stand on one of the oldest antisemitic conspiracies in the world, wild stuff.

But do you have evidence that there is NOT a Global Zionist Conspiracy ?

JFC... give it up with this one, he's not going to take his armband off...

[Black Dog]

29 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

But do you have evidence that there is NOT a Global Zionist Conspiracy ?

JFC... give it up with this one, he's not going to take his armband off...

I dunno Mike the argument that "I'm not a Nazi, but I'm not sure we can rule out the existence of a global conspiracy of Jews to destroy the white race" is pretty convincing.

[Hodad]

On 3/18/2024 at 9:28 PM, WestCanMan said:

What a lying piece of crap you are. 

Literally nothing has to be true or make any sense at all by your standards. 

If you wanna talk about "abusing one's office", why don't you talk about Joe Biden using the power of his office to get his cokehead son millions of dollars from corrupt foreign oligarchs and Communist Party of China heavyweights? 

I'm sure all the other little deplorables gather around you, slack jawed and eager for story time, but outside of your incestuous little clique people want, you know, evidence. Too bad for you that you don't ever have anything to back up your conspiracy theory bullshit.

Edited March 23, 2024 by Hodad

[Deluge]

19 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Pretty telling you can't even bring yourself to take a stand on one of the oldest antisemitic conspiracies in the world, wild stuff.

If Israel is, in fact, trying to erase white Americans then I am 100% against them. The problem is that I don't see evidence of that. 

What I DO see, however, is part of our government being comprised of Jews and I'm guessing the vast majority of those Jews are democrats & RINOs, which means they hate our Constitutional Republic just as much as you do. 

Now, since there's a distinct effort to marginalize whites in this country, I'm going to group THOSE Jews in with that and call it a conspiracy. 

Edited March 23, 2024 by Deluge

[Deluge]

On 3/18/2024 at 6:58 PM, Hodad said:

Give him a chance? He had a chance. He lied, cheated, criminally abused the office, squandered our international goodwill, ended in economic disaster and tried to end the Republic entirely after the people voted the bum out.

Give him a chance? Lol

Where's your evidence, dipsh*t? 

All you snowflakes  have is your opinions. Where is legitimate evidence?

You see, dumbass, YOU are not a legitimate source.

DEMOCRATS are not legitimate sources.

You can't just blab shit and expect anyone to take you seriously. lol

[impartialobserver]

The American Academy... another vastly unrealistic and overly expensive idea. Also.. a bit unconstitutional at its core. 

[Deluge]

5 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

The American Academy... another vastly unrealistic and overly expensive idea. Also.. a bit unconstitutional at its core. 

Explain. 

[impartialobserver]

4 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Explain. 

"It will be strictly non-political, and there will be no wokeness or jihadism allowed—none of that's going to be allowed."

 This is a violation of the First Amendment on many levels.

However, the real problem is the expense. Running a higher education institution is expensive and the younger generation is going to be reluctant to attach their future to something like this. Hence... low enrollment. Enrollment has been on the decline for the last 5 years. Seems like this would have been a better idea in 2000. Today.. too little too late. 

[WestCanMan]

On 3/22/2024 at 1:00 PM, Black Dog said:

Believe me if I were a Marxist, i'd admit it. i'm more of a Democratic Socialist. 

Aka Nazi. 

[Deluge]

24 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

"It will be strictly non-political, and there will be no wokeness or jihadism allowed—none of that's going to be allowed."

 This is a violation of the First Amendment on many levels.

However, the real problem is the expense. Running a higher education institution is expensive and the younger generation is going to be reluctant to attach their future to something like this. Hence... low enrollment. Enrollment has been on the decline for the last 5 years. Seems like this would have been a better idea in 2000. Today.. too little too late. 

There's nothing unconstitutional about returning to the pre-woke era. If someone wants woke bullshit and jihadist nonsense in their education then they can attend a school that will encourage them to strap on those feedbags. 

We don't know what the actual expenses are yet, so it's premature to go one way or the other. 

[Deluge]

I like this one. It's unfortunate that parents have to wrest their children from the claws of woke cultists, but that's what the world is rapidly coming to. 

President Trump’s Pledge to Homeschool Families

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/agenda47-president-trumps-pledge-to-homeschool-families

[Deluge]

So, I'm looking over this Agenda, and I'm noticing how detailed it is and how easy to follow it is. 

It's clear & concise, very pro-American, and everything democrat dumbf*ckery isn't. 

So what's Biden's plan for the next four years?

We know he wants to erase our borders, plant the pride flag on top of America, and force everyone into shitty climate scare vehicles, but is there anything else? 

[impartialobserver]

On 3/25/2024 at 9:26 AM, Deluge said:

There's nothing unconstitutional about returning to the pre-woke era. If someone wants woke bullshit and jihadist nonsense in their education then they can attend a school that will encourage them to strap on those feedbags. 

We don't know what the actual expenses are yet, so it's premature to go one way or the other. 

wokeness is a matter of speech, expression... You can't say it will not be woke without infringing upon someone's right to free speech. 

Higher education is expensive no matter the place. You have to hire staff, build buildings, have a lot of technical infrastructure, etc.. Professors do not work on the cheap no matter the topic. 

Besides enrollment is on the decline and hate to tell you.. it is not about politics. As always, its all about the time and money. High school students are starting to question the time spent to get the degree. the cost of tuition, and the foregone wages. 

Edited March 26, 2024 by impartialobserver

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

1. wokeness is a matter of speech, expression... You can't say it will not be woke without infringing upon someone's right to free speech. 

2. Higher education is expensive no matter the place. You have to hire staff, build buildings, have a lot of technical infrastructure, etc.. Professors do not work on the cheap no matter the topic. 

1. you might be able to make a case for the harm caused by "wokeness" but nobody has been able to define it, except in subjective terms.  I think I said in a thread that it's "extreme social progressiveness", which worked for a few people but it's not enough for law.
2. Luckily Trump doesn't care about costs...

[impartialobserver]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1. you might be able to make a case for the harm caused by "wokeness" but nobody has been able to define it, except in subjective terms.  I think I said in a thread that it's "extreme social progressiveness", which worked for a few people but it's not enough for law.
2. Luckily Trump doesn't care about costs...

Harm.. infers civil law/lawsuits. That is not the point though. To not allow the speech is something different entirely. 

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, impartialobserver said:

Harm.. infers civil law/lawsuits. That is not the point though. To not allow the speech is something different entirely. 

Well, maybe.  I think they believe that the mindset is "harmful" as that word is commonly used.  

But... the point is: what IS it ?  It can't be defined because it describes a mindset, or a caricature of a mindset... 

It would be like banning "Karens" or "Rednecks"

[Deluge]

19 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

1. wokeness is a matter of speech, expression... You can't say it will not be woke without infringing upon someone's right to free speech. 

2. Higher education is expensive no matter the place. You have to hire staff, build buildings, have a lot of technical infrastructure, etc.. Professors do not work on the cheap no matter the topic. 

3. Besides enrollment is on the decline and hate to tell you.. it is not about politics. As always, its all about the time and money. High school students are starting to question the time spent to get the degree. the cost of tuition, and the foregone wages. 

1. Sure you can. You can say that because wokeness is no longer just speech - it is now invasive, and leftoids want more of it. In fact they want more of it for EVERYONE, and they've been working for that since around 2015. As an American, I want the freedom to have choices that are completely devoid of wokeness BECAUSE of how invasive it has gotten. 

2. It'd be online, so building and utility costs would be out the window. 

3. Which is what makes this new university so great. It'll be free.

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

1. Sure you can. You can say that because wokeness is no longer just speech - it is now invasive, and leftoids want more of it. In fact they want more of it for EVERYONE, and they've been working for that since around 2015. As an American, I want the freedom to have choices that are completely devoid of wokeness BECAUSE of how invasive it has gotten. 

2. It'd be online, so building and utility costs would be out the window. 

3. Which is what makes this new university so great. It'll be free.

3. it takes time to attend classes, do assignments, etc.... Time that you could spend doing other things. Its called opportunity costs. They do matter. 

1. Wokeness.. can't be legislated away because it can't be explicitly defined. You can define someone's age or where they reside.. but their wokeness or lack thereof is purely subjective. 

[Deluge]

1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

3. it takes time to attend classes, do assignments, etc.... Time that you could spend doing other things. Its called opportunity costs. They do matter. 

1. Wokeness.. can't be legislated away because it can't be explicitly defined. You can define someone's age or where they reside.. but their wokeness or lack thereof is purely subjective. 

So you're saying college is bad? 

Sure you can. Wokeness is easy to identify - it can be spotted immediately. Freedom loving Americans should quash it just like they would quash Shariah or Marxism. 

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

So you're saying college is bad? 

Sure you can. Wokeness is easy to identify - it can be spotted immediately. Freedom loving Americans should quash it just like they would quash Shariah or Marxism. 

No but today's high school students have shown that they value getting to work sooner than spending 4+ years on a college degree. Even if it is free.. you have time that you have to spend on the classes, studying, taking exams. That either means you have a stressful life working full time while going to school full time.. or more likely, they take a part time job (therefore opportunity costs taken into account). Also, you generally have to take a certain type of job when you are going to school full time (Yes, i know this intimately). These are food service, customer service, or retail. All of which are relatively low pay and you have to deal with the public. 

so if a student has woke attitudes.. how would the school know this and be able to stop them from voicing such woke views on social media, word of mouth, etc? If it is easy to identify then lets seem some EXACT criteria where there is absolutely no subjective judgment. Age, city of residence, GPA are not subjective so as to give you examples.