Liberals you own part of yesterday’s tragedies .

a reply to: Fallingdown

You make blanket statements in your op about how *liberals * are evil and belittle conservatives constantly and he makes blanket statements saying the left are good people. You both make blanket statements yours actually enflame and belittle and he puts liberals in a good light, yet you take it upon yourself to tell him how he's wrong because he doesn't know every liberal... Do you know every liberal belittle or demean the same way he doesn't know if all liberals are good people?


The irony is maddening.

And you really want to talk about what people say, and how people belittle people can affect them? Look at trumps Twitter... Any of these you most likely supported sound familiar? "the democrats are the enemies of the people, the media are the enemies of the people, the dems hate democracy, if you knock him out ill pay for the lawyers etc etc...
Are those enflaming words?

Now all of a sudden you care about how words affect people? I thought conservatives don't think "words affect people and neo nazis should be able to say anything they want"


Did your old account get banned

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: rickymouse
The progressives are firing up people with all the bickering. It is leading to civil unrest and causing some loose cannons to come unglued.

Does trump and his racist tweets share any of the blame. Did you read Patrick Crusius manifesto? It echos trumps ideology. Could it be that's why he got all fired up and killed those 20 people and wonded 26?

www.nytimes.com...

why didn't more of Trump's supporters go on a killing spree yesterday? Most of them have guns?

could there be more to it than just owning guns and supporting Trump?

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: rickymouse
The progressives are firing up people with all the bickering. It is leading to civil unrest and causing some loose cannons to come unglued.

Does trump and his racist tweets share any of the blame. Did you read Patrick Crusius manifesto? It echos trumps ideology. Could it be that's why he got all fired up and killed those 20 people and wonded 26?

www.nytimes.com...

I don't think it's these people echoing Trump - you've got it flipped. Trump is echoing the people. Haven't you figured that out by now!!!

I woke up and read an article that said the Ohio shooter was an Elizabeth Warren supporter. His twitter account had been suspended. “@iamthespookster,” identified as a “leftist,” according to the Twitter profile.

I thought this was what the OP was referring to.

So Trump was blamed for the shootings at first. Should we now blame Elizabeth Warren for "her" shooting.


That would be ridiculous. There are other forces at work.

1. Hate is rampant and is being tossed around like candy by both sides. If you don't believe me just watch the 2020 Dem debates, they are rage filled rants, full of hate, yelling, anger, finger wagging.

2. We are encouraged by media, Hollywood, the news to hate each other. CNN, MSNBC encourage people to hate conservatives and white people by the labels they pass out. Just as people say FOX encourages hate for liberals. Young people believe what they hear on TV and tend to not view what media and Hollywood preach with a critical eye. So they soak in the rage, the anger at those who think differently than they do and believe it is completely justified.


3. Realistic video games teach people that the mass killings of humans is just a game. This is exactly how the military teaches and desensitizes soldiers to kill. It works on civilians too.

4. The USA has lost it's moral compass. There is no longer a common moral ground in the US. Morals are in flux daily, traditional values are ridiculed as outdated and irrelevant. People who have a strong faith that believes in the commands of their God, like "Do not kill" are called terrorists and a danger to the nation.

5. We have raised children who feel entitled and who have been pampered to believe their feelings and what they want are the most important things in life. We have raised them to believe that hurt feelings justify rage, anger, and retaliation.

There is absolutely no way any sane person (right or left) can deny that everyone, both left AND right are part of the problem we have in society today.

If one side thinks they share zero blame / responsibility for our society today they are simply and clinically DELUSIONAL! AND, THEY are the problem!

Period!

a reply to: olaru12

Did you read this AM that the Ohio shooter “@iamthespookster,” identified as a “leftist,” according to the Twitter profile. The Ohio shooter was also an Elizabeth Warren supporter.

So does that make the Ohio shooting the responsibility of Elizabeth Warren and the Democratic Party? According to your logic it does. You say Trump is responsible for the shootings, now we have "proof" that the Ohio shooting was the fault of Elizabeth Warren, according to your logic. See how this sounds? Do you believe that Warren and the Democrats are responsible for the Ohio shooting?

I believe the ugly hate spewed regularly by the media, Hollywood, the progressives, the liberals, the Dem debates, as well as right wing conservatives are to blame. Hate is in the air on both sides, and encouraged by both sides. Both sides need to take responsibility.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

There is absolutely no way any sane person (right or left) can deny that everyone, both left AND right are part of the problem we have in society today.

Very true sir.

Hell, we can even add the people who don't participate in voting or keeping up with current events but still want to point the finger at one side or both.

Truth be told, I think America is going through an accountability problem. Many want to ignore personal responsibility and pretend some bogyman is creating everyone's woes.

I thought it was the left who were the snowflakes?
It’s a stretch to blame the right for those mass shootings. It’s even a bigger stretch to blame the left.

a reply to: Secretrooster

Not really, as the Ohio shooter has been identified as a progressive, leftist, Elizabeth Warren supporter. Check out my previous replies above.

It is not a stretch at all to blame the left as much as the right is blamed.

I'll save you the search and repost what I wrote here.

I woke up and read an article that said the Ohio shooter was an Elizabeth Warren supporter. His twitter account had been suspended. “@iamthespookster,” identified as a “leftist,” according to the Twitter profile. I thought this was what the OP was referring to.

So Trump was blamed for the shootings at first. Should we now blame Elizabeth Warren for "her" shooting. That would be ridiculous.

There are other forces at work.
1. Hate is rampant and is being tossed around like candy by both sides. If you don't believe me just watch the 2020 Dem debates, they are rage filled rants, full of hate, yelling, anger, finger wagging.
2. We are encouraged by media, Hollywood, the news to hate each other. CNN, MSNBC encourage people to hate conservatives and white people by the labels they pass out. Just as people say FOX encourages hate for liberals. Young people believe what they hear on TV and tend to not view what media and Hollywood preach with a critical eye. So they soak in the rage, the anger at those who think differently than they do and believe it is completely justified.
3. Realistic video games teach people that the mass killings of humans is just a game. This is exactly how the military teaches and desensitizes soldiers to kill. It works on civilians too.
4. The USA has lost it's moral compass. There is no longer a common moral ground in the US. Morals are in flux daily, traditional values are ridiculed as outdated and irrelevant. People who have a strong faith that believes in the commands of their God, like "Do not kill" are called terrorists and a danger to the nation.
5. We have raised children who feel entitled and who have been pampered to believe their feelings and what they want are the most important things in life. We have raised them to believe that hurt feelings justify rage, anger, and retaliation.

.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: chr0naut

Because health care is not a right, not as they are understood under the COTUS.

Health care is a service that must be provided to you by another person. You do not have a right to someone else's labor. If you want to protect everyone's liberty, then you cannot grant others the right to the fruits of your labor like that, not even if you are a medical professional.

We once had a time when we believed in this country that we did have that right to the fruits of other people's labors, you even snidely referred to it to degrade our COTUS. Yep, that was called slavery. We fought one of the bloodiest wars in history over it.

Now, I can't help it if you like some forms of slavery and not others, but in order to ensure equal rights under the law, if you do not have the right to the fruits of another person's labor, then it does mean you don't have the right to demand a medical professional provide health care to you because that service is not a right.

So, you equate health care with slavery and claim that in the 21st Century, one of the wealthiest countries in the world cannot take some of its enormous and obviously wasted, misappropriated and misspent military budget and fully subsidize health care?

You see, it isn't slavery if you get paid, and paid well, for your labor.

It is also prudent, in this day and age, for governments to negotiate the pricing of medical services and pharmaceuticals, to keep prices reasonable. I believe that the US is the ONLY country in the world who allow companies to raise the prices of essential medicines thousands of percent, and way above production costs, just because they have no competitor. That is not 'liberty' it is plain bad governance.

Also, insurance is not health care. It is only a very tiny and barely related part of the entire health management picture but the way that the US media and government talk about it, you'd think it IS healthcare. Let me be clear, you could fully subsidize medicine and then entirely cut out insurance and still provide the highest quality healthcare. The US focus on a payment method alone is preventing proper governance.

Equal recourse to the law is a human right yet that doesn't make the judiciary slaves. Your suggestion that people become slaves if they provide a service that is mandated as a human right, is clearly not correct. Are Amnesty International, the UN and other human rights organizations, slaves?

The withholding of a human right from a population is not a freedom. In the 21st Century, quality health care IS a human right.

Health is a fundamental human right - World Health Organization Director General

originally posted by: olaru12
Does trump and his racist tweets share any of the blame.

Yes, absolutely... oh, wait, he is about as far from a racist as you can get, and has never tweeted anything even remotely racist.

So... objection: ass-u-me-s facts not in evidence.

Did you read Patrick Crusius manifesto?

Couldn't find it online, only references to it...

It echos trumps ideology.

Ummm... no, it doesn't, and I don't have to read it to say that with certainty.

Could it be that's why he got all fired up and killed those 20 people and wonded 26?

I say he did this because he is a whack job, probably on anti-whatever drugs during school.

So much wrong with this post...

originally posted by: chr0naut
So, you equate health care with slavery and claim that in the 21st Century, one of the wealthiest countries in the world cannot take some of its enormous and obviously wasted, misappropriated and misspent military budget and fully subsidize health care?

You see, it isn't slavery if you get paid, and paid well, for your labor.

It is a form of (hidden) slavery to force someone else to pay for your health care.

Where do you think the money for that military budget came from?

It is also prudent, in this day and age, for governments to negotiate the pricing of medical services and pharmaceuticals, to keep prices reasonable.

Yeah, that sounds really smart and all - until you realize that, contrary to the presumption, the exact opposite is actually true.

When governments get involved, prices always go up, and quality of service always goes down.

I believe that the US is the ONLY country in the world who allow companies to raise the prices of essential medicines thousands of percent, and way above production costs, just because they have no competitor. That is not 'liberty' it is plain bad governance.

When it comes to pharmaceuticals, my problem is with the way they are marketed, the monopolistic way they are controlled by the FDA, and most importantly, the fact that, in most cases, they do far more harm than good.

Also, insurance is not health care.

I agree. All I want/need is coverage for catastrophic cases... accidents, etc.

Equal recourse to the law is a human right yet that doesn't make the judiciary slaves. Your suggestion that people become slaves if they provide a service that is mandated as a human right, is clearly not correct. Are Amnesty International, the UN and other human rights organizations, slaves?

??? another false presumption.

If you steal (take) money from one person, to give to another - that is, in essence, making the one you are stealing from, a slave to the recipient.

The cases you describe above are voluntary interactions, not coerced at gunpoint.

The withholding of a human right from a population is not a freedom. In the 21st Century, quality health care IS a human right.

No, it isn't, and no amount of spew-mouthing from unelected talking heads makes it so.

a reply to: olaru12

Are you talking about the factual tweets that President Trump posted that had nothing to do with race and everything to do with sub par living conditions which are a result of a horribly mismanaged Frm run city and were misconstrued/spun by the left and their "media" pundits into a full blown racist attack?

No.. I wouldn't place any blame on Trump....if anyone is to blame or be held responsible it is the Dems and the left wing media for spinning it to meet their divisive agenda...how are some people so blind? You were gifted with freedom of thought...use it..too many people these days dont think for themselves..
But then...i do understand the amount of conditioning they have been put through as weak minded individuals to just follow and do as told.SHEEPLE!

a reply to: Peeple

Personally I consider it quite dangerous to construct a personal view of reality with such a broad brush.

I guess the dangerous personal broad view you’re referring is my position that more than one party is at fault in these shootings ?

Really ?

a reply to: odzeandennz

No not banned.

There’s one thing I noticed in just about every reply to me . It start’s off with an attack at credibility and most include a psychoanalysis .

A cheap sad way to try and deflect and incite the OP .

Then that group purposefully misrepresents that I am only talking about the left .

Here you go direct and to the point. A question formed from my position .

Can you give me an answer ?

Then we can move on.

Does more than one side of the narrative shoulder some blame for this violence ?

Yes or no ?

originally posted by: tanstaafl
So much wrong with this post...

originally posted by: chr0naut
So, you equate health care with slavery and claim that in the 21st Century, one of the wealthiest countries in the world cannot take some of its enormous and obviously wasted, misappropriated and misspent military budget and fully subsidize health care?

You see, it isn't slavery if you get paid, and paid well, for your labor.

It is a form of (hidden) slavery to force someone else to pay for your health care.

Where do you think the money for that military budget came from?

The military budget comes from the pool of public money that is raised through taxation. It is public money that is arguably going to end up in private (governmental) hands. That public money from many, is redistributed to a far smaller number of recipients. Why aren't you outraged at the injustice and concentration of wealth that is represented by the military budget?

The use of public money for the direct benefit of the public isn't slavery. Every citizen will require medical support, many times, during their lifetimes. It is prudent to use economies of scale to ensure that no-one is left without care when it is necessary.

It is also prudent, in this day and age, for governments to negotiate the pricing of medical services and pharmaceuticals, to keep prices reasonable.

Yeah, that sounds really smart and all - until you realize that, contrary to the presumption, the exact opposite is actually true.

Really?

The true story of America’s sky-high prescription drug prices - Vox

When governments get involved, prices always go up, and quality of service always goes down.

Again, no. Look at the prices and quality of medicine in Canada, Australia, Britain, Switzerland or New Zealand.

Also, you don't need some gold-plated, best that is ever available, medicine. You just need medicine that works.

I believe that the US is the ONLY country in the world who allow companies to raise the prices of essential medicines thousands of percent, and way above production costs, just because they have no competitor. That is not 'liberty' it is plain bad governance.

When it comes to pharmaceuticals, my problem is with the way they are marketed, the monopolistic way they are controlled by the FDA, and most importantly, the fact that, in most cases, they do far more harm than good.

Also, insurance is not health care.

I agree. All I want/need is coverage for catastrophic cases... accidents, etc.

Equal recourse to the law is a human right yet that doesn't make the judiciary slaves. Your suggestion that people become slaves if they provide a service that is mandated as a human right, is clearly not correct. Are Amnesty International, the UN and other human rights organizations, slaves?

??? another false presumption.

If you steal (take) money from one person, to give to another - that is, in essence, making the one you are stealing from, a slave to the recipient.

The cases you describe above are voluntary interactions, not coerced at gunpoint.

It is public money being used to do public good. Very few people have NO NEED of health care or medicine. The general public have a genuine need and there are even actuarial tables that describe the average frequency and cost of health care by population and other factors. It is a known. If things start to diverge from the expected, you can be sure that there is something wrong with the system and you can intervene to fix it. Other countries do, and have done, that.

The withholding of a human right from a population is not a freedom. In the 21st Century, quality health care IS a human right.

No, it isn't, and no amount of spew-mouthing from unelected talking heads makes it so.

I was talking about health care, whether someone was elected by absolute majority, is beside the actual point.

a reply to: Fallingdown

No it's this

originally posted by: Fallingdown


The right wings main focus is to protect what we have. Constitution, religion and implied rights. We generally don’t organize, get loud or go on the offensive.

The left wings main focus is us and the things we stand for. They organize, get loud , go on the offensive over anything and sometimes over nothing.

Which kind of makes the Republican Party the quiet married man living in the same house ( The US) with an overbearing wife (liberals) who has been nagging him...

Not everybody on the right is one and the same as well as not every one on the left is one person.
It's not just you who does this and it makes it harder to discuss. I'm not "the left" and if we could go back to everybody speaking and thinking for themselves that would be a dream come true.
Or do I have to refer to you as Mr.Spencer, because he is part of the right so I assume he is you somehow too?
See how that doesn't work?

originally posted by: chr0naut
The military budget comes from the pool of public money that is raised through taxation. It is public money that is arguably going to end up in private (governmental) hands. That public money from many, is redistributed to a far smaller number of recipients.

I understand that far better than you realize.

Why aren't you outraged at the injustice and concentration of wealth that is represented by the military budget?

Apples and orangutans.

The support of the military is a Constitutional use of tax revenue.

There is no Constitutional authorization for money to be taken from me, to be given to you (or anyone else) to pay your healthcare costs. PERIOD.

The use of public money for the direct benefit of the public isn't slavery. Every citizen will require medical support, many times, during their lifetimes. It is prudent to use economies of scale to ensure that no-one is left without care when it is necessary.

We got by without government funded healthcare for a long time in this country.

Again - there is no Constitutional authorization for such a use of the public treasury.

" "It is also prudent, in this day and age, for governments to negotiate the pricing of medical services and pharmaceuticals, to keep prices reasonable."

Yeah, that sounds really smart and all - until you realize that, contrary to the presumption, the exact opposite is actually true."

Really?

Yes, really.

Vox is not a legitimate source of truth, and there are far too many inaccuracies in that 'story' to debunk.

The first one that jumped out at me is the reference to the FDA only allowing drugs that have proven to be safe on the market. This is a lie. How many times have drugs been pulled from the market long after they were allowed to be sold, after discovering they were killing people left and right?

"When governments get involved, prices always go up, and quality of service always goes down."

Again, no. Look at the prices and quality of medicine in Canada, Australia, Britain, Switzerland or New Zealand.

Yes - and look at the taxation rates in those countries. The People pay for it, one way or another.

It is public money being used to do public good.

You (and lots of people) have a huge misunderstanding of what words like 'the public good' actually mean, in context of our Constitutional form of government.

Paying for a military is a good example of tax revenues being used for 'the public good'. Why? Because every single person in the country, benefits from it.

Giving money (whether directly, or in the form of some kind of 'benefit') to a small subset of the general population, is not an example of the public good, because only a small number of people benefit from it (those directly getting the money or benefit).

This (likely fictional) story from a biography if Davy Crockett is the best text I've ever found that explains just how and why stealing from one to give to another is not only wrong, it is evil when done at gunpoint through the use of government force.

" "The withholding of a human right from a population is not a freedom. In the 21st Century, quality health care IS a human right."

No, it isn't, and no amount of spew-mouthing from unelected talking heads makes it so."

I was talking about health care, whether someone was elected by absolute majority, is beside the actual point.

I know that - are you incapable of reading with comprehension?

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
The military budget comes from the pool of public money that is raised through taxation. It is public money that is arguably going to end up in private (governmental) hands. That public money from many, is redistributed to a far smaller number of recipients.

I understand that far better than you realize.

Why aren't you outraged at the injustice and concentration of wealth that is represented by the military budget?

Apples and orangutans.

The support of the military is a Constitutional use of tax revenue.

There is no Constitutional authorization for money to be taken from me, to be given to you (or anyone else) to pay your healthcare costs. PERIOD.

It isn't taking money away from the public, though. There are so many correlations between homelessness, drug abuse, crime and psychological issues. Consider that 70% of the incarcerated population have had a head injury bad enough to have them hospitalized but only 3% of the general population has had such an injury. Poor health care cripples a society and it costs a fortune to remediate the outcomes.

The use of public money for the direct benefit of the public isn't slavery. Every citizen will require medical support, many times, during their lifetimes. It is prudent to use economies of scale to ensure that no-one is left without care when it is necessary.

We got by without government funded healthcare for a long time in this country.

That was before big-pharma and high-tech pushed costs up.

Again - there is no Constitutional authorization for such a use of the public treasury.

Yes, there are many things missing from the US Constitutional documents. They have not evolved with society as we now have capability to raise the bar on quality of life and liberty. America should not loose anything from the Constitution but they should lift the game where they reasonably can.

The Constitution grants no presumption of innocence under jurisprudence. It says nothing about pollution or environmental responsibility. It accommodates slavery. It does not give the vote to women. It is unclear about universal surveillance of the citizenry. There are many holes in the fabric of the Constitution that are now seen as rights. It makes sense to carefully add new amendments as society progresses.

" "It is also prudent, in this day and age, for governments to negotiate the pricing of medical services and pharmaceuticals, to keep prices reasonable."

Yeah, that sounds really smart and all - until you realize that, contrary to the presumption, the exact opposite is actually true."

Really?

Yes, really.

Vox is not a legitimate source of truth, and there are far too many inaccuracies in that 'story' to debunk.

The first one that jumped out at me is the reference to the FDA only allowing drugs that have proven to be safe on the market. This is a lie. How many times have drugs been pulled from the market long after they were allowed to be sold, after discovering they were killing people left and right?

The FDA decides the safety of drugs using scientific means. Sometimes, the studies are incomplete and the need for the drug's purported properties great enough to get a drug approved that is later found to be ineffective or dangerous. Consider what would happen if there were no FDA (or similar authority) to evaluate and place bans on dangerous drugs. They would simply stay on the market and the negative studies would be suppressed or ignored (unless the drug companies had the moral fiber to remove them from circulation).

"When governments get involved, prices always go up, and quality of service always goes down."

Again, no. Look at the prices and quality of medicine in Canada, Australia, Britain, Switzerland or New Zealand.

Yes - and look at the taxation rates in those countries. The People pay for it, one way or another.

The combined US state and federal taxes (50%) are greater than in Australia (47%), the UK (47%) and New Zealand (33%).

List of countries by tax rates From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is public money being used to do public good.

You (and lots of people) have a huge misunderstanding of what words like 'the public good' actually mean, in context of our Constitutional form of government.

Paying for a military is a good example of tax revenues being used for 'the public good'. Why? Because every single person in the country, benefits from it.

How did you personally benefit from the $1.06 trillion spent on the Gulf war and Iraq?

Giving money (whether directly, or in the form of some kind of 'benefit') to a small subset of the general population, is not an example of the public good, because only a small number of people benefit from it (those directly getting the money or benefit).

This (likely fictional) story from a biography if Davy Crockett is the best text I've ever found that explains just how and why stealing from one to give to another is not only wrong, it is evil when done at gunpoint through the use of government force.

" "The withholding of a human right from a population is not a freedom. In the 21st Century, quality health care IS a human right."

No, it isn't, and no amount of spew-mouthing from unelected talking heads makes it so."

I was talking about health care, whether someone was elected by absolute majority, is beside the actual point.

I know that - are you incapable of reading with comprehension?

I clearly understood what you were saying. Your suggestion that I didn't is demonstrably false and has nothing to do with the topic. It is an ad-hominem.

a reply to: Peeple

You can call me Spencer but whatever you do don’t call me Ray .

Why are we so far off topic ?

Sure I might’ve tried to add a little humor in my OP . But like I’ve said multiple times to off-topic replies. My point is the left carries some of the blame . Their incessant shaming angers people .

Yet the left and the mainstream media put it all at trumps doorstep .

Three years of constant shaming and vilification .

Trump supporters are Nazis

Trump supporters are xenophobic

Trump supporters are racist

Now to be fair the right attacks .

Liberals are gullible

Liberals either lie on purpose or they’re stupid

Liberals are being manipulated with their emotions

My point is it’s a two way street

Some mentally unstable people can’t put up with constant attacks they feel the need to fight back. I’m not saying it’s right but I’m saying it’s a fact of life . ( and it happens on both sides ) not sure about the kid in Ohio yet but the Bernie supporter that attacked the congressional softball game. Fell for the left’s rhetoric about how bad Republicans were .


The left pushes their campaign of hate mongering with control of the media and social media . Step number one on the road to fascism is create a terrifying internal enemy . That’s exactly what they’re doing .

Hell the way their labeling the right. Charles Manson looks like a Sunday school teacher .

If you had an argument with the same person every day for three years that you couldn’t avoid and had to put up with every day all day . And that person poked you in the chest with their finger every time they wanted to make a point .

Would it piss you off ?


I know the right carries some blame but again my point is so does the left.

Anyone that can’t admit something so obvious is agenda driven and dishonest. There’s no sense in even talking to them. Because all you’re are doing is wasting your breath .