You cannot trust Republican with money ever.
Also you'll notice on your charts the Republicans send us back in the right direction and the Democrats are the ones to turn it back around every time. You do know those charts are highlighting growth of debt? So, when the chart goes up, that's a BAD thing. When the charts go down, that's a good thing. I'm amazed that you can't even read basic charts.  Tell me more. |
|
|
|
Notice none of those charges include "weapons of mass destruction" the standard charge applied to anyone who creates a functional explosive device... No shit dumbfuck. He didn't send a weapon of mass destruction. Notice how is say "illegal mailing of explosives"  That's the standard charge for anyone illegal mailing explosive devices. We have already been over this once smart guy, you know I sourced the law. Why are you going to make yourself look dumb arguing this again? |
|
|
|
Notice none of those charges include "weapons of mass destruction" the standard charge applied to anyone who creates a functional explosive device... |
|
|
|
The video is pretty sound but it is about two different things. It is a very valid argument to suggest DSA are unclear and perhaps many of them are in favor of social democracy rather than democratic socialism. The differences between the two systems are probably small enough that they can coexist within the context of current american politics. Slightly different means to the same end. Scandinavian social democracies achieve worker leverage through powerful unions. Although workers are not in control (socialism), they have a powerful collective voice which, democratically, provides them with a place at the bargaining table with capitalists.
At around 8:30 the video makes a inexplicable pivot away from critic of anything put forward by DSA and focuses on the failures of central planning and authoritarian rule for the rest of the video.
From around 8:30-9:30, the video even explains how Chomsky, "Why not socialism", and the published DSA platform have all rejected these principals (central planning and authoritarian rule) as failure.
So once again, why all the kicking and screaming against something no one wants?
Well the answer to that question can be found at 9:30 when a series of tweets are misrepresented. The author interprets a 3 word statement "communism is good" as some sort of proof that DSA is covertly endorsing the thing things everyone hates (central planning an authoritarian rule). This gives the narrator an excuse to spend the next 5 minutes destroying the straw man by explaining how central planning and authoritarian rule are bad. It really seems like critics of socialism have no other way to critic the ideology.
Oh wow you mean two groups of Socialists have microscopic amounts of disagreement over ideology? What diversity! Inexplicable only to the willfully ignorant. Anyone with any critical thinking skills still intact can clearly see the connection. It would be rather convenient for pro-socialists to just call every one of the past failures of Communism and Socialism unrelated to "true Socialism", but that is not how reality works. In reality these ideologies have been tried over and over again and inevitably degrade into these totalitarian systems you CLAIM have nothing to do with it. It is like you are running around having unprotected sex with people while you are infected with H.I.V. and people are complaining they don't want to get AIDS, why didn't you tell them? So you respond, hey don't worry, H.I.V. is not the same thing as AIDS, I don't know what all the kicking and screaming is about! Let me put it this way. If Nazism became acceptable again and neo-nazis were running around saying "oh but true fascism has never been tried! All those other cases were centralized state power fascism! Real fascism is much different!" you wouldn't be buying that horse shit would you? Of course not, because EVEN IF it were true the risk of having a repeat of the situation is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE. Now take into account Communists killed FAR MORE countless millions of people in the most horrible ways, more than nazis ever did. Yet some how they were not the real Communists and this time you will get it right. Communism is ideological ebola that steals and crushes EVERYTHING man kind has, from his property, to his body, his mind, and even his soul. It must never be acceptable ever again. The Hard Truth About Socialism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RNZ2LjpEl4 |
|
|
|
copy of wikipedia
I see lots of information you likely didn't even read, copy and pasted (that is against forum rules to plagiarize BTW), but I don't see your premise, retort, or argument... What do you want me to say exactly about well known documented data? Should I do a brief comment after each report? The argument that vaccines aren't safe or that the government doesn't care is simply false as shown above. Simple because they lost some reports somewhere it doesn't mean the whole thing is a hoax and they are trying to kill people. Vaccines are proven to work, it's a fact, we have stopped plenty of diseases thanks to them. No one is arguing that vaccines are 100% safe because nothing is, any drug has side effects, you can die from eating too many paracetamol pills, it doesn't even take that many. Science will prevail. Nutjobs wont. I shouldn't have to tell you what to say. In fact if you were giving this information a fair examination you wouldn't be saying anything, and be reading about it instead of simply denying its relevance over and over again (and don't lie to me I know damned well you didn't do anything more than skim at the most). I never made any of those arguments so I am not going to bother defending those premises. Also there is an important difference... no one is trying to force people to take paracetamol pills by law. This entire issue would largely be a non-issue for people if there wasn't creeping legislation mandating vaccinations in many states against any standards of implied consent. http://icandecide.org/government/ICAN-HHS-Stipulated-Order-July-2018.pdfThe Corruption of Science: What They Won't Tell You! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrGRP2mu0GAThe Death of Science | Scientific Corruption and You https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmvLdOkpg2M |
|
|
|
|
If Donald Trump and his supporters are all racists, what happened between Obama being elected and Trump? Did all the people who voted for Obama suddenly become racists? Because in order for Obama to win a very large percentage of those who voted Trump would have had to have voted for Obama as well.
|
|
|
|
My opinion? It hardly exists anymore, so I don't understand the obsession with it. Some countries are welfare states but majority of countries nowadays are capitalistic in more or less refined form. What you call socialism is extremely US-centric (I hope I worded that right), but the world doesn't not revolve around US. Each country has a right to self identify. If US want to call themselves socialist under potential future democrat rule with afordable health care so be it, I won't object. But I will laugh.
Edit:
Background. I have actually lived first 10 years of my life in true socialism and then in transition period. I remember the war my country had to fight to get out of it.
The "more or less" is the issue here, the US has been drifting toward Socialist policies for some time now, and that's what Trump was a referendum on. Also it seems to be US-centric because this thread is literally about a US Socialist representative in the US government. I don't like that every freak show that happens here is a matter of international debate any more than you do, however the internet is inherently international so this is going to be a relative constant for some time. Part of the issue here is too, there are a lot of people here active on the forum that are outside of the USA, but still seem to think they understand all the complicated internal cultural, economic, and political dynamics unfolding internally here. I don't claim to be an expert on any other nations, but I know my own pretty well because I live here and those events most directly effect me and those that I care about. Some how though the world is filled with "experts" in US domestic policy who have never set foot here. |
|
|
|
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. If this stretching is a campaign finance violation, then what exactly are the millions of dollars worth of in kind free advertising given to Democrats by censoring Republican voices and candidates from social media like Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube? Just a nice little coincidence?
Whataboutism at it's finest. Get some lawyers, Republican state AG's and some legal statutes to investigate and prosecute such violations. Feel free to start a topic about the injustice! The topic being discussed is Trump and his cronies specific violations, Cohen plead guilty to 2 of them! The other evidence presented also suggest Trump was not only complicit but in fact was directing it all. Not at all whataboutism. What is is, is a clear demonstration, yet again, of the endless double standards of the left. Trump uses his own money to do something perfectly legal and it is a "campaign finance violation", but the democrats censor millions of conservatives over social media for no charge, and allow Democrat talking points to get thru and none of you care. You don't think that is worth a lot of money? Oh but a stripper! No one cares. You don't care about election integrity or campaign finance, you care you can potentially use this talking point to attack your enemy. You don't have standards, you have vendettas. You don't have truths you have lies. You don't build things, you destroy them. Then you wonder why the world is starting to react to the left like a cancer, pushing it out. The left has been in control a LONG time, and you failed. Stop acting like this is some kind of coup, the American people told you to GTFO, not the Russian people. Until you realize that have fun pretending to be a victim and a winner at the same time. |
|
|
|
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, rethink this | 1791 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsLFYK59C5YI just found this content creator with this video, and if this represents his standards I am impressed. It is a pretty short but sweet critical break down of what is wrong with Socialism and Socialists in a modern context at its very core. The beauty of this is that he casts aside all of the distracting garbage people use to misdirect from these facts and addresses not only the symptoms, but the cause. What are your opinions of Socialism/Communism/Marxism? |
|
|
|
#metoo https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5062023.0I have been thru this exact process before here with other staff and their toadies trying to find any avenue to discredit me because they don't like what I have to say. I have seen this dynamic before. The problem is between Flying Hellfish and his little Communist toadies that follow him everywhere enabling his behavior (hint they show up in these threads too). Most people are happy to read the commentary, agree with it or not and move on unless some one is preventing a conversation. These people constantly seek out any possible technical violation and report it, knowing like an obedient collectivist, Flying Hellfish will see it their way and comply. Some one says some thing the leftists don't like, they shotgun reports hoping any will stick, then Flying Hellfish dutifully follows up and deletes the material with full deniability. Oh I had to! That other guy over there who just happens to agree with me completely reported it! In short this is the same leftist bullshit they pull on every other social media platform shutting out any kind of dissent from their approved opinion. We are all equal under the rules, but some are more equal than others. Don't let Bitcointalk become another Facefuck or Twatter. |
|
|
|
copy of wikipedia
I see lots of information you likely didn't even read, copy and pasted (that is against forum rules to plagiarize BTW), but I don't see your premise, retort, or argument... |
|
|
|
Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the nation and the highest gun violence. This is no coincidence.
All this example demonstrates is that attempting to impose gun regulation on the municipal level is rather ineffective. All one needs to do to circumvent the law is purchase your gun at a gun shop outside of the city limits. The city of Chicago also shares a border with the State of Indiana... Gun regulation on the national level would be harder to circumvent. AFAIK, both Mexico and Canada have even stricter gun regulations than the USA ever will. Therefore, circumventing a federal regulation would require efforts greater than just crossing a border. However, I do not see any serious federal regulation coming down the pipe until 2021 at the soonest. And since the Supreme Court justices have lifetime appointments, I suspect any meaningful legislation would be ruled unconstitutional. Yep, everyone knows you can't get guns in Mexico  |
|
|
|
Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.
Either it was settled or dismissed, it can't be both. So I checked for myself. It was settled, because it was a FOIA suit, and the requested records simply did not exist, even though they were required to be created by law. Essentially the government had responsibilities under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that it was not meeting. This does in fact have serious implications. It does not, obviously missing reports isn't good but it happens, they were meeting every other requirement though. Ok, now that you are past the point of trying to dismiss this source, and that you have been provided a premise with a source to back it up, what is your evidence this is NOT something that has serious implications? On what evidence do you base the conclusion that they are meeting every other requirement? |
|
|
|
I say "Hey! This approval rating has this average rate of loss, and the Democrats did just that number" (a
you reply (unsourced I might add) saying essentially "Yeah but, if his approval rating were LOWER he would have lost less seats!"
I took the numbers from the same article you linked to. I didn't say he would have lost less seats. It's just the average from past elections. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-midterm-elections-preview/It is "more impressive" because the example showed an approval rating HIGHER than Trump had, and the average was 33 seats
Trumps ACTUAL approval rating at the time of election was actually about 10 points lower, 40%... meaning that in spite of having an approval rating LOWER than used in the average calculation, he still maintained the same number of seats as in the average... meaning that the Dems actually had less than average gains for an incumbent with his approval ratings.
Which doesn't make any sense because there is no linear correlation "lower rating -> more lost seats". Again, from the same article the two elections where the President's rating was 40% or less had losses of 12 and 30 seats, or 21 on average. Trump lost 35-37. So which is it - Trump is worse at presidenting than Obama and Dubya, or this rating-to-seats criteria is meaningless? I'm leaning towards both. Its fine. You keep pretending like you never had any fault in logic here. That is pretty much all the left can do at this point. Fake it till you make it. |
|
|
|
Common core is specifically designed to break the critical thinking skills of children and teach them to use collectivist thought.
Any specific examples? All I know about is common core science and I can tell you that it is the only thing that has brought critical thinking into public science education. "Next generation science standards" are 100% designed around science practices which are all about critical thinking. I imagine the same sort of thinking can be applied to common core standards in other disciplines. All I can think of are the math examples that force students to do mental math instead of memorizing multiples and factors. Oh man. I am going to answer this question as if you have the capacity to understand basic psychology and how critical thinking works even thought you have repeatedly demonstrated you don't. At least this way some interested 3rd party can get use from it. Who knows, maybe you will bother to actually read some thing too. Common core actively punishes critical thought and logic, and rewards substituting basic realities with a substituted reality as long as they can "explain how they got there". In short this is postmodernism as applied to math and other STEM fields. The right answer is subjective, it doesn't matter if it follows the rules of math, if you can find some way to justify it, it is reality. This is just conditioning children to reject what they know to be reality in favor of a collectively decided reality, and that they need some one externally to tell them what truth is in stead of deducing that for themselves using logic. Now when the child, as an adult reaches a point of cognitive dissonance, they will be already conveniently pre-conditioned to dismiss it on the basis of any plausible explanation! How convenient! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi_methodhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilaSvC9PGKkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhdvRx_lmkgBTW if you don't like my answer I don't give a shit. I don't care if you believe me or not. I showed you the door, you walk thru it. Or don't. I have no interest in debating psychology with some one who thinks Communism is great. You simply don't have the basic tools to understand how your own brain functions well enough to understand any of this, you know like logic, critical thought, or the understanding the The Olive Garden "Never Ending Soup Bowl" is not really never ending. |
|
|
|
See you are just using circular logic. I say it is not easier. I give examples.
You say "If it was easier to kill it via other means why would all these mass shooters choose the harder way via guns?"
This is circular logic, you are just referencing your own unbased conclusion as the source for your logic.
My point is even if you waved a magic wand to make all the guns go poof, those shootings would magically transform into arsons, stabbings, bombings, etc. Murders don't happen because of inanimate objects. They happen because of intent. Furthermore those inanimate objects help protect people from all of this, so it is not as simple as "oh lets just get rid of that and the problems will be gone!"
Ok, so which is it - are you saying it's easier to kill with a gun than e.g. via arson or not? Getting really tangled up in your own arguments there. There is no magic transformation like you're implying. Harder to kill means fewer deaths. Most of those firearms deaths are not hardened assassins killing at any cost. Domestic disputes, drunken fights, petty crime, accidents, suicide attempts, etc wouldn't be nearly as deadly without guns and most sane countries have figured that out a long time ago. Am I? Seems to me you are the one tangled in your own argument... like I just said.... but hey maybe if you accuse me of the same thing you are guilty of no one will notice you have no argument. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
