Distinct cultures with distinct histories, interpretations of the constitution...

sets of scientists and facts, educational systems...

Indeed, at least 2 countries.

sure is! the only. ..

...reason people don't is that he has a D next to his name. If he had an R next to his name, DU would be buzzing with truth seekers like it was during the BushCo years. It's simply beyond the pale what a single letter does to some people's brain.

There are 2 camps of thought

And if there aren't, I'm saying there are now.

1. Polls show that young people are finding race and sexual orientation less important than than previous generations. Those are really old people's problems.

2. The Internet is fueling a raging inferno within a certain sect of the population. Although it will increase recruits, it's probably not going to grow too broadly, but it will burn with greater intensity than before.

We're moving increasingly and quickly to two distinct cultures with distinct histories, sets of historians and scientists, constitutions, and religions.

Don't tell me it's always been that way. I know. But Conservatives are masters of the systematic, methodical, long game. They discouraged, disenfranchised, jerry-rigged and wrapped up the country and put a bow on it. They don't need the presidency: (1) the status quo suits them just fine, and (2) they've had 2 Democratic presidents carry their water, anyway, with a 3rd waiting in the wings in Hillary.

I hope I live to see the day we split up into the 2 distinct cultures we are.

Gotta hand it to the GOP, Trickle Down Worked!

Let me explain:

1. use a Democratic President (Clinton) to help create a casino economy
2. Democratic President takes credit for fast growing economy
3. Under Republican President, declare war on the middle and lower classes to redistribute wealth "UP"
4. Double down in the casino
5. Great Recession, middle class shrinks
6. use a Democratic President (Obama) to bailout Wall Street and banksters, nothing for middle class
7. 1% gets incomprehensibly richer
8. Trickle Down!!!!! 4 years later, jobs start to "TRICKLE DOWN" to the middle class
9. Democrats rejoice! The Democratic President, Obama, brought back jobs...using trickle down economics

*EDIT:
Part I: Trickle Down Economics is (2) Under Republican President, declare war on the middle and lower classes to redistribute wealth "UP".

Part II: Trickle Down Economics is (9) The middle class Democratic voter rejoices and all praise goes to Obama for bringing jobs back via trickle down economics.

It's a total mind-fuck and succeeds at erasing 2008-2009 from a Democrat's memory. Bailouts of WS and banksters on the backs of the middle class, the increasing market concentration of multi-national corporations and financial institutions...poof! GONE!! It was all a movement of trillions of dollars to the 1% and 0.5% and 0.25% on the backs of the middle class Democrat and Republican.

I learned something today about the President's 3-D chess game and thought it was pretty cool :)

OK, of course he's playing chess with the Democrats, why should anything change now. But this time, he's playing chess with Hillary. He's starting to paint Hillary into a corner. She's going to have to pick up where he left off, or says stupid shit like, "No tax breaks for the middle class, and I won't raise taxes on the rich."

If you're going to play 3-D chess with a Democrat, you picked the right one. And for that, I salute you!

20-somethings see the world differently, that's fine, I get it

I'm sure they think half of the stuff we debate here is absurd. For instance, porn. Women my age (48) and older, in general, didn't watch porn. Today, don't get between a young woman and her porn. That's one example that comes to mind, but if there were more young people here, they'd say a lot of things we argue over are ridiculous.

BUT!

I work with intelligent, well educated, middle-to-upper-middle class, young, pretty white women between 21-33. Three have figures like that of the woman in the ad. Two insist on wearing yoga pants or skinny jeans every day. The third doesn't wear yoga pants, but does wear skinny jeans.

It's always been something that's bothered me because of the work we do, but this week I discovered at least one is self-conscious. You see, I'm the only guy. Last week I turned around and my supervisor, the 33 y/o, was hunched over and her tiny little butt-crack ass was "exposed"...oh, wait, she had yoga pants on, so that wasn't really her butt crack. It was only her yoga pants pinched up her butt crack.

When it occurred to her that I was behind her, her reaction was interesting. I suppose I'd liken it to realizing I had my fly down - I'd cover and turn abruptly. Well, that's what she did. She glanced at me, turned, and pulled her over-sized sweater down to cover her backside. Clearly, she realized she was over exposed.

Here's the problem I have with their attire. 80% of our clients are poor, uneducated, single, mentally ill black men between 35-53. As social workers doing home visits, we often spend an hour alone in their apartments. Some call the women "models." Frankly, that's not at all far-fetched. The three aforementioned are stunning. The other two dress more modestly but are still attractive.

Young people, I assume, would think I'm ridiculous for saying my 3 co-workers need to put on some regular jeans like the other two. That's great, young people! But you work with old people, like me and all of your male CLIENTS!

I know it's a generational thing, like porn. But porn stays in the closet, and old people like me aren't the wiser. This old guy thinks your yoga pants and skinny jeans need to stay there, too, when you come to my office to do home visits with my clients.


Aside: How our boss, a man FWIW, hired these 5 "models" is simply incredible. We're in Chicago FFS. Really, no black women applied? What's his motto, "Diversity, but NIMBY!" Sheesh!

No, you're just hi-jacking another thread!!!

OMG!!!

Someone said something about something and you don't like it!!!!!

OMG!!!!!

No other opinions than Hutzpa's!!!

OMG!!!

Yep. Hard to say their terrorists are "cowards" when we're slaughtering thousands remotely

Oh, so for a prepared speech, Obama doesn't choose...

...His words carefully? Not buying. He chose "cowardly act" this and other times. I'm asking, what's a cowardly act if not slaughtering thousands with drone strikes? Why is that honorable? Oh yeah, because a Democrat is calling the shots.

And having said all of that, I completely understand why you don't have a clue as to what I'm talking about. Nothing is getting through the bubble. That's what we used to say about Republicans.

^"Some people" take their cues from Rethugs

Republicans always know when it's the right time to talk about murdering people.

Aside: this isn't an isolated incident of "some people" who took the form of Republicans in Dem clothing shortly after 2008. It was sad to see, to be honest. Then I got pissed and disgusted by "some people." It's the "It's only bad when Republicans do it" attitude. In a word: pathetic.