bernie sanders: regressive

ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Justin-case said:
Yeah, and look how fractured the GOP is because of it, it'll work out great I'm sure...
Click to expand...
It's fractured because it went TOO FAR to the right, that's definitely not going to be the Left's problem for a good long while!

Now let's talk about how it worked;
Republican majority in the-
  • Executive branch
  • Senate
  • House of reps
  • Majority of governors
  • Majority of State legislatures
  • SUPREME COURT
Yeah, some failure.

I'd be terribly disappointed to see a liberal failure looking like that! o_O
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
bict said:
Bilateral agreement is not practical and effectively dismantles the social contract. How can you have a society where one gives up certain rights and another doesn't? Its a collective concept which amounts to nothing without unilateral consent.
True, it could be used in an abusive manor. However, Locke and classical liberalism in general lay out clear guidelines for how a state conducts its overwatch of citizens, stating that the state is there to protect life, liberty and estate. Without this protection provided by the state, ones freedom could be used as a weapon against another's liberty. Sacrificing a small amount of liberty on a unilateral level is nessercery.

Now, I'm off to smoke a joint. Feel free to reply, I wont be.
Click to expand...
The "social contract" is a misnomer. It not only could be used in an abusive manner, it seems to be the natural trajectory of the oxymoronic "limited government" .

The state does not exist to protect universally though, it exists to award some and consume and control others using offensive force as the primary means.

You might consider reading Spooner's thoughts on "no treason".


Agreed, time for a joint.
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
It's fractured because it went TOO FAR to the right, that's definitely not going to be the Left's problem for a good long while!

Now let's talk about how it worked;
Republican majority in the-
  • Executive branch
  • Senate
  • House of reps
  • Majority of governors
  • Majority of State legislatures
  • SUPREME COURT
Yeah, some failure.

I'd be terribly disappointed to see a liberal failure looking like that! o_O
Click to expand...
That far left would be equally devastating, in my opinion. Leaving us with two parties that are polar opposites. Our government works best when the parties function together. This shit we've seen the last decade is not governing, it's infighting.


And, what legislation have they been able to pass?

They couldn't even get gorsetch in without going nuclear.
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The "social contract" is a misnomer. It not only could be used in an abusive manner, it seems to be the natural trajectory of the oxymoronic "limited government" .

The state does not exist to protect universally though, it exists to award some and consume and control others using offensive force as the primary means.

You might consider reading Spooner's thoughts on "no treason".


Agreed, time for a joint.
Click to expand...

You better stick to smoking out of potatoes, someone could have been forced to make those papers in some sick socialized country.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
That's what was tried in the last election and it didn't turn out well for anyone on the left.

As I've said before, the 'Tea Party' movement on the right was highly effective at getting Republicans elected AND at moving the party to the right.

No one has given me a good reason why the strategy would be any less effective for the Left.
Click to expand...
It was highly effective at splitting the GOP voting bloc, at least temporarily and then it was back to business as usual.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Justin-case said:
That far left would be equally devastating, in my opinion. Leaving us with two parties that are polar opposites. Our government works best when the parties function together. This shit we've seen the last decade is not governing, it's infighting.


And, what legislation have they been able to pass?

They couldn't even get gorsetch in without going nuclear.
Click to expand...
I seriously doubt we would see the Overton Window of American politics move that far to the left in our lifetime. It's just a bridge too far and so I believe your fear there is unfounded.

The deadlock has come from other causes.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
It was highly effective at splitting the GOP voting bloc, at least temporarily and then it was back to business as usual.
Click to expand...
... With excellent results.

The Tea Party both gave the Republicans a kick in the ass and provided cover for a move further to the right than it likely could have managed on its own.

The very same logic would work just as well in the liberal direction.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
What I say is true, why not try work within the party? Infiltrate it, mould it from the inside rather than splitting the liberal vote.
Click to expand...
Because that has been done ad Infinitum..it was called aligning with your party and it doesn't work because when your candidate places what's best for themselves before you?

This will forever will be know as the 'great sitout of 2016.'

MILLIONS of voters would've rather take chance with the unknown than the known.

That's a very powerful message..expect it again should you try the same.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
Because that has been done ad Infinitum..it was called aligning with your party and it doesn't work because when your candidate places what's best for themselves before you?

This will forever will be know as the 'great sitout of 2016.'

MILLIONS of voters would've rather take chance with the unknown than the known.

That's a very powerful message..expect it again should you try the same.
Click to expand...
You voted for Clinton.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
Not true.
Click to expand...
Okay, let me put it another way then.

Socialists believe when a person labors to create something for himself or family etc. that other people have a right to forcibly take the fruit of that labor without the consent of the person who did the work.

It is based in the idea that human interactions can be beneficial if theft is used as a means, which is absurd.
 
tangerinegreen555

tangerinegreen555

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Okay, let me put it another way then.

Socialists believe when a person labors to create something for himself or family etc. that other people have a right to forcibly take the fruit of that labor without the consent of the person who did the work.

It is based in the idea that human interactions can be beneficial if theft is used as a means, which is absurd.
Click to expand...
If you can't accept being a 21st century member of society here, then leave for a remote island where you'll have your own little isolated, tax and law free utopia.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Socialists believe that it is okay to force others to labor for their benefit
Click to expand...
no, that would be racist old men who think that health insurance is rape and slavery even though they can't afford to own a fucking fridge, much less cover their inevitable health care costs.

we'll be paying for your medical care for ya pretty soon, mooch.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
That's what was tried in the last election and it didn't turn out well for anyone on the left.

As I've said before, the 'Tea Party' movement on the right was highly effective at getting Republicans elected AND at moving the party to the right.

No one has given me a good reason why the strategy would be any less effective for the Left.
Click to expand...
bernietards are arguing for mandatory ultrasounds now.

that's less of a tea party of the left and more of a tea party of the right kinda thing.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
no, that would be racist old men who think that health insurance is rape and slavery even though they can't afford to own a fucking fridge, much less cover their inevitable health care costs.

we'll be paying for your medical care for ya pretty soon, mooch.
Click to expand...

Health Insurance isn't rape. Forcing somebody to purchase something against their will is similar to rape though.

upload_2017-4-21_17-39-1.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top