America did not go Nazi, nor Marxist.

Why did Intelligent, Educated European Country's (yes more than one) go NAZI? How many million's of children were murdered?

Why did Some European Country's , and supported by European Educated Person's, become Marxist? How many million's of children were murdered?

America understands the vile/evil/murderous nature of the above. Why didn't Europe?

Talking with hindsight is easy. Of course you understand Fascism and Marxism are evil, after you know about the things they are responsible for. The issue is whether you understand the nature of these things at a moment where you have to choose for it.

Sounds like he wants to dissolve the United States and replace it with some Anarcho-syndicalist system.

Please stop thinking in these very silly European terms.

Anarcho-Syndicalism is no less a silly European term than Democracy or Republicanism. It is just a system of governance, characterized by a weak or non existing central government and where most or all power is placed in the hands of the local level. And is that not exactly what Mr. Huckabee just argued for?

These marches happen in the US, and are not considered, unlike Europe, important enough to even comment on. Nazi's, Marxist's, Flat Earther's, etc., are lumped into the same group, and are basically ignored.

Well yeah, but America doesn't have the same history with Nazism as Europe does. For America Nazism has always been some European thing. The closest you got to them was during the war. But America never suffered the occupation and all the horrors that came with it.

France

I'd reread that page a little more carefully before linking it here.

I'd reread the site before linking it here. Its Fascist garbage! Though the incident they were talking about really happened.

Unbelievable!!! But there should be no Legal/Civil penalties.

In the US: All these Right/Left Wing Hater's are allowed to Speak, Publish, Rally, all they want, with no Legal/Civil penalties.

The penalty is Social Ostracism.

The American NAZI Party is allowed to March, with their entire Organization (100), thru Jewish Communities.

When they do, the Local population usually watches in Silence, and the NAZI's go home.

We have NO FEAR that the US will have a Large NAZI, or Marxist following.

Perhaps Europe is/has been different.

Europe generally allows its Nazi party to march as well. Though quite often the Anti Fascism groups call in a bunch of threats to said Nazis so the local government is forced to stop the march because they can't guarantee their safety. Though when such marches do happen, its generally without incident. Personally I do not approve of this tactic.

Germany might be a bit of an exception given that it has outlawed the use of a lot of Nazi symbols. They still have their neo nazis and they do get to protest. I've seen one when I was in Berlin. An interesting experience, there were basically three layers to this protest. At the core where the Nazis yelling their usual racist garbage. Around them was a much much larger group of anti fascism and left wing groups protesting against the nazis. And around them there was a small army of riot police, standing by for when it would go wrong. Nothing happened though.

Sounds like he wants to dissolve the United States and replace it with some Anarcho-syndicalist system.

Yes the incident really happened, but agreed, this would be a better link. I'm quite happy if anyone wants to ask for the previous post to be removed. Bit it does show you the sort of stuff that is out there.

Racist Comment

France

I'd reread that page a little more carefully before linking it here.

I'd reread the site before linking it here. Its Fascist garbage! Though the incident they were talking about really happened.

France

I'd reread that page a little more carefully before linking it here.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Besides, you could argue that Europe has its own problems with race. Italy is racist as hell when it comes to black people, and the more north you go, people get more and more intolerant towards Muslims. And Eastern Europe has its own problems with gypsies.

Careful there, that is a lot of generalisations. I don't know about Italy, so I can't comment.

Any country where parliamentarians can openly call a black minister a monkey who should go back to the jungle without any real repercussions has a problem with race.

Where?

Italy.

Not only Italy, France as well. This not only outwardly racist, it is sheer bad behaviour and bad manners.

Italy

France

And bad government.

---

[/quote]

Old James

Not only Italy, France as well. This not only outwardly racist, it is sheer bad behaviour and bad manners.

Italy

France

Besides, you could argue that Europe has its own problems with race. Italy is racist as hell when it comes to black people, and the more north you go, people get more and more intolerant towards Muslims. And Eastern Europe has its own problems with gypsies.

Careful there, that is a lot of generalisations. I don't know about Italy, so I can't comment.

Any country where parliamentarians can openly call a black minister a monkey who should go back to the jungle without any real repercussions has a problem with race.

Besides, you could argue that Europe has its own problems with race. Italy is racist as hell when it comes to black people, and the more north you go, people get more and more intolerant towards Muslims. And Eastern Europe has its own problems with gypsies.

Careful there, that is a lot of generalisations. I don't know about Italy, so I can't comment. I wouldn't say the UK is intolerant of Muslims, at the last count we have

About 1,500 mosques = 1 mosque for every 1200 Muslims
about 55,000 churches = 1 church for every 700 Christians

Not too bad for a minority religion. It was against the law to be a Muslim in Britain until the Trinitarian Act in 1812 changed that. We do have a problem in the UK with Irish Travelers, but they have been recognised as an official ethnic minority under the race Relations Act.

Then why is it that if someone puts on his or her resume that they are African American, they get no job offers, but if they put on their resume that they are white, they almost immediately get a dozen calls? That doesn't sound like there are no jobs for this person, that sounds like employers don't want to hire an African American.

Мишель do you have data to back your assertion?

I believe the problem is this:

Europeans are seeing the US through THEIR Eyes, Ideas, and Culture's.

Since they are, they believe we must be.

No, I'm simply saying you guys have a problem with race and there is tons of evidence to back that up.

Besides, you could argue that Europe has its own problems with race. Italy is racist as hell when it comes to black people, and the more north you go, people get more and more intolerant towards Muslims. And Eastern Europe has its own problems with gypsies.

Then why is it that if someone puts on his or her resume that they are African American, they get no job offers, but if they put on their resume that they are white, they almost immediately get a dozen calls? That doesn't sound like there are no jobs for this person, that sounds like employers don't want to hire an African American.

Мишель do you have data to back your assertion?

Yes I do.

On average people with black names need to send out 15 resumes for one call back, while people with white names only need 10.

And then there are of course anecdotal stories like this.

Then why is it that if someone puts on his or her resume that they are African American, they get no job offers, but if they put on their resume that they are white, they almost immediately get a dozen calls? That doesn't sound like there are no jobs for this person, that sounds like employers don't want to hire an African American.

Мишель do you have data to back your assertion?

---

The US Supreme Court case you refer to was argued and decided in 2013. Texas passed its Voter-Photo-ID law in 2011, almost totally a copy of one passed (and upheld by the US Supreme Court) by Indiana in 2005. The FIRST Voter-Photo-ID law was passed by Hawaii in 1978. Over half the states either now have them or are in process of enacting them or are awaiting final court approval to implement them.

Check your sources, Texas changed the law 2 hours after the Supreme Court struck down Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act.

they enacted a law with provisions that were first deemed to racist when they still needed approval from the feds.

And then there was also this thing.

That US Supreme Court Case you referred to? Shelby County, Alabama vs. Holder?

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf

All it did was invalidate Sec. 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Sec. 4(b) was the 'preclearance requirement on States with a 'racist past'. It left the entire rest of the act alone. Sec. 4(b) only applied to 9 States. Way more than 9 States have the laws now. Your statement that 'its only the racist south!' fails a basic fact check.

The last poll numbers I've seen indicate about 3/4 of the American people support voter-photo-id laws including a majority of the Democrats (iirc, 52%).

It are not the voter ID laws that are necessarily racist, its just that in certain states they come with certain provisions which do make it harder for minorities to vote.

What the?!?!?

Poor & African-American vs. White People?!?!?

Don't you know that MOST of the Poor in the USA are White?

Perhaps in total numbers because for now White people are still the largest ethnic group. In percentages? Yeah no, others got it worse.

A non-issue? A myth? Started only after Obama got elected President?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot Interrogative

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/voter-fraud-real-rare/story?id=17213376

Its real. Thankfully it is rare, but it is real.

Even your link says that it rarely happens. Like in only a couple of dozen get convicted of it. Not the thousands of people trying to commit fraud like certain conservative and Republican law makers claim when they are justifying voter restriction laws.

Representative Democracy, or indeed ANY Democracy depends on accurate and correct vote totals for its legitimacy. ONE case of voter fraud taints the entire process. ONE case of voter fraud is ONE case too many.

Voter-Photo-ID laws are aimed at THIS issue, not at any sort of racial crap.

Oh please, you would have a point if .00000013 was the difference between two presidential candidates. Its not. 1 case of voter fraud does not taint the entire process, to suggest that it does is utterly ridiculous. Sure, you should have a basic safeguard against fraud, but these voter id laws go much further than simply requiring you to bring some kind of identification with you. That is why section 4(b) of the Voting Rights act blocked those laws and which is why those laws were only passed after the supreme court struck that section down.

Shows you how much you know.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42964.pdf

One hundred two women (a record number) serve in the 113th Congress: 82 in the House, including 3 Delegates, and 20 in the Senate. There are 42 African American Members of the House and 2 in the Senate. This House number includes 2 Delegates. There are 37 Hispanic or Latino Members (a record number) serving: 33 in the House, including 1 Delegate and the Resident Commissioner, and 4 in the Senate. Thirteen Members (10 Representatives, 2 Delegates, and 1 Senator) are Asian American or Pacific Islanders. Two American Indians (Native Americans) serve in the House.

I would say that this hardly qualifies as 'almost entirely out of white males', wouldn't you?

I would actually say that it still consists mostly of white males.
First, the number of males is still over 80% when again, males only make up about 50% of the population. So yeah, they are massively over represented. And then the whiteness of congress. Well, if you add up all the non white congressmen you will notice that about 17.5% of congress is non-white. Again, white people are massively over represented in congress as only about 63% of the Americans are white (I have included latinos in the non white category). So hell yeah, your congress consists almost entirely out of white males.

One reason why the inner-city black community is having employment problems is increased competition from both above and below chasing the same few remaining jobs. Much of the working class is having to move down on the ladder as the better jobs they used to have go *poof*, and there are plenty of new people being added (unskilled immigrants) to the pool of workers trying to climb up on the ladder. Dude, everyone is having a tough time of things right now unless they are in the top few percent. It is not racial in nature, but economic.

Then why is it that if someone puts on his or her resume that they are African American, they get no job offers, but if they put on their resume that they are white, they almost immediately get a dozen calls? That doesn't sound like there are no jobs for this person, that sounds like employers don't want to hire an African American.

Major the point I am trying to make is that you state signing an a statement that you are elgible to vote in order to obtain valid ID must be done at some place away from the polls under penalty of purjury is ok whereas doing that at the polls increases voter fraud. That dog don't hunt for me.

---