FLASHBACK: The most honorable political move in modern political history.

a reply to: introvert

And it's bickering and stereotyping like this that will keep the one party alive and strong.

You want socialism? That costs money, and you'll have to convince Republicans and Democrats to stop these failing wars abroad and domestic before we can humor such programs.

Fat chance when people view their neighbors as enemies.... We'll have to find things to agree on if you want any kind of change.

a reply to: introvert

I'm sorry, you seem to have misunderstood me. I wasn't suggesting that your opinion of me matters in the least. That said, there are plenty of good, quality Americans who voted for and support President Trump, still others who may not have voted for the man but who have loved ones and respected friends and colleagues who do. They see these hyperbolic BS insults flying around and think "Geez, that is the exact opposite of how I would classify this voter. Why are the folks on the left such asses over this? How utterly distasteful." and that distaste pours out all over the next ballot they fill out.

So, as I said, by all mean... I'm your huckleberry, please throw more crap at me. Give me what I "deserve" and for the love of God, don't hold back.

I'll crack a cold one on this, however...

Just because I'm a socialist and I believe in individual rights of all people.

These two values are in direct conflict with each other. It is impossible to believe in individual rights while embracing a political philosophy which rejects the rights of personal ownership, including of property, one's own earnings, and even the personal right to succeed or fail on your own merits. I don't think you're a deplorable person, I think you're confused and insensible.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: introvert

And it's bickering and stereotyping like this that will keep the one party alive and strong.

You want socialism? That costs money, and you'll have to convince Republicans and Democrats to stop these failing wars abroad and domestic before we can humor such programs.

Fat chance when people view their neighbors as enemies.... We'll have to find things to agree on if you want any kind of change.

I agree for the most part.

Though, I can still think my neighbor is an idiot asshole without thinking he is my enemy.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

These two values are in direct conflict with each other. It is impossible to believe in individual rights while embracing a political philosophy which rejects the rights of personal ownership, including of property, one's own earnings, and even the personal right to succeed or fail on your own merits. I don't think you're a deplorable person, I think you're confused and insensible.

I suppose you would be correct if you believe I think we need socialism to the degree in which you describe. I do not believe that whatsoever. There are different levels and ideas on how socialism could be implemented within a system that protects the rights of the individual.

This is not the 50's and 60's and the definitions of those eras do not necessarily apply to certain ideologies today.

a reply to: introvert

Kind of a bad argument because if the 50s-60s idea of socialism morphed into todays idea. That means it can morph back or sideways.

Just saying. I don't mind a little socialism.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: introvert

And it's bickering and stereotyping like this that will keep the one party alive and strong.

You want socialism? That costs money, and you'll have to convince Republicans and Democrats to stop these failing wars abroad and domestic before we can humor such programs.

Fat chance when people view their neighbors as enemies.... We'll have to find things to agree on if you want any kind of change.

I agree for the most part.

Though, I can still think my neighbor is an idiot asshole without thinking he is my enemy.

There are people in my own family I feel that way about.

But at the end of the day some may view me as an asshole for dismissing "their opinions" shall they be part of a mainstream party. In my mind it's all a distraction.

I've lived in the Bible belt along with progressive communities. At the end of the day it's all perspective and perception.

Assholes tend to show up in the same density in any given demographic. I'd be hard pressed to find any ideology is truly better than another. All are flawed, but they usually have a different approach to the same ideals.

This country is to big to have a blanket system that works for everyone. If you go into small concervative communities in the south, they tend to take care of each other in a different way than cities.

If we're to be open minded, we must recognize that diversity is the strength of this nation and quite literally what formed it.

I see to much recently that people only want a like minded country to their own ideals.

Ideology can be as poisoned and as deadly as any drug or weapon. We cannot forget ideology has killed more humans than almost anything else... Maybe more.

originally posted by: introvert
I suppose you would be correct if you believe I think we need socialism to the degree in which you describe. I do not believe that whatsoever. There are different levels and ideas on how socialism could be implemented within a system that protects the rights of the individual.

This is not the 50's and 60's and the definitions of those eras do not necessarily apply to certain ideologies today.

There is absolutely no form of socialism which doesn't predicate itself on some manner of taking earnings and the right to succeed or fail on your own merits away from one group to redistribute to a different group alongside threats of force to ensure compliance. If you happen to know of some manner of socialism which doesn't involve that, then please, educate us and share your insight.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: introvert
I suppose you would be correct if you believe I think we need socialism to the degree in which you describe. I do not believe that whatsoever. There are different levels and ideas on how socialism could be implemented within a system that protects the rights of the individual.

This is not the 50's and 60's and the definitions of those eras do not necessarily apply to certain ideologies today.

There is absolutely no form of socialism which doesn't predicate itself on some manner of taking earnings and the right to succeed or fail on your own merits away from one group to redistribute to a different group alongside threats of force to ensure compliance. If you happen to know of some manner of socialism which doesn't involve that, then please, educate us and share your insight.

Just to play devils advocate.... Doesn't the US exercise corporate socialism in some regards? Subsidizing certain industries/companies that the market wouldn't otherwise support? Banking and the war machine come to mind.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

Im shocked you are confusing justice for hate.

Well, you obviously don't know what Trump really is, so how would you know what real justice is?

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

Im shocked you are confusing justice for hate.

Well, you obviously don't know what Trump really is, so how would you know what real justice is?

Congrats. That is among the most loosely associated items strung into failed logic that i've read so far this year.

Shoulda just went with "Im rubber and your glue".

a reply to: burdman30ott6

No one had a problem with the invasion to begin with. Bush lied about WMDs and did a masterful job of doing a Muslim shell game that pretended Iraq and Afghanistan were both responsible for 911..

In the beginning they had me duped as well...


The problem came once the war started to turned out bad.. once we realized we couldn’t just have elections and check out and that domestic/foreign terrorists were flooding the region and turning all the civilian deaths into recruitment tools.

THEN HE GAVE THE REBUILD CONTRACT TO HOS OWN PRIVATE COMPANY..


On what planet does Obamacare touch that????

In what reality is that the bigger sin?!?!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

A) did this 20 years predate ATS???

B) since ATS , did you ever accuse a rep. For misagony againt a dem???

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
On what planet does Obamacare touch that????

In what reality is that the bigger sin?!?!

My point on entering the war was that the lies weren't needed. Had Bush gone on TV and said "I'm going to finish what my old man started. People of Iraq, the shelling will commence now and will not stop until Saddam's head is presented to the US on a steel pike." I'd have said "Hell yeah" and been perfectly fine with it all. Unfortunately, Bush ran a fool's errand of appeasement, which never goes well.

Obamacare directly hosed those of us who had existing satisfactory insurance plans. Absolutely hosed us. The Iraq war did not magically create a system whereby I was being forced to pay 3, 4, 5+ times as much on each paycheck for 1/10th the benefit. Iraq cost the US around $2 Trillion. Not cheap, but it was an overall budget item (which could have and should have been 100% taken care of through the US claiming spoils of the war, but that's for another discussion.) Not one American magically saw their taxes increase by hundreds of dollars a month only to then reach tax day and learn "Oh hell, you also are on the hook for an $8,000 deductable now. Pay up!"

Obamacare is a bigger sin because it directly cost me money, the Iraq war didn't.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

There is absolutely no form of socialism which doesn't predicate itself on some manner of taking earnings and the right to succeed or fail on your own merits away from one group to redistribute to a different group alongside threats of force to ensure compliance.

Let me just say that you bring up a very good point that I think needs to be discussed openly. It is only by having those discussions that we can learn more about what we each believe and give ourselves the opportunity to dispel conflations and assumptions. Both of which I believe you are doing here.

I would be glad to engage in such a discussion, but I fear that it is way off topic.

Perhaps you could start a thread? Too bad the debate forums are shut down.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

THEN HE GAVE THE REBUILD CONTRACT TO HOS OWN PRIVATE COMPANY..


On what planet does Obamacare touch that????

In what reality is that the bigger sin?!?!

I assume you're talking about Haliburton. That would be the company Cheyney was formerly a CEO of. Not to take away from the corruption tied to a no bid contract of that size... And I'm sure Cheyney's stock options did well after.

As for how Obama could compare to that sin... He continued Bush's foreign policy. The two were friends and he went for advice to Bush many times and even bombed five more countries than him.

If Iraq was a crime, what is Libya?

Look and see how many similar campaign donors they had.

This all goes back to the OP, most of the honorable politicians never got elected because they couldn't be bought.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Oh look, one of the videos proving John McCain was part of a rigged election...

McCain ran that campaign like a man who had zero intention of winning the vote. That's not honorable, that's called being a shill and very, very few modern politicians have made as successful a career out of whoring themselves to the opposition than John Sydney McCain.

DING DING DING

Yep. GOP could have trounced Obama with Ron Paul, instead the entire RNC+MSM+DNC apparatus came down on Ron like a ton of bricks, all to run Dubya 2.0 McCain and the kooky chick from Canadia against the Messiah Cometh. Then after handing Obama the election, all so he could torpedo our society with race baiting etc McCain turns Obama's "whip" in the GOP Senate in getting America to accept Al Qaeda as our new ally in the Axis of Evil they set in motion to further implode the Middle East.

And all are to be revered, the biggest traitors in US history.

Here's the real FLASHBACK:

a reply to: JoshuaCox


Honorable? Nope, Senator Songbird was just trying to distance himself from the "Conspiracy Nutz" and "Right-wing Racists". That's all.

Second point, He doesn't know a thing about politics, all he knows is being an opportunist and braggart. I spent some time in DC a long time ago, and my personal interactions with Mcmouth was him saying anything to get the hand shake while not giving a crap about what was being done. I really don't know why he gets re-elected.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: MotherMayEye

A) did this 20 years predate ATS???

B) since ATS , did you ever accuse a rep. For misagony againt a dem???

You can't even spell misogyny and you should be embarrassed for having a partisan litmus test.

This is what you are really looking for (before you, as the *Decider* will accept that I am *allowed* to have an opinion on misogyny, as a woman): Link

I don't make it habitual to complain about sexism & misogyny...it's not a popular or well-received topic on ATS.

But when I do -- I mean it. And it's legitimate despite your pathetic, meaningless partisan litmus test.

***

ETA: And, yes, I was a registered Democrat from 1989 to 2008. It predated ATS. Since 2008, I have been registered as 'Unaffiliated.' I have NEVER been registered as a Republican. But, let me guess...you still qualify me as a 'republican' or 'conservative,' in your mind. *eyeroll*

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Actually my point was exactly that.. that you don’t make it a habit to point out misogyny.. in fact you never do..

In fact you quite often call such claims ridiculous and give them no credibility at all..

unless you can come up with a way to point it at someone you deem left wing..

Then all the sudden misogyny is a dire problem that should be addressed
..



Be consistent.. if it is ridiculous to try handing out misogyny cookies like they are candy. Then is is ridiculous no matter who you are doing it at..


If misogyny is some dire problem that infests every crack of our society so even the smallest connection is worth pointing out.. then point it out all the time..


What’s hypothetical is spouting out VERY thin misogyny alegations at your political opponents then pretending like PC culture has run amok 5 min later..


Why people ever think..
“ well they did it and it was ridiculous. So now I’m doing it even though it’s ridiculous.. but then I’m still gonna try and pretend I know it is all ridiculous..”

a reply to: MotherMayEye

See I think all the 20 year old allegations of “he grabbed my butt without asking” are ridiculous..

So the ones aimed at al Franken are ridiculous AND the ones aimed at Trump are ridiculous..


Because I’m consistent..

Imho if there is no threat of physical harm, refusing to take no for an answer or retaliation if refused.. it is not sexual assault..


It is an awkward moment after someone hits on you but you are not interested...

.