It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Right Wing is Very Afraid of Bernie Sanders

page: 8
32
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14




Here is the difference. The right wing attacks the left mostly for outlandish non-evidence based things, for example calling Obama a Muslim, or half of us commies, or "oppressing Christianity" and wanting Shariah law enstated, and "They be taking ur GUNS CLETUS!"


Not one bit of difference.

The LEFT is just as 'outlandish' 'gun violence' corporation hate people. Were all gonna die if we don't let the government regulate the planet.

Lots more examples exist.

The LEFT is NO better than the RIGHT.



I think that you are still falling into the problem I already mentioned, trying to draw a comparison between real evidence based policies versus hysteria.

Nobody has taken your guns yet.

Countless economists, scientists, etc, have calculated not only that many industries do not pay the full cost of doing business but also that some well researched regulations do in fact address those gaps. Not only that, but there are countless well documented cases of a non-regulated or poorly-regulated industry doing real harm to some sphere of society or nature.

Hence, again, the left policy or more accurately responsible policy making is more grounded in reality than your example.

Try again.




posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14




Nah, as the saying goes, "Reality has a liberal bias." Both sides have problems, but holding all things constant, and looking at the evidence, more left policies are grounded in science, evidence, NOT faith, NOT arguments from authority, NOT xenophobia, not racism, than the right. More right policies moreover really are blatantly pro-rich, anti-poor, anti-gay, anti-minority, xenophobic, hyper-nationalistic, militaristic. Basically, all of the elements of fascism light.


That is PROPAGANDA.




but holding all things constant, and looking at the evidence, more left policies are grounded in science, evidence, NOT faith, NOT arguments from authority, NOT xenophobia, not racism,


LOL that was funny.


Nope. it can be demonstrated with ease that stacked side by side, more right polices are grounded in two problematic areas: 1) Tradition, arguments from authority, religion, faith, nationalism, xenophobia 2) Pro-corporate and pro-elite.

More progressive ideas are NOT based on those but instead relevant social or physical science.

It is demonstrable.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Progressives are elitists who want to determine what is best for everyone.

They have no regard for the Constitution, Bill of Rights or freedoms in general.

At least Communists and Socialists are honest.

Progressives dress the worst parts of communism and socialism and call it "a new way of looking at freedom".

Progressives are liars.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: OpenMindedRealist

Ya, which is too bad for the people of this nation as we're being destroyed right now and the future will only make it worse. Sanders is the only chance there is but like you say, his image isn't exactly dripping with charisma. But he's the one guy who will do what he says and says what he means.

Speaking of Michelle and Bernie, did you ever see this one??? There are a couple times where Sanders gets a look on his face when Michelle keeps blabbing that makes me laugh so hard!!




Wow, she would irritate me to no end. I would have just come right out and said...SHUT YOUR MOUTH ALREADY SO A BROTHA CAN TALK!

BTW, I can`t see where she get`s the idea that Obama (no I hate him as much as any Democrat or Republican President) is waging a war on women. Everyone who has any group whatsoever is being called a homeland terrorist...except for Feminists, who openly admit a war on men, and little boys. This doesn't sound like a war on women...more like they`re being subsidized.

Constitutionalists = Homeland Terrorist,
Christian Groups= Homeland Terrorists,
Militia groups (Just citizens wanting to protect our values) = Homeland Terrorist,
Protesters have been referred to as Homeland Terrorist,
even kids that dress up in Insane Clown Posse Makeup.....are being called Homeland Terrorist today.

The thing is, that the only ones who deserve to genuinely be called Homeland Terrorists are Feminists, because they knowingly use media, politics, hide behind womens rights and affirmative action, support women that psychologically abuse little boys, so that they will grow up damaged men, and even do things to male children while they are pregnant, in hopes to kill or maim the male.
(Source):
'I'm drinking and smoking because my unborn baby is a BOY'

So, to this Michelle woman in this video.
I don`t think Obama is waging a financial war, or any war against women...It looks to me like he`s helping them immensely. Let`s face it, if you walk into a court room during a divorce....who wins hands down? The female.
If a woman is not ready for a baby yet, she get`s to literally take it`s life (abortion), so that she doesn`t have to deal with the issue or the responsibility. Rape or not, there are many women out there who cannot have children, and want them, and as for the pain of natural birth..there are epidurals, so there's no excuse.

Men do not have a choice...it`s child support for us whether we are ready or not. Forced by the government as the woman systematically tries to control him (even outside of the marriage) by using the child as leverage....knowing that the courts are on her side. Women then gather in droves, and shout out one liners, like `I`ts a woman`s right` or `It`s my body, no man can tell me what to do with my body`. Pretty selfish if you consider that....it`s really the BABY`S life that is being taken,...not the woman's. It`s not her body under the knife at all. Whatever get`s them to sleep at night I guess.

At any rate......This woman in this video is full of it. Obama has helped women just as much, if not more than anyone from the Republican side...it`s MEN who are oppressed by the government today. Women have not been oppressed for at least three feminist waves ago...if even then. (No proof of this that I have been able to find, other than the words of feminists) It`s a bitter pill to swallow, but it`s all true and well documented...at least the Oppression of men, has been well documented...but ignored, and they just replaced the word man..with woman.


edit on 30-5-2015 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14




People are only afraid of Fox News because it lies constantly, is the best example of American propaganda (but not the only one by any means


This is EXACTLY wrong.

ALL POLITICS is PROPAGANDA thus by extension LIES.

American politics is the best example of propaganda.

American politics can be summed up rather succinctly: Vote for D the R's Sucks. The R's respond in kind Vote for R the D's suck.

AP is an absolute FARCE.

`

You both are right...politics AND Fox News are propaganda and lies...tey work hand in hand really. Whomever the International bankers want to win, they will financially back the politician, and then have Fox News as well as MSNBC and others, to go on a smear campaign against the undesired politician, who will not further the Banking agenda....and yes, definitely, both the Repubs and the Democrats both have the same agenda. The NWO. It`s just that the Republican`s choose to take us down the rough road of war, while Democrats choose the more crafty, scenic route. When it`s all said and done and the political wheels stop turning.....they both want you in an internment camp being beaten down by ruthless, oppressive police with your constitution flushed into the nearest sewer.
edit on 30-5-2015 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14




Nope. it can be demonstrated with ease that stacked side by side, more right polices are grounded in two problematic areas: 1) Tradition, arguments from authority, religion, faith, nationalism, xenophobia 2) Pro-corporate and pro-elite.


No

All the crap going on about the cops right now, jury verdicts say other wise.

That is 'arguments' from authority'.





religion, faith, nationalism


Guess gonna have to whip out some Gobbels.



What does Christianity mean today? National Socialism is a religion. All we lack is a religious genius capable of uprooting outmoded religious practices and putting new ones in their place. We lack traditions and ritual. One day soon National Socialism will be the religion of all Germans. My Party is my church, and I believe I serve the Lord best if I do his will, and liberate my oppressed people from the fetters of slavery. That is my gospel.


en.wikiquote.org...



xenophobia


The Christians, and the Jews especially Isreal critics say other wisie.




Pro-corporate


Alternative energy subsies to green corporations. Step right up get your free solar panels.

Step right up, and get your free education,healthcare,homes ALL corporate products.

Social Security step right up and by state edict gurantee them evil corporations money in their pockets.

Medicaid,medicare step right up and GUARANTEE them big pharmaceutical makers money in their pockets.

Step right up with the ACA and guarantee the HEALTH insurance CORPORATIONS money in their pockets,




pro-elite.


I have never met a 'poor' Democrat congressman. See Hillary Clinton, Pelosi, and the rest.




More progressive ideas are NOT based on those but instead relevant social or physical science.


The LEFT's cognitive dissonance sure is demonstrable.


edit on 30-5-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician




..politics AND Fox News are propaganda and lies


Here is the problem with that.

Fox News was created in the 90s because some people got tired of LIBERAL lies.

Liberals'/Democrats have no one to blame but themselves for Fox News.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician

Wow, she would irritate me to no end. I would have just come right out and said...SHUT YOUR MOUTH ALREADY SO A BROTHA CAN TALK!


I know, right?? Damn, she just kept saying the same thing over and over with that damn voice of hers. It's like the sound of an almost dead banshee with a cold. "But so and so wants a job.....".."Bla bla mhaaaa...." Listen to the noise coming out of my face hole....."Jobs jobs jobs"....

Everything she says has no substance to it either. It's just words next to each other that sound almost like she's saying something but there is nothing there.

Bernie on the other hand comes right out with it, "Yeah I'll take the money from here....stick it here, raise this tax, trash this, and walla. Jobs and stuff, mutha suckas. Now, leave me alone I got work to do!!"

Bernie is one of those guys who's at the age where he doesn't have time for more BS. He doesn't care about what the polls say or what some lobbyist wants. He's there to fix some broke ass sh*t in Government before he kicks it off this rock and leaves his family to live within it.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 10:28 PM
link   
How about some old school Bernie telling it like it is??? He's got something to say and he's not afraid to say it.




posted on May, 30 2015 @ 10:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician




..politics AND Fox News are propaganda and lies


Here is the problem with that.

Fox News was created in the 90s because some people got tired of LIBERAL lies.

Liberals'/Democrats have no one to blame but themselves for Fox News.



I get it, but to reiterate. I am not Republican or Democrat, nor conservative or any of this mess. Liberals, Conservatives, Dems or Repubs...they are all here to distract a wide base of personalities. Divide and conquer, if you will. It always ends up a 2 party system in the end anyway..which is DIVIDE AND CONQUER by its very nature.When is the last time ...or ever that you have seen a President other than Dem or Repub. Always the same old microwaved meal...day after day...year after year.

All I know is that `Roger Ailes` is a Republican and CEO of FOX News. (proof): How Fox News Chief Roger Ailes Tried To Win Republicans The White House
So Naturally, if one were a Republican or even conservative, one may support FOX...or blame Democrats. Its just the natural flow of the political pendulum as one blames the other and vice versa. But FOX News IS really a joke, and really is a conglomerate of lying propagandists, and its not fault of the democrats or republicans. It just is what it is. MSNBC is more of a propaganda tool for the Democrats...and FOX is a propaganda tool predominately for the Republicans. Its just another cable show for whomever likes the flavor. Below is proof that FOX News is `one sided`...

Part 1:


Part 2:



Fox News staging Chaos about a story in Russia....using footage of Greece riots (staging footage, not associated with actual events..many videos on this actually):


And just so that I am not accused of being `one sided`


MSNBC LIES:



And I did say `others` alluding to other News Networks outside of the obvious two... Lest we forget CNN.




But seriously...Ladies and gentlemen...the comedy stylings of ...you guessed it...CNN...




All of these networks......only have themselves to blame or looking foolish. I could fill up several pages of this post with more videos...let`s hope this is enough.

BTW man, I am not trying to prove you wrong, and I am a level 2 Technician for the largest ISP covering the US and Canada...but I don`t think of myself as smart, many more that I have observed to be smarter than me...I just live, observe and ride the waves of life, and I am not trying to prove you wrong or anything. I think that someone claiming they are smart, is either a self appointed statement, to ascend themselves above others, or those who have agreed that they're smart...were impressed by the confidence of the person, or the dictionary `word of the day`.

I don't think I am smart, I really don't care. As smart as the smartest guy who ever lived... I will end up just as he did...dead!
But, I have observed that both sides of this political fence is playing the American people, exploiting our wants and needs...while pitting us against one another, by using the one serious thing on the TV that can manipulate our way of thought NEWS!...So long as we have either an enemy or a competitor, we will try to prove who is smarter, even though WE OURSELVES will really never be anything in life....because they have stolen it all.

They exploit our pride in self, arrogance and intelligence, but laugh at us as we fight each other. Hence, they think they are smarter than us, and we are there puppets. Its easy to turn one against another..this divide and conquer... plebians in corporate offices do this. its the oldest trick in the book...but the most effective. its only when people start to think for themselves...Repub and democrats be damned...that they will then know the real truth.

You`re a smart guy. I want you and I to be friends on here. It would be my honor.

edit on 30-5-2015 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 11:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician

Wow, she would irritate me to no end. I would have just come right out and said...SHUT YOUR MOUTH ALREADY SO A BROTHA CAN TALK!


I know, right?? Damn, she just kept saying the same thing over and over with that damn voice of hers. It's like the sound of an almost dead banshee with a cold. "But so and so wants a job.....".."Bla bla mhaaaa...." Listen to the noise coming out of my face hole....."Jobs jobs jobs"....

Everything she says has no substance to it either. It's just words next to each other that sound almost like she's saying something but there is nothing there.

Bernie on the other hand comes right out with it, "Yeah I'll take the money from here....stick it here, raise this tax, trash this, and walla. Jobs and stuff, mutha suckas. Now, leave me alone I got work to do!!"

Bernie is one of those guys who's at the age where he doesn't have time for more BS. He doesn't care about what the polls say or what some lobbyist wants. He's there to fix some broke ass sh*t in Government before he kicks it off this rock and leaves his family to live within it.


Exactly! She was trying to ram home those `pivotal points` as she was instructed, by her constituents from her caucus...thus, had no real debatable content, as you so adroitly pointed out. All she could do is keep spitting out the same old tired lines,...in hopes that the opposition would not hear his words. Which is odd, because women don't usually cut a man off like that, or talk while something important is happening. This must have just been a `one off` .......ha ha.
edit on 30-5-2015 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic


I ran across this article on and it shows me just how desperately afraid the is of ...


We can litreally play fill-in-the-blank for all eternity, these news agencies have perfected the art of chicanery. None of them cares which candidate wins, the government (their boss) wins regardless.

I don't care which ruler your cage-handlers pretend to let you choose, the results will always be the same.

The state will grow in power and human freedom will continue to dwindle.



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 12:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic


I don't know about you, but I think it's about time this country is run to meet the needs of its people, rather than have them starving in the streets while the 1% decide which yacht to take out today...


Sounds like you need some Rothbard in your diet.

I'm all for obliterating the buddy system between corporations and government, but I'm all for obliterating government altogether, too.

The state is illegitimate.



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Freedom to eat is also a right and to make a decent living and have health care



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell


Freedom to eat is also a right and to make a decent living and have health care


Allow me to save you the trouble of wasted ad hominems: I am a monster, therefore, nothing I say can be true or valid.

Anyway, continuing on...

The phrase "humans have a right to healthcare" is a loaded statement. On the surface it sounds great to any empathetic human being, I mean, it sounds like you are concerned for your fellow man--but there is an issue.

All rights come from natural law, meaning, humans have rights that can be deduced from the natural functions of the human organism.

Like, say, our ability to formulate and communicate thought. It is a natural ability that we are inherently born with--thought and the means to communicate thought.

I can start an online blog and communicate all of my ideas freely. The inherent ability and action of my thinking and communicating requires no action on the part of another--meaning, my ability to formulate thoughts and communicate them is not dependent upon someone else to come to fruition--these are abilities I have according to my nature.

You see, I have freedom of speech by virtue of being sentient, I was born with that freedom and it will forever remain mine.

I wasn't born with the knowledge of medicine, through my labor, though, I could learn medicine and become a doctor.

If I get sick, since I do not have any knowledge of medicine, I have to go to someone who labored to get that knowledge to seek a cure. That person, the doctor, has to work to help me get better. His application of the knowledge of medicine is labor.

So, there is an issue here. I have no natural right claim to the doctor's labor.

Because, if it were true that I have a right to healthcare, then it would be moral in this instance to force the doctor with the threat of violence (because rights can morally be defended with violence) to cure me without payment. I have a right to his labor.

So, when you say you have the right to free healthcare, what you are actually saying is that you have the right to force another human being to labor on your behalf with zero exchange in value...basically, you support human slavery.

But, you are not going to be forcefully conscripting doctors to work for you for free. No, that would be too obvious. Instead, you can rob your neighbors to pay for the services that you require.

Those are your options. Human slavery, or state-sanctioned theft.


ETA: The same logic can be applied to your other claims about food and a "decent wage."

If someone has to plant, tend, harvest, ship, manufacture and package "food," then you are claiming that you have a right to that person's labor.

Labor is very, very important--labor is the natural law basis for deducing ownership.

Like, if you were to go hunting out in the forest, and through your labor were able to fell a deer, then by your labor--you are the rightful owner of the deer and can make the choice to use it as food. No one has the moral right to take it from you, it was your labor that transformed the deer.

Being the owner of the deer, though, you do have the right to exchange it for a good or service that, to you, is equal in value.

Everything has to be done on the basis of voluntary human interaction and equivalent exchange. But your premise of having a "right" to healthcare or "food" implies a right to the labor of another human being.

Forced labor is slavery.
edit on 31-5-2015 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 01:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

Those are your options. Human slavery, or state-sanctioned theft.


Or a third option which is "willful participation". That is something we do already all the time which creates and sustains our society from which we all not only survive but thrive. With option three each of us pitches in according to our ability or means which keeps costs to a minimum and we all gain from it. Nobody is forced into slavery nor forced into anything.

Your two choices then are to join society or to live completely on your own.



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 01:29 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

"Willful participation".

Like the "willful participation" of mandatory insurance?



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 01:34 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Did I say Mandatory Insurance??? No.



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 01:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
a reply to: Willtell


Freedom to eat is also a right and to make a decent living and have health care


Allow me to save you the trouble of wasted ad hominems: I am a monster, therefore, nothing I say can be true or valid.

Anyway, continuing on...

The phrase "humans have a right to healthcare" is a loaded statement. On the surface it sounds great to any empathetic human being, I mean, it sounds like you are concerned for your fellow man--but there is an issue.

All rights come from natural law, meaning, humans have rights that can be deduced from the natural functions of the human organism.

Like, say, our ability to formulate and communicate thought. It is a natural ability that we are inherently born with--thought and the means to communicate thought.

I can start an online blog and communicate all of my ideas freely. The inherent ability and action of my thinking and communicating requires no action on the part of another--meaning, my ability to formulate thoughts and communicate them is not dependent upon someone else to come to fruition--these are abilities I have according to my nature.

You see, I have freedom of speech by virtue of being sentient, I was born with that freedom and it will forever remain mine.

I wasn't born with the knowledge of medicine, through my labor, though, I could learn medicine and become a doctor.

If I get sick, since I do not have any knowledge of medicine, I have to go to someone who labored to get that knowledge to seek a cure. That person, the doctor, has to work to help me get better. His application of the knowledge of medicine is labor.

So, there is an issue here. I have no natural right claim to the doctor's labor.

Because, if it were true that I have a right to healthcare, then it would be moral in this instance to force the doctor with the threat of violence (because rights can morally be defended with violence) to cure me without payment. I have a right to his labor.

So, when you say you have the right to free healthcare, what you are actually saying is that you have the right to force another human being to labor on your behalf with zero exchange in value...basically, you support human slavery.

But, you are not going to be forcefully conscripting doctors to work for you for free. No, that would be too obvious. Instead, you can rob your neighbors to pay for the services that you require.

Those are your options. Human slavery, or state-sanctioned theft.


ETA: The same logic can be applied to your other claims about food and a "decent wage."

If someone has to plant, tend, harvest, ship, manufacture and package "food," then you are claiming that you have a right to that person's labor.

Labor is very, very important--labor is the natural law basis for deducing ownership.

Like, if you were to go hunting out in the forest, and through your labor were able to fell a deer, then by your labor--you are the rightful owner of the deer and can make the choice to use it as food. No one has the moral right to take it from you, it was your labor that transformed the deer.

Being the owner of the deer, though, you do have the right to exchange it for a good or service that, to you, is equal in value.

Everything has to be done on the basis of voluntary human interaction and equivalent exchange. But your premise of having a "right" to healthcare or "food" implies a right to the labor of another human being.

Forced labor is slavery.



To your first point:

I think your forgetting your education, in which that hypothetical blog would be enhanced by such education. Such education required a vast amount of energy from others.

Without that such a blog might be littered with illiteracy

You may have fallen into too linear a thought path.


To your second more extensive point:

First, there is no statement in my post about “free” health care


I said right to health care

Nothing is free I understand.



To counter your next point I have to refer to some of the logic of first argument.

That is that your idea of “natural freedoms” doesn’t take into account the philosophical and sociological evolution of what science calls: complexity


Indeed, complexity has evolved regarding human relationships where a human, mostly, is an integral part of a societal unit and there is the give and take of a relationship of mutual concern and a balance between the community and the individual that is the basic forming of this complexity.


So we have evolved to respect the freedom, or as you might say natural freedoms of the individual only to a point: one can’t yell fire in movie theater.

One can’t not educate their children


One can’t refuse their children medical care even if one's religious precepts forbid it.


So understood is that freedom, like anything, is NOT an absolute


Finally, in a society of complex interrelationships the society has arrogated certain rights to the whole and reserved relative and reasonable rights for the individual as long as they don’t infringe on the vital interests of the whole or other individuals.

Consequently, for instance, we have to have auto insurance

Therefore, I contend that in a modern complex society every human being should have access to adequate health care.

If the market can’t provide that and modern health care infrastructures obviously cannot, then the society has an obligation to provide the means for the whole and the individual
by the very constitution


edit on 31-5-2015 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2015 @ 01:40 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm


Or a third option which is "willful participation". That is something we do already all the time which creates and sustains our society from which we all not only survive but thrive. With option three each of us pitches in according to our ability or means which keeps costs to a minimum and we all gain from it. Nobody is forced into slavery nor forced into anything.

Your two choices then are to join society or to live completely on your own.


No.

The word society is nothing more than empty rhetoric from despots bent on keeping power, like the Old Powers that lied to the people about bs like "the divine right to rule of kings" and God. There is no society, there are only individuals, and interactions between individuals. I cannot interact with "society."

It doesn't matter what you choose to call a playground bully--society, democracy, the third Reich, republican....theft is theft regardless as to who is doing the stealing.

If theft is not theft when the labor of others is demanded by society, then murder is not murder when society demands the death of just one or one million. That means that the nazis were doing societies' bidding when they killed 6 million Jews.

Remember, society is the reason gays can't get married in the United States. So, I say society can rot.

You cannot physically remove me from the geography, and I will continue evading taxes.

edit on 31-5-2015 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join