tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 30, 2015 19:59:15 GMT -5
I don't know when it happened, but at some point it wasn't enough just to be liberal- liberalism became synonymous with anti-Americanism. Nonsense. It has long been known that you have a very twisted idea of liberalism. You apparently have a twisted vision of "Americanism" as well.
And truthfully, the social conservatives are the most un-American of all. I will grant that there is in fact a difference between un-American and anti-American but you are on very shaky ground either way, since one could if they wished to push the issue describe the far-right's "war" on individual liberties to be in fact "anti-American."
I consider our emphasis on individual liberties to be perhaps the quintessential element of being an American. It is not liberals who wish to take rights away....
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 30, 2015 21:48:44 GMT -5
I don't know when it happened, but at some point it wasn't enough just to be liberal- liberalism became synonymous with anti-Americanism. Nonsense. It has long been known that you have a very twisted idea of liberalism. You apparently have a twisted vision of "Americanism" as well.
And truthfully, the social conservatives are the most un-American of all. I will grant that there is in fact a difference between un-American and anti-American but you are on very shaky ground either way, since one could if they wished to push the issue describe the far-right's "war" on individual liberties to be in fact "anti-American."
I consider our emphasis on individual liberties to be perhaps the quintessential element of being an American. It is not liberals who wish to take rights away....
I agree. Our emphasis on individual liberties is the "exception" in all of human history. It's the exception in American exceptionalism. Liberals are destroying individual liberties. Liberals have eviscerated states rights. Liberals have confused liberty with an empty licentiousness. Liberals have turned the entire concept of rights on its head. There's a counterfeit notion of rights on the left that assumes a person has a right to the product of someone else's labor, a person has a right to kill another human being for their own convenience and economic well being, a person has a right to force another person to conform to the state doctrine or lose life, liberty, and property-- the liberalism of today is not live and let live. It is a gun to the head and a shrill screaming voice saying: not only are you going to tolerate us, but you will do what we tell you to do, and you will participate in whatever it is we tell you to-- or else you're a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a xenophobe, a nativist, a sexist, etc. It's getting old, and of late it's completely out of control and due for a reigning in.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 30, 2015 22:07:57 GMT -5
I'm going to keep repeating what I've been saying: it doesn't matter. Trump is the Republican Obama. Hillary was far better qualified in 2008. She had a lock on the nomination until the Democratic Party base revolted. It didn't matter that Obama was raised and mentored by Cloward-Piven Alynskyite communist radicals; that he attended a muslim madrasa in Indonesia in his formative years, didn't matter that he had a whole different name at one point- President Obama, or that his academic records were sealed while he played dirty pool getting the divorce records of his opponent unsealed to secure his Senate seat. It didn't matter that he was rumored to have been called "Bathhouse Barry" - a notorious gay, cocaine snorting activist in Chicago. It didn't matter that he had "community organizer" on his resume, or that the term originates with communist Saul Alinsky's book "Rules For Radicals" or that that book was dedicated to Lucifer- the original community organizer. It didn't matter that he sat at the feet of a black racialist cult leader for 22 years. It didn't matter that his political career was born in the Hyde Park living room of an unrepentant domestic terrorist. So many Democrats infected with BDS simply bolted and they did so with such fervor that even Republicans got sucked in and alas, the whole country was at once sold on "hope and change". There will be no "gotcha" moment. The GOP base is sick and tired of that rule anyway- to their way of thinking, they're tired of political and media elites deciding when a person's political career is "over" because they said something that offended some gay, transgendered, Mexican-eskimo illegal immigrant that whenever Trump stumbles and is criticized, all he has to do is extend the flying finger of friendship and the crowd goes wild. There will be no "fading away". Donald Trump isn't going to get tired and quit. He's not in the race to "shake things up" and go home. His record isn't going to matter- because frankly, he doesn't have one. Yes, he has technically switched parties-- as a VOTER. But he's only been in politics as a candidate since June. And for his entire political career- he's been a Republican. The base is gone. If this was Jeb Bush at 20% - 30% for this long, conventional wisdom would be that the race is over. The only reason we're still here today is that the splitter strategy is still in full effect, and they think they're going to get rid of the spoiler. Problem is: cat's out of the bag. A HUGE chunk of the GOP base now understands that ALL the other candidates are Jeb Bush, with one non-Trump exception: Ted Cruz. I know, I know- I really shouldn't make political predictions-- but I've had a feeling for awhile that it's going to be Trump-Cruz; and Trump will probably be a one-term President handing it off to Ted Cruz.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 30, 2015 22:16:39 GMT -5
Mark Levin: Donald Trump's Tax Plan Could Have Been Proposed By Ronald Reagan therightscoop.com/mark-levin-donald-trumps-tax-plan-could-have-been-proposed-by-reagan/Levin makes it clear he prefers the flat tax or fair tax, but says this is a damn good plan. He is by no means endorsing Trump (or any candidate) In addition to being a well-known conservative talk radio host, he's also a Constitutional lawyer who has worked in the Reagan administration. He is extremely influential- his book "Ameritopia", his solution, "The Liberty Amendments", and his "Plunder and Deceit" book are best sellers. It's high praise from one of the most influential voices on the right- give it a listen.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,208
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 30, 2015 22:40:42 GMT -5
... Yes, he has technically switched parties-- as a VOTER. But he's only been in politics as a candidate since June. And for his entire political career- he's been a Republican. ... FWIW ... On October 25, 1999 Trump joined the Reform Party.[8][9] and for a brief time he seemed to be a credible alternative to Buchanan. His pre-campaign gained a great deal of media attention. It seemed as though the primaries would amount to a showdown between Buchanan and Trump, the latter of whom remained confident he could win not only the primary, but also the general election. Trump told reporters: "It's not so much the Reform Party, it's really the fact that I'd want to make that if I ran and spent a lot of money I could actually win, I could beat that Democrat-Republican apparatus."[10]
On October 19, 1999 Donald Trump announced he would file to appear on the California primary ballot.[11] During the California primary, he received 15,311 votes.[12] Trump ultimately withdrew his candidacy. ... en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Party_presidential_primaries,_2000
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,237
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 30, 2015 22:41:03 GMT -5
The multiple bankruptcies and multiple wives (previously mentioned on these boards) haven't seemed to bother Trump supporters here yet. Time will tell. Really I think that's one of the few points that might eventually hurt him. I don't think his supporters really care about the wife stuff and I personally do not care much that he's switched party affiliations.
I think the important thing is can he build coalitions, and except for temporary business ones, I'm not sure that he can? Plus there's the ego thing which does not allow for compromise.
I disagree with Paul on comparing Trump and Obama. Somehow IMO Obama figured out how to build a better political coalition than Hillary. Not a huge fan of W, but he also knew how to build that coalition to win. Maybe Hope and Change was a brilliant marketing strategy. IDK. Trump's marketing strategy has a built in base and is much better than 'Jeb!'. Jeb, needs to roll out some serious rebranding IMO if he wants to do better.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 30, 2015 22:55:39 GMT -5
Nonsense. It has long been known that you have a very twisted idea of liberalism. You apparently have a twisted vision of "Americanism" as well.
And truthfully, the social conservatives are the most un-American of all. I will grant that there is in fact a difference between un-American and anti-American but you are on very shaky ground either way, since one could if they wished to push the issue describe the far-right's "war" on individual liberties to be in fact "anti-American."
I consider our emphasis on individual liberties to be perhaps the quintessential element of being an American. It is not liberals who wish to take rights away....
I agree. Our emphasis on individual liberties is the "exception" in all of human history. It's the exception in American exceptionalism. Liberals are destroying individual liberties. Liberals have eviscerated states rights. Liberals have confused liberty with an empty licentiousness. Liberals have turned the entire concept of rights on its head. There's a counterfeit notion of rights on the left that assumes a person has a right to the product of someone else's labor, a person has a right to kill another human being for their own convenience and economic well being, a person has a right to force another person to conform to the state doctrine or lose life, liberty, and property-- the liberalism of today is not live and let live. It is a gun to the head and a shrill screaming voice saying: not only are you going to tolerate us, but you will do what we tell you to do, and you will participate in whatever it is we tell you to-- or else you're a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a xenophobe, a nativist, a sexist, etc. It's getting old, and of late it's completely out of control and due for a reigning in.
As I said, it has long been known that you have a very twisted idea of liberalism.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,442
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 30, 2015 23:01:54 GMT -5
I agree. Our emphasis on individual liberties is the "exception" in all of human history. It's the exception in American exceptionalism. Liberals are destroying individual liberties. Liberals have eviscerated states rights. Liberals have confused liberty with an empty licentiousness. Liberals have turned the entire concept of rights on its head. There's a counterfeit notion of rights on the left that assumes a person has a right to the product of someone else's labor, a person has a right to kill another human being for their own convenience and economic well being, a person has a right to force another person to conform to the state doctrine or lose life, liberty, and property-- the liberalism of today is not live and let live. It is a gun to the head and a shrill screaming voice saying: not only are you going to tolerate us, but you will do what we tell you to do, and you will participate in whatever it is we tell you to-- or else you're a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a xenophobe, a nativist, a sexist, etc. It's getting old, and of late it's completely out of control and due for a reigning in.
As I said, it has long been known that you have a very twisted idea of liberalism.
I can only imagine what he means by '...due for a reigning in."
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 30, 2015 23:12:21 GMT -5
Or even "reining in."
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 23:52:53 GMT -5
Nonsense. It has long been known that you have a very twisted idea of liberalism. You apparently have a twisted vision of "Americanism" as well.
And truthfully, the social conservatives are the most un-American of all. I will grant that there is in fact a difference between un-American and anti-American but you are on very shaky ground either way, since one could if they wished to push the issue describe the far-right's "war" on individual liberties to be in fact "anti-American."
I consider our emphasis on individual liberties to be perhaps the quintessential element of being an American. It is not liberals who wish to take rights away....
I agree. Our emphasis on individual liberties is the "exception" in all of human history. It's the exception in American exceptionalism. Liberals are destroying individual liberties. Liberals have eviscerated states rights. Liberals have confused liberty with an empty licentiousness. Liberals have turned the entire concept of rights on its head. There's a counterfeit notion of rights on the left that assumes a person has a right to the product of someone else's labor, a person has a right to kill another human being for their own convenience and economic well being, a person has a right to force another person to conform to the state doctrine or lose life, liberty, and property-- the liberalism of today is not live and let live. It is a gun to the head and a shrill screaming voice saying: not only are you going to tolerate us, but you will do what we tell you to do, and you will participate in whatever it is we tell you to-- or else you're a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a xenophobe, a nativist, a sexist, etc. It's getting old, and of late it's completely out of control and due for a reigning in. name me one liberal that thinks these things, Paul. one. sleep on it. take your time. good night.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 23:53:56 GMT -5
Mark Levin: Donald Trump's Tax Plan Could Have Been Proposed By Ronald Reagan. of course the guy who tripled the deficit could have proposed this. DUH!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 23:56:27 GMT -5
The multiple bankruptcies and multiple wives (previously mentioned on these boards) haven't seemed to bother Trump supporters here yet. Time will tell. Really I think that's one of the few points that might eventually hurt him. I don't think his supporters really care about the wife stuff and I personally do not care much that he's switched party affiliations. . so does the most reliably conservative publication in America. that should tell you something. or anyone who is not utterly under the spell.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 1, 2015 6:51:16 GMT -5
How do you sign up? Just give up any thoughts of free thinking, and drink the kool-aid. Or be a hipocrit. It seems you already did as you are receiving Medicare and more than likely a Social Security check every month. Oh you paid into those programs for sure, but eventually, and if you live long enough, you will get more out of those two entitlements than the monies you ever put into them. That's the free stuff. So cheers on you having drunk the Kool-Aid. It's called return on investment. ROI
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 1, 2015 6:58:36 GMT -5
The multiple bankruptcies and multiple wives (previously mentioned on these boards) haven't seemed to bother Trump supporters here yet. Time will tell. Just what laws was he convicted? Seems I heard something like this some where around here at some time.
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,242
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Oct 1, 2015 7:15:05 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is going to care about the multiple wives as long as he isn't running on a morality platform. Same reason Clinton supporters never cared about Lewinsky, its not like he is shoving morality at anyone.
I am more concerned about the bankruptcies, and him being an asshat in general.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,442
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 1, 2015 8:01:29 GMT -5
The multiple bankruptcies and multiple wives (previously mentioned on these boards) haven't seemed to bother Trump supporters here yet. Time will tell. Just what laws was he convicted? Seems I heard something like this some where around here at some time. I can't imagine his conservative followers believe it's acceptable to a wife, not once but twice, and then marry a third time and thinking he can run a country even though he has had five business bankruptcies. The guy has seems to always whatever isn't working for him and walk away. He's got commitment problems. You can't do that as president.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 1, 2015 8:09:18 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is going to care about the multiple wives as long as he isn't running on a morality platform. Same reason Clinton supporters never cared about Lewinsky, its not like he is shoving morality at anyone. I am more concerned about the bankruptcies, and him being an asshat in general. I am amazed at how much criticism of Trump, which usually involves something to the effect that he is not specific enough about what he would do about "X", is generic, and ad hominem. Donald Trump has never declared bankruptcy. He held a minority position in four companies- in other words, no real say in the matter- which declared bankruptcy- Trump says, and I believe him because I've seen this first-hand, because creditors opted not to negotiate and forced the companies into bankruptcy. Trump is right: these lenders are not the widows and orphans fund. These creditors are sharks, they're assholes, and very often for reason which make sense to them, they deliberately create the conditions which force companies into bankruptcy.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,237
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Oct 1, 2015 8:30:30 GMT -5
That's one way to look at it, but then we could say that of every home-owner or business owner who has leveraged loans to be there and has less than 50% cash in.
www.forbes.com/sites/debtwire/2015/08/18/a-trip-down-donald-trumps-bankruptcy-memory-lane/
In true Trump fashion, the tycoon threw out zingers like “lenders were killers,” Wallace was “living in a dream world,” and pointed out that he never declared personal bankruptcy.
The truth of the matter can be found somewhere in the middle. Long before Trump was known as a reality television star or a wannabe politician, his name was most recognizable as the larger-than-life owner of a casino-hotel empire. Trouble set in decades ago as each of the Atlantic City-based entities under Trump’s umbrella went through separate bankruptcies– the Trump Taj Mahal in 1991 and the Trump Plaza in 1992 –before reorganizing into Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts in 1995.
Everyone knows he did not declare personal bankruptcy. The President is elected to run a country not a personal household.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 1, 2015 9:28:01 GMT -5
That's one way to look at it, but then we could say that of every home-owner or business owner who has leveraged loans to be there and has less than 50% cash in.
www.forbes.com/sites/debtwire/2015/08/18/a-trip-down-donald-trumps-bankruptcy-memory-lane/
In true Trump fashion, the tycoon threw out zingers like “lenders were killers,” Wallace was “living in a dream world,” and pointed out that he never declared personal bankruptcy.
The truth of the matter can be found somewhere in the middle. Long before Trump was known as a reality television star or a wannabe politician, his name was most recognizable as the larger-than-life owner of a casino-hotel empire. Trouble set in decades ago as each of the Atlantic City-based entities under Trump’s umbrella went through separate bankruptcies– the Trump Taj Mahal in 1991 and the Trump Plaza in 1992 –before reorganizing into Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts in 1995.
Everyone knows he did not declare personal bankruptcy. The President is elected to run a country not a personal household.
Everyone also knows he's not $19 trillion in debt and still borrowing. It's really hard to put that up against Trump's $4 to $10 billion (depending on the source) positive net worth and feign "concerns" over bankruptcies he's had.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,208
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 1, 2015 9:40:55 GMT -5
... Everyone also knows he's not $19 trillion in debt and still borrowing. It's really hard to put that up against Trump's $4 to $10 billion (depending on the source) positive net worth and feign "concerns" over bankruptcies he's had. Should the US declare bankruptcy? If it got some/all of its debt erased, it would be in better shape also.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 1, 2015 9:42:02 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is going to care about the multiple wives as long as he isn't running on a morality platform. Same reason Clinton supporters never cared about Lewinsky, its not like he is shoving morality at anyone. I am more concerned about the bankruptcies, and him being an asshat in general. As to the multiple wives, I would think that would be more of a problem for values voters. It's certainly cause for concern for me. My view is that if you will break your marriage vows- running around cavorting with a mistress, and when she won't be bought off- you start bringing her wherever you and your family go so you can escape the wife and kids to be with your mistress; and you finally end up dumping your wife and mother of three of your children for the mistress, name your daughter with your new wife / former mistress "Tiffany" after Tiffany & Co.-- then what are your principles, really? Who won't you deceive if you're willing to betray the woman you loved, married, and who bore your children? Unlike the rest of the modern world, there are some of us who don't put "personal life" in a separate box score-- A for job performance, B on economic policy, and an F for personal integrity. If you fail personal integrity, you get an F across the board. That being said, Trump has been married- by all accounts faithfully- for the last 10 years, and I think in that regard he does deserve a second chance-- until he screws up again, and then that's probably it for a lot of people.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 1, 2015 9:42:41 GMT -5
... Everyone also knows he's not $19 trillion in debt and still borrowing. It's really hard to put that up against Trump's $4 to $10 billion (depending on the source) positive net worth and feign "concerns" over bankruptcies he's had. Should the US declare bankruptcy? If it got some/all of its debt erased, it would be in better shape also. If we had any integrity as a nation, we would. It would be more honest than the steady repudiation of the debt via currency devaluation.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 1, 2015 9:43:46 GMT -5
I agree. Our emphasis on individual liberties is the "exception" in all of human history. It's the exception in American exceptionalism. Liberals are destroying individual liberties. Liberals have eviscerated states rights. Liberals have confused liberty with an empty licentiousness. Liberals have turned the entire concept of rights on its head. There's a counterfeit notion of rights on the left that assumes a person has a right to the product of someone else's labor, a person has a right to kill another human being for their own convenience and economic well being, a person has a right to force another person to conform to the state doctrine or lose life, liberty, and property-- the liberalism of today is not live and let live. It is a gun to the head and a shrill screaming voice saying: not only are you going to tolerate us, but you will do what we tell you to do, and you will participate in whatever it is we tell you to-- or else you're a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a xenophobe, a nativist, a sexist, etc. It's getting old, and of late it's completely out of control and due for a reigning in. name me one liberal that thinks these things, Paul. one. sleep on it. take your time. good night. You.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 15:26:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 10:15:23 GMT -5
I agree. Our emphasis on individual liberties is the "exception" in all of human history. It's the exception in American exceptionalism. Liberals are destroying individual liberties. Liberals have eviscerated states rights. Liberals have confused liberty with an empty licentiousness. Liberals have turned the entire concept of rights on its head. There's a counterfeit notion of rights on the left that assumes a person has a right to the product of someone else's labor, a person has a right to kill another human being for their own convenience and economic well being, a person has a right to force another person to conform to the state doctrine or lose life, liberty, and property-- the liberalism of today is not live and let live. It is a gun to the head and a shrill screaming voice saying: not only are you going to tolerate us, but you will do what we tell you to do, and you will participate in whatever it is we tell you to-- or else you're a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a xenophobe, a nativist, a sexist, etc. It's getting old, and of late it's completely out of control and due for a reigning in.
As I said, it has long been known that you have a very twisted idea of liberalism.
There are not very many liberals on this forum. I do not know what you call people on the left now, maybe progressives, idk, but they are not classic liberals. Their Pavlovian response to any problem is 'get government to fix it'. Liberals used to not want big government.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 1, 2015 10:21:30 GMT -5
name me one liberal that thinks these things, Paul. one. sleep on it. take your time. good night. You. wrong. i have nothing in common with the description you provided of liberals. but that answers the question. you got nothing. your "liberal" doesn't exist.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 1, 2015 10:23:29 GMT -5
As I said, it has long been known that you have a very twisted idea of liberalism.
There are not very many liberals on this forum. I do not know what you call people on the left now, maybe progressives, idk, but they are not classic liberals. Their Pavlovian response to any problem is 'get government to fix it'. Liberals used to not want big government. modern liberals have the same values as classical liberals, ime. what you guys are calling "liberals" are socialists and communists. what separates the two is collectivism. liberals place a low value on collectivism, particularly in regard to assets, wheras others place a high value on it.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 1, 2015 12:13:54 GMT -5
Just what laws was he convicted? Seems I heard something like this some where around here at some time. I can't imagine his conservative followers believe it's acceptable to a wife, not once but twice, and then marry a third time and thinking he can run a country even though he has had five business bankruptcies. The guy has seems to always whatever isn't working for him and walk away. He's got commitment problems. You can't do that as president. What is the problem here, if this was a car we would just trade up for a newer model. My wife would trade me in if she wasn't so worried about how much it would cost to take me off her hands! The bankruptcies were just good strategic financial planning. that's all
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 1, 2015 12:24:32 GMT -5
I can't imagine his conservative followers believe it's acceptable to a wife, not once but twice, and then marry a third time and thinking he can run a country even though he has had five business bankruptcies. The guy has seems to always whatever isn't working for him and walk away. He's got commitment problems. You can't do that as president. What is the problem here, if this was a car we would just trade up for a newer model. My wife would trade me in if she wasn't so worried about how much it would cost to take me off her hands! The bankruptcies were just good strategic financial planning. that's all have you ever been on the LOSING end of a bankruptcy? i have. one this year cost me $7,000. edit: four bankruptcies tells me Trump is gaming the system for his benefit. does that make him a good businessman? sure. does it make him a scumbag, as well? yes, it does, imo. this is a defining moment for the GOP, imo. are they "Wall Street" or "Main Street"?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 1, 2015 15:24:13 GMT -5
There are not very many liberals on this forum. I do not know what you call people on the left now, maybe progressives, idk, but they are not classic liberals. Their Pavlovian response to any problem is 'get government to fix it'. Liberals used to not want big government. modern liberals have the same values as classical liberals, ime. what you guys are calling "liberals" are socialists and communists. what separates the two is collectivism. liberals place a low value on collectivism, particularly in regard to assets, wheras others place a high value on it. Correct. In America in 2015 liberals are socialists and communists.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 1, 2015 15:25:59 GMT -5
Mark Levin: Donald Trump's Tax Plan Could Have Been Proposed By Ronald Reagan. of course the guy who tripled the deficit could have proposed this. DUH! You need to look at control of the House, not the White House. Unless you want to pin all the GOP spending since 2010 on Obama. I'm no fan of the guy, but I think that's unfair.
|
|