Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Judge Napolitano: Enough Evidence 'to Justify About Three or Four Articles of Impeachment.'" video.

>Napolitano >left wing Take your meds, boomer
4
And this is why we'll always be right and and you people keep electing politicians that lay the foundation of tyranny. At least we'll be smiling when we're lined up against the wall and shot next to you.
2
@JohnDoe-jh5yr tax cuts increase revenue. The problem is out of control spending.
1
@JohnDoe-jh5yr because you're not reducing the amount paid. Which is larger, 1% of a million or 90% of 1000?
1
@JohnDoe-jh5yr it's an example, and you refused to answer. If you tax at 25%, businesses with thin margins will go under, businesses with good margins will make less money, the taxes will be passed down to the consumer and buy less, weakening the economy. You're not taking 25% of a billion. The billion won't be there for you to take from.
1
@mehrshadvr4 "socialism wasn't a bad thing until the cold war" - it was pretty bad when Trostky and Lenin killed peasants (even communists and anarchists) simply for not adhering to their socialist ideals.
1
@mehrshadvr4 Nice whataboutism. You claimed Socialism wasn't bad until the cold war. Nope, the socialists started off by both killing Tsarists AND OTHER LEFTISTS. At one point the two brain cells remaining in your skull cavity should synapse and realize that socialists killing LEFTIST, aka people on YOUR SIDE, simply for opposing tyranny is a bad thing. I didn't praise Pinochet, you're simply trying to use the logical fallacy to get away from having to reevaluate your beliefs.
1
@mehrshadvr4 "in Europe people elect socialist all the time" - no, they don't. Name one country in Europe that has elected a party that abolished profit and put the means of production in the hands of the workers. "That's why people in Europe think Americans are dumb" - the vast majority of people in Europe have enough on their plate and don't think about that type of stuff that often. Only pseudo-intellectuals riding on high horses think that. Every day I meet people clearly below 100 IQ and no different from the "dumb American" stereotype. You're only speaking from your own ignorance and lack of experience. "You have been program to think socialism or socialist leader always ends up like USSR." - it's not a "program", you ignoramus. Socialism is the ABOLITION OF PROFIT (aka the end of capitalism) and the social ownership of the means of production. No bosses or factory/business owners. If you want a socialist system, you need to give control of the state to the communist party. If you do not follow the socialist principles, you're not a socialist. Yes, there are parties that call themselves Socialist Party but they're often center-left (in fact they're center right economically because they are for capitalism, and ACTUAL SOCIALISTS AND COMMUNISTS call them center right parties).
1
@mehrshadvr4 "Being a socialist doesn't mean you'll make the economy socialist" - Then why break your own principles? "just like how a Capitalist doesn't make every single thing privet" - that's a false equivalence. You can defend a market-based economy and a welfare state at the same time. But you cannot be for free market economies while defending the abolition of capitalism. That's contradictory. "Abolish of profit is how state run their programs" - Ahahaha that has to be the best sleight of hand I've ever seen in an internet argument. No. Abolition of profit is literally arresting anyone attempting to be a "business owner" and trying to take for himself the ownership of something that should be communal. It has fuck all to do with state programs. If you're not willing to line up factory owners against the wall and gun them down for betraying the socialist cause, then you're not abolishing shit. "Every rational person knows a mix economy is the best" - the worst of both worlds. The privatization of profits and the socialization of costs. Socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor. You attempt to get the benefits of the free market and ruin it all with overburdening taxation and bureaucracy. "Also no, the Europe doesn't have center right as leftist" - YOU CAN LITERALLY SEE THEM ON THE CENTER RIGHT IN POLITICAL COMPASSES "That's why they pass free trades, ACA as "socialist healthcare"" - did you just fucking say ACA was free trade? When it banned inter state competition and forced the elimination of plans that didn't meet up to the standards? It was a massive restriction on the market designed to benefit the industry. Not a free trade bill.
1
@mehrshadvr4 "lol you are still talking about cold war bs again" - It's the literal definition of socialism. Educate yourself. I won't explain it again. "then Venezuela is not socialist then since it's has privet businesses according to you" - Is that your gotcha moment? It only shows how bad it is for the economy if you start nationalizing industries. So much for your mixed economy model. "all socialized means the hospital and doctors work for the government with no profit" - but there is a profit - it gets the money it needs every year, and it grows over time. "As we have seen here , healthcare doesn't work when it's for profit entirely" - Why? "a rational person knows a mix system works the best" - You are mixing conclusions and premises. You have no argument. Stop making claims without evidence or at least a coherent basis for your conclusion. "Profit seeking is good on consumer goods but profit seeking on essential things like healthcare, education and utilities , will leave many people behind without government control." - why? "ACA is actually a healthcare plan from heritage foundation" - lmao and you expected those fuckers to do something right?
1
D G socialist republics exist...
1
D G but it is. Republics do not need to be democratic. Republic simply means that matters of governance are considered a public rather than private matter. The North Korean government is a public institution rather than a private one.
1
D G Saying it's false doesn't make it so. Kim Jong-Un is not the sole proprietor of the entire North Korea. Although he calls the shots, he is not the all encompassing power figure (which is why keeping the elites happy is such a priority, because the privileged class in North Korea could sweep the power under him if they wanted to). Again, nothing about corruption or totalitarian one-party rule conflicts with the definition of a republic. One-party republics were and still are a thing. Although in theory the military holds the monopoly on force, it is still under control of the state. If the generals decided they had enough of Jong-Un they would certainly implement a military dictatorship but until they decide to become the ones calling the shots, they not calling the shots. Just like the US military could in theory rebel against the US government, just because they hold that power doesn't make the US a military dictatorship.
1
D G it's not contrarian nonsense. You said a country (doesn't even matter that it was North Korea) was not a republic by definition - it is a socialist state. But there's nothing in the definition of republic that states it can't be socialist. That is all. You haven't proven shit. You have called NK a "socialist state" and now a "military dictatorship" (ironically South Korea WAS a military dictatorship twice in the 20th century but North Korea wasn't). That's not proof. That's just you saying words. And a very bad day to you sir. Thanks for tapping out. Saves me the trouble of contradicting your BS posts with facts.
1
@independentthinker315 "you need to find your safe space" - same to you. Why did you come to a libertarian channel if you wanted to cheerlead for a politician?
1