Which type of Republican are you? How to self-identify.
RobinHood said:
Nope, they hate us because we are glib, sarcastic, condescending and project a narrow sense moral and intellectual superiority in how we think and talk about their world view.
Yeah, .... talkin' 'bout them clingin' to their guns and Bibles and stuff gives them the sads.
I believe their votes for the Gropenfuhrer were votes of despair and fear.
Let's take your semantic argument one step further. Those who receive services they don't pay for are receiving charity. The question is: will the charity be delivered at the point of a gun or voluntarily? Either way it is still charity.
Those who are willing to help their neighbors understand the difference. It is the others that want their neighbor to do the helping. It makes one wonder: if we are all so willing to help, then why do we need all the guns and jails to make it happen?
The other thing to think about is centralization. Its one thing for a town to provide police and fire services. If one town goes bankrupt, the next town still has fire service. But nationalized health care? Look to our south to find an example of what happens when that one centralized system fails. Its important to remember that nothing lasts forever.
ml1 said:
we're in agreement that none of those things are rights.
as others have already said, we can get bogged down in the semantics of "rights" versus "privileges." Is it a privilege to be able to afford prenatal care? Or emergency care if you get hit by a car? Maybe it is. If it is, then as a country we need to be honest about it. We need to bluntly tell people that if they can't afford treatment, they're not getting it. Or they need to make an appeal to charity and hope someone feels sympathy and comes to their aid. Nobody should expect that there's any guarantee they'll get health care if they can't afford it.
terp said:
We also decided to use the police to systematically harass segments of society. We've decided to spend large sums of $$ to bomb the poor globally...all in the name of safety. Yet, I'm pretty sure those things aren't rights.
ml1 said:
we don't have a right to the fire department showing up if our house is on fire. And we don't have a right to cops showing up if someone is beating us up. Or a right to roads to get from here to there. Somewhere along the way we decided that we all have to pay for the fire department to show up at someone else's burning house, or for the police to show up to stop someone from assaulting someone else, or for road crews to come out and build roads we'll never drive on. But we decided that if you can't afford health insurance and you get sick, you have to pay for it on your own.
By making a caricature of them you are making a caricature of yourself.
Formerlyjerseyjack said:
RobinHood said:
Nope, they hate us because we are glib, sarcastic, condescending and project a narrow sense moral and intellectual superiority in how we think and talk about their world view.
Yeah, .... talkin' 'bout them clingin' to their guns and Bibles and stuff gives them the sads.
it's not charity if it isn't being given willingly.
terp said:
Let's take your semantic argument one step further. Those who receive services they don't pay for are receiving charity. The question is: will the charity be delivered at the point of a gun or voluntarily? Either way it is still charity.
Those who are willing to help their neighbors understand the difference. It is the others that want their neighbor to do the helping. It makes one wonder: if we are all so willing to help, then why do we need all the guns and jails to make it happen?
The other thing to think about is centralization. Its one thing for a town to provide police and fire services. If one town goes bankrupt, the next town still has fire service. But nationalized health care? Look to our south to find an example of what happens when that one centralized system fails. Its important to remember that nothing lasts forever.
ml1 said:
we're in agreement that none of those things are rights.
as others have already said, we can get bogged down in the semantics of "rights" versus "privileges." Is it a privilege to be able to afford prenatal care? Or emergency care if you get hit by a car? Maybe it is. If it is, then as a country we need to be honest about it. We need to bluntly tell people that if they can't afford treatment, they're not getting it. Or they need to make an appeal to charity and hope someone feels sympathy and comes to their aid. Nobody should expect that there's any guarantee they'll get health care if they can't afford it.
terp said:
We also decided to use the police to systematically harass segments of society. We've decided to spend large sums of $$ to bomb the poor globally...all in the name of safety. Yet, I'm pretty sure those things aren't rights.
ml1 said:
we don't have a right to the fire department showing up if our house is on fire. And we don't have a right to cops showing up if someone is beating us up. Or a right to roads to get from here to there. Somewhere along the way we decided that we all have to pay for the fire department to show up at someone else's burning house, or for the police to show up to stop someone from assaulting someone else, or for road crews to come out and build roads we'll never drive on. But we decided that if you can't afford health insurance and you get sick, you have to pay for it on your own.
I think the question the Progressives need to ask themselves is why are people so unhappy?
The Progressives have been winning. We have had more centralization. This has happened on a global scale with the EU, the larger welfare states including the US. Progressives are willing to take small incremental steps to get their way. We Libertarians tend to be purists and thus almost never win political battles in that we can't even agree amongst ourselves.
See the ACA for instance. This nobody wanted. Nobody in their right mind would want that particular peice of legislation. ****, nobody understood it when it was voted on. However, the progressives saw that as a step away from individuals controlling our lives and towards "Society" controlling our lives. That's kind of the goal of all this stuff. I mean look at how ml1 phrased his defense of shrouding the right upon healthcare. "We decided". What the progressive rank and file don't understand is that when it comes down to it "Society" in most cases is a small number of wealthy and well connected people. And those are the people who will make the decisions.
And you, the Progressives, are winning. The trend is clearly towards more centralization. Even when the nasty Republicans are in charge, the trend continues.
So, why are people so unhappy? I would agree that the Trump supporters are probably the most well thought out people in the world. But, why all the visceral anger? Why are there so many people rejecting this model?
If this trend is really serving all of us so well, why all the angst?
OK. Call it alms then. Its the same point. If you're on the receiving end, you are receiving goods and services you have not paid for.
If "We" decided to do this, then why all the guns and jails and threats and propaganda? Seems if "we" decided this, "we" wouldn't need all of that stuff.
ml1 said:
it's not charity if it isn't being given willingly.
terp said:
Let's take your semantic argument one step further. Those who receive services they don't pay for are receiving charity. The question is: will the charity be delivered at the point of a gun or voluntarily? Either way it is still charity.
Those who are willing to help their neighbors understand the difference. It is the others that want their neighbor to do the helping. It makes one wonder: if we are all so willing to help, then why do we need all the guns and jails to make it happen?
The other thing to think about is centralization. Its one thing for a town to provide police and fire services. If one town goes bankrupt, the next town still has fire service. But nationalized health care? Look to our south to find an example of what happens when that one centralized system fails. Its important to remember that nothing lasts forever.
ml1 said:
we're in agreement that none of those things are rights.
as others have already said, we can get bogged down in the semantics of "rights" versus "privileges." Is it a privilege to be able to afford prenatal care? Or emergency care if you get hit by a car? Maybe it is. If it is, then as a country we need to be honest about it. We need to bluntly tell people that if they can't afford treatment, they're not getting it. Or they need to make an appeal to charity and hope someone feels sympathy and comes to their aid. Nobody should expect that there's any guarantee they'll get health care if they can't afford it.
terp said:
We also decided to use the police to systematically harass segments of society. We've decided to spend large sums of $$ to bomb the poor globally...all in the name of safety. Yet, I'm pretty sure those things aren't rights.
ml1 said:
we don't have a right to the fire department showing up if our house is on fire. And we don't have a right to cops showing up if someone is beating us up. Or a right to roads to get from here to there. Somewhere along the way we decided that we all have to pay for the fire department to show up at someone else's burning house, or for the police to show up to stop someone from assaulting someone else, or for road crews to come out and build roads we'll never drive on. But we decided that if you can't afford health insurance and you get sick, you have to pay for it on your own.
omigod you're such a moron.
RobinHood said:
Nope, they hate us because we are glib, sarcastic, condescending and project a narrow sense moral and intellectual superiority in how we think and talk about their world view.
oh lord. the progressives have been winning? You say this after a thirty year descent into conservatism? Where the middle has moved to where the right was 40 years ago?
You know,. I can't even get past your first few sentences anymore. Talk about caricatures.
terp said:
I think the question the Progressives need to ask themselves is why are people so unhappy?
The Progressives have been winning. We have had more centralization. This has happened on a global scale with the EU, the larger welfare states including the US. Progressives are willing to take small incremental steps to get their way. We Libertarians tend to be purists and thus almost never win political battles in that we can't even agree amongst ourselves.
See the ACA for instance. This nobody wanted. Nobody in their right mind would want that particular peice of legislation. ****, nobody understood it when it was voted on. However, the progressives saw that as a step away from individuals controlling our lives and towards "Society" controlling our lives. That's kind of the goal of all this stuff. I mean look at how ml1 phrased his defense of shrouding the right upon healthcare. "We decided". What the progressive rank and file don't understand is that when it comes down to it "Society" in most cases is a small number of wealthy and well connected people. And those are the people who will make the decisions.
And you, the Progressives, are winning. The trend is clearly towards more centralization. Even when the nasty Republicans are in charge, the trend continues.
So, why are people so unhappy? I would agree that the Trump supporters are probably the most well thought out people in the world. But, why all the visceral anger? Why are there so many people rejecting this model?
If this trend is really serving all of us so well, why all the angst?
we have to preserve this one for posterity. (As syntactically challenged as it is.)
terp said:
... I would agree that the Trump supporters are probably the most well thought out people in the world. ...
If you say so I guess it's true. I don't care to point out that in doing so, you only prove my point. But strategically speaking, that approach is clearly working against you. You want to insist you hold all the answers fine, but don't expect to win.
drummerboy said:
omigod you're such a moron.
RobinHood said:
Nope, they hate us because we are glib, sarcastic, condescending and project a narrow sense moral and intellectual superiority in how we think and talk about their world view.
You offer the claim that we have descended into conservatism over the last 30 years. I'd like to know what you mean by that. I can see how we've become more polarized- socially, politically, economically, but I cannot see how the country has, on balance, become more conservative.
drummerboy said:
oh lord. the progressives have been winning? You say this after a thirty year descent into conservatism? Where the middle has moved to where the right was 40 years ago?
You know,. I can't even get past your first few sentences anymore. Talk about caricatures.
terp said:
I think the question the Progressives need to ask themselves is why are people so unhappy?
The Progressives have been winning. We have had more centralization. This has happened on a global scale with the EU, the larger welfare states including the US. Progressives are willing to take small incremental steps to get their way. We Libertarians tend to be purists and thus almost never win political battles in that we can't even agree amongst ourselves.
See the ACA for instance. This nobody wanted. Nobody in their right mind would want that particular peice of legislation. ****, nobody understood it when it was voted on. However, the progressives saw that as a step away from individuals controlling our lives and towards "Society" controlling our lives. That's kind of the goal of all this stuff. I mean look at how ml1 phrased his defense of shrouding the right upon healthcare. "We decided". What the progressive rank and file don't understand is that when it comes down to it "Society" in most cases is a small number of wealthy and well connected people. And those are the people who will make the decisions.
And you, the Progressives, are winning. The trend is clearly towards more centralization. Even when the nasty Republicans are in charge, the trend continues.
So, why are people so unhappy? I would agree that the Trump supporters are probably the most well thought out people in the world. But, why all the visceral anger? Why are there so many people rejecting this model?
If this trend is really serving all of us so well, why all the angst?
terp makes many of the same points as the "sovereign citizens".
Few posters here make me sad. Terp is one. Because he can't be alone in his remarkable lack of compassion. Others must feel that way as well.
terp said:
We Libertarians tend to be purists and thus almost never win political battles in that we can't even agree amongst ourselves.
Purists who can't agree what purity is. That's about right.
Does it give you pause that you are unable to read a brief post on the Internet, but you still think you know what's best for 320 million people and you are gleeful that you feelings will be enforced at gunpoint?
Answer No.
drummerboy said:
oh lord. the progressives have been winning? You say this after a thirty year descent into conservatism? Where the middle has moved to where the right was 40 years ago?
You know,. I can't even get past your first few sentences anymore. Talk about caricatures.
terp said:
I think the question the Progressives need to ask themselves is why are people so unhappy?
The Progressives have been winning. We have had more centralization. This has happened on a global scale with the EU, the larger welfare states including the US. Progressives are willing to take small incremental steps to get their way. We Libertarians tend to be purists and thus almost never win political battles in that we can't even agree amongst ourselves.
See the ACA for instance. This nobody wanted. Nobody in their right mind would want that particular peice of legislation. ****, nobody understood it when it was voted on. However, the progressives saw that as a step away from individuals controlling our lives and towards "Society" controlling our lives. That's kind of the goal of all this stuff. I mean look at how ml1 phrased his defense of shrouding the right upon healthcare. "We decided". What the progressive rank and file don't understand is that when it comes down to it "Society" in most cases is a small number of wealthy and well connected people. And those are the people who will make the decisions.
And you, the Progressives, are winning. The trend is clearly towards more centralization. Even when the nasty Republicans are in charge, the trend continues.
So, why are people so unhappy? I would agree that the Trump supporters are probably the most well thought out people in the world. But, why all the visceral anger? Why are there so many people rejecting this model?
If this trend is really serving all of us so well, why all the angst?
Well we can't all be dumb enough to agree with personal attacks based solely on the fact that "oooooh he disagrees!"
I heard that ignorance is bliss. Tell me. What's it like in Shangri La?
dave23 said:
terp said:
We Libertarians tend to be purists and thus almost never win political battles in that we can't even agree amongst ourselves.
Purists who can't agree what purity is. That's about right.
Thanks for both supporting the narrative that those who question the government are terrorist threats and lumping me in w/ terrorists. That was awfully nice of you.
wedjet said:
terp makes many of the same points as the "sovereign citizens".
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...
I am actually quite compassionate. You may be confused because you think you're compassionate. It's just that when I want to help I help. When you want to help someone you want someone else to help that person.
In the future, it would be great if you didn't confuse personal responsibility for ones actions with a lack of compassion.
Thanks,
Terp
GL2 said:
Few posters here make me sad. Terp is one. Because he can't be alone in his remarkable lack of compassion. Others must feel that way as well.
It's clearly a lack of compassion; social Darwinism; etc; whatever one calls it. It's usually able-bodied, white
folks with jobs and no present need for social services. I'm fine so fcuk everyone else.
To you it's that for 2 reasons. First, you lack the historical perspective and the imagination to think any other way is possible. Secondly, it's easier to argue against a straw man than any real argument.
The world has evil in it. This evil is enabled and encouraged by people just like you. I think its too late for you. However, I think you'll find that learning basic critical thought does go a long way.
GL2 said:
It's clearly a lack of compassion; social Darwinism; etc; whatever one calls it. It's usually able-bodied, white
folks with jobs and no present need for social services. I'm fine so fcuk everyone else.
yeah, as I said earlier...
RobinHood said:
You offer the claim that we have descended into conservatism over the last 30 years. I'd like to know what you mean by that. I can see how we've become more polarized- socially, politically, economically, but I cannot see how the country has, on balance, become more conservative.
drummerboy said:
oh lord. the progressives have been winning? You say this after a thirty year descent into conservatism? Where the middle has moved to where the right was 40 years ago?
You know,. I can't even get past your first few sentences anymore. Talk about caricatures.
terp said:
I think the question the Progressives need to ask themselves is why are people so unhappy?
The Progressives have been winning. We have had more centralization. This has happened on a global scale with the EU, the larger welfare states including the US. Progressives are willing to take small incremental steps to get their way. We Libertarians tend to be purists and thus almost never win political battles in that we can't even agree amongst ourselves.
See the ACA for instance. This nobody wanted. Nobody in their right mind would want that particular peice of legislation. ****, nobody understood it when it was voted on. However, the progressives saw that as a step away from individuals controlling our lives and towards "Society" controlling our lives. That's kind of the goal of all this stuff. I mean look at how ml1 phrased his defense of shrouding the right upon healthcare. "We decided". What the progressive rank and file don't understand is that when it comes down to it "Society" in most cases is a small number of wealthy and well connected people. And those are the people who will make the decisions.
And you, the Progressives, are winning. The trend is clearly towards more centralization. Even when the nasty Republicans are in charge, the trend continues.
So, why are people so unhappy? I would agree that the Trump supporters are probably the most well thought out people in the world. But, why all the visceral anger? Why are there so many people rejecting this model?
If this trend is really serving all of us so well, why all the angst?
Does the fact that you are alone here, with the exception of the late Zoinks, give you pause?
The fact that libertarians are basically one narrow demographic with no political juice whatsoever does not give you pause?
Even the mildly influential, like Rand Paul, run away from the label.
And of course, Dad is selling freeze-drying machines for the coming apocalypse...there's your brothers in arms.
But again, I don't want to argue. I've known you on MOL for a while.You just sadden me.
It is interesting that your entire argument is built on a set of fallacies. They are either guilt by association or straw men arguments.
This makes me extremely curious. When did you give up thinking for good? Was this a conscious decision? Did you ever enjoy the pleasure of thinking through a problem or an issue? Do you always do what you are told and get angry at those who ask questions?
Did your aversion to thinking affect your job performance at any time?
GL2 said:
But again, I don't want to argue. I've known you on MOL for a while.You just sadden me.
No, I've never thought. Nor have the vast vast majority of people who've said variations on the same theme over the years.
Remember the old line, "I was a libertarian; then I graduated."
Look at that Libertarian Conservative Trend towards small government go!
drummerboy said:
yeah, as I said earlier...
RobinHood said:
You offer the claim that we have descended into conservatism over the last 30 years. I'd like to know what you mean by that. I can see how we've become more polarized- socially, politically, economically, but I cannot see how the country has, on balance, become more conservative.
drummerboy said:
oh lord. the progressives have been winning? You say this after a thirty year descent into conservatism? Where the middle has moved to where the right was 40 years ago?
You know,. I can't even get past your first few sentences anymore. Talk about caricatures.
terp said:
I think the question the Progressives need to ask themselves is why are people so unhappy?
The Progressives have been winning. We have had more centralization. This has happened on a global scale with the EU, the larger welfare states including the US. Progressives are willing to take small incremental steps to get their way. We Libertarians tend to be purists and thus almost never win political battles in that we can't even agree amongst ourselves.
See the ACA for instance. This nobody wanted. Nobody in their right mind would want that particular peice of legislation. ****, nobody understood it when it was voted on. However, the progressives saw that as a step away from individuals controlling our lives and towards "Society" controlling our lives. That's kind of the goal of all this stuff. I mean look at how ml1 phrased his defense of shrouding the right upon healthcare. "We decided". What the progressive rank and file don't understand is that when it comes down to it "Society" in most cases is a small number of wealthy and well connected people. And those are the people who will make the decisions.
And you, the Progressives, are winning. The trend is clearly towards more centralization. Even when the nasty Republicans are in charge, the trend continues.
So, why are people so unhappy? I would agree that the Trump supporters are probably the most well thought out people in the world. But, why all the visceral anger? Why are there so many people rejecting this model?
If this trend is really serving all of us so well, why all the angst?
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
-
'Beethoven's Wrong Note: A Steampunk Opera'
May 12, 2024 at 2:00pm
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Advertisement
Yeah, .... talkin' 'bout them clingin' to their guns and Bibles and stuff gives them the sads.