Why I Am a Liberal

[kroxquo]

A while back, I asked Flock how he came to his conservative beliefs and he gave me a thoughtful, insightful answer which I genuinely appreciated (and if I never thanked you, Flock - thank-you). I have never reciprocated my views so I would like to rectify that. These words are not mine, but they reflect what I believe far better than I could. I will respond to questions or comments that do not involve name-calling.

This is taken from a post by author Lori Gallagher in 2018.

"...I'm one of those bleeding heart commies who hates anyone who's white, straight, or conservative, and who wants the government to dictate everything you do while taking your money and giving it to people who don't work.

Or am I?

Let's break it down, shall we? Because quite frankly, I'm getting a little tired of being told what I believe and what I stand for. Spoiler alert: Not every liberal is the same, though the majority of liberals I know think along roughly these same lines.

1. I believe a country should take care of its weakest members. A country cannot call itself civilized when its children, disabled, sick, and elderly are neglected. Period.

2. I believe healthcare is a right, not a privilege. Somehow that's interpreted as "I believe Obamacare is the end-all, be-all." This is not the case. I'm fully aware that the ACA has problems, that a national healthcare system would require everyone to chip in, and that it's impossible to create one that is devoid of flaws, but I have yet to hear an argument against it that makes "let people die because they can't afford healthcare" a better alternative. I believe healthcare should be far cheaper than it is, and that everyone should have access to it. And no, I'm not opposed to paying higher taxes in the name of making that happen.

3. I believe education should be affordable and accessible to everyone. It doesn't necessarily have to be free (though it works in other countries so I'm mystified as to why it can't work in the US), but at the end of the day, there is no excuse for students graduating college saddled with five- or six-figure debt.

4. I don't believe your money should be taken from you and given to people who don't want to work. I have literally never encountered anyone who believes this. Ever. I just have a massive moral problem with a society where a handful of people can possess the majority of the wealth while there are people literally starving to death, freezing to death, or dying because they can't afford to go to the doctor. Fair wages, lower housing costs, universal healthcare, affordable education, and the wealthy actually paying their share would go a long way toward alleviating this. Somehow believing that makes me a communist.

5. I don't throw around "I'm willing to pay higher taxes" lightly. ... If I'm suggesting something that involves paying more, that means increasing my already eye-watering tax bill. I'm fine with paying my share as long as it's actually going to something besides lining corporate pockets or bombing other countries while Americans die without healthcare.

6. I believe companies should be required to pay their employees a decent, livable wage. Somehow this is always interpreted as me wanting burger flippers to be able to afford a penthouse apartment and a Mercedes. What it actually means is that no one should have to work three full-time jobs just to keep their head above water. Restaurant servers should not have to rely on tips, multibillion dollar companies should not have employees on food stamps, workers shouldn't have to work themselves into the ground just to barely make ends meet, and minimum wage should be enough for someone to work 40 hours and live.

7. I am not anti-Christian. I have no desire to stop Christians from being Christians, to close churches, to ban the Bible, to forbid prayer in school, etc. (BTW, prayer in school is NOT illegal; *compulsory* prayer in school is - and should be - illegal) All I ask is that Christians recognize *my* right to live according to *my* beliefs. When I get pissed off that a politician is trying to legislate Scripture into law, I'm not "offended by Christianity" -- I'm offended that you're trying to force me to live by your religion's rules. You know how you get really upset at the thought of Muslims imposing Sharia on you? That's how I feel about Christians trying to impose biblical law on me. Be a Christian. Do your thing. Just don't force it on me or mine.

8. I don't believe LGBT people should have more rights than you. I just believe we should have the *same* rights as you.

9. I don't believe illegal immigrants should come to America and have the world at their feet, especially since THIS ISN'T WHAT THEY DO (spoiler: undocumented immigrants are ineligible for all those programs they're supposed to be abusing, and if they're "stealing" your job it's because your employer is hiring illegally.). I'm not opposed to deporting people who are here illegally, but I believe there are far more humane ways to handle undocumented immigration than our current practices (i.e., detaining children, splitting up families, ending DACA, etc).

10. I believe we should take in refugees, or at the very least not turn them away without due consideration. Turning thousands of people away because a terrorist might slip through is inhumane, especially when we consider what has happened historically to refugees who were turned away (see: MS St. Louis). If we're so opposed to taking in refugees, maybe we should consider not causing them to become refugees in the first place. Because we're fooling ourselves if we think that somewhere in the chain of events leading to these people becoming refugees, there isn't a line describing something the US did.

11. I don't believe the government should regulate everything, but since greed is such a driving force in our country, we NEED regulations to prevent cut corners, environmental destruction, tainted food/water, unsafe materials in consumable goods or medical equipment, etc. It's not that I want the government's hands in everything -- I just don't trust people trying to make money to ensure that their products/practices/etc are actually SAFE. Is the government devoid of shadiness? Of course not. But with those regulations in place, consumers have recourse if they're harmed and companies are liable for medical bills, environmental cleanup, etc. Just kind of seems like common sense when the alternative to government regulation is letting companies bring their bottom line into the equation.

12. I believe our current administration is fascist. Not because I dislike them or because I'm butthurt over an election, but because I've spent too many years reading and learning about the Third Reich to miss the similarities. Not because any administration I dislike must be Nazis, but because things are actually mirroring authoritarian and fascist regimes of the past.

13. I believe the systemic racism and misogyny in our society is much worse than many people think, and desperately needs to be addressed. Which means those with privilege -- white, straight, male, economic, etc -- need to start listening, even if you don't like what you're hearing, so we can start dismantling everything that's causing people to be marginalized.

14. I believe in so-called political correctness. Not because everyone is a delicate snowflake, but because as Maya Angelou put it, when we know better, we do better. When someone tells you that a term or phrase is more accurate/less hurtful than the one you're using, you now know better. So why not do better? How does it hurt you to NOT hurt another person? Your refusal to adjust your vocabulary in the name of not being an asshole kind of makes YOU the snowflake.

15. I believe in funding sustainable energy, including offering education to people currently working in coal or oil so they can change jobs. There are too many sustainable options available for us to continue with coal and oil. Sorry, billionaires. Maybe try investing in something else.

I think that about covers it. Bottom line is that I'm a liberal because I think we should take care of each other. That doesn't mean you should work 80 hours a week so your lazy neighbor can get all your money. It just means I don't believe there is any scenario in which preventable suffering is an acceptable outcome as long as money is saved.

So, I'm a liberal."

(c) 2018 Lori Gallagher Witt. Feel free to share, but please give me credit, and if you add or change anything, please note accordingly.

[Spock]

>>>"12. I believe our current administration is fascist. Not because I dislike them or because I'm butthurt over an election, but because I've spent too many years reading and learning about the Third Reich to miss the similarities. Not because any administration I dislike must be Nazis, but because things are actually mirroring authoritarian and fascist regimes of the past."<<<<

Out of curiosity, how much time have you put into studying the murderous, totalitarian regimes on the Left? Have you read "The Black Book of Communism"; "The Gulag Archipelago"? etc, etc.

>>>15. I believe in funding sustainable energy, including offering education to people currently working in coal or oil so they can change jobs. There are too many sustainable options available for us to continue with coal and oil. Sorry, billionaires. Maybe try investing in something else.<<<<

Again, out of curiosity, as there are no free lunches, how much time have you put into studying the environmental costs of "Sustainable Energy" as you define it?

[Spock]

Upon reflection, I retract my measured response earlier in this thread. Here is what I mean to say.

Krox, go and fuck yourself, Mr. I have studied the 3rd Reich-Blah, Blah, Blah. I will give you a little credit if you can show me in your posting history that you have expressed 1 ounce of concern for the million Uigers (sp) that are in Chinese Communist concentration camps today, but you don't give a shit about them.

Plus, on the environmental costs of "Sustainable Energy"-why bother? I might as well talk to the wind that dried my first shirt. You couldn't give a shit about those costs.

[T_Bone0806]

This pretty much nails my outlook as well, except for #12. I don't think of Trump as Hitler, I see him as a man who has spent decades as the head of an organization where his will was done without question and woe to anyone who was not on board with that, where in business the ends justifies the means, and believes it should be the same for him as the head of the country.

Otherwise, yeah, I'm in step with that piece. It is why I am nervous about the Democratic frontrunners. Biden is more in line with my views, but doesn't always come across as having a firm grasp on things, while Sanders is too far to the Left. I WANT the option to continue my current health coverage while people who don't have any coverage at all can get access to it. But to be honest, I don't see Sanders' more radical ideas going anywhere with the number of Republicans and Centrist Democrats opposing them. BUT...another 4 years of Trump? Way back when, he promised that his health care plan would be the greatest..tremendous...and other typical Trump superlatives. Details still to come. But to take his promises seriously that protection for pre-existing conditions would not change would, I feel, be foolhardy on my part and on the part of those in similar circumstances..Sorry, I don't believe him for a minute..the man says one thing and 2 days later says something completely different. I just feel like, if it comes down to a choice between the health of a small number of disabled folks and the health of big insurance companies, we lose. Again, my hope would lie in the political Centrists to keep the Far Right from doing anything drastic, but as long as politicians like McConnell have power, I will be wary of any health care plans proposed by this administration. For me, the stakes are too high...it is literally a matter of life and death.

Buttigieg and Klobuchar are more my types, but I don't see either of them getting the nom.

So once again, it looks like another "lesser of two evils" election.

[kroxquo]

This pretty much nails my outlook as well, except for #12. I don't think of Trump as Hitler, I see him as a man who has spent decades as the head of an organization where his will was done without question and woe to anyone who was not on board with that, where in business the ends justifies the means, and believes it should be the same for him as the head of the country.

I will admit that I gave serous consideration to omitting #12 from this post. I think it is a bit extreme, however the demagoguery, the rhetoric, and the propaganda that comes from the right frightens me. Does the left have issues? Absolutely. However I said in 2016 that I had had candidates I supported lose before, but never before that time had I feared for the future of the Republic as the result of an election. Nothing that has happened in the last 3 1/2 years has made me feel any better about my feelings then.

[flockofseagulls104]

Krox, i appreciate the response. But here's the thing, and I think it's telling. I wrote to you first person. I told you my thoughts as an individual. I did not go out to the internet and find an article from some writer to tell you what I thought. I told you what I thought. Too many people today rely on social and mainstrem media to do their thinking for them.
I, and millions of other conservatives like myself completely and totally reject the notion that we don't care for the poor, the disadvantaged, people of color (your side's designation. Most of us aspire to MLK's dream: a color-blind society), the environment or whatever other shortcoming your spokespeople accuse us of.
We are just not insane, based on the accepted definition. We do not believe that if you keep doing the same thing over and over that somehow you will get a different result. For example, poverty. LBJ started the War on Poverty, which basically came down to throwing money at the problem. We have spent TRILLIONS of dollars 'fighting' poverty through one federal program after another, piling up on each other. Have we solved the problem of poverty in this country? Do you really think another federal program will do the trick?
For a brief period, Newt Gingrich's congress and President Clinton kind of worked together and amazing things happened by rethinking how we use and distribute welfare. But that didn't last long.
Trump is doing something different and unemployment and wages for the working class poor are better than ever.
Of course the internet is full of "experts" who will refute that, and bobby and SSS have stopped on the previous sentence to go and look for them, but don't go there for once. Look around with your own eyes.
Krox, I long ago stopped looking for the government to solve our problems. In a perfect world, the government would be full of people like you and me who sincerely want to solve the country's problems. But it's not a perfect world. And the government creates more problems than it ever solves, and in most cases proposes even more government to solve the problems it itself has produced.
Hypocrisy. How do you reconcile that in your own mind? One example: A decade ago, all the leaders on the liberal side were for secure borders. They are on tape. They sound much the same as trump. How do you explain that now they are for pretty much open borders, sanctuary cities and throwing taxpayer money and privileges to illegal aliens? And how do you explain the fact that no one in the msm even bothers to ask them why they changed so drastically? Do you know?
I could go on and on, but the main point is that relying on government to solve social problems is a dangerous proposition. Conservatives are very wary about giving power to the government because history shows that it always takes away individual freedom.

[Bob Juch]

Krox, i appreciate the response. But here's the thing, and I think it's telling. I wrote to you first person. I told you my thoughts as an individual. I did not go out to the internet and find an article from some writer to tell you what I thought. I told you what I thought. Too many people today rely on social and mainstrem media to do their thinking for them.
I, and millions of other conservatives like myself completely and totally reject the notion that we don't care for the poor, the disadvantaged, people of color (your side's designation. Most of us aspire to MLK's dream: a color-blind society), the environment or whatever other shortcoming your spokespeople accuse us of.
We are just not insane, based on the accepted definition. We do not believe that if you keep doing the same thing over and over that somehow you will get a different result. For example, poverty. LBJ started the War on Poverty, which basically came down to throwing money at the problem. We have spent TRILLIONS of dollars 'fighting' poverty through one federal program after another, piling up on each other. Have we solved the problem of poverty in this country? Do you really think another federal program will do the trick?
For a brief period, Newt Gingrich's congress and President Clinton kind of worked together and amazing things happened by rethinking how we use and distribute welfare. But that didn't last long.
Trump is doing something different and unemployment and wages for the working class poor are better than ever.
Of course the internet is full of "experts" who will refute that, and bobby and SSS have stopped on the previous sentence to go and look for them, but don't go there for once. Look around with your own eyes.
Krox, I long ago stopped looking for the government to solve our problems. In a perfect world, the government would be full of people like you and me who sincerely want to solve the country's problems. But it's not a perfect world. And the government creates more problems than it ever solves, and in most cases proposes even more government to solve the problems it itself has produced.
Hypocrisy. How do you reconcile that in your own mind? One example: A decade ago, all the leaders on the liberal side were for secure borders. They are on tape. They sound much the same as trump. How do you explain that now they are for pretty much open borders, sanctuary cities and throwing taxpayer money and privileges to illegal aliens? And how do you explain the fact that no one in the msm even bothers to ask them why they changed so drastically? Do you know?
I could go on and on, but the main point is that relying on government to solve social problems is a dangerous proposition. Conservatives are very wary about giving power to the government because history shows that it always takes away individual freedom.

If you don't look to our government to solve social problems, who do you look to?

[Beebs52]

Krox, i appreciate the response. But here's the thing, and I think it's telling. I wrote to you first person. I told you my thoughts as an individual. I did not go out to the internet and find an article from some writer to tell you what I thought. I told you what I thought. Too many people today rely on social and mainstrem media to do their thinking for them.
I, and millions of other conservatives like myself completely and totally reject the notion that we don't care for the poor, the disadvantaged, people of color (your side's designation. Most of us aspire to MLK's dream: a color-blind society), the environment or whatever other shortcoming your spokespeople accuse us of.
We are just not insane, based on the accepted definition. We do not believe that if you keep doing the same thing over and over that somehow you will get a different result. For example, poverty. LBJ started the War on Poverty, which basically came down to throwing money at the problem. We have spent TRILLIONS of dollars 'fighting' poverty through one federal program after another, piling up on each other. Have we solved the problem of poverty in this country? Do you really think another federal program will do the trick?
For a brief period, Newt Gingrich's congress and President Clinton kind of worked together and amazing things happened by rethinking how we use and distribute welfare. But that didn't last long.
Trump is doing something different and unemployment and wages for the working class poor are better than ever.
Of course the internet is full of "experts" who will refute that, and bobby and SSS have stopped on the previous sentence to go and look for them, but don't go there for once. Look around with your own eyes.
Krox, I long ago stopped looking for the government to solve our problems. In a perfect world, the government would be full of people like you and me who sincerely want to solve the country's problems. But it's not a perfect world. And the government creates more problems than it ever solves, and in most cases proposes even more government to solve the problems it itself has produced.
Hypocrisy. How do you reconcile that in your own mind? One example: A decade ago, all the leaders on the liberal side were for secure borders. They are on tape. They sound much the same as trump. How do you explain that now they are for pretty much open borders, sanctuary cities and throwing taxpayer money and privileges to illegal aliens? And how do you explain the fact that no one in the msm even bothers to ask them why they changed so drastically? Do you know?
I could go on and on, but the main point is that relying on government to solve social problems is a dangerous proposition. Conservatives are very wary about giving power to the government because history shows that it always takes away individual freedom.

If you don't look to our government to solve social problems, who do you look to?

Depends on what one defines as a "social problem"; what one considers a right as opposed to commodity, etc. How one views state vs federal, how far one wants federal intruding into squishy areas.
It's too much of an octopus to entrust definitions entirely to government. Families, churches, nonprofits, are a start.

[kroxquo]

Krox, i appreciate the response. But here's the thing, and I think it's telling. I wrote to you first person. I told you my thoughts as an individual.

It is a fair point, so I will try my best to express how I came to view the world as I do.

I come from a family of teachers. Both of my parents were educators as well as two of my four grandparents. In addition, my dad was very active in the teachers' union so he always was an advocate for organized labor. As I became politically aware in my teen years, I would listen to Dad talk about world events and his perspective on how the world could be better. I also remember him yelling at the TV every week at whoever Mike Wallace was attacking on 60 Minutes.

I went to college in the 80's at a VERY conservative school - Grove City College in Pennsylvania. I was in the one liberal bastion - the history department - in a fortress of Reagan as Demi-god worship. As I made my way through my four years there, I came to feel that conservatism at its core lacks a heart. One discussion I had there resulted in one of my fellow students coming out advocating child labor, and to me he did not seem that far off from what was being taught there - strict laissez-faire economically, socially, and politically. Still I was not completely sold yet - I voted for Bush in '88.

I married a Dutch woman (from whom I have since divorced) and witnessed first hand in visits to the Netherlands and discussions with her family the success of a liberal social net and what "socialist" policies. It struck me that the Dutch cared for their citizens far more than we do here in the U.S. and I wondered why we couldn't do that. Were there problems with their system? Absolutely. My father-in-law was in a 75% tax bracket. But he seemed to accept it as the price of general welfare for the country.

Flash forward to today. I see how citizens who are outside the mainstream - racial minorities, the poor, et al - are made to feel less than accepted by society, an attitude which has been exacerbated by our current President.

My now wife - who is a Trump supporter - feels that I am arrogant when it comes to political thought and that I look down on those who disagree with me. That is not my intention, and if I come across that way, it is not intentional. I agree with much of what the Bobs say, but think they way overstep the boundaries of civilized discourse at times. With all due respect to you, Flock, I disagree with most of what you say and believe, but support your right to believe it and feel that you also overstep those boundaries at times.

I hope this clarifies where I am coming from, and I hope that we can agree to disagree.

[tlynn78]

Krox, i appreciate the response. But here's the thing, and I think it's telling. I wrote to you first person. I told you my thoughts as an individual. I did not go out to the internet and find an article from some writer to tell you what I thought. I told you what I thought. Too many people today rely on social and mainstrem media to do their thinking for them.
I, and millions of other conservatives like myself completely and totally reject the notion that we don't care for the poor, the disadvantaged, people of color (your side's designation. Most of us aspire to MLK's dream: a color-blind society), the environment or whatever other shortcoming your spokespeople accuse us of.
We are just not insane, based on the accepted definition. We do not believe that if you keep doing the same thing over and over that somehow you will get a different result. For example, poverty. LBJ started the War on Poverty, which basically came down to throwing money at the problem. We have spent TRILLIONS of dollars 'fighting' poverty through one federal program after another, piling up on each other. Have we solved the problem of poverty in this country? Do you really think another federal program will do the trick?
For a brief period, Newt Gingrich's congress and President Clinton kind of worked together and amazing things happened by rethinking how we use and distribute welfare. But that didn't last long.
Trump is doing something different and unemployment and wages for the working class poor are better than ever.
Of course the internet is full of "experts" who will refute that, and bobby and SSS have stopped on the previous sentence to go and look for them, but don't go there for once. Look around with your own eyes.
Krox, I long ago stopped looking for the government to solve our problems. In a perfect world, the government would be full of people like you and me who sincerely want to solve the country's problems. But it's not a perfect world. And the government creates more problems than it ever solves, and in most cases proposes even more government to solve the problems it itself has produced.
Hypocrisy. How do you reconcile that in your own mind? One example: A decade ago, all the leaders on the liberal side were for secure borders. They are on tape. They sound much the same as trump. How do you explain that now they are for pretty much open borders, sanctuary cities and throwing taxpayer money and privileges to illegal aliens? And how do you explain the fact that no one in the msm even bothers to ask them why they changed so drastically? Do you know?
I could go on and on, but the main point is that relying on government to solve social problems is a dangerous proposition. Conservatives are very wary about giving power to the government because history shows that it always takes away individual freedom.

Thank you FLock. I couldn't have typed a coherent response given my sprained eyes from the gigantic eye-roll.
t.

[silverscreenselect]

Conservatives are very wary about giving power to the government because history shows that it always takes away individual freedom.

Have you been asleep these last three years while Trump has engaged in one power grab after another while all the "conservatives" have eagerly fallen in line behind him?

[silverscreenselect]

Upon reflection, I retract my measured response earlier in this thread. Here is what I mean to say.

Krox, go and fuck yourself, Mr. I have studied the 3rd Reich-Blah, Blah, Blah. I will give you a little credit if you can show me in your posting history that you have expressed 1 ounce of concern for the million Uigers (sp) that are in Chinese Communist concentration camps today, but you don't give a shit about them.

Krox's statements weren't a comparison of the relative evils of the Third Reich in comparison with any evils in Communist or other countries, so your huffiness is beside the point and a real insult. One big difference between the Third Reich and many of the other totalitarian regimes of the past, left and right, is that the Nazis came to power through democratic elections aided by a powerful propaganda machine. Once in power, they subverted and dismantled those democratic institutions. Almost every other totalitarian regime, left and right, in recent history has come to power by means of a violent overthrow of an existing government. The political and institutional climate in the United States is more akin to Germany in the early 1930s than Russia or China or almost every other country where a Communist regime has been installed.

Comparing the relative evils of dictatorial regimes is a pointless argument. Condemning one while not adding a footnote that of course you condemn a hundred others is not a tacit acceptance or approval of any others. The point that many liberals (and a number of real conservatives) have made is that Trump and his followers are acting in ways that mirror what has gone on in prominent fascist regimes of the past.

[flockofseagulls104]

Krox, i appreciate the response. But here's the thing, and I think it's telling. I wrote to you first person. I told you my thoughts as an individual.

It is a fair point, so I will try my best to express how I came to view the world as I do.

I come from a family of teachers. Both of my parents were educators as well as two of my four grandparents. In addition, my dad was very active in the teachers' union so he always was an advocate for organized labor. As I became politically aware in my teen years, I would listen to Dad talk about world events and his perspective on how the world could be better. I also remember him yelling at the TV every week at whoever Mike Wallace was attacking on 60 Minutes.

I went to college in the 80's at a VERY conservative school - Grove City College in Pennsylvania. I was in the one liberal bastion - the history department - in a fortress of Reagan as Demi-god worship. As I made my way through my four years there, I came to feel that conservatism at its core lacks a heart. One discussion I had there resulted in one of my fellow students coming out advocating child labor, and to me he did not seem that far off from what was being taught there - strict laissez-faire economically, socially, and politically. Still I was not completely sold yet - I voted for Bush in '88.

I married a Dutch woman (from whom I have since divorced) and witnessed first hand in visits to the Netherlands and discussions with her family the success of a liberal social net and what "socialist" policies. It struck me that the Dutch cared for their citizens far more than we do here in the U.S. and I wondered why we couldn't do that. Were there problems with their system? Absolutely. My father-in-law was in a 75% tax bracket. But he seemed to accept it as the price of general welfare for the country.

Flash forward to today. I see how citizens who are outside the mainstream - racial minorities, the poor, et al - are made to feel less than accepted by society, an attitude which has been exacerbated by our current President.

My now wife - who is a Trump supporter - feels that I am arrogant when it comes to political thought and that I look down on those who disagree with me. That is not my intention, and if I come across that way, it is not intentional. I agree with much of what the Bobs say, but think they way overstep the boundaries of civilized discourse at times. With all due respect to you, Flock, I disagree with most of what you say and believe, but support your right to believe it and feel that you also overstep those boundaries at times.

I hope this clarifies where I am coming from, and I hope that we can agree to disagree.

I overstep boundaries only in response to those who do it to me.

Your fellow student who advocated child labor was an imbecile. There's lots of them in colleges, on both sides, both students and especially teachers. Look at the university system now.

Krox, I'm not an international expert, but I have traveled to a lot of countries on business, and I have been around for a while.
I believe that despite our problems, the United States is BY FAR the most diverse and least racist country on the face of this earth. Name me one country that has a more diverse population. We have always been a melting pot for different cultures and people from all over the world have come here. We mostly get along as Americans. I won't gloss over the prejudice and bigotry aimed at certain immigrant groups over our history, but for the most part immigrant groups have usually assimilated into our culture while preserving their unique ethnic heritage.

---------

I see how citizens who are outside the mainstream - racial minorities, the poor, et al - are made to feel less than accepted by society, an attitude which has been exacerbated by our current President.

I do not share your view. I really believe that is a cliche and talking point that has been used by the left since I was a baby. At one time it was true, but we have made significant strides as a society since then. I don't see how you can not acknowledge that fact. For your other point, tell me exactly how the president is doing that. Don't quote the batphone. Tell me specifically what you think he, the president, has done to indicate racial minorities, the poor, etc, should not be accepted in society.