User Profile: RajCaj


Member Since: March 02, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 11:54am

    Obviously you’re being a bit sarcastic here, but unfortunately what you’re saying is true. Had the cop not followed-up on the call & someone at the wedding got shot by this guy, the only news the media might have taken away from that tragic event was about guns killing people.

    You wont hear a single word regarding how / why someone decided that threatening a group of people, and ultimately killing someone, at a wedding was a reasonable idea.

    If the gun narrative didn’t fly, not a single person at these black brunches would be reciting this woman’s name because it was black on black violence, born out of thug / gang culture.

    Even with a shoulder camera exonerating the cop, the grief pimps will still grind the axe.

  • [8] January 23, 2015 at 8:40am

    Don’t the refs handle the ball on every down? Aren’t the refs employed by the NFL?

  • January 21, 2015 at 5:33pm

    Actually, FOX does do news…but only at a local affiliate level. Where I’m from, there is a local news broadcast on FOX at 9:00pm.

    That said…FOX News is closer to CNN (24hr News Network) than broadcast stations like CBS, NBC, ABC….where they do national news part time, to all the other pop-culture tripe that airs throughout the rest of the day.

    I tend to give people the benefit of doubt, but I feel pretty confident that some hyper-partisan recent college grad staffer thought themselves to be clever, with a slight to Fox News by not printing “News” on the place card.

    And all Shep did was feed the troll by acknowledging it on national news. Viewers of Fox News aren’t surprised and cheap shot will earn the political hack street cred in their tribe

  • January 19, 2015 at 6:23pm

    True…they keep mentioning MLKs name, but in the same breath advocate tactics held by Malcolm X, and see the world through the eyes of Derrick Bell. Both of those guys thought MLK was a fool for thinking working within our system & treating everyone equally across all races would end racism.

    I heard / read today more people complain about white privilege than mention a goal of a color blind society

  • January 19, 2015 at 6:18pm

    Same for me….and spot on regarding the “color blind” bit. All I’ve heard all day, from all of the MLK specials & programs across the TV & Radio dial has been nothing but Malcolm X & Derrick Bell.

    It’s a facade….they pimp MLK’s achievements and tell everyone we need to adopt MX’s tactics & adopt Derrick Bell’s Critical Race Theory….without every mentioning MX or Derrick Bell.

    I wonder how many people know that the father of the current mindset regarding race relations thought MLK was a fool and his vision of a color blind society was a load of crap?

  • [2] January 16, 2015 at 8:42am


    It’s not hypocritical if you’re up to speed on the “NEW” definition of racism that’s being taught.

    An act can only be racist if said act comes from a person of a race that holds a systemic power dynamic over the race of the person the act is directed toward.

    In other words, whites in America can be victims of racial discrimination, but cannot be victims of racism (due to the supposed power structure whites hold over people of other races)

    So if you buy into all of that, all of those contradictions you pointed out are allowed.

  • [11] January 14, 2015 at 11:39am

    I had the same debate with a good friend of mine, who later in life had an “Atheist Awakening”.

    After listening to one of his soapbox rants on religion being a scourge on humanity, and insinuation that there can be no peace in the world until all people lived according to science / reason & abandon theism, I informed him that he sounded just like one of the intolerant religious evangelicals that he hated so much.

    What he was saying, and what a militant religious evangelical would say (regarding what is needed to better human society) was the same thing….only that they get their direction (which develops their opinions & intolerance toward opposing opinions) from different sources.

    It’s hypocritical of him to decry religious people trying to push their lifestyle on others, while he tries to push his secular lifestyle on others…but he rationalizes it because he feels he is right, and the other people are wrong.

    That is the case in many other similar examples of hypocrisy you see with people far left of center. Leftists will call out people they disagree with as being haters, intolerant and bigoted toward people they disagree with…while being haters, intolerant and bigoted against people they disagree with….but don’t see an issue with it because they just so happen to be “right”.

  • January 13, 2015 at 4:38pm


    I fully agree with you on the point of being of a modern liberal mindset has much to do with upbringing. Lena Dunham is another shining example of what comes out of a parenting situation where both guardians decide to go off the reservation and experiment with “progressive” child rearing theory.

    The point I was trying to make though is chalking up a person that is of a progressive mindset being a result of a mental disorder…like being bipolar or schizophrenic insinuates that they are just born that way and there is little to no value of understanding why or how to fix it (outside of medication…of which I know of none that will cure progressivism)

    I think the reason we are seeing a critical mass of progressives in our country now has much to do with social engineering happening at many levels…resulting in a situation where adults by age are not maturing into adulthood at the same rate previous generations have.

    If that old saying “If you’re not a liberal in your 20s, you have no heart. If your not a conservative in your 40s, you have no brain” is true….and your aim is to increase the number of liberal minded people….all you need to do is enact policy & engineer society so that you extend the naivete’ of a teenager / twenty something.

    Not saying we have to go back to hard knocks life, but a progressive mindset can be corrected with a dose of reality, reason & life experiences.

  • January 13, 2015 at 10:30am

    Discussing whether or not Obama is “pretty good” or not is neither here nor there. It’s all relative until people are able to align on a common set of principles. “Good” to derp-central might mean progressing the country toward socialism. That would be “Bad” in the book of about 50% of the nation.

    To that point, some of the people in this threat point out to specifics of how Obama, and his brand of politics, have failed miserably.

    However, to credit modern liberal progressivism as a mental disorder does a disservice to the root cause of this thought process, and gets us no closer to resolving the divide. People are born with, or develop, mental disorders…and typically require medication to correct / suppress the symptoms. A particular political ideology is not born out of a mental disorder….its born out of ignorance of reality (due to lack of meaningful life experiences) and misinformation (theories & biased science taught as law & truth in our education system).

    Most of our parents / grandparents were working to support their families by 16, married by 17, had families by 18 & seasoned adults by 20. Most of today’s generation are still living with their parents at 25 and won’t accumulate a meaningful amount of life experiences until 40…if at all.

    It’s that trend that has to be reversed. Calling it a mental disorder doesn’t address the root cause.

  • [1] January 13, 2015 at 9:52am

    It’s the same explanation that most modern liberals give regarding failed socialist / communist regimes across the world.

    The idea of a society that is managed by a small concentration of “educated betters” isn’t the problem to them…its the poor execution of that societal model that caused those socialist / communist states to fail.

  • [7] January 13, 2015 at 9:33am

    I disagree….I think this was just another opportunity for the Obama Admin, and his brand of geo-political ideology, to manage the decline of America on the world stage.

    He (and like minded people) think that the most of the world problems today are because of the lead role the US has played over the last few hundred years. This was just another opportunity for him to allow other nations to lead & be in the spot light.

    I think that geo-political theory is flawed, and we should have stood in solidarity with the rest of those nations, but I don’t think the reason our current admin decided not to participate was for a reason as nefarious as not wanting to march against Islam because Obama is a secret Muslim.

  • January 8, 2015 at 6:07pm


    For what it’s worth, removing religion does not absolve human beings from tribalism. WWII was fought over a bunch of goose stepping radical nationalists that thought their country (and it’s dogma) was better than everyone else.

    At the root of all this is the idea that life on earth is a zero sum game, and a people belonging to group “x” cannot live happily because people from group “y” prevents them from doing so.

    This game happens every day on a much smaller scale (see race based, gender based, sexuality based infighting…YAY Multiculturalism!)

    That said…it’s also unfair to paint all religions in the same light…fanatics or not. Westboro Baptist lunatics claim to be fanatical Christians (although that is up for debate) and all they do is say hateful crap on poster boards.

    They aren’t strapping C4 & a ziplock bag of ball bearings to their bodies and blowing up others that don’t believe I their brand of religion.

    Even as much fun people make of the “prudish” Mormans…you don’t see the guys with white button down shirts & bicycles shooting up a “Book of Morman” play on broadway.

    I think it’s worth noting which fanatics are actually killing innocent people.

  • January 8, 2015 at 1:35pm


    What lettucepray did was jump to an assumption that best fit his argument so that he could “win”

    It’s why you see hyperbolic speech so much in political discourse today.

    Reading your comments, I can think of a half a dozen ways to shut down the radical indoctrination & propaganda shaping the incompatible view of society in radical Islam other than “killing them all”….but those methods wouldn’t be helpful for my argument if I were trying to be contrary or beat you in an argument.

    To Glenn’s point he’s been making lately….try to reconcile / understand, not win.

    That said, this is another unintended consequence of pushing for a multicultural over a melting pot society. Without a common tie or bond that unites people of otherwise different backgrounds, apathy & indifference (at best) or vengeance (at worst) fills the void.

    United we stand, divided we fall is not just a platitude.

  • [9] January 8, 2015 at 1:14pm


    I’d assume that he brought up Stewart’s (or Leibowitz’s) Jewish background because if any group of people in this world have a bone to pick with radical Islam, it’s the Jewish people.

    You’d figure that a person that belongs to a group of people that are the primary targets of militant islamists would stand a little taller in the face of religious fascism & oppression.

  • [24] January 7, 2015 at 1:53pm

    Excuse me, but there is a systemic problem with black criminals getting away with crime. Why else would there be such blatant criminal activity done in broad daylight? Are all of these criminals just that stupid or do they believe that they won’t get brought up on charges because “snitches end up in ditches”?

    Do you think Michael Brown stole the cigars & roughed up the shop owner because he was working with a 5th grade intelligence / maturity level? The guy was supposedly about to start college. Or could it be that he felt that he could get away with it?

    In reference to the high levels of crime in predominately black neighborhoods, many of the criminals get off scott free because people in the community are either scared to “snitch” on the perp, or out right hate the police. The ones that do get caught, in many cases, get released back on the streets because of over population in prisons.

    Secondly, if you’re going to truck out a slogan like “black lives matter”, and completely ignore the fact that over 90% of black murders are at the hands of other black people…you’re not being intellectually honest about the debate. So if you’re not REALLY concerned with “all black lives”, then what IS the motivation for a statement like that? (particularly when people using that phrase get butt-hurt when other people say all human life matters)

    Responses (1) +
  • [8] January 7, 2015 at 1:40pm

    It would be racist because of how racism is now defined. At some point in the last 20 years, the educators & powers that be amended the definition to include a caveat, that racism can only come from a person of a group that holds a power dynamic over another group, which absolves people of a minority race from ever being labeled as racist…..despite evidence of racial discrimination.

    In other words, this new definition of racism gives a pass to racially prejudiced minority groups, and prevents the hypocrisy test from being used when determining if something is racist or not (if White Entertainment Television is racist, then Black Entertainment Television is racist…..if a white special interest group is racist, a black special interest group is racist)

    This is why you hear ridiculous crap like Whites cannot be victims of racism.

  • [38] January 7, 2015 at 12:15pm

    You’re invisible because you do not represent an opportunity to be politically activated for their cause. (until or unless you become dependent on fed programs for medical services later in life)

    I’ve asked all these questions for a long time myself….until I became educated on Critical Race Theory – Dr. Derrick Bell & Rules for Radicals – Saul Allinsky

    It was crystal clear after that. If you’re comfortable, self sustainable, and otherwise have a small footprint in society, you are of no use to politicians.

    Allinsky said the biggest challenge of organizing citizens to effect political change is that there are too many people comfortable with their situation (middle class). To get a critical mass of people required to demand political action in one direction or another (toward socialism / communism) requires that the people that are comfortable in life are convinced otherwise (see propaganda in the education sector) or knocked out of a comfortable middle class status through regulations, taxes & other government policies (see health care debacle)

  • [4] December 11, 2014 at 10:26am


    I can get along with decriminalizing marijuana, given it’s relatively mild effects (if the standard for legal intoxicants includes alcohol), and acknowledge that the likely most of the felony drug offenses that harden people involve marijuana.

    That said, a person (or society) that does not place personal responsibility in high regard & as a moral priority will fall victim to the effects of any intoxicant.

    Until our society stops leveraging their failures on the population (see socialism), the “state” will need to manage our personal lives so that the population at large does not end up in ruin from the trappings of vices & incapable of producing tax revenue to support the socialist state.

    As a socialist you should know that legislators create laws to better manage society so that it is productive and generates revenue to pay for said management of society.

    The more individuals in our society are able to better manage our own affairs (responsible use of mild intoxicants included), the less laws & legislation are needed to manage the individual (drug laws)

  • [10] December 11, 2014 at 9:27am


    Russell tried to counter Bill’s point, regarding high incidents of violence in the black community, by suggesting that a “deeper” look at why there is a violence culture in the black community is because of high incarceration rates for non violent felonies (IE, drug use & sales)

    It’s true that people returning to free society from prison life do come back as hardened criminals (because that is what is required to survive in the zoos we call prisons), but he doesn’t get to the true root cause.

    Blacks are disproportionally incarcerated because they disproportionally commit a higher percentage of the crimes. They commit more crimes because of a break down in the traditional family unit (which has been replaced by gangs) and moral foundation (which has been influenced by hip-hop / rap pop culture).

    Gang / Thug Life + Rap / Hip-Hop = DEF JAM RECORDING – RUSSELL SIMMONS

    THIS is why you’ll never get Russell Simmons to own up to the real issues

  • [27] December 11, 2014 at 9:10am

    Critical Race Theory was born out of Critical Justice Theory, which suggests that people of different races should receive different punishments for the same crime.

    In other words….a Caucasian caught selling crack gets the standard fine & prison sentence and a person of a minority racial status gets a reduced fine & prison sentence.

    The justification for this is that the steeper hill racial minorities have to climb to achieve prosperity contributes to higher instances of criminal activity. So where Caucasians have no good reason to commit crime (because they face no barriers to normal life & prosperity), racial minorities have an excuse, so to speak.

    As much as a load of crap that is….it’s what’s being taught in Criminal Justice & other liberal arts programs all over the country.

    If Russell Simmons wants to do some root cause analysis, he needs to dig a little deeper than rampant drug use in the black community.

    Engaging in high risk behavior (which includes drug use & casual sex) runs disproportionately high in the black community, and is a sure-fire way to end up in the poor house. This starts with parenting, which requires a cohesive family unit & a strong moral foundation. Dig a little deeper, and you’ll find the breakdown of the family unit, as a result of cultural rot in pop culture / rap industry. (HELLO RUSSEL SIMMONS)

    No wonder he didn’t want to touch that with a 10ft pole

    Responses (1) +
123 To page: Go