Comments by "Newbie Prepper" (@newbieprepper8451) on "Bernie u0026 Trump React Very Differently To United Healthcare CEO Discussion" video.

Kyle Rittenhouse defended himself, in fact the guy that survived even stated in court on the stand under oath that Rittenhouse acted in self defense. Penny acted in defense of others, as testified by all the witnesses on that train during the incident.
22
i thought Oabamcare was supposed to fix the healthcare system?
4
@cherryorchard5600 whats BS?
3
@pcnoad well, interesting topic, but see, youtube and other platforms are recognized and protected under section 230 as public spaces and free speech does apply or should apply to them, but at the same time, youtube and other platforms and ISP providers are not required to give you any service. just like in the old days long before youtube and the internet and electricity, you had the right to speak publicly in the public square, but no one sent a carriage or a horse to escort you to that public square, its on you to get there. let's look at the 2A, you have the right to keep and bare arms, it says nothing about buying them or making them yourselves, same as freedom of the press did not require you to build your own printing press in order to print leaflets or pamphlets and utilize your right to freedom of the press, same as freedom of religion does not require you to build your own church in order to worship. the thing with freedom of speech is that no one is allowed to block you, at the same time, no one is required to listen to you. the right to a jury trial, the government sets and administers the laws, and therefore, it is the government that ultimately accuses you of breaking that law, and therefore it is incumbent on the government to prove your guilt, through a trial that they have to administer, a fair trial, meaning that you have to have adequate legal counsel and defense, a trial by a jury of your peers, meaning the government cant simply pound a gavel and claim without any evidence that you are guilty and lock you up for life, they have to convince 12 common people that you are guilty. now, lets take this example. if you have the right to housing, but you dont have a house, should you be provided a house? and who provides that house? do the taxpayers pay to build that house? if so, are the taxpayers paying more taxes in order to provide you with your right to housing? lets say that every taxpayer has to pay an extra $15 per month in taxes to provide housing, for a lot of people that is an hour or more of work, work that they dont get paid for since the government takes that money and taxes that they dont benefit from since the house goes to you specifically, would that not be akin to slavery? working to provide something to someone else without reimbursement?
3
and his entire career he has done absolutely nothing except talk, how easily you are satisfied with crumbs off a table.
2
@mix7893 dont matter if you are a CEO or a lowly janitor, once you allow this kind of behaviour and normalize it, it will spread to everyone.
2
@AwkwardPain supposedly the guy that Penny held in a chokehold later walked off the train on his own and even declined EMS help on scene, there is a term for that too.
2
no, those are not rights, rights are not tangible goods, those are privileges, nothing more. a right is an intangible idea or ideal that no one can take away from you and no one is responsible for giving you. healthcare and housing and food and education are all tangible goods that require the work and effort of others to provide for you. do you force people to farm against their will in order to provide you with the food you need? i think that was called slavery. what if there is no housing available and new housing wont be available for a year and you have no house? who is depriving you of your right then?
2
@CancerZodiacAstrologyHoros-k7z talk about someone needing an education. you dont even know what taxes are for and what the governments responsibility is to its citizens.
2
@CancerZodiacAstrologyHoros-k7z people fled the old ways of Europe for freedom, not because of housing or food, and we have independence day mostly because people here rebelled against taxation without representation, those "rebels" never once considered taxation wrong, their whole issue was with representation.
2
@OpalDruscilla yea, you keep telling yourself that, one day, when someone takes issue with the practices of the company you work for, you can comfort yourself with that lie when you are getting deleted.
1
@ChariCole-c2t whats BS?
1
@wkrp01 so since that insurance CEO normalized that behavior already, did the grocery store owner normalize it by refusing to sell groceries and starving people? how about the clothing store owner that refused to sell a coat for winter, did he normalize that kind of behaviour too? when you start making excuses for it, then the next time it makes it easier to make excuses for it until you dont need any excuses.
1
@wkrp01 here is the coherent point you are missing. as long as you can make an excuse to justify such behavior to others than that behavior gets normalized. it goes both ways.
1
@AwkwardPain if he was not a threat then why did almost every witness who testified said that they felt threatened by his actions and rhetoric?
1
@AwkwardPain he was a threat until he was unconscious, after that his situation deteriorated. first thing to remember is that he put himself in that position when he created the situation, as the old saying goes, play stupid games win stupid prizes. we are not going to parse over whether Penny held him 0.3 seconds too long or if he applied 0.17PSI too much pressure or whether pennys arm in that hold was 3.2 degrees off center in the incorrect position. the man died, too bad, but he created the situation and he put himself in that position.
1
Ritenhouse acted in self defense, as was testified by every witness on the stand including the prosecutions own witnesses. not a single person in that court room testified that Rittenhouse did not act in self defense.
1
@chriszhang1660 kind of like democrats?
1
why does Trump need a plan for healthcare? Obamacare fixed healthcare.
1
you could have, but the democrats enacted democracy and took away your choice because they are all in favor of choice and the democratic way.
1
@The_Varza and you already have a right to have your needs met, you have a right to go buy food and to go rent or buy a house and a right to get education, no one can stop you from doing that, but calling for those to be defined as rights can put them on slippery slopes, just like abortion, if an abortion is a right then no hospital or doctor can deny you that right else you can sue them. as for farmers, they make very little money simply because people cant handle their food prices spiking up, imagine your grocery bill tripled in order to bring farmers salaries up, most lefties were having fits because Trumps tarrifs on Mexico would raise the cost of their avocados for their toast.
1
@pcnoad well, interesting topic, but see, youtube and other platforms are recognized and protected under section 230 as public spaces and free speech does apply or should apply to them, but at the same time, youtube and other platforms and ISP providers are not required to give you any service. just like in the old days long before youtube and the internet and electricity, you had the right to speak publicly in the public square, but no one sent a carriage or a horse to escort you to that public square, its on you to get there. let's look at the 2A, you have the right to keep and bare arms, it says nothing about buying them or making them yourselves, same as freedom of the press did not require you to build your own printing press in order to print leaflets or pamphlets and utilize your right to freedom of the press, same as freedom of religion does not require you to build your own church in order to worship. the thing with freedom of speech is that no one is allowed to block you, at the same time, no one is required to listen to you. the right to a jury trial, the government sets and administers the laws, and therefore, it is the government that ultimately accuses you of breaking that law, and therefore it is incumbent on the government to prove your guilt, through a trial that they have to administer, a fair trial, meaning that you have to have adequate legal counsel and defense, a trial by a jury of your peers, meaning the government cant simply pound a gavel and claim without any evidence that you are guilty and lock you up for life, they have to convince 12 common people that you are guilty. now, lets take this example. if you have the right to housing, but you dont have a house, should you be provided a house? and who provides that house? do the taxpayers pay to build that house? if so, are the taxpayers paying more taxes in order to provide you with your right to housing? lets say that every taxpayer has to pay an extra $15 per month in taxes to provide housing, for a lot of people that is an hour or more of work, work that they dont get paid for since the government takes that money and taxes that they dont benefit from since the house goes to you specifically, would that not be akin to slavery? working to provide something to someone else without reimbursement?
1
and Trump still did more for the common people than the last 2 democrats combined.
1