User Profile: RajCaj


Member Since: March 02, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • April 24, 2015 at 9:09am

    No, it’s all about the MSNBC ratings…

    Me thinks this push back is as a result of some feedback provided to the producers that they need to pull back on the left lean….just a little

  • [4] April 24, 2015 at 9:04am

    I agree with missiondweller, and here is why…

    Sealing the border to the order of preventing 80% + of immigrants entering the country illegally IS achievable if taken seriously. If we can put a human being on the moon, and if the government has no problem dropping millions of dollars to monitor shrimp on treadmills and other asinine expenditures….they can staff the border & erect fences sufficient enough to stop the flow.

    Democrats could also stop incentivizing illegal immigration by offering hand-outs to anyone that can manage to get across the border.

    Also, illegal immigration, on the order of tens – hundreds of thousands a year is NOT a problem for the political party that is actively lowering the barriers to entry to get in the country, and who also actively works to get those illegal immigrants money, food, shelter, and a voter registration card.

    If you can’t put the dots together, there is nothing else to say.

    Regarding the pay disparity, that wouldn’t have anything to do with the US transitioning from an industrial economy to a expert / professional service providing economy

    When culture & our education system fails the next generation of workers, and when those who are getting advanced degree are going 10k+ in debt for a lib arts degree…you get a smaller & higher paid workforce.

  • [18] April 23, 2015 at 1:53pm

    Word…this is the space you get into when society has acknowledged that not only are words as harmful as actions, but that people are allowed to define what words mean to them, regardless of what was intended by the messenger. Comedy, humor, and general light-hearted nature goes out the door because someone, somewhere will not find something funny, ascribe the worst possible interpretation and put that liability on the person making said comedy, humor or light-hearted comment / statement.

    How you know these people are full of bull manure is when you look to see their track record on going after other offenders that may be politically like minded.

    Isn’t it interesting that some random Australian guy’s tongue & cheek “don’t mess with my daughter” facebook post goes viral over people criticizing him for being sexist, misogynistic and injecting sexualization where it doesn’t need to be……yet you NEVER hear of entertainers / rap n’ hip hop artists getting their facebook page blown up over out right lewd, blatant and real examples of sexism, misogyny and sexual objectification of women.

    Responses (3) +
  • [30] April 23, 2015 at 9:06am

    Let’s see, Under Obama…
    - Alphabet soup government agencies destroying the concept of “privacy” as we know it (I guess we can be glad there were no 9/11 scale attacks)
    - We are crawling out of an economic collapse at a snails pace, with the highest number of people out of the workforce since the Great Depression, record number of people on government assistance and skyrocketing cost of living (check your grocery bill and how much it costs to buy a car these days)
    - We did NOT end our war presence, having to send troops & combat operations BACK to the Middle East to take care of an enemy that is there because we didn’t take care of business in the first place
    - Forced a bad guy out of Libya to be replaced by a worse group
    - Forced a bad guy out of Egypt to be replaced by a worse group
    - Forced a bad guy out of Syria to be replaced by a worse group
    - Upped drone operations & killings across the entire Middle East
    - Failed to support a more pro-west revolution in Iran…but later decided to get into Iranian politics by securing a deal that would give Iran a bomb tomorrow instead of today
    - Released killers from Gitmo to return to the battle field while setting up a black site in Chicago where they can hold / detain Americans without due process
    - Allowed for the militarization of local & state police departments, while publicly decrying resulting abuses of said militarized police force

    I’m running out of characters and could go on…

    Bush wasn’t perfect, but Obama is worse!

  • [2] April 19, 2015 at 8:31pm

    Actually, they’ve conditioned a generation of people to think that a woman is defined by her subscription to progressive dogma, just as a black person is defined by their adherence to liberal issues.

    So if your a woman, or black, and do not tow the party line, you’re no *real* woman or person of color….therefore not afforded the protections given to those classes.

    So yes, they wouldn’t vote for a Sarah Palin, or Carly Fiorina because they aren’t really women. They also wouldn’t vote for a Herman Cain or a Ben Carson because they aren’t really black.

  • [2] April 16, 2015 at 1:24pm


    Which is in effect creating law.

    If a law says it’s illegal to do something, and all offenders face a penalty, not enforcing the law is a distinction with no difference between creating another law that says it’s not illegal to do said thing.

    Also, regarding Obama’s executive orders not changing the law, a fed judge has recently disagreed with that assessment. Not only is his executive order instructing law enforcement officials to NOT do something, it instructs other agencies TO do additional things for the illegal immigrants who have been allowed to stay.

    What’s a legislative branch good for if you have the judicial branch legislating from the bench and the executive branch legislating through executive orders and law enforcement directives?

    Congress has become nothing more than political theatre, while a highly ideological WH installs like minded & unelected cabinet officials & heads of departments that do all the government grunt work that no one ever hears about.

  • [6] April 15, 2015 at 12:40pm

    It’s hard to figure out because progressivism doesn’t like to draw lines in the sand, because eventually the progress will take them over that line.

    Some “ethicists” in Australia, who received a degree in Ethics from Oxford, are now suggesting that a human isn’t considered a “person” until they are 3 years old…meaning that a mother should be able to legally abort the life of their child up until 3!

    Progressive Model
    No Abortion Legal –> Abortion Legal in Early Pregnancy –> Abortion Legal up Until Birth –> Abortion of Life Legal up Until 3

    It’s hard for most to wrap their head around the “official policy” for progressives on abortion because there is no standard, but only temporarily established guidelines that the zeitgeist of the society at that time won’t revolt over, in a constant progression toward an end goal…which is rarely every shared with said society…which is another reason why it’s difficult to get uber progressives “in the know” to clearly state their policy standpoint.

  • [4] April 8, 2015 at 5:06pm

    Tying this to Obama is a stretch at best, but the fact still remains that there is a militarization of the local & state police departments by the fed government, while at the same time operatives within the fed government that are instigating social unrest in response to said militarization.

    It’s not just the police shootings as of late, it’s also the very liberal use of Tasers, night sticks, and SWAT like operations over offenses that do not seem warranted. In many cases, the Leos aren’t going rogue, but are just following protocol.

    Someone higher up made the decision to push armored vehicles down to local PDs, someone higher up made the decision to change protocol such that SWAT teams are sent out to confiscate a display gun and/or ammunition from a home, someone higher up made the decision to put the hammer down on people selling loosies in NY.

    Someone higher up has been influencing and meeting with these social action networks that take to the street to protest the things other higher ups have implemented.

    This isn’t an Obama problem, it’s a statist government problem. Government officials have a history of justifying a fix by creating the problem.

  • [5] April 8, 2015 at 2:17pm

    Trolling hard eh?

    It’s a good thing that what Rand actually believes is independent and has nothing to do with what you “believe” to be his motivations.

    And that is, at the root, the false premise that if Republicans are nicer to registered democrat members of the media that they will treat you more fairly….

    These people (along with most registered democrat millennials) have been taught that a male is inherently born sexist, a person of a particular race is inherently born racially prejudiced (and if your white…that means you’re racist), and a Republican who is male & white has not yet acknowledged their privilege and taken over steps to mitigate their bigotry.

    No amount of nice can wipe away this “natural sin”. Instead of honest discourse & debate over difference in opinion of ideas, mean spirited snark & hyperbole is used to shame & defame…..which is coincidently MUCH easier to do than actually argue the merits of a philosophical difference in policy.

    Stop being lazy!

  • [5] April 8, 2015 at 2:04pm

    I agree that he doesn’t sound like a modern day Republican, but surely you must understand why he wouldn’t run as an Independent.

    It’s actually all pretty interesting….it wasn’t that long ago when Libertarians were registered Democrats, not Republicans.

    Democrats rode that “free thought, tolerance, personal liberty” train long enough to get their fringe policies into the mainstream, and now that they’ve managed to popularize liberal progressivism, they shut the door on “free thought, tolerance & personal liberty” behind them.

    Hence the rise in Libertarianism within the Republican party….no room for descent or not towing the line within the Democrat party these days.

  • [15] April 8, 2015 at 1:54pm

    I agree with jamespubliusmadison on this one

    That said, I trust Rand less than Cruz to follow through with all of the campaign rhetoric & policies…but only because Rand is a much better politician than Cruz is. (By politician, I mean someone who has the ability to placate & appease)

    However, it will be Rand’s ability to reach & work with people outside the choir that will get him more votes than Cruz.

  • [18] April 8, 2015 at 1:25pm

    True, but one of Rand’s strong points is his ability to speak to folks outside the choir.

    If he doesn’t go on those shows, they’ll editorialize what they THINK his positions are, without him present to say “no, no, no, no, no you have it wrong”.

    Sure they’ll chop n’ screw it for their benefit at a later date, but they can’t make the people that saw his interview live un-see it…so he at least was able to present his position to those people.

    Love or Hate Rand’s policy positions, one thing that is undeniable is that he is best equipped to spar with these people, out of all the other Republican candidates

  • [1] March 23, 2015 at 10:25pm

    Your wrong, white folk by the look of the mug shots

    Why can’t trash just be trash?

  • [5] March 17, 2015 at 6:03pm

    Exactly….and Mark’s explanation for why some can use it, and other can’t is complete bull and he knows it.

    Words have the meaning you give them. The black community took the n-word, modified the spelling a bit and applied a different meaning to it than what came from the days of slavery. There are people in the black community that also use the word in it’s historical context against other blacks as well…..with all the hate & intent to demean the target of the word than if it came from the mount of a clan member.

    Why does the skin color of someone make it okay, or make it forbidden, if the hate behind the word is just the same.

    People should be good to all people, regardless of race, creed, nationality, or whatever social construct you want to identify as.

  • March 17, 2015 at 5:38pm


    Hypocrisy tests for evidence of racism do not apply anymore. The newly amended definition for racism being taught in school & other institutions involves an instance of racial discrimination where the perpetrator of said racism belongs to a race of people that hold societal / institutional power over the victim.

    That said, whites can never be victims of racism.

    Responses (1) +
  • [10] March 17, 2015 at 1:42pm

    That’s exactly the point….it’s not REALLY about having a conversation (requiring a two way exchange of ideas), but an advocacy program used to get out the PC accepted theory on race relations in our society.

    Any meaningful conversation on this topic is 30 minutes long, at the very least. You think executive management is willing for one of their baristas to take even 5 minutes to discuss with the person at the register….when there are 10 people in line & another 6 cars lined up at the drive through window?

    So what kind of message can you get out in 30-60 seconds? A one way awareness message to the customer to check their privilege, or an opportunity to exchange a few comments that are in agreement with each other (no time for debate needed) between like minded individuals.

    And for that….the almost always left leaning employees at Starbucks are perfectly trained for this awareness campaign.

  • [6] March 17, 2015 at 1:32pm

    I’m assuming the last bit from ewoodard was a bit tongue & cheek, with the point being any point of view offered in these so called discussions that doesn’t go along with the politically correct talking points are will likely end up in fireworks and serve for good entertainment for the folks that aren’t still waiting in line for their coffee.

    Anyone that’s been to Starbucks knows that the “partners” that work there are not what you’d call a politically diverse group of people. Couple that with the logistical nightmare related to ANY conversation lasting more than 30 seconds when there are other people waiting in long lines (inside & out) for coffee. With those two things in mind, what REALLY is the objective with this effort?

    Like minded customers & starbucks employees to share quick quips that fall in line with the theory that white greed runs a nation in need? Or is it for the left leaning staff to write clever one liners on a patron’s cup that attempts to get them to check their privilege?

    Any meaningful conversation on race would take at least 30 minutes and involve an exchange of differing ideas / perspectives where participants of the conversation maintain a base level of respect for the other.

    Doing this at a Starbucks register is NOT the right place for that conversation….unless the objective is to not REALLY have a conversation.

  • [6] March 13, 2015 at 9:47am

    I think the issue is a little more complicated than that. Race has nothing to do with it, political forces leveraging a base human flaw (tribalism) does.

  • [15] March 13, 2015 at 9:43am

    @ibbolton – it’s all facts until it disagrees with the politics of the progressive ideology. Free speech & resistance to the thought police was in vogue when hard core progressivism accounted for 20% of the Democrat party, and now that it’s become main streamed….free speech & resisting the thought police is characterized as a backward thinking & an impediment to progress.

    So was it REALLY about free thought and resistance to thought police before, or was it about progressing the political agenda?

    @yougottabekidding – is that in reference to Sean Hannity? There might be plenty to disagree with his politics & tact….but at least in that exchange, what part of what he quoted from the DOJ wasn’t fact based?

    There is video of MB taking the cigars & shoving the store owner into shelving after he tried to block MB from leaving…..and the protestor is asking for proof? The DOJ (run by Eric Holder) quoted forensic evidence showing that MB didn’t have his hands raised…..and the protestor, who has not analyzed official case documentation, says that forensic evidence says MB did. Who, in this case, has the “facts”?

    I’ll repeat my first statement….it’s all facts until it disagrees with the politics of the progressive ideology.

  • [1] March 2, 2015 at 10:20am

    Thanks for the context. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to matter much these days.

    There has been a major shift in the dynamics of communication that has been coming for a long time, but only now is out in the light, where people don’t even have to prove racial bias context was meant by the messenger any more. All that is needed to ascribe meaning to a message (verbal or otherwise) is how someone interprets it. (See ***** in the armor story with the ESPN writer)

    Fitting for an industry that trains our millennials to be hypersensitive about everything, and to assume race is the motivator for nearly ally actions. If an entire generation of people always evaluates everything through the context of race, just about any speech can be construed as racist. Couple that with the scarlet letter treatment racism gets you, you have a massive squelching of speech…innocent or not.

    I wonder how soon parents get reprimanded for teaching the old “Sticks & Stones…” moto.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love