• Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 03:26 PM
    What a strange and wildly off-topic question. Why on earth would you expect anyone here to speak for Biden? And what do you have against commenting on the actual topic of the thread, as presented in the OP? It is your OP after all.
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 03:22 PM
    I don't really follow that reasoning. Seems like you're saying that if the unjust law in question doesn't affect you, then there's nothing wrong with killing the people who break it. So fine. Pick whatever it is that does affect you. They ban something that's important to you (obviously reading books isn't in that category--I should have known that already), and some brave person insists on owning whatever that banned item is, and get killed by the cops for it. You won't feel sympathy for them? Plenty do. That's true. And you're really fine with that? Killing someone for running away to spare themselves from getting kidnapped and imprisoned when they never did anything wrong in the first place? Do you also grant yourself the authority to go around kidnapping and imprisoning people who do things you don't like and then killing them on the spot if they don't just kneel down and let you do it without resistance? Or is this a special privilege that you just grant to cops?
    92 replies | 1221 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 01:36 PM
    If they outlawed conservative books and then tried to arrest a white guy for having one and he tried to flee so as not to have to go to prison for the crime of having an illegal book and they killed him, would you have sympathy for him? Or would you say he got himself killed by way of doing those things he had every right to do?
    92 replies | 1221 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 11:05 AM
    My workplace has some strict safety rules that everyone has to follow, one of which is that we always have to back into parking spaces so that we can drive forward when we leave. Female workers at this company are routinely given a pass on that one. They just tell the boss, "Look, for the life of me, I can't figure out how to do that." I have been told that this is a regular thing at our local offices all over the country.
    92 replies | 1221 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 08:21 AM
    The status quo 50 years ago was a very temporary and short lived status quo. It was preceded and followed by different status quos, just as the status quo of today was preceded and will be followed by different ones. People mixing together has always happened and always will. It is not a recent experiment. The geographical horizons of it have changed with the technological developments of modern travel and communication. But the phenomenon has been the rule throughout human existence, not the exception. It's just that many centuries ago, you would have lived in a world where the limits of what you saw would have been geographically closer to you. Instead of dividing the entire human race worldwide into races that span continents, you would have divided the small portion of the human race that you saw in the areas surrounding you into smaller groups that you would have seen as just as important. The 21st century version of you might want to lump those tribes together into a single race, but the pre-modern version would not have. And that pre-modern you would have been just as concerned about the mixing of those tribes as the modern you is about the mixing of races. And the premodern you would have seen that inevitable mixing that you opposed happening all around you and believed it was some new experiment. But it would not have been, just as it isn't now. The racial/ethnic/tribal group categories have been constantly transforming with their individual members crossing their boundaries, just like languages do. Imagine somebody trying to make the same arguments you're making about preserving the white race, only instead making them about preserving the English language, as though the version of English that they speak in their generation is supposed to be the eternal standard. The two ideas are equally divorced from the reality of how these things really work.
    39 replies | 552 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 07:14 AM
    It sounds to me like you want to do more than just preserve a certain culture. You want to compel others to help you, because you don't see enough who are willing to do what it would take to accomplish the level of societal engineering you want voluntarily. And in spite of the persistent tribalist tendencies that all humans inherently possess, those tribes that have always existed have never managed to be preserved. All have succumbed to the inevitable reality of change. Those who saw it happening around them often didn't like it. But any imagined notions they had that the tribal groupings they had known their whole lives, each with their own cultural distinctives, were preserved unchanged since the distant past only to face the threat of change for the first time in their generation, were just imagined. And in my reading of ancient literature, I don't find your claim that tribes have almost always been based on skin color to be true. But even to the extent that it ever was true in any cases, skin doesn't exist in just a few discrete colors. Skin colors exist on a spectrum of innumerable shades. The choices people make of where to draw the lines between what they count as one color or another are subjective and dependent on their context.
    39 replies | 552 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 06:26 AM
    You certainly are entitled to your opinion. And many whites hold that opinion, whether they say it so forthrightly or not. But be logical about it. Immigration is utterly irrelevant to the preservation of whiteness. The white population of the world is what it is, and the nonwhite population of the world is what it is. These numbers don't change by moving those people around on different sides of national borders. If you and all other whites who want to preserve whiteness choose to live that value out by marrying other whites and passing on their whiteness (whatever it is they think whiteness is) to their kids and teaching them to do the same, then no amount of immigration will impede their pursuit of that goal. And if other whites choose not to pursue the goal, this too would take nothing away from those who do pursue it. Nor is it any of the business of those who want to preserve whiteness what the ones who don't choose to do about it. But I would also point out that the entire concept of race that underlies that mindset is a misconception. Races, ethnic groups, nations, and all other subgroups that we may want to divide the human race into, are not, and never in history have been, static entities that travel through history bouncing off one another like billiard balls. There are no impermeable boundaries between them. Their histories are histories of change and mixing, going all the way back to the beginning.
    39 replies | 552 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:19 PM
    Almost all of those who immigrate here by illegal means also want to live in the US legally. But they can't. There is no legal means of immigrating here available to them. So they resort to coming the only way they can, which is illegally. If we repealed all those legal restrictions on immigration that make it impossible for all those immigrants who want to be able to come here legally to do so, then practically all immigration would be precisely the type that you classify here as "legitimate immigration," and there would not exist an illegal immigration problem. I don't know your views, so I can't say if this is something you would support or not. But most of the time when I encounter people who say that they're not against immigration in general, but only against illegal immigration, and I make this point to them, it turns out they don't like this idea, and it really is immigration in general that they oppose.
    39 replies | 552 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:14 PM
    A couple years ago nonwhites surpassed whites in the under-16 age group in the USA. It's just in that age group, not the whole population. But this was a news story that was reported. So that might be what you remember.
    39 replies | 552 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    92 replies | 1221 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:43 PM
    I'm looking forward to the statement the NRA is bound to put out about how this happened because Daunte's right to keep and bear arms was infringed.
    92 replies | 1221 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:35 AM
    I'm not sure if that top one is Latin American, but if she is, it perfectly illustrates the point.
    10 replies | 167 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:24 AM
    It's weird that you say that, since I've made multiple posts in this thread trying to discuss that exact thing. And you just keep wanting to dance around the subject.
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:16 AM
    It seems to me that the age issue will be the crucial factor, and especially if it involved crossing state lines. If you take that out of the equation, then I doubt that they'll be able to prove that anything he did was as simple as flat out exchanging sex for money. Even if they did have sex and he did give them money, and even if it was understood clearly between the parties involved that it was tit for tat, it would be too easy for him to reframe it as him giving them gifts and them having consensual sex as adults, and to argue that we can't possibly rebrand it as prostitution every time adult dating relationships have asymmetrical distribution of benefits whereby the males are motivated by the sexual satisfaction they get from the females while the females are motivated by the money the males spend on them. I think when people get successfully charged with prostitution, there's pretty much always either a recording of the deal being made or an undercover cop eye witnessing it. And if they don't have that underage crossing of state lines factor to focus on, and they still do successfully prosecute Gaetz, then I bet there will be a whole lot of members of Congress who will get really scared about all the times they did essentially the same thing.
    96 replies | 3941 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:59 AM
    That's clear. Despite this very concern being central to the issue that the whole thread is about, you conspicuously avoid addressing it, no matter how often it gets raised. Why is that?
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:50 AM
    Oh. So you're not in favor of it being done constitutionally. I see. To others here, that matters. Notice how you could use that exact same line of argument for absolutely anything that is warranted for any level of government to do, and then argue that it needs to be done at the federal level. Absolutely every law and government service will get pushed upwards out of the states' hands and into the federal government because it is generically "legitimate." This is essentially what has been happening for the past 230 years in America. And it's why we now have such a gargantuan centralized federal government ruling over the states, with the state governments serving as extensions of that federal government. And by that same line of reasoning, if it really were valid, it would follow that pushing all of these "legitimate" laws and government services up to a single worldwide global government would be equally defensible.
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:34 AM
    Earlier you said I didn't comment on it at all. Now you're saying that I didn't "verify" it. I can't tell what you expect from me to verify anything. Is there something I said that you need verification for? And does this mean that you now acknowledge that I did comment on it?
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:30 AM
    I have to admit, when I see obviously white people try to say they're not white just because they're Mexican or some other kind of Latin American, as if white and Mexican are mutually exclusive, it does kind of annoy me.
    10 replies | 167 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:24 AM
    Great point. Nobody, no matter where they're born, should be a public charge. That is the basic problem here, and it has nothing to do with immigration policy. In fact, it seems to me that making public charge immigration rules is a way to preserve the welfare state, when we shouldn't want to preserve it. Statists love to say, "You can't have both open borders and a welfare state." Well, if that's true, then it's a big point in favor of having open borders. That 1792 quote from Giles in the OP is spot on. And it actually completely undermines the main point the OP is trying to make by tying this to immigration policy.
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:16 AM
    Every single post I've made in this thread includes comments with regard to the legitimacy of a public charge rule. Two of them prior to this one even explicitly state when they are "legitimate" and "not legitimate" (using those very words) and are direct replies to you commenting about me addressing the legitimacy of public charge rules. You are wrong about this being separate from the question of who enforces these rules, because the criterion of who enforces them decides whether or not they are legitimate. You can't just say they're generically legitimate, and then argue that because of that, they are legitimate for the the federal government, as you try to do in the OP.
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:01 AM
    The post you just quoted directly addresses that. Again, it is constitutionally legitimate for the states, but not for the federal government. That distinction is crucial to the whole issue, yet you insist on dancing around it.
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:37 AM
    There you go again, avoiding the point. Notice how you say "having a 'public charge'" rule without specifying what government would have the rule. It's obvious what my post has to do with it, because my post directly addresses the question of what governments are and are not permitted by the Constitution to have such a rule. Constitutionally, it is legitimate for states to have a public charge rule, but it is not legitimate for the federal government to have one. The evidence you adduced in the OP actually supports my claim, in spite of the fact that you attempted to use that evidence in support of putting the responsibility of having a public charge rule at the federal level, rather than the states.
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:59 AM
    The 10th Amendment of the Constitution prohibits the federal government from involving itself in such rules. It is up to the individual sovereign states to have them.
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:45 AM
    If Gaetz is the future of the GOP, then that's a reason to hope this is true.
    96 replies | 3941 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:31 AM
    Notice how the passive voice (i.e. "laws were enacted," "this law was followed by") is used to conceal the vital information here that up until the end of the 19th century, it was the individual states (and before them the individual colonies) that had these laws, not the federal government. If this was a power that the Constitution delegated to the federal government, why do you suppose that was? And why do you suppose the author of the OP chose to use such circumlocutions to avoid saying this fact?
    33 replies | 730 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    04-09-2021, 09:07 AM
    Looks like Trump lost that game of chicken he made believe he was playing against all the Republicans who refused to go along with demands that they not count the electoral votes that he didn't want counted.
    32 replies | 972 view(s)
  • tfurrh's Avatar
    51 replies | 2887 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    04-03-2021, 07:16 PM
    I knew that wasn't a bike he normally rode as soon as I saw a seat on it.
    9 replies | 406 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    04-02-2021, 07:28 AM
    The COVID shutdowns, and associated policies. That is Trump's single most significant legacy. If you support Trump over Rand on that single most anti-liberty thing Trump did, then that undermines everything you've said about how Rand's problem is being too supportive of Trump's anti-liberty actions. Your very entry into this thread was in fact you criticizing Rand for contradicting Trumpism/Fauciism, rather than supporting it. You went from complaining that Rand wasn't enough of a Trumper to saying he was too much of one. Also, I generally don't throw the word treason around that casually. The only reason I did in this case was because I was replying to a post you made where you used the word "traitor." I don't know what treason you had in mind. But if the COVID shutdowns don't qualify, then I can't see what else Trump did that would.
    44 replies | 2495 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    04-02-2021, 06:55 AM
    This is an odd line of argument for you to take in a debate that started with you condemning Rand Paul for standing up against the treasonous policies of Trump and Fauci.
    44 replies | 2495 view(s)
More Activity
About Invisible Man

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
11
Activist Reputation (Staff Rated):
1
Select if you support the site's Mission.:
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" badge by your name badge by yourr name in all posts.)
Select if you do not support Trump or Hillary.:
No Trump. No Hillary. (This will add a "None of the Above" badge by your name in all posts.)
Political Campaign Skills
Computer and Technical:
Scientists and Engineer

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,043
Posts Per Day
2.12
General Information
Last Activity
Today 08:13 PM
Join Date
12-09-2019
Referrals
0

1 Friend

  1. tfurrh tfurrh is offline

    Member

    tfurrh
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1

02-28-2021


02-20-2021


02-10-2021


01-11-2021


12-27-2020


No results to display...
Page 1 of 40 12311 ... LastLast

04-13-2021


04-12-2021



Page 1 of 40 12311 ... LastLast