User Profile: RajCaj

RajCaj

Member Since: March 02, 2012

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [3] December 11, 2014 at 10:26am

    @Redneck

    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

    ^THIS^

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 They commit more crimes because of a break down in the traditional family unit (which has been replaced by gangs) and moral foundation (which has been influenced by hip-hop / rap pop culture).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

  • [26] 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) +
  • [10] December 10, 2014 at 10:59am

    @paulbrown

    This started WAY before Obama & Holder. You have to get to their roots to see where it started (Black Liberation Theory, Critical Race Theory)

    While MLK’s “I have a Dream” speech served as the gold standard for race relations in this country (including whites), you had people like Dr. Derrick Bell teaching future leaders & educators that MLK’s Melting Pot / Color Blind society was a load of crap, and the only way to achieve “true” equality is for preferential treatment of minority races to make up for institutionalized racism that is baked into our societies founding documents.

    This is why so many of the liberal progressive crowd that subscribes to things like CRT don’t acknowledge that there has been enough progress over the last 40+ years. What is implied is that we haven’t made enough progress to THEIR vision of how races should be treated, not that we haven’t made progress toward MLKs vision.

    The reason why people who have adopted MLKs approach to race relations seem baffled when someone from the far left asserts we haven’t progressed enough is because we are assuming we are playing with the same deck of cards (end goal), when we aren’t.

    It’s the preferential treatment of one race over another that will always ensure there is a feeling of inequity being served…which is where most of today’s racism is born.

    CRT, by definition, assures a perpetual cycle of racism

  • December 10, 2014 at 10:41am

    @Mustang-2537

    He told the truth, but only to the “inner-circle” of like minded & educated people that are in the same social engineering “good for thee but not for me” crowd

    The message to the masses, however, was that any increase in costs to be incurred by insuring folks with preconditions and otherwise uninsured would be absorbed by the insurance companies…from all those gazillions in windfall profits they are making.

    All the while, he knew that the laws of economics would mean that the current paying consumers of medical insurance would shoulder the cost and the “American People” would not question the line from the WH about ACA resulting in a cost reduction because of ignorance of economic principles & popular “Eat the Rich” sentiment.

  • [1] December 9, 2014 at 5:29pm

    I get the optics of him accusing the American people for being “stupid” is bad…..but is he necessarily wrong?

    Thanks to our public education system, which typically relegates teaching civil education, history & economics to the football & volleyball coaches…how many people understand the difference between how costs are shifted between a vendor that sells an inelastic good/service (necessities) vs an elastic good/service (luxuries) ?

    If they knew that business that sold necessities like gas & health insurance get to pass an increase in costs to the consumer (because you have to buy it regardless), and business that sold luxuries like diamonds & bubble gum generally have to eat / mitigate an increase in costs (because people just won’t buy it if it’s too expensive) might have been able to call BS on the government when they said that you’d get to keep your doctor, health care plan & save $2,500 a month with ACA.

    If people want to be mad at someone, be mad a the gov officials that keep the masses ignorant of the rules they play by to socially engineer things in a way they see fit.

    I thank Gruber for being an honest a-hole, but an a-hole non the less.

    Responses (2) +
  • December 3, 2014 at 5:28pm

    You kid, but the Grand Jury not indicting this cop blows a hole wide open in the Ferguson Grand Jury ruling, for those that refuse to look at the facts of the case.

    My understanding was always that a Grand Jury will indict a ham sandwich if the DA can provide at least some evidence that would at least suggest probable cause. That said, it speaks volumes about how open & shut the Darren Wilson / Michael Brown case was.

    But since in this case the Grand Jury did not indict, with plenty of material to suggest probable cause, then detractors of the Ferguson incident will say that the Grand Jury was also corrupt there, facts of the case be damned.

    Put simply, it discredits the Ferguson grand jury ruling, and gives ammunition to those that think the process is corrupt and institutional racism is the root cause.

  • [7] November 19, 2014 at 9:27am

    Seriously though….

    Democrats cry War on Women regarding pay discrepancies between men & women, given said discrepancy typically comes from the fact that women work less hours due to child birth / rearing.

    Democrats cry War on Women regarding higher medical related costs than men, given said increased cost comes from things like birth control & child birth.

    And here….a leader in the Democrat party refused a proxy vote because the woman was pregnant & not mobile (a uniquely female condition)

    To Nancy’s point…..allowing proxy votes can a bad thing….but it doesn’t set a precedent that allows for misuse of that privilege if the exception is granted for pregnant women only LOL

  • [4] November 13, 2014 at 11:17am

    If she did misspeak, I think what she omitted was that *MOST* public schools suck….and not so much because of the teacher quality (as a whole), but because of the bureaucracy & administration of the public school system. As a matter of fact….the “bad apple” teachers that do exist….exist mostly because of said bureaucracy & administration.

    But the reaction of the crowd is partly why the system faces an up-hill battle to get fixed….because the education system has been politicized to the point that politics takes a higher priority than the well being of the students.

    The other difference between “good” & “bad” public schools has a lot to do with the level of involvement from the parents…reinforcing & supplementing what happens at school.

    It’s common sense that kids who are taught that education is a high priority, are challenged outside of school…and get one-on-one work from their parents will develop faster than kids that don’t have those things.

    Personal responsibility (don’t have kids if you can’t handle the work load) is Tax Free, doesn’t cost the government a dime….and would solve most of the problems in our society….including the education of the next generation.

  • [7] November 6, 2014 at 10:14am

    @Chuck Stein

    Our “betters” over in the Lib Arts Ivory tower have figured out a way to avoid the hypocrisy trap by altering the definition of racism such that it cannot be equally applied to all races.

    The new definition of racism that’s being taught to our kids & young adults in college is racial discrimination + said discrimination coming from a race that holds a power dynamic over other minority races.

    In plain speak….only a comment that can remotely be considered racial discrimination from white people can be racist. Racial discrimination from minority races is just racial discrimination…which is “okay” or “justified” in some cases.

    See what they did there? Can’t apply the hypocrisy test now because the definition now excludes people of a white race.

    Responses (1) +
  • [11] November 6, 2014 at 10:03am

    The word racism has been updated in the newly updated “Liberal Arts Dictionary” to be defined as racial discrimination AGAINST A RACIAL MINORITY.

    I was a kid of the 80s and the instruction that I got from my parents & from school, regarding race relations, was ALL racial discrimination was bad, and MLK’s “I have a Dream” speech was the gold standard…color blind society, judge people according to the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

    Kids of the 2000s are instructed that only SOME racial discrimination is bad (when it involves racial minorities), being a victim of racism requires there to be a race based power dynamic against them (White vs Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc), and CRT / Derrick Bell’s teachings against color blindness, against cultural assimilation are the gold standard of race relations.

  • [32] November 6, 2014 at 9:48am

    While I agree with the hypocrisy standard violation with all of the outrage over Paisley’s comments, the reason you all are a bit confused on how these people could levy racism for poking a little fun at the CMAs mostly white cast by calling it White-ish, while a comedy about a black family poking fun at their mostly black cast, called Black-ish, is because you’re still working on the “OLD” definition of racism meaning racial discrimination.

    All these millennials, have been instructed on the “NEW” definition of racism meaning racial discrimination OF A RACIAL MINORITY. Couple that definition with a hypersensitive approach to interpreting racial discrimination and you have a whole new generation ascribing any and all things to any racial minority as racism.

    Responses (1) +
  • [13] October 23, 2014 at 5:07pm

    Last I checked, the Democrats have controlled 1/2 of Congress for the last 3-4 years….and both houses before that. How many bills are sitting on Harry Reid’s desk?
    Also, not to take anything away from the arse-hats in Congress (some Republicans included), a national approval ratings on congressional members will by default be low, because of how the representation works.
    Nancy Pelosi is an advocate for her district, which is a sub-section of California. She does not represent Texans, or Floridians, so there is a high likelihood that people from those states will not have a particularly high opinion of her. Same goes for Ted Cruz…. You think people from Ohio give a lick about Mary Landrieu? She’s not bringing any bacon home to folks in Cleveland.
    The President, however, is supposed to be the president of the entire nation, and represent all.
    Comparing national approval ratings for the President & for Congress is apples n’ oranges.

  • [18] October 23, 2014 at 4:59pm

    With this president, and the political movement he belongs to, it could very well be that she’s hesitant to say he has been weak, not because she actually thinks he’s been strong, but because if she calls him out on national media (on the progressive’s flagship station no less) that she will make Obama’s “Poo-poo” list, and lose funding from the DNC.

    This administration has been shown to have thin skin, and have made no bones about leveraging political power to get back at “enemies”

    Responses (1) +
  • [18] October 20, 2014 at 4:07pm

    So in other words, they are the early voting version of the vote busses that troll around the parts of the more apathetic community and rustle up votes for their candidate in exchange for a small hand-me-out or a promise that their lives will be better / or not worse by voting for their guy?

  • [-1] October 16, 2014 at 1:37pm

    @LakeHartwellSailor

    Given the folks that subscribe to “white privilege” also subscribe to Critical Race Theory, all you need to do is look at Dr. Derrick Bell’s view on what is required to create “true” equality.

    According to Dr. Bell “and CRT”, our founding documents (Declaration of Independence & Constitution) are inherently racist…because they were drawn up & approved by white people (who are also inherently racist). The inherent racism in these documents is the source of the supposed “institutionalized racism” in our system.

    That said, equal treatment of whites & blacks will not mean equality of races because the system inherently provides “one-ups” for whites….IE Blacks are playing with a handicap. (Dr. Bell thought MLK’s color blind society was full of crap)

    To reach true equality, blacks need to be given preferential treatment “their own one-ups” to balance out the “one-ups” given to whites.

    Otherwise, the Declaration of Independence & Constitution have to be completely rewritten, with input & approval from blacks…and only THEN can there be equality from equal treatment.

  • [4] October 16, 2014 at 10:04am

    …and just to follow-up on my last post….
    I work at an engineering company, with people of all races, genders, creeds, religions and nationalities…who are all wildly & equally successful. You know what they all have in common? Highly educated, highly motivated and self driven.

    I’ve also known many people of all colors, many of them white, that never did anything with their life after highschool. Many of those folks seem to always be dealing with life drama, and almost never respond in a constructive way. They never made education a priority and generally take a “woe is me” attitude on life.

    Go figure…

  • [11] October 16, 2014 at 9:56am

    In my opinion, any disparity that exists is as a result of pop culture & social dynamics within each race…not because being born with a certain color automatically gives someone a benefit or disadvantage in life.

    At the school I attended in the projects, I witnessed black kids pick on other black kids for “talking white” because they properly annunciated their words in class. I witnessed black kids pick on other black kids for “dressing white” because they had their shirt tucked in. I witnessed black kids pick on other black kids for “acting white” because they raised their hands to answer questions in class & did well on tests.

    Where this disparity comes is that adopting behaviors that increase your chances to be successful in life (speaking proper English, dressing up & putting a high priority on education) has been associated with “white people”, and adopting those behaviors is akin to betraying / denying your black race…which can get you ostracized from the community. Is it any wonder why there is a success differential among the races? Couple that, with nearly 3 out of every 4 black kids being born into a single parent household (missing the “privileges” of having two parents – resources, parenting, foundation, structure)…is it any wonder why there is a success differential among the races?

    And to Bill’s point, the Asians do it better than whites…and that’s why they earn more & generally are more successful.

  • [11] October 16, 2014 at 9:24am

    @AllPeopleFreePeople

    Good point….what has been lost on an entire generation are what humans are capable of, when they reach deep & give it their all. Victimhood allows rationalization of challenges life gives you, and prevents deeper soul searching about what needs to be done to be successful & fulfilled in life.

    For some, the right attitude & motivation is all that is needed to put the gears in motion and start doing what is required to have success in life. For others, their backs need to be against the wall, with survival instincts kicking in and providing the necessary motivation to do what is required. The kind of welfare that we are providing today ensures that your back is never against the wall. Couple the menial existence provided by welfare, with low expectations (victimhood), you have successfully created a class of people that are still in need of resources but feel it’s helpless to even try to play the free-market system…so they vote for the person that promises to give more.

  • [5] October 6, 2014 at 4:19pm

    @Baron Doom

    It depends on how you define a religion. I’ve had a similar conversation with a close friend that is an evangelical atheist.

    What it boils down to is that deity based religious beliefs, scientific based secular beliefs, a belief in humanity, or your nation are all organized value systems that people subscribe to, and influence how they live their lives.

    My argument to him was that even if you got rid of all deity based religions (which he believes are the scourge on humanity) you will still have behavior, from humans, that is consistent with what he believes religion is the blame for.

    Nazis killed millions of people because they rooted their belief system around their nationalism (national socialists)

    There are plenty enough progressives that would buy into population control & eugenics based on what they believe the scientific outcome of the alternative would be.

    Getting rid of religion in general will not grant utopia (as John Lennon Imagined), particularly if you banish a religion that promotes brotherly love…because people will always believe in something.

123 To page: Go