Why current conservatism is NOT good for you.

Matt Dillon said:
"The people" is codeword for that they're commies.

You know, like "The Peoples' Republic" of China; Which is NOT a republic by any classic
Click to expand...

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
 
The Leftist neo marxist WOKE Revolution which runs America is burning it to the ground on purpose so that UTOPIA can arise from the ashes.....they are a much bigger problem than COnservatives.....who's main sin is incompetence and impotence.

PLEASE FOCUS FUCKERS!
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Actually, dude is wrong on several counts.

First, he says the difference between Leftists (yes, he uses "Liberals" but he means Leftists) and Conservatives is the Left cares about people while Conservatives care about property and profits. This patently untrue and wrong.

The Left only cares about people in the abstract. What they really care about is Power. That is, they want to control everything. They want to control people because they think they know better how to run someone's life than that person does. This is a necessity in order to make things like Socialism or Communism work. They have to force altruism on society.
They don't care about you, or me. They care that in their delusion we are "equal." That's in the literal, physical sense. The Left wants to level the playing field by handicapping the successful and giving to the incompetent such that everyone gets the same share of 'stuff.'
So, in a sense, the Left is extremely sensitive to property and profit making sure everyone gets exactly the same amount of 'stuff.'

Conservatives--or the Right--doesn't care about property and profit. Instead, they care about the Individual. They see a system where everyone has an opportunity to succeed or fail on their individual merits. There is no 'Rob Peter to pay Paul,' in that. How much stuff you have depends on you, not some central power grabbing from some to give to others.

Both--more or less--have values that say violence and crime are wrong, with some differences in what constitutes a crime.

He mentions the Saudis buying land in Arizona. This is more complex than he makes it out to be. Like the Chinese, the Saudis have bought a lot of private property in the state. They've also gotten some leased land from the state. This can't be just dumped on the state and a Conservative government. Rather, the Saudis--like the Chinese--take advantage of US land laws and are profiting from it.
I suppose the US could do what say, Mexico does and make it illegal for foreigners to own land. The problem with that is no foreigner is willing to invest into anything that has fixed, immovable, infrastructure. That is, there is no way a foreign company would buy say an oil refinery in Mexico because the risk of losing it on a whim of the government is far too great. As for the Saudi owned refinery in Port Authur Texas, this was owned 50 - 50 by Aramco and Royal Dutch Shell until the Dutch pulled out of the picture. So, I don't know what he's bitching about here as this refinery was owned by foreign businesses long before the Saudi's (Aramco) took full control.

Certainly, the Democrats have made little effort to stop foreign investment in such things in the US as have the Republicans. So, blaming conservatives is hardly accurate here as both ends of the political spectrum allow it.
Click to expand...

1. What is your problem, since "leftists" and "liberals" a just different names with the same basic political/social ideology? What you are trying to do is redefine are terminologies already used....it's called left or right of center, or sometimes "moderate" or "hard" are used as adjectives. Seems you are in a constant struggle to place what you think are demeaning labels of those you are opposed to.

2. Once again, you keep pushing your opinion, supposition and conjecture as fact. You can't deal with the simple truth derived from the FACTS the OP puts forth, so you go off babbling this blather.

3. See #2. And given the historical FACT of the efforts of the Shrub and the Orange Oaf to centralize decision power to the executive branch, you're blathering is just a collection of tired old cliches that essentially lost the GOP elections to Obama and Biden.

4. A moot point.

5. It's only complexed to YOU because those deals happened under GOP administrations & congressional majority. And once again, you push your opinion, supposition and conjecture as logical fact. In addition to owning businesses & real estate foreign companies can and are trucking along doing all types of commerce with the USA WITHOUT making the aforementioned ownership as part of the deal. Also, your "2 wrongs does make a right" attitude doesn't fly here...Texaco sold in part to Shell in 2002, now the Arabs own the whole thing. Note that we have no beef with Shell, but our gov't (no matter which party is in control) has problems with Saudi's free funding of religious sects prone to fundamentalist jihad (i.e., 9-11). In any event, partnership is one thing, complete ownership is a whole other smoke...just ask any stock holder on Wall St.

6. Nice try, but this moot assessment does NOT CHANGE THE FACTS REGARDING THE OP ONE IOTA. You just don't like how the pendulum swings.
 
Darker Soul said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Typical MAGA moron....ignores everything else because the man quoted Carlin to make a point.

Laugh, clown, laugh!
Click to expand...



I ignore it because it is a narrative. You take something that a comedian claims is fact, then ax me to defend it. Zero logic and epic thread fail. :rofl2:
Click to expand...

No stupid, the man states several FACTS that you neither have the intellectual honesty or ability to logically refute. TA Gardner tried, and I explained why he fell short.

You are just a blathering MAGA troll. If you can't debate the FACTS, then don't waste our time and space with your self aggrandizing BS.

Laugh, clown, laugh.
 
Cypress said:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Click to expand...

Don't hide behind the document you despise.
 
Celticguy said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
"But, but, but Obama....." Puh-leeze! How is getting millions of more folk (you must be employed for the ACA) access to healthcare selling them down the river?
Ask your conservative business and gov't buddies about selling the Saudi's water rights. By the time the legal moves to "ownership" get's through, our rates will be raised. Again, thank fools like you who consistently vote in the creeps who shaft us.
Click to expand...




not but but but

your video guy's examples are nonsense. Obama sold out to pharma in the ACA.
Click to expand...

But, But, But....YOU insert a comparison that when logically challenged you can't deal it, so you just parrot the SOS.

As for the OP, see how I deconstructed TA Gardner's diatribe, which you seem to support.

Claiming the OP is nonsense is any fool's option....logically and factually PROVING such is a whole other smoke. To date, you haven't displayed the intellectual capacity or honesty to do so. Carry on.
 
Taichiliberal said:
1. What is your problem, since "leftists" and "liberals" a just different names with the same basic political/social ideology? What you are trying to do is redefine are terminologies already used....it's called left or right of center, or sometimes "moderate" or "hard" are used as adjectives. Seems you are in a constant struggle to place what you think are demeaning labels of those you are opposed to.

2. Once again, you keep pushing your opinion, supposition and conjecture as fact. You can't deal with the simple truth derived from the FACTS the OP puts forth, so you go off babbling this blather.

3. See #2. And given the historical FACT of the efforts of the Shrub and the Orange Oaf to centralize decision power to the executive branch, you're blathering is just a collection of tired old cliches that essentially lost the GOP elections to Obama and Biden.

4. A moot point.

5. It's only complexed to YOU because those deals happened under GOP administrations & congressional majority. And once again, you push your opinion, supposition and conjecture as logical fact. In addition to owning businesses & real estate foreign companies can and are trucking along doing all types of commerce with the USA WITHOUT making the aforementioned ownership as part of the deal. Also, your "2 wrongs does make a right" attitude doesn't fly here...Texaco sold in part to Shell in 2002, now the Arabs own the whole thing. Note that we have no beef with Shell, but our gov't (no matter which party is in control) has problems with Saudi's free funding of religious sects prone to fundamentalist jihad (i.e., 9-11). In any event, partnership is one thing, complete ownership is a whole other smoke...just ask any stock holder on Wall St.

6. Nice try, but this moot assessment does NOT CHANGE THE FACTS REGARDING THE OP ONE IOTA. You just don't like how the pendulum swings.
Click to expand...

What pendulum? Cliche fallacies. Word games.
 
Matt Dillon said:
His way with words is much more adept than yours, commie cocksucker.

You ain't nuthin' but a sophist lying piece of shit anyway.
Click to expand...

Yep, you were well into getting sauced when you wrote this. Get back to me when you want to logically and factually argue the points brought forth in the OP.
 
Taichiliberal said:
No stupid, the man states several FACTS that you neither have the intellectual honesty or ability to logically refute. TA Gardner tried, and I explained why he fell short.

You are just a blathering MAGA troll. If you can't debate the FACTS, then don't waste our time and space with your self aggrandizing BS.

Laugh, clown, laugh.
Click to expand...

Redefinition fallacies (fact<->Universal Truth, logic<->bullshit).
Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).
 
Taichiliberal said:
But, But, But....YOU insert a comparison that when logically challenged you can't deal it, so you just parrot the SOS.

As for the OP, see how I deconstructed TA Gardner's diatribe, which you seem to support.

Claiming the OP is nonsense is any fool's option....logically and factually PROVING such is a whole other smoke. To date, you haven't displayed the intellectual capacity or honesty to do so. Carry on.
Click to expand...

Assumption of victory fallacy. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism). Redefinition fallacy (fact<->proof). Attempted force of negative proof fallacy.
 
Matt Dillon said:
Making sure votes are real and from people in the precinct is not a bad thing.

Not bused in from migrant farm worker camps or from some other state to vote for Democrats like they've been doing.
Click to expand...

When are you going to wise up and stop parroting that long disproved BS?

Trump had "his people" try to prove voter fraud because he didn't win the 2016 popular vote. They failed to prove fraud.

GOP friendly "private" organizations ran numerous lawsuits & recounts across the country. Again, they failed to prove fraud.

Red states enforcing all types of new ID laws in order to vote DO SO WHERE THERE WAS NO HISTORY OF RAMPANT VOTER FRAUD (that's when someone successfully registers and votes under a false or duplicate or deceased name either by write in or physical voting). These moves negatively effects millions of elderly and poor folk as well as portions of college kids. History shows that the Republican party does well under low voter turn out.

So spare us all your BS, you MAGA Florida flag waver (former Confederate flag waver---not surprising).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top