Usa Thread

[Coss]

Well let me have a go - bear with me, for a few sentences. "Hillary represents something" yes.

This harks back to my younger days and readings of Robert Ardrey's works, including  "The Territorial Imperative" and "African Genesis".

So my premise is this :: We are basically -  and this underlies any post-agricultural,  political or social behaviour, biological animals. We are violent, we live to eat, breed and dominate our environment. 

There is a reason that males will stop in their tracks when a young lithe woman, with a ball bearing arse, sashays across our field of vision, it is because she is a potential mate and that drive goes deep, way deep. 

Now in Hilary's case, she looks like, and has done so from an early age, a used up female, one who's visage indicates, that child bearing has been done and she's not happy on it, ergo, unpleasant to be around.

Members of the tribe who are snarling and unpleasant and contribute nothing in regard to the "eat, breed and dominate" ethos, are surplus to requirements, even if they do loudly, demand a share of the food and place by the fire.

Much as the girl with the ball bearing arse, will engender a response, from any hormonally normal male, so too will a snarling vicious crone.

I reckon this behaviour, is primal, as is the urge (in males) to hunt, quest, chase things, eat meat, and leave the opinions of philosophers/foofs/wastrels out of it.

Or in simple terms, despite the advancement of thought in the modern era, base behaviour is still, men are men, things like Hilary are best avoided.

[cavanami]

Migrants vow to re-form caravan, continue north toward US

CIUDAD HIDALGO, Mexico (AP) — About 2,000 Central American migrants who circumvented Mexican police at a border bridge and swam, forded and floated across the river from Guatemala decided on Saturday to re-form their mass caravan and continue their trek northward toward the United States....

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hungry-migrants-wail-mexico-guatemala-040047116.html

[cavanami]

The stink of the Kavanaugh hearings continues...the attorney for Ms. Ford never told Ms Ford that the Senate committee offered to travel to a meeting place of her choice so as to relieve her from traveling to DC....

Thank you Judicial Watch for filing an ethics complaint against the attorneys for Ms. Ford...
 

 

[Flashermac]

I remember Reagan being interviewed on the radio once, and he was asked why even though he had many of the same views as Barry Goldwater, he was able to become President. Reagan replied, "I can say the same things as Barry without frightening people. That's the difference." Maybe it comes down to the public persona more than the beliefs.  Something about Hillary just turns people off on her.

p.s. Goldwater nowadays probably wouldn't even be considered a conservative. 

[Steve]

Reagan wouldn't be considered a conservative. He had  one of the biggest amnesty programs for illegals ever. He also worked with Democrats when he could.  

[Steve]

The 'Honduran caravan' has been in the news lately, far more in conservative media. If we look closer into the issue, we find a few things. First, Honduras is one of the most dangerous places in the western hemisphere. Why? Well, they have a leader that has fostered violence. How did he get there? We (USA) helped install and back him. He's rigged elections and we back him anyway. He got there from a coup we backed in 2009.

The military has been used to terrorize the people. The economy is completely fucked as a result and the caravan is partly a desperate attempt to leave for economic reasons as well as safety reasons. The reason why the caravan is so big is because size is safety. If a few women or men leave, they are susceptible to criminals robbing them but not if there are hundreds. 

I am not saying I think they should be in America. I do think its important to at least know the whole story and full disclosure of all facets of it. The larger question of the caravan issue is the USA role in Honduras that is causing the problem in the first place. 

 

[Coss]

wot you said

and the world is going to have to get used to mass migration.

When the rich extract the last gram of worth from the poor, the poor will come for the rich.

It might sound "socialist" god forbid, but if you pay your peasants well, they don't revolt, or vote with their feet.

What good is Trump in his golden tower, if he can't cook and eat? and has no one willing to do it for him?

[Steve]

Immigrants were coming to America in droves by the millions from Europe. Why? Mainly economic. We try and portray it sometimes as they are seeking freedom, but its largely bullshit. They were dirt poor and wanted to see if the rumors of the 'streets paved with gold' were true. Immigrants from Europe left their homes for similar reasons to Brazil, Argentina, Australia, etc, 

So, why didn't millions of Europeans after WW2 try and come to America? Well, partly was that we had tough immigration laws from the mid 20s but we relaxed them right before, during and after WW2. 

The Marshall Plan was in effect and the working poor and unskilled could make a decent wage rebuilding their own country. There was very little reason for most of Europe to come America in the 1950s and 1960s because they were enjoying the benefit of a solid social system that national healthcare, union rights, etc. America knew that by making Europe strong financially again, there wouldn't be a need to migrate and they would be wealthy enough to buy our Coca Colas, and other products both large and small. 

So, why didn't we enact the same thinking with central America? If we really want to stop migration, we should be helping these countries thrive economically. I'm not saying aid. I'm saying just stop fucking with their elections, etc. let them decide how they want to run things and lets not interfere so Tropicana can get cheap fruits out of the 'Banana Republic'. There was actually a net loss of Mexicans in the migration equation. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/01/27/even-before-trump-more-mexicans-were-leaving-the-us-than-arriving/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e7c799d2f175

We don't talk about it. We should but even the so called progressive media doesn't. Why not? It doesn't fit a narrative. Mexico has a lot of opportunities. Half our car parts are made down there. They have a lot of factories and such. Yes, they could pay more but when you are penniless, and with what we call meager wages you can now afford to send your child to school who in turn will get a better job than his or her parents, then there is no need to migrate to America. What also kept Mexicans there? Remittances. More money comes in from that than from oil.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/mexico-got-more-money-remittances-oil-revenues-2015-n510346

If we really want to stop illegal immigration we should work on stopping actions that keeps these countries poor. Canada has a fairly pourous border with us because very few of them want to come south. 

[Flashermac]

Canada also has a government that cares about its people. You can't say that about much of Central America or Mexico. More often than not, the countries have been run by strongmen. If they supported the US, we don't seem to have minded very much. They were only bad if they didn't.

 

[Coss]

Apropos of this - Who is getting all the money flowing out of Venezuela's oil wells? Could it be, that some rich cunts are hiving off with all the money? It is a mystery to me how a country with such a huge fucking revenue stream, cannot feed it's own people. Will the rich claim they are victims when the poor come for them?