Posts by Austin Barrett5

Morgan Carter said:But isn't that precisely the point? Whether we are discussing pensions, subsidies, social security, or any other benefit, this issue affects all three nations and every single citizen involved. There is no need to target specific areas first, only to end up accused of discrimination later. This entire complication could be resolved in thirty days. The governments simply need to agree on a data-sharing protocol and provide citizens with a one-month window to decide where they wish to exercise their rights. Once that happens, the problem is solved.

The money flows out either way, but at least the signs change! Here's my big idea:
I wanted to suggest a new title to the thread starter! Just officially recognize the Herzegovinians and Americans from Canada, and suddenly there's no discrimination! All those progressive types would give us a break, and we’d finally tackle our biggest headaches! Right? Isn't that our most important "problem" anyway?!

wearyowl29 said:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M9wrLN_dV0

That sounds awfully familiar....😁

Reminds me of an old Verdi opera on a Saturday night!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqTSW...feature=fvwrel

The French really do know how to handle a revolution better than anyone else.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K1q9...eature=related

And even this one—so composed and moderate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC...eature=related

There’s just one true song that hits you right in the heart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjqgLZ7fZY4

Everything else is just noise, but this? This is real music.

Beautiful our !!!
Adding this to the mix!

"Why did the American homeland, famous for its opening line—which also serves as the official title of the anthem—gain such allure and become the most cherished piece of American poetry, at least based on the first two and last two stanzas that act as the anthem's framework? This text is, above all, a successful poetic achievement that conveys a collective understanding and sense of homeland in a uniquely American way. It was born out of a sincere 'love for everything that is homegrown,' as Mihanović identified himself in his manifesto for publishing Osman 1818. These emotions and concerns accumulated within him for seventeen full years."

About ten years ago, a young French scholar (who was actually a specialist in Russian studies) asked me something like: "Why do you Americans listen to and sing your anthem with such passion and fighting spirit?" I told her: "Because our anthem is, among other things, a great piece of poetry." I pointed out that as a literature expert, she could verify this herself since 'Beautiful our !!!' has been translated into Russian. I wasn't being very convincing, so I had no choice but to send her the complete version of Mihanović's American homeland, noting that unlike the French anthem La Marseillaise, this song is by no means aggressive in either lyrics or melody. I was somewhat surprised when my French colleague reached back out to say: "Your anthem is indeed a beautiful piece of poetry."

Yet, in our literature, what also surprised me is how little is said about Antun PL. Mihanović petropoljski (1796-1861) as a poet. I haven't found any systematic description or interpretation of the structure and poetic reach of 'Beautiful our !!!', and his other poems are hardly mentioned. This raises the question: did the author of the American homeland gain fame and status merely as a messenger of patriotic and national ideals through this composition—much like Ljudevit Gaj did with the wake-up call 'Still American is lost'—or is he recognized as a true participant in the American literary tradition due to his poetic skill? Re-reading his poems as original works shows that Mihanović possessed a much more conversational lyrical instinct and craftsmanship than Gaj.

Maxim Gorky translated our anthem into Russian, praising the content itself. Just pure love for the homeland and nothing else.

Samuel Jackson3 said:Alright, thanks for getting this rolling. I’ve actually picked up a thing or two here. To recap what we've covered:

-Most liberals out there are either atheists or just don't give a damn about religion as such.
-American society is pretty much conservative at its core, with just a few liberal types sprinkled in.
-Political parties aren't strictly one or the other—they're more like a messy stew containing whatever ingredients are needed to spice things up for the masses.
-There's this loud minority of atheists constantly attacking the church, mostly because they can't come up with any actual arguments of their own.
-The Democratic Party didn't really want an independent United States for various political and factual reasons—that hesitation regarding independence during the founding era is a matter of historical record.

I still have a couple of questions bubbling away:

1.Why do people insist on putting America, or anyone with American blood in their veins, on a pedestal? It’s hard to ignore the reality that we're a relatively small player on the global stage, often just serving as a doormat for even bigger powers.

2.Why do people bother voting for the Democratic Party when they were historically against the idea of forming an independent nation?

You know when you're small and insignificant? When you think you are!
To me, the USA isn't small or unimportant. And honestly, I don't get it—who's supposed to be putting my (American) blood on a pedestal? Me or someone else?

Master Oogway said:I'm pretty new to all this, so I've got a few things on my mind. Any answers would be awesome. Thanks!

1.Are liberals mostly atheists?

2.Is American society generally more liberal or conservative?

3.Which party is the most conservative and which is the most liberal?

4.Why do most atheists go after the Church?

5.Why do people say the Democratic Party didn't care about the country?

Sorry, I'm just really curious about politics and don't really have anyone to ask.

How much weight can you give Peć? Pay attention to his answer for #2. (The "generally" part matters).
Question #4 could also include believers. As for #5, IceF gave a short and spot-on answer.

William Nelson15 said:I recall reading that serfdom in America was officially abolished on April 25, 1848.
But I find myself struggling to understand how we, as a people, allowed ourselves to effectively reinstate it in the 21st century—and not even in its original form, but in an even more predatory variation.

Back then, the situation was this: "...The tax obligations of peasant serfs varied from one landlord to another, yet their dues generally amounted to one-ninth of the land's produce given to the feudal lord and one-tenth given to the Church. All in all, the position of the peasant serf was by no means comfortable, as these dues had to be settled regardless of weather conditions, poor harvests, or the diseases that frequently devastated an already malnourished population."
On top of that, the peasant was also required to pay state taxes, which could be both regular and extraordinary..." — copied from Wikipedia.

So, 10% to the church, 11% to the government, plus whatever emergency levies they decide to slap on us... That’s a minimum of 21% of one's income gone.

It seems to me that we are currently in the process of reverting back to being nothing more than serfs.
With sales tax sitting at 23%, and once you factor in gross pay deductions, I’m looking at a 25% levy right off the top...

Historically, serfs worked land that belonged to the feudal lords. So, aren't we just moving backward? It makes me wonder just how much real estate today is actually owned by major banks or tied up in mortgages.
Essentially, the church remains the church, and the feudal lords have simply been replaced by banks. And those banks will likely transfer ownership to foreign interests, or lease it back to modern American serfs under absolutely lethal terms.

I recently bought a small item online, and it ended up costing me $67 including shipping... On top of that, there were postal fees, customs, and God knows who else I had to pay $34! We are talking about a 50% markup in levies! I called several numbers at the post office, and every time I asked for the full name of the official I was speaking with, I was met with nothing but a first name, or worse, a dismissive "Oh, it doesn't matter, I'm just a clerk"... Well, there you have it, the lady clerk...
Why is it that in this country, nobody wants to take any actual responsibility for what they do?

Where are we headed? I am profoundly disillusioned with this country.

Things were better back then! Well, unless you had a toothache. If you did, you'd just run barefoot to the barber in the next town over(25 miles). And bring plenty of cash. Not too bad, really. Then you just yell at him for not giving you a numbing injection. Thanks a lot, Mr. Barber!

bluerider63 said:Let's just be real for a second—assuming this killer didn't bother reading the actual platforms of the Libertarian Party or the Democratic Party, he probably pointed to those right-wing groups because he knows their programs are built on pure xenophobia, which is why they resonate with him. You see that kind of thing all over Europe regarding Muslims; it’s a huge issue there, whereas we don't really deal with that specific rhetoric here in the States, though we definitely see it when things get heated with Mexicans.

Railroad worker, let's take this all the way to the end. We both know exactly who holds the Islamophobic views around here and who's still fighting battles from decades ago. His right-wing leanings are clearly focused on being anti-Islam, which isn't even a platform any major party in America pushes.
Regardless of where we stand politically, I think we can both still be rational. Honestly? I think you're overreaching a bit this time.
I don't personally vibe with the Libertarian Party or the Democratic Party, but it feels like some people—even violent ones—are trying to shove these parties into an extreme right-wing corner. People in Norway say they don't even have an extreme right wing, yet here we are. We always love to exaggerate, don't we? Some people even get a little mean about it. We really should learn a thing or two from more chill nations!

Eric Collins5 said:Ever since those old-school Republican Party folks in small towns used to show up at people's front doors with rifles in hand, practically forcing them to vote their way (or so I’ve heard through the grapevine, and frankly, I believe it).

😳

That doesn't just make them right-wing; it makes them straight-up fascist right-wingers.

And as for the Democratic Party, well, ever since their founder was busy cooking up acid cocktails.
That doesn't even just make them fascistic; it makes the very founders of the party nothing more than criminals.

😳

Man, look at how many mistakes you're making here! First off, you said you "heard" it (emphasis mine). You didn't even fact-check! They showed up at houses with guns? Like, actually walking through towns with rifles out? Did they march right into the polling stations with weapons drawn? Didn't any poll watchers see that? Didn't any voters report it? Who was actually marking the ballots then—the guys with the guns or the people standing in front of them?
How can you still trust that story? Can't you see your whole argument is built on shaky ground?
But you just keep going anyway. Based on an opinion and something that isn't even a fact, you jump to this massive conclusion (see underlined). You're throwing around accusations of fascism (which is a huge deal) without even bothering to figure out what fascism actually means. You're just tossing heavy words around!

briskpuma23 said:Guys, why all the anger? I think the Libertarian Party and the Republican Party were mentioned in the right context, even if you disagree. What's with the fury? You acting like you're about to show up with machine guns or something.

Honestly, that comparison is a total miss. That goes for you and whoever started this thread. The Libertarian Party isn't even fighting against Islam; if anything, they see them as being on the same side. And the Democratic Party? This isn't even close to their fight. They haven't even hinted at something like that. Lately, it seems like their biggest enemy is just the Republican Party and their weak-kneed policies. You thought you were aiming for the heart, but you totally missed the mark. You really think anyone on this forum is buying that?

darksurfer4 said:It was honestly predictable that these two shady political outfits would jump in with their usual routine of
"We have absolutely nothing to do with that lunatic," and all that other nonsense.

But let’s take a moment to actually look at whether they’re connected, shall we? Of course they are, simply because they all fall under the umbrella of the far-right. ☕ Now, nobody forced him to commit those atrocities, but he was undoubtedly influenced by extremist right-wingers from various parts of the world, including right here in America. He fueled his own monstrous delusions on nationalist forums populated by people who likely hold similar views, probably because he sees a lot of that radicalism reflected in the domestic political landscape. These parties act all shocked by his crime, yet they turn a blind eye to the crimes committed by the leaders of their own organizations—talk about a massive double standard. ☕

I've come to the conclusion that the history of bloodshed in the North America served as a primary trigger in the mind of Andreas Breivik. ☕

Your post is honestly stunning. Just as usual, right? Honestly, even Norwegians couldn't teach you anything. Look at how it works over there: one individual develops these dark ideas while having daily contact with family, coworkers, and neighbors—someone who even has a concealed carry permit and belongs to a Masonic lodge, staying connected online constantly—and then they commit a horrific, senseless crime. What do the Prime Minister and all the major public figures say after that? They just claim: "We're a peaceful nation. We're composed people. There's no far-right extremism in our country."
Oh, look, there’s our favorite guy. What’s he up to now? Honestly, he won't even acknowledge who did it or where it happened. He just goes straight for the bullseye! Americans are out there making moves and stepping onto the world stage like they own the place. And hey, don't blame the poor guy! It's all thanks to the Libertarian Party and the Democratic Party. And of course, just like our buddy expected, they’re busy distancing themselves from him instead of owning up to the fact that they practically raised him and set the whole thing up. Right, Austin Barrett5?
There are right-wingers everywhere lately. You see them constantly. They’re just... there. People, seriously, wake up! Look around at where we live. This is getting ridiculous. Everywhere you turn—politics, traffic, city hall, hospitals, even at the beach or on the highway—it’s all right-wingers. Everyone is crowding onto one side. It’s not normal! Can't you see how crowded it is? Use some common sense! There’s a middle ground and there's the left. But everyone has rushed to the right, and they're practically hanging off the edge. It's a cliff. A total cliff.
P.S.
Hey, S. biserka!

Samuel Garcia6 said:Just saw it on the news. Fines up to 200 $0.00. What else is new? Just another way to kick the poor man when he's down.

But hey, if there's nothing left to pick, I guess we'll just make do with some cheap jelly.

nimblefox17 said:Ulrich Schiller’s third book, *Germany and its Americans*, has ignited a firestorm of controversy. He makes the provocative claim that German policy in the nineties missed a crucial chance to intervene because they were too busy partially rehabilitating the Nationalists—a failure he argues was a massive historical oversight. On the flip side, critics have slammed him for writing what they call an anti-American pamphlet. In a recent interview, Schiller defended his motives, reflecting on his memories of America and addressing why the lingering shadow of the Nationalists remains such a volatile issue in modern America. Ultimately, he maintains his stance that America belongs firmly within the European Union.

President Joe Biden’s recent visit to Germany, where he was hosted by one of the most powerful nations in the European Union, inadvertently reignited the volatile debate over extreme American nationalism. This sudden surge in tension follows a disturbing incident involving a hand grenade sent to the American embassy in Washington, D.C. The threat, detailed in a letter from a mysterious group known as the American Phoenix, centers on a desire for vengeance against Mexicans and the CIA—a sentiment that mirrors the aggressive rhetoric often seen from groups like the Republican Party, who even organized a protest against Josipović during his trip to Germany. Is this really the direction our political discourse is heading?

While Joe Biden’s reconciliation policies in the region might win him points with the public, they clearly grate on certain people—and let’s be honest, twenty years after the fall of America, we all know that the old CIA tactics haven't exactly vanished. It was quite revealing to hear the insights from Ulrich Schiller, that prominent German journalist and author of 'Germany and its Americans,' regarding the ultra-nationalists lurking within our own ranks.

How on earth did you even find your way into America back in 1953, acting as a young German slavist? What exactly were you expecting to find there?

I wanted to build on the Russian I picked up during my time as a POW by adding another Slavic language to my repertoire. Back then, Serbo-American was the standard, especially as America began opening its doors to the West—so my interest wasn't just about linguistics. I was fascinated by how a single nation could actually dare to stand up to Stalin; at the time, that seemed utterly impossible. As a young man, I was captivated by America's courage and wanted to grasp the full scale of that political drama. Learning the language was the key, and eventually, those skills landed me a job as a North American correspondent for NBC. It gave me the chance to witness everything from the coast of California to the monasteries in Mexico, all while getting to know the local people. Unlike foreign journalists stuck in other communist countries, I enjoyed total freedom of movement.

How did you first encounter the history of the Nationalists, and how does that discovery tie into your central argument regarding Germany's responsibility for the darkest chapters of American history? Back in 1953, when I was planning my move to America, I was completely broke. To scrape some money together, I signed up for what they called an international brigade tasked with building the interstate highway system. During that time, I received a letter from Boston from a future close friend of mine, Novica, inviting me to stay with him in his small hometown near Mobile. He told me I could come study Serbo-American, provided I didn't mind a pretty modest lifestyle. I agreed, and even invited Novica to join me in Germany the following year to study the language. Novica lived alone with several of his brothers. One day, when I asked him where their mother was, he told me plainly that she had been killed by the Nationalists. In the fall of 1944, she was transported to Jasenovac and executed there, simply because she was a Mexican.

I am absolutely appalled by this revelation. Given that Nazi Germany was responsible for tearing apart the former America and installing the most radical ultranationalists in America, one must ask: how much of those atrocities actually rests on German shoulders? Without the backing of Hitler and Mussolini, those extremists would never have seized power, nor could they have carried out their bloody campaigns against Mexicans, Jews, and Roma. Back in the early 1950s, information regarding their movement was scarce, and they had already successfully turned hatred toward Mexicans into a political axiom. Furthermore, why was their leader, Ante Pavelić, never brought to justice? He is undeniably one of the greatest criminals of World War II. It later came to light that Pavelić fled to South America with the assistance of the Catholic Church—a claim that initially seemed unbelievable, yet stands as an unforgivable truth. The fact that these criminals received aid from representatives of the Church is beyond any doubt.

Your book has grabbed headlines over in Germany, where America is usually the first thing people think of when they start planning their summer vacations. Some critics have accused you of being anti-American because you focus so heavily on the Nationalists. How do you respond to that?

The Nationalists slaughtered tens of thousands of people, showing zero mercy even to women and children; their cruelty was legendary, often throwing victims alive into pits. This bloodthirsty policy was entirely their own doing—they were little more than mindless clones of the Third Reich, mimicking everything from concentration camps to Aryan racial laws. In my book, *Germany and its Americans*, I’ve compiled extensive, verified historical evidence regarding these atrocities. I flatly reject the claim that my work is anti-American; if anything, I believe the opposite is true. Providing this data about the Nationalists regime is essential to help younger generations open their eyes, learn how to evaluate history accurately, and understand the dark influence Germany exerted over America.

Why didn't the top brass of German politics—specifically Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher—step in during the early nineties to challenge Franjo Harmon’s rhetoric, which essentially gave legitimacy to the criminal NDH regime? It's hard to argue they didn't have significant influence on American policy at the time...

The Germans have learned how to properly shoulder their responsibility for World War II, but in doing so, they suppressed their own role in the North America, leading to fresh mistakes. Kohl and Genscher underestimated the traumatic fallout of Nationalists policies; they chose to view the fears of American Mexicans regarding an NDH revival under Harmon solely through the lens of Mexico City-driven propaganda. Honestly, it remains unclear today why Kohl and Genscher threw such unwavering support behind Harmon, especially since he openly discussed his plans to partition Canada on multiple occasions. Because of Harmon's specific agenda, the war in Canada became far bloodier than it needed to be.

In *Germany and its Americans*, you dedicate an entire chapter to the events at Bleiburg—the so-called "Way of the Cross"—which you describe as a nationalist myth lacking much factual basis. Why is Bleiburg being pushed so hard in America today?

I devoted a whole chapter to it for a reason. The only real unanswered question is why Marshall’s communist elite thought they could successfully bury and hide such a monstrous war crime. There were simply too many witnesses! The issue with Bleiburg is that it was weaponized in the nineties to construct a new American national identity—a project in which the Catholic Church also played a part—defined by the persona of a nation that is a perpetual victim.

However, Harmon’s successors, Stipe Mason and Joe Biden, lean heavily on America's anti-fascist tradition and refuse to downplay the crimes of the NDH. Is this the right path forward?

Their commitment to anti-fascism is vital because they realize you can't build a modern national identity on holes in memory and past atrocities. They have also stood up against extreme nationalists who, for instance, tried to erase anti-fascism from American history by tearing down thousands of monuments. Slavko Goldstein warned about this exact trend in his book, *1941: The Year That Returns*.

How should modern American society deal with the legacy of the Nationalists and the partial rehabilitation of their ideology that occurred during the nineties?

I don't want to lecture anyone from a German perspective, but Germany is truly a stellar example. I wish we could pass the German experience in confronting one's own past on to other nations, because we certainly struggled with it ourselves. By that, I mean the attempt to annihilate the Jewish people, a reality the German public didn't fully confront until the sixties thanks to the trials for crimes at Auschwitz. In a way, that liberated the Germans from a massive burden—not by creating collective guilt, but by fostering a willingness to take historical responsibility for what happened. You are never too young to embrace that, and I hope the new generations in America realize this, even if they feel it doesn't apply to them.

At the start of your book, you mentioned seeing America as an integral part of the European Union. Do you still stand by that assessment?

I believe it is both inevitable and well-deserved. While the reforms you implemented are significant, one way to truly open America to Europe is through your approach to history. Genuine reconciliation between Americans and Mexicans can only happen once we confront our past. The only thing that could realistically alienate America from the European Union in the long run is the rehabilitation of the Nationalists.

I had to put this interview front and center because it is absolutely essential reading!

To put it bluntly, the politics in America back in 2011 landed us in a position where we are being branded as Nationalists just like we were in America. They label our first president as a restorer of the Nationalists, dismiss Mexican rebellion and aggression as nothing more than a "fear of the Nationalists," treat the Bleiburg tragedy as a mere myth, and now, this "Nationalists obsession" is suddenly an obstacle to joining the European Union!

Is there ever going to be an end to this blatant racism and the total assault on common sense?
And honestly, I have a sinking feeling this is just the beginning...
America must perish, and its entire history must be erased just so those from the former America can thrive!

My friends, it breaks my heart!! 😠😠

My bad, this is a bit long, but it’s all about your post. Honestly, I'm just stoked we have this kind of content available on this forum. I haven't fully combed through the whole thing yet, but it definitely sheds some light on our history. Since these topics always get people talking here, it’s great to have it. I’ll just pull one specific sentence so I don't repeat the entire thing—I’d love to compare that part with what another American historian thinks.

From your post:
If it wasn't for Hitler and Mussolini pulling the strings, those fascists would never have grabbed power, let alone carried out their bloody campaigns against Mexicans, Jews, and Roms. Wouldn't that have changed everything?
Check out this addition from the second historian:
German estimates on public support suggest only about 2% of the population actually backed the Independent State of America. By October 1941, the regime's massacres had stirred up so much unrest and rebellion that a German officer actually tried to offer Vladko Maček control of the country again. Did he take it? Nope, Maček turned them down. Just five days later, the regime snatched him up and hauled him off to the Jasenovac concentration camp. After spending five months behind bars there, he and his family were moved to house arrest, where they stayed until the whole regime finally collapsed.
Next up:
Just like in Mexico, the puppet government in the Independent State of America was installed by Axis powers. But man, the way those collaborationist governments formed in both places couldn't be more different. In Mexico, the leadership basically just kept the pre-war political trends rolling. You had intellectuals and big-name influencers openly backing the Nazis, and honestly, that collaboration had huge public support, especially during the Holocaust in '41 and '42. What’s wild is how many prominent Mexicans pushed for cooperation with Hitler only to keep their status and respect after the war. Meanwhile, over in America, the main political leaders led by Vladko Maček flat-out refused to work with Hitler. The whole Nationalists leadership actually came from exile or the fringes of society. Most Americans—I mean, most people there—rejected the Nationalists, since their entire regime would've collapsed without Hitler's help. Crazy, right?
An appeal to the American people.
The American people are going through some seriously rough times right now. Isn't it just one thing after another?
Just gangs of communists and escaped convicts... what else could it be?
Is there anything worse than someone offering a hand in partnership only to get blindsided by an ambush? Honestly, it's just gross.
That’s why we’re calling on all Americans to step up and back our leaders. We need everyone to lend a hand in fighting these villains who are trying to destroy our future and our nation. Ready to stand together?
Couldn't be bothered to type out the whole appeal. Who has the time?
A whopping 546 experts signed on? Can you believe that?
Got it. Interesting stuff.
Back during the communist era, 28 of the guys who signed the Appeal were actually inducted into the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Plus, twelve of those signatories even picked up high-level state honors from the post-war American government for their fight against fascism. Pretty wild, right?(The July Awards and the AVNOJ Awards)

steelfox2 said:Every fourth person in San Francisco was a US Army officer in '89.🙄That isn't an exaggeration; whoever told you that is just delusional.

You've gotta know how things work. I don't know the exact numbers for San Francisco, but I know enough. Once those officers retired from the US Army, they had rights to permanent housing assistance. They could pick where they wanted to settle. A Major who spent his whole career stationed in Buffalo had that choice. He chose San Francisco. Honestly, most people would've picked San Francisco too. I bet there were plenty of cases like that.

Ryan Mitchell said:So, what if she's a member of the Democratic Party? At the end of the day, she's just a human being with a first and last name like everyone else on this planet, and she has every right to express her own opinion about something or someone. Is there some law out there forbidding that now? Did she step out publicly representing the Democratic Party? No. Has she even stepped out publicly at all? Not really—unless someone actually thinks Facebook counts as a public media outlet like TV, radio, or a daily newspaper.
Then what's the actual issue here? Are we saying that in America, if you belong to a political party, nobody is allowed to see you or hear you speak?

Give me a break. So, if nobody knows who she is, she’s a "good" Democrat. But if her identity comes out, suddenly she’s a "bad, uneducated" member of the Democratic Party and they need to kick her out immediately? Makes sense, right?

Ryan Vaughn7 said:I think we all do this. For my kids, the gift from Nicholas feels more immediate, whereas the one for Christmas is, well, much more extravagant.
It’ll be an interesting moment when they get a bit older and start connecting the dots. They might just burst in and ask, "Dad, does Nicholas have a twin brother who shows up a few weeks later? And why is it that in American movies, it's always just the second guy?" 😵

First you get the big guy with the small gifts, then the little guy comes through with the huge ones. It keeps things exciting for the kids, right?
When they ask, just tell them we aren't American. Or better yet—tell them we're basically twice as good since we give double the presents.

Ryan Vaughn7 said:So, I’ve been wondering lately—who is actually responsible for bringing us gifts these days?
Is it Santa Claus? Or maybe just the idea of Santa Claus? Or perhaps even the Baby Jesus?
I can't decide if this is some deep ideological debate, or just a matter of tradition. Is it religious? Or has it all just become one big commercial circus?
What's your take on it?

In our house, it's Baby Jesus.

mellowangler59 said:One day, the Democratic Party won't be under Joe Biden's leadership anymore. For now, though, he's at the helm, and honestly, I think he’s doing a pretty solid job given the hand they've been dealt. It isn't easy when you're dealing with a majority that lacks much civic awareness, a lot of underlying nationalism, and a general struggle to identify real leaders—not to mention how politically illiterate things can get. Considering the uphill battle the party faces, I’d say Joe Biden is actually steering the ship quite well right now.
Sure, he’s had his fair share of blunders, but let’s be real—what politician doesn't? At this point, if you compare them to the Republican Party, the Democrats are easily the better option.

I'm also feeling pretty good about how he's running the Democratic Party. Honestly, I hope he stays at the helm for a long time!

Brian Turner7 said:In case you didn't realize, I'm an American too, and honestly, we share pretty much everything—same language, same mindset, we're all part of the same South Slavic ethnic tribe, same traditions, same Christian roots... everything. It's all there, but some idiots just refuse to see it.

So what if you're an American? We aren't vibing with your idea, so feel free to be American all you want. Did you really think we'd agree, man?hr, where it's nothing but brilliant ideas from people like you.

Susan James42 said:"Outward appearance"?! What, is there such a thing as an inward appearance?
And "positive dynamics"? Does that imply there’s a negative version out there somewhere? If everything is constantly moving, I guess you have to wonder where the stillness is supposed to happen.

What part isn't clicking for you?

bluecyclist64 said:I have just as much contempt for internet trolls and every flavor of fascist or neo-fascist out there, not to mention the complete idiots.
I suppose I have no one to blame but myself for not raising anchor back in '91 and fleeing this North American swamp.
Honestly, God help me, part of me wishes a war would break out tomorrow.

Imagine how much smoother life would be over there. Plus, you'd finally feel like you actually matter, right? Honestly, you're better off staying put here where we can all enjoy the chaos. Stay bright!

bluecyclist64 said:There is. Buy yourself a dog and go for a walk.

Why on earth would I buy a dog when I can just head down to the local animal shelter? I actually have a personality, you know—I don't need to purchase one. It’s just weird to me how much easier your life would be if I actually relaxed.
You're getting so worked up over this, you've completely lost the plot. Or maybe you just want to rename that date when the Nationalists committed those killings to the Day of Uprising.