Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 11:40am PT
|
Craig posted do tell
what do they keep repeating?
I've made numerous posts about it. I'm not going to bother making another. Pick any random pro-Sanders meme. They haven't changed in months.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 11:54am PT
|
At least now MILLIONS more that were not insured, ARE...
I don't give a damn about them
|
|
fear
Ice climber
hartford, ct
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 12:16pm PT
|
There's nothing wrong with helping the unfortunate by choice.
Now can we agree stealing money by first financial extortion and then at the point of a rifle would seem wrong? Then the theif takes their sizable cut, distributes it to his network of hundreds of henchmen and drops a few pennies on the unfortunate.
But if the state does that it's cool.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 12:26pm PT
|
If a Libertarian candidate is on the ballot come November who lines up with your belief system, would you vote for them?> If not, why?
As I said, there's an element of game theory here. At present, given that Clinton seems the likely Democratic candidate, my vote to keep her out of the WH is more important to me than a drop-in-the-bucket elevation of a Libertarian candidate. If I saw a shred of Libertarian momentum, that would change my assessment. But, like most Americans in this election, I'm more casting my vote "against somebody" than for anybody in particular.
I'd love there to be a minimally credible Libertarian candidate that garnered some traction, but Americans are so inured to freedom at this point (and the personal responsibility that goes with it) that Libertarianism seems to them to originate in (and belong to) some alternate universe. So, I don't see any traction happening there.
Thus, we're a two-party nation, and the Democrats have hitched their wagon to Clinton.
Trump could turn out to be a pedophile, child-murderer or something like that. All sorts of things could happen between now and November that could be game-changers. But the way things stand today, I find Trump less odious than Clinton.
There's no "lofty principle" at play here, as the party more aligned with what I take to be the key principles has no hope of traction. So, at present, my goal with my one, tiny, diluted vote is to keep Clinton out of the WH. Nothing more "principled" than that (although I do have some underlying principles that motivate how odious I find her).
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 12:28pm PT
|
short fingered vulgarian
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 12:28pm PT
|
Let them continue to get nowhere...
Projecting much?
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 12:29pm PT
|
Let them die.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 12:34pm PT
|
Ah, yes. Self reliance and personal responsibility.
An oldie but goodie:
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF JOE REPUBLICAN
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of coffee, he
takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joes employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.
If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
Its noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.
He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.
Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day.
Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 12:41pm PT
|
Nice one, Dirt
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 12:57pm PT
|
"We good?"
Far from it, Esco. You found one Half Truth.
Donald's got dozens of Pants on Fire.
Keep digging, buddy.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:00pm PT
|
After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have.
If you could prove that all these "benefits" arose strictly and entirely from left-wing liberalism, you still would not have made the critical point necessary.
When I pay taxes to support such things as roads, fire-departments, etc., I am reaping a direct benefit back to myself in the form of those very tangible goods and services I am paying taxes for.
By contrast, when I pay taxes to literally have my money taken from me and handed directly to somebody "less fortunate" (by somebody's estimation), I receive no direct benefit back to myself in the form of the very tangible goods/services I am supposedly paying for. Such "taxation" is literally just stealing from me to "give" to somebody else.
I am not opposed to taxation. But I am opposed to theft. I am opposed to the "socialism" (falsely so called) that conflates road-building with wealth-redistribution.
I am opposed to conflating all "entitlements" together, as though if I want some fraction of SSI/Medicare back that I spent my life paying into, then I must also agree with the full-blown welfare state.
I am opposed to the "less fortunate" idea that equates to dragging all income-levels down to the lowest common denominator.
I am opposed to a president and party that insists "People who have been successful and don't realize they've been lucky. That God may have blessed them; it wasn't nothing you did," as if my working until the wee hours while my employees are home enjoying themselves so that necessary things get done, well, that effort (and any resulting success) "wasn't nothing you did." Nothing! It wasn't nothing I did! But I can tell you that the necessary things get done not by luck but by something I did!
I am offended by the suggestion that any success I enjoy now and into the future was primarily luck, as if that means that I have no rights to the private property (the concept of which founded this nation!) I have earned, so that others are (somehow) just as entitled to my property as I am.
Half this nation has become firmly entrenched in the entitlement mentality that genuinely believes "It wasn't nothing you did" and so will employ the full force of the government to steal the private property of people to give to other people.
However, half this nation still believes in some robust notion of private property. Unfortunately, the halves don't fall along neat party lines, so it is easy to keep the private-property folks divided and ineffectual. Meanwhile, the "default position" of the feds now is to steal from the "rich" to give to the "poor," and somehow on a grand scale this is seen as something more "noble" than the mere theft that it is.
It's not greed to say, "Don't steal from me." And if you don't believe that, then don't you dare call a cop the next time somebody steals something of significance from you. The thief was just as entitled to "your" property as you were.
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:00pm PT
|
Hahaha. What I found was a website that gave Obeezy the same award CF has been trotting out for Trump like a 4 year old.
And he doesn't like it. Which makes the silly website that much more endearing to me.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:03pm PT
|
well, if lying is so very important in determining which political candidate to support then why are you supporting Donald Trump?
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:09pm PT
|
Can't seem to find anything close to the scope and scale of Trump's lying, eh, Esco?
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:31pm PT
|
I could care less about the scope of Trumps lying. I just love how the partisans trot out stupid awards like the "Poltifact Lie of the Year" and say that anyone who gets that award is unsuitable to be president.
Especially in light of the fact that our current president has received the same award.
It shows the partisan retards for what they are: Hypocrites
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:39pm PT
|
You really don't understand how PolitiFact works, do you, Esco?
Except in the narrowest sense possible to serve your ignorant agenda.
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:44pm PT
|
LOL, yeah I guess I don't know how it works. Please, by all means, do tell.
I am DYING to hear this.
EDIT: Locker - feast your eyes on THAT ^^^^^^
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:45pm PT
|
I could care less about the scope of Trumps lying.
well, you should care very much about Donald's lying
reason being, lying is very important to you, you talk about it a lot
you care so much about the morality and ethics of Democrats
fair is fair, you have to care as much about the Republicans you support
you can't duck this one and ignore your boy's lies while you adore him at the same time
strike three, you have zero crediblity
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 01:47pm PT
|
Hahaha. I'm a Trump supporter now? Wow, that's news.
How old are you?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!