Youtube comments of Patchwurk (@patchwurk6652).
-
305
-
252
-
239
-
213
-
141
-
139
-
120
-
101
-
99
-
86
-
81
-
79
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
69
-
68
-
67
-
65
-
65
-
63
-
62
-
60
-
59
-
58
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
55
-
53
-
52
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
50
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
Okay, I got an amazing grift idea. Straight from the master of grifts Milo himself.
Okay here's the plan: Your trans, I'm bi. But I'm also a pasty white blonde,blue-eyed Aryan looking dude. So I'm thinking we switch it up so we're always on the counterculture to whoever's in power right now. If it's a Rep, I'll pretend to be a Neo you "converted" to the LGBT side, and we'll run that grift for awhile. But Then (and this is the brilliant part), when it's a Dem, we'll swap, I'll regress into my "Fascist ways", you'll "see the error" or your trans-ness (Because apparently you can just Do that now, thanks Milo!), and we'll just keep going back and forth forever until we both make millions and turn into an even Weirder duo of Alex Jones dopplegangers.
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
@cwg9238 ...We kind of figured it'd be fucking obvious, seeing how there's a looong list of events that demonstrate how we change as a society.
Protests, strikes, marches, and making noise. Kill no one, but grind the economy to a halt, leaving businesses en masse (Which is currently going on, America's in the midst of its first mass-scale strike in years). This worked for the Civil Rights movement, it worked for the Industrial Revolution, and it Forces the system to cave or risk the entire economy going nuclear.
The economy doesn't Work unless the Workers are working. Seriously, did you pay Any attention in social studies, they literally covered how nonviolent resistance works in pretty extensive detail.
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
Lioness of Lechistan ...Please, kindly tell me what my "Kind" is. Since you can apparently read minds and know exactly what I believe despite me only saying "What the fuck does China have to do with this?"
Also, Vet genius. Served from 2012 to 2020, I was Part of that system, and my duties were specifically related to logistics and finances (Yeah yeah, pencil-pusher job, bite me.) And while I am NOT anti-military and obviously believe a nation without a military is a stupid one, our budget is a complete scam. Most of the budget isn't going to us, it's going to private defense contractors through which we purchase all our equipment. And we're contractually bound, we HAVE to buy from these specific contractors so sayeth the government, and since these companies know they have the military dollar held hostage they artificially inflate the price of our equipment. No joke, the standard portable radios we outfit our guys with on Air Force flightlines, if you're a Civilian, don't even cost 100 bucks per unit. However, if you're Military, that exact same radio (The design of which is from the 1980's and has been obsolete for decades) costs 3 grand per individual radio. Our budget is mathematically almost 5x higher than the Actual Military's costs, you're literally being robbed by defense contractors as a taxpayer.
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
@idrathernot_2 I mean that's kind of blatantly clear why. Most City people are Democrats in general, and cities inherently have a higher than average amount of crime just by how many People are there.
But that's literally true of all cities in the US, regardless of where they're at or what the politics of the State are. Like Illinois has been conservative and progressive, Republican and Democrat or another dominant Party over the years.... And yet Chicago was never any less of a corrupt criminal pit no matter who was in charge.
Michigan's changed sides quite a lot, and yet Detroit still sucks every flavor of ass regardless.
Also, politically speaking, Progressive policies (regardless of which side of the aisle they came from) are always popular in cities. Because if something's Wrong in the country at large, that problem is usually amplified due to a city's dense population, and bad times for citizens do generally breed more progressive beliefs in those people because they're desperate for Any solution, whereas the typical Dems and Reps usually end up giving them zero options besides "Suck it up, losers. Sure We caused this problem, but you're to blame if you can't take it, freeloader."
When one guy's offering up ideas to solve your problem and the people in power tell you to piss off and figure it out, the "figuring it out" usually results in a greater number Lefties. Not Democrats, Lefties.
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
@michaeljoseph796 Honestly I'm not so sure about that.
Granted, this is totally an anecdote, so take it with a grain of salt, but I was in the service, Air Force specifically, and at least among the DoD enlisted there is an alarmingly and contradictingly massive amount of "Libertarians" among the Fed's Armed Forces.
I have no idea why, it seems completely antithetical to me, but there it was. They all Claimed to be anti-war, yet seemed to find no conflict of interest or mental disconnect with them actively volunteering to serve Uncle Sam in their endless illegal wars of aggression against foreigners.
Not saying "All Libertarians", because obviously that's not true, but ho-lee SHIT there's a lot of self-proclaimed Libertarians who openly endorse America militant supremacy. Like they only notice "Tyranny" when America acts against Them, but don't see it when it's America acting against "Anyone Else."
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
@uttcftptid4481 What you're failing to consider is that no, these companies have long since stopped being Just American. They're international media conglomerates who can actively twist the results of elections, have been caught Repeatedly stealing the data of Americans to sell to the government, and are essentially the new public square.
They only remain "American" companies so that, if anyone gives them shit for it, they can be like "Nah, see, we're American. First Amendment, bitch!" Yet when tax season comes, suddenly they're not Americans, but international and as such not beholden to American law.
That's the serious issue here: They control and twist the outcomes of political actions in America, pay next to no taxes, and if they're selling our data to America, then they're selling it to everyone else on their network too.
They get the protections of being American AND the protections of being International, while avoiding the legal responsibilities of Both.
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
@CosmicDreamz139 Okay, then get rid of all of it.
Ban CNN, MSNBC, and Fox. Ban Breaking Points, Tim Pool, Kyle, ban anyone who speaks on the news for any reason.
Propaganda isn't allowed, these are propaganda, get rid of them. No one should speak on the news unless the government hands them the narrative directly.
Do you not see how this precedent can and would be instantly abused?
BLM are terrorists, ban their propaganda. -Republicans.
Antifa are terrorists. Ban their propaganda.
LGBT activists are terrorists, ban their propaganda.
Texas is actively trying to prosecute parents of Trans people for "child abuse", you seriously think your government won't immediately abuse this excuse you're just Handing them?
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
@spunkinater
"Peterson is correct in stating that the LGBTQ community is not a community. That would be like me saying that all latinos are a community. If you've ever met a Columbian and a Puerto Rican.....most of the times they hate each other.....and those are the words of Columbians and Puerto Ricans, not my own.
They do not consider themselves the same. Very different cultures. "
com·mu·ni·ty
/kəˈmyo͞onədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common.
"the scientific community"
2.
a feeling of fellowship with others, as a result of sharing common attitudes, interests, and goals.
"the sense of community that organized religion can provide"
Similar words would include: group, section, body, company, set, circle, clique, coterie, ring, band, faction, gang, bunch, or any other such word that denotes a group that shares commonalities.
You. Are. Categorically. Wrong.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
@julianbluefeather8491 I mean they're still hypocritical about it as hell with guns.
Like the Church was ban-happy and fullblown "Fuck your freedoms and fuck your rights, God says it's immoral!" When it comes to LGBT people, racial minorities, free speech, radio, television, videogames, movies, books,sexy clothing, women's rights, sexual education, drugs, religious liberty and due process...
...But GUNS are a sacred right that can't be infringed upon?
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
@jonathonrobinson6081 I dunno, let's ask Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan exactly how "peaceful" America is.
How does it being a neighbor matter? What, are Middle-Eastern lives worth less than Canadians or Mexicans to you?
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
@drewkline96 Doesn't seem like it. Dude, no offense meant, but Republicans in particular have been like this for a long time. Sure, I will concede that elements of the Left get too uppity with this PC shit and snowflakey bullshit, but most of the time there's an actual point. Maybe you don't like the point, but there IS usually a point.
Meanwhile, let's look at the Republican side of things to get snowflakey about: War on Christmas, minority groups having equal say, hatred of anything not Christian and/or Jewish, trying to prohibit Mosques from being built, denying girls from participating in the Real Scouts to do Scout stuff because... girls are icky I guess?
Like maybe you think an SJW is going too far language policing you about minority groups, and I get that, but their rationale is based on the fact that minorities do generally get fucked with more often than others in America, and they're overreacting a bit. But the shit Reps get uppity about in the same vein are just... Stupid. Stupid, petty, and wholly geared towards nothing but moral outrage at shit that doesn't affect anything really when you get right down to it.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@pjukas And Russia's retort so far is "No you don't because we didn't do anything."
One nations word against another, America is the accuser, the burden of proof is on America.
America, the nation that lied it's way into every single war it's been involved in since WW2, who actively make naked fraud and dishonesty their model of politics and who have absolutely Zero credibility and an economy that only thrives IF America stays in a perpetual state of war.
A picture, a document, SOMETHING! Literally anythig is better evidence than "Because the most shameless liar in the room Said so."
Also, I don't give a shit about our spies. Not America's spies, not the warcrime capital's spies. If you are going to Declare War on a nation, sentencing god knows how many people to die over however many years of violence, YOU DONT GET TO HIDE BEHIND ANONYMITY!
Bring forward ironclad evidence, and Then we go to war or not. I refuse to accept people have to die just because America promised me really really hard that THIS time they aren't lying to me.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@whyamimrpink78 "1. My stance on marriage is that government should be out of it"
Okay.
"2. Nothing in the Constitution mentions marriage, thus it becomes a state issue"
Immediate contradiction, you apparently support State government involvement.
"3. I support the Constitution above all, so if a state wants to get involved in marriage I would disagree with that decision, but I would 100% support their rights to do so"
So you aren't actually against governmental interference in marriage on the Fed or State level at all as long as it's legal to do.
Your clarification was pointless, in practice you're on the side of bigots.
"Ok, to examples on my stance, first, abortion
1. My stance is rare, safe and legal
2. Nothing in the Constitution mentions abortion, thus it becomes a state issue
3. If a state decides to ban abortions I would disagree, but I would 100% support their rights to do so"
So you support abortion, unless the local government doesn't, in which you support the rights of local government.
Again, what was the point of you having a position if you just nod like a chimp when it's "their right to do?"
"Ok, now free speech
1. I dislike racist speech
2. Free speech is protected by the Constitution via the 1st amendment
3. If someone makes a racist comment I would disagree with it, but I would 100% support their rights to make such comments"
Holy shit, this is the first non-contradiction you've stated so far.... And it's in defense of racist speech.
"1. On state rights: we do not want an overpowering, centralized force dictating these complex issue."
Yes you do, you just call it the State government.
So just to recap: You will support and stand by the "state's right" to criminalize women's reproductive rights, you stand by the State's right to interfere in marriage as long as it's not the Fed, and your only principled stance that you actually Commit to is "defense of racist speech" uas nder the 1st Amendment.
Wow what worth is your position at all? "I'm against all these obviously bad things, but I will suck the State dick and champion their violations of individual liberties."
So in theory you're a libertarian, in Practice you submit to the State like a dog.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@ToxicAudri Lol, the obvious American whose trying to pretend they understand British politics... Is criticizing someone else for just speculating with no information as they're trying to apply American social shit to non-Americans.
Ottz already explained Their nations viewpoint, your opinion is irrelevant.
But you knowhow I know America's doing worse? For every story I hear about Britain doing some stupid shit on the news, there's about a dozen highlighting exposed American warcrimes, the fact we assassinated major civil rights leaders, lied our way into illegal wars of aggression, and shamelessly bombing civilians while arguing that we just HAVE to keep doing it, otherwise the terrorists win.
If transphobic people are the Worst social problem I have to deal with, then I'm trading up.
I'll take the transphobic nation that actually runs over the transphobic war-profiteering war criminals whose entire economic policy seems to be based on slaughtering brown people for profit.
Like you keep trying to shit on Europe here, but every problem you keep saying "Britain has too" in regards to America, you're actively omitting that America has it on a completely different order of magnitude.
We have Multiple individual Cities in America who, Alone, have higher violent crime rates than the entirety of full European nations combined.
We have States more violent than the entirety of Britain's official stats combined, both per capita AND in base totals.
Math wins. If I was forced to choose between one or the other, Britain wins.
...Still not the Euro nation I'd personally pick first, but still an upgrade.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@scottdavis3571 Want has nothing to do with it.
PR is clear: Trump, for better or worse, is an exciting candidate. Exciting candidates get attention.
Nothing exciting about Biden, and the few things that are exciting about him just make him look pathetic, weak, and worthless when it comes to power.
Trump has endless ammo to use against the Dems, and he's crazy enough to actually use it, even if it makes him look bad by association. Dems Won't attack Trump on anything of actual substance, because condemning the Direct Actions of Trump in terms of politics is impossible without implicating and corrupting their own image, as they're guilty of voting With Trump on a good chunk of those policies.
Sure they can say "You engaged in police brutality on protestors!", but Trump can immediately turn around and say "And isn't that your signature right there on the list Supporting me doing this, Mr. Democrat? Guess you didn't care THAT much about this 'horrible sin' of mine."
If Trump understands nothing else on this planet (and he probably does in fact understand nothing else), he Does understand how sensationalism and PR related to it works. Dude lost the election, sure, but he has more control Now over the Republican party despite being out of power than President Joe Biden, the most powerful political leader of the most powerful single nation, has ever demonstrated over his own damn staff, let alone his Party.
At least Trump was smart enough to LIE about how much he helped Americans, Biden can't even pretend that he has an agenda at all outside of "I'm not Trump."
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@robertcampbell8070 I think it's just bad argument 101. I've heard this same diatribe in favor of or against a lot of positions. I think it's just the result of a dumbass trying to argue for their position.
Emotionally charged, enthusiastic, but painfully uninformed and somehow convinced that Their Word is good enough and the delusion that they are an authority on anything, yet compulsively holding all opposition to more stringent standards that their own position can't even measure up to, not to keep their opponent honest, but in hopes to discredit them entirely before the argument even begins.
Pro-gun, anti-gun, pro-anti abortion, pro/anti drugs, pro/anti Trump, etc etc.
If there's an idiot with an opinion then this method of "debate" isn't far behind.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@treborkroy5280 On top of that, look what happened when Biden took office. THe whole way through the campaign, Democrats demonized, insulted, brow-beat and shamed people into voting Biden, since they had absolutely no salespitch besides fearmongering.
"Trump is so horrible, this nation is going to hell under him, vote for Us and we'll fix it."
And we as a nation caved. We did what they wanted, Trump got voted out, the Democrats got put in charge..... And then not only did they Not address a single thing Trump did to fuck anything up, they instead piled on even More shit. They got the crazed lunatic out of the driver's seat only to floor the gas even harder at the brick wall.
"Trump is scary" is not a persuading salespitch anymore now that we have Confirmation that apparently Biden decided Trump's destructive idiocy wasn't wrecking shit fast enough.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@a.16.g Yeah, those exceptions to the taxes hinged on the corporation Spending Money On its business. Corporations could easily evade all taxes on their business, IF it's constantly improving on itself. Expanding their employees, doing research, innovating, providing better benefits for their staff, doing Something with all that money they made that benefits the people working under you.
Under the old system, modern companies would have been taxed into oblivion, because Stagnation in the name of the CEO's bottom line was NOT an acceptable reason to not pay your corporate taxes.
Now it is. And what a surprise, the private industry doesn't innovate so good anymore. the private sector isn't outperforming the public sector in most nations anymore.
Why should they? There's no punishment for stagnation, no punishment for stealing your companies entire profit margin for yourself, and no punishment for corporations evading taxes.
Why try when you can just change the rules so you just Win forever Legally?
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@trademisconception9816 Eh, they probably don't know. Most people don't just casually know the internal politics of an entire group of others who just incidentally share the same workplace.
However, if they did vote for Trump, I'd hazard a guess it was probably out of either being duped, justifiably pissed at backstabbing from their own allies, possibly a few racists although I'd never claim to know their motives, or they're just another average uninformed voter.
I guess I'm unclear on why their specific voting choices in these last couple elections would alter the information. Let's be honest, these past two elections have been an embarrassing shitshow that no one looks good coming out of. Like if you voted for Trump, there's a laundry list of reasons as to why that was a horrible choice. But if they voted for Biden, there's Still a massive laundry list of reasons why that was a bad idea. Or they voted 3rd Party, which either makes them principled to the point of self-sabotage or tossing a spite vote. Or maybe they didn't vote at all, which means they didn't exercise the miniscule amount of power they had to change the situation.
Like there's really no way you could've possibly voted or not voted these past couple elections that Can't be spun into a scathing indictment of your character. Assuming of course I was one of those uncharitable assholes who blindly judges a person or entire group of people on absolutely nothing but the specific name they checked the box next to.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Can confirm: About to head to college now on the GI bill.
And that's pretty much what my thought process was. I need a degree to get where I want to be, I came up from poverty, watched my parents slog and grind their entire lives only for the floor to be ripped out from under them by college loan debts.
The military was, as ironic as it sounds, my liberation. By selling myself to the government, suddenly my poverty was gone. I had a stable roof over my head, three squares a day, free medical, and MY gated community was guarded by a lot of dudes with guns. I could finally afford to live a little for once, because I sold myself to the government.
And now I'm finally going to college, on the government's dime, because I sold myself to the government.
....In what sick world is this not abhorrent? The military is almost purpose-Built to be the shiniest, juiciest carrot to anyone in poverty, while the entire Rest of the system makes life a living purgatory for you if you're poor.
It's pretty much straight extortion.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
The point has to be made to Sinema: "You are not free of us no matter where you run."
It sucks for the wedding, and I'm sorry for that, but the protestors are fighting someone who is actively telling them in a Federal way "Fuck off and die, plebs." She's attacking their lives and trying to give their employers the green light to bring down the hammer all the harder on them.
If my future is at risk... Yeah, sorry, a wedding is nowhere on my list of "Things I'm concerned with ruining." Sure the bride and groom had a bad celebration, but these people's Lives are at risk of being thrown into upheaval. And Sinema is responsible for more than a few of those reasons why they're at risk.
And this hammers it home harder. It's fucking with Her personal life and seeing how she likes it. Not with violence or threats against her future well-being, but by being such a constant and relentless source of "You are a corrupt piece of shit and here's why" that everyone she knows, everyone she cares about, and every other relationship she has is infected and torched by those people getting a nonstop broadcast of everything Sinema's done anytime Sinema's around them. Making her a pariah until she finally does what the American people want instead of blatantly rejecting all democratic process to abuse those same people.
...Comparatively being yelled at until you stop being a corrupt dirtbag is downright merciful. Arguably that's borderline treason in regards to her function as a political representative, and we still allow execution for traitors. All these people are demanding is that she stops being such an abusive bitch of a politician.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@thenightingale7405 ...And are we Cool with this?
Like you do realize that, even in your example, America is the BAD GUY, right?
The only reason Assange got fucked with was expressly because he ratted out America. America gets to spy on everyone else, regardless of legality or any respect for any other national law.
...But you spy on Us, and we will hunt you to the ends of the earth and demonize you and hound you every second of every day until you eventually blow your skull out or we do it for you.
Like I'm not stupid, I Get what your concern is. Yes, if you engage in espionage it behooves you to protect your sneaky folks.
I Understand that. I just don't give a shit because I couldn't give a rat's ass what a war criminal tyrant nation thinks is fair or not. I don't give a damn what the authoritarian war criminals think they're owed in terms of rights or not, they are Felons and Traitors and war-profiteers to a man. You're not going to make anyone think "Oh poor America, whatever can they do, thy just HAVE to be corrupt you guys."
I'm sorry dude, but ignorance isn't the problem. No one feels a shred of sympathy for America anymore.
We're the bad guys. We've Been the bad guys.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@FoxGHosen26 ...Because it doesn't pretend to be otherwise. Kyle is openly a progressive, makes it abundantly clear as to what his political stances are, and in spite of that still displays less blatant bias than most media outlets that claim to be fair and/or balanced.
He condemns where he sees condemnation due, and will actually give credit where it's due, even to those he otherwise despises, regardless of political party. There's no such thing as a truly objective news outlet, but Kyle tends to come much closer than most.
Also, I beg your pardon? Exactly where in my comment did you get the impression that I thought this was a "liberal bubble channel?" If you actually read the Rest of my comment, you'd have noticed I was responding to a comment a few further up from it where some other poster was bitching that Kyle didn't call out the Republicans for being "just as corrupt" as the Dems in this video. On a video where a Democrat was the topic of discussion and the Republicans had zero input to their choice of corrupt behavior.
I mean you just said so yourself, you're not a Kyle viewer. And yet here you sit, actively making a blanket judgement call on the entire viewerbase, on the grounds of the phrase "most of Kyle's audience knows"? If you've watched more than two Kyle videos you'd know how silly that is, and if you Haven't watched more, then I'm sorry but you're just nakedly and willfully lying for no reason.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@Gnigghunter "Toward the end of last year when inflation began hitting people, Kyle ran a series of videos where he professes his own ignorance of the causes of inflation and then uncritically begins parroting Jeff Stein of the CIA-funded WaPo who claims that endlessly printing currency doesn't deflate the value of existing currency already in circulation."
And that episode was....? Like frankly I don't trust your assessment, I'm gonna need a title.
"2. We got another more recent example here where he runs with a claim from an "anonymous source" at the same CIA-funded WaPo that says the warrant was issued by a Trump appointed judge (turns out not a Trump appointed judge) and that the Mar-A-Lago raid warrant specified nuclear-related documents (it did not)."
And you know this how?
"3. How about a month or so back when Kyle ran with the MSM narrative about the pregnant 10 yr Ohio girl who had to go to Indiana to get an abortion?"
What about it? You going to disprove it, or is incredulity all we're going with?
"Turns out it was a 29-yr old Mexican illegal immigrant who graped her (no mention of this in the MSM reporting or Kyle's parroting of said MSM reporting) and as such she would've qualified for an exemption on the basis of oh, you know... ITS GRRRRAPE."
Citation needed.
"To say absolutely nothing of the fact that, if not for leftist open-borders policies that Kylie supports, that man likely wouldn't have been in Ohio to grape that little girl. Oh but he doesn't let that stop him from exploiting her abuse to push a political narrative, and he makes zero effort to correct his disinformation once he has put it out there."
Why are you speculating now? Where's the verification of your claims?
"Kyle is about to become TYT 2.0. You heard it here first, xoomers. I watched it happen there years ago and the same shoddy propaganda is now coming out of Secular Kuck. It's only a matter of time now, sit back and enjoy some YT history going down in real time."
....Ah. My mistake, figured out your game. Carry on, but I don't imagine I'm getting any of those questions answered by you.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@thecheeseburgler591 Also no, Hitler was a Catholic. Stalin was an Atheist, but as to why I don't take responsibility for Stalin, well it's actually pretty straightforward:
Atheism has no dogma or rules outside of "Do you believe in deities, yes or no?" That's it. We're not a religion, not an ideology, there's no holy books or doctrine, it's an answer to ONE question and only one question: Do you believe in deities?" If you don't, you're a Atheist, fullstop. Outside of that you're every bit as free to believe whatever you want or not believe whatever.
This would be like asking "Do you take responsibility for Jeffrey Dahmer? He ALSO believed in wearing pants!"
Like we have ONE thing and only one thing in common with Stalin, and it's a disbelief in deities.
However, Christianity is a doctrine. A church, an institution, a righteous army in service to God and beholden to his rules, no?
You guys HAVE a rulebook and a claimed system that enforces these standards... And yet Christians disobey anyway. That's a lack of accountability in the system.
...How tf do you "Take responsibility" for people that have absolutely zero relation to you outside of "we answered the same way on one specific Yes/No question?" or organization that even HAS rules that can be broken or not broken?
Like you're one to talk, you literally just tried to pawn Hitler off on us, and all records show openly that he was Catholic. Not Atheist, Catholic! In case you forgot, Catholics HATE us.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@jamestepera3356 Drugs are expensive. Because they're illegal. Addicts steal to get the money because they're addicts.
And rehab usually fails because if they're AT rehab, most likely in this country they also got a criminal record because they can't seek help without confessing to a crime. And if you have a criminal record in America, no matter what for (unless you're rich as shit), you've got a career blacklist following you around forever, ensuring you're pretty much stuck to jobs that can't support a life on their own. Adds more stress, makes the drugs tempting for a release valve, and the cycle continues.
Legalizing drugs removes that blacklist, removes the cost of drugs, and removes the feedback loop of perpetual punishment that exists in this nations justice system (That makes it rather pointless for a crook to reform, since society will keep punishing them loooong after they've already served their time and paid their dues back to society).
Or you could just blame the drugs like a child. Hey, why not blame guns for gun violence while you're at it? Or videogames for murders?
You're ignoring the ten tons of extenuating factors America forces in that have no purpose being there besides petty vindictiveness. We don't Want to rehabilitate criminals, we just want to punish them and punish them until they off themselves or end up right back in jail for the private prison system to leech them for taxpayer money.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
TRUTHNTRADITION Ohhh, so you did all that instead of addressing a single thing I said, all while insulting my intelligence.
Hang on, let me go find your comment, brb.
Ah, here we are! Here, let me copy/paste since apparently you can't reiterate comments without deleting evidence and completely rewriting it.
Posted by TRUTHNTRADITION on main thread after inexplicably deleting a differently-worded comment on THIS thread
"Doesn't $15 minimum wage negatively affect the working man by driving up the cost of everything you'd buy from any place at which people were typically paid min wage to work?
Wouldn't it be a better idea to, I don't know, stop flooding the labor market with people to the point the your labor becomes undervalued due to the fact there's literally a million people waiting to replace you?"
There, now there's a point to you being on this thread again. I'll answer:
Yes, inflation goes up, but not nearly to the degree you think unless the company owner Actively raises it higher than necessary. Several years back it was verified that, when Papa John's was made to pay health insurance for all employees, that entire cost amounted to a whole 5 cents added to the price of every pizza. A unit of currency most people don't even bother to pick up off the ground if they see it, and now everyone working there has healthcare.
Also, not sure how you haven't noticed this, but inflation goes up under Capitalism at obscene rates. Our currency is over-inflated in the extreme relative to other European nations, and we pay MORE on average for healthcare and goods than the socialists do, for care and benefits that are At Best equivalent but are statistically worse on average than what they get.
Capitalism hasn't ever done shit to walk back inflation, yet I'm supposed to be worried about it when the only thing that changes is whose holding onto the majority of that wealth?
...Also, the fuck is your solution here? Because that reads like you're blaming workers for literally existing being at fault for the plight of workers in America. But I thought there was a labor shortage and no one wanted to work?
Which is it? Is there a job shortage because no one wants to work and we're lazy, or is it that there's too many workers and not enough jobs? Those two things can't be true at the same time.
And even if it's true, if you're suggesting any depopulation scheme, then lead by example and volunteer first.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@insightfulhistorian1861 Probably because of simple hostility to traitors.
Like okay, everyone Knows who the Reps are. They're the enemy, but they're the enemy right in front of you. No bullshit, no pretense, you both hate eachother and want to overthrow the other. It's a simple and honest relationship.
The Dems are the guy Behind you who tells you that they're your friend...While they're robbing you blind and giving all your money to the Republicans anyway, but Do periodically say the occasional nice thing about minorities.
...They almost never Do anything to actually help any minorities and vote bi-partisan with Republicans to fuck workers over in ways that would affect minority demographics Worse than white cis-people, but they do Say they care.
....Also the country is literally in the midst of a general strike, economic implosion, and the Democrats are literally imploding and being thrown away for lying to their own voters for decades.
The Democrats committed Every Single possible fuckup they could have caused since the campaign trail, and now they're suffering for it. It's that simple. The shit Trump does flies just fine with a certain type of Republican, but the way the DNC behaves is literally everything they've hammered into their own base to Hate and Despise in Republicans.
...Did they seriously not think their base would notice at some point that they're following the marching orders of glorified Republicans?
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@PedroCastro-vn8qg "Do you expect right wing criticizem to in good faith to being with? Because i don't."
You literally opened up your last comment by fessing up that Harris is moving further and further to the right.
" but trump is an uniquely bad candiadate and you have realistically only have 2 options, so when somebody attacks Harris for being bad at something there is a 99.99% that Trump is even worst"
...This is exactly why it's frustrating dealing with Harris supporters. Because to me it feels like every criticism, no matter how valid, is dismissed immediately with "but Trump" by absolute fiat and the conversation is utterly pointless. If a criticism or condemnation can just be "but Trump'd" away, then where's the line? There's nothing she could do, nothing she could say, no line she could cross that it feels like you people will just brazenly ignore or dismiss as not a problem.
So long as she's "Not Trump", she could endorse Trump's border policies, be just as enthusiastic a supporter of our barbaric foreign policy and Israel, accept the endorsements of GOP war criminals, and it doesn't matter. Because "But Trump."
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@dorkknight413 I wouldn't, but then again I'm not a dickheaded world power that can't function unless it's spying on the planet.
...Also, that's a suuuuuper convenient excuse for someone who Doesn't Have a source.
"I have a trustworthy source that tells me Russia's up to no good and America should intervene"
Okay, who?
"Classified."
What evidence?
"Classified."
Anything at all besides Your Word this person you're getting information from even exists or that your claims here onstage are even remotely valid?
"Classified."
How are we supposed to take this complete lack of details, followed by a demand for blind trust and fealty?
"Classified."
Funny how literally everything that could conceivably exonerate America of their crimes is always "classified." The "have" the proof, they said so... But it always conveniently never pops up in any way anyone can prove, you just have to unquestionably trust that the US government wouldn't lie their way into a war.
....Ask Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, and Libya how trustworthy America's word is.
Now maybe I'm just paranoid, but that screams "Guilty" from the word Go.
People who have Proof of their claims aren't THIS reluctant to prove it. If the CIA wasn't going to be fucked to reveal ANY information at this press conference, then why tf did they even open their mouths at all?
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@DUNGSI27 ...Dude, you're taking the bait.
If Republican and Democrat politicians weren't in it together, how come they Never go after eachother on anything that matters? Like think back, whenever Trump said or did some stupid shit, it's all over CNN and MSN. But when Trump gets bipartisan support on a bill that bails out the corporations at the expense of the public.... Crickets They're anti-war the entire time during Trump, but the moment Trump starts being kinda diplomatic with Korea or the moment Biden pulls out of an illegal war, suddenly the Dems are demonizing Trump for doing something Not-warlike and suddenly they're standing right next to the Republicans condemning Biden for stopping American war-profiteering on any level.
They tear into eachother over social BS, but they're right on point with eachother every time it comes time to fuck a few more bucks out of the American people for their rich friends. Hell, the last election is stark proof that the DNC would rather lose to a Republican than ever tolerate a bit of Progressive anything in their leadership, and what a coincidence, the Republicans are in agreement with them.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@thecheeseburgler591 ...Why do we have to?
What objective moral standard?
Like okay, fair enough, you want to know an objective reason why rape is bad? Well sorry, I don't believe in objective morality so I dunno how to answer you. I believe rape is bad because it's an incredibly physically and psychologically destructive act that violates the bodily autonomy of a sapient being, and I find that idea abhorrent due to empathy and concern for my fellow humans. Because I wouldn't want to be raped, I can't imagine anyone else wants to be either, so it's wrong. And apparently most humans agree with me on that point, so there's no particular conflict on that point. Subjective morality decided it's bad all on its own.
However, You Do believe in objective morality, ostensibly, so I'd ask you: Why do YOU think rape is bad? What is the Objective Incontrovertible Moral Truth as to why rape is bad?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@louie3216 "He can't win. He's not electable. He's gonna lose. Stop rocking the boat, do you want Trump?"
This right here was you bootlicking fucks for the entire run of the elections. Bernie sells out stadiums, not covered by anyone but Fox and Fox is fearmongering. When Bernie makes waves in the debates, suddenly Warren accuses him out of left field of being a sexist bigot with no evidence, only for the Debate Hosts to openly act like it's a real accusation despite it being outed by Warren's own Staff as a lie.... While the same DNC makes infinite excuses for Biden and ignores everything wrong with Biden.
When Biden did literally anything, CNN and MSNBC and the DNC covered it in every inch of detail and flooded the media with it, yet if Sanders was ever mentioned at all, he was scoffed and ridiculed and called an unrealistic pipe-dreamer stealing votes from the Democrats. Literally Every Time Trump got ahead in the polls the DNC blamed US for it and anyone who was voting Bernie instead of establishment.
Or right, on TOP of that, the DNC hiring vote-counters and buying voting programs for their machines that they Refused to allow anyone to examine and were sold to the DNC by people Directly Married to Buttigieg's campaign manager, allowing Pete to declare victory and Actively Spread that message on CNN and MSN for hours, only to be like "Huh, nevermind guess Bernie wo-IN OTHER NEWS!"
Ya think this bullshit doesn't affect votes?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@ma_abbott "You believe that a certain small group of individuals should have some financial relief ‘just because’...."
Actually we never got past you failing to justify your own beliefs, so No actually, you Don't "know" I believe that at all.
You're correct, I do "just because", but you have exactly zero reason to have assumed that.
"paid for by a much larger amount of others that will not benefit from said action."
False. You literally directly benefit from educated qualified professionals in fields of science. I shouldn't have to explain to you that having educated professionals in cyber, IT, Medicine, and the sciences in general is a good thing that advantages the nation supporting it.
Unless you got a compelling case to make for an aggressively uneducated society with next to no collegiate expertise.
But thanks for airing out that your political motivations are as basic as "That which directly benefits Me."
"Actually, it will be generational taxpayers to address this repayment, some whom are not even born as of yet."
Wow, it's almost like taxes always worked that way. None of those kids ever volunteered their tax dollars to the military or the police, and yet that's not a biggie.
What? You're telling me "we'll keep paying taxes" in the future? Just like all of living memory? Say it ain't so! My child's gonna likely be paying to benefit others the same way I paid to benefit them? Truly a horrendous situation has befallen u-
-Oh wait, that's how it fucking works you doorknob. Why do you people never consider this fact unless it's paying to Help someone else?
"I do not see the fairness, equality nor equity in this partial debt relief."
Then you need your eyes checked because the only people you're defending here are the ultra-rich.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@nickmoore6381 This is Always the Democrat excuse. This has been the score the entire time I've been alive.
When it was up against Bush: "Vote for us! We won't do anything, but the other person's a fascist!"
2008: Vote for us or the fascists win!
2012: I know Obama did nothing he promised us, but vote for us anyway or the fascists win!
2016: Oh my God, I know we lied about everything we promised, but vote for us or the fascists win! You don't want Trump do you?
2020: I know we lost to Trump and wasted everyone's time his entire Presidency to bitch about Russiagate, but vote for us anyway for the fascists win!
....Yeah, fuck you.
Democrats don't just Get my vote. You DO something to earn a vote, and "I'm Still a corporate sellout who will let the fascists get their way and do absolutely nothing I promised you.... But vote for me anyway, because otherwise the fascists win" for well over a decade does absolutely nothing to inspire any confidence.
...Sounds like the fascists already won. Vote Republican, I get Republican shit. Vote Democrat, I get Republican shit with more whining about how Democrats didn't win Enough.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Oooh, this is an oldie but a goldie of conspiracy theory bullshit! Let's see if I can dismantle this for the old Internet's sake.
"- Aviation specialists say the plane speed wouldn’t have been possible"
No name stated, no details at all of what the specs of the commercial airline in question even are, baseless unsupported assertion and appeal to unnamed authority
"- The plane didn’t glisten in the sun. Not what you normally see"
...In regards to what? The people's viewpoint literally present, on TV? Aeiral camera, ground cameras, you're once again omitting all pertinent details that would actually provide evidence.
"- Witnesses footage beyond the mainstream media say there weren’t any"
And witness footage beyond the mainstream media also says this absolutely did happen. Also, another bizarre appeal to the authority of independent media instead of official sources like you did with the "Unnamed Aviation Specialist" earlier
"- Assuming an inside job, there is no incentive to use planes for a false flag as this requires more money, higher risk of failures and more conspirators. Also it would be hard to find someone to fly the planes."
1: Why are you assuming an inside job in the first place?
2: When did we even establish the planes literally never existed?
You literally just decided the airplanes Can't exist, not because of any proof, but because "My conspiracy theory of 9/11 being an inside job flat out doesn't work if there was an actual catastrophe to BE "an inside job", so the REAL conspiracy is that there even WAS a 9/11!"
...Can I live in your brain for a month? It sounds fucking wild in there.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@SY-qg6qn "As a police officer, you are making decisions that impact a persons rights on a regular basis, I.e arresting someone or detaining them. "
Or indiscriminately shooting them/killing them for "resisting".
"You are also dealing with common criminals on a regular basis."
Parking ticket violators and harmless stoners and homeless people just "being there" shouldn't qualify as criminals, but welcome to America. You're not wrong.
"You are dealing with sovereign citizens that would put out bogus lawsuits on a regular basis if they could." Which they can't. Sovereign citizens lose in court pretty much every fucking time without fail.
And a police force that can literally get away with murder, but sure. Frivolous lawsuits.
"An officer, without qualified immunity, would be extremely vulnerable to bogus lawsuits."
And an officer With qualified immunity is a government sponsored thug who isn't responsible for the consequences of anything they do, no matter how heinous or illegal. Which one would I rather have?
"Even if you could afford to fight them, you would quit very quickly because it would eat up all your free time. "
...Yeah, I joined the military, Iknow what working your ass off and living life slave to a contract is. These cops get no sympathy from me for the life they swore to lead.
If they didn't want the responsibility of law enforcement, then they have no business Being in Law Enforcement.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Mark-zk3gu No, we lost BBB because absolutely no one in the Democrat party fought Manchin on it, after Manchin Bold-Facedly told the media the other week that he was lying to you idiots the entire time and Never planned to vote for BBB.
ANd instead of Listening to Us when we Told you Manchin was never gonna bend, nooooo, you dingleberries thought you could appeal to his morality and good decency.
Good job. You failed yet again. Manchin didn't bend, BBB was lost, and Democrats looks like idiots in public yet again.
How does it feel knowing you have the Senate, AND the House, AND the Presidency, yet Democrats all got gridlocked by One rogue Democrat?
...Wow, renegade democrats are better at getting their way than the Democrat Party is. Manchin was ONE Democrat, yet the Democrat Party was absolutely helpless to stop One Guy making a fool of all of you, relentlessly, for Months, on public television. And Unlike Joe Biden, Manchin got his way and got what he wanted, while all the DNC can do is whine and flail impotently about it. What a competent Party, I'd sure trust them to lead a nation.
Joe Manchin's Existence is a standing refutation to the idea that Democrats have anything close to a plan to victory besides just fearmongering about Trumpers more.
You have exactly Zero candidates anyone respects.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@MrJonnyl123 How? Explain that to me.
We have the resources, we have the economy, Both of which dwarf Russia and China.
WTF's the point of being the richest nation on Earth if apparently you get exactly fuck all for it?
Also, bullshit. Hello, Vet here, I KNOW exactly why our budget is so fucking big. Because the DoD is forced by the US government to only buy from a select few contractors, which we HAVE to buy from under threat of prosecution and lawsuit. We pay something like 10x and up on markup on everything we buy compared to an American CIVILIAN, because our defense contractors know we have no choice but to pay because the government is on THEIR side.
We pay $3000 per INDIVIDUAL Radio for our flightline workers. $3 grand for a piece of shit that barely works and was outmoded back when Radioshack still existed, and which a civilian could probably get a dozen of them for 300 bucks tops.
Bullshit your purchasing power, You Are Being Robbed! And they're using your fear of Russia to sneak it by you. We're paying 1000's for crap I wouldn't even sell for $20, and you think that extra markup is going anywhere but in a millionaire's pocket?
If your defense budget is Larger than the 10 most militarily powerful nations behind you combined, and your government STILL needs more to "be on par", then you're either being robbed, or America is the most incompetent military on the face of the earth.
4
-
@oddjam Not beneficial?
Hmmm.... Let me think... How has America ensured it's economy and the wealth of their elite exploded in recent decades beyond all prior records?
...Oh right, we're a Perpetual Warstate. We make money hand over fist from war on pretty much anyone we can get away with blowing up indiscriminately.
Gee, I wonder what possible vested interest in escalating a military contract the "Eternal Aggressor and War Criminal" nation of America would have in instigating another war?
Did you seriously forget WHICH country America was? We've only been NOT at war for a grand total of 7 years of our history. We are not peaceful, we are not innocent little lambs. We are raiders, butchers, looters, terrorists, and utterly shameless liars when it comes to our military interventionism.
But I'm sure our long illustrious history of "Indiscriminate Warcrimes" against foreign and native populations that we Are Currently Still Doing by the way is gonna have absolutely no bearing on why the US Government Almost Exclusively is trying to instigate shit despite America's people, the UN, Ukraine, AND Russia all telling our government to "Fuck off."
How many possible ways does the US government need to be told to stay the fuck in Their Own country before they take the hint?
Literally NO ONE wants the USA involved here But our government.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@nunpho Context, different ecosystem on Youtube at the time. Before 2016, all this shit hadn't escalated quite as bad as today yet. MAGA wasn't a thing yet, this was back when the Steve Shives types were the "SJW's" on Youtube by and large among content creators with any clout. Basically less interested in social justice and more interested in virtue signals.
Like calling them SJW's is kind of doing a disservice to actual social justice, these guys were basically just Karen's and concern-trolls cry-bullying people, not exactly "leading the charge and making a difference."
Anywho, in walks this offensively inoffensive "enlightened centrist" type in Boogie who tried to fence-ride the middle as per usual, only pissed off everyone for being a milquetoast lack of input to the discourse. And since the SJW's were the bigger content creators at the time than the chuds, most of the public flak was coming from SJW's.
Not because "Oh SJW's are so bad, blah blah", literally just how the numbers worked out at the time. There were more popular SJW content creators than popular chud content creators, so law of averages kind of just created that particular fallout.
Boogie isn't really an anti-SJW, that would kind of imply Boogie has a real stance or position on anything besides "fence-riding."
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@innocentnemesis3519 Honestly in fantasy the concept of servitor species isn't exactly new. D&D has plenty of them. But there's definitely a major distinction: In properties like D&D, the servitor races are INDEED, by and large, actively designed in that fashion. Like you could explain up and down a million different ways to, say, a modron in D&D that they're effectively slaves and "slavery is bad", but their active fundamental programming as a species wouldn't be even capable of parsing that as good or bad. Just "what they are." Or the Sidhe from Dresden Files who are active primal beings for whom the concept of free will akin to humanity is a disturbing and uncomfortable concept to them (Because the Sidhe actively view their existence as one that comes with built-in purpose, and actively feel pity for mortals in having no defined sense of purpose to their existences).
Rowling, meanwhile, through Dobby in particular, made it aggressively clear that House Elves are NOT the same as those other fictional species, actively DO have a sense of free choice, and are functionally indoctrinated as a race to be slaves, has Hermione actively recognize how wrong that is.... Then just does nothing with that and continues on as if the House Elves are "just like those other species."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@otomicans6580 Agreed. Plus people forget Why people voted Trump initially.
And it wasn't racism, it wasn't bigotry, it wasn't conservative values, it was "hatred of the Establishment." Like sure, obviously Trump was also a fraud, but the Establishment HATED Trump. He kept saying the quiet part loud, kept exposing all their corrupt behavior, purely because Trump's too stupid to Hide anything he does, even if it is incredibly damning.
The people who like Trump or at least seem to understand what he is and how he came about as a political candidate at all are fundamentally aware that he was despised by the Establishment for giving away their entire grift. Even if he was corrupt, he was too volatile and a loose cannon to be Trusted by the other corrupt politicians to not immediately screw up the grift.
His policy was irrelevant, only the fact that the people the voters Actually hated, Democrat and Republican alike, lost their shit and panicked the moment the voters threw Big Orange at them.
All it takes to ruin a carefully-crafted subterfuge is one rogue idiot.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@thecheeseburgler591 Dude, this is only a contradiction from Your perspective.
I just told you, from our viewpoint morality Isn't generally objective..... Usually, anyway, there are a few Atheist Objective Morality folks out there, but tbh they make even less sense to me than religious objective morality for... Actually oddly enough the same reasons you don't understand objective morality without a god.
Like okay, fair enough, I will actually agree with you on this point: IF an Atheist believes in objective morality, that belief system makes absolutely no sense.
...But that' not what the majority of us go by, so I'm really confused as to why you keep lumping all Atheists together as if we have some system like yours. And... We just don't.
Anywho, back to the topic: Your confusion only makes sense... IF you already believe morality is objective. We do not.
There's no contradiction if morality is subjective. We just decided we don't like murder or rape for whatever reason, probably subjective pragmatic ones and basic empathy ones like the reasons I laid out. But there's no contradiction involving "What's Objectively moral" because "It isn't objective. So what? We still don't allow rape and murder, why do we need to consult Socrates and the Great Philosophers just to figure out "Don't rape people?"
There's only a contradiction IF the person is "Objective Morality" believing AND an Atheist. But that applies to an extreme minority of Atheists, an already minority position to begin with.
Like I'm sorry, but I think the problem is that you're trying to rationalize secular thinking through the lens of Christianity and they're just flat out not the same lens my dude.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@charliekowittmusic No, dude, I think you might be misunderstanding Why I think these are misguided.
I guess I'll respond in order to your points.
1: I'm not dismissing "People getting together". I am fully aware that "People rallying up is step 1 to all group plans. But that's the problem: It's Only step one. That's the basic requirement for ALL plans, but it's not a plan in and of itself. It's like 10% of a plan, what you do AFTER you rally people up is the actual plan. Hence my frustration, I was under the impression that "rally people up" was somehow the totality of your plan. If I'm wrong then I apologize.
2: Politicians are all about public perception and "What the public thinks" is what political plans live and die on. AOC Has to give the people Some reason to trust her, otherwise she's going to lose the support of the people, plain and simple. She could have the best plan ever, but unless we SEE her acting on it, SEE her fighting for us, then the people will, regardless of what she wants and regardless of what her Actual plan is, will abandon her. Rendering the entire purpose moot. Millions of voters aren't just going to keep waiting around on AOC just Hoping she does what they want when they're not getting results.
3: I suppose I should have clarified accomplishments that happened After I was born. Not the same world anymore and the majority of those accomplishments have been ravaged or crippled by Republicans and/or establishment traitor Democrats. And even then none of those accomplishments came Without people in major positions of power agreeing with us. And none of them as of now do. The people with Real power in America view Leftists as a plague that should just be gotten rid of. You don't reason with people whose only image of a Positive outcome is "Everyone who thinks like you is gone." It's the same logic of trying to bond with a MAGA supporter who bold-facedly Tells you they want you dead: You're just gonna get killed by the opposition if you don't treat threats like actual threats.
And 4: Kind of my main issue: The historical timelines are too different now to just assume everything will go the same way that it did before the Internet Age. And you're right, I'm not interested in movements that burn out and go nowhere either. However, between Occupy Wallstreet, BLM, Third Wave Feminism, Bernie's movement, and every other major political movement since I was born in the early 90's was exactly that: Failure. Every politician we've trusted up until now: Failure, every grassroots movement: failure.
Failure, failure, failure. That is the root problem of every major movement I've seen since I've personally been alive: THey failed. And most of them failed expressly because their endgoal was "Blindly trust politicians that said nice things to me to do what they promised." Obama, both Clintons, Biden, Bernie, AOC, we've trusted every time and been betrayed Every. Single. Time. By specifically the Democrat establishment and very specifically the politicians who. after telling us they were gonna fight back against the establishment, pulled a Bernie 180 and started kissing the establishment ass and telling Us to bend over and do what Pelosi wants.
That's not very inspiring shit. I don't HAVE the cool historical patriots, all I've gotten so far in my life from power is traitors, liars, backstabbers, and bootlickers who led me down the primrose path.
...So imagine, after ALL of that, some rando online explicitly telling me to keep doing the same thing that's been setting me up for being backstabbed for nearly 30 years now, the definition of insanity, with me somehow stupid or insane enough to expect a different result from the past near 30 years of spinning wheels in the mud.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@MH-ro1lg Erm... Okay fair enough, I typed the wrong letter.
But how is that better? Oh, so illegally murdering Iranian heads of state is okay? You called him a terrorist, how? He was a Military General, a Political leader of his nation, and we just assassinated him.
That is a Declaration of War with ANY nation on Earth. If you murder heads of State, you are Trying to get a war going.
But sure, Trump is "anti-war." He actively treid to instigate a war, but he gets points from you for Sucking at it? The only reason we're not at war with Iran Now is because Iran's government has some fucking sense and Knows America was saying "Do it. Strike back for this. You're legally justified in doing so, Do it! Do it so we can butcher you all and call it justice!"
It's how we instigated Vietnam, it's how we instigated Korea, We Want people to hit back. Our entire economy is built on illegal wars, we WANT them to be pissed off enough to fight back so we have the excuse to make more money off corpses.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@larrymac6529 "led" is patently wrong.
It did damn good for it's budget, but it was only the 20th highest-grossing movie produced This Year.
I will give credit that it's fucking impressive for a shameless propaganda piece to make $184 million domestic from a $14 million starting budget, but it was absolutely destroyed in ascending order by the Taylor Swift documentary, The Nun II, The Flash, Creed III, the Five Night's at Freddy's movie, Dial of Destiny, Meg 2, Transformers Rise of the Beast, John Wick Chapter 4, Quantumania, Elemental, Mission Impossible, The Little Mermaid, Across the Spiderverse, Fast X, Guardians of the Galaxy, Oppenheimer, The Super Mario Bros movie, before the undisputed Champion Of The Year at a $1.4 Billion worldwide box office in Barbie.
So...."Led" in what respect? It did a damn sight better than these movies usually do, I will not deny that, but it's flat out not even in the Top 10 movies anyone gave a shit about this year.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@treborkroy5280 The difference is that Trump is a dynamic character that's actually interesting. There's your barely-paying attention idiot voting block covered, because they're only barely paying attention to politics to know where their vote should go, and Trump's the only name they can actually remember without immediately boring themselves to sleep.
Then you've got the fact that Trump is loud and hostile and verbally antagonistic towards the government, which is going to resonate more and more the more the Democrats showcase how absolutely worthless they are as governors the worse America declines under them.
And Trump actually has positions. Stupid, insane, and completely asinine positions, but the shit Trump supports Are popular among Republicans, so that's Another block pretty much guaranteed to be in Trump's pocket.
....The fuck do the Democrats have as a salespitch? The hell do Democrats have to entice you to vote for them? What do Democrats do for you when voted in?
Because for the last 12 years, all the Democrat Party has ran on is "We're not Republicans." That's it. No policies advanced despite promising universal healthcare, UBI, ends to the wars, closing Gitmo, promises upon promises upon yet more promises.
....Only to immediately turn their backs on All of them the moment it actually comes time to deliver. All Democrats have as a salespitch is fearmongering and hoping to Christ people hate Trump so much that they'll ignore the fact that a vote for a Democrat is synonymous with "Doing absolutely nothing and blaming Republicans for their complete worthlessness no matter how much of an overwhelming majority they have."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@imnotmike "Yeah, but you have to acknowledge that this is a strange situation where there's some ambiguity and it's difficult to know what's right and wrong."
No it isn't.
"Am I allowed to refer to Ellen Page when I'm referring to her old work before her transition? "
Ask Them.
" She's listed in the credits of her old movies as Ellen Page, and she was clearly a woman at the time, and was portraying herself as a woman."
Again, Ask Them.
"So now is it reasonable to only refer to him as Elliot when I'm talking about his new work, but refer to her as Ellen when referring to her old work before the transition?"
I'm feeling like a broken record here. See the previous.
"Don't try to answer. It's a rhetorical question. You are no more qualified to answer that question than I am."
Too bad, I did, because you're wrong and the only person whose opinion on the subject is relevant is the person it applies to. You and I's opinions mean fuck all.
"What I can tell you is this. My best friend changed his name to Bob several years ago. He was named after his father, and he had a falling out and hates his father, so he changed his name. I won't even mention his old name, because he hates the name."
So you do understand what a dead-name is.
"But - it took almost a decade for all of his friends to get used to calling him Bob and stop calling him by his old name."
Seriously? a decade? Damn Bob's friends are slow. But whatever, that's fine. It takes time to adjust.
"If Bob took offense to it every time someone called him by the wrong name and assumed it was malicious, then Bob would not have any friends today."
Quick question: When Bob told you what Bob's identity was, did you guys also spend every single conversation questioning them on their identity and dismissing their choices as "fake" or "problematic" or ever implied Bob might be grooming children and exploiting their identity as Bob to do it?
Or hey, whenever Bob told you about the name change, did you ever point-blank Refuse to call them Bob and just said "Pfff, facts man, you're not Bob" whenever they got angry about it?
Because that's kind of a big fucking difference.
"Calling someone by the wrong name is not something that is worth getting upset about. "
Sure is when you keep doing it no matter how many times you've been corrected out of spite.
There's a massive difference between an honest mistake and deliberate well-poisoning.
And Peterson is doing nothing but dumping arsenic down that well.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@2ndtonone1000 "At the end of the day it's just an opinion, doesn't mean you are right or I am right. "
Pretty sure the voters would disagree there seeing how they keep opposing this. You being on the losing side of this one isn't a debate. The law literally says this is fine you are categorically incorrect.
"An you mentioned you don't care about what might aunt thinks, I think the feeling is likewise. "
I don't think you do. I don't care about what your aunt thinks because your Aunt doesn't dictate for the American people what the American people want. Majority consensus does.
It's not that I "don't care because it's not me" I don't care because your aunt was outvoted. Why would I cater to her over the people who won the vote?
"Voting is not about your convenience, its not up to poll workers to bring you refreshments while standing in line."
No, but why would you Not make it more convenient if you can? What benefit are you getting out of voting being a pain in the ass only Tech-illiterate rednecks wou-
-...And I just figured out why Republicans love this so much. Your voters mostly use physical in-person voting while everyone Else uses mostly mail-in.
You guys would win way easier if you could just get rid of enough mail-ins. Methinks you don't actually care about democracy and just want to win.
"I worked two jobs and went to college, still made it to early voting, so its not impossible."
It's not impossible that shoving a spear up your ass and out your throat wouldn't actually kill you, but I don't see people testing that theory out much.
You're not better for doing things the least efficient way. You're just wasting time. It's the 21st century, stop being afraid of AOL.
"This wasn't an issue until the plandemic came about, now all of a sudden people on the left think it's their God given right to cast a ballot on the couch."
Right, they should only allow white landowning slavers vote like the Founders intended. /s
You're just whining about the newfangled technology now.
"No one cares about you being butt hurt because you want to be catered to."
Apparently they do, because mail-in voting is the law of the land.
What you meant to say was "No one cares what I think the right way to vote is." Because they don't. Because mail-in voting exists.
"The polls opened for early voting for people like you who are on a tight schedule."
And mail-in voting opened up for the same reason. And yet you're only against the one "the Libs" use most frequently.
Methinks you just don't want Libs to be voting at all.
"I am hearing alot of excuses, nothing really viable that would keep you from making it to the polls. "
Says the guy without a single reason why Mail-in is bad besides "I Don't wanna!"
Tough titties no one's making you. Vote in person if that gets you boned up, but stop being a whiny little snowflake because other voting methods exist.
"It's a non issue just like it was before the plandemic."
You're right. Voter fraud's been a non-issue since you people started whining bout it under Obama.
And yet you people still keep talking like it's the biggest crisis ever and we HAVE to remove all "at risk" forms of voting....Which are all conviently "Any method of voting Republicans typically lose at.
"Either I won or you cheated" huh?
3
-
@2ndtonone1000 "This doesn’t infringe, but having people handing out snacks and talking politics and asking who they are voting for is an infringement and shouldn’t be allowed."
...How? Handing out snacks has exactly nothing at all to do with voting one way or the other, talking politics is perfectly legal courtesy of the Constitution, asking who your voting for, while rude, is again free speech.
I don't recall a "right to not be asked your opinion" existing. They have the right to ask, you have the right to not answer.
"I said I didn’t agree with it, so how is that whining?"
"I don't agree with it" all by itself sounds like a lot of "I don't wanna." Now I think you're a whiner because you're This bothered about being called one.
"I didn’t say “I don’t wanna”, that’s something you stated in response, that’s your opinion to what I am saying. An either way it won’t change that the method is being used, I just think there should be more safeguards placed around this method. "
Oh yeah you want this all banned because you Don't want to get rid of the thing your only objection to is "I don't like it."
No sir!
"I didn’t say 1,384 votes, I said 1,384 incidents of voter fraud, you were so eager to make a point that you misread the statement."
Ohhhh, so I just have to trust you that all those individual instances of voter fraud Actually mean "About a thousand times that number in cases"
That's convenient, your method of telling me how many cases of voter fraud occur mysteriously didn't Actually tell me. You just told me "It's greater than or equal to 1384."
How fucking useful. Do you type like a weasel on reflex or did you have to train to be this evasive with your language? Like do they hand out blackbelts in obfuscation?
But fair enough, just pony up the closet Actual numbers we have for voting. Not "incidents", Votes.
"You were to busy trying to convince yourself it was a non-issue, when clearly there are recorded instances of fraud that lead to convictions, but what about the ones that slip through the cracks?"
Then stop being a pussy and put up the Actual numbers so we can see what the real data is. Not "incidents", I want numbers.
"any kind of fraud even if its small should be scrutinized and investigated."
...You can't find any numbers that wouldn't look pathetically small, huh?
Oh well, this was a waste of time. Respond or don't as you like, unless there's a number in your next comment I got my answer out of you.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@bobsonbobbybobson6888 Yeah, nice slippery slope fallacy, but you conveniently left out exactly in what way this would be in any way different from "What's currently going on right the hell now", and you completely omitted why or how small businesses would be "100%" gone by this standard.
...Do you think all small businesses aren't paying their employees a fair wage? If so, all you just told me is that you apparently support actively corrupt business practices and rank exploitation of workers.... As long as it's small-scale exploitation.
And let's look at the result of Your position. Which is.... Oh, wait, you didn't actually state one. You just told me "This manner of getting rid of corruption is bad." It's just a bad idea, will make the situation worse, don't try it.
So let me think... Who profits most in your scenario here, by actively NOT doing a single thing about worker wages and always increasing wages on such a slow scale that it'll never keep up with inflation or cost of living...
OH! The people already NOT paying them a living wage and who actively look for any excuse to not do so.
So let's get this straight: Making corporations pay More helps them gain more power to opress... Somehow. So what we Should do instead is... Let them continue to pay less?
So give them exactly what they want? That solves this somehow?
I'd like to know, what's Your solution to getting workers a living wage? How gradually are we talking here? Like if we decide to do this TODAY, exactly when in this timeline are American citizens not treated like wageslaves utterly at the mercy of their boss' whims?
A year? Ten? Fifty? Will my grandkids finally get treated like human beings, or do we need to give it a good century before we do anything whatsoever about workers rights?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@SaveFarris1 "Yes, it provides necessary transportation to and from my employment."
Then buy a nerdmobile, it's our money
"I also take kids joyriding on weekends spreading happiness amongst the least of us."
Which can be done in any other car.
"Who are you to deny them the experience?"
The taxpayer.
"10K in school loans, much less the 50-100K some have, aren't "societal necessities" as any chair maker could tell you."
Yeah, thankfully I don't get medical advice, engineering advice, STEM advice, legal or media advice from a "chair-maker", who apparently sucks so bad at their job they forgot what their actual title is.
If you don't understand why educated specialists are a modern necessity, then nothing I can say will convince you. Maybe ask your "chair-maker" friend how one would perform a triple-bypass heart surgery. Maybe the point will sink in somewhere during the chat.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@JayJay5244 But do I think Our change is gonna happen through politics? Not really, no. Or at least not Just through politics. And can you honestly blame me? I've got 2 elections so far that verify that Progressive victory is impossible under the current system without something fundamental changing.
And this is how it always works here. We didn't accept gay people until the LGBT community started protesting enough to cause problems with the American bottom line. We didn't accept Civil Rights until people started causing problems for the American bottom line. We didn't except workers rights either until Unions banded together and Forced the issue, threatening the American bottom line.
We Wreck Shit, THEN pass legislation.
But for some reason we still keep acting like the Corrupt System will just willingly bend over and die if we ask nicely enough times.
When None of the successful attempts in the past ever did so. Words are easy to ignore, but attack their bottom line en masse, grind the factories to a halt until billions in cash burns overnight, Then they pass laws that do what we want.
Corrupt Politicians do not respond to reason. CEO's do not respond to reason. Unless you rip away their bank accounts, destroy their enterprise by worker non-compliance, and make them Fear being made a pleb just like us, they're Not Scared of You. Your threats of Progressive change mean nothing without Real World Consequences backing up what happens if they don't listen to you.
Meanwhile, between Bernie and AOC, all we've been teaching these politicians is that they have absolutely fuck all to fear from Progressive politicians, because Progressive politicians will respond to losing to corruption by cheerleading for the corrupt sack of shit who cheated them, like Bernie did for Clinton and Biden and like AOC does for Pelosi.
Progressive People fight for their liberties. Thus far however, Progressive Politicians cave like wet toilet paper.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Mark-zk3gu Obama was actively advocating for a single-payer healthcare system on the campaign trail for 2008. A single-payer public option is the bare-bones minimum of M4A. His views on the matter only changed after he was in office and the single-payer healthcare option was stripped from Obamacare.
Biden's checks came AFTER he had already promised 2k for votes, and his lazy ass excuse was "Well... Trump gave you the first 600, so we're good. I'm not a liar, even though this is absolutely Not what I promised, AND it's weeks late anyway, AND after yet more months being late because my associate Pelosi actively denied Trump the ability to send them out. Presumably so Trump wouldn't get credit for helping anyone, suggesting the Dems actively let more people starve and suffer rather than allow Trump a single win. Golly gee aren't I a good leader."
Biden promised an overhaul and revitalization of Obamacare. Unless he was literally promising "Exactly how it was before" (which isn't exactly what overhaul means, but possible), the only improvements to Obamacare would be Obama's Original posit for it, which again, had single-payer on it (aka, low-rent M4A).
I don't care what you think is true or not. Because it's beside the point: WHen it comes to the Election, the Democrats have done jack shit to entice people to vote for them. They've actively allowed Manchin ALONE to make the entire Party his little bitch, absolutely nothing productive has been done FOR the people since Biden and co. took office that they're even remotely advertising, selling, or promoting for themselves, and the things they Are promoting are things actively in favor of the Corporate Elite, NOT us.
...If I didn't know any better I'd say Democrats Want to lose. They're certainly doing everything right out of the 2016 playbook on "How to Lose to Literally Anyone."
3
-
@markzuckergecko621 ...The people hypothetically being taxed in question have two distinctive difference in factors though:
1: They have individual resources to pose a threat to the surrounding nation. No sane nation allows any One person the power to threaten the nation as a whole, and yet America has Multiple people with well over 100 million USD: Which is more than enough to rig elections, cripple democracy, and do exactly what you just said was "Not Liberty" to everyone else by virtue of raw wealth.
2: They're not paying their taxes anyway, which is illegal, and they've actively been skirting the law for generations due to their advanced wealth and connections. If they WERE paying their lawfully-prescribed fair share of taxes, then we'd have no issues here. But Bezos actively paid Less in taxes this year, both per capita AND in total, than his secretary did. He paid effective Zero in taxes and in fact collected Billions this year in corporate bailouts From the taxpayers against THEIR will, all of which went right to him and his shareholders.
Somehow I can't find it within myself to care about the liberty of a class of people who shows such unmitigated contempt for the liberty of the other 99.8% of the Rest of the American people. Why should I stop to consider their liberty of anyone who'd so casually set my entire life on fire just to make an extra buck?
All we're asking is for them to be LESS Rich. A millionaire is still a damn millionaire, no One human being NEEDS 100 million or up.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@dukekenny9340 ....Are you dense?
The overwhelming majority of ALL US immigrants, legal or otherwise, fly in. Planes exist, Visas exist, it's literally only the extremely poor and desperate that try to blitz the border.
Why do you think everyone was mocking Trump's wall? Because the majority of illegal immigrants under Biden, under Trump, under Obama, as far back as Bush Sr. at least Were Not coming literally across the border.
How's a wall gonna stop people who are flying in the commercial way, showing up with all the authorized paperwork to come in, then just stay here?
Also, more to the point, how come you JUST Now noticed this obvious flaw with American immigration policy? We, the Progressives, pointed this out to you under Trump, and again under Obama, Twice under Bush, etc.
Like this isn't new, no one pays attention to this shit until it's the Other Team's politician in control.
Same way Democrats and Republicans don't got shit to say about the debt until the opposite Party is in charge.
3
-
@dott8045 1: Completely irrelevant to this video.
2: You have absolutely no idea where matter or anti-matter came from, or if they "came from" anything to begin with. All you know is "They exist" and that they've always been present at all known points in history as far as humans are concerns.
-"Both of them came from an unimaginable source" And you know this How?
-"logic says every action has its own reaction, so the reaction of sin must be different than the reaction of virtue"
...No, that's not "logic", that's a very botched attempt at repeating Newton's Third Law of Motion "For every Action, there is an equal and Opposite reaction" in terms of applied force. Newton's Laws have absolutely jack squat to do with moral or philosophical concepts or even "logic", it's just "Exactly what happens" when you apply a literal energetic force to matter.
-Also, Sin and Virtue are not scientific concepts, have no practical opposites, and as such would be completely conceptually irrelevant to scientific principles regarding Physics!
-"the creator has created prophets to let us know about each and every detail of sin and virtue, also about their reactions" Then tell God to get better prophets, because this one ain't working.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Empedocles449 I kind of figured the reasons would go without saying if you've watched literally any Kyle video mentioning Biden, but fair enough.
Let's start with the fact that Biden actively refuses to use his power to override Manchin or Sinema, refuses to use EO's, and actively keeps conceding to Manchin and Sinema's policies in spite of the fact that he claims to support workers?
How about the fact that he adopted Bernie' more Progressive policies and promised us a Lot of things in these reconciliation bills, only for them to be shredded down to under $2 trillion AND every single thing that was promised to the Progressives Specifically didn't make it into the bills?
How about the fact that, during the campaign trail, when COVID got into full shitstorm, instead of continuing to speak and ease the worries of the people like "every single other candidate", Biden crawled into a bunker somewhere and we didn't hear from him for weeks? A dude we're supposed to take seriously as a leader of nations, and he's nowhere to be found in a crisis?
Like this guy's pretty much been proven to be full of shit on damn near everything he promised to the people in the event he was elected. Hell there's a nationwide series of strikes going and shit's going insane, Biden couldn't even keep the "Nothing will fundamentally change" promise, the One promise we at least hoped was a given.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@rjohns25 What part of "This video is about Israel" are you too thick to understand? When the topic of the video is fucking Japan, I'll talk about Japan. Hey, when you rallied in defense against Israelies, you didn't mention a single shred of concern for the people of mainland Africa, should I just blanketly assume you're racist against Africans because you didn't Expressly state in This thread that you're worried about Africans?
Because that's literally how moronic you sound right now.
I don't want America supporting any other nation Period unless the American people voted to do so. If they do, then fine, but that's the point: America didn't vote to help Israel, America didn't vote to help Japan, and America didn't vote for a single one of these goddamned wars in the Middle East. And yet here our government is, stealing our tax money funding these without our consent.
Americans want their tax money doing something for Them for once, we're told to fuck off and die. Israel asks for our money, and our government jumps and throws Our tax money at them without a second thought.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
No one wins in this scenario, granted. However, in a no-win scenario, it's usually sensible or understandable to pick the option where Less people suffer. If the tenants can't be evicted, that screws the owner, true, because the tenants can't pay. And they can't pay because COVID and the resulting fallout put most of the nation out of a job. So if the Tenants stay, the owner doesn't get paid. But if the tenants are Evicted, now there's a horde of new homeless people, through no real fault of their own, AND the owner still doesn't get paid. A handful suffer, or Everyone suffers.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@shakayojgph "no that´s not the strategy, the real strategy is to build a Malcolm X, MLK, or Chomsky type activist movement" And we do that how exactly?
"did you know young Chomsky was arrested several times and make it to the president´s list of political enemies rather than expecting congresspeople to do the work for him?" Is this relevant? Also you're Supposed to expect your political leaders to do stuff. That's literally why they were elected. What's the point of having a government at all if we're supposed to solve Systemic problems Without pressuring the system?
"if you want congresspeople to do certain stuff is fine, it may be good but first you need to build an activist movement big enough to justify it" Literally the majority of voters. It's what the majority of Americans want when actually polled, exactly how fucking big of a group do you need? MLK didn't have 60% of the nation on his side, yet he got shit done (None of which was codified until AFTER a politician signed the paperwork), yet apparently 60% of the voting public isn't big enough to try something?
...Are you seriously suggesting that playing nice with the people who publicly lambasted us as Communist Traitors who want to destroy America is how we succeed? Where the hell was your ability to reason with horrible people when it was MAGA? What, could Mitch McConnell not be persuaded with the power of love and friendship and begging for tablescraps?
You do not concede to people who have point blank TOLD you that America would be better if people who thought like you didn't exist. Biden TOLD us he was not our ally, Pelosi dragged us through the mud and publicly shits on AOC and openly rejects anything vaguely progressive out of spite with AOC just going along with "Momma Bear", and you think that is progress?
Progressive policies literally threaten the corporate politicians. What crackhead universe do you live in where they would ever bend the knee to any policy that takes away their power when you, the so-called Progressives, will never pressure her, never force her, and never give any reason for Nancy Pelosi to think there will be a single consequence of telling you to go to hell?
Because if I was Nancy Pelosi, all I see is a stupid opponent who is too busy trying to be "nice" to actually pose a threat. I see someone who talks a big game but will break and beg the instant they're presented with the slightest resistance out of fear of pissing me off.
In short, if I was Nancy Pelosi I'd see Progressives like AOC as my BItch.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@grandcentral3007 "Wait, I can do this too."
... Can you?
"Leftists believe in leftism. Leftism includes communism, so lefties believe in it. Since communists are genocidal criminals, it stands to reason leftists believe in, as an ideal, genocide and crime."
Okay, let's compare.
" love this. And I totally agree with this man. In fact I am going to take his comment to the logical conclusion of absurdity. So slavery is bad because it was able to make money. So the problem is making money. And the ultimate group of people known for making money are capitalists they're all about making money."
Here's where you fucked up: The person the OP is mocking unironically called weed legalization akin to slavery BECAUSE it makes profit.
Literally no Leftist in the history of Ever has ever said "As a Leftie I believe in Leftism." Leftism's not even a term used at all outside of Rightwingers smacktalking us, and the American Left are still Capitalists.
Social Democracy and Capitalism aren't incompatible.
Also genocide and crime has fuck all to do with communism as a concept inherently, whereas "Making Money" is literally WHat Capitalism Does.
So if Making Money is a bad thing when applied to weed on the grounds of "it's like slavery", then Capitalism HAS to be even worse because "making money" is what Capitalism does best.
One joke is turning the previous speakers own logic against them, you're just treating their joke as if they're being serious.
One's funny, the other seems like a lazy deflection that ignored all the hyper-specific digs at one specific moron and replaced it all with "Leftists are Filthy Commies who R bad." The original joke didn't even mention Rightwingers.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Im__Andy-f6x Besides actively engaging in political corruption with the DNC during elections, actively getting military personnel killed overseas, covering up government lies and corruption just like the rest, and being such an insufferably smug bitch about it that she's literally the least likable human being?
Like dude, Clinton's a public figure, you can probably just look up the list of controversies.
On top of that, Everything Clinton says is a lie. No one knows what her Actual beliefs are because her Stated beliefs are just "Whatever's surface-level popular with Dems at that given moment."
No joke, there are videos people have compiled of Clinton Now arguing with Clinton a five years ago. And again five years before that. You can't even believe anything she says because one minute she'll be anti-gay in the extreme, the next she'll be like "Oh I've Always been pro-LGBT, I've always supported minorities, I never said anything bad about the-DONT QUOTE ME FROM THE PAST YOU FILTHY TRUMP SUPPORTER!"
3
-
@Im__Andy-f6x Yes, but Unlike them, Hillary is her single worst enemy.
She always Juuuust about gets away with her corruption... THen fucks herself at the finish line.
SHe lost to Obama because her dumb ass just assumed "Psh, America won't vote for a black guy, I got this".... And lost like an idiot.
Then, against Trump, she was Winning.... THen decided she didn't have to try and campaign for the last several months and instead just insulted, demeaned, berated and shitsmeared anyone who didn't just vote for her unquestioningly, no matter how much she Didn't offer anyone in terms of policies. Her entire platform was "Status Quo is great, America is fine, No changes needed, Don't vote Trump."
In 2016. When the average American is knee-deep in shit and hates the system, this idiot told them "Shut up, America is fine how it is, vote for me or you're a filthy Trump supporter."
She also accused a lot of people of sexism if they didn't just give her the vote as a right she's Owed.
So not Only was she a bog standard establishment nothing candidate... She was also an antagonistic and extremely unlikeable bitch to anyone who didn't praise her name and cast their vote for her no questions asked.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Hello Mr. City Police Officer.
Semi-pertinent question, and I'm not saying this as an attack on you, just asking for your insight as to why a specific situation in a city PD may be occurring:
I currently live in St. Louis. And as you can imagine, the violence capitol of the USA got sooooo much worse in the last few years since the pandemic shutdown.
But here's the weird thing to me: My neighborhood and the neighborhoods around us have gunshots, explosions and break-in shit all throughout the night. Like seriously, it's getting to be an hourly occurrence some weeks, it's a total hellhole here.
But I haven't seen a cop in my neighborhood for a week. Not even joking, the crime is going on very audibly Here.... But I only seem to see the cruisers a few streets over at the closest. The authorities and related services don't even seem to show up here at all unless there's already a body. Not even a patrol.
So, cards on the table, I just really want to know: Is there a rational reason for this situation to be occurring? Like in some places it's actively getting to the point where gangs are filling in the vacuum, do cities just not have the manpower to deal with this when national shit's putting the squeeze on everyone, or is there an ulterior reason you may have insight on?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@nathanielchieffallo4273 I don't think the military has any control over the decisions, but I noticed something wildly off after I served for 8 years:
I had no clue what our objectives even were. Like I get it, OPSEC is important and all, but like the soldiers who fought the Nazis knew "Our target is Hitler and the Third Reich." Okay, fair enough. Vietnam it was "We're fighting the insurgents." Korea, similar deal. Whether you agree with the reasons Why is another topic, but like we Knew what the overarching objective was.
But with the middle east, beyond "Fight terrorism", there's no actual objective. Whose our current enemy? Never got an answer. What are we after? No real answer. How do we know mission's been accomplished? Crickets.
No one I ever worked with, enlisted or officer, SNCO or even up to 1-star generals ever seemed to actually have a concrete understanding of who the enemy even was or what steps would need to be taken to get from A to B on Winning anything. It was always just the assumption that we weren't allowed to know and that someone higher up the chain knew and to trust that orders given facilitate it.
But since when did "Who is the enemy" become OPSEC? Since when was knowing the most basic aspects of the objective now only the privilege of the highest ranked people? How come no one was allowed to know when the war was projected to be over?
Only answer I could think of was "They don't know either. The generals are being told to shut up and obey just as much as we are. They don't know who the enemy is, only to attack whoever the Fed Says it is that week. They don't know when the war will be over or how because the people holding our leash don't want it over. There's no way in hell we've been Actually losing to a rag-tag bunch of terrorists for 30 uninterrupted years despite dumping so much money and lives into this. Perpetual war IS the objective."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MartianManHunter7 "Look no further than the last video, they posted. She is was literally in favor of banning flavor tabacoo but not regular tobacco."
Notice you omitted the why and just stuck with the "She dun like this specific thing but not all of it."
"She also had a terrible take on the Will Smith Slap."
Eh, no disagreement there. Fair enough.
"They both also had bad takes on the Economy, We all remember this is only transatarory even though everyone in their audience was telling them it wasn't. Sometimes they both have terrible takes and sometimes they have great ones. "
Ahhh, "The Economy" and "this is only transitory", but once again omitting anything in the way of details as to "What About the Economy they were even talking about" , just "The Economy."
Very helpful. So far I'm at 1 out of 3 on relevant criticisms, and even that 1 still completely omits any pertinent details that indicate what her opinion was. You're lucky I remember that video otherwise you'd have a big fat "0".
"It's okay dude, everyone has different morals and it's ridiculous for you to think that these two have never been hypocrites, or that they've never been biased or that their arguments and morals aren't floppy."
Pretty sure I expressed annoyance at your vague-ass substance-less declarations of hypocrisy and bad takes.
"Everyone's a hypocrite" is true, but without context as to What they're being hypocritical about it's about as worthless an addition to the conversation as "The sky is blue". No shit Sherlock, got an Actual problem or are we just talking about generalized human flaws?
"I've watched them for thousands of hours over the years, can I point out all the terrible takes and how many times they've been hypocrites, no. It's impossible. "
I'd settle for like 2-3 actually with details. Your previous comments had exactly None of them demonstrated in any detail, seems like someone whose watched "thousands of hours" could at least go into detail about One of them, y'know?
"Not that they care, but I was just giving them and the comment the same energy. Everyone needs to be humble and accept that they can be wrong or that they could be in the wrong."
JFC again, no duh. But if you aren't Specific about what they're even wrong about, you can't blame anyone else reading your comments for starting to get pissed off at nothingburger criticisms.
Everyone is and can be a hypocrite, but all hypocrisy is not equal. The slave-rich tech mogul declaring themselves pro-free speech one day and banning/firing anyone publicly who criticizes them is not equal to a child lying about who broke the vase while decrying dishonesty.
Everyone is and can be wrong, but not all wrongs are equal and just Saying It without context is a nothing statement where the only valid retort is "No shit Sherlock."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@horvatlovren7198 Eh, America's education system is already kind of crap, and our understanding of foreign nations and contemporary politics (if it exists at all) is usually limited to "The most immediately significant nations involved at the given minute.... And also Russia/China regardless of express involvement at the time."
If anything I'd almost call this a compliment to the Balkans, but you guys haven't really started enough shit or made enough big messes to really be on the average American's radar.
Again, it's not a dig at the Balkans, the average American's list of known nations is largely restricted to "USA, Texas, Florida, California, Portland, (Yeah I know, three states and a city on the list, but they may as well be the way we bitch about them), Canada, Mexico, all the formerly imperialist Euro nations we got our playbook from, any nation with a bunch of poorly-defended oil, and the "cOmMuNiStS!!!!!"
If we don't know you exist, that's a good thing. The world is just divided into "Nations Americans hate" and "Nations Americans don't know about." And yes, our own nation is also on that list.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
It's usually considered the "default" position because of human biology. Like we've come into contact with previously undocumented native tribes that don't participate in global society (or in the case of Amazonian ones, maybe literally never knew there was a world outside their jungle). And they are actually a fairly solid barometer for how humans behave in a more natural state simply because they've never advanced beyond tribalism.
And they are fiercely communal societies almost entirely. Not "Communist", they usually don't have a frame of reference for modern economic philosophies, but they care about eachother and work as a unit to care for the needs of the tribe. This is backed up in our archaeological findings of old hunter-gatherer tribes, arguably the First communities, and they were also seemingly very communal groups.
And with good reason: In their world, it's Do or Die. And humans, being social creatures, means "Succeed Together or Die Alone."
Now obviously we don't really have AS extreme consequences for community failure on small-scales anymore in the modern world, but all our problems with corruption and greed stem from people choosing themselves over the community (i.e. the tribe).
Not to say Individualism is bad, far from it. Individualism is the source of a lot of amazing innovations and successes for humanity. However American Capitalism takes individuality to such an extreme that people are willing to burn the entire community to the ground just to net themselves a few more millions. "Do right by the community and indulge your success a bit on the side" turned into pure "Fuck You, Got Mine" in the States.
Social Democracy is in many respects just trying to apply modern technology and philosophies to essentially try and simplify things to when humans could actually cooperate without suicidal levels of avarice getting in the way. And it's not anti-meritocracy, Europe is still Capitalist and has wealthy people while being what Americans would call "Socialist."
And it's incredibly popular. Most policies in America that are classified by politicians here as "Socialist" poll extremely well among the populace as long as you Don't call it Socialist. It's only among politicians that "Socialism" is actually evil, and it's only evil because it threatens their extortion racket and the rackets of their billionaire donors.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@EXCELLENCE "zygote, fertilized egg cell that results from the union of a female gamete (egg, or ovum) with a male gamete (sperm)."
"I can already tell you aren’t very educated on this subject as nobody is talking about zygotes (aka sperm or eggs) and rather they’re talking about embryos and fetuses." -You
Pfff! Yeah, I'm the one who has no idea what they're talking about.
"And no offense, but if you can’t see the difference between a fetus in the womb and a cancerous tumor, you have some tough thinking to do."
I believe I literally asked for an explanation as to the difference as You people see it, this strikes me as an admission that you can't even explain your own moral position.
"If you’re pro-choice, just say it and move on."
Ah, so you don't even want a discussion, you just want the people who think differently to shut up and comply. Then why are you even here?
"If you think the human life of an embryo or zygote is less valuable than a born human being, just say it and move on."
I believe I asked you why you think it's equally valuable, but you declined to answer. Presumably because you can't actually answer, which seems to be the trend with you pro-lifers.
"But the same old nonsense arguments from the left about how “iTs jUsT a ClUmP oF CeLlS” is so absurd that I can say with confidence the people who believe it are trying to save face for the sake of upholding abortion"
Such nonsense that you can't even pony up a coherent explanation for why it's incorrect?
You seem awfully confident for someone who can't be fucked to answer a single question. Do you not know your own reasonings? Can you not explain why you believe as you do?
I'm starting to think you just want to control women and need an excuse. Most people with a coherent morality can actually explain it. You apparently can't.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@richardreese8038 "that’s why they say they are gay one day bi the next day."
Nice citation there. Whose claiming this exactly?
"So how are you born nonbinary or gender fluid ?"
Not the same thing as sexuality, but literally the same way genius.
Jesus dude, this isn't that complicated. Look, I'm assuming you're straight and a man (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), but just use yourself as an example here:
You live in a culture where LGBT people exist openly. We're present in your media and have been so for decades now, most likely well before you were born.
At Any point did you ever question you man-ness just because you saw a trans person or genderfluid person? Ever once question your manhood just by being exposed to LGBT people or topics in media?
Ever once question your sexuality just because you may have seen two dudes kiss or ever found yourself attracted to a man for any reason sexually?
If the answer is "No", then congrats! You're straight and a cisgendered man.
If the answer to either is "Yes", then guess whose not as straight/cis as they think they are?
Convincing someone to "Be gay" or "be gender fluid is a ridiculous concept because that's as ridiculous as you claiming you can just Decide to suddenly like sucking dick.
If being gay is a choice, if being Trans is a choice, then prove it by just Deciding to be gay/trans. Flip the switch and just decide to love the cock. No big deal right, you can just flip the switch back to straightness whenever you want if your position is correct, Right?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@GordieKat ...Yeah, I'm not interested in the Party lines, my dude.
Like you're not wrong, but I remember nothing for the past two elections but a shamelessly corrupt and privately-rigged DNC controlling the Democrat side of them and ensuring No One but a Establishment lapdog would ever even be allowed as an option for the General Election.
Like you're right, Republicans are some cheating SOB's.... But let's not kidd ourselves here, we have pretty much the entire last 20 years of Democrat behavior confirming that they're exactly as low, underhanded, and willing to cheat to win if they can get away with it as the GOP. Not only that, but were generally bipartisanly Supporting and voting WITH the Republicans to actively fuck us common folk over.
I'm sick of cheaters and criminals, and I'm sick of choosing between one corrupt fraud and the other. Let them all burn on the same pyre.
Like I'm not gonna just vote Republican or whatever, hating Democrats doesn't mean I'm jumping to the opposite corrupt game. But... Dude my entire life for the past 3 decades has been shaped by these two clownshow parties interfering with and overriding my choices and life trajectory on a whim.
It's really hard to pick a side when I have an exceedingly short list from both Parties on exactly how much value they've provided to my existence, and every positive is counterweighted by about three-dozen negatives and warcrimes that completely invalidate any decency the victory may have originally had.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@CANT_FEAR_YOUR_OWN_WORLD "In this scenario, I think his thinking is pretty fair. When talking about God, there are so many semantic plot holes especially when dealing with English, a language to describe specific things in a three dimensional realm from a subjective individualistic view from a subjective culture. The concept of a god has always been something of higher dimensions. The moment you add one extra spatial dimension, everything breaks down completely where known truths and their seemingly contradictory counterparts blend together in a weird conclusion that happens to still work like a 4D tesseract where its different cross sections seem to slip through their selves. "
A God is a supernatural fucking being with reality-warping powers typically associated with or depicted as the object of worship in religion.
Not that complex, it was a basic Yes or No.
"Whether you like it or not Jordan Peterson DOES have a mind like a philosopher who thinks scientifically and religiously"
Oh yeah, after a benzo bender that melted a few cortexes.
"so his idea of god is more nuanced than a person who follows the Bible by every word. "
Wow, jerk him off some more why don't ya? He asked what the word "Do" means, is this seriously the hill you wanna die on and the dick you wanna suck while doing it?
"The concept of a god has always been something of higher dimensions."
No it hasn't.
"The moment you add one extra spatial dimension, everything breaks down completely where known truths and their seemingly contradictory counterparts blend together in a weird conclusion that happens to still work like a 4D tesseract where its different cross sections seem to slip through their selves. "
No, it just means you have 1 more dimension. Fucking Christ, you're already made of 3 of them and can contemplate a 4th, and you're just a stupid naked monkey. Clearly it's not that big a deal.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@notmee2388 "Let everyone else witness the crudity and nastiness of your dismissive, uncivil, and smug tone. "
Oooooh, such holier-than-thou judgement. XD
" Slave holders always think they know what is best for their slaves, and if the slave dares to speak up, they become hostile and irate that such a lowly personage should challenge their obvious superiority."
You're not a slave, get over yourself.
"Shall we bend down to every zealot of the moment who declares that he knows "The Truth (TM)?" Especially when that "Truth (TM)" is sponsored, disseminated, and paid for and by a corporation that stands to make huge profits?"
You're literally demanding people accept illness and disease and your beliefs, but okay zealot.
"Free, honest people have calm, respectful discussions on matters, and try to help each other understand our differences, boost each other up, and even persuade each other; they do not degrade and belittle each other. They seek to understand each other's perspective; because everyone is fallible, and sometimes others know things you do not."
Your entire argument is "I dun wanna, you can't make me" followed by nothing but comparisons of yourself to rape victims, slaves, and blanket accusations that anyone who doesn't think like you are tyrants.
I understand your position just fine. Your position's just that of a whiny ass idiotic child who has nothing but appeals to victimhood.
Where's the world's smallest violin when you need it?
"So Shall we respect each other's human dignity and treat each other with respect, and understand that a diversity of attitudes and opinions is to be expected? Shall we say diversity is good, we are going to disagree on any number of topics, and that is okay, we should still be kind and compassionate to each other? "
Non sequitur, irrelevant to the discussion, also practice what you preach dimwit. Where's your respect for other positions, all you've done this entire thread is bitch and whine that other opinions that contradict yours exist.
"Or should we treat others as this person, who seems to want to be called "massah?" and whose philosophy is: don't get a second opinion, don't do your own research, just shut up, follow orders, and do as you are told."
Ohhhh yeah just Feel the respect in the air! XD
Imagine being such a baby that you need to compare "getting a damn shot" to being a victim of Trans-Atlantic African slavery.
God you are the biggest perpetual victim. Get. Over. Yourself. You. Child.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Why do we have to use the government? Actually a probably more cynical answer than you'd think: Power.
The government of America holds a frightening amount of control over the goings-on of the entire planet for a single nation. What our government does, in Our name, reflects on us if we do nothing about it. And "Power" doesn't just go away.
I don't particularly like it, but reform seems more likely to work than abolition simply because America's government is straight up too powerful to just do away with. And even if we did, we'd just create a massive power-vacuum that one of the dozens and dozens of countries we've actively pissed off will inevitably rush in to fill. And even if America turned a new leaf around... Well, I can't exactly imagine the Middle East just letting that go after we've been bombing them and bombing them and slaughtering their civies in collateral damage for decades. America's simply punched too many nations in the dick over the years for us to honestly expect them to Not hold a perfectly understandable grudge.
Plus "big government" is kind of inevitable. At least it is in our case, there's 300 million plus Americans in this country, and we're ridiculously massive. You can't really organize and hold onto that much territory without needing a "big" government.
However, that being said, I'm not exactly advocating for More government as much as I'm advocating for more efficient usage of our manpower and resources. So sure, the government would still be involved, but the plan is to trim the fat and streamline the government.
Like let's take all our social welfare programs, specifically the healthcare-related ones. Each program is severely limited in scope, and on Top of that you're paying not just for the program, but the salaries of the workers (Which we've got multiple redundant copies of in terms of beancounter employees since we've got multiple redundant systems in place). This is inefficient and sloppy and wastes resources through bureaucracy that could be better spent actually doing the task at hand.
So let's say we instituted Universal Healthcare: Now you're paying for yet another government social welfare program. Which sucks. However, what you're NOT paying for anymore (in addition to the insurance premiums privately that you no longer need) is Medicare, Medicaid, the myriad of other healthcare-related organizations whose individual bureaucracies no longer exist, and since this would mean less people are in crippling debt due to insurance scamming (because insurance companies are completely superfluous, add nothing to the system, and are literally just a useless middle-man/loanshark between you and the doctor), so you're Also most likely paying less for the national programs relating to poverty and homelessness due to their simply being less people in that group to begin with. Kind of like adding ten but subtracting thirty, your ultimate overall costs annually would drop. And your taxes don't even need to increase, we've already got more than enough in taxpayer dollars to do this without tax hikes, and maybe even lower taxes, if we can just strip the excess bullshit from the Fed and streamline the good shit.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ardemua ...Dude, small business was dead in the water the second Amazon existed. Do you honestly believe that some underhanded subterfuge and political mindgames is necessary to destroy small businesses when we're already doing the one thing required by just having a juggernaut like Amazon whose just more convenient, generally cheaper, and delivers to your door?
Small business are dying already because of corporate corruption, bully tactics, exploiting lawsuits to force small companies to either submit to the Big Dog or go broke in court trying to fight frivolous lawsuits, and we've effectively slackened our laws regarding monopolies (and defunded the IRS' ability to prosecute major corporations, thanks for the one Microsoft lobbyists), meaning there's next to nothing anymore in America stopping a corporation from just devouring any small business who gets uppity with them.
But small business is also dying for the simple fact of convenience. Major corporations simply have access to resources, technology, and manpower your little Mom and Pop place simply doesn't have. Small businesses die because they're too weak to compete with the most predatory monopolistic shitbaggers we created.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MakeCaliGreatAgain How do you figure?
Because that's not even a correctly formatted sentence and you can't exactly drag up the Founder's corpses to ask them directly.
As Written, the 2nd Amendment Doesn't explictly grant the right to Individuals to bear arms, and any lawyer allowed to take on that case would have a field day in all the vague as shit language in the Constitution.
Vagueness in legal documentation only ever advantages the party abusing it. If Anyone in the US system decided to ban guns for anyone except recognized militia forces, you'd have zero legal grounds to fight them on it. Maybe you could argue it violates the Spirit and Intent of the 2nd Amendment, but it sure as fuck doesn't violate the Express Letter of the 2nd Amendment. And in courts the Exact Wording matters, not idealism.
There legitimately exists No Language in the Constitution that explicitly specifies individuals, therefore you can't Legally Prove it meant individuals.
Doesn't matter what's true, doesn't matter what the Founders meant, only matters what can be legally proven in court. And as Americans are so fond of proving, there exists No Law in your system you won't violate, pervert, and abuse into oblivion just to get around legality and consequences.
Your system would absolutely do it if they get any opportunity to do so.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ejcarron2283 "What are you lying about? You just said he never retracted his statements. I told you that he did and you said that's irrelevant."
Hmmm... Let me check... Pretty sure you called me a liar before that was even a vague topic of discussion, but let's check.
"You're lying, which makes me think this isn't a rational argument. I suspect you just hate Alex and want him to be silenced. That is not good.
When you said he was given a chance to retract and didn't, I don't know what you're referring to. In what way was he given a chance? Also, he did say he realized he was wrong about saying Sandy Hook was a conspiracy. Did you realize that?"
Hmmm... Looking your comment over, literally right there so you can see it to.
...Nope! You at no point told me he retracted his statements. You did however say "I don't know what you're referring to" and asked when he was ever given a chance to retract his statements.
So did he retract his statements or did he "never have a chance to"? Ohhhhh, I see, I'm supposed to take you saying "but he said he was sorry" (first off, when?, second off, not a retraction by itself) as the retraction?
Yeah, not how it works, you "retract a statement" as a media outlet by removing your lies from your platform, not just 'saying you're sorry."
If you're gonna call me a liar you'd better have something more than "hoping to Christ they don't re-read my previous comment."
You suck at this.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@BarrySlisk Step One: Be Born into a rich family.
You don't even need the other steps, that's pretty much it. Be born to Rich Americans, Then you're guaranteed to succeed in all things in life with minimal effort.
Your chances or ever becoming anything in America drop exponentially in direct tandem in America with your tax bracket. If you're rich, America will bend over backwards to ensure yo never fail. If you're poor, fuck off and die, YOU get to "pull yourself up by your nonexistent bootstraps."
Socialism for the rich, Capitalism for the poor.
If Capitalism was so damn awesome, then why do None of the American rich actively engage in the Actual consequences of Capitalism on any level? Why are all America's most successful capitalists all criminals who commit tax fraud like it's their job, exploit overseas slave labor, and commit criminal violations all the damn time with impunity?
If Capitalism is so great, why does it Only seem to work great for you when you start doing everything in your power to circumvent Capitalism? Usually a Good system doesn't only guarantee success if you're a shameless cheat.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
"Kyle… this is doxxing. The information being public doesn’t change it. "
Literally does.
"Doxing (sometimes written as Doxxing) is the act of revealing identifying information about someone online, such as their real name, home address, workplace, phone, financial, and other personal information"
Can't "reveal" something that's public information. Real name's already public, it wasn't his home address, workplace, phone, financial information, or anything classified as personal.
Every aircraft's location is known at all times, "Owning the aircraft" does not change things.
You cannot legally be doxxed by any information that's already public. You can't "reveal" something that's already revealed.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Dude, your gen was the first to take the shit. Don't apologize for being lied to.
The only difference between your gen and ours is that your parents gen had the best economy in US history to lord over you (Provided to them by THEIR parents, not them) and use as a bludgeon to slap you back into compliance. Hard to argue with success, right, even when that success is sneakily cutting off all the ways for you to achieve the same success.
We... Didn't get that. We heard the same shit, but we didn't have a well-off Boomer just a generation away smacking us with their wealth and calling us lazy. We saw you guys, busting your ass through economic recessions, we watched you get laid off for shit you didn't even do wrong, watched you guys struggle and claw and suffer menial labor jobs unworthy of your credentials just to put food on the table for us kids.
We watched you guys, our parents, get fucked in front of us as children by this system and watched you guys struggling to keep it all together and soldier on through it anyway.
You have nothing to apologize for. You guys got abused first in this sick chain of abuses. At worst your gen are kind of victims of Stockholm syndrome.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
A world with less dead people over gaslighting.
America literally lied you people into Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Vietnam and Korea, ALWAYS hiding behind high-minded ideals and philosophy to justify it.
...And you were being Lied to, deceived, and conned every single step of the way into sacrificing your life for a "high-minded ideal" that was nothing but bullshit words in the wind.
If you're doing things for your ideals of your own choice, that's one thing. But if the Government tries to persuade you on "high-minded ideals", then they're literally just doing a census of the room as to whose gonna be the most inexpensive cannonfodder so their kids don't have to die.
Fuck that, my family means more to me than America, America views me as rich kid cannonfodder.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@xhagast Laws of Economy?
I mean I'm conflicted here. On the one hand I do agree with your assessment that the rich are pretty much engineering their own demise.
...But bro I am not gonna lie, we came to that conclusion by Wildly different avenues. I'm sorry, I promise I'm not trying to be rude, I genuinely do believe you insofar that the rich are too divorced from reality to see the obvious consequences of their actions and it's probably gonna screw their whole game up.
...But my dude, that's honestly all it probably is: a grift. And it doesn't make sense for them to just shitkill all of us.
Like you don't stay in power as long as these people have if you're THAT stupid. Like they know full well they kind of Need the working class to exist in order to keep their grift going. Power, again, means jack squat if there's no one around to wield it over, literally their entire lives require the "serfs" to continue existing, this grift of theirs has been working pretty damn well right up until they start getting a bit Too greedy.
Like there's no sane point in slaughtering a bunch of people you intend to keep robbing over the course of their lives. The rich's problem is greed, not outright insanity. Greed's at Least smart enough to remember to keep the people it's robbing alive as long as the hustle keeps working.
You don't even need some dark syndicate working behind the scenes, just a nation of rich assholes all independently doing what rich assholes have always done: Be greedy shits until it goes too far, accidentally supporting the cause being made against them in the impending societal shift.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Drew_goo ...What I promised I'd do?
Like you wanna know how you Win elections? Give people the shit they want.
If I'm Biden and I'm on the campaign trail, you know what I'm doing? Grabbing a list of the top 50 things voters want by majority, pick the top 10, and run on That. Champion those policies every possible chance I'm on camera, make it Impossible to associate me with anything but those policies, Annoy the ever-loving Shit out of every other politician all day err day until they're sick of me.
They'll either deny me or they'll comply with my demands just to make me shut up. If they do as I want, then sweet. The people get something they wanted off that list, and my 2nd term is secured right then and there by virtue of "I was a President whose appointment was actually Worth something."
If they deny me, guess whose ass is on blast the Entire Rest of my term? Every single motherfucker who voted No. I would campaign on reminding every single voter who looked at their demands and told them "No." Turn the people on the people Actually getting in their way.
In short I'd actually Do Something with the political power I've been granted besides sucking my own dick over how "Not Trump" I am.
Bernie, as much of a pussy as he was for caving, had the right idea when he focused on actual policies people wanted. Hell, Trump, for all his bullshit, was at Least smart enough to Lie and pretend he was for what the people wanted.
...The fuck are Dems doing? The fuck are Establishment Republicans doing?
Promising nothing, delivering nothing, only helping out their corporate donors and telling Us why we deserve to eat shit.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@exomancer3632 Not the same political system, communists and fascists flat out hate eachother, but I see your point.
However, here's the major difference: Without a God, you have to justify why your position is valid. Stalin justified his position with a big fuck off military force the people couldn't oppose effectively. But he still had to Convince people his way was right, still had to rationalize it, still needed human reasons that spoke to Somebody to get them to comply.
But when it's "God", you don't have to justify anything. Just say "God commands" and the idiots will follow.
Hell, you want a good example of how fuck-easy the religious are to dupe into atrocities, let's look back at Stalin: An atheist in a nation dominated by the Russian Orthodox Church, and yet what did all the Christians do? Followed the atheist anyway in spite of his system being in direct conflict with their creed. He didn't even attack religions or churches directly, Just those that challenged HIS authority by asserting the idea that God was superior to Stalin in Soviet land. A Secular Stalin may have given the order, but it was Russian Christians carrying out his commands against churches that questioned the State.
Hell, let's whip out Hitler since we're in the 40's. Overwhelmingly Christian Germany, Still got led to atrocity because an angry man spouted off about God enough to convince. They even had "God is with us" emblazoned on their equipment.
Secularism isn't perfect, but the history is pretty evident: It's wayyy easier to manipulate a religiously-obsessed culture over a secular one. Because you never need to justify anything to the religious with anything except "God said so, now Obey!"
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ottz2506 "I’m just saying he can’t complain about people feeling nihilistic and depressed as if he doesn’t contribute to that at all. "
Ohhhh, so you're objection is that he has complaints, yet by virtue of being a news commentator he contributes to the misery regarding those complaints.
...And this is a problem how?
"However you sound like the people who turn to people with mental health problems and say “lol, just stop being sad! Stop letting people get you down! Stop go outside! Waaah!”."
No, I believe I told you to stop bitching about the delivery of a message. No one's making you watch, no one forced you to be here, if you don't like the delivery than it's on you to suck it up or go somewhere else. If you don't like it there's a very very easy way for you to correct this disparity in your life. No one's victimizing you here except your own viewing habits.
"I’m fine with him talking about it all but I think he just needs a little bit of self awareness when he talks about people feeling nihilistic and depressed about the state of the world and acting as if he doesn’t contribute to that"
I know. You said this already. You're fine with the subjects being discussed, you're just pissy about the delivery. And apparently think Kyle should acknowledge that the nature of his position contributes to this as if that will do anything to change the result.
"I literally made it clear what I meant in the second comment I made. And then I made it clear again in a comment response to another person. It’s like you’re intentionally missing the point but then, at that point, that’s a you problem."
Or you're just a shit interlocuter. That's also an option, you sucking ass at spitting out a damn thought. But nah, it's a "Me" problem. I understand your position just fine, I just think it's a whiny ass position. Do not mistake my fundamental disrespect for your viewpoint for ignorance. I Know. I just don't care because your definition of a problem barely classifies as one to me.
"I’m pretty sure if Kyle did a thing about how the news heavily rely on bad news for ratings, which can then lead to people feeling down, you’d all be nodding along."
Probably, sure. But there's no way to get around that without censoring or sugar-coating the news, so I take it as the price of doing business.
"You wouldn’t be doing the “wahh fee fees are hurt. They should get over it”."
Actually I would be. Case and point, I'm doing it right now to you. I understand your premise and point, I just fail to see why it's worth giving a shit about.
"Social media contributes to people feeling down and horrible. We all consider that a problem and yet I don’t really see the “oh waaah social media is hurting my fee fees!” crowd making an appearance when this problem is brought up."
Because you can fucking log off. All the solutions to the problem are Right There. If you don't take them, that's on you.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@oddjam Lol, how is that not an excuse the USA would use?
Worked for Korea and Vietnam. We started shit, We opened fire and kept shooting shit from their shores into their territory.
AN Active provocation of war. But the instant they decided to fire back, suddenly it's all over our media "OH MY GOD THEY ATTACKED US! WHAT SAVAGES, WHAT MONSTERS! HOW DARE THEY?! DRAFT EVERYONE, WE'RE GOING TO WAR!"
This is how we do things: bait, and bait, offering unjust and asinine provocations until the target gets sick of our bullshit, whereupon we turn around and pretend to be the victims as an excuse to slaughter.
We're the world's most violent victim-complex in progress. Hell, we're doing it to the Middle East right now, starving innocents to death with blockades and sanctions, actively ENSURING the next generation in the Mid-East will have nothing but very justified reasons to hate us and want war.
Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat. America WILL have its profit war.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@oliviamoore3426 8th, actually.
Behind, in order from least to most wheat production, Pakistan, France, Canada, the USA, Russia, India, and China.
Like I'm not saying their wheat contribution is unimpressive, but "Breadbasket of the World" is a bit of a stretch when they're the 8th biggest breadbasket.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@brettmaloney1411 Hmm... Let's see, on the list of things that "aren't codified rights...
Since you seem to like that argument, let's go down the list of things that Aren't codified rights.
1: Gay rights
2: Women's rights
3: a prohibition on child labor
4: Ammunition (Ohhh you have the right to "bear arms", but I don't see a single rule anywhere that says you need to be capable of Firing them)
5: Oh hey, White Rights, seeing how the Founders apparently thought that was so obvious they didn't need to codify it.
6: Free Speech (I mean hey, the Government can't bar you from speech, but as demonstrated there's absolutely zero rules about buying a private company as the government and Making Them censor for you)
Literally anything AND everything that isn't explicitly laid out in bold text in the Constitution is not a right you have. Hell, you don't even have a Constitutional Right to Your Children, so hey we could argue that we can just take your children from you without reason or resource because "You actually Don't have a right to your kids, isn't legality fun?"
Think about every single thing in your life that's NOT in the Constitution, add ALL of it to the list of liberties you can lose, and realize your entire point is not only vapid and pointless, but it's Exactly how your enemies are going to make you regret this.
"It's not a right" Do you Really want to give us card blanche to attack every aspect of your life on the grounds of "It's not a codified right?"
Because I can guarantee that everyone that hates you conservative busybodies is exponentially more creative than you when it comes to turning your own laws back on you. Flip that coin.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MH-ro1lg "A teacher or district can't have their course curriculum like this: 9 am is Math, 10 am is History, 11am is lunch, noon recess 1pm is Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Why There Are Now 7,843 Genders Instead of 7,842, 2pm STEM/Arts, 3pm school is out."
...You haven't been in the school system for a long time, have you? Because that's literally not even remotely close to how public schools handle this topic.
There's literally no such thing as "Sexual Orientation Class" and it doesn't take a full semester to say "Hey it's possible to be LGBT and that's fine."
How stupid do you think kids are that they'd need a full course just to understand Gay People Exist and are Valid?
"And teachers also can't talk to a little child about anything to do with sexuality and then say "don't tell your parents we're talking about [insert disgusting sexual thing an adult, especially teachers, shouldn't be talking to children about even though people like you go literally insane at the very idea of adults not being allowed to groom children into normalizing adult activities]."
This literally wasn't fucking legal in the first place, good job creating a law to prevent the Already Illegal. Was Florida just letting sex offenders in their schools or something before this? Did you have ZERO anti-pedophilia laws as a State until JUST NOW?!
"We identify as threats to pedos and chomos everywhere, including the ones who infest the schools. Our pronouns are fuck around and find out."
Then why do you people only ever talk about LGBT people and drag queens?
Unless you think "Being LGBT" or "Being a drag queen" is inherently sexual? Which says a fuck of a lot more about you then it does about them.
"Edit: You also lied about it being illegal to "mention your spouse." What an absolute absurdity."
Prove I'm lying. XD I'd love to know what someone who just lied about this bill not being applied to LGBT people thinks a lie looks like.
You accused me of lying, so surely you've got the smoking gun.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@moejohnson2132 It's literally a fucking play on words, doorknob.
This commentator of OAN at previous times yammered on about the sanctity of life and shit, in regards to abortion, and yet here the same pro-lifer is advocating execution for all their political opposition.
I.e. "Huh, guess he ain't so pro-life after all."
Like the joke would be obvious regardless of your political stance, I fail to see how this is a "progressive joke."
And I see, your concern for life has a limit. Hey, awesome, so does a pro-choicers usually. We just set our level of concern for when a person is Actually a person, not some incidental sharing of biological material with an entity that can't think, feel, reason, or do anything we'd classify as recognizably human. "Being alive" is not a virtue in and of itself, and I highly doubt you'd shed a tear for us killing cancerous tumors just because they are also made of human DNA. Just like I highly doubt you spared a single thought to the trillions of lives you snuff out every time you have sex or jerk off or use Windex on the glass.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Tchafsir "I don't know what your problem is or why you're getting agitated."
That diagnosis come with a degree or is it just "your opinion man?"
"I'm talking about myself, what i think, and said you can disagree, no problem."
Yeah, and that's all you say. Literally all you say. This is a conversation with you:
You: Joe isn't right wing.
Everyone else: Because?
You: Just my opinion.
Okay that's your opinion. Why?
You: Just my opinion.
Does that opinion come with anything substantial?
You: Nah it's just my opinion.
I'm not agitated, I'm wondering what the point of you even being here is if just asserting things and going "just my opinion" to avoid any justification is all you do.
Whatever, you've made it clear "Just my opinion" is all you say, so I guess we're done here.
"You can label him if you want, cool, relax bro"
And you can keep going "Nuh uh, just my opinion" like a chimp, "Bro".
2
-
2
-
@elfullin "your framing is off. (1) Biden was not primaried, we can’t help that."
Primaries were cancelled in several states with Biden just unilaterally declared the winner.
"I blame only those who vote against their own interests, if you want to have Trump in office, vote for him, and if you’re against Biden, vote against him, but if your political values align more with the policies of Biden and you don’t vote for him because of his age, then you are to blame for bringing about a future which you yourself didn’t want."
Interesting that the people who forced Biden on us despite all protests are absolved of all responsibility for their actions.
"you can want him to step down all you want, this is something regular people can’t make happen, no matter how hard you push. Those who stick with Biden have the fact that he was voted for to be the nominee, other politicians didn’t want to primary him, and they’re sticking with the only option AT THE MOMENT, instead of trying to rip apart the party when we should be uniting against Trump."
Voted in? No he wasn't. We actively CANCELLED PRIMARIES so he Wouldn't have competition and just win by default.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@waltergrace565 "But I'll reply to the nonsense you posted in another thread."
Seems totally incoherent for anyone reading this thread, but okay.
"Ok, first, the site does not contain voter records.
Secondly, it's a poll site, a voter registration roll, and an absentee ballot tracker."
Which site? My other comment flat out said the link wasn't posting for me and I just said "Google public voting records for New York." You never got a site link from me directly, the hell do I know what site you visited?
"And third, you have to be a registered voter in the state of NY to use the page."
Still talking about a site I never sent you.
"(You most likely just found this out yourself and that's why you deleted your nonsense)"
Oh, so you Do know the comments didn't go through. Meaning you also know full well I have no idea what site you looked up due to the same reason.
"Kyle's a corporate dem and Bidenist cult member. "
Then prove it.
"You're obviously a disingenuous liar and a Bidenist cult member too."
Then prove it.
"Nice try though, haha.
Why'd you delete your posts? Haha...."
The comment you're pretending you're responding to literally includes repeated gripes on my part about YT deleting outside links, at least Pretend you're not full of shit.
Apologies to anyone else on this thread for the derailment. May as well accept this maggot doesn't answer questions. Just pulls this kind of shit and bails.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@blastortoise I'd say your average Republican voter is more Left than they think they are.
Like the popular direct democracy issues aren't just Lefties, but conservatives too. Not the majority of them, granted, but usually 30-50% of them.
Republican voters usually tend to also find Progressive policies reasonable enough if you rephrase it in a way that avoids American-politicized buzzwords or vernacular they associate with Democrats.
Like if you say "People should be paid a living wage for an honest day's work", they're usually onboard. "Hell yeah they should, we work hard, we should get paid like hardworking Americans!"
But the communication breaks down if, in your question, you use any words that the Establishment Right have spent decades demonizing. You know "Union", "collective bargaining", "Socialism", "fairness", the same way A Democrat follower might stop listening if you rephrase "We are obligated to defend our borders" as "Build a wall!"
Tribalist indoctrination is wild, dude.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@nickthompson1812 I will concede that, when you have no other choice, lesser of two evils voting is understandable.
However, that's not how people usually use it. They don't do it because "Oh I'm making a hard choice here", they do it because it's easier. Because if the lesser evil does anything fucked up, it's not Their fault, they just went for the lesser evil. It's not Their fault for not standing for anything or taking the easy way out, it's the lesser evil's fault...Despite the fact that the lesser evil's in power expressly Because they refused to take a stand.
Like that's kind of the elephant in the room here: When Trump was elected, people didn't pull this "lesser evil" excuse, they viewed everyone who voted Trump as complicit and willing. But when you call this group on it, it's "lesser evil". What choice did they have, don't look at me. Plus hey, it's the "lesser evil", I didn't fuck up THAT bad.
"Lesser evil" at this point has turned into an excuse for people who don't want to take responsibility for the Still massive pile of garbage they put in. You made a lesser evil choice. Fair enough. But that doesn't absolve you of the consequences of the choice made, lesser evil or not.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ardemua ...You do realize taxes don't make workers rights, Right? Like you could cut my taxes as a worker 100%, but that ain't gonna mean shit when I'm Still massively underpaid for a basic living wage, and live in a Right to Work state where my only options for work are "submit to the demands of the boss without question, personal ambition, or any indication that I aspire to more than low-wage bitch work... Or you're fired without a single bit of recourse or explanation."
It's also WHY Unions fail in right to work States. Someone talks Union, boss fires them immediately as a warning to anyone else thinking they might deserve more than being boss man's stooge.
Cutting taxes solves exactly None of the problems with workers rights in this nation. Great a min-wage worker has an extra few bucks on them. Too bad Rent is way more than that, food and utilities cost money, and my living situation doesn't adjust or shift in any way, Except I've got money for an extra sandwich at payday. All my taxes are mine, for a salary that was already wage-slavery designation in any first world nation outside of America BEFORE taxes.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@AlexeyVedernikov Eh, I'd reserve judgement for now. This is admittedly the most.... Well, oddly reasonable they've ever been, but they're on every damn Kyle video for the past several years demonizing everything Kyle claims as a positive.... Even when they contradict eachother.
Like seriously, up until now I was genuinely under the impression that his beliefs were literally just "The exact opposite of whatever Kyle says at any given time." If Kyle opposes big business, RTN is pro big business. If Kyle happens to praise a big corporation for any reason, suddenly Kyle's a corporate sellout and corporations are bad. Kyle wants higher taxes, RTN's full on anti-tax, but Kyle wants to reduce people's taxes for any particular reason, suddenly America Needs them to fund something or another.
Like I'm reserving judgement until the Next Kyle video comes out today, because the comment section of That video will determine whether or not anything in this comment thread was anything but a massive waste of time.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@shakayojgph The people you are asking me to trust Have no strategy, dude!
THese people always say "Not yet" and "Don't be reckless" every Single time the Left wants to do something. And it's ALWAYS people who are shamelessly polishing the Democrat Party's balls. But when you ask them what the actual plan is, there's nothing. Because the Actual Plan is to make the Left shut up and stop challenging power.
Seriously, what do you think you're going to get by doing nothing again, and again, and Again? When Bush was in office it wasn't a good time to push "because Republicans might win again". When Obama was in power it wasn't a good time because "He doesn't have the majority." When Obama DID have the majority it STILL wasn't a good time because "Democrats might lose their majority." 2016, not a good time. Trump's entire Presidency, not a good time. 2020, STILL not good enough.
I am not going to listen to a group of people who have spent the Entirety of my life telling me to never do anything, never rock the boat, just to trust them implicitly, and what the hell have I gotten for accepting that? Oh right, I got fucking Trump for it. Why should I trust the Democrats when they're actively telling me to Never fight for my own interests and to just hand them all the power to decide for me and are actively Working Against my political interests? Do you trust Republicans when they tell you to just shut up and trust them?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@CassieAngelica Oh I agree, it's true to one degree or another in pretty much every nation. Corruption is a human universal.
...The difference is America glorifies and exalts corruption, and objects to any restrictions upon it in the name of "liberty". America includes "freedom to strip freedom from others" as one of their "freedoms to protect."
America doesn't just "have a corruption problem", we actively dropped the pretense and just handed the whole enchilada over to the corrupt.
Hell, our Supreme Court has actively ruled in previous cases that "The cops are not legally obligated to protect or serve anyone but the US government." Our entire system Encourages a police force of predominantly bullies, thugs, and cowards who will bootlick for the US legal system.
The problems aren't just the cops, but they're absolutely a symptom of the real problem: America is not a democratic republic, we're not a free nation, we're Rome during the Fall.
We're Germany right after the Treaty of Versailles, we're the British Empire burning down.
We're an Empire, dominated by tyrants and traitors. And we're an empire that's dying. History always kind of indicates that the tyrant is at it's most savage just before the guillotine falls.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@RC-ll7hk Dude, I Know.
It feels like you're trying to pretend propaganda isn't effective or something. I'm saying that, at That point in time, when everyone was already pissed off at how ineffectual and obstructionist to populism Obama's establishment was, CLinton comes out with the only salespitch of "America's fine the way it is" when No One whose an average voter feels like shit's "fine" on any level, so we KNOW Clinton is lying and that the establishment is bold-faced lying to us.
....And in comes Trump, at the exact right time, mostly getting by On highlighting exactly everything wrong with "The Establishment", along with appealing to people sick and tired of establishment bullshit.
The Right Lie at the Right Time is a dangerously powerful thing. People didn't Want Status Quo, they wanted the America they were Promised. The Great Nation that we were spoonfed bullshit about our entire lives, this "Great Prosperity" that apparently only ever existed in the past, and Trump promised us that: The same monumental "change" Obama promised us, but never delivered on.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@patrickhenry4874 "ye alot if places should be run better I think that's more of a critique on corporations in general and they're inefficiencies not capitalism as a whole"
...Dude, I feel like you're missing the point. No one cares what "True" Capitalism is because never in the entire history of humanity has "True" capitalism ever been a thing.
The system we have Now calls itself Capitalism in America. If you're an American, Our system is, for all practical purposes, your experience with Capitalism. And it's a cruel, savage, exploitative and predatory relationship where corporations bribe the government to enact laws to steal even more from you, as we saw during the pandemic when corporations were given trillions in bailouts all while simultaneously Firing off the overwhelming majority of their staff so they could pocket it. I mean that bailout was "supposed to provide for workers during the shutdown", but Amazon doesn't need to pay them nearly as much if 90% of the workforce is fired the week before.
If THAT is all you've seen of Capitalism, why would anyone like it? Europe has capitalism too, they're just not morons and recognize that shit tends to go well when the people are content.
People aren't Anti-Capitalist, they're anti-Whatever-the-fuck-America's-crackedhead-definition-of-Capitalist.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@palestalemale8831 Uh huh. So was blowing 44 billion on it, lying at every turn, pretending to be shocked by bots existing he explicitly Said he was buying Tiwtter to fix to try and weasel out of the contract, not fixing anything, turning it into a MAGA cesspool and rendering it absolutely financially dead in the water, suing his own lawyers for "making" him buy it, All of which will forever be blamed on him and his reputation was nuked By Him Personally.
Interesting that Elon Musk's "Just As Planned" looks exactly like a stupid rich manbaby fucking up and making himself look useless and like all his success was a total fluke and corrupt and incompetent and evil until he just set it on fire to save a little face with "Totally planned all that, seriously. I'm not stupid, LOVE ME AND WORSHIP ME AS A GENIUS! PLEASE!!!!!"
The real genius here is Jack Dorsey for taking his failing business and dropping it on a chode too up his own ass to realize he has no idea what he's doing, thus ensuring the fall of Twitter will be 100% blamed on Musk and not him. 44 billion richer, dropped a failing company, shit-canned Musk's reputation and crapped all over Musk's finances in one move.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@friendlypup5650 So.... Just clarifying, the video didn't really have much to do with your comment and my difficulty reading it.
Like seriously, I'm sorry, but your initial comment is just very jankily formatted. Like I straight up had no idea what your position even was. Like okay, maybe I just didn't read it properly, I'm just saying.
Although now that I do know your position here.... Look, let's be real here, think in terms of optics: The One major positive thing that the Democrats did for us last.... Was pass something the Republicans thought up, put forward, which got Rejected by Democrats, only to be passed Exactly how it was initially pitched, but by a Democrat instead.
....Media-wise, how does that make Democrats look Good? It makes them look extremely petty and willing to steal credit for ideas that weren't even theirs, after prohibiting the exact same thing previously in order to deny Republicans any credit for it.
So.... The Democrat salespitch is "We're Electronic Arts?"
May as well just surrender and give the Reps the win now.
1
-
1
-
@friendlypup5650 ...Ohhhhh, you're an establishment shill.
Yeah, no, screw your Party. You're not Owed votes.
You know exactly what Progressives want for votes, Biden Promised us those things for our vote, and you lied to us.
None of the things we were promised are even up for discussion, and people's lives are being made worse by the economy imploding.
If you want Progressive votes as a Party, you're gonna have to Earn it this time. I don't know when you last looked at polling metrics relating to Democrats, but people Hate your Party. Not just Republicans, but everyone to the Left of you too. Promises aren't good enough anymore after well over a decade of lying to us for votes.
Like real talk, do you Want to win or don't you? Because to Progressives we've just been getting "Ohhh, you want our votes... But not enough to actually do anything to earn them. Oh well, hope that works for you come elections."
1
-
@friendlypup5650 So... Let's see if I understand you here:
You are correct that Progressives don't have the votes to win alone. That is correct, we do not.
...However YOU, Democrats, can't win Without our votes. We make up too much of your voting base, if We don't vote your way, Republicans win by default.
You know this. Hell, Democrats in general know this, hence why we get blamed whenever you guys lose.
So... Knowing that, Knowing you can't win unless we play ball, This is how you try to persuade us?
Well, I guess we'll see how well that works out for you, good luck in the election since you apparently don't need our votes.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@justsomeguy6336 "Obesity, debt, population."
You just said words. How does obesity factor in? Does Europe not have obese people? Are US citizens uniquely fat and lazy for humans?
How does debt factor in? Every modern nation has debt and the USA magically has endless money to spend without giving two shits about debt when it comes to corruption and war, but suddenly the debt is some actual problem the second it's "Doing anything productive whatsoever for the US citizenry" Fucking Israel has universal healthcare on Your Dime, but You guys can't figure it out? Does US debt work differently than "Every Other Nation's Debt?" or something? Are Americans uniquely incapable of economical math? Kind of impressive if the richest nation on Earth doesn't know how to handle money on any level.
Also, how tf does population factor in? In case you don't get why we use "per capita" measurements for nations, it's because "More People=More Labor=More resources in play." You go by "per 100k" peoples, not just "This number bigger than that one, ergo can't be done for reasons."
Is America uniquely incapable of making their population functionally productive despite having the heaviest workload for laborers of any nation that doesn't employ slavery?
"You clearly don’t think."
Ah, yes. I should discuss ideas like Real thinkers and just respond with context-void words as if that's actually an argument.
But hey, thanks for verifying that Americans are uniquely sub-intelligent humans that can't figure out how to do what every other modern nation does easily.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ignatiusjackson235 "'A fetus is literally incapable of cognition on any level for the majority of its gestation, so it's lacking the one uniquely human trait in biological organisms. So... How is it comparable?"
Hmmm.... Looks like a question to me.
Guess reading comprehension wasn't ever your strong suit.
See, this symbol here "?" indicates that a question is being posed. And the "How" is "How is this comparable" is oftentimes how the Beginning of a question begins, with some variation of the terms "Who, what, when, where, why, and/or how"
Now that you've been brought up to speed on basic English sentence structure, care to explain how your analogy to slaves not having any rights is even remotely comparable to an unthinking, unfeeling, mindless fetus?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Even then, "Trump's worse" isn't gonna hit hard when, like it or not, life Has incidentally gotten worse under Biden.
You can definitely debate how much of it was expressly Biden's fault or not, but all the horrible sanctions and economic policies Trump passed? Still there, despite Biden promising to remove them.
How about those cages we're tossing children in at the border Biden condemned under Trump? Still there, still operating, we just don't talk about it now. Stopped a war... Only to replace it with an enforced famine that's casing more chaos and destruction than the war was.
Supply chain Tanked. Inflation exploded, gas is functionally unfeasible as an expense, we're scared shitless of impending world war, Biden was actively proven to be lying about all his campaign promises.... And Biden's the one holding the sack with nothing to justify himself except "I'm not Trump."
All Trump's hellish policies exist despite Biden's group having the majority, ergo Biden supports them. So... What was the fucking difference between Biden and Trump to a voter Now?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RebornLegacy ...I'm aware that he used that to his advantage, yes. I'm not condoning or endorsing Trump, I'm just saying I don't think Trump won and ousted the Democrats Because Of bigots.
If the Dems had a good platform and message pushed and a massive checklist of accomplished promises to their voters under any of the last few Dem administrations, that'd be one thing. But let's be real here, we got lied to constantly. Promised the moon by Clinton prior to his run, got Republican shit. Got promised hope and change under Obama, got Republican shit. Pushed Biden on us as salvation from Trump's "Republican shit"..... Only for Biden to do absolutely nothing and let Republican shit do whatever it wants anyway.
You can only lie, cheat, and mislead people for so long and so sloppily before people start actively hating you as a traitor. And with human psychology being what it is, if your current leadership is doing nothing but screwing you over, humans have a tendency to over-correct the opposite direction out of spite if it actually does something. Humans compulsively Hate being fed bullshit once they find out it's bullshit.
The Dems are effectively driving their own voters away and blaming everyone else for it. Trump is, was, and remains a piece of absolute garbage, but we wouldn't even be Talking about Trump politically at all if the Dems at any point in the past 30 years did what they promised.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
...Yeah, hi, Vet here.
You do realize most of the military are broke ass enlisted, right? And because this country did minorities dirty early on and kept bringing the hammer down, unsurprisingly the demographic disparity between races is a lot smaller in the enlisted because most American minority populations are broke (Because again, fucked up history with racism), and the military actively incentivizes the poor and desperate.
Point is, if you think it's the "White Man" serving in the military exclusively on any level, then you don't know a single damn thing about the military. Sure there's "more" white people, but we're literally the majority demographic population, that was gonna be true no matter what unless we Exclusively restricted military service to non-white people. There's significantly more representation of racial groups in the military than in the civilian population.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KingSaida "So a lowballed estimate of pay and an average of benefits alone is pretty much 2 million."
No, the low-ball was $50 million. $2 million ain't shit to $50 million.
"You wrote travel off as if it were nothing, but it isn't, traveling across the country is only part of the expense, there's also the hotel rooms, which would also come out of production costs, a per diem per employee for food, which would recur daily, security for the events, such as Change my Mind, etc."
Literally none of which costs anywhere close to $50 million unless Crowder's being frankly criminally irresponsible with his money.
"We're not having an honest conversation if you're going to try to hand-wave that away." -You
"that was all I needed to know that you either can't read or are blinded by your dislike of either the man or his political affiliation." -Also You
You weren't having an honest conversation to begin with you troglodyte.
"Secondly, whether you like it or not costumes / makeup for the various skits that are played after the cold open in each episode, the ads for his sponsors, and gag interviews are a part of the production and not cheap to design and put together. "
And yet every other Youtuber can do so easily without coming even remotely close to spending ONE million, let alone 50. Why is Crowder so bad with money?
"You also ignored the regular bills that the studio would have to pay to keep the lights on, and with that much equipment the electric bill at least would be pretty sizable."
Which amounts to several decimal points short of 1 million for an entire year. Does Crowder's set cost more than Fox or some shit?
"You can dislike him all you want, as a matter of fact he does and says things that I vehemently disagree with, but the disingenuous way you framed your argument makes you lose all credibility."
Ah yes, the way you shamelessly gargled Crowder's balls and gave him every possible excuse to find $50 million dollars for 4 years of work "an insult" really screams "credibility."
Eat a fucking dick, you're not making "An entire USAF SSgt's Annual salary (plus per diem)" PER DAY sound like anything but a shitton. If you can't run a show where you sit on your ass Talking 90% of the time with $50 million over 4 years, then you don't have any business being in business.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@patrickbooth5091 Easy, one's subsidized by the government, the other isn't. We have authority over that particular debt because it's taxpayers handling it at large. That's literally how our system works, the student loan debt is part of the National debt for a reason. We're not talking about debts you incur with private organizations, we're literally talking about the debt the Entire Nation pools together.
We're the one's holding our own national debt, we have the authority to forgive all of it if we felt like. But your debt with a credit card company at present is the exclusive property of said company.
We can legally forgive one without needing any law changes, the other requires law changes.
There, your question has been answered, how about you come up with a reason why this is a bad idea. Besides just being indignant that your weird hangup on contracts is being ignored in this situation, What Happens if we just forgive student loan debt that is in any practical way a negative? Poof. Gone. Never happened.
The US is the dominant owner of the US debt, why can't we just disregard our portion of it at our liesure?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ramonserna8089 ....I'm sorry, are you asking me to provide a demographic list of random?
The only commonality in Stalin's victims were "Opposed the Soviet government." If "Opposed the Soviet government" is a demographic, then there ya go. But if you're asking for a demographic breakdown of the people killed by such a loose standard as "opposed Stalin", then I don't know how to answer because I don't know the racial demographics throughout the Soviet Union's history off the top of my head.
Seriously, WTF is this question? And why did you answer my question with a question? I asked you to elaborate on why racial bigotry in Hitler was the reason Hitler was evil as opposed to Stalin's "ruthless?"
He commanded the deaths of over 6 million people and he's just ruthless. Hitler did 11 million (I will correct myself there, I was off, Hitler's bodycount was higher by almost double), but the Racism is what made Hitler evil as opposed to Stalin just being "ruthless?"
I'm curious, how many millions of corpses must I command into existence before I'm actually Evil? Because 6 million clearly isn't it to you, Hitler has 11 million, so I'm guessing the number is somewhere around 9 million to be Evil.
...Oh wait, I forgot the racism angle. Because that makes him more evil. Idle curiosity, what's the kill-to-kill value exchange between a racist murder and a normal murder? Like how many normal murders is one racist murder worth on the Evil-o-meter?
Because if it's 3 to 1 then Hitler was good to kill at Least 2 million jewish people before he was "More Ruthless" than Stalin.
1
-
@ramonserna8089 " If the standar is "opposed Stalin" is not random is it?"
No, but considering I asked "Why are the demographics relevant when I explicitly said there wasn't a racially-specific component to begin with?", I don't see your point.
"Stalin had to face with internal and external opposition during his mandate."
Most mandates don't slaughter 6 million of their own citizens, but that's not evil to you apparently. Unless it's racial evidently.
"I do see a difference between executing a man for sedition and treason and doing so for the color of his skin."
Well duh, there's a categorical difference as they are two separate motives, but I asked you to clarify why one is "Evil" while the other is just "Ruthless" by your own words.
"Do you consider George Bush evil?"
Yep.
"How about Obama?"
Yep.
"They both killed (and tortured) similar number of people, exept Stalin did it to preserve order in his land, while George Bush and Obama did it to "prevent terrorism"."
Ohhh, I didn't realize my Motives made slaughtering 6 million people for getting in the way of my political agenda any less evil.
That sure is a very nice way you phrased "Killed all dissenting voices within my own borders."
Like FFS, Bush and Obama are evil scumbags, but did you seriously just condemn Both of them while apologizing for Stalin in the same sentence? Despite the fact that Stalin's Directly Ordeed bodycount dwarfs Bush and Obama's combined, Those two are Evil while Stalin "did it to preserve order in his land."
Double-standards much?
Starting to think you just like Stalin, because otherwise your definition of Evil has zero logical consistency and seems to have no relation whatsoever to practical costs of the evil as much as "what's the mentality behind said evil?"
In short I'm starting to think there is no answer to "Why is one Evil while the other is just ruthless" besides just "Cuz I said so."
1
-
@ramonserna8089 "Because one group of people are trying to implement a political agenda concecuences be damned, while hitler was killing innocent people due to his own deranged lunacy."
You mean implementing his political agenda, consequences be damned? Funny how you keep rephrasing the same actions as different things.
"What do you think would have happened to Stalin if Trotsky would have won?"
What I think about this hypothetical world is irrelevant.
"Do you think he would have said " Well played ol chap, admit your defeat with grace and I has a good sportman will let you live." Or would he have killed Stalin and his supporters?""
I think it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
"Kinda a do or die situation isnt it?"
Kind of an irrelevant situation.
"So you are saying Stalin= evil and Obama= evil ergo Obama is as bad has Hitler."
No, because I don't speak in non sequiturs and don't think like an absolutist child. How about you answer my questions instead of making up what you think my position is? I will tell you my positions myself when I feel like it, I don't need You to translate for me.
" I dont think many people would agree with your position."
You mean the asinine position you just made up like an asshole to attack instead of answering my question? Yeah that position sucked.
"Bush and Obama numbers dont dwarf Stalin do: "
Wanna try this sentence again? This is gibberish.
"Afghanistan has 39 million habitants that have seen their life spam cut 1/3, that is without counting Irak, Syria, Somalia, etc."
For fuck's sake WTF does this sentence even mean? Like take 30 seconds to look over your comments for coherency, because those last few lines are gibberish and incoherent to any native English speaker.
But hey, thanks for openly airing out your sycophantic love of Russia, because if you sucked Stalin's dick any harder you're gonna need kneepads.
1
-
@ramonserna8089 "Oh please tell us your position when you feel like it your majesty, we shall fervishly await for it."
Lol, wow someone's salty. You're the one who decided to dictate what my position was To me, but I'm the asshole for telling you to stop.
"You keep saying the context of a situation is not relevant"
Not when the number of casualties has an "-illion" in the number. At that point number matter more, there is no Not evil reason to need millions to die for your own interests.
" You say youre not an absolutist yet you compare Hitler has Stalin, that is not a nuanced position."
No, I asked you to explain how Hitler was, in your words, Evil, but Stalin is only "Ruthless". And you've done nothing but make excuses and get pissy that I even asked. Instead of Answering how it's different, you seem oddly intent on avoiding the question by hurling yet more questions at me instead of just explaining your position.
"Godforbid that we ask logic in your train of thought. So has been said: "Strange are the ways of Patchwurk"."
Pfff, 'We'?
Don't tell me this clusterfuck of word vomit is the work of more than one dirtbag. XD
"What I meant is that people in Afghanistan had a life expentancy of 60 year before US invasion and now it has been reduced to 20. We could add also the number of other war theatres Obama and Bush started."
Citation needed.
"Its not really hard bubu."
I know, so why didn't you do it?
"I dont see why having a nuanced position in history equates to giving a man fellatio other than a childish attempt to cover lack of logical arguments with insults."
Lol, so nuance means forgiving e shit out of a man who slaughtered 6 million people as "something that has to happen to secure you power", but getting holier than thou with America over Afghanistan.
Your position isn't nuanced. It's blatantly forgiving of Russia while casting judgement on everything and anything else to "Whatabout" away from the accusation. "Whatabout Hitler?" "Whatabout Bush?" "Whatabout Obama?" Instead of addressing the question you just deflect and run and become a snotty little prick.
Answer the question or don't, I'm bored of you either way.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nashton9964 "Life is dangerous, you probably went to college to to extend your adolescence and stay out of danger."
False, I served for 8 years in the US military post-highschool graduation and have never formally attended a college outside of the occasional isolated lesson.
Also, seems kind of weird that you'd find bragging rights and points in your favor just because your life is hard. Keep in mind that your life is only hard because some shitstain that isn't you wants to live easy and you just make a valuable tool for that effort.
"People like you is the reason we dont have shop classes in school anymore or can go rock climbing or do anything fun."
Pfff, news to me, shop class is still all over the USA. My school had it the entire time I was present. Don't remember anyone ever asking me to vote on it.
"Saying something like "you support child labor" is so vague and a total slander since it makes it seem like I would support a 6 year old working in a coal mine which is not at all my position."
There is nothing vague about child labor, and I Don't respect this position from rightwingers because it contradicts several other positions you people have on the topic of children.
"For you, what is the youngest age you would accept somebody working?"
Whatever age they're considered a legal citizen. If someone's able to get taxed then they should have their Constitutionally warranted rights to represent themselves politically.
Teenagers are taxed, yet not allowed to represent themselves politically or vote. As such, remove them from the job pool (or stop taxing them) until such time as they're the age of majority.
If they're old enough to be taxed like an adult, they're old enough to vote like one.
"What if they were a homeless youth or needed to take care of sick family members?"
I'd say their society has utterly failed them, because that entire situation being pushed on a child is absolutely unobjectionably fucked up.
"You seem very narrow minded in your approach and just want to call somebody out so you can give yourself a cheap pat on the back."
Projection much? Literally your entire comment is literally just this. I see no solutions from you, I see no logic or evidence, I Just see a holier-than-thou asshole giving me shit because I don't glorify their "hard upbringing" like a lunatic.
No one benefits from your hardship-worship other than the lazy do-nothings who want to exploit it.
1
-
1
-
@nashton9964 "So basically for you, if Republicans want to do something it must be bad because you know all about how they think and they are just the worst, okay."
....Dude, "Them being Republicans" isn't the fucking issue, stop trying to deflect. Specific People within the Republican Party are actively trying to walk back the past several decades of progress we've gained.
Whose opposing Roe v. Wade? Mostly Republicans.
Who opposes LGBT rights? Mostly Republicans.
Whose currently defending child marriage in Wyoming? Mostly Republicans.
Whose trying to remove social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and wants to remove school lunches for children? Mostly Republicans.
But This time they're doing something wholesome and good that Coincidentally also allows them to profit from child-labor?
Come the fuck on dude, you're not an idiot.
"These people care about children, they just arent concerned with the same things you are in regards to children, they have different values."
Yes, their concern for children immediately stops the second that child is born. They only care that a new worker bee was born, beyond that you either serve their profit margins or they don't care if you live or die as long as you're not any sort of financial annoyance to them.
1
-
@nashton9964 "Yeah, I'm all on board for the social issues stuff, but this is more about economics. I seem to recall Republicans causing a big stink about what's being taught to their kids in schools, the crime rate, drugs, pedophilia and sex trafficking, and living up to classical moral standards."
Yeah, the problem is Why. They oppose what kids are being taught in schools because "what's being taught in schools" doesn't line up with conservative rhetoric. They don't want their children learning anything outside of Their personal indoctrination and values.
The crime rates in the USA are horrible because Americans are Broke. Most crime occurs due to desperation, and most Americans are a paycheck away from being homeless. And people like this actively Don't want to pay workers more, so it's a self-creating problem.
Sex-trafficking is rich because that's a flat out lie. They accuse LGBT people of being groomers because they want an excuse to demonize them. It's the same argument re-used over and over.
"Trans people are grooming your children! They don't deserve rights!"
Few years ago "Gay people are grooming your children! They don't deserve rights!"
Back during the Red Scare "Atheists and Communists are grooming your children! They don't deserve rights!"
Back during the Civil Rights movement "Black people are grooming your children! They don't deserve rights!"
They always accuse their opposition of child-predator behavior because it's a damning accusation that immediately inspires emotional outrage regardless of whether or not it's even true.
"You can argue the specifics of how they want to change or enforce details around any those things being good or bad, but you can't say they don't care, that's just lazy thinking. "
They care plenty, but only about themselves and their interests. They don't care about You unless you're somehow directly affiliated with them.
"Also, I think I'm done with this conversation since you don't really have much to say about my substantive arguments and just want to expand on the petty remarks I make towards you, which is honestly just low hanging fruit that I put out to gage where my "opponent" is at in their thinking. "
So.... Let me get this straight: You deliberately engage in ad homs and fallacious retorts with the express intent of pissing off whoever you're talking to, just so you can act holier-than-thou at the end for them being pissed off?
Sounds like bad faith douchebag behavior from someone wholly uninterested in an actual conversation to me, but you do you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BoramK9294 Post them. Right now. I Just proved it shows up no problem. So unless you're dealing with a glitch that is Uniquely related to you (Because you flat out Said that Youtube might be scrubbing you before I saw a single goddamned link, despite there being absolutely zero precedent for that shit).
Dude, if you're comments get scrubbed, YOU DO NOT SEE THEM. There is, on this chain, 15 of 15 comments as of Right Now. So unless you have a super special version of Youtube that lets you See your own comments that Youtube gets rid of (Which isn't how the site works at all), then I'm calling absolute bullshit.
But hey, keep dancing. Hey, you want me to pull up another account just to check? Because that 15 of 15 comments is suspiciously missing every single link you've posted.
Oh, also dipshit you don't have to separate the .com in links for Youtube to accept it. They literally accepted me posting a bullshit link to Federal budget info wholsale. No extra tricks, no extra work, just copy fucking Paste. Christ, message me DIRECTLY with your links or something, for fucks sake.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
...If all Amazon wanted to do was eliminate small business, then this is unneeded. Amazon as an entity is already, By Default, more convenient and efficient than any small business, with prices that run any Mom and Pop store into the dirt. Not saying Amazon isn't a bunch of shitheads, but give the Devil his due, in a Proper Capitalist society Bezos would still be killing small businesses left and right from just outperforming them.
Also again, automation is something that was gonna happen anyway and that we HAVE to plan for. Because it literally doesn't matter what the wages are, in the next ten years there's gonna be next to no jobs among damn near 90% of America's job market where a human worker would be preferable to a mindlessly obedient machine.
It literally doesn't matter how much you "pull yourself up by your bootstraps", outside of VERY specific career fields there's no situation where a human being is a better employee then a tireless, mindless, utterly relentless machine that has no rights to worry about. I mean what are you gonna do, pass legislation that actively forces people to not use automation just to pretend like the human is better? This was going to happen no matter what, the point is to have an actual System in place when it happens.
Because as of right now America's plan for automation is "Go fuck yourself." Doesn't matter that automation is set already to annihilate the job market as we know it, America's current plan is to just do nothing, throw the poor out on the streets, and just hope everything just magically works out.
1
-
@haidercross1 But... Again, why would you?
Like let's not beat around the bush, Mandating humans instead of machines is literally the definition of crippling yourself just because you don't feel like changing. If we were Smart, we'd just drop this whole game entirely, give all the menial work to the machines, and live like kings one and all off their labor. Like who cares whose richer than who, if the labor's taken care of and we've got the resources, there's more than enough for all of us to kick back and relax.
Like I kind of resent the fact that our society Hinges on you having a job. Not pursuing your passions, not doing something you want to do, not finding where you excel, just the literal bone-idle act of "Having a job." We base our entire culture around it, despite the fact that America's verifiably rich enough and advanced enough technologically to literally set everyone up for life like it was nothing. And yet we created a system where not working is a death sentence for the poor and a luxury enjoyed only by the rich.
However, working within the broken irrational system we have, it makes more sense to just set up a UBI and use the machines to provide it. There's no virtue or character to be gained from suffering when you Know it's entirely unnecessary. That's not character-building, that's self-mutilation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
M H ...How? Canada's wait times are a priority list, that's it. I've never once heard Canadian's remark on this seeming mass slaughter of Canadians, but I hear about it from anti-universal healthcare Americans an awful lot.
Canada's wait times aren't based on first-come-first-serve, there's a priority list. The more life-threatening your condition, the quicker you move up the list. The reason they have waiting times is because some clod with a broken arm whose been here for an hour, while painful, isn't anywhere near as important as the person with a bullet lodged in their heart that game in a minute ago.
They prioritize cases by level of severity, not just who happened to be in line first or who paid first. Their hospitals aren't a profiteering racket, they actually exist to save lives first and foremost. So yes, you'll have a long wait time if you're in there for some non-critical surgery, but you're Customer Numero Uno if you're life's in danger. Y'know, kind of like what a hospital Should be.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ag7367 Ah yes! In the real world it's more politically advantageous to just shut up and obey the corporatists. Because maybe if we kiss their asses and polish their balls for Another 4-8 years the Progressives will Finally get some Progressive policy?
Tell me, what exactly is mature and grown up about never taking a stand, never rocking the boat, never speaking truth to power, and just impotently begging for them to listen to you like Oliver Twist asking for more gruel, despite the fact that you willingly surrendered all power in the situation to corporate candidates who no longer have to give a shit what you want, since you gave them the car keys with no tangibles or concrete payoff for it?
I've been told this same line by Democrats for my entire life. Just vote Blue and change will come. But under Clinton, it wasn't a good time to push for change. Under Bush, it Still wasn't a good time, because we can't show division now otherwise Bush might win agai-Oh, Bush won again. Well it's still not a good time because if Libs rock the boat too much Obama might lose to McCain. Oh shit, Obama won? Well we Still can't push because if Obama's first term is rocky he may not get a second term. Oh shit, he got a second term. But we Still can't push, because Mitch is still in office, despite the fact that Obama could EO most of what we want or take measures outside of McConnell's support. Wait new election? Oh shit Trump's on the ballot, now we REALLY can't do anything useful otherwise Trump might call us commies... Trump won and called us commies anyway, but we STILL can't rock the boat because Trump could win again.
...Biden won. But don't push him Left, otherwise the Reps could get another Trump in.
I refuse to accept that the "mature" political position is to be absolutely politically impotent and worthless, doing absolutely nothing productive for the American people for decades, yet inexplicably Demanding they vote Blue out of Party loyalty (or American loyalty against Trump), despite the Democrats Never, in the entirety of my time on this Earth, ever Once doing a single progressive thing, despite them all promising me Progressivist positions. And yet no matter how many promises they break, no matter how many times they bend over and take Republican dick like a good bunch of gimps, no matter how many times they stab me in the back, people like you Continue to make the claim that I'll achieve what I'm looking for if I just abandon all my political interests and just keep Voting Blue until progress magically happens.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MartianManHunter7 "LOL, everyone is a hypocrite, everyone is biased, everyone flip flops. That's like saying you've never smelled your own crap"
Yes, but most people aren't hypocrites on "shit they said like last week", whereas here you are defending a shameless liar with "So what? Everyone lies, who cares?"
Lol, I love it, the "Sure, I'm a piece of shit, but so are you so how dare you question it?" defense.
Final sanctuary of someone who can't justify their bullshit in any respect besides deflecting.
1
-
1
-
@MartianManHunter7 "I'm not throwing shade at them. I watch them all the time, but they also live in glass houses and their throwing rocks."
And when asked how all you had was some general "well everyone's a hypocrite" nothing response, so until you show some example of it I'm not interested.
"Just like anyone who's a celebrity or are in the public space, they had some terrible takes."
Such as? Lol you sure do love vague general statements. Sadly I kind of need Details in order to determine the quality of a take and whether or not it's hypocrisy.
" Plus, the same applies to Krystal and Kyle, seems rather judgy from them considering they are in media and make mistakes and have hypocritical takes all the time."
Sure, by your vapid ass standard where hypocrisy is apparently universal and all equally problematic. But that's Your standard, they aren't under any obligation to listen to your standard. I'd are You Are though, seeing how it's Your standard and you apparently thought deflecting to Kyle/Krystal was more relevant that addressing your own inability to refrain from judgement.
"It just happens that you like Krystal and Kyle (I like them, watch them everyday) and oversee their bad takes, and you dislike Elon, so you don't give him a pass."
Uh huh. Once again an assertion that you haven't substantiated (Me liking Kyle and Krystal enough to overlook their bad takes and hypocrisy, which you can't possibly know is true or not), followed by a generalized accusation that "They have bad takes I still won't clarify, but they're bad, trust me", finished off with a defense of Elon Musk, whose hypocrisy is rank, obvious, and literally broadcasted on Twitter for all to see.
If all you got is generalized bullshit and no specifics then this conversation may as well stop. Details or we're done.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nickvoss7954 Lol, oh yeah, I'm sure all those civilians we blew up and tried to cover up repeatedly felt suuuuper liberated.
Fuck off, America isn't a savior or liberator, it's a fucking warstate that's entire economic system NEEDS perpetual war to remain profitable.
If America Fixed anything, the defense contractors would make less money. But if they make everywhere Worse, then they're guaranteed endless profit from future conflicts.
The Taliban did nothing but gain More power and control the entire time America was occupying their territory. How the actual hell did the Taliban Get Stronger the longer it fought a direct US occupation?
Simple answer: America wasn't actually doing a fucking thing to help the situation and the Taliban was still getting new recruits and funding completely uninhibited.
So unless the Taliban is leaps and bounds superior to American logistics on every conceivable level AND better at OPSEC, how tf did the Taliban get exponentially more control, territory, munitions and manpower the entire time we were fighting them, all without the DoD being able (apparently) to do a single thing to stop it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@denisejustdenise "Well, I wasn't addressing you, Patchwurk. You have my attention now though. You read what I wrote and thought that I was saying something against someone else and you picked up an offense on their behalf or possibly on your own behalf, is that what happened?"
Yeah, stop trying to guess my motives so you can gauge which bullshit list of generalizations to dismiss me with. My comments don't change context regardless.
"I support everyone who is created in God's image. Everyone is important. No one is better than anyone else. Satan is a jerk, a liar, a loser. Thanks for the reply, I like them all, any type."
I don't care what you like or not, I'm pretty sure I responded asking if you have any Proof of this religious thing of yours being valid.
Also the hell did Satan ever do to you? That seems kinda rude to say about one of "God's Children."
You were rather smug and condescending about it, Surely you have Proof, right?
"If you have more to add or want to challenge something, have a question, whatever, I'll respond if I see it."
Then why aren't you?
"And for the record, demons bother us all. I've seen them manifest a few times, mostly for 1- 2 seconds, just a reaction."
....Manifest How?!
"There are different ways they take opportunities to gain access and it isn't always our doing. I wasn't putting anyone down, I have been thanked often."
Like What?!
" This applies to each one of us: "The heart is deceitful and desperately wicked.""
Lol, so you love all of God's children, yet also think human feelings are deceitful and wicked.
Why are you denigrating something you think God made?
"We're created in God's image BUT we're in a fallen state, born with a dead/dormant spirit. "
...Guess spirit is getting added to the same list as "God" for "shit I'm waiting for evidence of."
"We naturally resist God, giving as much thought to some instances of missing that mark as fish give to swimming. We don't need to take a class."
...Or demonstrate it in any way as a valid claim to make, evidently.
1
-
1
-
@WhosZaq Sure they were. Temporarily. I won't lie and pretend like your taxes didn't drop under Trump, but there's a caveat you're missing: The Wealthy's tax cuts were permanent, Yours are completely temporary and legally allowed to be reversed at any given time. Also that reversal is inevitable, because Republicans Love spending tax dollars. That's kind of the reason a lot of people think Republicans are batshit insane. Dems, if nothing else, at least have an internal logic when it comes to the economy that makes sense. Increase taxes, yet Also increase spending. Makes sense, you need more money if you want to spend more money. You may dislike taxes, but the logical A to B of that policy at least makes sense. Republicans meanwhile Still increase spending... Yet reduce the amount of money available To spend, thereby ensuring debt and deficit costs increase purely because we're paying for shit we can't afford.
Plus at the end of the day your costs are still hiking up. Sure, your Taxes dropped, but every company in the nation whose job is to leech off you got Bigger tax cuts than you, more Permanent tax cuts than you, and as such have the available capital to risk hiking Your prices on the Private market, thereby ensuring you're paying more than you previously were anyway.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@firefly9838 "no no no you come back here you slippery fuck. It's not the guns, it's violence from others leading to people dead."
Why are you acting like I was directly referring to your values? Were we not just talking about the dishonest weasel Jon was fucking on? Was I really giving any impression of "slipping away" or something?
Violence with....? C'mon American, what's the violence being done with?
"The gun is just one of many, many ways a human can kill another human."
Yeah, and the only one you guys object to any sort of restriction on.
"It's also a constitutional right so it's not going away anytime soon. I have 54 guns. I've never hurt a fly. That's a choice I made. You let those violent fuckers killing kids off the hook saying "oh it's the gun not the violent actions people CHOSE to make.""
Erm.. Pretty sure the guilty party stills gets arrested, prosecuted, and punished. Sounds like you're more concerned about any sort of impact on your collection of toys for someone else's crimes than you are about reducing casualties.
Also, "being a constitutional right" is not an argument against regulation. Hell, the 2nd Amendment is quite literally the only amendment that Explicitly mentions the term "well-regulated" in conjunction with itself.
Are you trying to suggest "well-regulated" means "No regulations?" Because the dictionary would like a word.
"As far as the trans issue goes I don't care if you are gay, trans, or other. I get on my republican friends for not just letting that issue go. I'm all for personally freedoms. I care about the environment. I have gay and trans friends. I'm a socialist. We need vast reforms in mental healthcare access in this country. I'm also a gun owner. I'm a avid pot smoker. I'm a country singer. You can't put me into a box."
Fair enough. Your ideas regarding guns are still childish and asinine and entirely predicated on protecting your stash of toys than anything else. Also I don't remember asking or giving a shit what You believe.
1
-
@firefly9838 "you can't take two words of the amendment out of context from the rest of it. "
But you can totally remove words from the amendment to get the context you want apparently. I guess "A well-regulate militia" isn't actually in there.
"Believe it or not words meant different things 300 years ago. I know shocker 😒"
Oh really? Then please, educate me on how "Well-Regulated"'s definition changed to "Fuck Regulations!" Or hey, where "militia" turned into "Any chucklefuck who can hold a gun?" I don't believe I got that memo from Webster.
"What most legal scholars say is that it likely implied by "well related" isn't from the point of view of a government."
The Constitution is literally the point of view of the government, it's enforced by the government, and only exists as long as the government enforces it. Whoever you're listening to's a fucking moron if they think there's such a thing as a view of the Constitution "independent of the government."
""It's not the only weapon we don't regulate." We don't regulate knives, bow and arrows, crossbows, flamethrowers, poisons, heavy trucks, etc""
There's literally types of knives that are illegal for civilians to own, so once again, wrong.
"Beyond that the things we do regulate don't prevent anyone from making those things.... you realize criminal rarely give a fuck about the laws on the books dumbass. "
Then why is it that the USA has the far and away highest rates of violence crime per capita AND the highest rate of gun violence In Total, but that has Nothing to do with the fact that we have a metric shitton of guns?
If "regulating guns" does nothing, then why does it work everywhere it's done? If having more guns makes you safer, then why are you far and away the most violently dangerous nation in the West?
"If I didn't to go out and kill people tomorrow do you really think I'm going to make sure I have the "legal weapons" and not the "illegal weapons" to commit a goddamned murder?! No! "
Seems to work everywhere else, evidently they also made it harder to get hands on an illegal firearm. Amazing what can be done in a nation that actually gives a fuck.
"Yes I am worried about my tools not toys you dumbass eurocuck"
No, Toys. There is exactly 0 reason for one person to have 54 guns outside of "I just really really like guns." Your damn sure not using 54 fucking guns as tools routinely unless you're a defense contractor or hired gun, you're just a hobbyist who likes collecting dangerous weaponry.
Stop pretending you care about the Constitution, stop pretending you care about crime rates, You Don't.
You are statistically wrong on this one flat out, but you don't care. Your only argument is "That which allows me to keep my toys."
If that's all it is, then fine. I won't ever convince you to not champion your toys. But don't dismiss the fucking data when it conflicts with you and lie when your only point is "I don't care because I want my guns and my constitution allows it."
Nothing but "I don't want to and you can't make me", why is that so hard for you to embrace? What's the point of all this extra pretense when you'd obviously be defending your hobby in the face of any opposition.
1
-
@firefly9838 "1. The 2nd amendment didn't change to "no federal regulations on guns." it was always meant to be that from the start from their prospective."
Ohhh, so when the Founders wrote down "Well -regulated militia" they were lying. And you know this how?
"They wanted to people to never suffer the same the fate again. Therefor an armed populous, not controlled by a nation."
Says that nowhere in the Constitution, but keep speaking for dead people.
"2. The constitution is literally not written from the point of view of a government. It's literally written for the protection of the people BY the people. This isn't the UK, we don't have a king. We don't have a dictator. The people rule here. "
Remind me, who wrote the Constitution? Oh right, the nascent US government. Who decides what is/is not in the Constitution? Oh right, the US government. Who interprets what is/is not Constitutional in all legally relevant capacities? Oh right, the US fucking Government.
Nice rhetoric, but you're fucking wrong. Go on, try telling the Fed what is/is not Constitutional, let me know how that works out for you. Show me whose in charge in the USA.
"3. Where I live there are zero restrictions on types of knives. 99% of Americans don't live in downtown New York. I can legally make and keep any kind of night by freaking dream of, and I have done that. So you sir are wrong. "
Why? Because you have an anecdote? Irrelevant, your nation regulates weaponry, your unnamed lone state means fuck all.
"4. You're wrong on this one as well El Salvador has the highest violent crime rate per capita. Not the US. No surprise. The Eurocuck can't get his statistics right. "
Wow, dipshit can't read. I specified "In the West."
Is El Salvador considered part of the West? No? Considered a third world country? Bring up one of the first world nations I was mentioning, let's see how your country compares.
"5. Gun control doesn't work everywhere it's tried. Not at all. To a certain extent, it's worked pretty well in some of Europe."
"Not at all" followed by "it's worked pretty well in Europe." Cognitive dissonance, thy name is gun-nut.
"First, that's because of culture. You eurocucks are mostly submissive to your governments."
Lol, bull-fucking Shit! Europe protests, revolts, and opposes their government all the time.
Also are you admitting that American culture is so singularly stupid and insecure that we just have to accept mass casualties in the USA because Americans are uniquely subhumanly stupid compared to Europeans? Is it just part of your culture that an American can't function properly unless they have the capacity to kill their neighbors and school-children in mass-shootings all the time?
Is it an affront to your culture to expect any degree of self-control from a gun-toting redneck?
Unlike Americans, they're not Scared of their government. Your pussy-ass culture is the one that bootlicks Uncle Sam and endlessly makes excuses for your corruption. You people Idolize and kiss politician ass so badly you turned your government into a popularity contest, and you have the Balls to call any other nation cucked to their government.
Wipe the Federal jizz off your mouth and say that again with a straight face.
"You do what you're told like a good little cuck. Honestly, that's admirable. Very peaceful culture of cucks works in the UK because of lots of economic opportunity and a different culture."
Lol, only an American would be proud of having the highest murder rates and child death rates and mass-shooting rates and highest rate of murders by your own people and think that makes you look better than "a cuck."
At least European children don't have to fear getting shot up in their own school like the "real chads" in America. Or mowed down by their own cops.
"Mexico has a crazy amount of gun control. Everyone still has guns. Different culture. no real Económic opportunities. Everything went underground. The laws literally don't work when the masses just do whatever they want. The Mexicans are submissive little cucks. End of story. "
And here's the typical American racism against Mexico, what a fucking shock.
Christ you people are shameless when defending your toys.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@westcoastplinkin6559 "But we have to pay a huge markup as private sellers sell them at double the price and it's not like we can choose from an array of stock available. It is a ban, that is what it is. 100% unconstitutional. For example, if Texas banned abortion pills at the state level, but yet you could only buy them in the private market at a huge increase in price, what would you consider that? It is a ban. "
A ban is not Unconstitutional though, unless the Constitution explicitly lays it out as such. Which it kind of doesn't for either case.
"The definition of arms or "small arms" includes handguns and rifles."
That's a distinction. The Amendment says "Arms". Not "Small Arms", Arms outright. And "Arms" in this definition is used to refer to ALL forms of weaponry.
"I would argue it also includes cross bows, bows, and knives as well."
And tanks and drones and fighter jets and warships and nuclear warheads and landmines and.....
"Furthermore, the Heller decision also protects all weapons in "common use". Considering the fact that semi automatics make up majority of the weapons sold in todays market and majority of the weapon bought today, I would argue that it definitely meets the criteria of being in "common use"."
You might. Clearly the lawyers couldn't. And they're supposed to be good at this relative to any of us.
I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of what the Founders intended, but that's not what I'm saying.
I'm saying in a Legal Court setting, Intent doesn't matter. The Letter of the Law is what matters, and it doesn't matter what you Know, only what you can Prove in a court of law.
Not like we can ask the Founders what they meant anymore, they're dead.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@VancouverInvestor What stats?
Also, I've taken the ASVAB test, and "failing" is borderline impossible. The test is used to determine what jobs in the DoD you have enough basic knowledge to be taught and as a basic litmus of how rapidly one absorbs new info. "Failure" in this case means scoring so absolutely low that there exists no job in the DoD, not even sweeping a fucking floor, that the DoD could teach you.
And the lowest score that still translates to a job in the DoD is still so phenomenally low that the only way you're going to fail is if you've quite literally never set foot in a school in your life, actively suffered a severe concussion, Didn't sleep for 3 days beforehand, OR you're failing it on purpose for whatever reason.
And EVEN THEN, The Army is so stupid that even if you fail that, they'll just write a waiver that exempts you and snatch your ass up anyway for some labor job.
IQ is not tested At ALL in the ASVAB. I served from 2012-2018 in the USAF and at no point was an IQ test ever administered. Hell I scored a 94 on the damn thing and I was a low B/high C student in school At Best, the DoD's test isn't any sort of barometer for genius.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dadbodenvy4247 How is that my plan?
Did I voice voting support for Republicans when I wasn't looking? No?
I said I'm "Not voting for You".
And why should I? The fuck have you people done to protect abortion rights? You Promised, for 50 Years to Federalize this, you've had supermajorities dozens of times in the past 50 years, 3 TIMES during which you had the House, Senate AND Presidency under Carter, Obama, and Biden, 50 Years of promises to Federalize this.
...And now it's 50 years later and Republicans are getting rid of it. Good job. 50 fucking years of "I promise" and what did you actually do? Oh, that's right, Nothing!
"Vote Democrat! We'll jerk you off on the issues you want, but will do nothing when it's actually time to deliver."
Thank you Democrats, Republicans couldn't have done it without you, you utterly worthless Establishment sellouts.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Charlotte_Martel "Peterson briefly turned to bezos when his wife, his love and companion since his childhood, appeared to be on death's door due to cancer. But nice to see Leftist compassion on full display. "
Ah yes, very good reason to follow the advice of someone clearly not in their right mind.
"Yes, I prefer to have my opinion in this matter guided by those who a) have children"
So credential 1 for you to consider someone's opinion valid on trans people is "failure to pull out".
Great, literally any accidental parent is qualified so far.
"b) in Peterson's case, have a distinguished career in psychology"
A discredited career at this point since he stopped following the scientific consensus to spew political rhetoric.
So Credential 2: Has a degree I can appeal to in order to justify my beliefs regardless of whether or not the scientific community at large even recognizes their viewpoint.
"c) don't have the hubris to believe that they can bend reality to whatever trend is en vogue this week."
So... Doesn't believe they have the Infinity Stones?
Weird one, but okay.
Notice that you omitted literally any professional in the relevant field that isn't Peterson and seem to think "Getting knocked up" in and of itself is a credential.
It isn't, you have no grounds for this position scientifically, you're just a bigot who wants an excuse.
Hence why you latch onto Benzo-brain Peterson instead of literally any other expert in the field, almost all of which have the opposite view of Peterson and view his credentials as suspect.
But he's "the one who says what you want" so you champion him in this appeal to authority. Because he justifies what you already want to think anyway. That trans people are freaks who deserve to be treated as such.
1
-
@Charlotte_Martel " So, in your estimation, I should take car advice from someone who has never owned one and has never even driven?"
Are you implying that every specialist that verifies that you're incorrect is also childless? Because usually what I do when I Don't have the credentials to speak on a topic (like most parents on the topic of human psychology), I defer to the scientific consensus.
"If you had children, you would understand that while being a parent does not guarantee that you'll be an expert on parenting issues, it gives infinitely more experience and credibility than advice from someone for whom children are simply theoretical. "
Pfff, the fact that your country has extreme abuse, neglect, and orphan problems tells me it absolutely fucking doesn't. Literally the only credential one needs to "be a parent" is a broken condom.
"As for Peterson, why were his credentials stripped? Because he refused to undergo re-education and refused to mouth the liberal platitudes. The fact that the man sacrificed the ability to practice in the field he loved and excelled in defiance to speak the truth only makes me appreciate him more."
Translation: Anyone who agrees with me is respectable and any experts who think otherwise are in a conspiracy from the liberals.
Wow you sound perfectly insane.
"Lest we forget, germ theory was not held by the majority of the medical establishment when it was introduced. Blood letting was once a common medical treatment. The "gods" of medicine make mistakes all the time, but sadly, our children are the Guinea pigs for this round."
Seems to me like the biggest problem with the lives of trans children is being forced to deal with people like you.
Seems like their gender identity fucks with you a lot more than it's fucking with them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@moecizlak "Should the US apologize for dropping the bombs? Probably wouldn't hurt, but what would it change?"
Interesting excuse for a nation with absolutely zero intention or inclination to apologize for anything it's ever done.
And of Course it was "necessary". America only allows context to exist for THEIR crimes.
If Russia nuked Japan we'd condemn them as evil. If China nuked anyone, no matter the reason, we'd condemn them as evil. We do it all the fucking time, every enemy America has is framed as iredeemably evil and sick and malicious and "Someone we just had no choice BUT to destroy. You made us do this, don't you see? This hurts us more than it hurts you, honest."
But when someone brings up "The Single Biggest Single Atrocity America ever did", suddenly I'm supposed to give a fuck about CONTEXT?!
No one ELSE gets an explanation for their warcrimes and human rights violations, and Uncle Sam has NEVER expressed any degree of political remorse for any crimes we ever committed as a country, but I'm supoosed to accept "But we had good noble reasons doh?"
Suuuuure. Let's go ask the Middle East about America's "Mercy", I want a second opinion from someone NOT an American.
America gives zero benefit of the doubt to anyone else, why should I give a single shit about how "Necessary" Earth's Warcrime Champion feels their brutality is?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Gold_Microphone " If Kyle wants the GOP to concede Trump, trans stuff, and abortion (and weed), what issues would he be fine with them keeping? If the GOP concedes every issue to the democrats, what issues would separate the GOP from the democrats?"
This. This right here is the GOP's problem.
Because this isn't a political platform, it's just "Yay Trump, LGBT bad, abortion bad, weed bad." No economics policy, no foreign policy, no legislation or platform or anything that would improve upon the lives of anyone who'd vote for them, just a declaration of who their Dear Leader is and a list of things they mindlessly hate in direct defiance of all voter support.
No need to concede anything though. I hope the GOP sticks to their guns and never budges. Then they'll just keep losing and we'll get Everything we want anyway.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kekwayblaze3176 MSN, CNN, literally every left-leaning political commentator for the previous 4 years from TJ Kirk to Kyle. Hell, fucking Tim Pool was calling out Republican bullshit before he realized how profitable the rightwing grift is.
So no, I don't "Fucking know it", because what you're saying and what my eyes and ears and "basic fucking memory" are saying don't add up.
Also, wonder why tf that is. It's not like the DNC have been doing everything in their power to get rid of Progressives and alienate everything we are from the Party in the pursuit of More crony capitalism.
Not like people don't get very Very pissed off when you nakedly lie to them or anything. Nah, it must be a conspiracy against Democrats.
Whatever keeps the Democrats from being blamed or criticized. The Democrats have absolutely no selling points besides "We're not Republicans". That's the ONLY incentive anyone's had for the past 5-6 years to vote for a Democrat, because as you're demonstrating right Now, there's apparently no defense of the Democrats that doesn't hinge 110% on Republicans being in the spotlight.
Why should I give a fuck about Democrats? Give me One good reason to be on the side of Democrats that Doesn't require reminding me of Republicans to try and scare me into compliance.
If the party is so damn good, then they should be able to justify me voting for them Without needing a bigger demon standing next to them for me to even consider it.
I am TELLING you why we're focusing on the DNC right now, and you're actively refusing to listen. Sorry, but Democrats do not speak for the Left, Democrats are every bit an enemy to the Left as Republicans, and I fail to see how you forgot that.
Corporate Capitalists are the enemy of the Left. Democrats in politics are corporate crony capitalists. One and One make Two.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robinsss Oh, so you just flat out asked a completely irrelevant question on a completely unrelated thread then.
Read the thread above your initial comment and maybe it'll click that you're in the wrong neighborhood entirely.
Maybe try a basic political class for one. Because apparently you're not even aware of what type of government America is or what the terminology means.
America is Ostensibly a Democratic Republic, not a Democracy. However, our system also operates like a plutocracy, as the most powerful people in America are the richest, an oligarchy, because the government obeys the whims of that same wealthy elite more often than they listen to the public, we share elements with a theocracy because we inexplicably let Christianity get away with interfering with our laws despite it being against the first amendment directly.
If Our system is democratic, then so is North Korea's. I mean NK Calls themselves democratic, and since when has a governmental body ever Lied to anyone?
But good job trying to simplify the topic of Politics down to "Murica is a Democracy." It isn't even a democracy to begin with, everyone whose calling it that is either lying or patently wrong, and America actively overrides any degree of democratic fairness in its system at every turn anyway, so clearly the powers that be don't Care what America's "supposed" to be anyway, making your objection meaningless.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
...Inflation has literally never Not risen every year since Reagan.
Stop worrying about pointless shit. If Inflation was such a monster, why hasn't it killed anyone EXCEPT the poor? Why are the people warning about inflation always A: completely insulated from all consequences of it? B: Completely silent on inflation UNTIL it's brought up for anything meant to help the American People?
Inflation is complete bullshit. It goes up no matter what, the MAJORITY of the cause of inflation is tangled up in the stock market and Federal Reserve, i.e. Rich People, and it's only a "negative" because it's a threat.
"Accept your lot in life or we'll make it worse." It never affects the rich, Always affects the poor, and only ever comes up when the poor want something the rich don't.
Ever notice inflation is mysteriously gone as a concept whenever the rich need trillions in bailouts or the government needs a new bout of war-profiteering? Not a trace of "inflation" concern anywhere, yet suddenly inflation's a problem when it's "Give the plebs a couple grand."
...Also, HOW is it inflation? We pay taxes, that money is Already There, we Should be getting back money WE already put in.
If I put 10's of thousands if not 100's of thousands in taxes into the system, and I take back 2k, How does inflation happen in this? If anything I'm still Owed way the hell more based on the money I put into it, what happens in this transaction At All that increases the amount of money in circulation?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@waltergrace565 "Nice diversion tactic, haha."
So asking you to define your stance is a deflection. Okay.
"We need an actual economy."
We literally have an economy. It fucking sucks dick and is built upon oppression and inequality, but we're a Trade Capitol of the planet, we by definition have an economy.
"So start with abolishing the fed, abandoning both the republican and democrat parties and let the real estate market collapse. But that's just the beginning."
So... Okay walk me through this. Your solution as I'm understanding it is as follows:
1: Completely abolish the Federal government
2: Abandon the Two-Party system (No argument there)
3: Let the real-estate market collapse.
"Go on, though. Proceed to tell me that I'm wrong and that corporate party Dem bureaucracy is the only answer. Haha..."
...Y'know I'd probably think you're less of a douchebag if you didn't consistently tell me what my position is.
I wasn't going to defend Democrats, not sure why or where you got it in your head that I support Establishment Dems in any respect as an institution.
But no, if I have any question at all, It'd be the following:
How does destroying the US government (Which is what the Fed is) Help people who are homeless and in poverty?
Like Step 1, remove the Fed (and consequently the Dem/Rep stranglehold), Step 2, housing market crash.... And somewhere down the line income disparity and poverty in America are improved.
So... How?
1
-
@waltergrace565 "Nah, "the fed" means the federal reserve. "
Ah. All right, kind of confusing, but I'll adjust to that.
"The federal reserve can be replaced by a national credit union, and then let the private sector compete with that in the market."
0_o Huh, admittedly kind of curious about how that'd work, but I don't disagree with the idea in and of itself. Sounds like it could be useful with the right controls.
The issue I see with it is the same problem with our public education system and healthcare systems when the private sector gets involved: Immediately obvious corruption.
Because in the case of those federal programs, the problem is that... Well, "Conflict of Interest." Like using public education as an example, the reason the system of public education is so shit is expressly because "The person in Charge of it has a crapload of stocks invested in Private education."
Meaning they start making the public version worse On Purpose in order to increase the market value of private education, thereby increasing the value of their stock portfolio. Conflict of interest that I worry would befall this nationalized credit union without several regulations put in place to ensure a bad faith actor interested only in their own profit isn't allowed in that position.
But I'll admit, I don't hate the idea and think this credit union wouldn't be a bad idea in and of itself.
"The housing market has to collapse as it's propped up inflation is essentially devaluing the value of our labor, which is essentially the currency. "
No argument here actually, but it Is worth pointing out that this issue is largely the fault of the private sector explicitly buying up properties and forcibly cranking up costs maliciously. But I totally agree that the bubble needs to burst.
"Government programs will not solve anything and would be a kin to assisted suicide."
We may have to agree/disagree here, because of what I mentioned above: The main reason government programs fail is because of blatant conflict of interest as a direct result of the person In Charge of those government programs usually being a scumbag with a private profit motive for wanting to Ensure they will fail.
Still, we seem to have more agreement than not so far, which I admittedly find surprising. Maybe we have some issues with the "How", but still, so far I have to admit to a bit of misjudging of you if this is genuine.
"Fixing the economy is pretty obvious in getting people off the streets and out of poverty."
No disagreement here, although I'd imagine we'd probably butt heads over exactly Why the economy is fucked up on some level. Personally I see it as the result of massive economic income disparity as a result of private interests and government power working in direct collusion with eachother in order to turn Capitalism into a weapon against the poor in service to the oligarchs. Effectively economic feudalism.
Not sure if you'd agree, but it's how I see it if I'm being honest. Corruption in the government and unchecked greed in the private sector.
But hey, I'll eat some crow here dude, I think I've misjudged you quite a bit up to this point. I won't lie, I'm still distrustful because (let's be honest), the conversations between us have been far from positive in the past, but I'll admit that your stance as described is one I would personally find superior to our current system as it stands.
Personally I'd want some regulations on it to work against the corruption I've mentioned above, but I see the merits in a lot of what you said.
1
-
@waltergrace565 Like look, I'll just air out a few of my positions for you just so we're on the same page in regards to Capitalism and the free market. You were cool here and I don't want to shit on you if you're being legit (Seriously, at least on the face of it you sound like the kind of Republican I'd actually Like having as political opposition. And not because I think you'd be "easy to beat", but straight up because it doesn't sound like your intentions are malicious or in bad faith).
Anywho, I Am Left-leaning, a "leftist" as you may call me, but I'm not anti-capitalism. I'm fine with the free market existing, I respect the people who can start a free enterprise and want them to go out there and get what they're worth and all.
My beef with Capitalism is a mix of a couple things: Firstly, I don't believe private enterprise and corporate enterprise should be allowed positions of power in the government. I think it creates an inherent conflict of interest and opens the floodgates for corrupt corporate assholes to rig the system in their favor and shitnuke any form of meritocracy in the system. Effectively recreating feudalism and a nobility class of inherited wealth and power.
On the same token though I Also do not want Government officials to have any corruptive influence in the form of participation in the stock market or insider-trading or overlap between their public jobs and their private finances that would result in them having a Very obvious financial incentive to ensure the public sector fails. For largely the same reason as what I said prior.
I don't want people to "stop working", obviously that's necessary for us at this point in time, but I DO want at least a bottom floor that's livable. Like I don't personally respect this system of "Work or Die" that keeps people poor and desperate on purpose so that they'll accept unlivable wages and obscene hours just to "Not Die" at the same time we have multi-millionaires and billionaires who just inherited all this wealth and power despite doing nothing to earn it, all because an ancestor of theirs worked hard once upon a time. I don't believe Anyone deserves millions or more just for "being born", in the same way I don't believe a poor person deserves to slave away in some shit position of struggle and suffering just because they happened to be born unlucky.
Especially when the amount of money some snot-nosed rich brat may inherit might give them enough leverage to completely override the entire nation's economic stability and political trust. Again, I don't respect feudalism in any incarnation.
And while I Personally do think the government, If Oriented and Regulated properly to work against corruption and conflict of interest, is the best tool to do so, I'm open to any system that could accomplish this endgoal. If it happens to be Capitalist, then sweet, but I feel like our nation's biggest problems at present stem from the fact that our private sector enterprise and the government are being presided over by the same group of scumbags actively working together to screw all of us into being powerless, broke, and too desperate to think about opposing them.
My "support" of the public sector, if you can call it that, isn't out of love or affection for Daddy Government, but base practicality. The government in my mind Should ONLY exist insofar as it benefits the people it presides over by existing. Maybe that's as a productive and robust welfare system, maybe it's just as the arbitrator that keeps businesses honest and just keeps its nose out of private interests otherwise, but to my mind the reason our government is such a fucking failure is expressly because it doesn't exist to serve the people as much as it exists to serve private corporate interests.
And since I have zero control over the private sector, I'm stuck in a position where I have to at least Try to make the government better in some way, since I have a miniscule degree of input in regards to the public sector as a voter.
So... TL:DR, those are my general positions on capitalism/government. I'm not anti-capitalist, I'm just against capitalism colluding with the government and vice-versa. I think the USA as it exists is a shining example of how broken and unstable a society gets when this occurs.
1
-
@waltergrace565 "The point is, capitalism didn't corrupt the system. People did that. Immoral and corrupt people."
I mean... Technically true, but the same response could be said about government. The government isn't corrupt, just the people within it.
I was just speaking in simpler terms for the sake of being concise, I wasn't trying to imply "Capitalism R Bad, period."
"And haha, we're never gonna make any real progress if we continue to play this game. Like, what makes you think I'm a republican?"
The honest answer is your responses to Kyle's stuff. Which was wrong of me, I'll fess up to that, but....Dude you gotta admit that your responses to me in the past and your responses to Kyle are kind of deliberately incendiary, vague, pretty much designed to provoke hostile reactions, and this is kind of the first time I've ever gotten any insight into your beliefs at all.
Which sure, isn't an indicator on it's own, but it's kiiiind of also the exact same responses from the legion of shamelessly rightwing assholes lower in the comments. King Charles and whyamipink and Lou G as commenters come to mind. And in their cases, if you ever call them such, they always say "I'm not a Republican, so irrelevant", but Also never clarify their positions past that point and just keep attacking Leftists and/or hyping up the Right.
Like they'll be cheering on Trump and DeSantis and exclusively the rightest of rightwing positions in direct reverse of literally anything Kyle says, but the moment you identify them as a Rightwinger, they immediately derail, deflect, and ignore any responses with "I'm not a republican lol, why would you think that?"
But your point is fair, I was apparently mistaken in assuming you were the same sort. And for that I apologize.
That being said... It's kiiind of a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy if you're usually coming into every conversation guns blazing. Like "Man, these people I'm insulting seem really pissed off at me."
I mean hey, use me as an example: Was I ever particularly nice to you until this thread? Was I trying to hear you out or meet you where you live? Nope! I was mostly being rude and dismissive.
Did you assume until this conversation that I was anything but an incendiary asshole stirring up shit for the sake of it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fullyfb3847 "Baal, I think I can make up an argument to put it into context for you."
Sure hope so, you've made up every other thing you're against on this thread, why not another?
"Have you heard of Newtons third law that every action has an equal and opposite reaction?"
Are you implying your shameless bigotry against LGBT people is a Newtonian counter-response to being expected to accept LGBT people?
"hink about that idea (or law) within the scope of societal and cultural change."
The... societal change in which we stopped treating LGBT people like degenerates and animals and started treating them as equals?
Still not seeing a justification for the counter-response that doesn't make you guys assholes.
"If enough people feel that something (yes, it's that broad) has distributed too much force in a particular direction, there will likely be an equal and opposite reaction in response to the initial force(s)."
Right. Like a bunch of lying pricks trying to shove LGBT people back in the closet while openly lying about us being "groomers" and "pedos" because they have no actual reason besides character assassination and fear.
"To oversimplify, this is the societal pendulum swinging IRL. Arguably, it is an overreacting to excessive force to begin with. AKA - F me? No, F you!"
Well "Fuck You" is the standard policy of the Right, so makes sense.
"Does that help you understand what may be happening? I have another explanation, so just let me know if you want it!"
Depends, does this explanation come with a reason better than "We don't like people who are different than us being treated like they're equal to us?"
If not I'm gonna be suuuuper disappointed that "I don't like being told to accept other people and will be even Less accepting out of spite" was the best you had.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Somalia690 I mean sure, go for it, we don't care. All your Presidents since Reagan At Least were war criminals and vicious civilian-murderers to a man.
However, in case you missed it, the difference between Trump and others is "What he did was still illegal for the President."
"Shady shit" isn't good enough, because the Bush administration basically legalized all warcrimes for the Fed under the post 9/11 defense authorization. So "War crimes" are things the President can't be punished for legally speaking, according to a prior Presidential administration.
Clinton was similar, he couldn't be tried for anything he did in terms of political/military actions, because "Those aren't illegal for the President in America", but "Lying under Oath" still was, so that's what he was judged for.
Trump hit one of those "Still illegal" pitfalls with stealing and lying about classified documents to the Fed.
"Being shady" means fuck all when you allow these pricks the power to decide what is/is not illegal for themselves. And thus he's being punished for what he CAN be legally punished for.
He could have tripled the output of warcrimes of all former Presidents combined and you Still wouldn't be legally allowed to punish him for it. Because "warcrimes aren't illegal for the President."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lawrence208 Well for starters, the fact that you avoided a single one of the questions and are just leaving shit open-ended.
It's a shameless propaganda piece that recycles the same DailyWire talking points as normal, but with more open mockery. The fact of the matter is MAGA people patently aren't funny.
Like let's say for the sake of argument the movie was actually well-produced. And they seriously Tried to make this a comedy hit. Here's the problem: Conservatives have a whole 3 jokes when it comes to trans people, 1: some variant of "I identify as an Apache helicopter" rephrased a fucktillion different ways, 2: just dressing up in drag and acting like dipshits and implying "this is what trans people are" and 3: Openly imply trans people are sex offenders. This one's not even a joke, they just tend to bold-facedly call trans people "groomers" and p*dos outright.
And these jokes have been told again, and again, and Again, and Again over and over by every single fucking conservative in the US a million times because "They only have the three main jokes."
And here's Ben trotting it out yet again as if it's some fresh hot take when it's "wow, the same thing, but in movie format." Like even if it was a funny joke to begin with, No Joke is funny after the ump-millionth retelling.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheEarthStoodStill "you think morality is all about the self preservation of humans ?"
Uhhh, is it not? Our moral systems are designed by humans, generally for humans first and foremost, and our understanding of morality inherently comes from a human-centric lens because Gasp Everyone Capable of Observing it is a Human.
"wow just wow."
Does your incredulity come with a refutation, or what?
"when I was five years old I was taken to a zoo for the first time, I remember frowning and thinking "why do people put animals in cages ?"
Did this five year old figure out a few reasons why, or is question-posing your moral system?
"I felt it was wrong.... understand ?"
Yes, and your moral judgement for doing this is literally "It made the human feel bad."
Human centric morality, your sense of what's right and wrong in this scenario was literally predicated on how it impacted your feelings in the situation.
Jesus why are you acting like I said morality is bullshit or something? We have a sample size of "One Species" currently that even has an articulable concept of morality, and it's centered around the feelings and sensibilities at the micro and macro scales by "How that species feels about it conceptually."
Ergo, species-centric morality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Milanvaneijk So... Just to be clear here:
You presented absolutely no evidence for your position, just declarations.
You are disappointed in the efficacy of the vaccine, because like every Other vaccine, it has an effective shelf-life before mutation necessitates a new vaccine. Which... Dude, do you think people get annual flu shots for shits and grins? We KNOW vaccines aren't forever. I mean they're "forever" against the current iteration of any given virus, but viruses mutate and evolve same as every other organic "thing". You Need to update vaccines because the flu virus next year isn't gonna be exactly the same as the flu This year.
...Like I'm sorry, but it feels like your objections hinge on a fundamental misunderstanding of what vaccines even do, combined with "BIG PHARMA" paranoia. Which yeah, sure, they're corrupt, but you're apparently assuming they're malicious to the point of self-sabotaging stupidity on top of being corrupt.
Riddle me this: How exactly does Big Pharma rip you off for money if you're a corpse? You're a more lucrative moneypit Alive than dead, so why would Big Pharma have any interest in Killing you? Your rotting corpse doesn't make them any profit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@marchmelloow "You don't know how money works.
These students were loaned money, payed their schools to study there, and now need to pay back their loans to whoever loaned it to them. This means that the loaner LOST money in this process and the school GAINED this money in this process. Now, the loaner needs to get the money back from the student. If the loaner doesn't get the money back, then they lost money, if the interest didn't gain them the money back, and/or the loaner will know that the government can invalidate the whole point of the loan to them, getting money off the interest and the pay back, and will now NEVER lead money to students again because it would be a bad business decision."
For someone claiming I don't know how money works, you apparently forgot that selling debt is a thing. Or bailouts exist, or predatory corrupt systems exist.
Keep justifying a completely pointlessly predatory system though, I'm sure your loansharks are grateful for such a willing debt slave.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Aeroneus1 "I don’t care about the public’s opinion or eye."
It's good you don't care. XD
"I simp for a lot of things."
Like Rob Schneider. XD
"Henry Cavill, cold sandwiches mmm, and horror movies as some examples"
Those are not Rob Schneider. XD
"So compared to a hater, that’s fine."
Hehehehe, the cope is strong with you.
"You are filled with hate, and it seems to be directly related to people who do not think like you."
Pretty sure mocking people who think like Rob Schneider just means my brain works.
"How tolerant and open minded you must be"
The booty-itch is strong with you, fanboy of Adam Sandler's living punchline.
"Even the worst player in the nba is still more successful than you or I. So, even if Schneider is a terrible comedian he is still far richer and more famous than you or I ever be. So, despite your hate, he is successful. It is sad you can’t admit that because you just do not like him. How do you define success?"
I didn't claim Rob lacked in success, I was mocking you for using that as your Sole justification for Rob having any worth.
If the only value you have to the species is a pile of cash mostly given to you by nepotism, that's the only value you have. Everything of value in the existence of Rob Schneider is EXCLUSIVELY measured in a bank statement.
And the fact that's a bragging point to you says a lot about how much You got going on in life. But then again, you simp for Rob Schneider. XD
1
-
@Aeroneus1 "I don’t care about the public’s opinion or eye."
It's good you don't care. XD
"I simp for a lot of things."
Like Rob Schneider. XD
"Henry Cavill, cold sandwiches mmm, and horror movies as some examples"
Those are not Rob Schneider. XD
"So compared to a hater, that’s fine."
Hehehehe, the cope is strong with you.
"You are filled with hate, and it seems to be directly related to people who do not think like you."
Pretty sure mocking people who think like Rob Schneider just means my brain works.
"Even the worst player in the nba is still more successful than you or I. So, even if Schneider is a terrible comedian he is still far richer and more famous than you or I ever be. So, despite your hate, he is successful. It is sad you can’t admit that because you just do not like him. How do you define success?"
I didn't claim Rob lacked in success, I was mocking you for using that as your Sole justification for Rob having any worth.
If the only value you have to the species is a pile of cash mostly given to you by nepotism, that's the only value you have. Everything of value in the existence of Rob Schneider is EXCLUSIVELY measured in a bank statement.
And the fact that's a bragging point to you says a lot about how much You got going on in life. But then again, you simp for Rob Schneider. XD
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sangwaraumo "Imagine you have a 8 voters and 3 candidates."
Pretty sure there's millions in play here compared to those 3, but I'll humor this metaphor.
"You're one of those 8 and you decided not to vote, or you voted for Captain Not-A-Chance. So that's now 4-Trump, 3-Biden, 1-Doesn't-Matter. So Trump wins. See how the math works?"
....That's not a "vote for Trump" that's called LOSING. No votes went to Trump, Biden just categorically lost fair and square.
"Sure, you didn't vote for Trump. You just made it more likely he would win. Like the voters that voted for him, yes, pretty much."
So your pitch is "A vote for anyone but Biden is a vote for Trump" not because it's accurate, but because that sounds better than "If you don't vote for us, we won't win."
Yeah. That's how Voting works. You are supposed to persuade people to vote FOR you, so you get MORE votes, so you win. If Biden has less votes, that means Biden just lost.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sangwaraumo "No, it's quite accurate. Any vote that's not for Biden, favours Trump. It's a fact based on years of track record and current polls."
No, you got less votes, therefore you lost the popularity contest. That is the math you showed me, stop reframing Your Defeat as if you aren't responsible for it.
"Either Biden wins, or Trump wins. No one else is winning, you know that, right? I hope you know that."
No, I'm not a human being with basic pattern recognition, thank you. I can see you're really intent on persuading me to hate you less.
"Whatever reason you vote, or choice you make, you have to be aware of its impact. Want to punish Biden for his failures? Go ahead! I think he deserves it. But know that you paid for that by increasing Trump's odds. If you accept the price, I can't fault you."
-_- Fine. IF you right here admit you are categorically a fascist supporter. Because that is the actionable consequence of what your actions amount to. You supporting a fascist.
Say it. Right now. Admit what you are and I will own all consequences of Biden's loss. Confess for the class the consequences of what YOU support and Own It!
1
-
@sangwaraumo "No, it's quite accurate. Any vote that's not for Biden, favours Trump. It's a fact based on years of track record and current polls."
No, you got less votes, therefore you lost the popularity contest. That is the math you showed me, stop reframing Your Defeat as if you aren't responsible for it.
"Either Biden wins, or Trump wins. No one else is winning, you know that, right? I hope you know that."
No, I'm not a human being with basic pattern recognition, thank you. I can see you're really intent on persuading me to hate you less.
"Whatever reason you vote, or choice you make, you have to be aware of its impact. Want to punish Biden for his failures? Go ahead! I think he deserves it. But know that you paid for that by increasing Trump's odds. If you accept the price, I can't fault you."
-_- Fine. IF you right here admit you are categorically a f@scist supporter. Because that is the actionable consequence of what your actions amount to. Fess up to what you are and I will agree.
1
-
@sangwaraumo "No, it's quite accurate. Any vote that's not for Biden, favours Trump. It's a fact based on years of track record and current polls."
No, you got less votes, therefore you lost the popularity contest. That is the math you showed me, stop reframing Your Defeat as if you aren't responsible for it.
"Either Biden wins, or Trump wins. No one else is winning, you know that, right? I hope you know that."
No, I'm not a human being with basic pattern recognition, thank you. I can see you're really intent on persuading me to hate you less.
"Whatever reason you vote, or choice you make, you have to be aware of its impact. Want to punish Biden for his failures? Go ahead! I think he deserves it. But know that you paid for that by increasing Trump's odds. If you accept the price, I can't fault you."
-_- Fine. Whatever. I really don't care about what happens to you people anymore. You were warned at every conceivable step and you disregarded them to keep supporting this man's march into Hell.
Hope that doesn't come back to haunt you. See you election night.
1
-
@sangwaraumo "No, it's quite accurate. Any vote that's not for Biden, favours Trump. It's a fact based on years of track record and current polls."
No, you got less votes, therefore you lost the popularity contest. That is the math you showed me, stop reframing Your Defeat as if you aren't responsible for it.
"Either Biden wins, or Trump wins. No one else is winning, you know that, right? I hope you know that."
Thanks. Didn't know that. -_-
"Whatever reason you vote, or choice you make, you have to be aware of its impact."
Ironic, coming from the people most chronically averse to taking any responsibility for their actions politically. You're just gonna blame the Left as per usual.
"Want to punish Biden for his failures? Go ahead! I think he deserves it. But know that you paid for that by increasing Trump's odds. If you accept the price, I can't fault you."
-_- See you election night.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@heani742 Four companies, sure. But it's still an effective monopoly, even if it doesn't fit the definition on paper.
These owners are all in direct collusion with eachother, they hire, replace, and transfer employees and executives between eachother, and their shareholders are more often than not the same people.
Like I know it doesn't fit the Technical definition, but that kind of strikes me as an oversight in the definition. I don't think the original term inventor thought about the "What if it's multiple companies, but they're all in collusion with eachother and only keeping a surface-level appearance of competition to maximize everyone involved's profit at the public expense?" scenario.
I dunno, I guess I think it fits the spirit of the definition, if not the exact letter of it. And I don't know a term that defines the situation more accurately without being a fullbown sentence by itself just laying the situation out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@justinmiller947 "the fact that you assume bigotry means you are not a serious person."
Well yeah, I'm not taking your imagined problem seriously. Glad you caught that, You Smart! XD
"But let's see. Before we get into stats we need to ask a couple of questions."
Always good when I need to answer a questionnaire just for you to vomit up something that proves anything you say valid. /s
"First are women's sports important or not?"
About as important as any other sport is.
"If your answer is no then this is a made up issue."
It's a made-up issue even if you say yes. Seeing how you're still not proving this is even an issue and we're still playing 20 Questions.
" If they are important then the second question, why are women's sports important?"
Literally no sport is important, but if you're going to pretend one is, you kinda gotta pretend they all are.
"If it is just an arbitrary distinction and there are no differences between men and women physically, then it is a made up issue, but it also means that we are discriminating against men for no reason (as men are not allowed to play in women's league based solely on their gender)."
So either it's a real issue, or you're being discriminated against. Interesting "head I win, tails You lose" you got there.
"This would imply that we need to get rid of women's sports completely and everyone can compete on the same teams. "
....Huh? How the fuck does it follow that "Women's Sports need to be eliminated, or else discrimination"? The fuck are you on about?
Are you gonna PROVE this is an issue or is it purely hypothetical circle-running?
"But until I know how you are looking at this issue, no stats will change someone's mind who thinks that women's sports is nothing but a social club."
WRONG!
ACTUAL EVIDENCE WOULD!
I asked for stats, you gave me this instead. Therefore, you have no stats until you stop filibustering.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ariel-y-e-m There's something inherently assbackwards about a situational ban that only allows exception for one demographic.
Like this isn't a ban, it's not going to get rid of the word, the word itself isn't banned, just WHO is allowed to use it. Context is meaningless, logic is meaningless, t's purely an irrational overcorrection that I don't even recall hearing the black community even wanting.
Why am I listening to a bunch of rich white people as to what the black community wants banned or not? When did the black community ask for this? Also, why does this "ban" only ever conveniently exist for people those same rich white people don't want encroaching on their powerbase?
Like Biden has Openly used the N-word in official capacities to justify doing shit to minorities with the law, yet he's not cancelled. And no one in the Democrat Party cares.
But Rogan says it, despite not ever using it in that kind of context and never using bigotry to endorse or pass/enforce laws Against minorities, a guy whose entire platform threatens the Establishment media's bottom line by existing, NOW we gotta cancel. Like am I just supposed to NOT see the obvious and scummy way this well-meaning but still censorship behavior is being abused?
If Rogan deserves to be cancelled for just Saying the N word, then everyone who cancelled him in the media deserves a public hanging for the same shit while actually DOING racist shit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@LaughOutLiberty "1. Manifests aren't public record. And no one is track his private jet because it's so damn interesting to see a plane fly."
No one was talking about manifests you dolt. Nice attempt at a non sequitur though, totally doesn't make you seem like an evasive turd.
"2. I'll go ahead and believe your accusation that he "spied" on people. That doesn't negate his own right to privacy and lets everyone violate it because of that. 2 things can be true at the same time."
I didn't say he spied on anyone, I said he literally owns a company that has a pre-him track record of spying on people. I'm guessing lying isn't something you're against doing to make a point, seeing how you're implying shit I never stated just to avoid what I did say.
" That doesn't negate his own right to privacy and lets everyone violate it because of that."
Ah, so you're more concerned about Musk's right to privacy even if that Was my accusation. Nice to know you're a consistent sycophant.
"3. Twitter spent the entire pre-Elon era banning/shadowbanning decent, with requests straight from the top of governmental people."
Which I'm sure you can demonstrate as true. Citation needed.
"If you think Elon is doing the same thing here, you're being very disingenuous. But it's all "a private company!" until they start banning people you agree with, right?"
Once again making up my arguments instead of addressing anything I actually said. Doesn't even merit a response, you're clearly not even talking to me now.
"4. At the end of the day, it is his company and he can do whatever the hell he wants with it, just as Jack Dorsey or whoever was licking his boots and was in charge was doing."
Yep. The only defense of yours that's technically true. He can indeed legally do it.
"All of you libs/leftists talk about freedom of speech still having repercussions up until it's happening to you."
I never mentioned free speech at all, actually, but don't let me stop your screed at Strawman-Patch.
Care to try and respond to something I DID say for a change you lying sack of donkeyshit? Or proving a single claim of yours to be true? Any day now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@waltergrace565 "Notice the "allows" bit. He's referring to the massive fraud by the Biden regime. Meaning that since they've committed "A Massive Fraud of this magnitude", by doing so, they've essentially allowed for the "termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the constitution"."
And you know this how? Last I checked fraud has to be proven, which Trump's never been able to do.
Interesting you got all of that out of one word.
"Like I said, this is pretty basic reading comprehension. Nowhere does he indicate that that's what he's going to do, wants to do or intends to do."
Except in his literal wording where he's actively demanding an election overturn even though there's no evidence of fraud.
"And do you seriously think he's going to run on a platform of "terminating the constitution" and win? Most Trump voters jerk off to the constitution. "
Pfff, no you don't. You absolutely don't. You people only care about the Constitution insofar as it enables your bullshit.
Hence why "Jan 6th" is a "peaceful protest" yet you mongrels defend people like DeSantis legislating the ability to just run down leftist protestors if in the way.
You people treat the Constitution like something that only exists For You.
Nice bullshit defense of Trump based on One Word that means exactly nothing of what you've claimed though. Let me know when you've got Actual arguments besides some claim to just magically knowing what Trump actually means, regardless of his actual wording.
1
-
1
-
@waltergrace565 "Haha, yes, dawg. 100% real. This is the cult nonsense I'm talking about. Just because I'm not regurgitating the narrative BS talking points of the predetermined "sides", you can't even fathom that. It's like you can't accept a unique point of view or opinion."
...The unique point of view that keeps you defending Trump on every Kyle video about him.
That's not "unique", you're a MAGA sycophant and have been until literally this exact second when it stopped being easy to defend him.
"And it's not that I'm defending Trump. I'm just pushing back on this manufactured consent approved narrative delusion and the grifters that push it."
"I'm not defending Trump, I'm just defending Trump."
There, fixed that for you. You can say whatever the hell you like on that point, the fact remains that you defend Trump on every single video with anything At All disparaging to say about him.
But sure, I'm the cultist. Right. Makes sense. And which cult am I part of? You seem rather confident that I must belong to one even though I haven't stated a single actual position at all besides "You, Walter, are full of shit."
"I just can't believe people are still falling for this BS. You don't have to follow the cult, my man. Break free and run."
Follow your own advice and stop lying.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"What counts as work?
How do disabled people fit into that?
Or taking time off work for one reason or another?"
Presumably the same way it works in less savage countries. Like yeah, you work, but work is just "That which makes profit or contributes to the function of some other service." The idea is that you're producing enough capital AND resources for your people. Not the "exponential growth" model America uses (Which is literally impossible and is just fuel for economic depressions/recessions when the bubble finally bursts), but sustainability.
If people are out of work, no problem, they get unemployment for a given grace period if they're not on retirement or disability. If they're retired, they worked enough for us, let them relax, we can fit the bill off the profit they made us easy. If it's disability, no problem, you're good if it's something that makes you incapable of work, we'll do our best to accommodate your needs in whatever field you can work in if you're deemed capable of working.
Like when you really break it down Democratic Socialism is basically "Capitalism, with a government focused on the common good more than the rich." Like you can still get rich, meritocracy's still a thing, but no one gets So disproportionately rich that they destabilize the system and poverty isn't a glorified purgatory or death sentence.
The idea being that obscene wealth loses a lot of its power when welfare and community programs are well-funded. So the rich can't pull a stranglehold over the poor by hoarding critical resources, and the poor are less hateful and unwilling to cooperate with the system made by the rich because your society eliminated the ghoulish consequences of being poor in a cruel society.
Studies show that people are more ambitious and eager to work when their lives are secure and they're not worried about how to care for their families. The whole "People get lazy if you just Give them money" logic isn't backed up as generally true in practice, and America is already brazenly hypocritical on that point because, if that Were true, then why does giving Me a basic UBI of, say, $1000 a month make me lazy and an entitled freeloader (despite the fact that I have a job), but giving CEO's literally Trillions in Our taxpayer dollars for them to hoard as they fire off their staff at the same time is "Trickle Down Economics"?
If this logic was true than Bezos should be the single laziest shit on the planet.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@abrahamlincoln937 ...Did you seriously ignore what my comment said?
I don't take the vote on a Presidents "Historical track record" seriously from people who are actively writing from the biased opinion of "The day and age in which that person was President."
Every President at the time of their service or shortly after always gets more shit than they'd historically get, and I can think of a dozen Presidents that have worse "Actual Things they Did" on their ledger that Trump flat out never did.
He was a shitsmear and obnoxious in the extreme, but his actual Presidential actions aren't even remotely abnormal for a modern President (I.e. If Trump's the "4th worst President", numbers 5-8 better be Obama, Bush, and Clinton)
Did Trump set up a concentration camp for Japanese-Americans? Nope. Did Trump legitimize America's slave trade? No, so that's already "The Founding Fathers in totality" worse on paper than Trump since they were literal slaveowners, did Trump bulldoze the Native Americans in the name of Manifest Destiny? Also no.
Was he Jackson? Reagan? Hoover? One was a genocidal racist maniac, the 2nd is arguably responsible for everything wrong with modern American Capitalism, and the third was holding his dick and useless during the Great Depression.
Like seriously, I gotta know, What Specifically did Trump do that was so bad that he ended up "4th Worst President of American History" on a list that includes genociders, slavers, and people who actively caused the nation to implode or actively instigated illegal wars of aggression?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@herpetolgyprodigy I'm noticing an utter lack of Proof for this claim. Also appeal to authority much? "A bunch of vague nameless doctors said this sucks, therefore it sucks."
Also no data even back that claim of yours up. Drug legalization didn't increase Colorado or Oregon's homeless problems, and in fact that biggest problems relating to drugs all stem from the fact that they're illegal. Why do junkies steal? Because they're addicted and can't seek help. Why? Because drugs are expensive as shit because are illegal, and seeking help is confessing to a crime and actively ruining their lives more in this country, because drugs are illegal. Which, in America, means that your entire life is ruined, you've got a criminal record for the rest of forever, which means you're career blacklisted from damn near anything but menial bitch work, which already doesn't pay enough to live, adding to the stress, making those drugs enticing as the only break you get from the feedback-loop hell that is the American Justice System. In legal states a junkie can seek help and get put back on their feet to be made a productive member of society again.
Whereas our current system is not focused on rehabilitation so much as petty vengeance. We don't Want people to be clean or fixed, we just want them to suffer and Keep suffering, because it makes us money. Catch someone with weed in an illegal State, and now that man is your bitch until they die. Doesn't matter if they clean up, their record will never go away. If their record doesn't go away, then 95% of jobs will never hire them (You could be a PhD level genius with the credentials to back it up, but if you've got a record and aren't rich, you're doomed to McDonalds indefinitely). If jobs won't hire you then crime is starting to look Real nice, since it's the only industry in economics that doesn't judge backgrounds. Our system Makes criminals, then beats them into the dirt for the rest of their lives from crimes that shouldn't even be crimes.
If I drop some LSD, the Only person affected by it is Me. There is no victim, I'm complicit and consenting, what right is it of the government to dictate what mental state people are allowed to be in? If drugs are bad, then they are bad, Period. If you're gonna be a Puritan at least be a consistent one. Alcohol and cigarettes have killed exponentially more people than LSD ever has, why am I allowed to be drunk but not high?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BM-js9bf I don't care. Dude, you seem to be wildly misunderstanding this little relationship of ours.
Your attitude, your emotional state, whatever, doesn't mean anything to me. It's good for you that you're working on your own issues and stuff, seriously, good on you, but your psychology doesn't really factor in to why this conversation of ours got less than cordial.
My frustration with you begins and ends with a complete lack of evidence presented for the things you claim and you continuing to act as if you just Declaring something to be true is somehow supposed to be enough for strangers. When it very obviously wouldn't satisfy you the other way around.
I don't like or hate you, I don't know enough about who you are as a person to form any degree of emotional interest in you (Nothing personal, I just literally don't know who you are), all I know about you is what's been stated above.
You could literally be the worst human being ever in terms of how you interact with me and I'd still just be sitting here asking for a citation same as I would be if you were being cool.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BM-js9bf Yes I am. And I've been so the entire time I've been here.
Hello, my name's Alex, nice to meet you. I'm abrasive and rude to people I think are bullshitting me, and I have done absolutely nothing to hide or shy away from that since I got here.
Your comments however are chock full of accusations against my behavior that you're actively contradicting in the same comment half the time.
Like if my behavior is somehow an indictment against the quality of my character, why is it magically Not in regards to you? You seem more concerned about my etiquette than anyone else is, which is peculiar because, as stated above, you're pretty much guilty of the same things you're judging me for.
Like in that last comment, I'm somehow to blame even when you're being a douchebag? Are you so easy to derail from your principles that you're immediately willing to toss them aside the first moment someone's less than polite to you?
Because I am Me all day, every day, regardless of whose around or who says what, and I've at no point tried to mislead anyone on exactly how I behave.
1
-
1
-
@BM-js9bf ....Okay, let me see if I can describe this to you using an analogy.
Let's say our argument here is a fight. Like an actual fist-fight.
You keep apologizing for hitting me a certain way, admitting fault... Only to immediately do it again anyway with the exact same apology.
Like an apology or admitting fault is meaningless on its own if the behavior continues unabated. Like if you keep swinging fists while apologizing and claiming to wish to seek peace, it just looks like you don't want people to think you just like swinging fists, but still didn't want to stop swinging fists.
Meanwhile, on my end you've got someone who, in this analogy, started out swinging fists, never once apologized for it, and has pretty much been matching you swing for swing. You can say I'm mean, hostile, aggressive, rude, whatever, but my behavior is pretty much completely consistent with itself. Mean and crass, sure, but not dishonest.
...Meanwhile this is the third time you've apologized to me during this conversation, and the past two apologies were immediately followed by a comment that completely worked against whatever sincerity you might have otherwise garnered in me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JustAnotherNamelessGuy You kind of need to, actually.
Seriously, if the Dems oppose Republican tyranny so much, Why, pray tell, is it so easy for Republicans to keep doing fucked up shit even when Democrats could do something about it?
Like am I just crazy here or something? Seriously, Someone, Anyone, PLEASE show me where Democrats are fighting the good fight. I Want to believe, so desperately, that we can fight this, but it fundamentally feels like we're on our own in this country.
I don't want to feel this way, I HATE this utter lack of faith in the "good guys" I feel, and I want to believe as much as you seem to that the Democrats will fight for it.
.... But maybe I'm just ignorant here, but I just see Republican evil and Democrat compliance. And at this point I don't know what I'm supposed to fucking do about it but despair.
And when I voice these concerns, I get accused of "Both siding" this. And I don't feel like I am. At this point Republicans are far and away the worst offenders and culprits in this corruption... But why the fuck are Democrats just Letting this happen?!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@michah321 "you really need to work on your anger preoccupation with Christians."
Thanks for more psycho-analysis.
" You know that includes, but isn't limited to Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, Episcopalians... Greek and Russian Othodox Catholics.. You're saying ALL of us are like these unhinged lunatics?"
I don't. But you know what I DO see in the rest of you? A demographic that's more concerned with Christianity's PR than they are anything horrible done under their banner. Look at you, still more interested in denigrating the outsiders for "not getting the nuances of Christianity" than you are condemning and opposing the fanatics making your entire religion look horrible.
"These people are the joke of Christianity."
A several thousand year-long murderous joke Christianity sure loves retelling.
"There are as many liberal and progressive a Christians as right wing."
Yeah, but one of those groups is a fuuuuck of a lot more active than the other, isn't it?
"In fact, Christianity at is core IS progressive, equality, everyone sharing, no one in power oppressing anyone."
...It literally calls for a monarchy, has instruction manuals for slave-owning, preaches the notion that monarchs are divinely put in place, and demands total subservience to an All-Powerful despot.
But other than that, sure.
"That's what I mean by these people don't represent all Christians. If you think it does, you're lumping everyone together in the same way the evangelical extremists do."
...The whole human rights violations, warcrimes, and overt fascism seems like a huuuuge distinction to me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Don't like it, don't vote.
If you don't want to participate in democracy, you don't have to. Seriously, don't vote if you don't want to.
Sadly the Rest of us actually participate in society, so whatever you want is functionally pointless. Sorry, but literally no one is obligated to cater to your whims, you are not the arbiter of what's ethical or moral or not, and your opinions on voting are completely irrelevant. Don't like it, don't participate or hey, advocate to change the system.
But wait, that would be you "bothering people." So... Shit, do I even really need to care about your position at all if violating it costs me absolutely nothing?
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Sure sure. Yeah, you're the only one thinking longterm.
Despite you never once demonstrating any capacity to consider a position beyond your own base emotional reaction to it, You uniquely are playing the long game.
...Forgive me if I take that with a mountainous grain of salt, especially considering you couldn't even say it without an unfounded insult. You've literally never once in any of our conversations presented a single scrap of proof for anything you claim to be true, not a single citation verifying you know what you're talking about, and in fact has openly stated before that you just "Choose" to disagree when/if basic facts of reality contradict your narrow sense of morality.
But sure, YOU have a finger on society's pulse. You, the person whose perfect world doesn't even include any understood definition of society, you who rejects everything society does for you and pretends as if you didn't benefit from our work, You inexplicably have the only understanding of these concepts you actively despise.
You remind me often of an anti-vaxxer. Someone who knows absolutely nothing about a given subject (at least nothing you'll ever demonstrate in a way anyone else could corroborate), besides that you hate it, so just yammer on as if you're an expert when literally all you've got it "Let me tell you why everything about vaccines is bullshit! Because I'm totally an expert, just ask me! Got my degree right here i-Oh, wait, I'm not qualified in the slightest to comment on this... Uhhh... Well fuck Scientists anyway, who said you actually needed an education to have a valid educated opinion? Maybe if I just reapeat the same declarations often enough and nakedly insult anyone who dissents from me long enough, this will somehow pass as unquestionable fact!"
...Meanwhile I'm Still waiting for you to provide a single solitary scrap of evidence for your beliefs from our First conversation a couple weeks ago
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@juchou2983 Wow, one example in 5 fucking comments you separated. Good job fucker, have a cookie for finally doing your job.
"they can be compared on carbon footprint during manufacturing, during first 5 years of operations, first 10 years of operations, recycling .. Also can be compared for operating cost.. Price when brand new, resale value, depreciation.. And so on. Any topic can be discussed without being biased. That was the point."
Could be, sure, but you mentioned the environment. Welcome to America, the fact you considered that at all means you think about the environment. Biased. You mentioned recycling you "Green-Party hippie", bias in favor of renewable resources.
Operating cost is entirely contingent on your tax bracket as to how much that is or is not a relevant factor, but I counted 2 Partisan as hell issues in the USA in your "unbiased" breakdown.
And I can't help but notice your comparison leaves out the final factor to Objective Decide something. And it's called a Decision.
Go on. Which is Objectively the superior car? Gas or electric?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mae_Dastardly Propaganda does bad things to good people.
Lol, believe me I get it. I just have a hard time rationalizing it. Familial upbringing, southern family, and I'm the gay one.
And the family ran the whole gambit from "Accepting and supportive, but crass" to "BURN THE HERETIC!" when it finally came out.
And sure, some of my family members were genuinely hateful shits about it, but even among the more religiously indoctrinated most of them didn't really... Erm...
...Hang on, having a hard to time finding the words... Okay, you know how when someone isn't hiding hatred from you, and you can just Feel that vibe off them outright?
Well I wasn't really getting the same vibe from most of them. If anything most of my family seemed genuinely, wholly 100% convinced that their family member (Me) was at genuine risk of being lost in some way. Like it didn't strike me as malice as much as what happens when someone who genuinely means well and doesn't know any better falling in with a cult.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thecheeseburgler591 Okay.
So in order to even discuss an objective moral standard, I have to already accept that there is one to begin with axiomatically.
Followed by the moral law that is superior to you and I....Wait, why would it be superior or inferior? If I can defy a law of existence, how is it superior to me?
...Nevermind, I'll allow it, Objective Moral standards exist axiomatically, and so do superior moral laws. I am accepting for the sake of this conversation that these things exist and can't be questioned. They're just real, end of story.
...And now I have to also accept the existence of a God, or "universal moral consciousness".
....See, I think I see where the logical disconnect is here. Your entire premise is predicated on the existence of something you defined as a god. We do not believe in gods. Like that's literally the ONE THING about Atheists that actually is 100% universal: Atheists do not accept the existence of deities as a given.
But okay! Fair Enough! Once again, for the sake of the conversation, I will accept that God is also axiomatically a thing.
So the things I have to accept as axiomatically correct are as follows:
1: An Objective Moral Standard exists in the Universe
2: A Moral Law associated with this objective standard exists that supersedes all mortal morality
3:An universal objective moral consciousness (i.e. God) exists to preside over this law, potentially of their own creation as the proverbial "law-giver"
Got it. I'm following you, I've been responding to this comment of yours as I am reading it. I've accepted your premise, I'm humoring the axioms of your argument, in this moment I Believe in Objective Morality and the tenants you have prescribed! Amen Brother!
Now what's the objective moral standard?
"Again, I'm not telling you what exactly the universal moral law is (that's for you to figure out, although we all intrinsically know that rape and murder are against this law)"
.....
"Believe me, I used to be atheistic and secular in my thinking too"
....Okay then. You used to be atheistic and secular in your thinking too. That right?
Then tell me, my good chap: Why would an Atheist that believes in subjective morality's eye be twitching when they're told that the key to finding OBJECTIVE morality is "For them to figure out for themselves"?
You used to think like me, tell me why I miiiiight be starting to lose my patience?
1
-
@thecheeseburgler591 Lol, I'm sorry what?
You think I'm getting frustrated because MY thinking is inconsistent?
No, you Just described exactly, point for point, how Subjective morality comes about: People "Figuring it out for themselves." That is literally what subjective morality is, but you called it Objective.
So Objective morality exists, but the means by which you figure it out is completely subjective.
...And this doesn't seem even the tiniest bit backwards in your own head?
You Tell Me, WHY is murder wrong? Objectively, why is murder wrong?
You claim to have objective morality, tell me something Objectively wrong and tell me Objectively why that is so. Give me One example, just one teensy little thing that is objectively immoral that you can demonstrate to be objectively immoral.
Demonstrate to me that your own position can meet your standard of proof.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GeorgeEugeneBarrett No one said you couldn't believe whatever you want.
I'm not saying you Can't believe this, I'm saying you can't justify it. At least religion has the excuse of dogma and ignorance, thus far you have yet to justify a single aspect of your beliefs except that you "Believe" it's wrong.
So George believes a certain way, therefore fuck everyone not George who feels differently about their rights, George doesn't like it for some unexplained reason.
At least God is a title to invoke with some gravitas, who tf cares "What Would George Do?'
And you may call my assessment wrong, but I asked you to lay out what your viewpoint was nd why anyone should give a shit, and you just said "I can believe whatever I want."
Sure you can. I can also believe the universe was pulled out of a unicorn's ass. Doesn't make my belief any more or less valid because "I believe it really really hard."
Like seriously, why, in the process of getting someone to explain their beliefs, we have to first reassure them that they can, in fact, choose to believe this shit? You obviously can, you're doing it, that doesn't explain a single aspect of "Why" you think you're not only correct, but correct to such a degree that an entire nation 's democratic rights need to be overridden in order to enact Your beliefs against everyone else's will.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theeccentrictripper3863 Lol, which is it? Is this un-American, or can you not objectively quantify that statement?
Also the law disagrees with you, your objections are irrelevant. Philosophical objections are irrelevant, this is a legal matter, and this is permissible within the letter of our law.
How you feel about it is irrelevant, a country is what is Does. America Is doing this, Has been doing this, and apparently will continue to do this.
How you feel about it is one thing, but you objection that this is not how America works is objectively false. America's literally been doing this since the early days, that is Verifiably "What America does."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@felixbonneau1834 I don't fucking know dude, most of Putin's actions in the past month are completely asinine from political PR viewpoints.
And I'm not going to claim to know the mind of Putin by any stretch, but Putin isn't exactly Known for being "completely out of his damn mind." Ruthless, sick, totalitarian in the extreme, all yes. But not suicidally insane, and that's exactly what all this looks like.
So either Putin went ten types of buggernuts crazy all at once... Or there's some other thing going on. And I don't even mean like "grand conspiracy", it could be something as basic as "Russia is a massive fuckhuge oil nation that's been sanctioned to the point of being largely cut off from the international oil supply for awhile (not excusing anything, just chain of events), and Russia's starting to get desperate."
Like if you're an oil nation and your entire infrastructure only lives or dies if you have oil, you either get that oil or your nation goes under bigtime.
But at the end of the day the only people who know what the motivations are are the powerful folks in Russia. And it's not like they're going to admit to all their enemies that something's going wrong in the back room. Gotta look strong and all even when you're freaking tf out as a country.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Christian Barrett "The difference is the intent and how the joke punches metaphorically."
....Okay, what's this "punching down" "punching up" thing?
Like I know WHAT it is, but since when was it a mandatory part of comedy? I can't think of a single comedian off the top of my head whose ever been able to maintain this standard, let alone one who even Stated this to be their intent.
"But instead joking that the man is tired because he had to run twice as far to catch up to the white runner, is a satirical joke pointing out the systemic inequality between different races."
....Not entirely sure how you make that sentiment into a punchy joke, but I can see why that would be funny in concept.
"Meanwhile the original joke makes fun of a stereotype and insults black people by treating them as the de-facto type of criminal."
I mean yeah, it's a bad taste joke, but those are still part of comedy. I don't Like those jokes, but the track record of comedy would suggest that absolutely no one and nothing is off-limits so I accept the reality that I'm not going to find it all funny.
"Chappelles trans jokes fall much in the first category where he insults trans women calling them fake and comparing their genitals to to vegetarian alternatives to meat.
A better jokes would have been to instead play to the strengths by saying that trans people can become what they always knew they could, or to play off the adversity they face in some way."
So... A joke that exempts trans people from the same level of mockery Dave throws to pretty much everyone else?
Like I'm sorry, but I feel like this is where we ideologically split off. I believe trans people are people, obviously. I believe them, I believe their experiences, I am pro-trans.
However, Part of being equal is being equally fair game for mockery and insults and comedy at your expense. If a trans person is my equal, then is it not working against that equality to turn around and act like my trans friend is too fragile and weak to take the same slings and arrows the rest of us do? Hell, if they take offense, fire back. Make the jokes right the hell back, respond to mockery With mockery.
Because my buddy Blake would punch me and be massively insulted if I felt the need to "protect them" from reality. And it occurs to me that the majority of the people I see up in arms against Dave in Defense of trans people.... Are not trans people.
1
-
@Christian Barrett " A lot to go over here. First punching up and punching down refers to your target. The classic example is punching down targets those who are treated as lesser in society, mostly minorities, while punching up targets centers of power like politicians and the state. A great example of a comedian who punched up and pretty much outlined the modern day standards for comedy would be George Carlin. "
You mean a guy who also mocked pretty much everyone else on top of the powerful, right? Like this guys general assessment of humanity as a whole was that we're a disgusting species too stupid to live. And if Carlin was touring Now, I'm pretty sure the same group of people turning on Dave would be outraged by Carlin's complete disregard for what people consider offensive. Like Carlin made liberal use of racial slurs in his routines. As part of him highlighting the injustice of it all, granted.
...But you and I both know that modernity wouldn't see any of that and would only see an old white man using the N word.
"As for Chappelle's jokes in general, the issue isn't making a mockery of a group, but how that mockery was made. Playing into stereotypes without subverting them only reinforces them in the public consciousness. For instance take the floating TV joke from earlier, if instead you told it to make the punchline about police abusing civil asset forfeiture by making a cop the thief, then you have created a bait and switch, a solid punchline, punched up, and satirized a real issue."
Starting to wonder why you're not taking the stage and showing the comedians how it's done.
"It is not that you are protecting them, it is that you are not allowing bigotry to go unchallenged. When you have a comedian with a platform you can:t simply trade jokes in a punch for punch fashion, and outrage by the audience is the only recourse."
Not only can you, it's Expected of you. You paid for the show, you agreed to abide by certain rules of decorum by doing so. If you go to a Dave Chappelle show and you don't think your demographic is gonna take some shit, then welcome to your first Chapelle Show, it's gonna be interesting.
"I will also mention that as trans people are a minority, if it wasn't for non-trans people voicing their outrage then there would not be enough of a backlash to make a difference."
Did the trans community ask you? I'm sorry, but I'm more interested in the assessment of the people who may have had an actual horse in this race to be offended by.
Like real talk, if a Trans person voices their offense, then I'll hear them out and consider their viewpoint. But... I dunno, it's always weird to me that the people most adamantly offended in the name of trans people are usually not even trans people.
And as far as I've noticed the trans community seems a bit split on this one, so I can't really rationalize in my head why I should be outraged and offended by a joke that the community themselves is divided over.
Trans people, like me, are grown ass people who can decide for themselves what does/doesn't offend them. I don't exactly take the words of proxies as gospel here, I'm sorry.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheLyricalWrdsmth ...How?
Dude, the DNC literally invented superdelegates expressly so they can forcibly override any outcome except "What the DNC wants", they actively Won in court arguing that, as a PRIVATE organization (The DNC is Private, not actually public), they have absolutely zero legal obligation to run a fair election and can rig it anyway they damn well please.... And won. Private organizations are the arbitrators of our elections, the Voter ultimately means nothing until the General election. THEN they get to choose, but the DNC/RNC are the ones who decide WHO you get to choose.
The DNC quite literally has legal precedent stating they can cheat and rig their elections anyway they like, but Bernie just needed to persuade more voters? It's expressly set up to ensure the winner is always someone the DNC, NOT the people, want as a Dem nominee.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SkidRowTrash "You're making a lot of garbage strawman fallacies."
Such as?
"There is nothing wrong with gays, lesbians, or bisexuals. Those are all natural and normal things. They are human sexualities. Not only that, these tendencies occur in all of nature in over 4000 different species. All the other letters and numbers and symbols are mental illnesses and have no place being grouped with human sexualities. It should be SLGB, Straight, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual."
Oh yeah that sounds peer-reviewed. /s And your credentials to speak on this subject are what exactly?
"These people are like lepers as in they have become physically deformed due to hormone treatments and none of them look like normal people anymore."
Lepers actually don't look that way due to hormone therapy at all, and all I just heard was "I think trans people are gross."
Tough titties, your disgust is not an argument.
"I encourage you to look into this more and actually watch some interviews with these unfortunate victims."
And I encourage you to present actual specialists and studies, but we both know that's going nowhere.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alexseguin5245 ...Does Kyle's position change at all on this topic if he knows the details of Canadian elections?
Most Canadians support this policy. Kyle verified this to be true in this video. He stated that the final outcomes would be more visible if/when Trudeau is up for reelection, which since he probably would be, is still accurate with or without Kyle's express insight: The results of Trudeau's votes would indeed be a good indicator of support or contempt for the guy by the voters.
Also... Seriously, I feel like a broken record, I promise I'm not trying to be obnoxious, but you can look further up this thread at the comment spam between me and others, I keep asking "What Specifically is Kyle wrong about in regards to this protest?", and just keep getting disconnected or unrelated responses, usually acting like it's suuuper obvious why without actually saying it.
So... Fifth time's the charm, I'll ask once more, "What exactly is Kyle getting wrong about this protest?" Like has he stated anything explicitly false about it, has he been misrepresenting facts, like can I get One ironclad instance of Kyle's unilateral "wrongness" on this issue?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@adlucem9845 " the goal post move. Now you're all about being independent."
How is that a goalpost move? And also yes, if you're still looking at the actual policy choices of your politicians and not seeing them actively cooperating bipartisanly, then I don't know what to tell you.
"Above the stupid red v blue paradigm."
You mean the one where all you idiots vote for Reps purely because they piss off "the Libs" and Democrats actively avoid policy entirely just to sick by "I'm not a Republican" as a selling point?
Golly gee, what a choice you have! Coke and Pepsi, what a difference as they both vote to steal from me.
" The leftist is always superior"
Not sure why you're still trying to force labels on me. But if this is the extent of your ability to reason, then yes, in this case I'm at least superior To You.
"....and white."
Pfff, says the guy bootlicking for Republicans n a video where MTG, a white Republican, is bitching and whining about discrimination against whites.
I guess you didn't get far enough into the fallacy list to figure out what "projection" means, because you're a natural!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dubbadizzo86 Okay, fair enough. I guess illegal immigration is an issue on some level (although seeing how the US' entire agricultural supply thrives expressly because of effective slave labor using illegal immigrants, not sure why the right is anti-illegals)
"Freedom of Speech" No you don't. Kirk literally just contradicted the First Amendment entirely in this video, he flat out Doesn't believe in the 1st Amendment apparently. I.e. You are more American that Kirk is by a country mile when it comes to Freedom of Speech apparently.
"2nd amendment rights" Don't really know how extreme he is on it, but I've got no particular objections without context, so fair enough.
"even pro-life to a degree" Pff, he's not pro-life. Just pro-birth. He hates and opposes any and all programs that suggest the State has any obligation to care for children, yet demands the State FORCE children to be born no matter what, fuck the situation they're born into. "Pre-birth", Kirk cares, "Preschool" and he doesn't wanna hear from you ever. He's only "Pro-life" when it gives him an excuse to strip rights from women.
He's a wolf wearing the skin of a Christian, nothing more. He's only there to convince the more reactionary and easily-led of your faith into atrocity.
1
-
@Dubbadizzo86 "1. In regards to the first amendment, this video is only discussing one aspect of the 1st amendment, which is state church separation, which is not all of the first amendment. So I guess you could say I partially agree with Kirk on the first amendment. But that doesn't mean we disagree entirely, or that he's completely wrong about the 1st amendment, just some of it."
I get where you're coming from, but I think you're giving Kirk entirely too much credit.
Kirk, like most of these kinds of assholes, only says what he has to in order to push his agenda. He believes in freedom of speech only insofar as he can abuse it. He supports no freedom of speech at all except that from people who agree with him.
"2. 2nd amendment, I don't know what you mean by "extreme" but I think the 2nd amendment protects the 1st amendment. I would say my ears perk up every time I hear the conversation around the 2A turning towards government limitation. I'm completely against limiting against rifles. And I don't think mass shootings, or gun deaths in the US in general is a 2A issue. I think it's a mental health issue, and should be discussed as such. I don't believe that if your intention is to reduce the number of gun deaths in America, that the solution is to limit gun rights or remove the 2a entirely. I think we need to be having a discussion on why people feel the need to harm others in the first place and solve the problem that way. "
I'm sure you are, but I'm sure you'd also agree that "Everyone as a right to a nuclear warhead" would be an extreme viewpoint of the 2nd, and plenty of pro-2nd folks seem to think they should have a right to All forms of arms for any reason if they can procure them.
One's a bit more extreme than the others, hence why I was withholding judgement without knowing what specific take of the 2nd Kirk has.
"3. I don't really like labeling myself pro-life or pro-choice, because I'm somewhat in the middle. I don't want abortion to be illegal, but I also don't want it to be commonplace either. I think we need to seriously start having discussions about responsibility and the growing hookup culture that is resulting in a high number of abortions. The argument that conservatives want to "force" you to carry a child I think is a dishonest strawman of conservative intentions. "
I think people characterize people like Kirk this way because, once again, Kirk has demonstrated he doesn't see abortion as valid for any reason whatsoever and isn't above circumventing the will of the people to make it illegal unilaterally. Your position may be that it's permissible in certain contexts, but His is "Never. For any reason. Under any circumstances, fuck the mother's life I Oppose Abortions Full-Stop and you're a disgusting evil human being if you disagree with me on any level."
"4. I also don't buy this perception that conservatives don't care about what happens to a baby after they're born. That's a strawman argument as well. They definitely care, but their solution is not the same as liberals. Liberals believe that the state should get involved if a baby is born, and conservatives don't. Conservatives believe if you plan correctly, preferably be married to someone and have a dual income, that the baby should be able to be supported without government assistance. They are encouraging folks to get married because as it turns out, there's an awful lot of evidence that points to a child who grows up in a married household, suffer far less in terms of school dropout rates, teenage pregnancy, crime, drug addiction, poverty rate, and homelessness. As a matter of fact, the poverty rate for married couples for both black people and white people are roughly the same, 12%, and has stayed relatively stable for over 60 years. If you get married, no matter your race it seems, the likelihood you will be in poverty is very low."
So the want to mandate that abortions can't occur.... But don't want to accept responsibility for the price that mandate incurs.
And they want to push everyone back into the "traditional" family unit. So... What? Is their plan to purposefully make a situation where these family units HAVE to exist in order for people to not starve to death in the streets? Because they're also against any governmental support of these children (despite wanting Government support to enforce this mandate, so rank hypocrisy when it comes to government authority), and seemingly in favor of the corporate "right" to fire women if their pregnancies interfere with the company bottom line.
Similarly, these same assholes are Also against contraceptives and birth-control and Planned Parenthood AND basic comprehensive sex education entirely. It's like they WANT people to have as many kids as possible without any means of stopping it.
The end result being "Women out of the workforce and back in the kitchen pumping out kids. Just as 'God' intended."
I feel like I need to clarify something here: You seem to think I'm aiming this at all conservatives. I am not. I am aiming this as maggots like Kirk who pretend to be conservatives expressly because conservatives will default assume "anything said against a conservative is aimed at me too."
They're taking advantage of your solidarity. They're not the same as you. They're not "live and let live" libertarians who just want personal responsibility, they're theocratic fascists dancing around in Your label and Using you as a cover to scapegoat all attacks on them as "an attack on conservative America."
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dubbadizzo86 "Why? If no one can strip anyone from speaking in the first place, then why would you need to strip someone of their right to speak?"
...Because the government can always strip the rights they've allowed the citizens to have.
Demanding free speech be removed isn't "free speech" if the government Can actually do that. It's a threat. And the government can Always change the rules.
"In your example, you're the first to be doing the stripping. The other party only demanded it, but never actually carried through. But you didn't like their demanding, so you went first. Doesn't that then mean you're the one demanding AND you carried through? "
Sure. In absolutist world where common sense doesn't exist and things can only be done in black and white. I don't think anyone will shed a tear if the "Get rid of free speech" fucker was given exactly what they demanded, but for them specifically.
If anything it's just an ironic punishment for their threat.
"I don't see how this couldn't easily just get turned on it's head. With that kind of power, all you have to do is say that someone is stripping the freedom to speak, and then you can become the stripper without consequence. "
In America sure. Because our culture only views things in "How would I abuse this?" logic.
Just a nice idea, not like I'd be stupid enough to Actually give Americans that kind of power. You'd be fascists in a week just to piss off your opposition because the USA is Exactly that petty and vindictive.
"I would just keep it simple: "No one can ever strip anyone of their speech, no matter what." I think that covers all the bases, don't you think?"
Yeah, works great right up until the people who disagree are in power. Then we're right back here again. If you're not going to stop people openly rallying against your rights to happen on your lawn, then you're going to soon be without those rights.
Like that logic creates an inherent paradox where you're effectively defending the rights of your opposition to actively try to remove your rights.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therrydicule "I'm stopping that conversation right there: either you are ignorant of politics or dishonest."
Or I'm legitimately asking you presumptuous dickhead.
"Trump was against the federal mask mandate"
And Biden's presiding over an economy so bad it's killing people right now and calling it great. Which do you think the people care about more right now, a pandemic we did absolutely nothing about anyway and mostly survived, or what's currently fucking them?
"for the Keystone XL pipeline"
Yeah, ngl I'd like gas prices down and the pipeline Would have helped with that, like it or not. If the nation's committed to killing the environment either way, people may as well be able to afford to go to work.
"against the Paris agreement"
Which your nation was and is violating anyway.
"for staying in Afghanistan"
Oh yeah, genocide by famine's wayyyyy more humane. Also, Biden's evidently For boots in Ukraine, so you just traded one pointless ass war we have no business being involved with for another. What a change!
"against nominating Ketanji Brown Jackson"
Who?
"and against paying federal employees $15/hours."
I don't see a mandated $15 dollar minimum wage under Biden, do you?
"Bidden did all the opposite of all these"
No, he's SAID the opposite of that. He's Done jack fucking shit but let Trump's still-in-effect policies continue while blaming Manchin/Sinema for why he's useless.
"You do know how the crazy conservative sees him? Conservapedia claims Biden has having these political beliefs: "Socialism with Chinese characteristics
Communism, Xi Jinping Thought, Marxism, Fascism, Liberalism, [and]
White Supremacy.""
I Wish Biden was that cool, all I see is a decrepit old bag that lets Republicans get whatever they want. Republicans should be on their knees Thanking Biden for handing the administration to him on a silver platter.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ravenblood1954 ...Okay, I think we're on the same page.
Sorry dude, I think I'm just tripping up on your sentence structure. It's not a you problem, I think it's just me, but...
...Okay, maybe I can convey exactly what I'm thinking and why it's probably causing a communication error, just so you can get what kind of wavelength I'm on:
Reads your last comment
"...That was a very very long and roundabout way to say "I don't want war, but I want them to make good on their sanctions" without ever actually explicitly saying it."
Like your conclusion I got no beef with, but it's like my brain instinctively thinks "No one talks like this unless they're bullshitting me somehow."
Not saying you are, I fully admit I was failing to understand your position, that's on me for making assumptions and I'm sorry.
...But Jesus dude, you missed your calling as a politician.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@traiancoza5214 You seem to be the sort who values your freedom to a fault, but you clearly have zero idea how nation management works. COVID Kills people. THe more it's allowed to spread and mutate, the more people it kills. Unvaccinated people are walking petri dishes of infection and disease and an obvious safety risk to literally anyone they come in contact with. You have no idea what others are vaccinated against/ not vaccinated against or what their circumstances are, but you Do know what YOU aren't immunized to. And Knowing this, an unvaccinated person is Knowingly, Deliberately, and with full informed choice of their actions, putting everyone around them at risk.
Because apparently their personal freedom matters more to them than anyone they might kill as a consequence of their flagrant idiocy and irresponsible behavior. Everyone Else has rights to, and one of those rights is Not to be exposed to a potentially lethal illness against their will because someone Else felt like their freedom to be a dumbshit trumps everyone and anyone else's freedoms to Not Die.
A nation that willingly allows it's citizens to die and it's infrastructure to crumble just to cater to the "freedom" of stupid people to endanger everyone around them is a nation unfit to exist.
But you clearly don't care about that, seeing how in a further up comment you outright endorsed a nurse committing 8000 consecutive felonies, fraud, and willful endangerment of the public just because "You don't like getting a shot."
Welcome to the phrase "turnabout is fair play". You don't care about anyone's rights or safety as long as you get to be as reckless as you like. Well guess what, no one cares about your right to be a reckless endangering clod because You don't care if they live or die.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@temptationtv1726 Oh yeah, that's comparable.
Try it, right now, speak a sentence in which you're directly referring to someone in person in which their pronouns ever even Enter the sentence.
Here's the kicker: It has to be a sentence a human being would actually say. None of this "Hello, Your pronouns are X, Y, and Z, and I shall refer to them as such from here on."
No, an actual conversational sentence between two human being in which the pronouns of a person are used to refer to them.
I'll wait. Show me how much of a cross this actually is to bear for you, and I'll decide if it's even remotely comparable to the suffering of forcing a woman to carry their R*pe baby against their will.
Go on. Let's see how much of a moral suffering this is on you, having to learn a couple new words vs. Actively stripping bodily autonomy from another living sapient person?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kimpacheco8466 "Name a western country that isn’t a two party system?"
Argentina, Armenia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, the Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Tunisia, Turkey and Ukraine.
Wow, Google is amazing.
"It sucks but unfortunately you are over simplifying a political status that America has had since its independence and trying to pass it off as some deeply reflective notion that everyone but you has missed just illustrates how shallow your political assessment is…."
Interesting assessment for someone who was proven wrong in 30 seconds with a Google search.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@charliekowittmusic Fine, since apparently waiting for you to explain yourself isn't working, I'll walk you through why I haven't "refuted" you:
For a start your "point" is literally nothing but a disagreement of opinion. You believe AOC should play ball with the establishment, I do not. That's it, it's nothing but an opinion on tactics. In and of itself I can't Refute anything, because all you did was state a declarative opinion without any following evidence. I can't refute Your Personal Opinion.
But I'll take a stab at explaining why I think you're wrong.
"-AOC gets closer to the levers of power and builds a reputation." Yes, but only if she sits her ass down and does what the establishment wants. Anything But that garners her a reputation as "Do Not Touch", where she becomes a pariah within the Party. However, her Submitting to the Party gains her another reputation as long as she actively Isn't doing what she promised us: A reputation as a liar and a sellout, thereby ensuring her public cred, her ONLY gambit to play when the establishment doesn't listen, now distrusts and hates her as a traitor. Exactly how effective is she as a politician if she alienates all support and can't get anything done? There's only so long people are going to tolerate "No no, I'm totally working on it" with zero results.
"-We build the energy and mass organization and, someday soon, our goals can actually be achieved. "
THis is Not a plan. This is "Get people together and get them motivated". The Plan part is the "And Then we do X" that follows AFTER that. Any dipshit can build a group, but you don't have a plan at all. You literally just said "Get people together" as if that's a strategy or something, but that's a group huddle at best.
What exactly am I supposed to do here? Am I supposed to take you seriously when literally all you've done so far is simultaneously crap on the plan of everyone who isn't on Team Knee-Bend, but your alternative is, in full "Don't hold your leadership accountable to their own promises" and "Gather people up for.... Oh Wait, we didn't actually describe a plan at all for what to do with the people we gathered up."
Plenty of criticisms, not a single concrete solution. And to top it off you get shitty with anyone who questions you as if it's just a fact that your way is the only way, acting like you're some indisputable authority, when you're just some nobody nothing pleb like the rest of us.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@X2LR8 ....I'm pretty sure Republicans doing an annual "Libs are declaring a war on our traditions every single year since the 80's, despite no legislation passing and none of them doing or saying anything that would actually serve that goal.
Christmas, Boy Scouts, War on drugs, terror, "Owning the Libs", actively trying to keep gay people from equal legal rights and throwing a bitch-fit cancelling fit literally anytime someone kneels instead of standing for the pledge.
Conservatives don't get to push this one on us, y'all have literally accused us of trying to kill Christmas WHEN THE MAJORITY OF US ARE CHRISTIAN AMERICANS AND AS SUCH PROBABLY CELEBRATE CHRISTMAS.
Like I didn't even see anyone saying shit about Seuss or Potato head UNTIL someone was already screaming about the Libs wanting to cancel it all. I heard the accusation of cancelling weeks before I... Actually wait, I haven't seen anyone try to cancel Seuss or Potatohead's at all. Hell no one I know was even familiar with the books Seuss decided to stop printing, we just suddenly start hearing whinging from the Right about how the Left is cancelling Seuss (Which was news to me, there's not a whole lot of anti-Seuss going on over here. Hell we'd prefer you guys actually read the damn books once in awhile).
Plus with all the "War on X" shit you guys have been pushing since the 80's, further insinuating we're trying to destroy your lamest and most pointlessly irrelevant traditions (Which.. WHy would any of us care? We're trying to get fucking healthcare, your choice of children's books is of no relevance), it's really hard to take the "Libs cancel everything" accusation seriously from the guys who tried to cancel a ball player for taking a knee.
I'm seeing a lot of flakey snow in here, but it ain't on me.
1
-
@X2LR8 ..."Make" the Potatoheads gender neutral?
Dude, literally ALL their parts are completely interchangeable. There's no difference whatsoever between the potato and hookup points on a Mrs. or Mr. Potatohead. They aren't gendered at all by design, they look like whatever the hell the part I shove in Says they look like. It was literally just a branding nitpick because the Brand isn't "Mister Potatohead, and includes Mr. and Mrs. varieties despite how completely pointless that is for a damn potatohead.
However, whose the one Actually making a big deal out of this? Like the conversation on Our side of the fence is the Left-Left trying to pressure the establishment Dems to actually stop lying and to fulfill their damn election promises.
....Only for suddenly the Reps to be like "Oh my Gawd, this is horrednous! Cancel culture is everywhere!"... In response to some nobody dipshit on Twitter whining.
And the only people taking this utterly worthless and irrelevant topic that exists purely to distract from actual issues? Democrats and Republicans. The Actual Left, y'know the 40% of the group the Democrats willingly abandoned on the campaign trail and the one's Biden actively threw under the bus to Republicans, blaming US for everything the Reps hate about Dems despite that fact that we're Not Democrats? Yeah, Those people for the most part didn't even know about Seuss or the stupid potato until either a Democrat or a Republican brought it up, acting like it was some big deal when... It's not. At all. The things Democrats get self-righteous about are fake, just a smokescreen so they can pretend to give a shit without putting in any work whatsoever. It's "Progressivism... As acted by corporate puppets who lump Progressives in with Stalin and know as much about Progressive policy as I know about testicle-based fashion accessories.
Meanwhile the Republicans don't really have a single talking point anymore that's liked by voters now that Trump's gone, so the culture war is the only thing they got. So naturally these books none of them have ever read (and that most Seuss fans didn't even know existed) and an agendered plastic potato are the height of moral outrage to them.
Not Biden's godawful governance, not his blatant lies, not him continuing the unjust and illegal wars in the Middle East. Nope, nothing Actually important, We call Biden a Socialist despite him being not even in the same post code as socialist, so we're just gonna blame this on Biden and the Progressives somehow. Don't matter if it's nonsensical childish bullshit, no one who watches us is gonna fact-check.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I mean... Can you blame them?
I mean no offense, I don't want to crap on your beliefs, however the recorded history of Western Christianity is.... Well, not exactly peaceful. Granted I don't 100% blame Christianity for that, you guys got smacked around and indoctrinated by Roman warmongering just like the rest of that part of the world, and just like the rest continued on the Roman traditions of violent imperialistic conquest when they fell just like every other group that spent god knows how many generations under Roman authority.
The whole peaceful message of Christianity was warped and corrupted the moment it was adopted by a hyper-militaristic and domineering empire and said empire's Stockholm-warped conquered tributaries
I absolutely agree with you that the intended message of Jesus got screwed with bigtime, but I think the message-butchering of the Church is oooold. And most of the world's history doesn't really record the Church as loving and peaceful, but violent, subjugating, and perfetly happy to use the "Convert or Die" method of bringing people to Jesus. So... I dunno, it's not exactly shocking that people within the faith would also have a really broken viewpoint of their own religion with so much historical baggage attached.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@VittorioE17 Well, off the top of my head, George Carlin, Lewis Black, Bill Maher (before he went with his recent pseudo-"why I left the Left" heelturn), Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Chris Rock, D.L Hughley, Janeane Garofalo, David Cross, should I keep going or do I need to keep listing more of the political comedy world you guys Don't exist in?
And what do they all have in common? Oh, that's right, they all are/were decidedly wayyyyy more Progressive than you guys. Well, except Maher, but frankly you can have him at this point. Point is, they fit the definition of Progressive you chuds ascribe to, which is "Literally anything that's less rightwing than me", so thankfully Democrats count too.
But where's the glut of rightwing comedians and political jesters that are even remotely in the same category as "just what I pulled out of my ass right there?"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nappel6496 So... Absolutely nothing then. There is no right that exists that isn't given by a government authority.
Also, again false. You are perfectly allowed to own arms in plenty of European nations. Hell, France for awhile had the 2nd highest confirmed number of gunowners on the planet, 2nd only to the USA. Their rules are significantly more stringent to Ensure you're actually competent and responsible ahead of time, but "They don't allow gun ownership" is flat out false.
Hell, Switzerland has more gun-owners as a percentage of their population than America does, because they have a robust culture based around their national militia forces.
Also, America has hate speech laws too, so your objection is irrelevant.
So... Going down your list, let's see what we've got:
1: Some vague nebulous notion of rights that are independent of government.... Which you mentioned exactly no examples of.
2: A flat out falsehood relating to European gun ownership
3: The freedom to be a bigot
Wow, what a hill to die on, go Team America. Now how are any of those superior to Europe's basic right to healthcare?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Addiict429 "my bad, you're right. the chinese government is the pinnacle of promoting freedom and justice for it's citizens."
Not what I said, I said they're better at honoring their agreements than your nation is.
"On the real though, we Americans are the most anti authoritarian on our own front first."
Pfff, not even remotely close to true, you're a perpetual warstate that keeps the overwhelming majority of your people poor on purpose expressly so they can't meaningfully defy your government and policy passes that favors the elites no matter how wildly unpopular it is with the people because you're not even allowed to Vote on the overwhelming majority of your own legislation.
Your people might be anti-authoritarian, but your system sure the hell isn't.
"no matter what you tell us, half of us will assume you're lying. Impossible to convince the entire population of anything"
That's not anti-authoritarian, that's being a bunch of partisan hacks.
Americans pick and choose what is true based purely on what bolsters their opinions of things by and large. And since you people treat politics like it's a fucking entertainment sport instead of something that's serious and has lives on the line, that includes "whatever supports the team I picked."
Your system has utterly failed your people and fundamentally Doesn't deserve your veneration or respect. That doesn't mean China is great, that doesn't make them Not horrible tyrannical assholes, but the Middle East is a goddamned warzone Directly Created by the United States decades-long interference into the region's politics in illegal wars of aggression. America overthrew democracies and installed dictators, America funded religious zealots and armed extremists decades back only to be shocked that said fanatics and dictators decided to take over and turn on them later. Hussein and Ghaddafi come to mind.
And if I was in the Middle East and Had to Pick between two horrendously bad options, "Subjugation under a violent military war-machine that keeps drone-striking civilians and blowing up our neighborhoods and resources and handing us over to tyrants and fanatics" or "Subjugation under an economic tyrant that wants to abuse and exploit our nation's resources for their own ends and entrap us in a shitload of red tape controls that are going to fuck me in the long run", I'm picking the one where I'm Still Alive to regret my decisions. China is the only nation Big Enough to make Uncle Sam back the fuck off from attacking. If Uncle Sam's the one making your life absolute hell, Who Else but China would you go to as a nation to ask for help? Seriously, who else has the manpower and resources and concentrated power to make the USA hesitate to attack a nation? You literally need the protection of Some world power nation to protect yourself From a world power nation.
A subjugated person can eventually become free, freedom doesn't mean anything to a fucking corpse.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@crazy_jackal5216 "you are not thinking with a clear head. Once life starts, doesn't matter if it hasn't form yet, it should be protected."
Tell that to the burger you ate earlier this week. Guess that life didn't deserve protection. Or hey, tell that to the trillions of living sperm that Died so one could succeed. Guess that life didn't matter.
"Typically a few micrometres in length, bacteria were among the first life forms to appear on Earth..... if this is a life form, a child growing isn't?"
I've never in my life felt anything genociding trillions of bacteria every time I clean my kitchen counter. Bacteria is life, so what?
"People should work on themselves before planning, and not go all out there, because if a man sleeps with a woman, and doesn't see red flags until its to late, a man will suffer."
Oh look at me playing the world's smallest violin for the person who Isn't pregnant. Spare me your whining, the person carrying the fetus has the Actual struggle going on.
"I don't see a problem in telling people to relax for now."
You fuckers are trying to ban contraceptives and you're actively banning abortion.
Responsible people took precautions, You idiots want all those precautions eliminated and just "Don't Fuck Ever unless you want children"
Guess life is only sacred as long as it's Not the mother's.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ardemua If you can't afford to pay your employees something livable, then you have no business being in business. Also, that's logically not even true. The overwhelming majority of the job market Right Now is small-wage jobs from major companies who are Already actively trying to destroy all small-business competition, and have been doing so successfully for decades.
The minimum wage Initially was actually supposed to be exactly that: The minimum Livable wage. When these fucksticks were coming up you could pay for college on ONE minimum wage job, afford to live in a house, and NOT have crippling debt for the rest of your life to do it. These talking points only serve to advantage the corporate class, who are already DOING all the bad shit you're warning against. Whether you pass a minimum wage or not, Corporations are already going to destroy small businesses because they pose a challenge to profits. Whether you fight for your rights or not, the corporations will strip as many of them away as they can to get out of paying you what you're worth. The entire point of a corporation is to maximize profits while minimizing costs. That's it, a company has no further obligations besides making money.
If YOU don't take an interest in your rights, then they'll continue to strip them away for money BECAUSE you just let them. Corporations are the reason the minimum wage is no longer living, corporations are the reason every politician is bought off and sucking corporate dick nonstop, and every single thing you just said in their defense is exactly Their propaganda, because what a coincidence, Their idea of "you standing up for your freedom" doesn't actually gain you any more freedom, but instead gives THEM more freedoms Over you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mpls1982 -Americans aren't rescued, guess that's a plan failure.
-A corporate bailout stripped of about 90% of its aid to the public before it was even allowed to pass
-What leadership? Citation needed. Also, 200 million Americans is still "One third Unvaxxed in a modernized nation." Congrats Biden, your vaccination numbers look like a third world country.
-Ending Afghanistan was good, I won't disagree there.
-Much better economic numbers? Great, so the Rich are doing great and the stock market is doing great. Was doing great under Trump too, didn't save any of the citizens going through an economic collapse at the same time the economy was doing great on paper. It didn't count as a positive under Trump, I fail to see why it'd suddenly be a positive under Biden.
-Improving the supply chain? News to me, seeing how our ports are clogged up, mass-strikes are happening all over the country, and the biggest problem right now is the fact that our supply chain is FAILING. So how exactly do you get the impression Biden's "improving" it when all outward evidence says "Shit's all kinds of fucked?"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jirkazalabak1514 Dude, I was based at Ramstein and Andrews. The heaviest cargo transport hub in the DoD for all overseas operations and "The President's Base", where I served under both Obama's last couple years and Trump's first couple years. (Surprisingly not all that different from my perspective as a 2T2, only real difference between them was that Trump's admin seriously needed to fire whoever did the flight scheduling for AF1, because Trump's flights seemed very random and sporadic and same-day coordinated more often than it wasn't. Beyond that not much changed on my day to day personally)
And yes, obviously I ran into conservatives, but unless conservatives just "Never deploy" and thus "Never go through Ramstein", I never met this anomalously large glut of "Hyper-specifically conservatives and only conservatives" in ANY branch or ANY job description that came through my air terminal.
Not 'No conservatives", obviously, but the DoD is a mixed group from everywhere in the USA, it's NOT some conservative hotbed anymore, I assure you it was nowhere near as straightforward as "Military just conservative."
I'm sorry, I know you want this specific stereotype to still be true, but this became less and less true the further away from 9/11 we got. It's been decades man.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@odinson6348 Last I checked I was asking why I should vote Biden.
Also, is this not literally "We have to abandon democracy to save democracy?" You people seem incredibly resentful and offended by the fact that *Gasp*, you're supposed to EARN votes.
Not just force the worst possible candidate through, bar all competition or debate or choice, deny everyone an option But Biden, and just mercilessly blackmail and threaten people with the GOP if you don't get what you want.
So Once Again, What EXACTLY does voting for Biden do to stop fascism? What's he gonna do? What's he running on? What are his policies, agenda, campaign promises?
What, if ANYTHING, makes Biden a good option aside from "At least he's not a fascist?"
Anything at all that doesn't live or die on the hope that I fear MAGA more than I'm disgusted by the DNC?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@odinson6348 "I never claimed to be a Biden fan or claim his merits are worthy of the office. I'm telling you he's the only available alternative to genuine fascism. "
Because..... Why?
"If those are your choices, the hell more do you need to know? We're not voting for Biden, we're voting against Trump. It's a shitty position to be in, but not voting Dem is a worse position. What, you need Plato to run for office to be convinced that an authoritarian theocracy isn't worth voting for?"
So.... Yeah, that really is the salespitch isn't it?
"You get no choice, you're taking Biden and you're going to sit down and pretend you ever had a choice. We promise you nothing, we will offer you nothing, we will do nothing to persuade you besides threatening you with the GOP if you don't do what we want?"
I will concede your point if you admit to me you're "choosing" an anti-democratic authoritarian oligarchic traitor to the very notion of democracy, not because you actually believe in any of this or believe they will do anything positive, you are actively accepting a dictatorial fiat command by a private corporation to "Get Back In Line".
And you are willing to do all this and abandon any notion of policy or integrity or... Well Democracy in the Democratic Party and with zero concessions or promises of anything, because in your mind this is still better than letting a fascist win.
I understand this logic, I just want to Read It.
Admit to me that you are all willingly accepting the anti-democracy anti-choice dictates of the DNC and throwing any degree of trust in the process of this country to the fire and submitting yourself to the fiat rule of oligarchs and autocrats all to stop something you view as a greater evil, and I will concede the point.
Because that Would be the "lesser evil". That would be the honest truth, a tyrant would still indeed be marginally better than a fascist.
....Fucking Christ democracy was wasted on this miserable excuse of a nation. The Crown is more free in their system than you people these days, rebellion seems to have been an utter waste of time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hello! Vet here.
Every scrap of our technology that's actually Used by general forces has been outdated for the past several Decades. We still use fax machines for Christ sake. The overwhelming majority of that massive budget is disappearing into contractor pockets. Next to none of it actually factors into our equipment, which is Deliberately overpriced.
Seriously, for the price of One of our radios (Which are pretty much the same model we've been using since the Gulf Wars), I could go to Best Buy, buy an entire AF Squadron's worth of individual radios for each person, and I'd still have about a grand left over to burn on liquor. However, that same $3 grand Instead goes towards getting a Single radio older than anyone whose ever gonna be using it, is probably already extremely well-used from the past few decades, and which will have to be replaced within a year anyway because of planned obsolescence.
If you Actually give a shit about how well-armed and equipped for the tasks required the US military is, then were was this outrage for the past 50 fucking years of paying Top Dollar for antiquated garbage?
The entire damn system has been a scam by contractors since WW2 ended, not sure how you somehow missed that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alex29443 ...Dude, meaning no offense, but I LIVE here.
You are trying to romanticize America to someone who lives on the receiving end of how America treats Americans, and I've Lived In Europe during my time in the service.
You talk about us like we're idealistic and saviors, but you didn't exactly address the horrifying reality of what We are. For every Balkan genocide ended, I can name three genocidal dictators We put in power over helpless citizens. For every dictator we overthrew, there's two democratically elected governments we ground into the dust for even suggesting a world exists outside of American Capitalism. For every success story in America there's a thousand stories of abject poverty and abandonment of any degree of decency by our systems for base ruthless capitalistic greed.
Like Christ, by every metric that can actually be quantified, damn near every European nation is superior to the USA in every metric Except the ones no one should ever be proud of.
Land of the Free, yet with more prisoners per capita than the entire planet, most of which for completely victimless crimes like weed possession.
Land of Opportunity, yet we have the highest income disparity of any modern nation, with obscenely wealthy multi-billionaires and a fucking Trillionaire at the same time we set per capita records for homelessness, unemployment, poverty, and deaths related to such, and actively legalized bribery to Suppress opportunity for anyone who wasn't already born rich.
For every person we lift out of poverty there's another hundred we threw to the wolves to do it. We're idealistic because Denial is easier to swallow than watching the nation we've been indoctrinated into loving since birth devouring itself and shamelessly turning into an international disgrace.
Everything America claims to be is a bold-faced lie these days, but I'm supposed to worry about China? China didn't hike prices up on insulin and life-saving Alzheimer's medicine, America did. China didn't leave Americans to starve and fend for themselves over the Pandemic and shutdowns, America did. China didn't tell Americans to fuck off and die and refuse to provide any meaningful relief during a shutdown Enforced upon the people with zero actual gameplan to fix anything, America did.
It's kind of hard to be impressed by how awful China is relative to My abuser when my abuser just won't let up or stop and Hasn't let up or stopped during the entire time I've been old enough to reason. Seriously, what possible reason would a European have to look up to America on anything except how to turn war into an endless profit-stream?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lizebartsch7674 ...Well fuck literally every society, ours included, who thrived on and continue to thrive on non-Biblical family units.
Also I don't particularly care about what "gets your motor running", and frankly it's really bizarre to me how apparently God is a component in your sex. Like is it not hot enough unless you think Big G is watching your O face?
Also it always irks me how often Christians are the first to cry and blame others for "corrupting the bedrock of our good society", despite the fact that the things you guys zero in on.... Honestly straight up don't matter. Like why do I need to consider your religious viewpoint, which I inherently find silly as a salespitch because it presumes I believe in your God at all in order to care. Which I don't, so I don't.
But it does admittedly crack me up how seemingly "fragile" and seemingly weak everything about Christianity is culturally. I mean it has to be, cuz literally Everything is an attack, or a subversion, or some war against you guys. Like the rampant victim complex is just comical. And it's not even like we're Trying to get rid of you, you guys just have this weird tendency to view even disagreement with your faith as some indictment of societal well-being. Like unless everyone just accepts your religion is true and abides by it, society's always a stray fart away from collapsing from something as irrelevant and childish as "Two women decided to adopt a child, the horror!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cynthiapool6972 I'm not promoting their agenda, I'm saying they're getting away with everything They want to do with next to zero resistance from Biden's admin.
Idaho's basically rendering women 2nd class citizens at the behest of Republicans, and Dems aren't stopping it. Texas is criminalizing Being Trans, where's the Dems?
The most psychopathic elements of the Right are turning this nation into a christofacist hell State by State, and Where is the Dem solution besides just "Vote Blue no Matter Who?"
The enemy is at the gates, our democracy is being ripped apart by these savages, and WHAT THE FUCK ARE DEMS DOING ABOUT IT?!
"America and the rest of the world for that matter isn't going nowhere until people can get passed the mirror and do for each other. "
...What the fuck are you talking about? I never said "America is going anywhere", I'm saying it's turning into a fascist state by the right.
"Remember Kennedy (ask not what your country can do for you, but what can you do for your country)."
No, Fuck You, if you're not going to do a fucking thing for the people as a politician, then you're a worthless politician. Kennedy didn't demand loyalty for Nothing, Kennedy still gave people Reasons to remain loyal. He was A Leader, not just a useless old bag demanding unconditional loyalty for jack squat.
Kennedy wasn't saying "Just shut up and give s power and expect nothing in return", he had a strategy, a plan of action, a means of improving our country, and it just happened to Require us as a people to work together. What's the Dems plan of action besides "Just vote for us and stop asking questions"? What is the plan for these lunatic Republicans?
"I'm so tired of all the lie, deny, repeat. Speaking of which were have the Republicans been for the last 7 months "
Stripping citizens rights, embracing Christian Dominionism, overturning Roe v. Wade, and currently trying to overturn gay/interracial marriage, all without a single vote required from the voters an without any pushback from the Biden Administration.
....If THIS is what Democrats are pitching, this "Don't ask us what we're gonna do with power, just Give it to Us sight-unseen", then your nation is going to burn in the name of Republican Fascism.
And it seems like you fuckers don't care. I see no strategy, no battle plan, no political action, You're Not Taking This Seriously.
Do you want to save this country, or do you want Desantes to win? Because in that entire line of yours I didn't see a single reason why someone should vote for Democrats, and a lot of openly insulting me for even Expecting that politicians DO SOMETHING with the power they demand.
If Democrats are going to do Nothing, then what value is there in giving them power?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@randominternetguy1499 "Teaching young kids about changing their gender and different like 70 sexualities,"
Citation needed.
"telling them if they differentiate from a gender norm they might be trans"
So what? They might be. Seems like a useful question for them to ask themselves, the fuck's the problem here?
"school districts not telling parents that their young kids are randomly "gender transitioning,""
So you want trans people outed to their parents. Guess you're fine with the high rate of parents disowning their kids upon finding out. Asshole.
"drag queens performing infront of children in obviously sexual ways, etc. "
Citation fucking needed.
Also, something tells me you wouldn't have given a flying fuck if that was some cisgendered female dancer. But now that it's a "Drag queen", suddenly it's sexual?
The only thing that marks a drag queen is an affinity for a male to wear women's clothing. You don't even need to be trans, in fact most drag queens aren't.
Completely irrelevant non sequitur.
"Never said anything about stripping away their rights. Im not a conservative and I support trans' peoples right to exist, defend themselves, work, and so on; but I also recognize that there are some problems in that community."
Problems you apparently can't clarify WHY they're problems. Just that they are.
Sure. Compelling stuff there. Get me some actual evidence and I might give a shit too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Capo Di capo People are Born poor you dipshit! And America doesn't pay enough to make a decent life for yourself without extreme levels of good fortune IF YOURE BORN POOR. You need money to pay for a home, shelter, any form of education to advance yourself, multiple different forms of insurance, a mode of transportation, and God fucking help you if there's children involved. And guess what Poor people don't have?
If I'm Born into poverty, the statistical likelihood of me ever escaping that bracket is minimal in America. A Poor person has to be far and away a flawless paragon of a person in order to attain anything higher up the chain despite likely being unable to afford the education or opportunities to even think that far ahead in the first place, but a rich brat can fail a million times and never suffer for it, because they will literally never be allowed to fail (Including the government themselves stepping in with Tax Dollars to keep them rich if bailouts are needed).
Are you seriously suggesting that External Factors are not relevant to how people turn out? THat other people, society, the circumstances of birth and location thereof have No bearing on success?
If so then enjoy you idiotic delusions and shameless ignorance of the world around you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@unyieldingsarcasm2505 "utter madness "youv lost my vote", cool, and that does WHAT? exactly?
oh, right, only make it worse, faster."
As opposed to whatever the hell you guys were doing?
Oh, right, fuck all and blaming Republicans for why your candidate is a genocide supporter. Or when the GOP revoke Roe on YOUR watch. Or deregulated climate change on YOUR watch.
What Exactly will Biden do to meet my interests? Because I don't give a shit about your threats or guilt-trips.
You never cared one iota for what I wanted politically, and unsurprisingly I don't care what You want politically. So here's how nice and simple this will be:
Convince me Biden willl materially benefit me if elected, and you get my vote. Prove to me my life with get better under Biden and I will vote Biden.
Otherwise, I'm voting 3rd party and never listening to a Dem again on elections until such time as you do.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brantleyerik "Why doesn't Trump get the same flack"?
...Where the actual hell were you the entire time Trump was in office? Does Trump need MORE flak? He was already the new "Literally Hitler" of the internet, what, does he need to be TWO Hitlers?
Pelosi is screwing people Now. Pelosi is ruining lives Now. Pelosi is actively Handing the victory to Republicans because the Democrats have done Nothing over the past year to actually fix a single thing Trump did.....Meaning they had no actual issue with Trump on a Policy level.
So if Pelosi didn't object to Trump's policies (because she and her Party did Nothing to fix any of the extremely damning things Trump did), then clearly her and I have Wildly different ideas of Why Trump was bad.
And if that's the case, every reason I despised Trump applies to her. Because she's Sustaining his policies through her inaction, she's Permitting this with her inaction.
Like you basically just asked "What's better? Trump? Or the simp who will bend over and let Trump's shit stand unmolested the instant they have the power to get rid of it?
Like aside from the mean tweets going away, what dramatically changed between Trump's shithole and the current Democrat shithole? Like are people's lives improving? Is the economy improving in a way that benefits the people? Did our sadistic warmongering xenophobic ways improve?
No, No, and No.
So, from a PR perspective.... Why would anyone vote for a Democrat when the last year has been one long chain of "Everything the Democrats promised for victory was a shameless lie. They're Republicans in blue ties."
Vote for a Republican, get Republican shit. Vote for a Democrat, get Republican shit, but "woke".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@CANT_FEAR_YOUR_OWN_WORLD "you obviously have no clue what I’m talking about."
Well that's presumptuous of you to assume.
"It’s not that I’m jerking him off. It’s more that I fully understand why he said that; you had a bunch of indicators in your response the clearly paints that you don’t understand. There’s literally nothing wrong with that though."
Is that right? Well by all means, show me the error of my ways professor. I'll try to ignore how condescending this is and humor you.
"1. you stated that the concept of a god is not complex which is a little strange to say"
Why?
"2. You defined god as a “super natural fucking being with reality warping powers.” Sounds like you have an elementary understanding of why religion and philosophy exists from specific minds. "
You mean the religious? Yeah they're simple folks, but "Supernaturally powerful beings beyond the ken of mortals" is a pretty common theme for "Gods".
Also, does your accusation come with a actual example or concrete thing to say, or are we just sticking with vague ass declarations of my ignorance?
"Fyi, the device you’re using to respond to me has its origins in the same semantic problems brought to life by philosophers who would answer the question of “god” the same way JP did (Boolean logic/truth tables)"
Pfff, wow if you're gonna do a blatant appeal to authority fallacy, at least have te balls to actually mention the authorities you're appealing to.
I'd feel bad for being rude to you, but seeing how your entire coment was just calling me ignorant, stupid, and simplistic without any actual concrete evidence, I don't feel any issue being rude to a disingenuous shitgoblin.
1
-
@CANT_FEAR_YOUR_OWN_WORLD "also the moment you add just one more spatial dimension means that a theoretical 4D being can see time as a spatial dimension, meaning that that being would be able to see your whole life’s timeline and all of its parallel universes of your free will actions (if you believe in that)."
So. Fucking. What?
Still sounds like "a being with seemingly reality-defying powers" to a human now, doesn't it? Also for the record you'd enjoy the same level of power over some hypothetical 2D flatlander.
"Also, it’s worth noting that a 4D object can exist outside of the 3D space and can present itself at will while still seeing every timeline of the 3D being that observes the cross section of its 4D self. Just like how you can place your finger on a 2d object while seeing its whole reality from a far."
Y'know, this would be a fun discussion of dimensional physics if I didn't know full well that you're trying to gish-gallop.
"Now, in Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism Islam, etc. it’s commonly accepted that there is a 4D realm that is lower than the realm of the “creator of the universe” from their interpretations (each interpretation is based off of cultural and environmental subjectiveness)."
Lol, the fuck it is! XD I defy you to find a single piece of evidence that validates the idea that a majority of Christians, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists ALSO incidentally being believers in dimensional theory.
"hat means that a 4D god would actually be a false/lower god which explains the christians’ repulsion of multiple gods as the lower the dimension, the more individualistic, material, and separated things are. "
Christians do not believe in Platonic Philosophy, so no it doesn't. They despise any religion and any God that keeps people from worshipping their own, stop making a cult sound more wise than it is.
"That’s why Vajrayana Buddhism believes in 31 planes of existence 32 being all its reality. Because with so many dimensions, everything is basically one"
Yeah nice bit of sophistry there. Once again, how is that i any way functionally different from "A supernaturally powerful being wildly beyond the ken of mortals with significantly greater power over reality than us?" as a God definition?
You just replaced "Supernaturally powerful" with "May as well be supernatural as far as we're concerned, but technically not assuming String Theory, Plato, and DC Comics know what they're talking about."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"I’ll sum up the argument with a few short words, regarding the popstar- just look at it."
"Just look at it" .....Well this is starting out well.
"Zero respect, especially for the self- yet emboldened in it’s self absorption." ....Are you calling someone "it" while bitching about lack of respect?
"The ongoing decay of cultural norms and values is obvious to anyone with decorum or a simple sense of shame."
So... Twats.
"Two things this beast lends a hand in destroying for the new generation, under the weight of it’s general behaviour. "
"This Beast" Jesus Christ dude WTF
"In one word, disrespect."
Projection much?
"Give 1990’s Carrot Top or Bobcat Goldthwait a bag of cocaine and an antique African ceremonial piece to use as a prop. See who has issues."
Wow, it's almost like 30 years have passed and standards of comedy changed. Who knew?!
"But no, not according to progressive ideals. She’s stunning and brave and perfect as she is and it’s the world that’s wrong. "
No, she's a good musician, this is innocuous, and you people are hyperbolic crybaby snowflakes. That's the actual position. You didn't even know this flute existed until a few days ago, get over it.
"Pure cancer. Enjoy it and all that follows."
Well there's certainly been some cancer on display, but looks like you're the one in need of the chemo.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PendulumCancel ....Okay, real talk, in what universe do you think Biden has a shot to win when the ONLY thing, the ONLY thing he has in his favor is "I'm not Trump?"
What the hell has Biden done in the past 2 years that would do anything but nuke his chances? He literally needed COVID the First time in order to Barely squeeze out Trump, and he's done exactly nothing but maintain Trump's bullshit for the most part, lied about every promise he made to get elected, has nothing but excuses for why Republicans are to blame for his administration being utterly worthless.
So like... Seriously, A to B, how does Biden NOW beat Trump? What possible PR could he use as a Selling Point to promote himself?
Not demonize his opponent, what makes Biden a candidate who could win? By the virtues of Bidens Own Merits, why should anyone vote for him?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MaynardCrow I mean to be perfectly fair, and I don't mean this as an insult because Fascism does have a definition outside of people's emotional feelings toward the word, but the American Right does in fact exalt many things Fascists also embody. Extreme levels of nationalism, a fostering of resentment towards anyone viewed as the enemy, an extreme support of militaristic culture (Which the Right admittedly flips on when a Dem is in charge, but under their own they tend to be rather supportive of the State using militant force against their choice of "Undesirables"), and most notably the same Deathcult-esque worship of the Ubermensch ideal and "Heroes" in the context of military force.
I'm not saying you're wrong, the word fascist is wildly overused. You're dead on there. But Fascism is to the Right what Communism is to the Left, the most extreme authoritarian iteration of the Left/Right split. So if America is pushing for higher authoritarianism AND moving more and more to the Right, then they're doomed to look an awful lot like Fascism. The same doesn't really work in reverse because... Well, it's America. There is functionally no Actual Left in our political system, the furthest Left you're allowed to be is the Corporatist Authoritarian Centrist position of the Democrats.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@harrisd1983 "with "the unchecked gun violence," how did we solve it?"
You still have far and away the most gun violence of any modernized nation, so... Honestly you just "Didn't Solve It."
"Again, Americans have always been obsessed with guns. In fact, people used to own military weapons. So it clearly isn't the guns or our obsession with it. "
Considering you have the highest gun violence rates in the modernized nations and you've had no particular change in that status since the 20th century began and this is pretty much Exclusively a problem of "the nation obsessed with guns and the military", I'd say it has something to do with it.
"Could it be our current violence problems because we are detached from each other?"
You have quite literally never been a unified country on anything in the 200+ years you've been around.
"Also we celebrate mental illness by saying "live your truth" and "be your authentic self"?"
For fuck's sake, LGBT people are not responsible for your gun violence. You idiots have been the most gun-violent nation in the West since your inception and have literally only NOT been at war for a while 7 years of that time.
For fuck's sake American, does your culture take Zero responsibility for itself? Why do you seek to blame every conceivable individual possible rather than face the fact that you're a gun-obsessed, war-obsessed, dysfunctional and antagonistic culture that values your individual freedom to own bang-bang toys over the lives of anyone who might die in the process? Like I need only to open your Media every single mass-shooting event in your country to find people NOT talking about the tragedy and INSTEAD screaming "BUT DONT TAKE MY GUNS DOH!!" Bodies of the victims not even cold and all the Americans care about is "What about my toys?"
It's not anyone else's fault but America's why America's gun-violence and death rates are and HAVE BEEN so wildly disproportionate. You barely Qualify as a nation, more a loose-collection of barely-tolerant neighbors all looking for an excuse to hate eachother and jump at every outrage and excuse to demand violence against everyone you dislike.
And you have more guns than you have people capable of holding them. No fucking Shit you have massive gun-violence problems, the guns are in the hands of the most dysfunctionally violent and ill-tempered culture on Earth and they don't want any restrictions whatsoever stopping them from being so.
TL:DR: Your a culture of ill-mannered idiots with a shitton of weapons you don't give a shit about being responsible with.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jonstone9741 "You're missing the point"
...You know, you'd think I'd be used to hearing this phrase on Youtube but it's starting to really grate on my nerves that everyone seems to think I don't understand them when I'm just outright disagreeing with their point.
"Defining "god" is a matter of semantics -- the meanings of words and language."
Most of the time it flat out isn't. Unless you're very specifically talking about academia this is not the case in general. When you ask the average religious person what God is, they're not talking in abstracts, haven't read these philosophers or ever taken a course in it, and are Quite Literally referring to a Sapient Supernatural Being they Literally Believe Is Real. Christians by and large believe in a literal God, along with most Muslims and Jews. Hindus for most of their history also viewed their gods are real entities, so did the Greeks, Egyptians, Norse, Pagans believed in literal spirits, like where the hell are you getting the idea that God was a definition game among the general public? Because the general public's only semantic for the most part is WHICH supernatural entity is the Real McCoy, not philosophy.
" Under my definition of "god," using the word "Nature" to define god is much more realistic than defining god as the guy who got the Virgin Mary pregnant 2000 years ago, so she would give birth to the son of god who was sacrificed on a crucifix -- because his father needed a human sacrifice to wash away the sins of humanity -- and now all the evangelicals will be raptured into heaven if they believe in Jesus yada yada yada."
It also strip God of literally everything associated with deities socially and replaces it with "The natural mindless flow of events." Fair enough, but not really what most people think of when they're thinking "I Am."
" You and I disagree about the definition of god. That's okay."
You, me, Webster, yup. Just friendly disagreements. Also what point did I supposedly miss?
1
-
@jonstone9741 "This is a straw man. I didn't say "God" is a definition game among the general public. When I use the term, "defining god," I'm not talking about people giving dictionary definitions of god. I'm talking about people describing or defining what "god" means to them. For example, if you ask a Christian to say what "god" means to them, they would probably give a description based on the Christian god described in the bible. Hindus, Greeks, Egyptians, Norse, Pagans (and any other group you can name) would define "god" in a very different way than Christians define it."
Do they now?
Let me check. Hmmm...
Christianity: God i a big strong sapient being with superpowers.
Hinduism and Greek myth believe in Multiple big strong sapient supernatural beings with superpowers, but that's still the same fucking thing just multiplied.
Egyptians: Pantheistic big strong beings with superpowers.
Norse: Pantheistic big strong beings with superpowers.
Pagans: Depends on the group, but 9 time out of 10 it's till "supernatural shit with superpowers."
....What do you think "major difference" means as a phrase?
"This is another straw man. I gave you only a very brief description of my god, Nature, and I certainly didn't describe it as "the natural mindless flow of events." You came up with that straw man on your own. Also, I'm not sure what you mean when you talk about "what most people think of when they're thinking "I Am." This sounds a little kooky to me. Maybe you can explain what you mean. I wouldn't want to guess because I would only be speculating."
...Jesus fucking Christ, you're sitting here purporting to be some sort of person I should listen to about religion, and you just flat out don't get a "I Am He Who Is" reference? Fucking Exodus dude, it's famous.
"This is another straw man. I gave you only a very brief description of my god, Nature, and I certainly didn't describe it as "the natural mindless flow of events.""
No, but once again, seeing how nature has no guiding underlying will or independent mind of it own, the actions of a mindless force of physics could also be rephrased a "the natural mindless flow of events."
It' not a strawman, it's your position phrased insultingly. Get over yourself, just because I don't give a shit about your stupid ass beliefs doesn't mean I didn't understand you.
"Does everyone seem to think you don't understand them? Has everyone been saying that to you? I'm not surprised. If you don't want everyone to keep saying that to you, maybe you should make more of an effort to understand what people are trying to communicate. Instead, you prefer to straw man -- substituting your own (rather snotty) interpretations of what people are trying to communicate."
No, jut very specifically people who seem hard-pressed to give a straight answer. It' never a disagreement online, it's never "oh just differences of opinion", it' only ever "I'm right and anyone who disagrees is just ignorant or not listening properly."
You people never seem to accept the fact that people might just not agree with you. It's always some indictment of the opposition if they don't just take your claims as the truth. I mean once again nothing in my comments suggests any misunderstanding on my part of your position beides just A: Me personally thinking your position is idiotic and B: You apparently Really taking offense to expressly How I sum up your stated positions. I mean you sit here and accuse me of constant strawman's, but that's really it.
You say "Nature is my God" and you've stated before that you do indeed view the simple natural processes of this world a divine even if you don't believe it's individually sentient and thinking on it own.
...Which is synonymous with being Mindless.
Nature is quite literally "Mindless forces of physics doing as they would do with or without you", so why do you take issue with it defined as such? Is it not reverential enough or something?
I didn't misunderstand you, you didn't misunderstand me, and we both know it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@notmee2388 "Really, "I dun wanna and you can't make me!"? ought to be enough, considering that the alternative is that: "You don't want to, and I get to make your choices for you." No, you don't have authority to force yourself on another. That is the whole point."
And yet you think it's good enough logic for the anti-vaxxers to force disease on everyone around them. Special pleading, party of one!
"Do you think that you would be happy if I got to make your choices for you?
I suspect not."
Dumbass, the hell you think the Law is? The hell do you think the Government is?
"And even if you think the fact that you are really really sure that you are right, and that gives the government control over me"
Pretty sure they do. That's how Nations work.
"do you think that the people in power will always do the right thing, or are they more likely to be corrupt and self serving."
Doesn't really matter what I think on the subject. Sure they won't be, but no one was making that claim. And I Do trust people who are actual subject matter experts over your ignorant ass screaming "I dun wanna and you can't make me!"
"You want to be forced into conversion therapy to save your soul because they are really really sure that is what is best for you?"
False equivalency, religious subjugation and "stop being a goddamned plague carrier" are not the same thing. Get over yourself.
"What you advocate for leads to North Korea. If you strip away human rights, the populace becomes slaves of the state."
You don't have the right to kill your neighbors via plague, sorry the rest of the country isn't willing to get sick so you can feel special.
"Possibly you haven't been following the news, but the claims you make above are false, poking does not prevent transmission, according to the pham companies themselves."
Vaccines have never had this claim made about them. They increase resistance to the illness and Reduce transmission.
What, unless it's 100% cure-all (which was never claimed), it's bad? 90% resistance is still better than 0, dipshit.
So yeah, that really is all you have. "I dun wanna and you can't make me" followed by comparing "taking your medicine" to every atrocity imaginable like a disingenuous cow.
Dismissed as irrelevant, but thanks for playing. Maybe next time you'll have something besides playing victim.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@2ndtonone1000 "You do know there is a difference between absentee ballots and mail in ballots right"
Considering both ballots are transferred via mail and counted in the same fashion the GOP is screaming to get rid of for voter fraud, no I don't see much of a difference.
" I didn't say I was against absentee ballots because that's mostly for military or government contract workers that are overseas, completely different than an able body individual that just don't want to stand in line at the polls, even though they are perfectly healthy to do so. "
...Why?
Okay that's it I gotta know: What is in any respect better about showing up?
I have Work. I have shifts and most of the US allows private industry to fire people for missing work for any reason. And those companies aren't obligated to give you the day off to vote.
Why would I sacrifice a paycheck as a poor person just to vote IN PERSON to satisfy some uppity prick when the mail is right fucking there? Your stance betrays a patent disinterest or disregard for the complications of people's lives at worst or a Massive fundamental misunderstanding of the tech you have available to you at best.
"An absentee ballot is generally used in every state to refer to a ballot filled out by a voter who cannot, for various reasons, physically make it to a voting location on Election Day.
A mail-in ballot is used more broadly to refer to ballots sent through the mail, including in all-mail voting states and some forms of absentee voting."
And how exactly are absentee ballots showing up? This distinction reeks of "Because I said so."
The absentee ballot and the mail-in ballot both function the exact same way and for the exact same reason: The person voting for whatever reason was incapable of showing up in person so voted remotely through "the mail."
Distinction without a difference. You changed the demographics and nothing else.
"An usually you have to request and absentee ballot, but you don't with mail in ballots. In California, they sent out mail in ballots to people that weren't registered to vote, or had not requested them."
So what?
Unless that vote lines up with an actual social belonging to a citizen then it's worthless.
The government has your ID, your entire work history, your life on record in this country with little left out, and we have multiple redundant forms of ID for a fucking reason. But with all that information you think they don't know a bullshit vote when they see it?
Funny how voter fraud only comes up as a problem whenever Republicans specifically lose. "Either I win or you cheated": The Party everybody.
1
-
@2ndtonone1000 "Actually, early voting pretty much eliminated the need to do mail in voting unless you are physically disabled. You mean to tell me you are fully book throughout the entire seven day week?"
Tell me you don't live in poverty in America without saying it.
No 2nd, no I Don't have the free time because I work 2 fucking jobs just to pay the bills. My time off from One job is the other fucking job.
Also if the necessity has been removed, why are you so adamant this HAS to be removed?
What a coincidence you want to ban the main voting method used by Democrats. How many fraudulent votes are there even that you're basing this necessity on?
"I have worked some ridiculous shifts, 12 hours or more six days a week at times and still made it to early voting."
Awww 12 hours 6 and 1's? Look at you working hard a couple weeks in your life.
Get back to me when it's 7 and 0 with shift overlaps for months. I sleep and eat when I Can, I'm not wasting what little energy I have left just to once again satisfy some prick who still can't explain why I HAVE to frog-march my ass to vote the way He wants when a more convenient option is right there.
Why should I tolerate even More inconvenience in my existence for your ass' preferred voting style?
"You do know people can move to another state, and you are sending a ballot to someone at that address that doesn't even live there anymore. "
Wow let me introduce you to a novel new thing called "Forwarding the mail." If you don't have an address that mail can find you at, that's something you're actively making harder on yourself.
Why would you care if you don't get your ballot if you're This adamant to Not be getting it?
"An you said so what, well its always been that way, mailing out that many ballots cost money, and in liberal states you are paying for that extra cost."
This is the richest nation on the planet, no one cares if an American says "but that's too expensive." You idiots blow trillions annually on boondoggles and corporate bailouts for the rich and layoffs caused by those same rich people and financially support 70% of the world's dictators and provide Socialism to Israel on Our tax dime, but I'm supposed to believe paper is "too expensive" for you.
Sure. I'll believe that crap.
"An if you are a registered voter, you easily go online and make a request to have a mail in ballot sent out."
Sounds convenient. Wow the first actual thing you said about mail-ins that was correct and its praising it for the efficiency. XD
"My aunt who is physically disabled, who last year in a wheel chair still went in person to vote, this year she can't make it, but even she agreed that you should have to request the ballot to be sent out."
Who cares what your aunt thinks? She shares this country with 300 million other people and Most of them want mail-in voting.
You're outvoted on this one, accept it.
"It shouldn't automatically be sent out, because most times the voter registration is not checked to see if that person is even still living in that location."
Citation needed.
1
-
@2ndtonone1000 "Again, its not about it being convenient for you, its about the right to vote, and some of those people handing out stuff have been known to try to push politics to the people they are giving water and snacks to. "
And this infringes on the right to vote in no way at all, so your point is moot. If anything this is Expanding the right to vote to greater avenues.
What are you complaining about here?
"Not really, just don't want some bozo exploiting mail in ballots by sending them to people that are no longer at the current address or dead. "
So a functionally nonexistent problem that doesn't meaningfully impact elections. Got it.
"I never once said they didn't exist, I just stated I didn't agree with the method, all the other things you are saying is just bloviating."
No, you said no one cares what I think the right way to vote it.
Seeing how my voting position is "The one that's the law", clearly it's actually Your position on voting no one cares about.
"Hardly think that's the case. early voting is actual in person voting but early, and mail in voting is sending out a ballot to an address in some cases a ballot has not been requested, and you have no confirmation that the person still lives there, or is still alive. That is the reason I stressed that a ballot should be requested, and not just sent out like they do in states like California. "
Until you show e numbers of how much this actually happens then I don't care. Unless it's actually enough to impact an election it's a waste of time that ONLY negatively affects the voting demographics that mostly vote against your side.
In short it's either a solution to a crime as relevant as jaywalking or it's a solution to a completely Different problem to your people: "People who don't vote Rep being allowed to vote at all."
"Glad you think someone that's giving an opinion on something is whining, but you are a riot to debate. No, like I said I am not for it, but it exists, and if its going to exist, I think more safeguards should be added to it. Has nothing to do with whining or the childish rhetoric you spewed in this last statement. "
When all you've got in response for Why it's bad is "I don't wanna" and "it's my opinion" then yes you are whining.
Suck it up snowflake, either present an Ironclad reason why this is dangerous or you are whining.
"No, there have been issues of voter fraud up to 1,384 to be blunt. There were convictions of up to 1191, so the system is working, but a lot slips through the cracks, so saying its a non issue when there has been reported proof of there being voter fraud is downright asinine."
Wow 1,384 votes! Golly gee a whole1384 cases, we gotta put a stop to this!
...Oh wait, the voting public numbers around 153 Million.
But hey, you proved me wrong. It's not a NON-issue.
...It's just 1/110549th of an issue at its most dangerous.
Pffff!!!!! XD This wouldn't flip a county election in fucking Idaho, much less a election that actually means something. Come back to me when you've got a whole 10th of a percentage of a problem then I might care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"Should America be in Syria? No. Should America be in Iraq? No.
however, Russia's situation is far more serious then to just point and go "what about America". "
Rephrase: "Should Russia be in Ukraine? No. however, America's situation is far more serious than to just point and go "what about Russia?"
You're literally doing the fucking thing.
"1. Ukraine is a democratic nation. (Although not the best at it but it's a lot better then it use to be)"
So?
"2. Russia's invasion compared to Iraq and Syria is Russia invading to ANNEX another countries land and do regime change."
Ohhh, so you have a Better reason to illegally invade and occupy a foreign territory against their will at gunpoint. Nice!
"3. America's illegal invasion was just to do regime change and not take Iraq's territory. "
Cool excuse. Still illegal.
"4. Both Iraq and Syria are dictatorships and their leaders are and were brutalizers (which doesn't excuse the invasion) but I don't think Saddam will be missed and Bashir if he were gone would be missed. "
Okay, FIRST OFF: PFFFF! That's fucking rich coming from the rabid dog warstate. You think someone else is a brutalizer WHILE YOU ILLEGALLY INVADE NATIONS AND KILL THEIR CIVILIANS! Your nation quite literally lied about Saddam supporting Al-Qaida, then lied about their WMD's, then just said "fuck it, we don't like him" after all that was found out to be lies.
Piece of shit? Sure, but you still illegally invaded a sovereign nation and lied to the UN and your people about why. Uncle Sam doesn't get to call ANYONE a brutalizer as long as you keep behaving like violent murderous savages to Foreigners.
'5. Invading another country, committing genocide on it's and taking their land is going back to the 1800s and the world should be passed that."
Unless it's America. Because they have "good reasons."
Special Pleading, Party of ONE!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@LymbicSystemuwu ", and she proceeded to play this on stage with her overly revealing clothing while twerking."
So what?
"Now whether you think that's controversial or not is a different story but that is what Ben was talking about and you completely missed the central point of his argument. So, you're either disingenuous or ignorant."
So Ben's central point is a bitchmade point.
"Yes, the obvious difference is that Taylor Swift does not encourage young women to disregard their health and peddle dangerous misinformation about health at every size, did not wear skimpy, revealing clothing while twerking on the piano, and doesn't write depraved songs. "
....Wow what a pussy you are. Who cares?
"There was backlash against Swift as well but between these two instances, Lizzo is by far the more egregious one, especially since Lizzo is capable of conducting herself in a very professional, elegant manner as she did before when playing the flute but decided to completely shit on the piece of history that the flute holds and it was completely intentional. "
How did she "shit on a piece of history" you prude?
"Furthermore, to cover another aspect of this issue, is the fact that there are many, many talented musicians that can play the flute, but Lizzo was "lent" the flute based on the fact that she is a product that is high in demand, not because of her contribution to music at large, which is negligible at best. "
The fuck have you contributed to society? Someone is salty! XD
"Taylor Swift has a much better claim to that title. But in a world where Bob Marley's guitar is gifted to DJ fucking Khaled of all people I no longer have expectations for curators to have dignity."
So dignity is incessantly bitching and moaning about meaningless decorum only pretentious twatgoblins would ever care about.
In short nobody whose opinion matters.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Dude, no one's shitting on you for wanting to keep what you've earned. But guess what: everyone Else would like to keep what they earned too. And whether you like it or not, you live in a society, from which you've benefitted.
If you tell me you're self-made, then I'm calling you a liar. You grew up in America's school system, you use American roads and American services. Hell, you're on the tax-funded project called the Internet right now.
If you don't think you owe society, then fine. But as long as you continue to use tax-funded utilities, what you want is irrelevant. You benefitted from the system, a Capitalist system no less, and you somehow think you don't owe anything for the utilities you use? Did you build those roads? Did you organize the fire department or postal service? Did you program the Internet?
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Do you ever get tired of this? Like you've entirely too consistent on this to just be some dipshit, so I have to assume there's an intelligent human being currently engaging in blatant character-assassination, well-poisoning, endless red herrings, and constantly pretending to Not understand anything be said to you by the Left.
If so... Why? Like dude, we could totally be talking like normal right now. Two dudes, presumably differing political positions (No idea what you really think), just chatting it out like normal.
Like dude, you know what's in your own comments. You gotta admit you are deliberately incendiary and aggressive, and as an outside observer it's not really that hard to see why "No one debates you civilly". You're not terribly civil yourself, you're antagonistic and holier-than-thou straight out of the gate, and, well, people straight up don't like talking to someone who shits on them before so much as a hello.
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 ...Huh. Okay, that was surprisingly civil. Shit I might have to retract a few insults of mine, this is unexpected.
Anywho, as far as your question.... I guess I don't really answer A or B. I mean I don't know the situation of either person besides their monetary situation presently.
But if I was going to average it out, both answers are statistically likely to be true. Look, America in general is cruel and dismissive of the poor. No one Chooses poverty, you kind of just end up there. Maybe you were born into it (Which statistically usually means you're screwed, in the majority of life situations an American citizen usually doesn't rise up much from the financial bracket they were initially born into.), maybe you were irresponsible and dumb, or maybe you were screwed by one of America's many faulty systems, most of which the rules for are deliberately made so convoluted that lawyers struggle to follow what's going on.
So by those metrics, the poor person could be a victim in the situation. Not guaranteed, but fairly likely. But also obviously the rich man was robbed, making them also a victim and due some honest justice.
I don't think your analogy is 100% fitting, but I do see where you're coming from here. I'll just tell you where my sense of ethics is. When you really get down to it, I Am a Capitalist. Way more Left leaning than yourself, evidently, but I am still a capitalist. I love free enterprise, I engage in private commerce, I love having nicer things, I like my little gadgets and toys, I'm definitely not communist by any quantifiable metric in terms of what I actually do.
Here's where I think we probably differ: I am personally of the belief that humanity thrives the most when suffering is minimized for the maximum possible number of people. I don't dismiss the value of individualism (I am very individualistic personally), but the sort of mass-scale projects I'd love to see humanity undertake can't be done by individuals. They require the level of organization and resource-allocation that's largely only possible if you're a massive corporation or the government. Do I like that state of affairs? No. Am I crazy pro-government? Not really, especially not ours. Truth be told if we could reasonably achieve the goals I want done without the government I'd be more than happy to take those options. I HATE that I'm frequently arguing in favor of something as flawed as the American government, but please understand that I'm not siding with them because "Woohoo, government is great!" or whatever, I'm just trying to get things done with the available tools at hand. If my goals were more likely under Randian Libertarianism, I'd be a Randian Libertarian.
Granted, I can see why you would be hesitant. I mean you're right to a point, I can totally see why you'd feel robbed, assuming you're wealthy. I'm not blind to that, I can absolutely see why you'd feel that way (Assuming you're legit, which I'm willing to entertain for now.) That being said, let's call a spade a spade here: Losing money does not mean the same thing to a rich man that it does to a poor man. If a rich man loses a few dollars, that's nothing. They've got millions, a few dozen, hell a few thousand dollars less a year doesn't mean That much besides a minor inconvenience.
But if you're poor, lost money could very well be a death sentence. Lost money while in poverty is rent going unpaid, food you can't afford, medical bills you legitimately have to debate with yourself whether or not it's better to go to the hospital and incur that obscene debt for the foreseeable future or try to tough it out and hope for the best.
And maybe I'm a bit biased in this regard (I mean we both clearly are, you said as much earlier and since we're being honest (I hope), I figured I should fess up to the possible bias ahead of time) but this issue does hit home for me because I grew up in poverty. I watched my parents go hungry so that us kids could stay fed, I watched my father bleed and sweat for years in a steel mill to keep us afloat, my mother still working to pay off college debt today almost 30 years after she finished school. Hell, due to a massive clerical fuckup during my time in the service, I was outright homeless for a few months directly (Long story, legitimately just the result of a clerical error where someone decided to move me out of the barracks two years before I was scheduled to and only informing me three days from move-out day.)
So... I guess that's where my ethics are. I would personally prefer any option that mitigates the most human suffering. So while I don't dismiss the plight of a robbed rich man, I'm also not advocating for "No rich people." I'm just against any one person being so individually rich and loaded that they can pose a threat to the rest of the American citizenry. Even in my more social-democratic idea of a system, there'd still be millionaires, multi-millionaires, and maybe a few billionaires. But I don't see any reason why a lone human needs multiple billions or outright trillions, seeing how That much wealth allows a lone person to completely subvert and disregard the rights and voting power of American citizens entirely.
Your vote only counts for one. But Bill Gates vote counts for millions of votes since he could just lobby and get laws passed without ever allowing a vote at all.
For the record I'd like to try this again from here, if you'd be willing. I'll try my best to curb the hostility if you're willing to meet me halfway here and keep the good mojo going.
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 I never said you weren't. Look, I'm not making a moral judgement about you just because you disagree with me on expressly what the best option is. I apologize for my prior comments doing so, I'm sure if the Internet wasn't the medium and we were just chilling, we could probably chat this out perfectly civilly with no issues. Do I think you're incorrect? Sure, but just because I personally think you're wrong doesn't say anything besides that. This is just diverging opinions.
Although I feel like you're kind of oversimplifying what the intended game plan is, assuming we went with my system. All you'd need is a Progressive tax rate that ramps up specifically when a person starts accruing enough money to be a genuine threat. Again, I'm not against rich people existing. Hell ambition and something to push for is very good for motivation. I just want a middle-ground here, just enough of a social safety net that poverty isn't the purgatory it is now in America, and where a person can't be So rich that they can completely override the people's will when it comes to politics.
Using Gates as an example again, Microsoft holds a terrifying monopoly in America. And not in the financial sense, but in the hardware sense. The government's computers and standard OS are Microsofts. The Military's computers, Microsoft. Every level of governance is contractually shackled to Microsoft for computer hardware and software. Because of this, Microsoft Today could completely gridlock the US government on every level with just software patch.
To my thinking it's completely asinine and self-destructive for any country to allow lone operators to hold power enough to cripple the country with a stray vindictive thought. We're essentially a de facto Corporate Oligarchy by the simple fact that Microsoft's holding a proverbial gun to the government's head. Doesn't matter how you vote, if Gates doesn't also vote that way, you're stuck with whatever Bill wants.
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 A UBI is just to prevent something that's inevitable. It's just trying to get ahead of the inevitable push for mass-scale automation. No matter what we do, unless we forcibly pass laws restricting the freedom of businesses to use automation, then within the next ten years the majority of America's job market Will be gone. Not because of Capitalism or Communism or some foreign power, but purely because a sufficiently competent machine is more useful for about 80% of America's job market than any human could ever be, no matter how little you paid the humans.
You can pull yourself up by your bootstraps all day long, but no human is more cost-effective than a relentless, tireless machine that can work 24/7, doesn't need a paycheck or benefits, and unlike the human doesn't have any pesky rights to worry about.
Meaning that, unless we overhaul our current system so Americans can get money to sustain themselves OR actively stymie progress with automation with bans just to satisfy humanity's bruised ego, 80% of Americans will be out of a job through no fault of their own. And unlike the assembly line, robotic automation doesn't create nearly as many jobs as it destroys for humans. Your machine works all hours of the night and performs the exact same quality of results each and every time, cutting down on human error and doesn't need payment. You'd lose 10-20 jobs for ever 2-3 you made.
A UBI is basically an idea for how to approach this inevitable problem. Which we do need a solution for, because god knows the corporations will lobby like hell to make sure banning automation isn't happening (And I can't really say I want them banned either). And American Capitalism as it Currently exists has absolutely no safety net for what happens when our conventional concept of a job market just doesn't exist anymore.
It's already begun all over America, these past couple years have been the first few in over a century where America produced Less jobs in a given year than it had people to fill them.
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 I dunno, think about all the stuff you could do. Like okay, honest question (Feel free to not answer if it's too personal), what did you want to be when you grew up? What got your passionate and fired up and was something you wanted to do with your life....Before you ever knew what taxes were?
I wanted to be a Doctor. Surgeon operating on people and fixing them up. I Love medicine as a subject and wanted more than anything to be that. But then reality shoved the boot in, I functionally can't become a surgeon without going into crippling debt for the education (Another point of resentment for me, a poor kid can't get into a good college unless they prove themselves leaps and bounds better than everyone else academically to rack up a sufficient amount of scholarship funding, but some rich punk can just buy their way in without having to try), so I ended up having to settle and drop my dream.
But what if you didn't have to? What if you could have been what you wanted to be, free to make a choice for your future without having to be afraid that you'll ruin your future indefinitely if you slip up? Your purpose in this world could be anything, the circumstances of your birth not crippling your dreams before they ever had a fair shot. I mean obviously I'm still in favor of meritocracy, so I'm not suggesting equal outcomes for all. I just want everyone to have a fair chance. And so many Americans are born into situations so fucked, or get conned by the system (Which SHOULD be on their side, but is actively engaged in the predatory exploitation just as much as the corporate sector) and consequently have their futures strangled in the proverbial crib due to the simple crime of just not being born rich.
I just want a world where a poor kid who wants to go for STEM has just as much of a chance as a rich kid. Not because they're both guaranteed to have PhD's, but simply that they both have the same opportunities to succeed. As it stands, we just hand success to the rich man's son on a silver platter no matter their actual competence while actively denying the poor unless they can prove themselves essentially Better than the rich kid at every turn JUST to allow them past the front door.
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Just keep in mind that "spoiling" a person and saving their lives isn't really a 1 to 1 correlation. I'm pretty sure if I helped out a legit homeless person I'm probably the first good thing that's happened to them in awhile. College tuition money for some rich kid is trivial, but the exact same amount of money saves several people who couldn't afford a doctor for years, or feeds dozens more who are starving.
Desperation only motivates people for so long. It's an automatic body response, fear and anger only motivate up to a point because it's supposed to be for Immediate problems. Predator cornering you, your children at risk, things you're supposed to get wild, adrenaline up, and fight/flight your way to safety. But it doesn't work on existential continuous threats. Your system reasons out that "We haven't eliminated the problem... But it also hasn't eliminated us yet, so... Why are we trying?" Rage turns to apathy, desperation turns to despair, and the person slowly starts internalizing their horrid situation as "just how things are and always will be."
You subject someone to a certain level of abuse and fear long enough and relentlessly enough and anyone will break sooner or later. That kinda shit is extremely taxing on the psyche, people start getting crazier the longer they're like that. Desperation works in the short term, but in the longterm that person's going to either break and lose most of their effectiveness to apathy and burnout, or they're gonna snap and kill the boss.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@roblovely15 Uhhh, okay, guess I'll go in order:
I'm not sure if I'd go quite as far as Wi-Fi at this point, but I could see myself being persuaded to see it as a necessity in many respects, especially considering how many businesses don't even hire anymore in person, opting instead to have you apply online.
I am in favor of legalizing and regulating most drugs, mostly for the sake of consistency. Doesn't make sense to me that I could get completely shitfaced on my own time and be at work hungover on Monday with no issue, but God forbid someone toked up. Not my place to dictate to anyone what mental state they choose to experience.
Same with prostitution and sex work in general: Legalize and regulate. As a proper capitalist I won't begrudge anyone making money however they like as long as it's consenting and no one's legal rights are being screwed with.
The last one does need some context. I'll say yes, anyone should be free to identify themselves however they wish. And I'm fine using pronouns if asked to do so. That being said, if you're identifying as something I know for a fact is not even logically justifiable on any level (For example: Otherkin identifying as members of completely different species), then I'm probably gonna assume you're fucking with me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@namaan123 "It's amazing to see how prevalent this sort of thinking has become, it's like a society-wide call for help. Instead of people elevating parents and centering on the children who will write the future, it trivializes them and relegates them to the edge of society. Sign of the times I guess."
You clearly can't be a parent without the government doing about 90% of the work rearing your kid For you, protecting your kid FOR you, and holding a loaded gun at the back of every other adult's rights. All because You are so lazy, so negligent, and so pathetically bafflingly incompetent as a parent that your crotchspawn would be better off as a Ward of the State than in your care. Quite obviously so, since you are actively Demanding Uncle Sam parent them in your place through legal means.
And you want RESPECT?! For What? You're not even a parent, you're just genestock. I'll take is up with The Fed, Their REAL parent, not You.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@regular-joe "Let's go back to your first comment. If I had made the following reply, what would your response have been?
"National history". Yes, it absolutely has had many grim moments. But I'm focusing here on the present and on the changes that can happen in the here and now. "
Right. And my question was effectively "How exactly do you plan on doing that without getting your hands dirty?" I mean the corrupt have zero problem using violence and force to get their way against you, zero issue using and abusing corruption against you so that even the civil route isn't viable because they can just "Nope" your efforts away.
How do you plan on beating a corrupt violent and vicious enemy without violence?
""Entire system is corrupt". No. Every institution has some corruption, that's just part of human nature, and can and is being fought against. "
Right, but Your System as it currently exists does not. Your system as it currently exists almost exclusively advantages the biggest dickhead and most corrupt asshole in the room.
""Destroying the country". Yes, the country is going through hard times now as we work to protect our democracy and freedoms. Again, part of human nature, the fight is eternal"
I guess my question is just "How?" Like a genuine A to B here, a gameplan. Because to my observation your nation is running on borrowed time.
I don't see how you even Have the Time to do this cleanly when your nation is already teetering on the edge of complete economic and social implosion, and your leadership is a horde of senile geriatrics so proud that they'd rather destroy this nation via incompetence than admit that the world they govern over has truly left them behind and outmoded their entire existence. Like the time for peaceful solutions seems like it was 30 years ago, not 2 minutes to midnight.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@craigewen7542 "reeeeeee how dare you call out our side for literally inventing slavery"
Now that's just a straight up lie, pretty sure the God Republicans claim to venerate did that one.
"and Jim crow laws reeee"
You people want Jim Crow back, why are you acting like you're on some moral pedestal?
Also, just gonna ignore the fact that the Demographic of the South Then and Now is the exact same in ideals, except that the Party team switched?
Care to explain why all the Fascists, Neonazis- White Supremacists, Segregationists, Anti-LGBT and Anti-Woman people all flock to the Republicans?
If what you say is valid they should want Us, not You. And yet they hate us and exclusively recruit From you.
Guess your 200 years old attempt to blame people alive today for the sins of dead people meant fuck all. By your smoothbrained logic we should still hate all Germans because "The Nazis existed, therefore all Germans are Nazis forever."
Hell, by Your logic the entire worthless American people should be killed because "Your ancestors supported slavery too, therefore You ALL support slavery."
In case your dipshit ass forgot all the Founders whose cocks you suck were slave-owners. Therefore, you as an American support slavery by your idiotic toddler logic.
1
-
1
-
@Maarlock "I dont see what's so weird with violating your principle for making a point."
Because they're not making a point, they did this Seriously. They made the legislation, pushed the bill, it didn't pass, and THEN it was "oh we were just proving a point."
They wouldn't have said Shit if it had actually passed and just went on to get rid of their Democrats, As They'd Now Be Legally Allowed to Do. It's only "a joke" or "making a point" because it backfired and they have to save face.
"with Republicans who won't budge on their principle."
Which Republicans? Because here's the problem: There is only One consistent principle for Republicans. Only one.
Fuck Democrats and Fuck Everything Democrats do.
When Democrats compromise on their principles, it's usually because they're being corrupt sacks of shit behind the wall and lying to the people. Doing double deals with corporations, back-stabbing their voters, normal typical American political corrupt horseshit. Disgusting, but the type of disgusting Americans inexplicably all decided we're fine with for some reason.
Republicans, on the other hand, have ONE position, and that's "Fuck Democrats". Like you guys will Actively vote against your own best interests if a Democrat's the one pushing it.
Don't believe me? Look at Obamacare. The Actual policy came from the Republican Heritage Foundation, and was the policy Mitt Romney was pushing to compete with Obama, who was campaigning in 08 on fullblownuniversal healthcare.
....Only for Obama to turn around and slap his name on a Republican Insurance Mandate. Suddenly a policy Romney Almost Won on was an evil, sickening, unacceptably socialist pile of dogshit.... But it only Became that when a Democrat pushed it.
Similarly with other topics. Republicans will complain about corporate corruption, yet vote Against the Left every time a bill comes up to do anything about them. Only to push legislation Themselves that would specifically impact Democrat corporations.
You're pro-guns, yet in Democrat states you're Also extremely in favor of the police being allowed to use lethal force against suspects who "have a gun". Not "Pointing the gun", not "threatening them with the gun", the simple act of "Having a Gun as an American" is apparently fair game to use lethal force by default against "undesirables." So you're simultaneously pro-gun, but also pro-cops taking the presence of that gun on any suspect for any reason as an automatic KOS.
The position is utterly Void of principle, it's literally just "Fuck everything that guy wants, Period." You guys don't even vote with Democrats bipartisanly on shit Both of you agree on because all a Rep politician has to do is say "The Left wants this" and you're all like "HELL NO!"
Like I'm genuinely convinced at this point that if the Democrats came out as pro-2nd Amendment full-on outright, the Reps would start demanding gun control immediately out of petty vindictive spite.
There is No Republican Cause but Victory at All Costs.
Like I'm genuinely curious, feel free to correct the record here, but I am genuinely interested to know a Single Republican position that the Republican voting base Actually supports, across the board, whether or not a Democrat wants it to. One position Republicans will not backtrack on the second they have a chance to fuck over their opponents.
""I dont see what's so weird with violating your principle for making a point.""
It becomes a problem when you do it so often that your integrity and principles are functionally void.
Because no one trusts you, no one believes you, you're a Known liar who will wipe your ass with everything you believe just to make an inconsequential point you're equally shamelessly guilty of.
How can a voter have any faith at all in a candidate who thinks nothing of bold-faced lies to their face and responds with "it's just a joke" when they overplayed their hand and it failed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If you want to do a damn thing about the border (which... Why?), then a wall is literally the most hilariously pointless boondoggle.
Most illegal immigrants in the USA don't bother crossing the border, they Fly In perfectly legally, either as tourists or on Visas, then just stay.
And the ones that DO cross at the border usually do so by either going through tunnels that start wayyyyy before the border and go under it, or just come by the water.
A Wall is absolutely worthless when there's like 50 significantly easier ways to get across it. And even if you Did have a wall, the USA doesn't have anywhere close to enough manpower to secure the entire thing.
It's just a waste of time and money so some political jerkoff can Say they did something about it. It wouldn't actually stop anyone but the dumbest of illegal immigrants.
On top of that, most of US farmland keeps crop prices (relatively) cheap by abusing and exploiting illegal immigrant labor. As in it's actively in the economic interest of every single State on the border to NOT do anything about the border, because Red or Blue, the border states All abuse the shit out of illegal slave labor using illegals with no US rights.
So even if you Had the wall, pretty much all the States on the border would be deliberately leaving gaps for Their specific abuses of the law to keep slipping through. Because they'd rather abuse illegal labor than pay an American fair wages for said labor.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bobsonbobbybobson6888 "Could pose severe consequences for the future"
Like what? Complete corporate dominance of all industries? Monopolization? Corruption of government?
Welcome to twenty years ago. The concerns you have? Yeah, already happened, corporations already run America in totality.
And once again, if you can't pay a living wage to your employees, Regardless of what economic status your business is, then you have no business Having employees.
You want slaves, move somewhere else and get slaves. You want workers, pay them like it.
How slow of a rollout does it have to be? Our minimum wage Stopped being a living one in the 1970's. Since then, we've only bumped up our wages to match inflation, not to actually match cost of living like we did Before the 1970's.
We are already 50 years behind, how much longer do these workers have to wait to be treated like people? Why should I give a shit about some Mom and Pop store who doesn't give a shit about their workers financial well-being?
They're not Owed workers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@CerebralFriction "to think creating a life, a replication of your own DNA and anothers, carrying it healthily to term, loving it and raising it the best you can, is not an accomplishment, is ultimately delusional and nihilistic."
That's not what you people are defending, you're defending the literal act of having children.
"Nb4, "that not what I said" I know."
Oh, so you know you're lying.
"You're trying to conflate bad and unintentional parents, with intentional and good parents which is just asinine."
Yet another lie, but keep going.
"Even then though, having a healthy baby is an accomplishment no matter what happens after."
Wow, what an accomplishment. You boinked without protection and created a living consequence.
If that's an accomplishment to you then your life is a sad one. If you were an Actual good parent you'd have more to be proud of than living evidence that you got laid. Instead, here you are, calling it an accomplishment like a sad weirdo.
1
-
@CerebralFriction "to think creating a life, a replication of your own DNA and anothers, carrying it healthily to term, loving it and raising it the best you can, is not an accomplishment, is ultimately delusional and nihilistic."
That's not what you people are defending, you're defending the literal act of having children.
"Nb4, "that not what I said" I know."
Oh, so you know you're lying.
"You're trying to conflate bad and unintentional parents, with intentional and good parents which is just asinine."
Yet another lie, but keep going.
"Even then though, having a healthy baby is an accomplishment no matter what happens after."
Wow, what an accomplishment. You boinked without protection and created a living consequence. If that's an accomplishment to you then your life is an immensely empty one. If you were an Actual good parent you'd have more to be proud of than living evidence that you "got busy" once. Instead, here you are, calling it an accomplishment like a sad weirdo.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I mean good luck counting those votes on anything even slightly resembling a reasonable time table with a nation this huge but totally manually. Like it'd be slow, grueling, and paper's not exactly hard to "misplace", or in the case of certain Republican "concerns over votes", suddenly they start getting Really nitpicky over what does or does not count as a vote.
Like "Hmm... Well this checkbox isn't filled in 100%, which means Mayyybe the first 95% of the ink COULD have been a screwup. Oh well, throw this one out on suspicion of being faked." Reps are kind of infamous for getting ridiculously nitpicky about what does or doesn't count as a filled ballot when they want to choke off votes to someone. Like at one point they were throwing out votes that didn't Perfectly match the ID of the voter, but taking it to such an extreme that if your ID has a middle initial, but you didn't write it out fully (Despite no express requirement that you do either), they'd just throw out your vote because it "might" be a fake. Or they take the opposite route of "Wait, he wrote out a full name, but his ID just says "C." for the Middle initial. I choose to believe their middle name is Actually "C", meaning this fully-written out thing must be fake!"
1
-
@uttcftptid4481 I'm aware, I just fail to see the point in choosing by default to slow the process down, make it more inefficient, contend with all the Manual ways a person can compromise vote integrity, all just to eliminate a problem that.... Well literally all they need to do is make the voting machines a closed system. No wifi, no internet access or exposed connection points, no means by which it can be hacked outside of literally ripping into the box with a crowbar.
Like these could be as secure as possible Today. All you gotta do is design the program like this is the 90's (i.e. no mandated internet connection, everything's being counted by the box and ONLY the box).
And hell, another layer of basic security: Add Social and ID checks. Doesn't need to be a driver's license, just some form of valid ID and your social. You meet with the people in charge of voting, give them your ID. They check if it's legit, find the associated social, and greenlight it. But the box is Manually wired to the observer's computer (Like it really doesn't matter if the observer knows how you voted, it's not really important information and they see millions of votes a day, they don't care.)
The process is thus: Once your ID is checked into the system, you go vote. But before then, you have to put your social into the ballot box (two tier verification). Meanwhile the observer is watching from their computer. If Any answer pings in that booth that is tied to any social except the one on your record? Invalidated. Start trying to double up on votes? Thrown out and any successful votes passed by your up to that point are invalidated.
We don't need manuals, we just need to think a bit more about the tech we do have. We just have to design something so dirt-stupid basic that no one will Actually fuck this up on purpose, but so blunt and direct that it leaves no room for wiggling.
From your perspective, you show up, drop ID, they send you to the booth, drop social, vote. Done. One vote per person, all done in person (or mail Specifically if you're not in the country (i.e. military mostly), and just make election day a federal holiday that Must be given off. That way if someone didn't vote, it's because they were too lazy to go, not because they're literally being held back from it by work.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AbdullaAmr791 "you are terrible terribly misinformed."
And I'm sure your comment has all the ways I'm misinformed listed. Let's see.
"Ok, I’m going to try to say this the least offensive way as possible so then to try to stay open-minded."
Oh please do.
"A sensibility that is within the common people even if they are not necessarily religious shouldn’t it not detract itself from society?"
...I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're even asking. Society is inherently linked to the sensibilities of the people that comprise it.
And the overwhelming majority of the US population was in favor of marriage equality. The contention was among the political leadership, many of which were actively Avoiding a direct ballot vote in their States because it would have resulted in marriage equality (I.e. the people wanted it, the politicians didn't, and the politician's wanted the right to reject the will of their voters on this point).
Also, if there's a nonreligious reason why marriage equality should've been opposed, I've yet to hear it. All the arguments I've heard are still actively making appeals to religious dogma. "Sanctity of marriage", "Marriage is meant to produce children", these arguments have no basis at all in reality Outside of religious dogma.
So assume that I'm not swayed by theology, what's Secular argument against marriage equality exists?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rhmotes "It's incredible that you don't know anything about me but are perfectly comfortable insulting me."
Yeah, funny how that works. You start dictating to others what the "ideal family is" and foisting unverified claims on people, and suddenly they start treating you like a self-righteous asshole.
Wonder if there's a connection there?
". What about the fact that it evolved before we were even human, and maybe we should have some level of respect for why we evolved that way, regardless of whether we understand it or not?"
How about you produce some actual data instead of just rhetoric and appeals to nature, and maybe I'll give a shit?
What you find natural or not is irrelevant, either you can prove heterosexual parents are the superior parenting dynamic or you can't. Which is it?
"What about the fact that our psyches contain mother and father complexes? "
Citation needed, your assertions mean nothing.
"What about the temperamental differences between men and women that lend themselves positively towards social and emotional development when paired?"
Citation needed, also how'd that work out for all the abused children and foster situations. All those children of heterosexual couples that were abandoned call this shit into question, at least when a gay couple has a child it's Always on purpose, not the result of a piss-drunk backseat gropefest.
"What about motherly and fatherly instincts?"
Irrelevant to the discussion without data verifying your claims of "heterosexual ideals", Citation needed.
" What about the fact that you need a man and a woman to create a child? That didn't evolve for no reason."
Any idiot can get knocked up, wild animals do it all the time. Parenting is actual work.
All you're telling me here is that your parents clearly failed to teach you what a fucking Parent is. It's Love, commitment, work and attention and supporting a child you care about.
If you think that call be reduced to something as base and juvenile as "Daddy has a penis, Mommy has a vagina" then your parents fucking failed you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Javier Martinez Someone who, much like a neolib, claims to be with an ideological belief, but their position is just "Whatever the Republican Establishment wants."
Same way a Neolib is just an Establishment Democrat bootlicker who claimed to be liberal despite, once again, their beliefs being "Whatever their Party establishment said most recently."
Basically a Neocon would be someone whose about reduced taxes and spending on the part of the government.... Right up until it effects a rich Republican donor, the military industrial complex, the ability for the rich to do whatever they want with impunity, or whatever else Fox News said today.
Similarly, a Neolib is against ALL of the things stated above that a Neocon supports.... Unless a Democrat Establishment person supports it, in which case they're just a Neocon in blue.
They're basically the same term, just divided along Party lines. Neocon or Neolib, it means the same thing: An establishment sellout spouting whatever the Establishment wants and sucking corporate rich cock.
A good way to spot either is using the following metric: How many people suddenly became pro-US war among Democrats AND Republicans the moment Trump was out of office and Biden suddenly took up Trump's "Get out of Afghanistan" mantra?
How many people suddenly stopped talking about Trump's camps rounding up foreigners from below the border the Instant "Not-Trump" was in control over those still-active camps?
Both would be examples of Neocon/Neolib behavior: Hypocritical Party-line bullshit.
1
-
1
-
@philipangelo595 Erm.... Okay I did read over your comment, and fair enough. I can imagine you'd be incredibly jaded and with good reason to be so.
However.... Trying not to be a dick here...
But My position here as stated on this thread is literally just "Why?" Democrats want my vote, Republicans want my vote, these 3rd Party people want my vote, and I flat out refuse to vote for anyone unless they can give me an answer to that question "Why should I? Why should I vote your way?"
You see, I'm a selfish bastard. An a lazy one. If I'm gonna put forth the effort to politically support a cause with my voice and my money, then I'd better be Getting Something for my vote for my trouble.
I don't care about ideology, I don't care about rhetoric or platitudes, my position is that I want them to Sell me on it. Buy my support, Do Something for me to Make Me loyal, or I ain't loyal.
I've spent my entire life being promised the world for my support only to be given nothing when it's time to pay up. Promises ain't good enough anymore, "what have you done for me lately?"
All I've asked since getting here was just "Is there a Plan with these 3rd Party spots or... What?" Like I'm not voting for the other 2 Parties because they never deliver anything positive, but I Just wanted one of these 3rd Party supporters to lay out exactly HOW they planned on addressing the problems with our Two Party issue as they keep bringing up.
I'm not supporting anything in America's system anymore unless I see an actual roadmap to victory and a clear practical benefit to me doing so.
1
-
1
-
Y'know what I hate about this response?
Not you specifically, you're fine, but the response itself to corruption.
Because it's cyclical and infuriating. Like if you're talking to a rightwinger about this shit, it's like "No no, my pundit tells the truth! You're just a sheep!"
Then it's "Well... I don't agree with everything they say, but they still speak the truth as they see it, you're just biased!"
Until finally "So what? Political people always lie, not sure what you think you're surprising me with."
Like.... Wait a minute, were the supporters Knowingly following and spouting the opinions of a lying fraud up until that point or did they Also just find out that all the people pimping all the positions they support are lying frauds and just go "Fuck it, this fraud's pushing the narrative I like, so I don't care if they're a reprehensible fraudulent scumbag."?
It reeks of a knowing admission from the voters that they Knew the political person they championed was a lying sack of shit, and just didn't care. And just jumped to the "Who cares, politicians always lie" excuse when Caught supporting an open fraud.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SaveFarris1 Actually, no it isn't.
There's also another more practical difference as to why we can forgive student loans but not your Ferrari shit.
The Federal government (and by extension, the taxpayers) actually own the overwhelming majority of student loan debt. Your car loan is most likely owned by a private party. One actually CAN be legally written off entirely and rendered nonexistent by the public sector, the other can't under present laws.
But hey, if you feel better about it, if laws do change and the government does end up owning your debt, I'd be fine forgiving it too. Why not, the government owns that debt, the taxpayer is ultimately the one funding it, it's a debt America literally owes to... America.
"Okay, I don't owe myself $100 bucks anymore." And the debt's gone. No inflation, no resources added or subtracted, a self-owned debt can literally be legally negated that easy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SaveFarris1 "Because that's how reality works."
Translation: I don't actually know why.
"Just because it wasn't printed or paid doesn't mean it wasn't added."
It actually does though. If it's not printed, added to the ledger, deleted from the database entirely, it doesn't exist.
Welcome to the 21st century, you must be new here. See, the overwhelming majority of the US currency is Digital. 1's and 0's, theoretical, no resource or service or practical value to any of it but what we ourselves decide. It's not real, it's information. A mental construct of value that we made up for ourselves.
You know what happens when imaginary currency and debt is deleted from the database? It's Gone. Capital G Gone, no record, no trace of it on existence, it never was. If you went to the IRS Today and wiped the databases keeping tabs on the US government's personally-owned debts, those debts are just Deleted from reality. Same way we could just Delete that massive chunk of imaginary digital currency Today and bye-bye inflation.
Inflation exists because the government Wants it to exist. The Debt exists because the government Wants it to exist. It's only there so they can clockwork ratfuck you as the citizen and have a never-ending scapegoat. But it's completely fucking imaginary and artificially-enforced. This is a problem that shouldn't even Be one.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Considering the religious have no issue violating the separation of church and state and getting involved in politics despite being tax-exempt, I really don't care what they think.
If they want any liberties At All, then they can pay their fucking taxes like everyone else. Until then, they're basically squatting on government land tax-free and violating the Constitution whenever they like.
Fair's fair, if it's A-Okay for these assholes to force their beliefs on the rest of us, then we can do it right the fuck back.
And with even more legal precedent to do so on the grounds of "I actually pay my taxes and don't break the law."
Hypocritical? Sure, in principle it is. But I'm a monster to these people no matter how "principled" I decide to be, so fuck it. They don't deserve fairness as long as they hold this Unconstitutional double-standard for themselves.
If I have to obey the Constitution, so do they. If they get to violate it, so do I. Fair's fair, if they didn't like it they should've kept their nose out of my fucking love life.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Aging_Casually_Late_Gamer "such as hormones blockers and HRT.
Those are not reversible."
Literally false, but feel free to provide the data I know you don't have and the sources I know you don't have verifying that these are irreversible.
"While long term horomone blockers may not have life threatening side effects, there are still permanent changes that happen. "
Ohhh, so you Know the data isn't on your side, but you're referring to some other vague ass implication you refuse to state.
"And yes, kids under 18 are getting surgeries as well."
No shit sherlock, Everyone gets surgeries. Hey, I got sinus surgery as a teenager, does that count?
Why do you speak so fucking vaguely? You don't state A Surgery, you just leave it at vague "surgeries". You have no example of an irreversible cause of HRT, yet you allude to some vague consequences.
Did you parents never teach you how to speak Plainly?! Stop avoiding and SAY WHAT YOU MEAN!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@supremechungus2060 ...Because the Presidency is a spot watched by all politcal Parties, and its more resistant to fraud expressly because all the cheaters are A: trying to cheat, and B: trying to stop anyone Else from cheating. Keeps a room honest to a degree when literally no one in the room trusts anyone else.
Plus you're giving the Dems wayyyy too much credit. They couldn't even successfully cheat their own, in-house legally riggable Primary without being caught red-handed almost instantly, do you honestly think these same idiots could successfully run a con that A: Includes the entire Dem political Party, B: Would also need to include every single Republican judge and politician who ever told Trump "No", and C: that they pulled it off so expertly that not a single bit of legally admissible evidence, when Trump had a Republican-stacked Supreme Court AND Mitch watching them? Literally not a single scrap of proof that could damn them despite how humilatingly sloppy and brazen these idiots have been before and since 2016?
Like you do realize that the DNC would have to simultaneously be Bond-Villain level genius masterminds... Despite all their behavior suggesting that Pauly Shore could pull off more competent tactics. Their actions and the implication don't add up. Not because I don't think the Dems Wouldn't rig if they could, but if they did, it'd have been brazenly embarrassingly obvious. These dipshits couldn't even cover up that Booyjudge's votes against Bernie were being counted by the privately-owned company whose CEO was the spouse of one of Pete's direct campaign teammembers, do you seriously think they somehow upgraded to the perfect conjob after easily a decade of doing nothing but sucking ass at subterfuge on every level?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kavian9620 And yet it's Those Two Senators who are the tiebreaker, and guess who just won? Republicans.
Republicans are the enemy. They're SUpposed to be anti-progressives and anti-Democrat. That's literally the exact stupid game we've been playing since Reagan: Democrats reject anything a Republican does on reflex, vice versa.
Manchin is a Traitor. He voted against his own Party, he voted against his own constituency, he's willfully giving his own base the finger and handing victory to the Reps, and he flat out Threatened the DNC that he would obstruct and block any progressive policies Period, and nevermind how much the people want it.
On one side you have "Republicans doing the exact same damn thing we've been doing for decades", and on the other you have a traitor who sold out the people to give the Reps the win despite being the tiebuster and Deliberately delaying his own vote so he would be so.
But nahhh, that's not bullshit, it's all the Reps fault for just not bending over and accepting the Literal Exact Opposite of everything they believe in.
...Which I'd imagine would be about as expected to occur as you spontaneously developing an interest in Randian Anarcho-Capitalism. Blame the guys who are supposed to be our opposition, not the fucking traitor in our midst.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@av3902 "It is certainly human, that is inarguable, even though leftists claim otherwise to make themselves feel better. "
I mean if you're talking "literally comprised of human DNA" then sure. It's "human."
And so is a cancerous tumor and a wad of semen. Fine, whatever, it's "comprised of human DNA."
Can we agree on that so you guys can get to the fucking point?
"I suppose the fetus wouldn't have much relevance to the individual wishing to exterminate it, but that wouldn't make it morally justifiable."
Why not? We kill things with human DNA all the time and it's not a moral hangup, why is killing a zygote immoral but fighting cancer is not?
"Over 95% of abortions are undergone without r_ape or serious health issues of the mother being the reason."
Citation needed and also, relevance? Why's the motive matter if it's not a viable fetus?
"That means that in over 95% of cases, the woman consented to pregnancy, and then killed the human fetus whose existence she intentionally brought about."
Pretty sure the fact the abortion's happening at all means they Didn't intend it, but okay.
"Peak immorality."
I feel like a broken record, is there a "Why" in there somewhere?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dustin Stich Fair enough. However, in order for "States Rights" to happen, it has to remain Federally legal, which is what these people are in opposition to. Fed supercedes State in the hierarchy, so technically speaking it kind of Has to be generally legal on a Federal level in order for the States to have any legal grounds to... Well, as you seem to wish them to do, choose either/or. Like if execution was federally illegal fullstop, a State can't just go off and start shitkilling criminals anyway in the name of State's Rights.
I mean I'm not on the States Rights team when it comes to medical procedures, I don't personally think known science and medical practice should be up to the interpretation of anyone except people who actually know what the fuck they're legislating over (i.e. the Specialists, not the civilians or politicians or anyone who got their spot from a fucking popularity contest and fuck all else). However, setting the record straight, I Am in favor of States rights when it comes to most areas of policy, so long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of the individual.
However, the people in favor of this aren't on Either of our sides, my dude. They don't want "States Rights", as flimsy as I think that argument is, they want to Federally Ban this across the board. Unilaterally, complete prohibition, fuck your rights it's Our Morality or nothing!
They don't want the States to have the freedom to even choose. These are Autocrats and demagogues preaching a religious ideology in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade.
You think they give any more of a shit what individual states want when they clearly already don't give a shit what the people this actually impacts want?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@makeamericagreatagain3401 Ah, so it's literally the entire rest of the nation involved in this conspiracy now?
No no your Honor, I'm not shit at defending myself legally, the truth is literally the entire political system is engaged in a concerted nation-wide heist of the election, a heist that would require a level of organization, bipartisanship, and coordination between hundreds of Federal and State level politicians, millions of voters, and every court in America INCLUDING Trump's own Republican-stacked Supreme Court.
Which tells me 1 of 2 things: Either Trump is a fucking liar, since he's claiming conspiracy without any evidence, despite him swearing up and down he has evidence to win it instantly (only to not state any of it and instead resorting to "rumors" and threatening Georgia into "finding the votes" unless he wants the MAGA swarm turned on them. Which is a clear sign of honesty, threatening lawyers and judges into ignoring the process and just "giving" you a state win.
Or B: Trump was so singularly incompetent that he literally alienated every possible ally he had outside of his mob, proving that he's frankly too incompetent to be anywhere near power if, with the Power of the Presidency AND Mitch's power AND the Supreme Court, Trump still couldn't find a whiff of provable evidence or a single member of his political base who stood with him to the end (Political base, voter base doesn't count).
Point is it's Trump's job to prove his case since he's the accuser. It's not up to the rest of the nation to just implicitly trust him, either he has evidence or he doesn't.
If he doesn't like it, maybe he should have actually tried to unify a nation at some point, instead of pandering exclusively to his xenophobic cult of personality and actively alienating every Other Republican (Because as per Trump a Rep that doesn't stand with him is a traitor) and literally everyone from the Center-Left down the line, which is half the country.
He pandered exclusively to one 10% fragment of the Republican Party, alienated everyone else who was more moderate, and did everything in his power to make everyone Left of Gary Johnson actively despise him on principle.
Mathematically it's not shocking in the slightest he lost. You can't win an election when only 10% of your voters even give a shit, and you single-handedly motivated everyone who opposes you into voting for some schmuck like Biden just to get rid of you out of pure spite from you going out of your way to piss them off for 4 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@christopherhook2141 I'm sorry, are you asking us to prove His accusation wrong? His blind accusation to a bunch of randos on YT that he can't possibly know the voting records of, and is therefore lying from the get-go AND has the burden of proof to begin with since he's the one making the blanket accusation.
We don't have to prove him wrong seeing how he has yet to even prove himself to be right. If I accuse you of abusing your pet cat, it's not Your job to prove that you didn't, It's My job to prove that you did. He made the claim "We support corrupt policies."
...What policies? He literally has no idea what the political make-up of the people he's talking to even is because he's just Assuming we all support Biden without any rational reason for thinking so.
This same moron who, on a completely different video, is operating off the brilliant logic of "Bernie is Leftist. The people who support him are Leftists. Bernie supports Biden. Therefore Biden is a Leftist, his policies are Leftist, all Leftists MUST support him (Even though Leftists are more substantively critical of Biden than the Right is, and the Dems actively call us Party traitors for it)." This insipid child's logic is literally just the transitive property, literally like "I'm friends with Steve. Steve's friends with Alex (who I've never met), whose friends with Chuck (Whom I've never met), whose friends with Stacy (Whom I've never met), whose friends with some dude on the opposite side of the planet named Abdul who I've never met.... But Abdul's my best friend ever because I'm friends with Steve whose friends with Alex, whose friends with...." You get where I'm going with this.
He operates on logic your average toddler would find ridiculous, his entire premise is blatant character-assassination and logical fallacies that apparently think the transitive property is how you determine loyalty, so no, shockingly no one feels any particular push to "refute" a series of strawmen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Derek Hitt That is the literal definition of Capitalism. Don't like it, take it up with Webster's.
Secondly, will you Just fucking stop? Seriously, I'm getting more than a little annoyed at people who don't know at all what I think Telling me what I think. You at no point during this entire conversation made a single attempt to actually figure out what I believe, yet you just blindly assume that because I'm not on Your side that I must be literally every single evil thing you can imagine up about "The Left."
Seriously, what's so hard about Asking what someone thinks? I mean you kind of remove all doubts as to where you stand, seeing how you comment on pretty much every Kulinski video with the same general arguments, but literally all you know about me is that I'm not on your side, and you feel the need to toss every single perceived evil on my shoulders like I somehow wronged you? Because lemme tell ya, that shit gets real old, real fast.
If you want to actually talk, then Say something. Ask something. Something that's not just blanket statements about a person you know absolutely nothing about or empty platitudes where you shove everything you think is wrong in the world onto everyone you don't like for petty ass political reasons.
If you can't, then I guess this is where the conversation ends.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nathanielchieffallo4273 "lmao it's called picking up boxes so that people richer than me can get their comfort toys. Don't "no ethical consumption" me on this issue."
Why not? Just did. If you're gonna act holier-than-thou your ass better be spotless.
"Nobody is forcing you to be a murderer for the state, the war machine is objectively worse than a packaging plant, factory or McDonald's."
No one's forcing you to financially support slavery and worker exploitation the world over, and I'm fairly certain the US has plenty of corporate entities with body counts higher than some militaries. Bring it on North Korea, I bet Ronald McDonald's gonna eat your kill-count's ass.
"As long as the war machine exists, vets deserve to be the LAST people to get healthcare or education. "
Why? They serve the nation more directly than most do, seems like fair compensation.
"But of course, our government needs to give people an incentive to sell their soul to something they either 1. Don't understand how evil it is or 2. They understand it, but don't care because they are getting a Mustang in 3 years."
You talk like someone whose never in their life been poor enough to even have to consider a choice to "sell your soul" or not.
Let's starve you in the ghetto for a couple months like most of the US enlisted were before they joined. See how strong that stance of yours is.
"I'd love to know how being a package handler and staying in my own damn country is the same as helping Raytheon get new contracts for the valiant effort of drone striking a village, and then coming back with a superiority complex about my "freedom fighting" that only further serves to manufacture consent for our reprehensible war machine."
Lol, who do you think's employing the sweatshop slaves in that nation to produce those packages you're handling? Your entire nation exists as a parasite of suffering and pain on this species, your nation Doesn't Exist unless you're maximizing worldwide suffering.
You "staying in your nation" means fuck all because your fucking nation doesn't stay in its nation. The corporations you work for assault the rest of the planet every bit as aggressively if not more so than your military.
At least a corpse is beyond suffering, that corporation you're working for's probably got an army of Chinese people in some warehouse wishing they had it half as good as the dead guy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theheretic3764 "correct. When anybody does it it doesn’t imply guilt. In fact, that’s how officers keep you from doing it when you should do it… which is all the time. They presented this notion that pleading the fifth implies guilt or that you have something to hide."
You seem to be missing the fact that Trump's stance on the 5th was "Oh if you plead the fifth you're guilty as all shit and deserve to be investigated" until Very Specifically HE was the one zeroed in on.
No one said he wasn't Legally Allowed to plead the fifth, he obviously is. But since you guys love projecting your own failures on everyone else, when I hear a Rightwinger accuse any and every political opponent they have who pleads the fifth of unilateral guilt, I apply the exact same standard to the person who Voiced that standard.
Sorry that "abiding by the standards you yourself claimed to support" is always hard for the Right.
"But basically, every person who has ever been convicted of a crime, they didn’t commit got convicted, because they talked to the police, and what they said was used against them because they didn’t realize that they’re dealing with someone who’s trying to make a story fit."
Citation needed.
"Interesting. So according to you trumps an idiot, who doesn’t know what he’s talking about ever and everything he says, is a lie, ridiculous and stupid. Until he said something that would let you condemn him on its basis."
Where did I say "Trump's an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about ever" Or "Everything he says is unilaterally a lie, ridiculous, and stupid?" I want a fucking citation or an admission that you're knowingly lying right now.
Interesting that you Didn't consider Trump a liar at all until you Really Needed him to be a liar in order for you to dismiss his own active telling on himself. Does it strike you are a bit of a sign that you support horrible people if you're only defense of Trump now is "Oh come on, he's always a lying fraud, why are you taking his words seriously?"
"Which is it? Is Trump a hyper bastion of intelligence or does he occasionally say stupid things?"
I at no point have ever called Trump a hyper bastion of intelligence or even implied it, and he Does say stupid things more than occasionally. Where did you get it in your thick skull that "Duping and exploiting the American people's idiocy and playing them for suckers" Requires some Machiavellian-grade intellect?
You people vote celebrities into political power and treat your politics like Sunday Football and hang on the every word of dipshits and manchildren who've got nothing on you aside from "was born rich."
You acting like "taking your stupid population for a ride" is hard when you're literally the least educated and most ill-informed population in the first world and you people only need some shiny bling and a loud voice to convince yourself to form a personality cult around the dumbass wearing it.
Case and Point, You being here defending Trump.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@salomaogomes7311 "oh for f*ck's sake, at least argue in good faith..."
You first cockhole.
"We're talking about LGBTQ+ people who want to perform marry cerimonies. You know, the whole point of the video, the Bill, and this discussion in the first place. THESE are the allies I'm mentioning. These people hate organized religion just as much as we do. "
...Fine, I'll pretend this discussion didn't jump goalposts at all. Okay, fine, I'm sorry for offending any and all LGBT+ people who hate organized religion yet still want to play pretend along with organized religion's bullshit.
I don't get it, it seems moronic to me, but whatever. I have no objections.
"And again, they, just like me and you, also want for cristianity to remain a seperate thing from politics, and for them to pay taxes. They dont want christian law. They just want to be able to be themselves and live their lives in the same way everyone else can. "
Not sure what this has to do with shithead churches saying "fuck that" but again fine. No objections.
"I'm not repeating this again. If you dont want to argue in good faith and keep running in circles, that's your issue..."
Fine by me, because whatever point you were making went absolutely fucking nowhere.
I agree, this conversation's a waste. Blame me if that makes you feel better, but you failed at conveying whatever you were trying to convey.
1
-
@salomaogomes7311 "Geez, how mature...you could at least pretend you actualy paid attention and aren't arguing for the sake of arguing, you know? "
Hey, didn't you say you were done with this conversation?
"Then my second one is an explanation of why I care about such a thing when I'm not religous myself, and that's because if we allows this type of discrimination to happen, it legitimizes it, and makes it easier to justify further bigortry against other groups that don't conform. "
Bigots don't need a justification, but okay.
"Did you even bother seeing the video or reading the bill? The whole point is that it's a federal block on state legislatures being able to pass laws that legalize a churches' "right" to refuse to perform cerimonies for gay couples."
And you've been sitting here defending the rights of churches to do whatever. Including exactly that. But I guess as long as the State itself isn't doing what a bunch of fanatics want it's all good.... Oh wait.
"My point was clear as day. It's not my fault you kept making this about extremists and how much organized religon sucks(wich I actualy agree with), while never adresing the fact that actualy started the whole discussion."
Lol, man suck yourself off some more.
Also, silly question, maybe I'm just glitching out here, but where the hell are your comments on this thread?
Not implying you got rid of them, but I'm literally on the page right now and only ever see your most recent comment.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@albertfralinger2711 "in most states you have to be at least 18 years old to get a tattoo. "
Without parental permission, it's earlier in most States with that permission. But that's just the parent accepting legal responsibility for a choice they're allowing a thinking human being to make for themselves.
"That’s because teenagers and children generally don’t make the best and most thought out decisions."
If you can trust a teenager with a car and a job and tax them like a grown ass adult and send them to Prison like an adult, then I fail to see why they aren't capable of making this choice like an adult.
Last I checked "Making good decisions" is not how we define adults in this country. If it was, next to no one in America would be considered an adult.
"Even if you’re 18, most well respected tattoo artists won’t give a face tattoo because they understand how that permanent decision can negatively affect someone’s life."
Purely because other aspects of our society will preemptively judge them negatively. Because we're a bunch of fucking prudes.
"I cannot understand the excessive push for such extreme medical treatments for children with so much risk of permanent damage."
Because you people pick and choose when convenient as to how old a "child" is. When it comes to tax dollars, driving, and criminal consequences, a teenager is an adult all the fucking way and treated like one. Hell, when a teenager gets knocked up, suddenly they're an adult to you people.
But when they want to make a fucking choice for themselves you don't like, suddenly they're children again and incapable of deciding for themselves. Pick One.
The choice doesn't impact You, the subject probably isn't interested in having kids At All (The side-effects of medical procedures are explained to patients, They Know!), and there's endless ways in which they can obtain a kid to raise courtesy of all the children and orphans we Don't raise in this country.
So... Why do you give a shit?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MandoRick1978 "Good point. Careful, you are on a slippery slope. Logic and reasoning is how I found my way to the right, and away from the left. I know that sounds insane at first, but then I took along hard look at my own party, the left, and I did not like what I was seeing at all. Noting but division and stupidity. Sorry, that is the way I felt. And purple hair, and screaming children. Not something I wanted to associate with anymore."
Lol, but you were a leftist. Yet apparently hate the Left so much that you flipped on every economic and ideological position you had to become a Republican because of "division and stupidity."
You joined the most divisive, hostile, and stupid group of people in the country because you couldn't tolerate "division and stupidity?"
Sure you did. And I'm Karl Marx.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@waltergrace565 Well hat's an incredibly myopic and juvenile assessment.
I have no choice but to live with the system as it exists, rebel, or leave. I literally don't Get to choose anything else, I have no power to change this system or demand otherwise besides refusing to support it with my vote or money. I'm not "fine" with any of this, no one asked me what I wanted the system to be, I'm just stuck dealing with the mechanics of the pile of bullshit forced on me by the government. Just like You.
If you got "I'm fine with the current system" from what I wrote, you're a goddamned child. If I had my way I'd fire every nuke at the exact location of every US political leader and finally rid the planet of this mongrel nation.
But until I get my wish or America dies, that's all I get to do: Vote, don't vote, rebel, or leave. Not sure why you think "how I feel" about the system means a fucking thing here.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gligarguy4010 "Possibly the weirdest reply here, not only because he didn't address my comment all in any substantial way, but also he bolded what is clearly meant to be an action (guy, this ain't Reddit, asterisks don't signify actions on Youtube)"
Don't need to, your comments are all summarized as "Nuh Uh! We're not like MAGA at all! Nuh Uh!"
"Checking out this dude's recent comment history on this site, though, he seems to be a total weirdo to everyone, including in other Youtubers' comment sections. "
XD, dude's calling me a weirdo now. Whose not addressing anything now my BlueMAGA sewergoblin?
"(And yes folks at home reading this, he has on multiple instances done this strange bolding actions thing)"
Wow your entire retort was literally just "You're weird. This is weird, hey everyone this guy's weird, stop being so weird!"
Are you 12?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@colbybrown1360 We spend more in total, but Not on individual kids. Other nations have smaller class sizes, well-paid and motivated teachers, and actually bother to figure out what the students excel at or are passionate about in order to guide them towards where their talents would be most valuable.
America, meanwhile, shoves 30-40 kids into the same class with one exceedingly underpaid teacher whose expected to just shove standardized tests down their throats. Not to encourage growth or learning, but because we base school funding off standardized tests that are Verifiably next to useless at determining what a student does or doesn't actually know.
Our system as it stands has no interest in actually making competent human beings and we suffer for it.
Also, incentive (That's the word you're looking for, by the way) is stupid easy: Literally all you've got to do is make school less of a colossal waste of time for Americans. German schools actually give a shit. French schools actually give a shit. But here in America the only thing public school exists to do is break ambition and create mindless cogs.
$15k per student is pocket change for the richest nation on Earth. If America is losing to anyone at anything, it should be ashamed of itself for being incompetent and losing despite having all possible resources to succeed. Yet only in America is the response to failure just disregarding the results. America's losing to most European nations in education? Psh, fuck it, America will just declare itself the smartest anyway and declare any studies that say otherwise "Communist Propaganda from Russian Bots."
We are Proud of how anti-intellectual we are.
1
-
@colbybrown1360 ...That's kind of the inherent issue here though: 1: Private schools are not standardized and aren't subject to even the most basic of quality controls and are effectively scams bilking you out of excessive amounts of money (That 15k ain't gonna cover shit at your average private school in America) for an education you could've gotten just as easily anywhere else (You're not paying for the education, you're paying for the prestige of a certain school's name on your record). And 2: Homeschooling is even Less quality-controlled and verifiably does not produce quality results in the majority of situations because, surprise surprise, teaching is actually really hard and the overwhelming majority of parents, Including the homeschoolers, aren't even remotely qualified to have an opinion on the subject to begin with.
If you're giving me the options between "Fix the standardized system" and "Give private schools and homeschoolers card blanche to take their place", then no, I'm gonna have to pick the option with less incompetent unqualified idiots and scammers. The public school system just needs restructuring, and I'd wager that could be done wayyyy before you'll ever convince some dumbshit Karen parent that their anti-vax, science denying, completely unreasearched and unsourced "lesson plan" is asinine.
1
-
@colbybrown1360 I can't really find any data that backs that claim up. I'm not saying "Standardize everything", I'm saying you need Some set of standards. Like even if a kid isn't a math wiz you Still need the basics of math: which most Americans are not qualified on, meaning most parents aren't either. I'm saying that homeschooling, unless your parent is incidentally a qualified educator, is largely a waste of time because it's just the blind leading the blind. An incompetent student from before isn't going to make a good teacher now when they still don't know basic things.
Plus again, Most homeschooling runs completely contrary to understood science, which these people are Definitely unqualified to teach in opposition to. That's kind of the main bonus of public school, unless a teacher plans on being fired it's a piss-poor idea for them to contradict the people who Actually know what they're talking about when it comes to publicly sensitive topics like stem cells, or evolution, or technological progress, or hell something as simple as "The Earth is not flat". Homeschooling and private schools, however, are under zero obligation to tell you the truth or give you actual facts. They can just feed you their own opinion without recourse or a single bit of proof and you're just expected to accept it unquestioningly because either A: it's your parent, or B: Your parent paid a Loooot of money for you to go to that private Young Earth Christian school expressly to indoctrinate you to a religious mindset instead of actually Teaching you.
Standardization in this case simply means "Some standard of quality control."
1
-
1
-
1
-
@colbybrown1360 I do. Admittedly a huge portion of our disagreements is probably more of a philosophical difference of opinion than anything.
I'm definitely more on team pragmatism than others, I admittedly do not share any particular reverence for arbitrary notions of freedom and liberty like my fellow Americans (Not to say that I don't believe in those concepts, I just dislike nebulous and vague language, and the American notion of freedom has so many contradictory and varied definitions based on the person that the words functionally have no meaning anymore). I'm partial to any plan that has data which can be verified, quantified, and proven.
I'm also a massive logistics and infrastructure nut based on my specific work experience. Streamlining, correcting, and improving efficiency within logistical systems was pretty much my whole thing for years.
So to me it kind of runs contrary to what I'm specifically trained to focus on and do to... Effectively abandon a system instead of fixing it. And homeschooling/private schools drive me personally insane because, while there's plenty who are perfectly qualified and reputable teachers, has entirely too many scammers and rogue actors to be quality-controlled without forcing them to adhere to standards. Which is difficult to do in this country due to how... highly politicized so many things are.
I don't oppose the concept of homeschooling or private education in and of itself, I just dislike that there's only so much that can be currently done about the bad faith members of those groups without... Y'know, increased systemic oversight, which would probably cause these same people to protest and push back, regardless of the logic behind it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@playea123 "so if I am wrong on the same spectrum but the other side, that means Kyle isnt? "
Not what I said, and nowhere in my comment do I imply that.
What I DID say was that, if Kyle can be so easily dismissed with nothing but "he doesn't have enough information to KNOW that", then your assessment is equally dismissed because, by your own standard, you can't possibly know the future, actively just made that entire assessment up of future events, and your opinion as such is disregarded as useless.
Like maybe I'm just slow here, how's about you show me what you're talking about. Like list out ONE of Kyle's arguments you specifically took issue with in this video, list YOUR counter-argument, just so I can actually Look at the difference as you tell me the difference.
Because I have no idea if you're right or wrong, you didn't actually SAY anything besides an unfounded statement you can't possibly verify as it was a prediction of a hypothetical future.
I just want to know what a Non-bullshit argument looks like by your standard, because as I'm reading it your last comment didn't even meet the standard you demanded of Kyle to be taken seriously.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tyhammel3448 "I disagree with that stipulation. He’s guaranteed to lose 25% if he signs that contract with his history of being demonetized constantly"
75% of 50 million is still 37.5 million, so... Big deal?
"Also, it would limit what he could say on the big tech platforms."
Pretty sure getting demonetized/banned constantly does so more, but continue pretending like a billionaire dick-rider's set back by demonetization.
"Also, that 50 million is not all going into Crowders bank. He’s gotta use that for production and to pay the employees."
Pfff, so less than 1 million of the total gone for those costs and Crowder pockets the remaining 36 million. How expensive do you think "Sitting in a Youtube video" is, exactly? Spoiler alert: Not 50 million's worth at all.
" For four years, that’s not enough. Crowder is worth much more than that."
Wow, imagine how divorced from reality you have to be where 50 million dollars over 4 years isn't enough money to pay a small staff to support you bloviating in front of a camera.
Most people on YT with success can do it for under 100 grand a year, Crowder must SUCK at budgeting.
"Crowder is better of starting his own subscription based show independently. He’d make a killing with such a loyal fan base."
Hope so, cuz now he doesn't get a choice. Now everyone but loyal dickriders like yourself know he's utterly full of shit and a spoiled rich brat.
"I wish them both the best, I like DW and Crowder."
...Jesus fucking Christ you don't even have to try on the Right. Built-in audience of willing dipshits.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Old_School_293 "First, Ben pointed out that a parent not feeding their child due to negligence or poverty is a child endangerment situation and authorities do need to be called"
"Being Poor" is now child endangerment, huh?
"If it's negligence, the child needs to be taken, if it's poverty the child either needs to be taken or the parent needs to correct their actions."
So the solution either way is "separate families and spend a lot of money to do it."
"I'm not a fan of CPS, but we all agree they do a lot of good work actually protecting children. Suddenly Kyle is not a fan of CPS? Wow."
BEING POOR IS NOT CHILD ENDANGERMENT YOU ASS!
"And even if they do, the problem of insentives is an issue. You'll be insentivizing children to see government as their caretaker."
Ohhhh, so we're starving the kids to teach them a lesson?
Nice to know you'd rather those kids know that the adults in their life give more of a damn about their wallet than children Not Starving.
" This could result in many more children growing up and living off the government."
Hey, dipshit, if you make CPS take the children from poor people, guess whose gonna be their parent now? Guess who they're gonna be living off?
Here's a hint, you just said you Don't want them learning this lesson.
"Which will expand the number and percentage of children who aren't fed or cared for by their parents, their true caretakers."
Why do you care? You don't want to feed any of them.
"It will expand and extend poverty for people, making it multi-generational. Don't believe me, look at many black communities. Which, due to the "War on Poverty" have been in poverty for many generations."
And yet you people also don't want to raise wages and also don't want any support whatsoever for poor people to change their situation because "Socialism".
You already didn't give a damn about the multi-generational poverty you already have, but I'm supposed to believe you're worried about future poverty?
"What we don't need to do is make poverty comfortable for people. That only serves the Democrat Party's electoral interests since they've always depended on the uneducated and poor for the majority of their votes."
Why not? Why does poverty have to be a position of abuse and suffering? What are you getting out of abusing people who already need to slave away just to Not Starve?
Does their suffering net you something? Because I'm not seeing an actual argument besides "I don't want to." Just some vague ideological BS.
I don't care about your parties, I don't care about your government, there is NO EXCUSE to leave a child hungry, and a culture and community and government who'd sit idly by while kids go hungry to "teach them not to rely on the government" is a government unfit to exist!
If you can't rely on your government then why the hell do you Have one?!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Hipfireturtle "nobody is saying you have to change what you say, I just pointed out that in the society we live in with the contest that exists around this issue, you’re arguably reinforcing shitty bigoted arguments against gay people whether you mean to or not"
So I'm free to use the term... But I'm a total piece of shit reinforcing bigotry if I do.
"when you describe being gay or gay folks as “abnormal."
Guess I'm a self-hating gay man then.
"You can lament this as much as you want, call it “ruining” that language has evolved in this way, but it doesn’t change what’s happening, does it?"
So yes, the rest of us have to adjust because Americans feel weird about words.
"Whether we like it or not there are specifically “icky vibes” when it comes to calling being gay “abnormal,” because the people who say this overwhelmingly really mean “unnatural,” “not intended,” etc."
Thanks for the history lesson on the origins of "being called a freak", really needed that.
"because the people who say this overwhelmingly really mean “unnatural,” “not intended,” etc."
Guilt by association, got it.
"etc. it’s up to you if you want to use their same rhetoric, I just don’t know why you would want to especially when the large majority of gay people in my experiences don’t like being referred to this way. That’s just my 2c tho"
Because gay people aren't a fucking monolith.
Tell you what, if one of my fellows takes issue with my blunt speech patterns, they are perfectly free to bring it up to me and I will adjust.
But fuck you and fuck your moralizing self-righteous bullshit presiding as judge over everyone who uses a word You "find icky."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ckq "It kinda sucks that I'm in such a small minority for having views that are very common sense imho."
Black/White absolutism is not "common sense" unless you're a child.
"what's the difference between abortion in the first trimester, third trimester and abandoning a newborn?"
One's a mindless clump of cells, the 2nd is close enough to being born that pretty much no one has an abortion there at all unless the fetus is already dead/going to kill the mother, and the third is a living sapient being.
If you don't see obvious differences then I'm pretty sure you're insane.
"All result in death 80 years too soon, decreasing human life expectancy in the US by 14 years (for reference climate change is ~3 years, homicide is ~0.3 years)"
No it doesn't, we don't factor zygotes/fetuses into those numbers, Citation fucking needed.
"You can argue for abortion based on bodily autonomy, but you can't deny the huge loss of life."
OMFG so fucking what? Cancer is life, the bacteria on your kitchen counter is life, a wad of jizz in a napkin is life "It's a life" is a BS standard and you, person who eats Plants, are still ending life every second of every day in some format or another by Existing.
You know goddamned well there's a line between "Living" and "Person" you dishonest hack. Unless you want to accuse everyone who cleans their counters or watches porn of committing repeated mass-slaughters just by tidying up or whacking it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RobertWGreaves Too bad. The Constitution doesn't operate off Your interpretation. It operates off the Supreme Courts.
We live in a Common Law system of governance. For every constitutional amendment there are several extra bylaws and precedents that have been established over the years as part of the Amendment.
The Federal Government and the State are not permitted to use any public funding in service to or opposition against any religion. Someone could Gift them a nativity, but it Can't be presented on Government Property as that is viewed as official endorsement. And per the rules, every government employee, while in their position, is a direct representative of the government. Police, judges, accountants, DoD, if you work for the government you are, by definition, an extension of the US government's will. As such you are expected to abide by the same regulations and standards. Hence why that Kim Davis woman got thrown out for refusing to validate a gay marriage based on her religion. That's too bad, you're a government employee, you Do Your Job or you find another one.
The only options you have without violating the 1st Amendment are either A: No religious displays or endorsements, B: Allow Any and All religions that wish to do so have one there, or C: Do it at your own damn house because the Government is not authorized to participate in this in any official capacity.
You are either in compliance as a government entity or you are violating the law.
Citizens are free to express and endorse/oppose any religion they wish, the Government is not.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thegheymantis8702 There's actually a simple reason for this: Reasonable Conservatives are kind of "live and let live" for the most part. They don't really make a fuss, they abide by status quo, they're generally just fairly polite neighbors.
..Reasonable Conservatives, however, tend to not be in the media. And I'm not just talking Left-ish outlets who hype up how awful Conservatives are to a hyperbolic degree, I mean also that the Conservatives in the Rightwing media are also extremely poorly representative of mainline conservatives. They're all hateful shitstains who are profiting off fueling the culture war and exploiting people's fears for profit. That's the breed Conservatives most Americans tend to see in positions of power, so generally speaking when they're talking about "conservatives", they're talking about scumbags like Carlson, Shapiro, Alex Jones and Trump. Not folks like Gary Johnson.
And the same thing doesn't really work in reverse. CNN and MSNBC view Liberals as Party traitors and shit on us at every opportunity to blame us for why they're incompetent and can't seem to do anything productive. Meanwhile, Fox is usually Very careful to not shit on their more reasonable base, so the Left just flat out never Sees this level of conflict among Republicans.
It's hard for normal people to not assume everyone in a group thinks like the worst of them when all they See is the worst of them, with next to no challenge coming from others in the same camp.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PvmCurtis I dunno, you tell me. Because I keep Hearing that "Democrats are better", but at this point in time I'm not seeing much of a difference outside of social BS.
Democrats correctly called Trump's internment camps on the border inhumane and a human rights violation. I agree.
However, Dems failed to mention that Obama, Not Trump, Built those facilities, this was Exactly what they always existed to do, and once Biden was put in, all that happened was they changed the terminology used and went right on back to doing Trump shit with those camps. Opposed Trump as a warmonger, only to up the ante by just blockading a country and starving them all to death with sanctions. Better?
They condemned Trump's psychotic abuse of the American citizenry, but the second they're in power, not only do they solve exactly None of Trump's shitty policies, we got Nancy Pelosi and Manchin on TV arguing for why they Should be allowed to engage in insider trading and corrupt lobbying.
Like seriously, I want to know, on what subjects are Democrats NOT like Republicans? Like I really want to know what I'm getting that's an objective improvement.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@5flapjacks468 Okay. So I understand the general concept at least.
...Seems rather convenient that I only find out whether or not this is true AFTER I'm incapable of strangling the pastor if they lied to me.
Like I'm not disparaging your faith, I promise, for all I know that is true exactly as you stated.
...But like doesn't that seem like a pretty obvious sign of BS if you're anyone except a Christian? Like... I dunno, try and think like me for a second, some Average Joe with no way of verifying anything you're claiming, and the main thing I'm going off of is...
...Well, the summary of your position as I summarized it in my last comment.
Like look it over, think like someone whose never ever heard the voice of your God (to their knowledge, anyway, I know it's part of Christianity that God is with all of us and all that, but if they don't know that's the case then it amounts to the same thing): Where would you personally stop on that list and say "Hold tf up, that sounds sketchy"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Cowz19999 "You wanted people to get violent? Did it ever occur to your smooth brain that the majority of people wanted order rather than violence? Of course it didn't."
No, but if I'm supposed to view you as a violent militant threat, you kind of have to be violent on some level yourself. Any idiot can call themselves Billy Badass by just showing up, doesn't mean they're actually Billy Badass. Anyone can talk a big game, but unless you Do something substantial that's all it amounts to: Big Talk from a pissant who can't back it up.
Nice holier-than-thou though, totally doesn't make you look like a petty dishonest turd when you tell me how I think.
"Spoken like a true thug who doesn't know how to enact change. Low IQ."
When the hell did change enter this discussion? One topic at a time Duce, you're starting to drift.
No, spoken like someone who knows what a military threat is. You know what Isn't a military threat? Someone sitting on their ass, whinging out a position no one likes or respects on any relevant statistical amount, being listened to by idiots that have proven Repeatedly that they can't maintain any form of organization or cohesion for longer than five minutes before infighting, who make more enemies every time they open their mouth, persuade no one to support them who didn't already, and who are vastly outnumbered and reviled even within their own Party, nevermind the rest of us.
If you fear this little trog then you clearly don't think much of your countrymen's ability to punch a skinny little Nazi in the dick.
Frankly I think you're just a coward an insulting the rest of us' intelligence for taking this goblin seriously as a threat. Let me know when a Real Nazi starts goose-stepping and then I'll be worried.
If it's this maggot though then bitch please. He'd get shivved in five minutes and dumped unceremoniously in the nearest dumpster in any city in this Union the moment he started throwing hands.
If you think the characterization of you is unfair, too bad. You already demonstrated in your last comment that you have zero issue making baseless assertions as to the thought processes of strangers, fair's fair dickbiscuit. At least I didn't outright dictate to you that you're a stupid ignorant violence-hungry mongoloid.
If anything it seems like you want this man to be a bigger threat to justify your own fearmongering. Sorry, not scared of someone like him. You're just ennobling this pathetic wretch by giving him what he wants.
He Wants you to see him as a threat sooooo bad. It's just downright cute how badly he wants to be Seen as a threat.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@albertcovington9942 They're pointing out that you have no data backing that up, no evidence that it's even statistically likely to happen, the math doesn't even add up, yet you're just declaring it factual.
And you're ignoring the one major Reason why it would fail in your scenario: Because the Corporation decided to be massive cunts and refused to pay their workers a fair wage. Are you gonna actually sit here and tell me a Trillionaire, an honest to God Trillionaire, who is only beaten in terms of individual wealth by the Federal Government Itself, can't afford to pay a livable wage and reasonable working conditions?
Explain to me how the business of Amazon fails from treating their workers like actual people that doesn't hinge entirely on Bezos being a massively greedy shithead who'd rather watch people's lives struggle and fail to achieve anything rather than pay them properly?
Why do the massively wealthy never seem to have enough money for basic human decency, but their income to throw at lobbyists for bailouts, tax loopholes, and undermining workers rights legally is bottomless? Why is there endless reserves of cash for fucking people over, but the wallet's strapped the second it's to Help someone?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@inteallsviktigt "Doxxing is always about revealing publicly available information. Personal information includes you location. "
No, doxxing is about revealing PRIVATE information you dunce. Your jet is not You. Every private aircraft is tracked. Don't like it, don't own one, this has literally been how it always worked.
"Doxxing allows people to connect you online person to your real life person. And act upon it. "
Thanks for the irrelevant explanation. Elon Musk is a known public figure whose the head of a major corporate entity whose constantly online. Can't dox someone on information they've shared themselves to the public.
Like as an example, my name is Alexander Hale. There, that's a thing you know now. If you tell people "Hey, this guy Patchwurk's actually named Alexander Hale", that wouldn't be doxxing because I literally Told you what my name was in a public forum for all to see.
"Or would you say if I’m posting online what your real name is, where you live and updates your exact location as you move around publicly etc isn’t doxxing?"
My name isn't public knowledge (Until this comment), Musks is and has been by his own hand.
No one posted Elon's home address so not sure why you're bringing it up
And no, the location published was the ALREADY PUBLIC information of where his JET is. Last I checked a jet isn't a human being and by virtue of being a jet is already publicly tracked and known position-wise at all times.
Stop adding on other shit that never happened. If you need to lie this much to have a point, you have no point.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"I’m a bit sad that so many on here like Kyle are smug and dismissive of spirituality."
Why?
"You don’t believe there’s anything else beyond this world?"
Nah, the universe is right there. Look up, there's obviously quite a lot of shit beyond this world.
"We live in chaos then die?"
I mean you live and die, seems a bit odd to call it chaos when it's very clearly operates by rules like physics. Chaos doesn't usually imply predictable patterns.
"I can’t claim to know the answers but I’ve always had a strange sense there is more than what meets the eye."
Yeah, that's called self-interest. You're an animal like the rest, you want to live and value living, like the rest. However since you're a Smart animal, you can rationalize your base survival instincts in a way most animals can't. As such you come up with other justifications to explain why you're so invested in the biological impulse of "Surviving."
So humans invent a myriad of notions for themselves that make us out to be special, unique, divinely ordained, Better than other things in order to provide that motivation.
Mix that need to feel valuable with natural human curiosity and sensory observation and you get some interesting ideas. Some of which might actually turn out to be true, but just Asserting that this supernatural shit exists without anything to back it up besides "just a feeling" isn't evidence, it's just the typical human need to feel special and our primordial fear of death rearing it's head.
Why do you think every religion has an afterlife? Because the human animal Fears the end and Needs to be reassured with the idea that they'll still exist even after death. Death is preferable to us than "Ending", so we imagine any number of scenarios in our mythology to avoid the thought of "Ending" entirely.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chris4231 Oh my God, stop deflecting.
If Libertarians are so good at political organizing, then why does No One view you as a political threat?
This is just facts dude, you guys are Good at rallying up support.... For all of five seconds. You rallied around Ron Paul, only to turn on eachother the moment talk of policy came up. Suddenly all the Libertarians are like "Wait, who are any of you to legislate things on me?" because, surprise surprise, Ron Paul the Politician had some political legislation in mind.
Then you rallied around that JoJo woman, only for the same pattern to repeat when she started talking policy. You built up a critical mass of people who COULD have posed a political force if directed, then pissed it all away with infighting before that leverage could ever be used.
You can talk all you want about Dems and Reps being cults, but y'know what the cults can do you guys apparently Can't?
Be a political threat.
Now do you want to keep jerking yourself off about how much of a "freethinker" you are while continuously losing to everyone even slightly more organized than you, or do Libertarians want to WIN something at some point?
Prove you're a viable Party on some level, THEN people will start following you. But no one's going to take the side of a group with no gameplan or capacity to cooperate with anyone.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chris4231 "But WHY NOT? You can't at the same time believe that social security is better done by the government but somehow smartphones aren't. Where do you draw the line?"
Personally? Things I'd qualify as luxuries. If a certain resource is absolutely necessary for human life or basic function in the society in which they live, then sure, I'd prefer it to be publicly-owned since we all need it/use it.
Now maybe our collective standards of what that entails changes in the future and cellphones get added to that list, but at present I think we can all agree that a cell phone isn't exactly a necessity. Far as I'm concerned capitalism's fair enough with non-essentials.
"What about lawyers? Expensive af, why not socialize it?"
Good point, why Not? Seriously asking, Why is it a positive thing to rope financial incentive into our justice system at all? Private interests shouldn't be intertwined with public affairs, and the judicial system is about as public as it gets.
"What about Apple? Insanely expensive, huge corporation, I don't want some random low quality phone, I want Apple, but the damn corporate greed. Socialize it."
...Or just regulate them a bit better. Greed and ambition in business is perfectly fine as long as it's not getting to the level of human rights violations and dystopian income inequality.
"You can always ask for more. If your argument is too expensive so socialize then you have to be a commie to make it logically consistent."
Only if my brain functions in black and white extremes. I have to honestly ask, are you incapable of making a necessity value judgement between something like "Food", a thing humans need in order to not die, and "A PC", a thing that's mostly a fun little luxury?
Food, Water, Shelter, Healthcare, Education, this shit pretty much everyone in society needs in one form or another in order to have any sort of life in this society. If our economic prosperity reaches a point where it can comfortably sustain more things less necessary for humans, then I suppose that's a discussion that generation will have to figure out their damn selves.
But a gaming PC and not starving to death are not equatable costs dude, and I feel like you're pretending to not get that. If so, Why?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chris4231 "That's not true. Companies care deeply about their brand because in a competitive market people can very easily just for example stop buying Nestle water and choose any of 100 other brands. "
They care about what makes the most profit. As long as "providing a good product" is what that takes, companies will comply.
But look at EA, Ubisoft, Microsoft, Apple, pretty much every major retail outlet, Blackrock, the MIC, and every fastfood outlet for what companies start becoming the moment "Just stealing the money" becomes easier.
Companies at their core have one function and one function only in America: To keep costs low and profits high. I'm sure if they could be persuaded that perfectly legitimate business was the optimal profit plan, I'm sure they'd do it. But fraud kind of has a maximized Cost/Profit ratio. And since our system allows for legalized fraud, guess what corporations go with every single time they're allowed?
"But that's still not answering the question. You still haven't explained how you're in the middle. "
You ask me my positions, I answered. I never claimed to be "in the middle", I'm not a fucking moderate. I said I'm not a communist.
"Does the government produce a better quality and cheaper product? If you believe so then why are you not a commie?"
Why are you so fucking adamant to shove me in the commie box?
You know what I'm hearing? "Why aren't you this thing I can easily demonize all the way? Fit into my label goddamn it!"
I'm a fucking individual human being, I speak for no one but myself, stop whining because I don't fit into your painfully narrow viewpoint of politics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ammarkhalid874 The same way we're currently doing with videogames.
I'm serious, you just need One major nation to flip, and the dominos start rolling.
At present, America is pretty much the only first world nation where "Games as a Service" isn't classified as fraud, despite fitting the literaly textbook definition of it in most cases (It's only Not classified as fraud because the American lawmakers that wrote the original consumer rights laws existed Prior to the age of digital goods, and as such the games industry has a loophole. Technically an American software company Can't legally defraud you in America because the laws didn't take Digital (i.e. non-physical) goods into account. If a car dealership destroys your car after the point of sale, that's destruction of your property and blanket fraud, because they stole functionality away from a product you legally Bought and have the rights to use. But if a Videogame dev kills your game after taking your money, even if the game shuts down and dies literally the day after you bought it, it's Not fraud because the law doesn't Explicitly state that Digital goods being stolen back post-sale is fraudulent).
Anywho, since trying to make America see reason didn't work, France started suing Ubisoft and Valve. Because they were doing business in France, where the definition of an "economic good" includes digital goods, and as such makes Ubi and Valve guilty of fraud in France.
THen other nations flipped, and as you've probably noticed in recent years the games industry is kind of eating itself alive right now. Because America's the only FWN left where they can nakedly ignore the law regarding fraudulent business practices without punishment.
Cultural sensibilities cross borders more and more often in the modern age. If one culture flips on some blanket bullshit, the others start flipping. Basically it's "You do things above the table or you don't do business anywhere but underdeveloped nations with no regulations. I'm sure Somalia buys a lot of videogames."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dylanwhite8299 Nope, it's just gone. Oh well. I don't have an alternative. I do not see a single avenue that gets me what I want through elections or legislation. Not anymore.
Like do you realize how long this bullshit lie's been going on for? Clinton promised the moon, we got nothing but Bush next. Obama promised "Hope and Change", but cowtowed to the Republicans at every turn even when he had the supermajority and straight up Championed NSA spying on citizens when he ran on the idea of it as an obvious 4th Amendment violator.
Then the actually pertinent Clinton promised nothing but status quo and "Fear Trump." And we got Trump anyway because turns out "Having no platform at all besides "Stop the other guy" is a dumbassed idea.
Biden himself only won BECAUSE people hated Trump and he even almost lost That because he's that fucking incompetent. Seriously, Trump sucks every flavor of dick imaginable, but Biden sucked so hard that COVID was tantamount to a miracle from God for the DNC, because you guys only just beat Trump on that point almost exclusively.
....And then did absolutely jack shit but whine about Trump and be Manchin's little bitch for two years.
....So you tell me, exactly how many times does this cycle need to repeat before you realize our government is Forcing us to the right as a totality? Democrats Don't fix anything anymore, they only exist to keep the ratchet from moving further Left and nothing more.
Dems do nothing, Republicans enact Republican laws. Dems do more nothing, Reps add more laws.
Unless you people are willing to get violent there IS NO alternative from within the system's rules. Stop pretending we aren't past the point when we all KNOW this system is fucked. If you don't do something, your future is and only Will be Republican.
Because the Democrats want that too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@migrantson "I mean, I am sure you have access to an internet search engine- but sure!...I'll help you out grandma-ma! "
Wow, how gracious of you to put forth any fucking effort at all to prove your position. Truly you are a benevolent saint. -_-
Well hey, you're not wrong. Among Republicans he still holds 70% favor.
Well shit, I'll eat me some crow, you are right.
...However, let me just point out that your same study also says that the number of Registered Voters period who have any sort of favor for Trump is.... Wait for it.... 31% of them. Pretty much exclusively those Republicans and fuck all else.
So hey, I really hope you people choose Trump.
Because you'd be just handing the victory to the Democrats.
I will give credit where it's due though, you provided evidence that could be verified, and I commend you for that. Seriously, respect for that much.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@xSayPleasex Stopped the Nazis? No, Russia stopped the Nazis. America was predominantly involved in fighting the Japanese, the Soviet Union were the ones that actually brought down the Nazis.
Went to the Moon? Jesus, going that far back just to find a brag?
Lead the world in humanitarian aid? Oh yeah, the Middle East REALLY appreciates America's helpful aid in blowing up hospitals and slaughtering civilians.
Create new medicines, then charge people so much for them that they might as well have just died, since their life is one of perpetual debt now, because America has no problem exploiting the dying for every cent they've got.
Olympic wins? Who gives a shit? The Olympics provides fuck all in terms of actual value whether you win or lose, its means absolutely nothing. America could lose every single event and no one but America would give a shit.
Freedom? Lol, Bullshit. "Freedom" is a nebulous buzzword that means absolutely nothing without context. What freedoms do you have that are better than Europe in any respect? I'd rather have the freedom of reliable healthcare, my taxes actually doing something for me as a citizen, actual rights as a consumer and worker, and hey, all of this Without having to be part of the wealthy elite, the Only class of person America gives a fuck about. America has the largest percentage of prisoners per capita of any first world nation, most of whom are only there for drug use. Y'know, something a Free Society shouldn't have a single issue with, but apparently your notion of freedom requires throwing anyone in prison who does something with their own bodies you don't like. How delightful!
Christ, you guys didn't even allow gay people the freedom to marry who they liked until recently, and you Still have people in politics actively trying to rip rights away from them even now.
Tell me, what does Freedom even mean to you? Because apparently it flies in the face of what I'd call freedom. Hence why it's a bullshit claim to make: Freedom means whatever the hell the speaker Says it means, it means nothing on its own.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mhmhm5337 Erm... Yes, actually, I would still call us worse in this situation. For one teeny tiny but ever so important reason:
America's one of the two major reason the Middle East Is the way it is. Back during the Cold War, prior to the rise of Islamic extremism, the Middle East was more democratic.
Not some perfect paradise by any stretch, but America wasn't doing so hot during the 60's-70's either. They were better than they are now at least. But then the US and Soviets started fighting proxy wars all over their shit for resources and territory. We, the USA, actively assassinated political leaders, staged coups, funded rebellions and terrorist groups, and actively put Dictators in place that offered us better trade deals. Those religious fundamentalist tyrants that drove the region into chaos? All of them were on the US payroll at one time or another or only ended up in power BECAUSE of our interference and that of the Soviet Union.
We took all the progress they had made and burned it to the ground for the sin of "not doing what America wanted when America demanded it." America is only the "Land of the Free" if you're a rich citizen. If you're literally anyone else, a normal citizen or a foreigner, you're only options are to submit to power or be crushed underneath it.
On top of that, most of the intel the rest of the UN operates off when it comes to the Middle East? It's coming from the US! And as got declassified and rooted out over the last couple years, all the impetus for wars that we used in regards to the Middle East, EXCEPT 9/11, were complete absolute bullshit and lies. And even 9/11 still resulted in us lying our asses off about Which country was to blame so we wouldn't jeopardize our trade relations with Saudi Arabia.
The UN has been taking the majority of it's facts about the Middle East from the USA. I.e. the war-profiteer nation that only makes more money IF there's more wars to get involved in, and which had an active historical hand in driving the Middle East under for its own benefit for the past several decades until now, and which in recent years actively rejected the UN's power to even question the legality of US actions on the bone-basic grounds of "You and what military?"
Like you were in the Middle East cleaning up a massive mess the USA caused. And as long as we're involved, the problem won't be fixed. Because we're a parasite nation that's economy is actively Built On privatized monopolization of human suffering. Illegal profit wars, for-profit prison systems, no price negotiation for life-saving medication, and legally-sanctioned exploitation of foreign slavery are "good business" here, what makes you think America has ANY incentive to actually Help the Middle East?
Peace in the Middle East means less money for corpses. Dude, America FUNDS 73% of the world's dictatorships actively as trade partners, most of the Mid-East regimes are on the same list after We supported their creation. The chaos in the Middle East is just a feature: More havoc, more wars, more money for American business.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Inside Voice Well hey, if you'd actually like to clarify what you mean with something substantive, I'll gladly correct myself. But you've literally been doing nothing for the past 24 hours except NOT saying anything besides "It's Leftist, because it's Leftist, because it's Leftist." What's there to refute, I can't argue against Nothing.
So what am I supposed to do, just keep blindly guessing at what your irrefutable point is? You've had ample opportunity to say something substantive, back up your points, or hell even Have a goddamned point besides "It's Leftist because I said so", yet here we are.
So yes, I'm getting grumpy and snotty and mean to you, because it just clicked for me that I've talked to you on and off for 24 hours and you have done jack shit but declare your position over and over and berate me for not just saying "Shit you right!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Walter's a spambot account whose actually a MAGA spammer.
Best to just ignore him, his only responses are quite literally "Kyle is a Grifter", "Everything Kyle says is wrong because I said so" "Haha", "Hilarious", "What?
and "DEMINEM!"
You will never get a real answer out of him because he's not a real person. Seriously, go back to every single Kyle video in the last week, month, hell year and Walter's on every single one, his script never deviating from what I said above.
Either he's a bot or this is a man who literally spends their every waking moment sitting in front of their computer, waiting for Kyle to post, JUST to be among the first there to spam the same old shit on every video without deviation. @bosmith1820
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thomasmann4536 "The first part is debatable, you can simply include the word "human" in the definition of subjective and you're done."
No, the definition of "a subject" doesn't include a "except God" clause.
"The latter is in contradiction to omnipotence."
No it doesn't. Nowhere in the definition of the phrase "All-Powerful" does it imply your viewpoint is "Objective."
Could be rendered so, but you're adding your own presumptions when "Omnipotent" is a power-level judgement, not an "Official source of morality" judgement.
"You can't try and disprove something by ignoring one of its fundamental qualities."
Can't disprove the "fundamental qualities" of a being that's never been proven to exist in the first place, let alone what "fundamental qualities" they possess or don't. Why are you talking as if you Know what God's D&D stat-block is?
"If someone or something is all knowing and eternal, then by definition, they have already thought of the best possible choices, values and actions and therefore their opinions would never change, thus they would have no whims or change of heart."
New Testament Exists
Good point! Thanks for disproving the Abrahamic God by your own logic. XD
"Thus it would be as if anything decided upon by this being - including morality - was objective."
No, that's called "Might Makes Right", which in addition to being the same logic of bullies is also Subjective.
"Because I Said So" is not an objective reason for shit.
1
-
@thomasmann4536 "according to the oxford dictionary, a subject is a person or a thing being discussed. That would make rocks subjects as well. Do you really want to play semantic games?"
Well since you're already Special Pleading for God to escape basic definitions, yes I very much would.
"We colloquially accept that "subjective" refers to humans only."
No we don't, and no it isn't. Stop changing definitions to be more convenient for your narrative.
"I see you don't know much about mathematics then, because as a mathematician I can assure you that we can and do disprove things of theoretical concepts that have not been proven to exist."
And yet you can't do so for God. Nice jerking yourself off for having a degree, but someone with an Actual degree would know to shut their fucking mouth about speaking as an authority on subjects they lack a degree in.
"omnipotent and especially omniscient might be "power level" judgements, but especially the latter quality entails the knowledge of a truth if such truth exists."
Yet another thing you'll never demonstrate knowing on any level warranting your certainty on this topic.
"What you said makes no sense because if it was proven to exist, it could not be disproven and vice versa."
Oh look, Mr. Math degree doesn't know what "falsifiable" as a term is referring to.
"You have things confused here. The New Testament is by no means disproving Christianity simply because it contradicts the Old testament on some occasions."
Objectively Perfect beings don't contradict themselves. Your holy books contradict.
"By the way, thanks for showing us how little you know about religion! Because there is no such thing as "the Abrahamic God". The Gods of Judaism, Christianity and Islam differ quite substantially from each other."
No they don't, and thanks for airing out your rampant unfamiliarity with your own cultural terms you dipshit. Feel free to air out a single meaningful difference if you think otherwise, I didn't invent the term "Abrahamic" and think they're all equally made-up bullshit. Til then, don't give a shit what a math dork thinks they know about theology.
"Let me ask a different question then: What makes a reason objective?"
You're the one asserting Objective Moral Reasons exist in the first place, you tell me.
Here I'll make this stupid-simple for you: You agree murder is wrong, I agree murder is wrong.
Now give me an Objective Reason why murder is wrong. The same reason God has for thinking murder is wrong.
I can rattle off a plethora of Subjective reasons why murder is wrong, but you claim this objective moral truth.
Put up or shut up, why is murder Objectively Wrong, according to God? Demonstrate what an "Objective Moral Truth" is in the first place by presenting A Single One.
One thing in all of human morality that is Objectively true. I'll Wait.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@unreasonable-man.bsky.social "Shame? This really is all about emotion with you, isn't it? FFS, think. This is a time for pragmatism, not pointless, meaningless idealism."
Says the person whose Party is losing because of "pointless, meaningless idealism"
You're the ones who sold your soul, that's your problem if it bites you. You want pragmatic, how's this:
You will change course as a Party, or you will lose. Period, end of story, your rhetoric means nothing, this is the fact of your existence. You win with your voters, or you lose without them.
Don't like it? Leave. Til then you need our votes more than we need you. Pressure Biden to comply with peace or accept the results of your fascism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lip124 While I agree with you, I think what fucks the right over is....Well, let's be real, the Party at least in terms of the social conversation has been taken over by religious extremists and actively hateful assholes.
Not saying the Left doesn't have it's fair share of douchebags, because we do. We're far from perfect socially. But it's really hard to hear the sensible economic rightwingers when the media/political conversation among the Establishment seems to be "Fuck non-Christians, fuck LGBT people, and fuuuuuuck poor people."
Like not even "Hey, let's show that our system can work and showcase the value of Capitalistic enterprise", but straight up "If you're poor you deserve it, gimme your bailouts and taxdollars because I'm better than you, but go to absolute hell if you think I should pay a single cent for a poor person!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@trollnerd Yeah, US history was fucking Cool to me as a kid. I mean you know how boys can be about "war" as a subject, so I was eating that crap up and loving it.
But that's just it, to me it was just a marker of how far we've come. The people in that history are past their suffering, their time (I thought anyway as a kid) was done, and I was basically just reading old news. I'm a pasty blonde-haired blue-eyed German-American and I didn't feel shame, or guilt, or remorse, or beat down for my skin color. Why would I have? I was a child, they weren't my crimes, not my atrocities, and I'm not so fucking dense that I'd feel some racial kinship with Nazis and overlook "Evil Shit" when I saw it.
I mean I was hoovering up Marvel comics too, why would I side with the guys Captain America punches in the face? They kinda seemed like twats to me even as a kid. Like I had no problem distinguishing "Entertaining" from ethics and the only times I ever struggled to "separate fantasy from reality" was when an Adult was actively muddying the waters on it.
Why do rightwingers get the impression NOW that white children should be feeling "discriminated against" by teaching history? I don't recall them being this uppity about touring "Whitey's Biggest Oofs" in the 90's.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dru2037 What a shock, a guy lost a rigged primary run by a private organization who could declare victory for whoever they liked and who Sander's policies actively threatened.
Totally fair and not even remotely suspect there. Ignore Buttigeig declaring victory due to the voting machines being owned by the spouse of one of his staff (blatant conflict of interest) only to reveal the real numbers after MSN and CNN gave all the press to Pete for winning. Ignore MSN and CNN adopting Bernies' policies, only to abandon him and start promoting literally all other Dem candidates while openly lying about Sanders in the media. Ignore them nakedly spreading false allegations of Warren's relating to sexism, and ignore, at the end of it all when Bernie was set to win, all Bernie's competition dropping out suddenly and declaring their support (and by extension the support of their voters) to Biden the second Bernie was posing a problem for them.
Even if Bernie won every single vote, the DNC could just declare someone else victorious through the superdelegates, which are completely arbitrary and answer to no one but the DNC. No one's votes decide what the superdelegates vote for, and who during 2016 argued Successfully in court that they were perfectly allowed to commit voter fraud in the DNC and rig it how they wished on the grounds of them NOT being a government body and instead private, and who changed the rules out of nowhere to allow people to Buy their way into the debates so that Bloomberg could strip away even More voters, regardless of whether or not they had the support BERNIE had to attain to qualify.
Nope. Nothing fucky here
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Ayman Hussein "are you talking about human life or life in general?"
....The topic is abortion. Take a guess.
" I'm a doctor so I accept the scientific stance on what makes something alive (metabolism, growth, reproduction), but if you're talking about a human life then obviously it gets complicated"
A doctor would know that failing to clarify exactly what sort of doctor you are is about as helpful as saying "I have a degree."
Is this degree of yours in a relevant field of study?
" but if we consider babies humans, even though they're still very far from grown, then how is a fetus any different?"
A born infant is significantly more developed and has cognitive function and can survive without being a mindless parasite leeching off its host. A fetus at the points in time when most abortions are performed wouldn't even be identifiably human to most observers and can't do any of those things.
You sure you're a doctor? Because the differences between infant and fetus seem pretty obvious.
"Most people easily see how a third trimester fetus is a human life, I believe mainly because of the resemblance, but that's just thinking in a primitive way (looks like baby so still care about it), however it's not the looks that makes a human *human*"
Then what does? I just asked You what Your thoughts on this were.
"so I honestly don't know, it could be the potential it has to become a human individual, or the fact that it has a mother and father and is growing, I don't know, what I do know is that abortion fundamentally takes the sacredness of human life away, screws the whole moral compass"
You literally just said you weren't religious or spiritual, so what "sacredness" are you even referring to? Also in what way is a Potential human so damn valuable that an Actual human (The Mother) is so Less valuable that it's a fair enough sacrifice for this "maybe" person?
Guess I got a nice object lesson in question-dodging, so thanks. -_-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mattmiller4048 "What happened to your highlighted response? I gave an answer to what you initially asked, and you deleted it?"
My comments as I can see them are the following, since you're apparently content to make baseless accusations instead of addressing anything stated to you:
First Comment 47 minutes ago: "Why?
So you can start excluding people?
Just cancel ALL of it. Indiscriminately.
Problem solved, no one feels left out, everyone but fucking parasites benefit.
What does purity-testing do aside from setting the precedent to completely neuter this policy via exclusion?
Anything that can be used against them can be turned on you, so why would you just Hand them the weapon?"
Second Comment 21 Minutes ago: "@Matt Miller And there it is.
"I don't want to pay for something I didn't use."
I have never called the cops. I still pay for cops. I've never had to call the fire department. I still pay for the fire department. I will never have children, yet I still pay for the education of children.
You pay for shit all the damn time you don't personally use that are boons to your fellow citizen. And you USE services that are paid for that those people probably don't make much use of, yet they still pay for them.
So there's your answer: Who gives a shit if I'm not using it? I am benefitted by it by virtue of being in a nation that would benefit from this. How does these people being in debt HELP me in any way?
...Also, why does it need to cost anything? We Own this debt, Nationally. It's Our debt to Ourselves.
If we say "Nah it's good", then that's it. The debt is just Gone. We owe the money to ourselves, we forgave our own debt, now the debt is just gone. This doesn't HAVE to cost a damn thing to forgive.
The only person who loses here is the insurance company. And insurance companies are parasitic middle-men that serve no point in society besides debt exploitation, so I could not give a fuck less what happens to them. If they die they die, not like their existence is of any value to the citizenry."
I made two comments prior to this one, there they are.
So how long you wanna keep filibustering?
1
-
@mattmiller4048 " Why stop there? why not pay off all debt? Car loan? Why should someone have car loan payments? Got any credit card payments? Why not just make that vanish too?"
Good point, why not?
"But for you, student debt is somehow different, that shouldnt exist. EVEN IF the persons life is doing great, homeowner, family, everything perfect. "
For me? Where did I say anything like this? If America owns the debt, and the taxpayers are the ones financing the debt, why not forgive it? The topic was student debt, so we were talking about student debt, but if the USA is the owner of that given debt, and "We are the USA financing it", sure, forgive the debt regardless. I do not care.
"Take 2 scenarios, first person is struggling to rent an apartment month to month, nowhere close to being in position to be a homeowner and have a family, and even owes car payments. Second scanario, someone makes good salary, has beautiful house, beautiful life, has student debt. Im trying to understand, You choose to give government assistance to scenario 2, but not to scenario 1. OK, got it."
....So you're just making up my position entirely now huh?
Wanna shove any more straw up my ass or are you good?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnlennon6790 "That is not "judging" someone. You're changing the scope to fit your argument. "
Okay. How?
"Calling someone a "dick" or female dog epithet is not "judging someone"."
It's literally an insult in regards to their character, so yes it fucking is a JUDGEMENT you paint-huffing little cockgoblin.
"Letting a stranger in your car is an act of judgment"
No it isn't, and are you going to explain any of these blanket assertions you're making instead?
"Even judgment of guilt or innocence might be revealed through careful, thorough inquiry, like a trial in a court setting, and that still isn't "judging someone", that's judging whether or not they did something."
IT LITERALLY FUCKING IS YOU STUPID TROG!
"We're talking about judging someone, their entire person, who they are, which requires a lot of knowledge that we generally don't have about anyone except those closest to us. "
Wow, the literal existence of Nazis and bigots proves you wrong, what a shock.
"Nobody is doing that in here except for you losers that have judged Steven to have deserved this based on a carefully selected moment of hidden video."
Wow, sounding a little JUDGY there! XD
"I just don't like the dude. I don't have to. I don't wish him bad experiences though, nor any of you."
No one cares.
"Hidden video is excellent for whether or not someone did something, or said something - it's not enough to "judge someone", such as you all have."
If it's "not enough", then how are we doing it?
Ohhhhhh, you're just being a holier-than-thou pretentious assnugget. Silly me, I thought I was talking to someone with a point, not a pearl-clutching little Biiiiiiiiiiiitch!
In case it slipped you're mind, EVERYTHING in this comment is me judging you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@masterchief9291 "you're being unhinged. "
Nice start. Totally honest.
"Funny, your actions from the start indicate otherwise.
Anyways, you're once again being hyperbolic, (and gaslighting for that matter) "
Wow, yet more accusations you won't substantiate. Now I'm unhinged, hyperbolic, and a gaslighter.
"I've never referenced or hinted at hamas once during this entire thread. Once again, stop being hyperbolic."
"@masterchief9291
13 hours ago
I don't buy that. Are you saying no response to oct 7 was warranted? Please answer directly."
Ohhh, my mistake, you didn't blame Hamas. You just implied retribution was deserved for something Hamas did.
Stop lying.
"PLEASE TELL ME how anything other than "no response" is equated to being "genocide" I'll wait as long as i need to for your "honest" response on how that's totally not hyperbole and is definitely an accurate representation of what i said."
You are justifying Israel's response to Oct 7th. And Israel's response to Oct 7th is genocide.
And all you have to defend yourself is "Nuh Uh" and accusing me of being crazy, dishonest, gat-lighting and hyperbolic, while avoiding ever saying how I'm wrong. Besides that "I am."
"It's so frustrating that people refuse to even engage and hop into a discussion with preconceived notions and run down a BS dialogue tree while knowing absolutely nothing at all"
Yeah, I agree. Now stop doing it and state your fucking position like a real person.
Do you support Israel, Yes or No?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@1boreal "Which Europeans were colonizers?...That is such an american thing to say. Europe is made up of many nations each with a different history. "europeans" were as much the colonized as the colonizers...Eg who was more of a coloniser historically, Switzerland, Mongolia or Songhai?"
The UK, France, Spain, Italy, and Germany come to mind right off the bat, and those are just the ones I know off the top of my head, but continue.
"Strawman... nobody ever said transpeople dont have the same rights as anyone else, only that there are areas where society discerns between the se xes, trans identifying or otherwise. including biology as it happens"
That is not at all what you said.
"RVW is not an issue of denying the mother healthcare at its fundamental level , its of determining the worth of a living human being.. its a triage issue... the american left has gone into the weeds of attaching human status based on things like mental ability which is insane and basically arbitrary and facile. More over you descend into screeching matches when that is pointed out"
How about you stop complaining about your own strawmanned version of "Leftists" and actually make a specific point. Because all I see are unsubstantiated assertions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@talyahr3302 I mean he'd probably have gotten better longterm approval ratings if they Did all these shutdowns, enforced them the vaccines, yadda yadda.... But only if they did it all right at the start of his Presidency, Actually Did it instead of dancing around it forever, and dropped all of it within a couple weeks.... AND also kept half his election promises.
Like even if it didn't eliminate COVID (which it wouldn't, viruses do virus stuff), The successive strains of COVID are milder and milder in terms of threat despite spreading easier. Publicly it'd Look good: "Hey, Biden closed things down, but when it opened up things don't seem nearly as shit as they did beforehand and the virus doesn't seem as deadly. Wow, it worked!"
People are stupid enough and issues get politicized enough in this country that the Dems absolutely could perpetuate that idea to look good. But no, Dems don't seem to even be Good at being corrupt liars anymore.
His shortterm approval rate would still be crap, but if he Had closed down, opened up in short order, Actually put up the propaganda exploiting the correlation there, And kept his promises, he'd probably have the best approval ratings of any President in the last several in the grand scheme.
...But the Dems don't seem to even care what they're approval rating is anymore. They seemingly want us to think they're worthless and unwilling to do a single thing to garner votes, even if it makes them lose.
1
-
1
-
@09marathon What? Comments asking why, on the topic of Putin, the current war going on, and the fact that Trump has absolutely zero authority or control over this situation... That people are STILL somehow trying to make this Trump's fault?
Fine, whatever, I'll humor you. Trump's to blame.
...Now what? We agreed Trump is a shithead, what's different?
Oh, exactly fuck all, the situation is still here, Trump's never going to be punished, and you just wasted everyone's time with a pointless non sequitur that added nothing but a red herring related to Trump.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@waltergrace565 "Well, life can come at you pretty fast. I think the point here is more about accountability than victim hood."
Right, but accountability for what? Like legally speaking most of the things criminal about drugs are only "accountability" things Because drugs are illegal.
"But what if you're neighbor/roommate/sister (whatever) has an accident/gets stabbed/needs cpr (whatever) and you're the only one around to help. But now you're all twisted, or at least you ain't fresh, and can't deal with the situation as best you could've if sober."
I suppose that's fair, but as an avid weed-user myself I'd say 1: Most users aren't using nearly enough in one sitting to become completely fried to the point of function to that degree (Usually anyway, everyone definitely has days where you just smokes yourself silly and relax all day, but it's usually a "fun occasion" thing as opposed to the default).
And 2: Let's be perfectly honest, Most people aren't any better equipped for emergency situations than the stoner would be. Most people don't even know CPR, most people are not fighters and wouldn't be doing well if stabbing's on the agenda, and most people's general response to serious accidents is either panic, call 911, or be dumbfounded.
I get where you're coming from, but even then it feels odd to me to condemn the drug users for not being equipped mentally for situations most people in general wouldn't even be ready for. It's kind of a semi-rare person whose competent in emergency situations or went out of the way to get trained in the relevant skills to be good in a crisis.
1
-
@waltergrace565 "While I agree, natural bud is pretty harmless, but let's not pretend we all have a pothead accountant or dentist"
Actually surprisingly you probably do. Well, depending on the State maybe not, but the main reason you don't is because of the criminal record. The biggest problem with drugs in this case is usually the result of how our system treats criminal records. And most of our prison system on the Fed and State level are nonviolent drug offenders.
However, a criminal record's still a criminal record. And "reputable" businesses in this day and age Do Not want the PR shitshow that occurs whenever the news media gets wind that "they employ excon's" and the resulting drama, so they just toss the resume after the background check.
It's not uncommon for educated professionals to also be stoners, the difference is just that they either work in state's where it's not a crime or are just wayyy better at not getting caught in the case of illegal states.
But that's more a condemnation of our culture's views on excons than it is about drugs specifically. It's fucked up to allow a nonviolent offender's record punish them for the rest of forever regardless of whether or not they've bettered themselves, or whether or not the thing they were charged for should even be a crime in the first place.
There's a reason America has such a high relapse rate of excons back into crime: No jobs but shit jobs hire excons, and you can't better your life financially being shackled to a McDonald's paycheck. The punishment doesn't end at the end of their time served, so why Not?
As we've seen a lot recently, crime Does indeed pay.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danielm5161 So we Have to let innocent people Definitely starve and die, because otherwise we might fund terrorism. So instead of showing the country any shred of good faith, let's just give the entire damn population propaganda on a silver platter as to why America are a bunch of monsters.
"Blow up our fucking country for 20 years, massacre our civilians in warcrime after warcrime, actively hand More power to the Taliban, then piss off and tell us it's our fault for accepting the Taliban THEY funded. What ingrates."
....Which we're literally already doing because Saudi Arabia, the primary funder of most of these terrorist groups, is our biggest trade ally in the area. America is and has been funding terrorism this entire time. Saudi money already funds the Taliban, Taliban starts shit, American defense contractors make more money off the conflict. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.
Whatever justifies America's wanton savagery I guess. But don't give me this shit about America giving a fuck about funding terrorists.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@markzuckergecko621 You don't really have to, dude. Your entire argument began and ended, to my observation, about your objections to progressive taxation on the grounds of Liberty. Your arguments are point-for-point the same as every American Libertarian.
Ergo, on this particular topic, you are an American Libertarian. Like if I sat here and was preaching the values of proletariat ownership and public ownership of the means of production, would you say I'm NOT a communist sympathizer On This Express point just because I never actively Called myself a communist?
You share this particular belief with American Libertarians, and the discussion never really left the "Liberty" objection, so I made an educated guess as to your political position also lining up with this point.
If I erred, I apologize for the insult. I'm just saying that, regardless of what your politics are, you DO seem to have this position almost exactly identical with American Libertarians.
1
-
1
-
@markzuckergecko621 ...But we are?
Look, we're not exempting Ourselves from taxes. The Rest of us already have to deal with Progressive tax systems. All of us are already paying our fair share.
Our Beef is that the American system is rigged from the ground-up so that the people at the Top of the system don't have to abide by it. The ultra-rich pay nothing, and in fact get taxpayer bailouts against the taxpayers will. Taxes are collected, sure, but never in service of the people, Always in service of more war-profiteering.
And everyone whose paying their taxes would similarly benefit from this system, same as the poorest person would be.
I'm sorry, but I'm really unclear on where our hypocrisy is here. We want the rich to pay taxes, We pay taxes. We want the tax dollar to service the American citizen first, we support policies that serve that express intent.
We just believe something I can't really find much logical fault in: No One person in a nation should ever be allowed the level of personal power to override the nation. Someone like Bill Gates or Bezos shouldn't be allowed to completely invalidate the political desires of the entire citizenry Just because they're richer than the entire citizenry combined.
You do not let any One citizen have so much personal wealth that they could destabilize the entire nation single-handedly. And yet America has Multiple people who are exactly that individually wealthy. Not taxing the wealthy in proportion to their wealth leads to what we've Currently got here in America: Tyranny by a different name. Sure you can vote, but you lose by default to the rich. Sure you can protest, but the rich will just lobby to make your protest illegal. We're a Corporate Feudalist nation wearing the face of a Democratic Republic.
1
-
@markzuckergecko621 I beg your pardon?
Does proportionality not factor in here? 100 bucks to a homeless man is Not the same as 100 bucks to Bezos. Everyone paying the same rate is Not fair if the rate that's meaningless to one person is a death sentence for the other.
Also, success? How are you defining success here, exactly? Most of America's rich were Born rich. They didn't achieve anything to be rich, they didn't Earn anything to be rich, there wasn't a single shred of meritocratic effort in their lives to Get there, they're just "rich" by default and as such literally starting AT the finish line and claiming they got there on merit.
Meritocracy can Not coexist with any system that allows the passing on of nepotistic wealth. Meritocracy in such a situation lasts exactly One generation, and Only one generation. Then a child is just born with millions if not Billions at their disposal and unfettered access to all benefits of America without ever needing to earn it, while every single poor kid that's born will have to struggle and claw and fight for even a shred of the advantages that kid was just Given. Purely by the luck of the draw on which family they were incidentally born into.
Also, Bezos is not the reason Amazon is a success, the thousands on thousands of thankless workers Under him are. He sits on his ass and profits off Their work, is legally free to Steal Their Taxdollars on a whim, all without having to pay a single cent in personal taxes.
Why are you seemingly more concerned about the rights of Bezos than the rights of anyone under Bezos? Why is Amazon's success apparently all Bezos' to claim?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@markzuckergecko621 Here's a wild idea, how about you stop Telling me what and how I think?
Once again, for someone who was previously so up in arms and accusing me of lying, you don't seem to be anti-lying with how much you keep telling me what I really think instead of addressing anything I'm saying.
Once Again: Why is Bezos allowed to be selfish, entitled, greedy, and a stealing cheating fraud, but I'm not allowed to be?
Why is Bezos allowed to rob taxpayers of their tax dollars with impunity, but if I want something as simple and life-saving as an organ transplant, I have to run the numbers on whether or not it's more economically advantageous to Die instead of racking up a single cent in medical debt?
Why is it better to let millions of people die of easily preventable things just because Bezos won't be AS overwhelmingly rich and in control of America's government otherwise?
"Wahhhh, we gotta think about the poor Billionaires! How will they be AS rich if there aren't millions of people in abject poverty!? Have to let all the plebs die in the name of Bezos' rights!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@asyetundetermined "these comments highlight my point further. You fundamentally fail to understand what voting is."
Oh PLEASE tell me o wise one, tell me what voting is. /s
"But when the rubber meets the road, when a choice has to be made, your best intentions are not recorded and will not achieve what you wish. "
You have no damn idea what I wish, yet apparently "complying with your agenda" magically gets it done?
"Voting is one such opportunity for us to yield to the trappings of our position. It is an action of realpolitik, not ideology."
Blah blah blah blah Booooooored.
"You can vote however you wish. It is reality, however, that your vote has practical downstream effects which may be entirely incongruent with what you desire. Recognizing that, and carrying on anyway for personal reasons, is definitionally selfish."
Translation: Stop being selfish and DO WHAT I WANT!
Smug, self-satisfied, arrogant, patronizing, all while saying nothing but "Do what I say or else You are selfish."
Bored with people like you.
1
-
@asyetundetermined "these comments highlight my point further. You fundamentally fail to understand what voting is."
Smug patronizing incoming.
"Please, by all means, develop and advocate your ideals. Do your best to implement them in a way you see fit to amend society positively. But when the rubber meets the road, when a choice has to be made, your best intentions are not recorded and will not achieve what you wish. "
Translation: Only have principles until it contradicts your agenda. Then abandon them for YOUR political convenience.
"Part of the disillusionment and loss of ideological optimism that Dave references in the video is the resignation to engaging with the world as it is, not as we would like it to be. Voting is one such opportunity for us to yield to the trappings of our position. It is an action of realpolitik, not ideology."
Lotta word salad there. Mind spitting it out in a less pretentious way?
"You can vote however you wish"
Thanks, didn't need your permission.
"It is reality, however, that your vote has practical downstream effects which may be entirely incongruent with what you desire. Recognizing that, and carrying on anyway for personal reasons, is definitionally selfish."
Considering your entire point is "Do what I want, or else YOU are selfish", I can't say I care what your assessment of selfish is.
1
-
@alexistoran2181 "I'm not sure whether this is directed at me, particularly since I myself am under 30, but I do have principles. Principles that the Democrats - and the Labour Party in my own country - often fail to uphold. But the Republicans and Conservatives oppose my principles far more, and if allying with a bad party is what it takes to defeat an evil party, that's what I will do."
Thanks for at least explaining your standpoint in a non-smug pretentious manner, even if it's still just boiling down to "But other guy worse though" as a rationalization for why you're compromising them.
"It can be sickening to be forced into that choice."
Not so actually. That choice is easy. What's annoying an sickening is the endless cavalcade of people whose reaction to you NOT compromising where they 100% did. The smug, hostile, pretentious acid-dripping self-victimhood from people who violate their stated principles only to act like you're the one whose ruining things when, by all accounts, the only reason we're even IN a position at the mercy of the GOP is expressly because they, your so-called allies, previously failed again and again and again to uphold their so-called principles, only to act like a bunch of assholes because you're not nearly as mentally weak. You wanna know why the GOP in America is so powerful? Ask the Dems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@petersaint5581 I'm not trying to be edgy, I'm just pointing out that if your notion of legitimate doesn't has any practical or concrete consequences that actually affect the Power of a given nation, then your declaration of legit doesn't matter. By your logic North Korea has been "illegitimate" since the 1950's. Along with Russia, America, China, every nation with a monarchy or dictator or some system other than democratic systems, essentially half the planet is illegitimate.
I guess I'm genuinely curious what legitimate even means in any practical sense here. Like okay, let's say we're countries. You declare me illegitimate.... And? Now what, what negative effect occurs to my country because you declared me, Supreme Overlord Bignuts McThunderdick, God-Emperor Who Shits Literal Gold and Who Farts Smell like a Warm Ocean Breeze, an illegitimate political leader?
1
-
@petersaint5581 I never said I didn't take issue with it, I'm saying it's not our place. Cuba is not America, the same way Iran or Korea are not America.
Whether you think they're legitimate or not, they're legitimate in the eyes of the international world. And especially considering who We are, what right do we have to march unprovoked into cultures that aren't ours, into nations that aren't ours, and condemn them as evil for not living up to an American-centric view of reality?
We wouldn't tolerate Cuba rolling on us to "save" America from the corrupt clutches of Crony Capitalism, so why is it okay for America to be the imperialistic domineering warmonger who thinks you win the ideological war by violently bombing and beating anyone who tells us to fuck off?
America as a nation is the Biggest offending example of everything America hates in the foreign nation we declare social enemies. Everything Cuba's done, we've done worse and for usually even shittier reasons. So I fail to see what moral value exists in America violently suppressing cultures that are foreign and beating them with the "Submit to Murica" stick.
It's not our job to police the world, no one Wants us policing the world, and America hasn't had an ethically justified reason to engage in military warfare since WW2 ended. We're not the good guys, we're the one who knocks.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Drew_goo I was just using it as a hypothetical.
My "Top 10" depends on what the Voters want. Not the Democrat voters or Republican voters, but what American voters At Large want the most.
...Plenty of which will also apply to West Virginians.
"Hey West Virginia, this is me, your President. You know, that guy you voted for. Well guess what shitsack doesn't want You, West Virginians, to have what you voted me in to get you? That's right, This bitch Manchin.
Midterms are coming up, he's in your way."
Politeness doesn't work with politicians, you attack their future. Attack their investments, attack their bank accounts, attack their chances of getting elected for another free ride. Make them Fear being dragged down to being just like everyone else, make them a pariah in their home state, Exploit the publicity of the position to wield the bully pulpit like a sledge.
Make their voters HATE them, without ever once having to lie to do it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@emersonwallace7226 "1. Doesn’t everyone have a vote?"
Sure. Not like it matters, the people never get to vote on anything but which asshole in a suit is gonna lie to us and not do anything for us.
But sure. You can vote for Coke or Pepsi.
"2. IT IS IN JEOPARDY, IT IS FRAGILE, but democracy is holding."
How?
"Moreover, I can’t support any group that held a practice coup, and is still beholden to someone who wants to be an absolute ruler (or whatever trump wants to be)… "
...Okay we're just jumping to Trump.
"3. Biden’s not an absolute ruler. Be fair again, he’s bound by the Senate."
Funny how the power of the President becomes "What can I do? I can't do shit" the moment a non-Trump is in charge. Why was Trump such a rampant threat to Democracy with the {Presidency yet Biden can't do anything?
" Now, I agree with you that Biden could do more"
Anything. Literally fucking anything.
"however, I don’t think it’s fair to lay everything at his feet"
I will. He promised a whole lot of shit and delivered on exactly none of it but the shit Trump was also in favor of.
I don't apologize for traitors.
"Until a better candidate comes along, I’ll have to go with the anti-trump movement."
So we're just gonna make it all about Trump for a third time and hope a platform void of any policy works.
....WTF are you even hoping to achieve here? You can't even claim Biden's admin is gonna oppose Republicans on any level, but somehow this vote will make a difference.
"I’ll have to go Blue…..just like you’ll have the opportunity to go whichever color, candidate you choose come November."
None.
I choose no color.
Your entire government can go to hell like it deserves.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@honest_E "How does that make my comment irrelevant? Just because movies are not identical to content put out by media personalities does not mean that they do not influence people just as much."
Because Hollywood doesn't support leftist media outlets, which is the topic of the conversation. Rightwing media is propped up by corporate interests and billionaires, and your retort is "But Hollywood Exists."
If you want Money in media, you suck corporate neoliberal and/or rightwing dick. Hollywood is only "Left" socially, because Hollywood goes wherever the public (i.e. their Moneypit) goes. Most of the public are Left-ish, therefore so is Hollywood.
"I mean actually good movies. Movies that will hold their value for years. Movies like 12 Angry Men, The Godfather (1&2), The Lord of the Rings (Trilogy), Remember the Titans, The Last of the Mohicans, The Dark Knight, Saving Private Ryan, etc."
You mean movies that weren't considered such until Years Later? That's kind of how timelessness is decided, by whether or not people are still talking about it years down the line.
Seems wildly unfair to claim such when most of the movies you're complaining about are still infants in the media. On the same topic consider all the movies from those time periods you're NOT giving any such credence to. Nostalgia goggles are called that for a reason, you're not Remembering the ten tons of shit movies every single one of those gold nuggets rests atop.
No one remembers the dogshit through the rose-tinted lens.
"It depends on how you define racism, bigotry, and being a dirtbag. And I have a guess that you and I do not define those words the same"
Pretty sure I'm using the official definitions that exist in the dictionary, but you're free to disagree with Webster.
"The platforms are predominantly owned by the left."
No, they're owned by corporate interests. If your motives can be guessed and your positions guessed entirely on the grounds of "What makes the most profit?", then you're not a Leftist. You're just another opportunistic corporate capitalist who found an audience to cash in on.
Conservative Rightwing ideology is not good for business and PR, therefore it's not the position of "What makes most money?" In case you miss it Hollywood and companies like Disney still operate the same way conservatives idolize in private business, they're Just socially liberal. Exact same capitalistic dirtbags you probably idolize, they just figured out "Hey, saying the occasional nice thing about women and/or minorities rakes in more money."
"As for your next unrelated to my comment sentence, the left broadly advertises a victimhood mentality, and it has taken hold strong."
Oh please, which side is the "War on Christmas" side? Which side bans books, which side fearmongers about LGBT people, which side turns Everything into an "attack on traditional values"? Cuz it sure as shit ain't us.
"Why do you think you’ve been taught to use the “bigot racist lying dirtbag” argument?"
I wasn't "taught" it, the Right has a massive population of bigoted and racist assholes who have zero issue lying in order to justify their bigotry. FFS you people baselessly accuse LGBT people of being "groomers" expressly because you have nothing else as an argument, so your side defaults to "They're a threat to your children" as a fear tactic. Doing it to trans people, did it to gay people, did it to Black people during Civil Rights, did it to Atheists during the Red Scare, "Exploit the inherent need to protect children" is the go-to bigoted response from the Right against Any demographic they despise. When in doubt: accuse them of pedophilia.
"This causes two things. It causes left leaning people to cry out about being victims of the system, and it causes them to lose hope for their future. Sounds like a never ending cycle of misery doesn’t it?"
You sure do love telling me Why I think how I do.
Also, interesting to be accused of a "never-ending cycle of misery" from the side that Needs to be perpetually under attack in order to justify its existence. If people were Happy under conservative values then conservatives wouldn't need to force it on the rest of us. Force and fear of victimization is the rightwing playbook.
" Anyway, the victimhood mentality is present on both sides, and everyone would be better off if they stopped subscribing to it."
One side has actually valid reasons to feel victimized, the other whines and defends rich people and the bigot's right to abuse over the lives of their victims.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnc3525 "Matt Walsher? No, I'm scientifically-trained, accept reality and believe that feelings come second to truth."
Pfff, scientifically-trained huh? That come with an actual set of credentials or are you counting middle-school chemistry as "training"?
"the fact that whatever movie you're referring to has a simple explanation of sex that works for 99% of people goes to show that it's not that complicated."
....Holy shit you actually are getting your definition from a Schwarzenegger flick.
XD Fuck you're stupid! The hell are you doing here besides letting your freak flag fly?
"You can split hairs and claim that a definition has to include 100% of the people to be real but it doesn't change the fact that most people can intuitively identified at least 90% of true women."
Oh really? Then please, tell me, what is a "true woman?"
"1. a vagina
2. a uterus
3. ovaries
4. sex hormones within a certain ratio range
5. capacity of giving birth at some point in their lives
6. capacity of feeding their babies using their breasts
7. capacity to menstruate at some point in their lives
8. capacity to pass on their mitochondria to their babies
9. XX chromosomes
10. producing large gametes"
Translation: "Boys have a Pee-Pee and Girls have a Vagina!"
Thanks for the baby's first sex ed class genius, but sex and gender aren't referring to the same shit. You're describing sex, and even then you're only Literally describing reproductive characteristics.
That all women are to you? A fuck-hole that produces little You-gremlins?
"The definition is bad because the definition above works, is well accepted, is intuitive, based on biology and in reality while the woke definition is circular, ideological, not based on science or anything rational."
Wow, suck your own dick some more. Sorry, if your definition was valid it'd be the accepted definition. Sucks to suck, but you don't define language.
"If you really can't understand why a definition can't contain the word it's defining, then you are incapable of having a rational/sane conversation."
Oh no, I'd need a less disingenuous opponent for that. Sorry, real people get discourse, chuds get mocked.
"Yes, men shouldn't compete with women in sports. Or be in their prisons, bathrooms, locker rooms, etc."
Good thing they aren't. Next!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Supernautiloid How do you know those two things for a fact, exactly?
I promise I'm not being confrontational, I really need to embrace modernity and actually get Twitter at some point so I straight up don't know, but has Kyle ever talked about them or directly spoken to them or addressed them in any way?
If so, then yeah he probably knows them, but he straight up admits that he doesn't read Youtube comments.
Also Kyle isn't really a debater to begin with. He's debated a few times in the past, but so has TJ Kirk and I don't think anyone would classify TJ as a debater either. He's a political commentator who has debated a few times, but debating isn't his actual niche.
However, I don't exactly see how Kyle would get destroyed. His position has been pretty damn consistently in favor of not escalating to war. And no one in America but the US government is trying to incite war, no one wants war, like his position is the generally agreed position of pretty much every party involved.... Except the US government very specifically whose been constantly making shit up about Russia.
And I'm not defending Russia, they're absolutely guilty of this shit specifically going on over in Ukraine. But we actually have verification on this one. And it's exactly None of the fifty-dozen completely bullshit accusations the USA has been throwing for the past while.
Like I dunno how you "destroy" what's essentially just a list of the facts followed by the opinion "I don't want another war." And I don't mean that like "Oh his position is unbeatable in a debate", I mean that it's not really a debatable position to begin with. It's just his opinion that escalation to war would ultimately be a horrible thing that we should try to avoid.
Like how do you determine Winner/Loser in a debate sense when it comes to such a simplistic and generally agreed upon opinion? Most people think war is awful, Kyle thinks war is awful, how exactly is he objectively "wrong" or "right" in this case?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Supernautiloid "All you had to do is ask. Here is the historical context Kyle won’t tell you"
I know. Hence why I asked.
"- The official purpose of NATO was to oppose the Soviets. Therefore, it should have been disbanded after 1990. But it wasn’t. Instead, it’s mission changed to controlling Europe economically. It then became an engine of western imperialism. Russia became the only thing standing in their way. They have tried to surround and intimidate Russia ever since. "
Not sure why this is relevant. Regardless of what the purpose of NATO was, that clearly isn't their purpose now.
"- In 2014 there was a US led coup that ousted the legitimate government of Ukraine and installed a right wing puppet government instead. This government has been under the direct supervision of the US ever since. "
Yeah, the USA and Russia have played coup grab-ass for decades and outside nations paid the price for it.
"- Since 2014, the neo-Nazi Ukrainian militias have killed around 14,000 ethnic Russians living in eastern Ukraine. These people have begged Russia for help ever since. "
I guess fuck all the other Ukrainians that live there. Also, nothing against Russia, but I take their claims of doing anything for humanitarian reasons about as seriously as I take American claiming it actually gives a shit about democracy.
"- Russia has had ground forces in the Donbas area for years, supporting the Donbas separatist movement. The only thing different now is that Putin has official recognized their independence."
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that would still be classified as aggressive military action and invasion if America did it. Which it is, because America does do exactly that, and it's classified as an invasion on our part by every nation that hasn't lost its damn mind. Why would Russia be any different?
"- Because of all of this, Putin decided to send more troops in the Donbas region to officially aid the separatists and protect civilians, who the Ukrainian militias have been killing for years. "
So shoved a bunch of troops into a foreign nation largely against the consent of the local government. I.e. An invasion.
"Conclusion: This is not even remotely an invasion. If it was, missiles would be shelling Kyiv. This is a liberation action. Russia is not annexing the Ukraine. They are defending civilians from neo-Nazis. Kyle is wrong."
Ohhhh, I didn't realize the definition of invasion changed based on your motives.
So your complaint is "It's not an invasion because I support it", is that about right?
Because by literally every textbook and legal definition, this is an invasion. Motive is irrelevant, reason is irrelevant, an invasion is an invasion.
Not sure why you're so against the literal terminology. If you support this action then the invasion is just, no? The same way the Soviet invasion of Nazi Germany post-Stalingrad would have been perfectly justified.
Not sure why you're trying to pretend the action isn't occurring just because you like the stated intentions behind it. If you justly assassinate a dictator, that's awesome and all but you still assassinated them.
Call a spade a spade and own it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dean-cz8qr "Read 7 verse 28 says “28 When Jesus had finished these words, the crowds were amazed at His teaching; 29for He was teaching them as one who had authority, and not as their scribes.”
Read Chapter 1, page 1 of the Hobbit. It says "In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat; it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort."
And I believe it's true because the Hobbit said so.
That's all your response mattered to me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@umageddon JFC this is tedious.
Fiiiine, I'll humor you and play your stupid game.
Capitalism is a useful tool for short-term expansion and wealth distribution, particularly for luxury items where I'd imagine its value will never truly go away.
However if allowed to be unregulated and used as a Political system instead of the Economic system it's supposed to be, it just creates monetary-based feudalism and plutocratic oligarchies if left unchecked for too long, as evidenced by the fact that Wealth has more control over our political system as Americans than voting does.
It is not nor has it ever been a tool of freedom or liberation or political advancement, and is often the final excuse For oppression and abuse (See the slave trade, early Industrial Revolution child labor and wage slaves, and the entire modern contempt for doing ANYTHING positive for anyone else without a "for profit" motive behind it). Once again, it's an Economic tool, and the only value such tools have is "wealth generation" as the primary motivator.
Useful for creating a flow of wealth and resources in the short term of history, but a dangerous wildcard that only helps the corrupt if left completely off the leash longterm. Like any tool, it's only as "good" as the people using it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@barbiquearea "The problem is when you abolish free market capitalism, the alternative is a top down centralized and planned economy, which often leads to authoritarianism. Which itself results in a lot of worse outcomes than the worst excesses of capitalism."
Uh huh. Citation needed, also citation needed on WTF you think "free market capitalism" even is. Y'know, before you get too far ahead of yourself ragging on Marx for "naïve ideas that look nice on paper but continuously fail in practice."
Where's this free market of yours? I don't see it anywhere that isn't a black market, and those usually come with slaves. Oh, right, doesn't count as slavery to an American when it's Foreign slave labor. Then you guys just call it "Outsourcing" to ignore the raging hypocrisy and violation of your own Constitution for cheap slave labor.
Also, if you're an American Now I would Loooooove to hear how any Lone communist nation's atrocities compare to the just general ambivalently criminal neglect by which America just casually ignores millions of their own dying and just ignores their record-breakingly high crimerates and prison populations relative to "The Literal Entire Rest of the fucking Planet" and the constant consecutive and simultaneous illegal wars of aggression and deposings of democratic governments just to install dictators who'd sell you oil cheaper.
Or hey, literally blaming other ideas and governments and systems for being plagued by the same shit you're literally doing all the fucking time as normal business with zero hint of irony. Kinda like what you're doing right now.
Stop being the fucking worst at everything as a nation and maybe people would give a shit what an American thinks about "functionally run government." Plus how exactly are we counting "Communist" here, because I know Yankees are stupid and think "mandatory breaks for the workers" is communist tyranny.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theywouldnthavetocensormei9231 It is when your guy lost every single court-case and to this day still hasn't presented a single bit of legally damning evidence validating that point.
The DNC didn't deny it, they just argued in court that they, as a Private organization, are under zero obligation to give a shit about voting legally. Which while beyond scummy and a brazen loophole for corruption, is still "Not Illegal" in America. Courtesy of those "Corporate Rights" you people on the Right fought so hard for only to be constantly screwed over by.
Trump literally accused the entire US system of conspiring against him, the system said "No we didn't", and all the evidence presented in regards to vote-rigging were In Support of Trump, not Against him, and even Then the number of confirmed instance of voter fraud wouldn't have changed the election results regardless.
One side's argument is "So fucking what if I did it, legally I can and you can't stop me" while the others is "No I didn't, you have no evidence verifying I did, quit crying and take your loss like a damn man."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@derekrequiem4359 I don't really care dude.
Seriously, I do not begrudge you your voting decisions. Vote how you see fit, it's your choice, at this point the only "wrong" answer I can't see a compelling case for is a GOP one. And they weren't going to be having this chat anyway.
No one's pissed at the VoteBlue people because they're voting for Biden. Seriously, I understand your salespitch and I'm sure you are sincere in it.
What they're pissed at is that the only seeming way you people have to "persuade" people that Biden is someone they should vote for is to threaten them with Trump, insult them for questioning Biden's actions in the slightest, support them when they just get rid of Primaries outright, and continuously browbeat anyone whose feeling (understandably), skeeved out about the DNC and Biden at this point. No persuasion, just beratement and gaslighting and accusations of "supporting fascism".
In short the problem is that while your vote doesn't offend me in the slightest, I have a looooot of evidence that my voting choices abso-fucking-Lutely offends the VoteBlueAndShutUp crowd among the Dems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ohhh, you want to play the blame game on Progressives, eh Democrat?
All right, I'll play.
THe Democrats got Roe passed through about 50 years ago. And in that time they promised to Federalize it as soon as possible, so that the reproductive rights of women would be above this sort of turn-over.
50 years later.... It didn't happen, and now Republicans are here removing it.
You had 50 fucking YEARS promising "Vote for us, and this will pass", and despite over a dozen supermajorities in that time and THREE DIFFERENT instances under Carter, Obama, AND Biden where you had the House, Senate, AND Presidency, and what did you do?
Oh, that's right, ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING, you disingenuous shitsmear of a Party.
But now? Oh, Now you'll do it, if only we vote Blue no matter who just one more time?
Eat shit you traitors, you're all Republicans too s'far as I'm concerned. You know whose Really to blame for Roe being where it is now? The Democrats for showing us "As soon as possible" means "Literally never."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@savant8826 "but the purpose of the comment was not to argue a partisan point, but to point out the flaw in OP's argument, considering both wings feel very much the same, albeit about different things if that makes sense."
Literally the only part I wanted, not sure why the rest of your belly-aching was necessary.
Also... Okay, I'm going to TRY and not immediately shit on this. I want to, I really Really want to, but I am going to at least try to accept for a comment that you're being sincere.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your point reads to me as, in summary "Democrats and Republicans feel similar things, but not about the same subjects." Would this be to your eye a correct summary of your position?
If yes, your last line implies that you may have felt as though something about your comment may have been hard for some to not understand. If this is also correct, my question would simply be "Why?"
What aspect of this point of yours did you worry I'd be lost on? Admittedly I'm not even seeing how it's even a pointing out of a flaw in OP's comment as much as remarking on an equally generalized and unspecific but separate thing.
And I'm really not seeing how the point is even supposed to be conveyed if "Part of the Point" is apparently "making the point as obscure and hard to parse out as possible."
I mean how's the point supposed to be made if it's only you who knows the details of what you're even talking about? It just looks like incomprehensible gibberish to anyone who isn't You and thus already clued in to why you do or don't do shit.
If no one gets your point, then you didn't make a point.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BadWolf- I mean I like the idea. Legit, no bullshit, I also envision a future mostly free of authoritarianism.
However, the infrastructure that's required Needs to be built first, the people need to be mostly onboard, and there's where I think the disconnect is.
Because when the government Wants to get shit done, it's 2nd to none on that front. Authoritarianism doesn't just crop up for no reason, more directly involved governments Do have significantly greater potential for pure "Get Shit Done" than most other entities. The collapse tends to come from that same government getting lazy and entitled and thinking they're Owed this support by fiat.
Which does cause problems with dissent and corruption, but governments are usually in power for the simple fact that they're Stronger than you, more connected than you, and more equipped to deal with Big problems that affect everyone than you are.
Abolishing the government or reducing authoritarian control to a manageable level is just not Doable without governmental power, because the Other government powers aren't just gonna surrender because you asked. You need the force to back your position up, and no entity consolidates force like a government.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@angelantayhua3096 "do research on gender neutral facilities and their cost, and revaluate the standards of fairness in sports even if it leads to Transgender ppl being excluded in some cases for the betterment of the group."
Are you seriously suggesting we discriminate over something as utterly irrelevant to any form of necessity as fucking Sports? I mean hey why don't we just go the whole 9 yards and just ban white people from competing, the majority of your major sports teams are black anyway, Clearly they're not losing anything but dead weight and a shitty manager.
"Don’t care what many leftists say about men, white ppl, capitalism, illegal immigration, crime, and foreign policy."
If you don't care about gender equality, racial equality, economic disparity being corrected, or America's hypocritical and destructive relationships with law enforcement and foreign affairs.... Then WTF Are your values in any respect that makes you "a Leftist?"
I mean you basically just threw 70% of the whole damn "This is a Leftwing person" checklist out the window.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brettmaloney1411 19th Amendment: Except bodily autonomy apparently, in that case women are just cattle to you people. Disregarded.
FLSA of 1938, not a Constitutional Right, Disregarded just like Roe.
"the right to bear arms is the right to use them not to just posess them so you dont understand what that term even means"
Then you can show me exactly where in the 2nd Amendment it grants you the right to ammunition, yes? Exact wording only, none of this "up to interpretation" horseshit.
"white rights are garunteed by the civil rights act which applies to everyone regardless of race or ethnicity"
Except a woman and her body. Lol, you think women's rights can be shat on but yours can't? That's just adorable.
"private companies already have the right to deny speech so youre describing the world as it currently is with that one"
Ah, so you already abandoned the 1st Amendment to corporations, guess the Constitution is bullshit if you can just make someone else take rights away for you.
"debate is the gay rights one which is another court decision based on a very loose interpretation of the 14th ammendment"
So gay people don't actually have rights in America by this logic. Not in the Constitution, doesn't count.
"you dont have a right to your children which is why social services can take your children away if you mistreat them."
Ah, so they're the Government's kids, not mine. Got it.
Lol, wow when you take even a slight look at the cracks, America's whole "Land of the Free" thing is absolute horseshit.
Freedom was wasted on your pissant nation, you're authoritarians to the core.
"The funny thing is i agree with women having a choice and gay rights, but i live in new york so these changes to the law don't affect my state and if people in the south want to move up here for the liberties we have they are welcome to, but im not going to sit here and morally grandstand telling them what laws they ought and ought not have in their own homes, thats their own business to figure out."
Got it. You'd be happy living next to Sharia Law abuse of women as long as it's not Your women being abused.
Fuck you.
1
-
That one might be harder to manage.
Totally a good idea for the record, but the main reason student loan debt can be forgiven in this way is because the US government is directly the owner of the vast majority of the US debt in regards to student loans. Making it effectively a debt the US goverment owes to... The US government. More specifically the debt the US Taxpayer owes to the US Taxpayer, since it's all our money involved. You can forgive a debt you owe to yourself anytime you like no problem, it only exists or not because you're Letting it (or in this case, your government of predatory assnuggets).
Same way if you owe yourself 20 bucks you can just decide "I paid it off" at your leisure. It's already your money, the money's already in your bank account, you are the owner of all the money in the system. If you wanna pretend like you actually did something you could pull it out of your wallet, hand it off to your other hand, and put it right back in the wallet.
Boom. Debt to yourself completely paid off free of charge.
But if the debt is owed Specifically to a private company or private party, you kinda need that private party to forgive the debt. Not sure off the top of my head how much business loan debt the US Fed owns.
If we own any though I'd say yeah, forgive that shit. Why are we paying money to ourselves to pay off debts to ourselves? Seems mathematically asinine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brothersandsistersofvalhalla Freedoms?
Tell me, walking victim complex, what freedom of yours am I violating?
Last I checked, there exists absolutely Zero freedom that says "Thou Shalt Not make fun of other people's ideas." Or "You are protected from ever having to hear viewpoints that don't line up with yours".
Unless we're talking theocracy, that is not a "freedom" anywhere.
You are free to believe as you wish. You are not free to be sheltered from criticism in a public forum.
Don't like being mocked publicly? Then Don't put your opinion on a public forum like the Internet. You knew what you were risking the second you posted on here, don't whine like a child because you have to deal with Other people's opinions too.
Also, pro-tip: If you're gonna accuse me of being a self-righteous holier-than-thou asshole whose pronouncing hateful judgement on you (I'm not, I'm Mocking you without interfering with your daily life in any way you're not equally complicit in, such as "You actively choosing to keep responding to me of your own free will"), Maybe, Juuuust maybe, don't be completely full of shit and holier-than-thou.
Lol, for someone who so heavily condemns judgement, you sure do love actively lying about my motives, claiming to know what I think better than I do, and ascribing cruel and hatefully, oppressive motives and intent to me, like as follows:
"You're free to live in your ignorance and pettiness all you want. I'm just going to call it for what it is. A man who thinks he knows better than everyone because his opinion is somehow more important than freedoms."
Point to a single comment I made where I said you should have your freedom to believe in your stupid God revoked. Quote me Exactly, and show me the smoking gun where I actively condemned your Right to believe any stupid thing you want.
I'll wait.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ketimeleah1409 Am I the only one that gets annoyed by this same repeated schtick? Like it's every damn time with these people "I'm right, you're wrong. I'm smart, you're all stupid and ignorant. But rather than actually lay out a clear point and proving why I'm right I'll just sit here and filibuster forever, wasting everyone's time by Pretending I've got a point, despite actively doing everything possible to completely avoid stating what the proof for my side even is, because it's just sooooooo obvious that my position shits pure gold."
Like when has this ever done anything besides make people stop bothering to talk to the person? People realize almost immediately you're a bullshit artist and stop talking to you, it doesn't even work as a troll ploy for longer than a week because it soon becomes common knowledge to stop indulging these self-proclaimed arbiters of truth and then the game's up. Too late, the hand was played, everyone knows what the trick is now.
...And then they just keep going for the next several months anyway in complete defiance to how many people know the con and how overwhelmingly disliked they are, continuing to bold-facedly lie to us directly about what We believe, according to them, as if the person you're directly talking to is just gonna accept blatant lying about them without at the very least demanding some proof that's never gonna come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@redspice3230 " I don’t believe in taxes"
Too bad, because taxes exist.
" pay them, but I would make taxes like 5% total, state and federal."
Neat. Run for office and tell me how you do.
"get rid of the FBI, DOJ, DOE, and all the bureaucracy. "
So... Get rid of the legal system and educational system and "All the bureaucracy". So if you were in charge of the government you'd just get rid of government. Interesting policy ideas if you're a toddler. Dumbshit ideas if you're a grown human being who works for a living.
"People would just keep almost everything they make, and then sink or swim on that alone."
Wait, there's still going to be business in this lawless uneducated society? You got rid of the systems that make sure contracts are abided by and the people that punish criminals and the people that make people competent at those jobs on a societal educational level, remember? Y'know, One Sentence Ago?
"No benefits, but also almost no taxes."
So your ideal society is Mad Max.
Good thing you're outnumbered because you have zero business being involved in the political system of a nation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vl8584 "the USA see Israel as a state of USA like Texas, California and New York rather than an independent country."
I really don't care how the US government sees Israel, there's what they think and what the actual legal situation is.
Legally Israel is an independent nation.
Legally Israel has absolutely zero authority to speak of as an American entity.
Legally the American people at no point voted on a single shred of support or assimilation of Israel as one of our States.
And yet Israel gets to have universal healthcare on America's dime, a well-funded military force on America's dime, endless support from the taxpayers of America without our voting consent, and oftentimes outright passed under our noses, and an endless supply of American soldiers to kill and die for them, also on American citizens to fit the bill here.
So Israel, despite having zero legal or political standing in the affairs of America, gets endless funding for everything Israel wants to do for its citizens, endless funding for their military operations, and an endless parade of bodies for the Middle Eastern warfare/meatgrinder, and Americans get.... What, exactly?
What does us endlessly supporting Israel get us as a nation? I mean we can't even argue that we get to protect an ally, because America's biggest trade partners in the Middle East isn't Israel, but Saudi Arabia: The nation actively using our money to fund the war Against Israel. All Israel is to us is an excuse to keep perpetual and perpetually profitable wars going while Americas contractor population and lobbyists make massive bank off the top.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kevc5510 I dunno, I tend not to try and apply morality through the backwards lens. Like to me these people were largely ignorant and lacking the contextual information, or otherwise hardened as cultures through the harsh crucible of evolutionary Darwinism.
I mean let's be real here, you don't ascend to the top of the foodchain in nature unless your species were some cold SOB's.
But you learn new things, change your minds as you go, so at worst I can't really call them "immoral" unless they were causing unique forms of suffering beyond the pale even for their own time. Wrong, sure, but I can't really justly call someone immoral for just being wrong.
"Similarly, it seems that the classification of human life and dignity should be independent of the technology you have and the society you live in. It doesn't matter what culture you grew up in, if someone murdered your entire family and friend group, you will feel wronged. "
I can definitely see the perspective here, but I just don't see how it's a possible standard to uphold. Every culture is going to look backwards and savage and immoral from the backwards lens. In two hundred years our descendants will likely see us as savages in comparison as well, and view our stances Now as repugnant the same way we look down on the 1800's.
"If we think that these pre-20 week fetuses should be considered humans with rights in this utopian culture with advanced artificial wombs that we speak of (and that a woman does not have a right to destroy the fetus no matter what, when her autonomy does not come into question, because they have rights) then it seems we should consider them humans with rights in this day and age as well."
I mean they're "human" in the sense of sharing human DNA with us, granted. But that's equally true of cancer, and we don't exactly seem too concerned about the humanity of cancer.
I'd say the only truly "Human" characteristic is the one that's unique to us, sapient intelligence. The thing we use to define Personhood, the mind and will behind the actions being taken place.
After the point where sapient cognition is possible, I am in 100% agreement with you, that's a person and worth the rights of such. However I can't exactly see how we can definitively define a fetus as "A person" when it fundamentally doesn't even have a sense of identity or self at all. You need some form brain function on a basic level to have the trait exclusive to us that makes us recognizably human.
1
-
@kevc5510 Also, just generally, I don't really take erm... Moral arguments on the topic from Americans very seriously.
Like for real, if Pro-lifers went All The Way with that shit, like taking a serious interest in the well-being of kids and advocating for the programs to support those kids as a community, Then I'd probably be like "Okay, I respect the idea, let's give it a try."
But that's not really what "pro-lifers" do in America. They rail and oppose abortion in the name of "protecting children", yet the moment that child is born it's like "Fuck you, you're on your own, don't even THINK to ask anyone for help you worthless parasite and accept your foster situation. We gave you Life, be fucking grateful!"
Like the movement immediately stops at birth and suddenly American pro-lifers couldn't give a rat's ass if you live or die. The same people who demand a prohibition on abortion are almost always the same people who demand cutting the costs of education childcare, medical care, hell these people think schools offering free lunch to poor kids is "Filthy socialism" and they'd apparently rather watch kids suffer than compromise their economic politics.
They're not "pro-life", they're just "pro-birth". More babies means more wage slaves and more manpower to abuse and exploit. They don't want children raised up in a loving environment, they just want an ever-growing assembly line of people to abuse and manipulate and indoctrinate into this cruel system of ours.
Like seriously, from a Political standpoint, think about it: We're in the middle of a recession, homelessness, poverty, and starvation among American citizens is higher than at any point in our history since the Great Depression, the nation is burning around us and the Current generations of civilians are starting to push back and reject the system.
....And immediately the government suddenly wants in THIS situation, to force the people against their will to have children in this hellhole. Why? Why does the Government think this is a practical or even remotely sane idea?
The only answer I can think of that doesn't sound like BS is "They need replacement workers and they're not above Forcing those workers to exist."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@markzuckergecko621 "what does my political view have to do with the fact that Kyle is deliberately misrepresenting this story?"
Your politics are irrelevant. You're a story-misrepresenter acting as if your accusations of misrepresentation mean anything.
"And the real story is pretty damn bad, the fact that there was any legal action taken against the guy in the first place is fucked up, there's no need to lie about it."
Holy fucking shit a perfectly sensible thought out of you for once.
"I mean sure, it is illegal for him to have weed, especially in a hospital where he's in plain view of everyone, it's not like there's no fault whatsoever."
Fault implies he did anything wrong. He did not.
"But any decent police officer would have been like nah I don't care about that, just try to keep it a little on the down low, can ya?"
Where tf are these decent cops I keep hearing about?
"This is the problem with you lefties, you care about the narrative more than you care about the facts."
And now we're back to you being full of shit and projecting. Stop bitching about behavior you shamelessly engage in.
"That's why you're so easily manipulated. You believe whatever supports your preconceived notion, and you never even bother to check and see if the information you see is correct."
...Irony doesn't exist in your world, does it? Remind me, which scumshit side of the aisle is currently demonizing trans people as predators like good little dogs following directions?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@liddyg4109 You mean actually financially solvent? That's kind of the thing most of you ignore about California, it's exactly one of ten States in the entire USA who pay more Into Federal assistance than they ever use. Y'know how Republicans constantly complain about people having to pay for "Welfare States?" Well Cali is one of the 10 States in the Union paying for everyone else. California is a welfare state, yes, but one that pays for itself. South Carolina, meanwhile, is the single worst welfare state in the USA in terms of actual numbers (a few years back South Carolina was and had been using 20 dollars of Federal welfare for every One they actually spent, it's the worst run State), yet if you asked any of those people they keep pointing at California as being worse despite SC having the highest State percentage of people on welfare. You have at no point in your life ever payed a cent for California's economy or social welfare, but they've verifiably been paying for everyone else's. But you've paid a LOT for the Carolinas.
And Cali's not even a Good state in terms of infrastructure. They just have such an extreme critical mass of income from their entertainment industry and computer tech industries that, if Cali seceded, they'd immediately become the 7th most powerful economy on the planet on those two industries alone.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Because the people you share values with, at least the talking heads, are all lying.
They're using you, exploiting your family values in order to twist your arm into supporting their Actual agenda, which is "Fuck all of you I'm not paying a cent for anyone not Me."
Did it not escape your notice that Ben's "solutions" to these problems all coincidentally never expect him to pay a single dime in the aid of anyone else, man woman or child, UNLESS it's specifically in a violently cruel context that abuses and sics police on demographics he doesn't like?
He's Using you guys and abusing your better natures to serve his own ends. He doesn't care about children, he doesn't care about community. He's only "anti-abortion" so he can force poor families to have kids whether they want to or not, all so he can Punish them later for the mistake of "having kids they couldn't afford", even though the unilateral no-exceptions anti-abortion stance he demands is Forcing that child to exist. Basically a Catch-22 that only ends in "The poor person suffers more."
The child is nothing more to Ben than a weapon to brutalize their parents with. You might be genuinely pro-life, but he just wanted "Stage One" of an engineered cycle of abuse.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Derek Hitt Oh yeah, because that's reasonable. It's not like there's monopolies to think about or anything.
Nestle sells freaking Water for god's sake, and has the market completely cornered in much of the US, especially in locations where the local water quality is toxic.
What, are you suggesting people stop drinking water just to ensure Nestle doesn't get paid? Hell, why do you think these companies own subsidiaries on top of subsidiaries? It's expressly to ensure it's a massive pain in the ass to know who owns what and whose to blame for a company's actions.
And as has been established, a business going under is not a sign of failure in this country. Freaking Trump bankrupted and ultimately failed at every business venture he ever tried, almost all those companies got liquidated, and yet look who didn't suffer a single second for it: Trump himself. And hey, Disney's sales have been taking a noticeable dive in the US, but all that amounted to was Disney turning around and sucking China's dick to make money hand over fist that way, American sales be damned.
To top it off these corporations directly influence the Law. So what if you don't personally pay Nestle money, Nestle's already got a choke chain around your State's politicians. Thee laws and rules by which you are required to live by as a citizen are determined by corporate lobbying, not You. Bill Gates can undo the entire voting people's interests with a freaking phone call, and your solution is to "stop buying XBox?" They're already rich, already given the overwhelming majority of any stimulus the government pays out, if you won't Buy from these companies they can just Steal your taxes with the full support of the government they bought.
You buying or not buying changes absolutely jack shit. Either way, your money Will end up in their hands, by your own choice or by them ripping it from you directly.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@makeamericagreatagain3401 Lol, a fucking spambot accusing anyone else of being predictable.
You're not following basic logic. If Kyle Sucked, his subs would be going Down. Not staying 100% in place, Declining. Sub counts are always moving up and down, they never gridlock in place.
Kyle's subs aren't following the basic pattern everyone knows is normal. His engagement keeps rising, yet his subs remain the same. I watch all of his videos yet Youtube Never recommends them to me, despite recommending literally everything else even if I watched a lone video at random. Most other channels videos lead to more of their videos, yet Kyle's always redirect to Jordan Peterson, The Hill, Jimmy Dore, everything Except another Kyle video if you're watching his videos normally.
This shit isn't normal, isn't how the algo typically behaves, and it started up during the election season when Biden was dragging the DNC asscrack first through verbal barbed wire every other day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@evandaugherty1223 Meanwhile, when I got restationed to Andrews' 89th, the Presidents base, suddenly the "random drug tests" were an extreme rarity. Specifically for our Squadron of 2T2's who worked directly with the President's staff and AF1. Suddenly every OTHER Squadron on-base was tested all the damn time, but the Air Transport people who service the Federal political staff directly are never "randomly" tested, always given a heads-up days or weeks in advance, which for anyone with any experience with drugs, is a flat out warning from management to "Clean your shit up Now before the test date."
Coincidentally, the 89th APS are the squadron most often featured on CNN, MSN, and FOX news because every single time the President comes or goes on AF1, that's us in the background servicing AF1. You seriously think the image-obsessed Government is gonna let the White House look like they violate regulations or let anyone know the DoD personnel directly serving AF1's operations are almost exclusively alcoholics or junkies of one stripe or another just to put up with the bullshit of working for the White House?
Fuuuuck no, they're gonna tell you everyone's doing what they're supposed to be doing.
If the government doesn't want to be punished for ignoring mandates, it won't be punished. There's always a loophole to get out of deep shit if you need it and are in a position of authority in the US system.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@spriot You point? Dude, I don't give a single solitary shit if someone Not me gets healthcare. I don't care if they don't meet my standards of ethics or work. They're a Human Being, and no one with even the faintest shred of a conscience would advocate one deserves to die while the other doesn't. That's kind of the Good thing about the idea: No one has to die. No one has to suffer. Under the current system, unless you're rich, it frankly doesn't matter one iota how hard you work. There's Millions upon millions of Americans who work their asses off day in and day out and still can't afford to get treatment. According to the current system, they don't deserve to live. Not because of merit, but because they're broke.
So I feel like you're wildly misrepresenting this. The argument isn't "Oh this one dude worked hard and this one didn't", it's "System A will cover and work to protect everyone to the best of its ability, and to hell with the rest" versus "System B: (America currently) If you aren't loaded, fuck your existence. Die or live the rest of your life paying debt to us. Your work ethic means nothing. Your character means nothing. Only your wallet matters to us and we will take as much as we can. What are you gonna do, Die just to spite us?"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@meoff7602 No I didn't.
Fucker, this system was in place BEFORE I was born. And my voting patterns were as follows:
2012, first election I was old enough to vote in: Voted Gary Johnson because I was in boot camp at the time and wasn't really up to speed on anything going on, besides "Obama lied about his '08 promises, not voting for him or the Republican frontrunner.
2016: Voted Bernie
2020: didn't vote.
So how is this MY fault, exactly? I was never part of the "Majority", I was never in a State location where I wasn't the ideological minority, my vote is Invalidated in pretty much every situation.
So no, don't put this blame shit on me, I had exactly Zero input or choice in any of this situation.
Also, I am doing something about it. Taking my GI, getting my degree, and fucking off to Europe. I'm done giving service to a nation that doesn't give a shit, I'll happily watch it all burn from the safety of a Competent nation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@realJB ...I mean that's nice, and on paper I agree with you.
...In practice though, this gridlock has existed my entire life. Literally the entirety of my life since being born in 93. And all it's done is obstruct, obstruct, obstruct, waste time, drag the heels even on policies the overwhelming majority of America wanted in the first place, it's been nothing but a complete brick wall to any sort of progress while letting all the corrupt shit through without a second thought.
And it's always the scapegoat whenever the politicians we voted for fail. "It's not our fault, we just didn't have enough votes for the filibuster. Oh well, guess we'll just stop trying."
It doesn't matter what it's function Was, what it's function Is amounts to a bigger motive to get rid of it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@11Nosferatu11 I'm not making excuses for them. I'm literally telling you that the reason why this is even legal to do is Because private businesses have more rights over the public discourse than the government or the citizenry have.
Also, what?! In what way am I an apologist for Hitler or Stalin? The government literally didn't do shit here, and I'm obviously not making excuses for "big tech and the elites", I'm pointing out that they CAN do this shit expressly because for the past several decades we've been deregulating them, giving them the keys and just trusting that they wouldn't abuse that shit. Which, not to be petty, but you're defending the Republican side on this one. Y'know, the guys who endlessly suck the dicks of Corporate power everywhere and preach the virtues of Reagonomics (The policy of which is literally "Give the elite all the money and hope nothing goes wrong there."). I'm not saying Dems aren't also just as much a bunch of corporate whores, but Jesus Christ dude can you get your position straight? How can I simultaneously be "Making excuses" for the shamelessly Capitalistic big tech corporations, The Facism, AND apparently Dictatorial Communism? None of those are even the same form of government and literally all of them think the other two are the devil.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 ...Dude, you literally just accused the Left of doing a thing, provided no evidence or examples besides the vague accusation, and that's literally all you said. There's nothing to disagree with, you just made a blanket accusation that you provided nothing for in terms of evidence, just continuing on as if your claim is just obvious Gospel Truth.
Like my dude, that's not how this works. If You make an accusation, it's not on the accused to prove you wrong, it's on You to prove your accusation. If I just randomly said "Russian Troll literally fucks chickens on a daily basis", it's on Me to prove my accusation is actually substantive, you aren't under any obligation to defend yourself from my accusation until I actually provide proof that you do, in fact, fuck chickens.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thesensiblesocialist Not really, although I'd say Kyle is obligated to a higher quality standard because he quite literally Is and Was directly involved in the US political system. He founded Justice Democrats, he's a political activist in the very literal definition of the phrase, and "politics and politics-related media drama" is kind of ALL he talks about. Presumably he's gotten "good enough" at the ONE THING he routinely does, is educated expressly to do, and has personal life experience being directly involved with to warrant the audience capture he has to be taken a biiiiit more legitimately than your typical vlogger/twitch streamer?
Vaush is basically a more SJW-ish version of TJ Kirk. Smart guy, says good shit and is usually not terribly off-base, but still "Not someone you should be quoting as a source directly unless they also brought sources to fact-check." Kyle actively pimps and promotes himself as a political commentator and activist and his actions and history and track record back that up.
Vaush for the most part pretty much Is just a Youtube vlogger airing out his personal views in front of a camera when he's not dicking around on videogames like any old Twitch streamer. If people treat him as a more legitimate source of information than that, that's on them. But hey, "Just a dude" can still be Correct about things, not saying they can't have good takes or bad takes, but why Would you take the assessment of a Youtube Vlogger as gospel If They Didn't Also have some extra extenuating credentials (like Kyle does) which might make "their opinion" more informed than the common vlogger?
Same way "Quoting Me" probably isn't a good idea if you want an official source to take you seriously. I can be the smartest Dude ever, but if I'm "just a dude" and you're comparing My political takes with someone more legit, that honestly says more about the pisspoor quality of the "legitimate source" than it does say anything Positive about Me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@herpetolgyprodigy A bit late to this party, but the simple reality for most of those counterpoints is that they're "true"... But not the way the Right thinks.
Yes, prices would need to be raised to some degree, but they did the math on this years back when Papa John's was being pressured to provide health insurance to their employees. When you did the math the price hike for all the employees to get healthcare was... A whopping 5 extra cents on each pizza. A unit of currency so insignificant most people don't even bother to pick it up off the ground. No one would need to be fired, no layoffs or exorbitant costs, just 5 cents.
...And then Papa John's fired a bunch of people anyway, hiked the prices by 11 cents, and at the time still refused to provide the healthcare, blaming socialists the entire time for why he did it.
To the second,sure they Could leave America to go elsewhere.... But they'd be stupid if they did. Most of the developed world is even More strict when it comes to corporate corruption, and also already have their own national competitions for market dominance. Any company that left here would have to either A: play by even harsher rules than America while simultaneously competing against already established conglomerates on foreign soil in a culture they have no understanding of, or B: Peddle to under-developed countries who flat out don't have the money to pay them like good ol' America does. Their power is here, their markets are Here, it'd be exponentially cheaper for them to just bite the bullet and pay their fair share.
It'll be cheaper than all the international sanctions or Europe nostril-dicking them the same way France curb-stomped Valve in court for their illicit business practices on Steam (which are pretty much illegal and defined as blanket economic fraud in damn near every UN nation except America.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@asherif3893 ...No. We don't. Dude, I'm sorry, but this needs to be nipped in the ass right now:
There's Democrats. And then there's "The Left". I know that doesn't ring true to America, but going by the standards of literally every other developed nation on Earth, American Democrats are not Left in any meaningful way, EXCEPT on social issues. In every other respect they're just as shamelessly corporately-bought as the Reps, they just say nice thing about gay people (As long as they never have to actually Do anything to help the groups they give lip service towards).
The Left, meanwhile, is Actually on the left side of the bar, and while that covers literally everything from regulatory capitalists all the way to AnComs, for the most part the Actual Left doesn't want to be in these wars at all. Afghanistan's being shitty or not? Who cares, not our fucking country, not our culture stop blowing shit up. Saudi Arabia? Fuck No One gave a fuck if we actually did anything about the right terrorist nation since we attacked every nation Except the one's responsible and Israel, we don't care either, get out of there.
We don't want to be in these wars under Any circumstance unless there's an actually good reason to be there. Fuck the SJW reasons, fuck the "War on Terror" bullshit, bring the fucking troops home and stop blowing shit up.
So I'm kind of with Kyle in the sense of not accepting Any of the reasons we're still in that fucking sandbox 20 years later with no actual plan, objectives, or stated winning conditions, no end in sight, and apparently no push to hurry it the hell up so we can all go home as valid.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ThanosDidTheRightThing Yeah, somehow I don't care.
I don't deny the people any liberty these political leaders don't take for themselves anymore.
Look, I'll try to meet you halfway here: IF America wasn't a lawless authoritarian hellhole expressly rigged to glorify corruption while oppressing the people, I'd totally 100% agree with your assessment.
In a just society it would be an incredibly unethical thing to roll up and protest someone at their homes.
HOWEVER! This is America. And these judges just tried to pull a fast one and just remove a previously existing right from the public without their knowledge or voting consent (I don't care about splitting hairs on your Constitution, I'm just using the word "right" coloquially with "a liberty" that the people have or don't that's permissible by law. Americans "Had" the liberties of privacy and bodily autonomy in regards to abortion previously, now they may not.), which legal or not is an incredibly unethical, shady, and asshole thing to do in a nation that (like it or not), IS mostly pro-choice as a voting majority.
Like if this actually IS a Democratic Republic, then ultimately the laws SHOULD reflect the will of the people at large on paper. They vote in people to represent their interests, those representatives speak their cases, and ultimately the group consensus gets it.
I mean I personally am not a big fan of guns, but I respect it as a right and... Well hey, it's America, I got outvoted. Oh well, sometimes that happens, I can accept it and move on like an adult. But the majority of Americans ARE at present in favor of Roe v. Wade's existence..... And yet there's no vote, no discussion, no eyes allowed, these people can just unilaterally decide "Fuck what you all want, we say THIS!" and that's it? We're all just supposed to respect their commands as gospel, AS THEY ARE overriding their own former rulings as "untrustworthy sources of Constitutionality?"
....How the fuck do Americans, Revolutionary War Americans, Civil War Americans, World War fucking TWO AMERICANS not see a massive autocratic elephant in the room there?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@seanfoley974 Not sure what your question has to do with anything stated prior, but whatever.
Easy start, expansion of women's bodily rights. You already had it, literally no one but fanatics wanted Roe gone in the first place, easy enough thing to bring back and codify. THe funny thing is "State's Rights" were already in there, it just Also allowed for individual rights in earlier terms. Which seemed perfectly fair as a compromise to me, the individual had full autonomy in the 1st trimester, limited regulation in the 2nd, full State's Rights in the 3rd (since Everyone kind of has an issue with late-term abortions unless there's actually a medical reason that would result in the death of the mother. Seriously, who the hell carries a kid up to the very end and just goes "Nah"? If you put up with it that long you obviously wanted the kid)
Same thing with LGBT rights and equality, your nation at large wants it, just a handful of bigoted assholes with religious excuses (Unconstitutional, by the way) to oppose it. That will pass and expand whether you people like it or not.
As to economic policies, considering Capitalism and Social Democracy aren't mutually exclusive (seriously, for all you people whine about communism literally every nation on Earth we consider a social democracy in any respect is still Capitalist) and considering how fundamentally sick and tired of corporate corruption your people are, more ethical corporate policies and regulation from the government will also (slowly) keep expanding to reign in America's bullshit. I mean hell you guys already want greater collective bargaining rights and the USA already Has a long history of unions doing kickass things for the people (corruption's still an issue, as it is with every human endeavor, but I'll take that risk of "might" vs. the Guarantee of US Corporate corruption and anti-labor practices that exclusively benefit the rich)
Honestly all I need to do is go down the list of popular opinion and I can find a whole host of positions your people want that only Wouldn't work because "The corporate corrupt don't want to lose their moneypit."
There's exactly nothing logistically that would make any of the economic SocDem policies unworkable here and everything to suggest this is what the majority of your people want in the first place.
Not to say it's "All Left", people here still want their guns and liberties and shit, but honestly I've never heard a person on the Right give an actual concrete reason Why these policies wouldn't work here aside from a limp-wristed Appeal to Culture that doesn't add up on the face of it.
I mean "America can't do Socialism" Bitch Please. We literally hero-worship the military as the most honorable profession in this country, and the Military is Socialist As Hell. By definition, the entire thing is tax-funded and the military effectively get Some of the things SocDem's want for All of us, not just us Vets and those who've served actively.
My position is just "Why should an American citizen have to relinquish some of their rights and sign up to be Federal cannonfodder JUST to get benefits other nations give to their people just because they're not Complete assholes?"
Am I That much better than you just because I served? Why should I get my college paid for by the GI Bill but the rest of my countrymen have to eat shit and suffer predatory student loans and corruption just to get a damn education? Why should My kids get a safe education on the government dime Complete With the protection of a military installation, but y'all have to suck it up in the under-funded shitpile that is our standard education?
Is it really so hard to believe that when a SocDem says they want you to have better opportunities than you likely had by default, that they might be serious? I mean that's what society's Supposed to do, right? Make a better and kinder world for our kids so they don't Have to put up with the same BS?
I'm telling you we're Not your enemy, dude. We only shittalk the USA because we see what it Could be and are dismayed when corruption interferes with that.
We don't want to destroy the damn thing, we fucking live here too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
"I disagree with here Kyle. Conservative view on community is one that is on a purely voluntary basis"
Because they want zero obligation whatsoever to community. They want the benefits of community without any of the obligation those benefits require.
Their idea sounds nice if we're still a barely-country of colonial territories in a relatively disconnected society, but in This day and age there exists exactly No One who wasn't brought up, advantaged, equipped, trained, and set loose in this world by society.
And yet conservative politics seems to labor under the delusion that they Earned where they got in life all by themselves with zero outside input. Like they Owe Nothing to the community which enriched them.
To me that screams of excessive levels of entitlement. Raised by the system, propped up by the system, yet the moment the system requires them to pay that cost back suddenly they're a "self-made" hardworker that doesn't think it's fair to support others.
If they actually Believed that, then why were they fine piggy-backing off the system when it was convenient for them? They want the roads, services, protection, and technology society pays for like the Internet, yet Don't want to fit the bill for any of it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alexamaya3208 No, you're thinking about it wrong here.
If God exists and evil still exists, then that's a contradiction.
But if there's no God, then presumably there's also not the "Objective Good" of God either. Subjective morality would more or less be the law of things (excluding the possibility that some other system is in play, this is humoring the assumption that it's either Secularism or Christianity, no other options allowed).
Sure things would still be "Good" or "Bad" by the same culturally subjective rules we already tend to base our developed senses of morals off of, but at the Grand Scale? There wouldn't really Be objective Good or Bad as far as the universe is concerned. It would just be "Events that occurred."
Like they're still be good or bad based on the perceptions of intelligent minds observing or caught in the event and the benefit or detriment caused by the events. There just wouldn't be some "Objective Moral Truth" dictating it all, just the laws of physics and mortal minds trying their best.
...Basically there's really no practical consequences and nothing really changes about our day to day with or without a God, y'know? Good or evil will still be pretty much coming down to the perspectives of the sapient minds asked, the world pretty much looks and behaves the same as it currently does, and the greater universe continues to do its thing. Same as it seemingly does from your perspective in a Universe With God. You know, the whole free will thing, subjective morality would exist in the Christian viewpoint if God is, as you claim, pro-free will.
The real decider is what happens after you finally die, but there's presently no real way to answer that one and come back, and I'd kind of hope most people aren't insane enough to volunteer as tribute to test it.
The Secular answer to the "Problem of Evil" is just that evil is a concept invented and defined by thinking human minds trying to contemplate the world around them and trying to enforce a sense of order. Evil is effectively whatever we say it is, hence why the definition and view of what "Evil" is changes and fluctuates from one person to the next, just like "Good" seems to mean something different from one person to the next.
i.e. "What problem? Evil's just subjective."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@StUrho-kw5sl Dude, why would you even need to? One, Kent is the one with the unaccepted position, not Dave. Evolution and an old Earth is the Default "No Shit" position, whole swathes of our scientific fields only work IF evolution is real, and its model predicts accurately how biological structures form and change over time.
Dave doesn't Have to prove evolution because it's the Official Position at present. YEC and Creationism in general, meanwhile, Is unproven, Doesn't have any evidence backing it up that I've ever heard, and... I mean it's Kent Hovind, dude. If you've heard One Hovind debate, you know every single argument Kent will ever use, the order in which he'll use them, because his script Hasn't Changed At All since the day he started decades and two different prison sentences ago. And Kent's arguments have Never posited a single proof FOR Creationism besides "Bible said it".
All Kent's got is attacks against evolution that highlight how fundamentally he doesn't understand evolution. Like there's literally a Hovind Bingo Cards because his script is so repetitive and transparent that we turned his predictability into a game.
Every debate Kent WILL conflate the Big Bang with Evolution, despite the fact that he's been corrected every single debate that those two concepts are not even remotely related to eachother as scientific fields. Every single debate Kent Will say some iteration of "A canine can't make a non-canine", despite being told every single debate that's not how evolutionary biology says that works, thus making his accusation irrelevant and ignorant. Every video he Will keep using the word "kind" instead of any biologically relevant categorization standard AND WILL NEVER answer the question "What does Kind refer to?"
Like there's no point being nice to Kent because Kent is Infamous for being the most disingenuous, dishonest, fallacy-spewing condescending brick wall of willful ignorance on the Internet. And that has nothing to do with his beliefs, Kent brought this on himself after Years of the exact same dishonest bullshit despite being called out on it a thousand different times, a thousand different ways, and even after him serving prison time repeatedly for his dirtbag behavior.
All Kent has For his position is "Bible says so". In the Entirety of his existence as a Creationist debater, Genesis is the Only evidence Kent has EVER displayed FOR his position. That's it. All he has in opposition to evolution is blatantly strawmanned misunderstandings of how evolution even works and just declaring "I don't believe you!" like an obstinate child when he can't even be bothered to Have an actual objection.
Like all he'd have to do is present Something, but he literally never has anything but Bible verses as proof For Creationism. And there's only so many times you can say "You can't use the Bible to prove the Bible, idiot" before there's no point treating Kent like anything but a bad faith actor unworthy of serious consideration.
Like it's not just Dave, this happens with EVERY SINGLE Debate Kent's in with ANYONE that doesn't think like Kent. Atheists, non-Christians, LGBT people, Christians who don't believe EXACTLY what he believes, any and all employees/representatives of the government, like Kent makes enemies of literally everyone he interacts with and goes out of his way to antagonize them and piss them off into giving him attention in the first place. Like he wanted to debate Genetically Modified Skeptic, and he tried to bait him into debating Kent by making a video actively calling him a god-hating sack of shit who was Never a Christian (despite GMS being formerly a devout Christian who was a Hovind fanboy)...But wait, there's more! Kent figured out that GMS was pro-LGBT rights, and in his video trying to bait GMS he was relentlessly calling him derogatory slurs for gay people (in front of his little flock of teenagers no less, apparently he thinks it's a good thing to teach children to mock and hate gay people), and was insinuating that GMS only left the Church because he was "a filthy perverted queer" (GMS is not only straight but happily married).
Kent brings this shit on himself.
1
-
@StUrho-kw5sl Okay then. Disprove evolution then if you think it's bullshit.
If it's so easily a con job, do it.
Also, way to miss the entire criticism: Kent HAS been shown proof, HAS been given sources, and everything Dave says about evolution is more or less in line with the scientific consensus, every single biologist within which has their sources and research.
Kent, despite having NOTHING for Creationism, just dismisses all of it without ever clarifying/demonstrating Why it's wrong, and expects Evolution to prove itself to Kent and his church... Despite Kent never in the history of ever proving anything about His position besides "Bible said so", and completely running away when Dave says "Okay, your evidence is the Bible, let's examine your evidence then."
Anything posited without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Kent has no evidence, Evolution does. Creationists just don't Like the evidence presented, don't understand how empirical evidence works, and this is all a smokescreen to hide the fact that Creationism has absolutely Zero empirical evidence verifying it on any level.
Meanwhile, if evolution is false, how do Vaccines work? If evolution is false, how does animal husbandry and genetics work? How/why do genetic defects occur IF evolution is false? What explains the massive variation and diversity in animal populations despite us all sharing DNA markers in common (an event we've literally never witnessed in biology Unless the different creatures are in fact biologically connected somehow, which evolution describes)?
What is the Creationist Model that explains Any of the phenomena I just mentioned?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@StUrho-kw5sl But you went to the effort to go in this screed, so let's dissect it.
"Biology does not support the changing of one living kind to another. Try again."
So apparently you don't know what Biology is, because otherwise you'd know Biology is the scientific study of organic matter and the processes of living organisms. Evolution is a process of organic matter and living organisms. Who the fuck do you think does Evolutionary Biology, genius? Here's a hint: It starts with a "B" and ends with an "iologists"
Also Kinds is not a thing. There exists no scientific definition of the word "Kind" and the only people who use it are Creationists.
So yes, Biology does not support the changing of One of your imaginary arbitrary standards into another completely arbitrary standard.
"You're (not) related to a willow tree or a crayfish."
And you know this how, exactly?
"No proof. Where is your proof??? Stop! You keep making claims th as t your religion is true and fact... Tou even say science backs your beliefs up, but you ALWAYS fail to give any science."
Lol, the double-standard is glorious.
Tell you what, pony up some proof for Creationism and then I'll give a shit what you think is proof.
"You fail to give one single example of anything changing from one kind of life to another. Or that life came from non life. Where is your scientific proof?"
And you continue to use this nonexistent definition "Kind" while mistaking abiogenesis for evolution. Just like every other uninformed idiot.
Like fucking hell, did you even bother to think "Maybe I should read something about evolution from before I comment on it" so you could avoid Blatant Basic fuckups?
Like this is like Me saying "I know Christianity. I understand how Christianity works, and it's Bullshit for fucking sheeple!....WHose this "Christ" guy?"
Like you can't even get Basic shit about evolution right.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fractal_3 "you really think that all the rules of decorum, the rules they all agreed to when they got sworn in as government officials, should go out the window - just because you feel like they shouldn't apply?"
Sure. Why not? They do it plenty. There's no value in playing by the rules when you're the ONLY PERSON DOING IT.
It's like "playing fair" in Monopoly. You're not virtuous for doing so, you're a dumbass who doesn't realize what kind of game they're playing and your defeat is guaranteed.
And I see no value in an LGBT person respecting decorum on a vote as to whether or not LGBT people deserve rights. Is Civility more important than People's Lives to you?!
"Whether or not you feel a rule is morally correct or not, doesn't change our constitutional processes. If you want that changed, then... There's a constitutional process to do so."
Oh. Okay. So nothing will ever change and the shithead gets their way. Because they can just prevent that from happening.
Oh well, sucks to suck LGBT people, but CIVILITY is more important than any of our lives! Fuck us right? Kill us all and throw us in the camps because Crystal thinks we're being too rude to the Nazis!
Imagine defending something as shamelessly nonexistent as "American Decorum." Fascism thrives with rule-botherers like you, because you're more concerned about forcing the decent people to follow the rules than you are opposing the people who never gave a fuck about "decorum" and abuse/exploit "the rules" to get their way against people with less established Power than them.
Great, a lot of innocent people will die, but Thank Fuck you can say "You followed the rules." I'm sure the victim's families will be very understanding of your obsessive love of "civility politics."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Chris11R "Elon’s flight information was private according to him."
Pfff, "according to him."
Yeah that's not how it works. His private jet, like EVERY private jet, is tracked every minute of every hour of every day expressly so airspace is monitored.
That account he banned was literally just sharing the publicly-available feed to Elon's jet.
Who gives a shit what Elon says, he's not the one who decides how aircraft tracking works, the Government is.
Don't want your jet's location known? Don't own a fucking private jet. That's how it works for EVERYONE ELSE who owns one, Elon's not special.
FFS, AF1's location is known, it's literally on mainstream CNN/FOX/MSNBC every single time the President comes or goes to Andrews AFB ,is Musk somehow More Special than the President of the United States?
Does Musk have some magical set of special rights where "Public Information" that pertains to Musk isn't allowed to be discussed? Because doxxing applies to PRIVATE information.
Oh shit, I just said Elon's name. I guess I just doxxed him according to you. By sharing Public Identifying information, right?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Chris11R "To say he’s banning anyone who has said anything negative about him is beyond ridiculous and you know it"
No I don't. Don't tell me what I know or don't know, I can speak for my damn self.
" I’m not sure you are reading what I wrote carefully so I’ll say it again."
Thanks! Be sure to type eeeeeextra slow, your patronizing insults might get through then.
"Elon said that his flight information was not available publicly and I have no reason to doubt him."
So you're just mindlessly choosing to trust a man who is patently wrong. Elon Musk's "word" does not supplant airspace regulations. His jet was being monitored publicly from the second he started using it, like every other damn aircraft outside of the special operations military service.
"And to say that it shared the location of his jet but not him, while he is on the jet is a stupid comment that deserves no response. "
What you think is stupid or not is irrelevant. Nice excuse for someone who has no actual retort though.
Silly question, how exactly would people know he was on the jet or not if He didn't say so? Jets can and Do still fly without their rich owners, they literally have to in order to keep the pilots training requirements fresh and keep the machinery from stalling out. All that jet information on its own means is "You can see when the jet is moving vs. Not moving."
So how exactly is this doxxing when it's not the person? How would anyone know he was gonna be on that jet unless Elon himself blurted it out?
"I do not view sharing someone’s location as “speech”, I view that as an action."
Nice personal bullshit. What's the actual law think?
"An action that puts his life and his family’s lives at risk"
That's nice, what's the actual law think?
" I’m against it, you love it, we can agree to disagree."
Lol, couldn't end without one last blatant lie could you?
How about you Prove your position has any merit instead? At least pretend you had a point besides "I don't like it because I don't like it".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Kryptic_Karma "It's about defending yourself and your place in the world."
Erm... I'm way safer about 100 miles the opposite direction of the frontline, so "Fuck this" seems to solve one of those, and "My place in the world" is with and supporting the people I care about. And that's not a set location. So hey, Go Team "Fuck it" 2 for 2.
"our anger and hatred of the government is making you see things in a different way than I see it."
No, me having a different opinion than you makes me see things a different way then you see it. Not sure why you're constantly deflecting to my emotional state.
" I'd rather defend my way of living and everyone around me's way of living than let a foreign government push me around and tell me what to do. "
Good for you. You and your buddies can go do that, all power to you. Not demanding you come with me, literally don't care what you do or don't. In fact someone staying behind to slow the attack down actually kind of helps me, so thank you for your noble sacrifice.
"They have no right. If you hate the government, okay. I don't care."
I mean you apparently care just enough to be a moralizing turd about it, but sure.
"I would like that choice to be on my own terms though and not a foreign invader."
Yeah,pretty sure if a nation strong enough to break the USA rolls us, you're just picking "Run and Live" or "Stay and Die."
I mean call me a coward all you like, sounds like I'll at least live long enough to feel bad about it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@goshky I mean I can't really see why inheritance couldn't necessarily continue to a degree. As long as the loopholes are closed up and the law is actually pushed to do it's job with the greediest of the wealthy, being rich could still be perfectly doable. Personally I'd make the cutoff at a single billion for an individual. Millions, I'm cool with. Hell, multimillions and I'd be fine with singular billionaires. But multibillionaires and Trillionaires are absolutely unjustifiable. No one citizen should be permitted to have So Much money on their own that they could single-handedly destabilize the nations chain of command.
No government with any brains should tolerate lone citizens with the capital to completely destroy said government. Yet America has Bill Gates and Bezos, two lone humans who arguably have MORE power over the government than the damn President or Congress does.
Beyond that, I'm fine with the whole spectrum from a billionaire downward. A billion's a lot, but not enough to throw off the entire nation with corruption, and let's be honest No One needs to individually have billions on billions, especially when people are still starving and homeless and dying.
By default a billion is beyond excessive for a lone person with any sense of rationality, and it's not acceptable to me that some people are literally holding onto the income of entire nations on their own, but none of that income goes to the nation despite these ultra-wealthy exploiting trade here without paying their legally required share.
But that's America's big first problem: Any law where the punishment is a mere fine. Because that literally translates to "It's not illegal if you're sufficiently rich."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wowowee69 Lol, dude you won't even want to do strenuous exercise while on hormones.
Fuck your skeletal structure, your entire body-chemistry is being changed. A currently-transitioning athlete 1: Probably isn't playing in the first place for medical reasons, and 2: even if they somehow Could, they're probably not feeling that great while the process is ongoing.
The situation you're describing is only possible if either A: The person hasn't actually transitioned and is Also a competent athlete in the sport in question (I don't give a shit how strong you think your Y chromosome makes you, you are NOT outperforming a WNBA player at basketball unless you are also a pro-level ballplayer. Your penis doesn't make you any less of the lazy uncoordinated shitnugget you currently are), or B: This person IS transitioning, but is such an absolute fucking Unit of a human being that they're having their internal biochemistry altered, suffering all the physical backlashes of such, and is STILL whupping your ass at basketball even while that severely handicapped.
If you think you can just muscle your way through hormone adjustments and potential bodily-surgery and play sports to a professional level under those conditions, you are patently fucking insane. That shit takes awhile to heal and adjust.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@iamthegizzard2495 "Anti-Establishment"
No, Anti-Democrat Establishment almost exclusively.
When a Republican is in power Fox flips the script and becomes utterly shamelessly pro-Establishment bootlickers.
Their principles are, in their entirety, "Whatever I have to pretend to believe at this given second in order to get more/remain making bank." Same logic as to how Fox's pro-2nd Amendment stance twists into "Ban firearms for LGBT people" the second it's convenient, or how Jan 6th was "just a peaceful protest" while any non-Right protest is "violent thugs that need the cops to break them up", or how they're 100% Pure "It's his company he can do what he likes, that's his right" with Elon Musk in charge of Twitter, but were screaming "TWITTER ARE WOKE DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDISTS WHO CENSOR US AND NEED TO BE BANNED!" under the previous owners of Twitter.
If it benefits Them, it's a "Glorious Freedom America exalts." If it benefits You, it's "A gross perversion and mockery of our Constitution." There is no standard but "That which advantages us in this exact moment in time and that which fucks all our opposition in this given moment in time." No code of ethics they will not wipe their ass with at the drop of a hat, no standards they won't abuse and exploit to get just a little further ahead of you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@justinmiller947 "But the key part you are missing... I've never met a person who wasn't a liar and thief."
No duh. Context matters, a lies is not equal to another lie and a theft is not equal to another theft. There's good reasons to lie and justifiable reasons to steal.
The shamelessly lying and grifting and theft of religion actively misleading and shoving lies into people's heads from childhood is an entirely different scale of stealing and fraud that's been perpetuated nonstop for thousands of years.
" Everyone is a bad guy, most people just choose to justify their bad actions."
No, "everyone" is only a bad guy if you can't mentally process the basic concept of a gradient and just unilaterally treat "all sin as equal", and that logic only makes sense to the religious.
"And yes having a "sky daddy" does not force you to do good. But living as though there are no repercussions doesn't seem to be any more effective."
Which no one does BUT the religious. You people use your Eternal Salvation and Jesus' forgiveness as a scapegoat for your horrendous actions constantly and rationalize your bad actions in the "But it's okay, I'm still saved" absolution of all responsibility.
We, the people WITHOUT God, Do Not Get That Luxury. We HAVE to approach this world and its consequences and repercussions in the very real and practical Fact of their existences. No "Sky Daddy" to apologize to instead of my victims, no "Perfect Moral Good" to hide behind, if We fuck up either We own up to it To The People We Wronged or we're bad people.
No "But Jesus loves me and I'm going to Heaven" to fall back on to excuse me not giving a shit about how my actions affect others.
"People are going to be people, and people do evil things to each other. If you think you or your tribe are the exception, you are just lying to yourself and other."
Statistically speaking Atheists make up a lower number of violent criminals per capita, lower number of prisoners per capita, basically kick the ass out of religious people on "Being less Evil" by any metric that can actually be calculated.
Weird, almost like throwing away the "Divine Perpetual Excuse" forces people to have to justify their values by Purely reality-based assessment instead of allowing them to hide behind God.
...Either that or we're just That Much Better at committing crime than you guys and just never get caught. Either way religion doesn't seem to be doing you any favors if your only options are "We're just dumber criminals" or "Our religion does exactly nothing to make us good people."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bold of you to assume we're Not mocking the appearances of the men too.
Shapiro, Gaetz, Fuentez, Tucker, Alex Jones, Glenn Beck, Pattinson, Trump, Biden, every single person I just named was dragged for their appearance with extreme prejudice repeatedly on this channel by Kyle and the fans alike.
Interesting that you Very Specifically noticed the insults aimed at the woman though. Like this shit happens daily on this channel, did you JUST NOW notice it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tim is a traitor.
Not to Kyle or the Left, he was always more conservative in bent and that's Fine. He's entitled to his views and that's great, it'd be boring if everyone was like us.
But I watched him since before Trump, and his views changed unnaturally. The second Trump won, suddenly Tim's views are more akin to Ben Shapiro's. Not That Bad, mind, but he's suddenly arguing less for the Left and now he's parroting conservative Republican talking points. And his popularity Exploded. And as he got more popular, his views got More right-wing. And now here he sits, on Fox news, kissing their ass and parroting their views after spending Years calling Fox out for being the same shameless corporately bought and paid for BS as CNN or MSNBC. In short within less than 4 years he became the exact thing he used to accuse Shapiro, Alex Jones, and Fox's own hosts of being: Bought and paid for Republican shills. And his popularity and profits grew the more he compromised.
No one changes This dramatically in such a short span of time. Seriously, look up Tim from 4 years ago and you could straight up make a video mashup of Tim Pool past refuting Tim Pool present. He flatout pulled a Hillary Clinton, just more Republican.
Now that the Dems are in power, Tim revealed himself to be a grifter. Now that OAN is going down the toilet and the Dems are in power, suddenly there's a whole score of alienated Republicans looking for a spokesperson to support. Someone who talks like them, champions what they think, and isn't Fox News or OAN. And look who stepped right into that niche in direct opposition to every viewpoint he had BEFORE he was sponsored? Tim Pool. Just like Alex Jones, just like Glenn Beck, Just Like Shapiro, Tim stepped up to make some bank.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MatthewDavis-xs2uo ...No, it doesn't.
Dude, I'm telling you the truth, the only reason the Viet Cong and Al-Qaida turned into extended and dragged out wars was expressly because "Winning" wasn't the objective. It never was.
War is profitable for private defense contractors. We had no clear objectives against either Vietnam OR everything in the Middle East because the Goal is "To keep the war going as long as possible." Maximum profit for the low low cost of some unimportant infantryman the contractors don't care about and a bunch of dead foreign people no one'll ever meet. If America wanted the entire Middle East crushed under heel we could do it in a violently bloody massacre of a week. The war continuing is just more profitable than winning.
Seriously, we've been fighting Al-Qaida and terrorists for over 20 years now. What's our objective? What's our victory conditions? What chain of events must occur in order for us to win and go home?
The answer is no one knows. I served for 8 damn years and I Still couldn't tell you even the faintest sense of a gameplan besides "fight terrorists."
There is no objective for winning the war, because the only way the contractors win is if the war's never won. We broke Al-Qaida's spine within less than a month of 9/11, we haven't had a single meaningful loss of lives to terrorists At All since 9/11 that even classifies as a defeat on any less, and yet we've just been spending the 20 years in the meantime just making up excuses to Not leave.
You, on the other hand, are of absolutely zero value to the military industrial complex. They can't exploit your death for money the same way they can by painting all brown people as "scary scary terrorists who need More funding to the industrial complex in order to beat."
Ergo, You would actually be the threat who'd face a US military whose actually being given clear orders, seeing how there's no value in keeping you alive as some foreign boogeyman.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@florinadrian5174 No, I will blame him. Because he stopped fighting. And immediately turned around and started kissing Hillary's ass and encouraging people to vote for her (despite us Watching the DNC rob him at every turn and Clinton being the exact opposite of what his base was voting for in every imaginable way), and then doing the Exact Same Thing with Biden despite, once again, Biden being a standing refutation to everything Bernie claims to believe in.
Say what you like about Trump, but Trump fought and resisted to the bitter end and Didn't start kissing up to the people who beat him. Trup's a selfish, stupid, preposterous egomaniac whose only ideals are "THat which serves Trump", but Trump Fought for his simplistic and bone-headed ideals to the end and never said anything that contradicted the simple objective of "Fuck you I'm Trump and Trump wins."
Bernie, despite having the popular positions of the people, despite being ground zero for exposing every scrap of corruption and backstabbing bullshit in the DNC against him as ammunition to run them into the ground and put them on blast relentlessly from Day One to gain support.... Didn't. He didn't go for the throat even when victory was Handed to him on a silver platter, he conceded defeat the moment the DNC stops pretending to be anything but rigged against him, then started cheerleading for the corrupt shitbaggers who were brazenly openly cheating to such a degree that for once in their lives Fox was on point condemning them in real-time during the Dem primaries.
Bernie has a significant amount of advantages Trump never had against Clinton or Biden, he polled significantly Better than Trump in all instances, even among Red voters during Both elections... And yet he surrenders and joins his corrupt enemy.
Look, it doesn't matter to me what Bernie believes if he can't get elected. And I have Two Elections as evidence that Bernie does Not have the grit to win. He keeps acting like he's playing a fair and honest game when literally no one else is. An honest man in a game everyone Knows is rigged is not virtuous, they're an idiot who can't read the damn room.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 That's why people hate the rich, dude. Rich Americans Don't spend, they Hoard.
Let me run you through the basic A to B here, it's pretty easy enough math to understand: We know for a fact America's richest people are hoarding Trillions in offshore bank accounts. Not spending it, just Putting it there to collect interest. That is money NOT involved in the economy, but which just generates interest.
i.e. "Money with no resources attached to it", also known as Inflation. This practice generates ever more and more money via interest without ever actually producing anything. And since it's not In the economy, it's income Not in circulation or being used by anyone.
So the Rich in America are simultaneously Reducing the Value of American currency AND reducing the amount of money In Circulation, because all that interest they're generating goes right back to them through their assets and accounts.
Money has no value at all unless it's in circulation outside of One function: This. Forcibly increasing inflation while reducing the amount of money in circulation, forcing a chokehold on the working class.
America's entire system, Economically speaking, is a Con. A pure Power Con to enforce the control of the rich over the working class Americans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Okay, got it. 3 people with a system that has a total of $3000, and one of them's me as a standard banker.
Now there's two ways more money gets put into this system that are purely based on economics via the American model.
Person A is gonna use the first one: They gather some iron, we agree as a group that an ingot of iron is worth 20 bucks (I know it's not the real price, the resource doesn't matter), and they give me three ingots of Iron. Our collective amount of resources in circulation has increased, because we have 3 new ingots of iron we didn't have before, so the system would be justified in increasing the amount of money in the system to reflect the new resources (Think of any version of the gold standard you can imagine: You get more of the "thing" you base your monetary value on, then you have more money. More gold means more money based on gold)
Person A's trade with me increased the amount of money in circulation to $3060, but Didn't increase inflation, because the amount of money in circulation still accurately reflects the available resources.
Does that logic track with you so far? I'll move on to Person B here if you've got no issues with my above line of reasoning.
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Okay good, glad we're clear on that. Just making sure.
So all of that is how Person A does economics with us. Our system with Person A gained $60, but it's Not inflation because new resources were added that are accurately represented by the available resources.
Now Person B is gonna be our stand-in for the American Rich: Person B instead comes to me, the banker, and gives me $100, but at a 1% daily interest (Again, the percentage doesn't matter, it's just for the sake of the example, put in whatever percentage you like)
Next day person B comes back, but their account with me says $101.... But I still have $1000. So in 1 day our economic system is now $3001 instead of $3000, but what does that extra dollar represent in resources? What's it referring to?
Nothing. There's suddenly just an extra dollar here but no resources backing it up.
That. Is inflation. That extra dollar that doesn't exist as a representation of any actual resource or service value, but is still nonetheless a dollar.
And the Rich in America have Trillions upon trillions shored away doing Nothing but accumulating interest. The stock market similarly is in the business of just "making up" money out of nowhere by shuffling around percentages. And this is the Overwhelming Majority of the wealth accumulation of the people in America already in possession of over 80% of the total wealth to go around.
So... How exactly is it the fault of the people who literally can't afford to do the One Thing that causes mass inflation (outside of direct government infusion of money, but my example didn't really need it, we're just talking strict economics in a vacuum) in America, but Not the fault of the people who make trillions every year of completely new money in the system with absolutely no resources attached to the interest payments?
Speculation and Interest are the prime generator's of inflation. It's effectively legally-sanctioned counterfeiting.
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 ...Dude, the number of politicians in our system who Aren't multimillionaires, who weren't Born multimillionaires, is exceedingly small.
The government isn't enabling the rich, the government is almost exclusively Commanded by the rich. Like fucking hell dude, most of the people among the CEO's and private industry powerbrokers are Related, like direct siblings, nice-nephews, parents or children of Someone in politics, or vice-versa.
They're not opposing sides of the coin, they're literally shaking eachother's hands under the table while yelling at eachother on TV.
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 ...Because they're in control of Companies with trillions upon trillions more. Sure, Bezos isn't a trillionaire, but he's the Dominant Voice and commanding force of a Trillion dollar company that does whatever he wants. Bill Gates is still the overwhelming shareholder of Microsoft, and as such He's the voice they listen to most when it comes to making decisions despite not being the CEO anymore.
Disney, the literal company Disney, operates as an independent political entity and literal nation Within a nation (Disney is literally in legal control of the entire county where Disneyworld occupies, down to dictating tax laws, infrastructure, giving Themselves a liquor license under their own legal authority, banning any business Not affiliated with Disney, they're literally a tiny Corporate dictatorship in Florida and America's weirdly cool with a rogue feudal state in our territory)
Also they're Relatives. Nepotism is THICK in America's elite. And I don't mean like some grandiose conspiracy, look no further than Trump (I know, cheapshot, but bear with me).
Trump surrendered his companies when taking the Presidency... To his children, while directly making one of his children a member of his staff, and signing off on massive bailouts and "taxpayer-relief" going directly to the companies owned by his kids, with his kids on behalf of Trump's company (not America, his Company) visiting foreign officials and taking bribes for Presidential favors.
And this isn't even atypical for America, the Koch brothers, Microsoft, hell the videogames industry have a crapton of familial overlap between the rich controlling the private industries and the Federal Government.
It's not really shocking at all, it's kind of the obvious choice for a corrupt shitbag.
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 ...Because you and I have had conversations for a long ass time now, dude. I Remember you, you started popping up all over Kyle's vids during the campaigning leading up to 2020, and you were Always on the opposing side of whatever Kyle says in a given video, even when your objections contradict your Previous claims.
As a simple example you condemned and objected to Kyle Twice in the same week last week on two vids and your own claims don't even match eachother. In One you argued that poor people are lazy shits and no one wants to work, in another you claim there's Too Many workers and it's just expected that people would be laid off.
...Those two things can't be simultaneously true, but the only consistent throughline in all your objections is "Whatever Kyle said most recently is inherently wrong."
Hell, I've had THIS conversation with you before, and yet here we are, you acting like this is the first time anyone's ever laid it out.
So... Like what, is your memory exceedingly short or something, because the biggest gripe I have with you is that we've been talking on and off for over a Year now, and your position is still every bit as nebulous and contradictory and impossible to accurately pin down as it was on day One. And it's like no matter how many times a Leftist explains something to you about what our position Actually is, the immediate next conversation you have with one behaves as if all prior conversations never happened and you suddenly don't know anything about Leftist policy again aside from "Leftists R Bad!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 ...I mean yeah, you made dumb decisions. You blew money on a rigged system that everyone Knows is rigged.
And I don't care. I still think you deserve to live and prosper.
And most people in the position of poverty didn't Choose anything. I sure as fuck didn't choose to be born in the ghetto. I didn't Choose for my parents to have to starve and work multiple jobs just to keep me and my siblings fed. And there's a lot of things and opportunities I'm not allowed by simple virtue of my birth. Nothing I actually did wrong or chose, but by the simple metric of being born unlucky, I didn't get a good education that I could've only afforded if I was born rich.
I didn't get medical treatment when I needed it because my family had to weigh the options between healthcare or Eating this month, I didn't get psychological help I needed because we couldn't afford the payments. Hell, we couldn't even afford food that fosters good mental development because, again, America likes to pile on the poor.
How can you look at a system that railroads people into a downward spiral from the moment they were born and say "Yeah it's just your fault for being lazy"? I grew up being given faulty information, not getting the medicine I needed, not getting the psychological screening I needed, constantly on the brink of starving.... And you're saying it's My Fault that's my lot in life?
You know what Didn't get me out of the ghetto? Effort. Seriously, I started a business on the side as a kid relating to MMO's, where I'd set a bot to power-level characters for them. I pay 60 bucks for a new WoW account, powerlevel a character with the bot, then turn around and sell the account to someone else for $2-300 a pop.
Was making damn good money and it wasn't even illegal.... And then the laws changed due to Blizzard lobbying and bribing politicians, now the best avenue of freedom I had available was immediately choked off. The "Land of the Free", and my first involvement in Capitalism was the "Land of the Free" eliminating my right to conduct a victimless business a year after I made 6 figures in 3 months as a 15 year old.
You know what Did set me free? The Military. In America, in order to escape my prison, I had to willfully surrender my rights and become a government stooge suppressing the rights of others in order to get my ticket free in the form of the GI Bill. How is that even remotely sensible as a system?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 Jesus Christ, you KNOW this. Fucking hell, your Messiah Trump even was on our side about this, do you just magically forget what Trump says when he's actually on the money?
The DNC rigs its internal elections and has it Ensured that they can never lose, no matter what the vote goes. The DNC is officially a PRIVATE organization, and as such is not obligated to respect votes at all, despite being the decider of Democrat candidates.
The DNC flat out Stated that all their superdelegates (The fake votes directly appointed by the DNC who don't have to adhere to what voting percentages are) would never vote of Sanders, which ensures Sanders could have won 100% of the Party vote and STILL lost because the superdelegates override the main ones in the DNC system.
Trump and Fox news were demonizing this rank corruption and subversion of the Democratic Primaries right alongside Kyle for Two Different Elections back to back, and yet you think the Democrats won fair and square?
The Democratic Party has their entire system rigged. Until the Republicans are involved, there's no aspect of the DNC that isn't directly controlled by the DNC, Not the voters.
1
-
1
-
@therussiantrollnetwork7464 ...No, they wouldn't. Because Democrats have another trend of being absolutely useless and the people are wise to it now.
Bill Clinton promised progressive reforms and Won off those promises... And never delivered. Obama promised Hope and Change and once again all those Progressive positions, and won based on them TWICE.... And still never did any of them.
Hillary didn't even bother promising anything and just berated people as sexist bigots for not just shutting up and voting for her, and she lost to a man who had no business even making it to the competition (Not even because it's Trump, but because it's a massively stupid idea to give people with no concept of how politics works the Presidency), and Biden once again promised Progressive policies to win.... And only just BARELY beat a man the overwhelming majority of the US hated (Again, just the facts, Trump was not a terribly popular man).
Democrats have lied to the people again, and again, and Again, getting elected off promising incredibly popular positions only to do absolutely nothing and blame Republicans for their failure to uphold any of their promises.
THe Democrats control the Presidency, the House, and the Senate at present. If Democrats wanted Progressive policies then they could pass them through all day err day right now with absolutely Zero recourse from the Right to stop them.
...And yet there's no universal healthcare, no financial aid, everything Biden promised in order to win was thrown away for yet more bailouts for the ultra-rich and megacorporations.
People who hate Republicans hate them generally for what they perceive to be callous and harsh beliefs, but at least Republican voters generally Believe the same things if they vote Republican. But Democrats are openly Promising us Progressivism, getting all their votes Off those promises... Then stab their voters in the back and give them Corporate Republican policies anyway, followed by blaming the Progressives for their failures and calling us commie traitors and denouncing every Progressive position they talked about the Second it comes time to make good on their word.
Like look at the last election, the Only reason Democrats won was because COVID happened. If it was literally anyone but Trump in 2020 as their opponent, the Republicans would've won in 2020 because of how much of an abject backstabbing disgrace the Democrat Party has been since 2008.
No one Likes the Democrats, they just get votes because "Center-Right Corporatists" are the closest thing to "Left" that our politicians won't immediately try to cheat out of victory. The same way Libertarians usually despise the Republican Party, but still begrudgingly vote for Reps more often than not because Republicans are the closest thing to Libertarians our political system will tolerate In politics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Octoberfurst It's actually pretty straightforward: On a local level, usually via groups like the NRA, the rightwing in America actually interfaces directly with people. Presents a friendly face on a local level, wears the mask of common working men and women, y'know, Networking.
Dems Don't. Their policies are more in favor of unions, but they don't show up and promote themselves, they don't have sit-downs with people, they don't even pretend to have solidarity with people in smalltown areas, if they show up at all. Thus despite their policies being overall better for workingclass people, they endlessly come across as utter elitists for whom interacting with the commoners is 'beneath them.'
Sanders and people like him are marked exceptions to this obviously, but if you're a smalltown American, odds are good that the political group that you're seeing actually put forth some token effort to listen to your concerns are backed by the GOP, NOT Dems.
1
-
1
-
Derek Hitt Well if only there was a simple, blatantly obvious reason why Trump was so despised in the public square. Something like a cripplingly unlikable personality, constant aggression to any and all people to hold his feet to the fire, making constant and publicly childish insults and openly threatening sovereign nations as the mouthpiece of the USA, despite actively ignoring the general American consensus that wants all these wars to stop. Which he Promised to stop, yet turns out that was a flat out lie.
...Hmmm... No, somehow for the life of me I can't think of a single reason why the general majority of planet Earth weirdly doesn't like the one rich fuck in America who is seemingly hand-built from the ground up to be the most intolerably unlikable prick.
Like did you guys forget that NO ONE liked or respected Trump prior to his campaign? He was elected for being a systemic anomaly in politics, but did we all just forget the decades prior where Trump was revealed constantly to be a Party-flopping corporatist sellout (Who was Dem once upon a time and kissing Hillary's wrinkled old ass for bailouts) with a personal track record of shamelessly fucking his own personal businesses up only to liquidate them for profit, screw his employees and their well-being, Daddy T's gotta get Paid for his incompetence.
Seriously, it's not even remotely shocking why people just inherently disliked Trump. He has literally spent the majority of his existence in America being known only as the unlikable douche of a businessman who is somehow still rich despite several Consecutive bankrupted business and whose wholly unjustified and off-putting ego was famous. He literally had a show where his entire purpose was to be a snobby cunt to people on the Apprentice. Like did we all just magically forget about who Trump was Before his campaign and Presidency?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Derek Hitt Yeah, accusations from a liar mean nothing to me.
And no, I haven't. Sorry, but this lazy attempt at gaslighting is just pathetic.
I've said nothing even remotely unreasonable thus far, yet you just keep shamelessly lying about what I believe, slinging baseless insults and actively doing everything you can to NOT say or prove or give a single position to talk about besides "Trump's amazing, he should be President, literally everyone who disagrees is a liberal snowflake shill betraying America."
Go on, I'll give you an easy freebie: Name One thing that you know for a fact I support politically. Say One thing about my politics that is true, since you "clearly" know what I think better than I do.
Or hey, ask a fucking question for once. Like demonstrate Some indicator that you actually have opinions like what we real human beings have and aren't just a mindless parrot for Trump's camp.
Have something to actually Say, FFS.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Derek Hitt "Oh sorry, I'd loooove to have a conversation but that would require me to actually know something worth saying. So instead I'mma blame you for my hilarious inability to follow-through after strolling up like Billy Bignuts. Nah it's not my fault for being a bullshit artist, it's Your fault for failing to uphold a standard known only to me, which you will not be told. But you totally violated it, no I won't tell you how, so fuck you I win."
No sources, no facts, no evidence, nothing of substance said but ad homs for 4 months. I'd have left an hour ago but I am simply fascinated by what vapid burbling will excuse you from having to actually talk this time. Maybe he'll never respond again? Maybe he'll actually say something. Probably not, calling it now, if there IS a next comment, it's gonna be as passive-aggressive, pithy, and as completely lacking in any proof or point as everything else you've typed thus far.
C'mon man, actually say something worth all this effort. Like is that how the troll works? You literally do nothing but waste people's time pretending like you have something to say and just dragging them on? No really sure how that works, troll-wise, it's kind of a given that people who type on YT comments ain't got a whole lot going on, so you're probably not distracting people or wasting any time they weren't already delightfully wasting.
Throw a curveball in there dude, you might enjoy not being a total thongstain.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jansmitowiczauthor78 Also, no we were not having a conversation. I responded to the OP. Then, you interjected with a complete non sequitur about Republican policy, which I fail to see why I even have to justify seeing how I'm not a rightwinger in the slightest.
Followed by a naked accusation that I'm a liar and that I don't understand conversation.
So, since My idea of conversation is flawed, I'm guessing the Proper way to communicate is to just bombard strangers with irrelevant non sequiturs, accuse them of being a liar, providing nothing whatsoever backing up that claim, followed by being a smug douche about how they don't understand that this drive-by bullshit is, as you called it, a "conversation."
You messaged me first, asshole, no idea where you got the impression we're just having a friendly chat.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Your nation, if American, already Throws Out enough food in the trash to feed the rest of the planet for the next several.
I know this is a difficult lesson for Americans, but here's a wild idea: Why not just share the already obscene load you already produce that only exists to end up in dumpsters anyway?
You literally aren't eating it, as evidenced by how fuck-full your dumpsters are with perfectly good yet-still-trashed food, and there's not a lot of money to be extorted out of poor people worldwide, so why not just "Share It?" Use that big as all shit trade empire you're all so fucking proud of and send that shit by the boatload elsewhere? You guys still eat all the same stuff you were eating anyway, and the excess is actually Useful instead of fertilizing the bottom of a landfill.
Don't even gotta become communists, just stop being such a massive black hole where precious resources go just to burn. That right there is kind of the biggest irritation the rest of the planet has with America. Not that you're Capitalists, but the fact that you used Capitalism to gain this massive wealth and powerful position America holds in the world, you climbed to a position where you have the resource output, finances, manpower, and technology to actually DO all the things you people keep Promising Capitalism can do for the people.
....Only to be the most greedy, resource-burning, single-mindedly nationalistic cunts ever who find every possible excuse to hoard all of it for... Well I almost said Yourselves, but you guys don't even look after your own people. You just throw all this power and luxury and wealth and prosperity at a select few rich people who abuse you and wonder why the abuse never lessens or wonder how you're still living more or less on the same economic average as the average resident of Mexico.
You Can solve all these issues, comically easy in some cases, it's the Active Refusal to Do So while Actively Causing More Problems that makes people absolutely sick of hearing America's endless spew of lies and bullshit. Your nation talks like the saviors of Mankind, but the fuck has America actually done for anyone that isn't rich?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@monteciagreen1050 Yeah, Osama, a guy We trained, a guy We equipped, and a guy we were only too happy to support Prior to him attacking us when he was helping us sow chaos in the Mid East during the Cold War.
...Anyone else find it funny that all these terrorist leaders and dictators from the Mid East we've killed used to be allies of ours in that region? Osama, Saddam, Ghaddafi, the one common thread for all of them is "Supplied by America, Trained by America, put in power by America.... Then killed by America."
We actively put fanatics, tyrants, and lunatics in dictatorial power over the region, destroyed any democratic systems that existed prior... And we're SHOCKED the Middle East hates us? When has our existence in the last century been anything but "The Biggest Scariest Boogeyman" to everyone in the middle east outside of Saudi Arabia and Israel?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ernestorodriguez456 Yes, but you're Wildly overselling by how much. A simple example would be Papa John's. Back in the 2010's they number-crunched and determined that, in order for Papa John's to provide health insurance to his employees, ALL his employees, the only cost increase was 5 cents on the pizzas. All his employees get massively improved healthcare, for the cost of a unit of currency people don't even pick up off the sidewalk. No one would need to be laid off, no one thrown away, and JUST a 5 cent increase in prices.
...Instead Papa John's fired a few thousand people anyway, raised the price by 15 cents anyway, and actively became the problem with the minimum wage.
There's only one reason that the cost of goods would raise past the point of reason, and that's expressly when a corporate entity is being Exactly what the Socialists warn against: i.e. when a corporate entity decides their bottom line is more important than the lives of employees. In other words, when a company becomes an abject disgrace.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@glupshitto5019 " no i agree as an anarcho communist he should be allowed to run even from prison bc what if malcom x wanted to run but had bogus charges against him for example?"
And what if Charlie Manson runs? Seriously, your argument is basically just "let 'em run becuz they might be good people and the charges might be fraudulent anyway so why not?"
Ooookay, but what if it's literally the vast majority of convicts who Did Indeed do the thing they're being tried for, which is illegal, regardless of your personal morality of the given crime?
"felons and convicted criminals should be allowed to run as they are right now otherwise the government could just bring charges against political enemies and disqualify them from running."
Wow you just flat out don't give a shit and are fine letting actual violent criminals run for... Seriously, what reason again?
Tell me, what's the positives you're getting out of also adding convicted violent criminals of every stripe from cannibals to pedos to serial killers to Charlie Manson into your political system? What problem are you trying to fix here Exactly that's worth actively discrediting the legitimacy of any and all legality in this country and giving possible power to ACTUAL FUCKING NIGHTMARES that are in prison for a god-damned reason.
Like if you were advocating for certain types of criminal that'd be one thing, but you actively endorsed letting Criminals As A Totality run for elections and the Presidency, on the Presumption that their crimes "As Decided in the Eyes of the Government which Legitimizes all this shit we're talking about" is probably bullshit and "we don't want to legitimize a thing like 'legal system fuckery' between American politicians.... Which they literally do all the time, have done the entire time in current living memory, and Have Done Demonstrably as Documented In Our Own History Books since AT LEAST President Jackson.
Making your crusade here basically "Hey let's allow people who are convicted felons to run for office because we have to prevent a problem that exists no matter if I do this or not."
....Make this make sense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@georgeemerald4389 Based on small government?
Dude, you're giving way too much credit to the Reps here. They're only pro small government as politicians when a Dem is in power. When they're in charge, they waste no time using the full force of the Fed whenever they can to forcibly push through and enforce whatever they want for the corporate class.
When it comes to doing things nice for anyone, THEN the government must be smaller, so that it Can't afford to help anyone, thus ensuring the corporate class can do what it wants without spending a dime. But if it comes to subjugation, foreign oppression, and military violence and war crimes (and in the words of a Fox host the other day, saying asinine shit like "We should annex Cuba" on public media), suddenly not only do they like big government, but they will gladly spare no expense to shove bailout after bailout through while funneling more stolen tax money into the military private sector in order to maximize profits off human suffering.
The Republican Party as a political power is a farce. They don't want small government, they want unilateral Control of the government. All resources, all wealth, if it's not in the hands of an ultra-wealthy corporate entity (and No One else) then it's "Socialism" and must be destroyed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dansmodacct Doesn't need to be controversial.
American Libertarian politics is just childish and idiotic and selfish on the face of it. It's Pointless talking to Libertarians about politics 95% of the time because if it doesn't affect Them directly, they don't care, and if it Does impact them, they want it gotten rid of permanently.
They're entitled brats who don't want any obligations whatsoever to the society they exist within and auto-reject any politics or philosophy that implies they're obligated on any level to anything but themselves. And will ignore any evidence to the contrary, since Libertarians will constantly crow about their "self-made" individualist status in spite of Every Single One having only obtained this as a result of the society they're so adamant to pretend isn't there.
In short talking to a Libertarian about politics is like talking to a Luddite about the quality of modern videogames. Their opinion is worthless, uninformed, and they're probably just going to say "Get Rid of It, Because Bad" anyway regardless of your input.
Appeals to emotion don't work, appeals to reason don't work, hell basic appeals to Math don't work, they're 110% committed to their "All Governance Bad" schtick and everything said to the contrary is corruption and lies trying to seduce them. It's a Cult.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nfzeta128 "trying" is being more than a bit generous. He literally wants to give the Republicans what they want (Hardly surprising, his entire track record is that of a Republican, regardless of what he calls himself), and openly shit on the entire Left by openly decrying us a commie traitors during his election run when we stopped doing what the DNC wanted and actually expected anything of him.
So far the entire loop has been as follows: His voters want X. Biden doesn't want X. The Dems spend a week or so shitting on the Left for wanting anything, points to Trump, says "He's better than Trump, how dare you expect More out of him?!" ...Until a Rep does something that would cause political suicide if Biden and Co. keep siding with them, essentially forcing Biden to concede to us or else ensure the Reps get reelected at midterms.
So... Fuck, why weren't we doing this before? If all it took was actually playing the game of Chicken with these idiots then we should've done thing during the election campaign.
"If you don't vote our way them Trump wins." Ohhhh no. It's more like "Do what the Left voted you in for, or the Republicans win. We can survive another Republican run, we've survived every single one so far. But can Your careers survive another Trump?"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@blairhaffly1777 Too bad. You irritated me the moment you decided to disregard my comment to keep trying for emotional appeals.
And if you want the actual solution, ask the French. If you're trying to fix the system from within the system, we've been trying that since WW2 ended.
...How's it been working out for you guys? As long as you people are fine "being too polite" to push back, you will remain in the shit you're in.
No choice but what the rich want, no real rights, endless meatgrinder wars slaughtering brown people and everyone's too broke to own homes, afford rent, pay their taxes or bills, hell with the oil shortage even "being able to Afford to go to work" is a dubious proposition for many. All while the rich waggle their dicks and money in front of you with mega-yachts and space trips and government bailouts of YOUR money handed over to them on a silver platter.
You don't win anything by playing a rigged game by the rigged games rules. It doesn't make you noble, it doesn't make you "the better man", it makes you a loser who feels slightly better about being a loser.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@heywoodjablomi1109 "When a person uses the term “on about,” I know that he/she is a wannabe Brit fop, "
So you're an instantly judgmental cunt, got it.
"but to make it clear, being a member of a religion comes with obligation. Pelosi is breaking the obligation by being pro-abortion."
Yeah, that's great, America doesn't need to give a shit. The day God and the religious start paying their fucking taxes is the day the Vatican's authority on American policy means a fucking thing.
If Nancy DID comply with the Vatican, then not only is she violating the Constitution AND her position as an elected representative, but she'd also be in active collusion with a foreign power against American interests.
In short, she'd be an American traitor.
If this is even a dilemma for her At All, then she has no business being in politics due to her apparent conflict of interest. God has no business in Washington until he pays his dues. If she's an American politician, then her first obligation Should be to the American people, not fucking God.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@middleschoolgravy "But what is the answer or at least what is the most realistic answer for right now, that we can actually achieve?"
Most realistic?
What's going to happen if the DNC continues down this road is the most realistic outcome. And the most realistic outcome is the DNC disenfranchising more and more of its own voters until the GOP wins by basic numbers.
That is the "most realistic" outcome of this current course of action. If that is fine with you, then I guess "Press Ahead DNC."
"Because believe it or not I believe a 2nd Trump term would be disastrous for this country and that we could actually fall to authoritarian fascist rule."
Agreed. Which raises the question "Why is the DNC helping him win?" Any PR monkey would tell you this is massively bad PR for elections.
"So yeah, I’m gonna cringe and hitch on to Old Brandon."
Go for it. Seriously, no judgement, I get why you feel this way and wholly support you doing what you think's best in this unfortunate voting choice put before you.
"Otherwise you know, you’d be on the receiving end of the “finding out” too? I don’t want that."
My beef isn't with your efforts, I appreciate them.
My concern is that it's not going to matter what I want. Because it never does. I'm not stating what I stated above as "my political ideal", just "What I think is Going to happen if this chain of events continues unaltered."
Biden will lose if he continues in this way. And the DNC's only possible prayer of avoiding Trump at this point, again IF THEY CONTINUE DOWN THIS ROAD, is hoping to Christ Trump's disqualified in court.
Because they're actively Handing the vote to him. Every time the Democratic Party wipes their ass with the values they pretended to hold to sucker in votes, they lose voters. That's just a fact of reality. And the Dems, unlike the Reps, don't have a singular monolith of a voting block that's locked in.
We succeed as a unified front, or not at all. And the DNC is actively going out of its way to tell its own voters "We Do Not Need You."
...Muslims they don't needs, working class people they don't need, Floridians they don't need, Leftists they don't need.
How long before the DNC is nothing left but a group of screaming old white men condemning minorities for ruining their lives and "not knowing their place" in an ironic return to origins?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@accavandam8673 "If you are a lesbian you will be judged for your genetic mutation, illness, sexual kink or all 3."
So Christians are judgmental dickholes who don't care if the object of their judgement even made an active choice. You're shitheads.
"I know this is what bothers you but do not give in to fetishes"
Why? Because the only negative seems to be "A bunch of shitheads no one should respect will be whiny little bitches about it and scream "SIIIIIIN!!!!!"
Seems like you guys shutting up and finding an actual cause would solve 99% of the issues.
"I know you people are ashamed of your sin, but I’m telling you you can repent and prey, do not give up on your self I will prey for you."
Very fitting choice of "Prey."
Because you people are predators who only grow through abuse, shaming, and self-loathing in others.
No one's ashamed of being LGBT, they're ashamed of You. Stop transplanting your bigotry, hatred, and disgust onto us. You have the problem here, You fix it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@waltergrace565 I'm assuming you didn't read my comment entirely. If you did, you'd have noticed that I made no distinction at all between conservatives, Democrat or Republican.
And let's go down the list: Yes I think education should be free, while political conservatives defend the unjustifiably inflated college prices in America, despite our education not being any better than it is in European nations, who offer the same education without forcing their students into obscene debt for the effort.
Conservatives have been actively trying to overthrow Roe v. Wade ever since it was established, and constantly try to regulate or outlaw birth control methods on State levels. Don't pretend like Republicans Haven't been doing that, Fox actively argues every other Week that abortion should be criminalized.
And remind me again, whose been the biggest obstacle to gay rights? Conservatives. Whose been the biggest obstacle to legalization of weed and psychedelics? Conservatives. Who keeps expanding the prison population purely on drug offenses, regardless of whether or not there's an actual victim in said offenses? Conservatives.
Who keeps making excuses for why we need to be infringing on human rights in Other nations in nonstop wars that have been going Nonstop ever since WW2 ended? Oh right, Conservatives.
Democrat or Republican, it's amazing to me that conservatives, despite shouting from the rooftops as to how much they Loooove freedom, but they're always the first to try and shove people into prison or blow people up for actually Exercising it.
We have the largest per capita prison population in the first world, despite claiming to be the "Free World" in America, and when you go down the list of politicians who signed off on the stricter and harsher prison sentencing for victimless crimes, what a shock, it's almost entirely politicians who are conservatives bipartisanly.
But hey, feel free to prove me wrong: Exactly What freedoms do conservatives fight for? Toss me a list.
1
-
@waltergrace565 Also, can't believe this even has to be said after these last two elections, but Democrats are Not "The Left." THey never were. Did you just miss how they called us all Party traitors and ran us through the mud for Not bending over and taking Hillary and Biden up our ass? Remember Biden calling us all "Communist dissidents" during his campaign post- nomination? Remember the Endless shit we got and fearmongering thrown our way that it'll be OUR fault if Trump gets elected, just because we preferred our own guys over the corrupt establishment?
Where exactly did you get it in your head that Democrats are at all a representation of what the Left is? They Hate us, and always side with Republican legislation over the Left. When push comes to shove, we only have One Party in this nation. Democrats and Republicans are just the "Good cop/bad cop" of the exact same corporate conservative party. Both want corporations to have absolute control, Both want endless wars, and both balk at the idea that taxpayer money should go towards the benefit of the Taxpayer, not them.
If the government does not exist to serve the well-being of its people, then the government has no reason to exist except to benefit those Within the government.
Arguing that the Democrats are at all representative of the Left is like saying Republican politicians are in any respect a reflection of American Libertarians. It's not even close, and the relationship is the exact same: They give lip service when they need your votes, then throw you away the second they no longer need you to get power.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Wow, it's almost like at one point in time being a Republican meant something besides being a hyper-Christian supremacist and fascist. Like it was an actual political position that had some nuance or something. Fuckin' wild.
Like FFS, just because your establishment party gets taken over by crazy whackjobs doesn't make you drop political positions you still have.
Sound I assume anyone and everyone who supports the DNC are actually in favor of shamelessly enabling the Republicans while only giving lip service to the idea of opposition while they're actively taking money from the same people that fund Republicans?
Shot in the dark, these guys still believe in small government, individual meritocracy as a concept to be revered, capitalistic enterprise and the like. They're not Dave Rubin, they're human beings with a political position.
Do you just wantonly abandon all your political beliefs because some fucking lunatic cult gets their hand on the wheel? Like if some cult infiltrated the Progressive movement you'd suddenly be like "y'know Fuck social democracy, a fucking Scientologist is here, everything I supported politically is now forfeit"?
"Well I still believe in like 90% of the general Republican things, but I'll just forget all that because some Christofascist showed up. My political positions are super-fickle, for I am a gay Republican." /s
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I will give an example... But it does involve Trump, so brace yourself.
Prior to the election, when people needed more financial aid, Trump was actually pushing for it. Not out of charity, mind, but he was on the campaign trail and it was gonna look Damn good for his campaign if he could tie "And I gave you even more $2k checks, vote Trump!" to his campaign.
Like just to clarify, he was still stalling until the campaign so these checks would be a political bargaining chip, so it's hardly altruistic. But it Would have been a good thing for the people in the midst of COVID, regardless.
...And Pelosi did everything in her power to completely block it at every step because they'd rather let people suffer than allow a single positive thing, however loaded and manipulative, to be associated with Trump at the time.
So yeah, I'd say your assessment's pretty spot on.
1
-
1
-
@webman1956 Lol, I mean are you surprised?
"Nothing" is all we've gotten for years.
From Reagan until now, what President have we had that actually Kept Their Word on promises? Obama was the last President we had that made ANY promises the majority of the nation even wanted, and he went back on all of them. At least Trump Tried to build that stupid pointless wall. Sure no one wanted it but his voters, but that's at least Something a voter wanted, y'know? Not my kind of voter, but SOME kind of voter.
Meanwhile, Clinton and Biden ran on absolutely nothing but "I'm not Trump." Great, neither is anyone on the face of this planet EXCEPT Trump, what else ya got?
"Wait, we're supposed to have policies?" ....*Facedesk*
This entire system has trained us to expect Nothing, and that anything else is entitlement and selfishness.
1
-
1
-
@kalebaldwin5398 So?
It baffles me how little faith people have in eachother. You have all been fed bullshit and lies your whole lives, railroaded into arbitrary political alignments and gaslit into tribalism. None of the plebs chose this, they were Pushed into this.
Like seriously, real talk, no bullshit: Do you believe that, if our leaders Weren't actively playing into social drama, fearmongering every ten seconds about how all the foreigners be scary spooky people, just pumping you with hate and fear and distrust of your neighbors, your friends, hell your Own motives constantly, if you people weren't worked half to death and kept in a perpetual state of desperate borderline-poverty to take up all your time to focus... Do you seriously think so little of your neighbors that they'd Still be like this by default?
Yeah, Jim Crow was popular. So was fearmongering about non-white people by the elite. Hell, violent retribution for 9/11 was popular.... But who was filling your media screens 24/7 with horror and destruction footage and forcing you, as a nation, to stare at the carnage just to get your blood boiling into supporting another war against your own interests?
Maybe that's genuinely how Americans are, maybe not. But I Can't allow myself to accept that this citizenry is so far gone that they Knowingly, Deliberately, and with full understanding of their actions, chose to follow a path that actively ruined their own lives and profited the elite exclusively.
Because if that IS the case, then just give up. America is lost, nothing can be done, we all deserve to burn and die together if we're That unilaterally corrupt and stupid.
But I think people have just been getting fed this bull for so many generations that it's normal now. "The way things have always been." People almost never question things that have been part of their lives so long that it's just a fact of reality to them.
I can't condemn someone for sticking to what they know if I know they're being kept ignorant on purpose. Especially when this country is so psychotically polarized that Any political disagreement is met with hostility and accusations of fascism or communism or whatever.
Like there could be a lot of people on the fence who are just being shoved to the fence, not because one side is more compelling than the other, but because Both sides are incredibly incendiary, tribalistic, toxic as all fuck to dissenting opinions, and Constantly gaslighting them or shaming them into supporting Democrats or Republicans.
1
-
Derek Hitt "antivaxxers are more welcome then corporate boot lickers"
Literally no one here likes you, no one here respects you, we all think you're a spamming troll whose position is literally always "The exact opposite of whatever Kyle says at any given moment", you are not in any sense welcome here besides the obvious "A view's a view" incentive, and you speak for exactly No One else here but yourself.
Also, hypocrisy much? If Kyle puts out a video against a corporation, there You are, on that video, polishing corporate balls because "it's the opposite of what Kyle said this time."
What parallel universe are you living in where Anyone here cares what you think besides disagreeing with you or mocking you? We already know exactly what your position is: The exact opposite of whatever Kyle said, no matter what it is. If Kyle came out Tomorrow against the vaccine, you'd be all for it. If Kyle switched to being the most Republican dude ever, you'd be espousing the virtues of socialism the same day.
You have zero grounds to suggest you speak for anyone here about who is or isn't welcome. It's only Kyle's refusal to block you that even allows You to be here at all. Kyle decides who is or isn't welcome as a commenter here, not your worthless ass.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hat8918 Ohhhh, so the definition of assault changes? Since when did the law go by what society wants?
Oh right, I forgot, rich people, different rules.
Also, that fucker was laughing right up until he looked at his wife. Bitch ass move slapping a guy for making fun of your wife when You Laughed.
But sure, over-correcting the opposite direction to save face in front of the wife and assaulting a working comic onstage after laughing right along with the joke not a moment before is "romantic."
Lol, more things to worry about than 1 rich guy, and yet here you are, defending an action that would've gotten a non celebrity in cuffs and on the ground at the very least. Yeah, your time seems suuuuper valuable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@charleswomack2166 No, the "Better for the greater good" thing would be for the government to get their fucking shit together, not deciding to throw all their genetically divergent people , mothers and children alike, just need to die.
I mean hey, no formula for them, no support for children, Mandated forced-birth incoming, America is actively trying to cull their population, and I guess we chose any and all genetically deviant children who can't take breastmilk.
"Pro-Life" indeed. "We'll kill you with Darwinism as God intended, No One lives who would've died in the wild! As is the American way" We're fucking animals.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yeah, nobody but his millions of followers, the American Right that treat him like a great thinker, CNN, MSNBC, Humanist Report, Rational National, Deep Fat Fried, the Majority Report, TYT, everyone who talks about him or hosts him or debates him or attends his tours of seminars in multiple countries around the world...
You didn't think about this comment at all. You're actively pretending someone internationally famous (for better or worse) wouldn't be famous unless Kyle wasn't talking about him.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brantleyerik Betrayal, most likely.
Look, let's face facts: If you support Republicans at this point, by and large you're part of the cult. You're a true believer, all the horrible stuff the GOP/MAGA want, you probably also like. Their behaviors aren't a bug, they're a feature.
But if you support/supported Dems, odds are good you were brought in under the assumption that certain ideals, beliefs, and policies would be fought for. LGBT rights, minority rights, worker's rights, an end to/slowing down of our foreign policy of unchecked warfare. All of which the Dems were happy to exploit to garner support..... Only to keep distancing themselves further, and further, and Further from all those values, courting Republicans now, all perfectly confident that "You will shut up and vote for them anyway out of fear".
Democrats endlessly promote themselves as "Better than" the Republicans, yet when push comes to shove, they will absolutely betray everyone who supported them on that point at the first opportunity. The enemy in front of you is less disheartening than the so-called ally knifing you in the back.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ashura3313 So... Being in favor of governmental intervention =fascist?
This entire damn video was him condemning the bad precedent Military intervention sets and how it's a bad idea.... But he's still a fascist because he still thinks intervention is necessary?
Hang on, let me check real quick:
"a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition"
So... Kyle's not a nationalist, Kyle's not a racial supremacist, Kyle has at no point been in favor of autocratic governments or dictators, his stated desire for economic regulation is pretty damn basic, so "severe" doesn't apply either here, and he's literally rejecting the idea here of Forceful government intervention, so the last one doesn't even apply either.
What definition of fascist are you using, exactly? Wait, maybe I can find another one:
"a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control."
Well shit, Kyle doesn't really apply to this one either.
So please, instead of expecting me to just Read Your Mind, care to explain by what definition Kyle is a fascist?
1
-
@ashura3313 I didn't say anything about the right at all in either of my statements, actually. I didn't invent the definition of fascism, if you take that as an attack on the Right, then I dunno what to tell ya. Fascism is the Authoritarian dictator of the Right the same way Soviet-brand Communism is the authrotarian dictator of the left.
...No one wants Either of them.
And I don't even agree with Kyle. I don't want a mandate. I want you people to be free to never wear masks, never get vaxxed, and mingle with as many people as you like.
However, My reason is that this has been going on for two years, I'm sick and tired of asking people to do the smart thing, and frankly if stupid people would rather die and kill others via an easily preventable illness, that's on them. I'm done trying to make America do anything but kill itself. Just take off the pandemic mandates and let whatever happens to this worthless excuse of a nation happen. Either America will be fine or the world will lose a worthless country. The species wins either way.
However, I Do understand people who still think enough of the American people to try and salvage this mess. I just think they're wasting their time because it's been two years: If these idiots haven't figured out the message yet, they never will.
Better to just let the cancer end. If it wants to kill itself for me, who am I to deny America's assisted suicide?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BrianIsWatching No no, I'm not even talking vocabulary, I mean "literally getting through a sentence."
Like the dude slurs words constantly, was forgetting where he was and what position he was even running for mid-campaign, going on senile tangents that lead nowhere in response to questions, and his mannerisms were fluctuating during the debates like someone whose Adderall was wearing off. Like he'd Start a debate sharp as a knife and actually doing pretty well, but the senile old gibberish started creeping in during the longer ones, providing reddit with a massive trove of memes.
Don't get me wrong, Trump should never have been allowed anywhere near the Presidency, he's a psychopath. But holy shit Biden should be retired in some old folks community with a nurse, not in the White House interfering with American policy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
....Are you just not watching all his vids? Dude was demonizing Biden DURING his entire campaign run, and every other video is demonizing Biden for shit he's Currently doing.
Like what is this, ten second memory? I watch his stuff daily and there's this same shit on every damn video of his, as if the person viewing it has only seen the ONE video and just started extrapolating. In videos where he was giving Trump credit on any level:"Oh my God Kyle is such a MAGA shill. Fake ass plant." When he condemns Trump: "Oh my Gawd Trump this, Trump that, all you ever do is hate on Trump." WHen he's cruel to Biden: "Oh my Gawd you're never happy, stop rocking the boat and sowing division!" When he's even slightly nice to Biden "Oh my Gawd you NEVER criticize Biden, what a fucking simp."
He was literally shitting on Biden Yesterday directly, calling his administration a bunch of shameless shills for MBS, and every video he's put out relating to the economy and covid and people suffering since Biden was sworn in has been chock full of insults and contempt for Biden. Seriously, what crack are you smoking, you basically just said the equivalent of "Gawd the NRA Never talks about guns. Why don't they talk about guns more?"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@paulapenny4048 Giving and compassionate?
Lol, are you having a stroke? America has been spending the past several Decades blowing up brown people who didn't even do anything to us, we haven't been in a single war WE didn't instigate since World War 2, we have ruined Islamic nations and handed them over to dictators WE appointed, and we blame THEM for it all like we're the victims despite committing warcrimes and blowing up hospitals and openly shooting into crowds of civilians being so common with our forces that the Rest of the world just assumes America did it every time they hear about war crimes in the Mid East. And most of the time they're absolutely right, America does blow up hospitals (war crime), torture prisoners (war crime), and indiscriminately kill civilians without concern if they're even vaguely near the intended target (War. Crime.)
Also not sure why you started harping on about illegals, no one else even mentioned it as far as I can see. But hey, thanks for airing out your obvious fear of foreigners.
But hey, it wouldn't be American if you didn't talk like a saint one second while slaughtering people like the worst devil the next. Hypocrisy and lies are pretty much all we got.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@imnotmike "There are a lot of problems with that plan economically."
Okay then. What do we got?
" Legally, the country can do anything they want. They make the laws, so if they want to excuse the debt, they don't have to jump through any hoops to do it. They can just excuse the debt."
Fucking sweet! Let's do it!
"Economically, that would be disastrous.
Regardless of the excuse they use to excuse the debt, they would still just not be paying back that debt."
So what? What happens to debt you owe to yourself if you don't pay it?
Seriously asking, let's say I owe myself 20 bucks... Somehow. I pull out a 20 from my wallet say "I' paying myself 20 bucks".
....What changed? I'm just "not paying the debt." But so what, I was the one paying Out that debt. 20-20= Net Zero.
"Most of the US debt is owed to American citizens in the form of bonds and social security payments and such"
...So we'd be forgiving our own debt.
Great! I don't want to pay it. Why am I paying money To Myself to pay for a det I owe to myself? Pretty sure "No debts to pay" is the solution, right?
They forgive the debt we don't pay another cent towards those bonds. Who loses here that I'm supposed to care about?
"If you just decide to default on that debt, that means you're taking the life savings away from millions of people and leaving them with nothing to retire on, refusing to give them back the money they paid you on savings bonds and the interest you promised they could collect."
As opposed to the current plan which is "We're taking the Millennials retirement. And Gen-Z. None of you will Ever retire until the Boomers are paid off."
We're talking the life's saving away from Hundreds of billions of people to pay for an ever-increasing impossible debt for a few million people Decades ago! Who Cares, they're mostly all dead anyway why are the bad decisions of corpses still screwing us Now? Why am I never going to retire because of a debt I never took out? Make those dirtbags take their own advice, pull themselves up by the bootstraps, and work until They die for a debt They took out instead of forcing the Rest of us to fit the bill for them and sacrifice Our retirements to do it?
Fuck Grandpa for ruining my future before I was ever alive.
"Additionally, if the US defaults on its debt, even if they try to transfer that debt to an individual before it defaults, the world would still come to the conclusion that a debt owed by the US government was no longer a safe debt. "
We already have the world reputation for violating contracts and deals like breathing. The only reason people get into deals with us at All is because we have a huge militarized gun to threaten them with if they don't.
The word of the US government isn't worth its weight in dogshit, it's just too powerful to NOT comply with.
"That would destroy the country's credit rating"
..Credit rating with Who?
"crash the value of the dollar on the world stage, ruin the country's standing as the world's economic leader, remove the dollar as the worldwide trade currency, and basically cause a global economic catastrophe."
So... Going down the list:
"crash the value of the dollar on the world stage"
So what? Japan's yen sucks balls outside of Japan and they're ore technologically advanced and have a higher average QoL for citizens than Americans.
Clearly a crappy currency isn't a big deal unless you Make it a big deal.
"ruin the country's standing as the world's economic leader"
A standing we only have because we're a perpetual warstate of warcriminals. In short: so what, why is it our fault other nations were stupid enough to tie themselves to the "endless inflation monster?" If they implode it serves them right for trusting the US government.
" remove the dollar as the worldwide trade currency"
Boo hoo, serves them right for making the USD the WSC in the first place despite record-breaking inflation for decades. I feel no pity for Lemmings.
"basically cause a global economic catastrophe"
Yeah Lemmings tend to do that.
So.... Are the problems with this plan just the result of Other dumbass ideas we've had? Because it looks like the only main consequences is "The richest stock-broking parasites in every nation suicidal enough to tie themselves to us get to learn what a Darwin award is, and any further problems would be the result of dipshits who still want to retain their debt-slavery over the US people.
In short, morons and corruption. If I waste time weeping for the stupid I'll be crying all day and I feel nothing for the plight of a rich man suddenly joining the rest of us in the Real World.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@artemisfowl9219 "California is the sespit for all the progressive crap that then gets disseminated throughout the country by ideologues."
Cesspit. Also, what's this have to do with Kyle?
"California is a Super Majority Lefty state, it has had free reign to implement its progressive agenda and it has resulted in turning the Cities into drug and feceas infested hellscapes, high crime, and higher taxes to fund these detrimental ideas."
Feces. Also, citation needed, really curious how LA and San Francisco compares to the US at large citywise. Also, again, what's this have to do with Kyle?
"Why do you think people are switching to Republicans even before Democrats took the whitehouse?"
Because Democrats suck and are ineffectual. Once again, relevance to Kyle?
"Its because more and more people are becoming politically aware of your movements and they cant stand you."
And our movement is....?
Also, yet a-fucking-gain, relevance to Kyle?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@LetsGetitBoah "The Democrats are using a combination of corporate big tech and the intelligence agencies, to suppress their political opposition."
Yeah, thats what American politicians do.
"They also chose to destroy small business all across the country and are leading the charge in helping to start WW3, they are also looking to further militarize the IRS and are trying to imprison their political opposition. "
Lol, oh yeah because Republicans are pro-small business. Which is why they give endless tax bailouts to megacorporations instead of small businesses. Stop bothering with your partisan bullshit.
Why are you deflecting to Democrats? I literally just said they're complicit.
"They believe in indefinite lockdown measures, vaccine mandates, using financial tech to shut down peoples livelihoods."
In order: Citation needed, boo fucking hoo, and "How the fuck is that different from the Reps?"
"They also weaponize race and sex as a weapon to run cover for any of their own getting criticism. "
Says the partisan defending the Party literally trying to criminalize sex outside of reproductive purposes, but okay.
"These are not the good guys. They have full support from media elite, imperialists, corporate elite, etc "
Who tf called them the good guys? They're "better than Reps" only insofar as Mussolini was "better" than Hitler.
I don't support fascists at all, I don't care which of your worthless Parties is "the better fascist", I want BOTH of these Parties to die violently in a fire.
"Look how they run cover for child grooming and racial instigators."
...What child-grooming? You better back that the fuck up.
1
-
@localnatives5897 We see the legal shit you guys pass and the politicians you elect, so yes.
It's not the least bit unreasonable to assume a rightwinger believes some psychotically stupid shit on the basis of hatred and fear, seeing how that's literally what all your politics for the last 30 years as a Party has centered around. "Fear of the border because Mexicans are scary". "Fear of LGBT people for decades because they confuse us", "Fear of not being taken seriously as religious people", "fear of governance", "Fear of education", "Fear of the Middle East", Russia, China, common core math, M&M's, shops saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas", Tipping!
Your Party almost exclusives operates and passes legislation and votes people in on the impetus of fear and hatred of others or else the supremacy of Christian values and corporate profits in lieu of the American People, whom are almost unilaterally treated with contempt as parasitic leeches by the folks typically voted for by the Right.
Like how much of a benefit of the doubt are we supposed to give you guys here? If I elect some gremlin who wants to euthanize straight people, I don't think you'd need to Talk to me to take a wild guess that I might be in favor of "The Guy who wants to euthanize straight people."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@juanavalos4232 ...Replace capitalism? Dude, capitalism isn't something you replace, it's literally the oldest compulsion of human socializing and was called bartering for thousands of years.
As far as I can see no one here's trying to replace capitalism. Even if they did politically, even the most communist of communist groups still engage in trade amongst eachother and with other nations. So you're kind of misleading with that narrative. American Capitalism is a completely different beast than what capitalism actually is. Capitalism is literally just the basic concept of trade, but American Capitalism is a socially destructive practice that incentivizes predatory behavior at the expense of people's supposed rights.
America's never really had a real free market, but we absolutely don't now. What American Capitalism is on the political spectrum is basically kleptocratic feudalism. Where the powers that be in your nation aren't law or governance, but instead a handful of people with control of all the resources who answer to no one but themselves.
Dude, I'm not anti-capitalist. I'm an enterprising mofo, I like having nice things, I am most definitely a capitalist. However, I Am against the parasitic society-killing tumor that is American Capitalism. I can't tell you how to get rid of capitalism because that'd be like telling you I knew how to get rid of speech. It's ingrained into our DNA, that's a human universal. But American Capitalism has many answers for how to do things differently, it's called every other country that's not America. Literally all of them in one form or another are proof that it is in fact possible to do things other ways.
I can believe that you have benefitted from this system. Plenty of people do at some point or another. But for every example of you and your buddies, there's dozens more who were ground into the dirt by this system, forced to grind in thankless menial work under threat of homelessness for this system, killed by being unable to afford basic survival things because they were born into a system that prioritizes the profits of a few over people's lives.
I'm not dismissing the success of you and yours, I'm sure it was well-earned. But you guys aren't the people who concern me as much as the dozens of people the same system ground into the dirt not 3 seconds prior.
If a machine gun fires perfectly three times but misfires the next 50, the three successes aren't exactly the most important data there.
1
-
@juanavalos4232 Lack of failure is impossible. I never said there was some perfect system out there, failure is possible under all of them.
However the American system Thrives on failure. We're a parasite of a system because so much of it Hinges on profits off the suffering and failures of others. Our Military industries profit off fueling unjust wars, ensuring the deaths of American military members and foreigners in spades for nothing but some contractor's bottom line. Our justice system is expressly tailored towards punishment over rehabilitation, and our prisons are privatized and Paid based on the number of convicts they're currently holding, giving them an Incentive to ensure more people end up in prison or stay in/re-offend. Our college system is a blatant scam that we still HAVE to participate in (if you had any ambitions higher than a trade school) in order to get a job, our healthcare industries actively act like vultures, strong-arming people into debt because it's either debt or death. Capitalism in and of itself isn't an issue, failure isn't an indictment of capitalism. But in American Capitalism, failure isn't just gonna happen, we outright Monetized human suffering on our own citizens for the benefit of a wealthy few. Suffering and failure isn't a bug in America, it's a feature we integrated in just to fuck the users out of a few more bucks like political Lootcrates.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@feint2168 " why were gun rights implemented into the constitution again?"
Apparently to stand around doing fuck all.
"Also who cares about that piece of paper, quit trying to take guns from good people."
If it's just a piece of paper, then what was the point of bringing up the Constitution? Oh well, guess you don't in fact have that right if it's "just a piece of paper"
Also, in case your dense ass missed who people want guns taken from, am I to assume you people think this child-killer's "good people"? I mean he got all those guns perfectly legally, is he the "good people" you want to keep their guns?
"You act like Martial Law in the attempts to stop school shootings is a terrible thing."
It's an effective suspension of civil liberties (i.e. Rights) until such time as the government decides to call it off. Guess the NRA's full on team fascist now. You guys can take away rights in the name of "safety", but God Forbid anyone touches your guns, fuck however many people die.
"And I doubt it would be enacted since there’s no war"
Several illegal wars of aggression currently going on, but I don't expect you people to pay attention.
Summary: "I don't care, I like guns, fuck the consequences, I'll use and simultaneously dismiss any and all arguments I need to in order to keep my toys, even though I'm not even the demographic we want this enacted upon."
Unless you have a violent criminal record or a known track record of violence and mental instability, why tf do you think anyone wants your guns? Why would we even try? This is fucking America, we have more guns than we have people to arm with those guns, why would we even bother unilaterally taking everyone's guns when that would Clearly never pass?
Christ, you people are such fucking victims. "I know a bunch of kids are dead due to a psycho who proved at every level that what we're currently doing isn't working..... But What About Me?!?"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@henryburton6529 Lol, apparently time isn't a thing for you.
Hmm... Let's see... Oh! Trump, seeing how he actually did Something for the US people during the Pandemic at least once or twice. Obama, because hey our country wasn't in shambles yet. Oh, Bush, because he still actually ran a nation that didn't completely implode yet. Clinton, because once again, country was halfway functional.
WTF has Biden DONE since he got elected that even puts him ON the list of good Presidents? I mean hey, I guess he did give those 1400 checks.... After he promised 2k checks for votes, actively walked back that promise, literally said "Pff, Trump already gave you some, you don't need more", and even then he was severely late on that already broken promise.
WHat, were you impressed by how much he sucks Wall Streets dick and does nothing for anyone besides the elite class? What has Biden done FOR the people that makes him a Good President in your eyes? Why do I have to justify why the most worthless lame duck President Isn't the "Best President in 40 years?"
Fuck off, you're not serious. You've said exactly zero things positive about Biden, it's not my job to defend Biden when you clearly have no intent to.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RC-ll7hk Fuck if I know dude.
I mean look, they were basically just taking a gamble. They Know the government fucks them, but Republicans have sold the lie pretty well to Americans that private rich people are separate from the government.
The government which has been hosing them time and time and time again for years, after being spoonfed bullshit from the government and career politicians for so long, in waltzes this dude whose lod, brash, everything in public an American politician wasn't, Hated by the same people they also hate in politics.
Sure, they were flat out wrong, and most people came to realize the private sector was every bit as full of shit as the government was, but when the only other opposition is Hillary "I'm championing everything wrong with American politics as the status quo we should all want" Clinton, it makes a pretty compelling case in the moment to side with the person whose whole salespitch was "I'm not These fuckers".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shgalagalaa "Oh so you are actually just so far gone that you believe that the AIM of the republicans is to fuck people over. "
I fucking asked you to persuade me that I'm wrong. Hop to it.
" Good god I feel bad for you."
Then help me. Receipts man, how does the GOP Help poor people?
"Has it never crossed your mind that maybe, just maybe they believe that increased social security will reduce the willingness of able bodied individuals to work and through that slowing down the economy which in turn makes everyone in the country worse off?"
Nice rhetoric, don't care. Ideals mean nothing, where's the Results?
"It is dishartening that you are taking such a position without actually looking up any economic theory about the issues you are talking about"
And it's telling that you're still whining about my character instead of demonstrating anything.
"You don't even understand how these things function so I suppose it would indeed make sense that you don't understand the goal behind it either."
Do You? C'mon bitch, put me in my place. Citations, Laws, HOW DO REBPULICANS HELP POOR PEOPLE!??!
"You are clearly just insanely bad faith and want to believe the worst of people. "
Says the bad faith fucker who instead of answering my question decided to psycho-babble at me and tell me what I think.
Any details AT ALL in this comment you bad faith lying sack of shit?
"Would you actually read the papers if I cite you studies about the topics you have mentioned and how said studies predict that there would actually be an overall welfare increase?"
YES GOD FUCKING DAMN IT YES! THAT IS WHAT I AM ASKING YOU TO PROVIDE! DO IT!!!!
TODAY PLEASE!
"From the way you type I doubt you would given that this information is easily accessible but rather than actually reading it you have just gone "yeah they cut welfare they must want poor people to die on the streets"."
How about you stop trying to interpret what I actually mean and take me at my fucking word?
Put Me In My Fucking Place NOW! Humiliate me with your sources, show everyone here I'm a dumbass who has no idea what I'm on about and PROVE IT!
Stop talking about my fucking personality and HOP TO IT!
"How can you possibly take such a position and not put any effort into research. Truly astonishing"
You done arguing with Straw-Patch and ready to drop those sources? Because I'm losing my fucking patience with your filibustering and delays.
Stop trying to piss me off into leaving. There's only one way you're proving me wrong, you Said it already, offered it, suggested you have all these sources.
Shit or get off the toilet.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jorgeabuauad "If you want to know why I don’t like same sex relation or a number of act like oral sex or back sex even with person of the different sex , is because I have a strong conviction the nature of our reality is artificial, I think we are not a random chance in the universe, I think we are an experiment, life did not start itself in this world , evolution is a fraud and when we die , a part of our consciousness remain , I believe is a kind of energy , this is collected and eventually each human is judge . "
And for this reason you hate LGBT people. For a total non sequitur that has absolutely jack shit to do with LGBT people.
What an asshole.
"I have to share something, I was a proud atheist but made the mistake of trying to research many occult , books , secret society, witchcraft and a lot more , one day I saw paranormal phenomena manifest, with witnesses I could not believe it , so yes that is the motive I try to warn , to give at least a chance of knowing we are being lie ."
1: 99% chance you totally weren't
2: What Atheist vehemently researches religious occultism?
3: And the paranormal phenomena is.....?
4: Interesting that you claim to warn people they're living a lie while you just dumped a massively fat pile of lies on me here.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@obsoerver7272 You're overthinking it.
It's just base frustration and rage at the DNC constantly fearmongering at us about what we tend to agree are very serious problems, hype that shit up for votes, get in power, then.... GOP shit tends to happen anyway.
Vote Republican. Get Republican bullshit. Vote Democrat, STILL somehow get Republican bullshit. Inexplicably the GOP is somehow politically capable of being a threat no matter how many or how few GOP members are in play (according to Democrats) and somehow everything we were promised is always on the backburner "until the next election is won". AND YET, no matter how many Democrats are in play, no matter how many majorities and supermajorities they've had since Bill Clinton....
Nothing. Nothing but more of what the GOP wanted anyway. And it's always somehow "our fault" for not voting for them hard enough. No matter how many times they COULD have crushed the GOP handily, they just keep REFUSING to. They keep refusing to do anything they promised, keep refusing to actually address any of the issues they pointed out, because "If they actually Did so, they'd have to come up with something else to campaign on besides 'Fear of the GOP'."
And people do not like being belittled and screwed with over their lives and forced to pick between "The people they view as destroying the country" and "The people who are just going to fucking let them" forever. People aren't moving "To the right" from the progressive standpoint, they're just "Moving away" from this game all-together and voting/not voting however the hell they like, and "to hell with the DNC's equivocation of every non-Biden vote as a Trump vote."
It's really that simple. The DNC fucked around for too long, now they're finding out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mr.saturn7833 "Easy there. The whole point was to make it clear that comparisons can be made on either side, but in the end it’s just a book. "
You literally disregarded entirely that the comparison works for the GOP, but you're walking it back now.
"Remember, the starting point was that the Conservatives were turning our current reality into the reality of a literal work of fiction."
No, it was a direct allegory to the type of world that existed under the Reich. It was actively an indictment of fascism. For someone who acts like they "read this book" you apparently didn't glean anything from it.
"Cut it out with the whining."
Wow, closest thing to a refutation you've done yet and it's still dismissive and moronic.
"We live in the freest and safest country in the world. People have no idea what living in oppression is truly like."
And like that you've been invalidated from having an opinion on the grounds of being a nationalistic apologizing dipshit denying basic reality.
" I grew up in a communist country, trust me, the United States is awesome. Of course, you always work to make it better, but c’mon man!"
Ah yes, the old country of "Unnamed communist nation".
God you people are insufferably transparent. I best you're not racist either "because you got a black friend."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mischevious " ..Well there’s the constant insult to our intelligence of whining about democracy being in peril when they themselves live in servitude to corporations, use their insider information to take advantage of stock opportunities to enrich themselves, use party donations to protect corrupt incumbents and PROMOTE MAGA psychos, work in the shadows to subvert democracy by stiffening candidate eligibility requirements so that no independent or third party candidate can ever split the vote again,
and even gerrymander districts just like republicans."
So... So far they're "Just as bad as Republicans."
But whatever, I got no objection so far.
"And then there’s the blanket insult, their 2016 assertion that they have no interest in representing the working class followed by the constant asserted insult that we’re idiots, obviously stupid if we don’t support them even though they never do a damn thing to improve our lives but instead work fist in glove with republicans to serve themselves."
Fair, although again, 1% boon to me as the voter is still better than the unilateral "Fuck you" I get from Reps. I'll take a victory where I can get it.
"..Now I’m thinking about every piece of legislation that’s ever done damage to my life, all of which were penned by democrats.. as was the profoundly degrading means testing that excludes deserving citizens but assists undocumented immigrants."
Yes, and that sucks and is evil.
But again, the other option is "Nothing, ever, Go fuck yourself" from the Right, so I'm a bit confused on how this is explicitly "worse, y'know?
"I don’t really have time to write a book. You see I’m fully disabled and in a tremendous amount of pain but, I have no healthcare and if I don’t get my butt to that job I’m no longer sufficiently able bodied to do anymore I’ll have no food or home either."
I'm sorry for your struggles an suffering.
...Admittedly confused as to why you're siding with the guys who originated the "Right to Work" schtick that allows any employer to discriminate against you without legal recourse and to actively fire you as a liability rather than do anything to support a hard worker in yourself, but you do you.
Dude, I just want Something. I've done nothing but lose, and lose, and lose to corporate shit my entire political life.
If I can get a victory anywhere, I'm taking it. Democrat, Republican, I don't care, if the system is purely "Fuck you, Got Mine", then I'll side with whoever I can get the most out of for myself and people like me.
Otherwise it's just more of the same: Fuck poor people, submit to your corporate masters."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SconnerStudios Right, but your example there kind of runs into the same issue.
Like okay, cards on the table, I'm a white dude. I know full well I am not the authority here and I would defer to a black person on this one generally.
But your example was Charlie Kirk. A racist asshole. And MTG, a racist asshole.
So... Is it overtly bad because of the skin color of the person saying it, or Who Specifically is saying it?
Cuz I feel like the phrase "colored people" would sound wayyyy different coming from, say, Mr. Rogers versus how it sounds coming from Charlie Kirk or MTG.
I guess my question is more "is this universally recognized as a slur", or is it similar to the word "queer" coming from, say, a hillbilly from the Deep South where they could be totally a Progressive, but just kind of a walking ill-informed anachronism where the Tone they said the word in's a bit more important than the word itself?
Like using the N-word as an example, if I just straight up call a black person n*****, Obviously I'm using a racist slur that no sane human being would say unless they Meant that shit offensively (outside of the hyper-specific context in which you're just speaking About the word in an academic sense, of course). But if I say "colored people" fullstop, is THAT the same thing or is there some benefit of the doubt to be given there if (UNLIKE MTG or Charlie Kirk), there's no clear track record of racist sensibilities or actions from the speaker?
I.e. What if I'm just a crass ass redneck who speaks crassly without really even thinking about whether or not my word choice could be offensive unless it's Unambiguously a slur?
Genuinely asking as a southern gay man that grew up with a fairly accepting family, I flat out didn't know queer was a slur until I ran into my first actual bigot from outside my smalltown area. I legit 100% thought queer was just "What LGBT people were" and didn't think much about it in terms of historical implications because... Well no one I ever associated with in my small redneck town processed it either.
Queer just meant "Not Straight".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ايفا-ت8ن It kind of depends. Like okay, if all things are equal, no, being successful and rich does not in and of itself mean you had to do scumbagged shit to get there.
...However if you're in America, a nation expressly designed to reward predatory behavior and punishment towards self-sacrifice.... Then yeah, the most predatory selfish pricks in the crowd are gonna thrive. You don't Necessarily have to be a scumbag predator to get rich in America, but you'll be at an extreme advantage over everyone and anyone with more principles than you. "Honor, Integrity, and Fair Play" in America are naught but the complaints of "Losers". Winners don't apologize for shit in America.
America as designed glorifies selfish and wanton consumption of resources and crushing opposition to your rise. So I'd say, as an American Billionaire.... No, you either got those billions off Daddy's bank account or you did some savage shit to get it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@yishnir Oh they Can, can they? Just like that, charged and arrested, easy peasy?
Oh yeah, I'm sure the corruption will pick Now, with the SCJ, to play fair with legality. Doesn't for the President, or Congress, or the Senate, or cops, or any State officials, or any American who needs more than 7 digits to clarify their bank account status, but NOW with the SCJ?
Oh yeah, the process has never been so easy! Why didn't we just try to Arrest them before?!
/s
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's purely because it's the path of least resistance. Corporations and major businesses are eternally looking for the optimal work/profit ratio. And there's literally no business model on Earth that has a more maximized work/profit ratio than crime and fraud. Mathematically speaking there's no rational reason why prices should become prohibitive with a wage hike. Hell we kept our wages directly tied to economic success before the 1970's, our wages went up not only due to inflation, but ALSO just by sharing the wealth of booming economies. Our Height as America in terms of prosperity for the individual (i.e. the Least amount of income disparity and the height of our economic golden days) was during this.
....Only for the Boomer generation to change the rules the moment they had power, changing the minimum wage to no longer keep pace, actively destroying the avenues by which they took power. Prices still went up with wages, but the comparison was so miniscule that in their day you could pay for college, have a house, and raise a family on ONE minimum wage job, Without incurring mountains of debt. Now because of them actively disregarding the nation in pursuit of personal gains, you'd need 3 minimum wage jobs JUST to avoid being out of debt.
So here's the million dollar question to the politicians and CEO's: If raising the minimum wage results in prohibitive cost hikes that cause the fall of an economy, then exactly How was America at it's most economically powerful (not just in the stock market, but in terms of actual National benefit at large) during their upbringing, when this was Exactly the setup before the 1970's?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1