Nick Sandman getting rich

That's because he doesn't have high-priced, well-financed RW scumbags lawyers willing to do the shaking. If Nikkie is paying anything for this then it's just the obligatory dollar bill to ensure lawyer-client privilege.

...and the media isn't run by scumbags?

I'm sorry but I have no sympathy for unethical media corporations being sued. The media industry, in general, is one of the most destructive influences in modern society, so I'm generally going to side with most people that sue them.
 
There are more important things than money -- things like freedom of choice. The state should not have the right to force me to serve someone, regardless of payment. If a person voluntarily chooses to serve someone without payment, that's fine, because there is no government coercion involved. People can have this honor on a personal level if they choose to.

What you're talking about is the state forcing people to make a choice. There's nothing honorable about that. And state coercion is actually a far better representation of North Korea.

Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to serve anyone by supplying basic health care to people in this country without official documentation.

We're talking about basic humanity.

You either have a sense of it or you don't.

It basically breaks down along these lines:

The Left:
Has it.

The Right:
Does not have it.
 
Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to serve anyone by supplying basic health care to people in this country without official documentation.

We're talking about basic humanity.

You either have a sense of it or you don't.

It basically breaks down along these lines:

The Left:
Has it.

The Right:
Does not have it.

Well, again, don't use North Korea as your counterexample if you're promoting statism.

You can call your position whatever you like, but it involves state coercion. I usually side with freedom of choice. Now, that being said, I do believe in limits to freedom of choice as well. I don't believe people should have the freedom to use meth, but that's partially because legalization of meth would incur a lot more burdens on our social programs.
 
If you're talking about pot, then maybe. The state would need to make sure the supply chain was separated from any criminal elements, however.

Legalizing heroin, meth, and cocaine are non-starters, however.

If we had that policy in combination with eliminating the welfare state, I suppose I'd be on board. However, as long as the welfare state exists, having this sort of stance would just result in more people living on disability.
That's the beauty of legalization; control of the supply chain.

You'll have to explain your logic in the remaining statements. Why are some drugs "non-starters"? The welfare state should exist to help the elderly, infirm and minors. It should help those who have fallen to get back up and find work. It should not define a healthy adult American.
 
When you were 15, if someone had beat a drum in your face while acting like a crazy idiot, what would your response have been?

I'd say a smirk involved way more self-control than most teenagers have.

Nathan Phillips is the sort of person that needs a few slaps to modify his behavior.

Phillips did not "beat a drum in (his) face while acting like a crazy idiot".


The smirking little Trumptarded asshole chose to stand directly in front of Phillips while he was exercising his Constitutional right of self expression.

Sandboy also had a crowd of other obnoxious little spoiled rotten pro-Trump shit heads crowded around him, backing him up.

Fuck him.
 
Well, again, don't use North Korea as your counterexample if you're promoting statism.

You can call your position whatever you like, but it involves state coercion. I usually side with freedom of choice. Now, that being said, I do believe in limits to freedom of choice as well. I don't believe people should have the freedom to use meth, but that's partially because legalization of meth would incur a lot more burdens on our social programs.

Who is being coerced to do what when health care is administered to undocumented immigrants?

That makes no sense whatsoever.
 
That's the beauty of legalization; control of the supply chain.

That would be dependent on your version of legalization. Currently, none of the states that have legalized pot have a system in place that prevents cartels from being part of the picture. This is why I believe it is being used to launder their money from other industries (like heroin and human trafficking). It would match what happened with the mafia after the repeal of Prohibition.

You'll have to explain your logic in the remaining statements. Why are some drugs "non-starters"? The welfare state should exist to help the elderly, infirm and minors. It should help those who have fallen to get back up and find work. It should not define a healthy adult American.

The more addictive a substance is, the more of a problem it becomes for society. Heroin, meth, and cocaine are far more addictive than pot and alcohol. Now, you could argue that nicotine is on par with heroin, but the difference is that nicotine doesn't usually kill people. The most destructive aspects of tobacco come from other components of the smoke. The nicotine is just the active ingredient that causes addiction. That being said, I actually would be ok with banning nicotine.

I agree with your premise on welfare, but we're not there yet. Until we are, other policies have to take this into account. It's why the open borders position that many libertarians often support isn't feasible.
 
Heather Heyer wasn't demonized by most of the media. Sandmann was.

What I see is that most of the media leans left. That's the reason for the disparity.

If most of the media leaned right, then this discussion would be entirely different.

She was demonized by Fox. You claimed only conservatives were demonized by the media, never liberals. How about Obama? Maxine Waters? Tell me again media corporations only demonize conservatives.

Look at the big picture, kid. Journalism is a liberal arts. Most journalists are liberals. Business is conservative. All corporations are conservative because they only exist to do one thing: Make money. Some will waver a bit, but the main goal is always the money. "The Media" is a business. If a business leans left, then it's for profit. If it leans right, then it's for profit. There's a reason why Fox is number one and both CNN and MSNBC are fighting it out for number two. It's because of what they are providing to their customers. CNN and MSNBC are splitting the business, Fox has a monopoly niche.
 
Whats with all the hate towards a young kid that was PROVEN to have done nothing wrong? Some of you people are really sick. So the kid simply by being innocent totally shatters the narrative the left wing media tried to push and you despise him for it? It was o.k for the media to lie about him but not o.k for the kid to be PROVEN innocent? Fuck you weirdo pieces of shit!

The story with Sandman and the loon is that *it never should have been a story to begin with*.

What made this a ‘story’ was the kids MAGA hat and the fact he appeared to have maybe smirked at the crank beating on his drum. Appeared to maybe smirked. It was a stifled laugh for all anyone knows.

But that is your ‘story’. Hardly the media finest hour. Basically, they saw that red MAGA hat and all their other thought processes shut down.

They deserve to pay for it. The kid is/was a minor for crying out loud.
 
That would be dependent on your version of legalization. Currently, none of the states that have legalized pot have a system in place that prevents cartels from being part of the picture. This is why I believe it is being used to launder their money from other industries (like heroin and human trafficking). It would match what happened with the mafia after the repeal of Prohibition.

The more addictive a substance is, the more of a problem it becomes for society. Heroin, meth, and cocaine are far more addictive than pot and alcohol. Now, you could argue that nicotine is on par with heroin, but the difference is that nicotine doesn't usually kill people. The most destructive aspects of tobacco come from other components of the smoke. The nicotine is just the active ingredient that causes addiction. That being said, I actually would be ok with banning nicotine.

I agree with your premise on welfare, but we're not there yet. Until we are, other policies have to take this into account. It's why the open borders position that many libertarians often support isn't feasible.

That's because only states have done it and the Feds haven't. It'd have to be done at the Federal level.


Umm, that's the point of cleaning the gene pool. How can we clean the gene pool if the dumbasses don't remove themselves from it? How come you are advocating a Nanny State?
 
Phillips did not "beat a drum in (his) face while acting like a crazy idiot".


The smirking little Trumptarded asshole chose to stand directly in front of Phillips while he was exercising his Constitutional right of self expression.

Sandboy also had a crowd of other obnoxious little spoiled rotten pro-Trump shit heads crowded around him, backing him up.

Fuck him.

Read more about how the Black Hebrew Israelites played into this. They had been harassing the kids before Phillips showed up. The funny thing is that they had also harassed the Native Americans, but the media didn't care. The BHI is a black group, so they don't have the proper optics for the narrative that publications like WaPo want to promote. The push is to paint white people negatively while making minorities the good guys.

The reluctance of the media to report on minorities behaving badly was best shown by the rash of stabbings that happened against Jews in NY and NJ by the Black Hebrew Israelites. There was barely any coverage of it, and protesters and officials in support of the victims blamed Trump.
 
That's because only states have done it and the Feds haven't. It'd have to be done at the Federal level.


Umm, that's the point of cleaning the gene pool. How can we clean the gene pool if the dumbasses don't remove themselves from it? How come you are advocating a Nanny State?

This is one of your more asinine posts. Sadly, it’s not the most.

Do we need to discuss the length of time in human generations it would take to remove the ‘drug gene’ from the gene pool?
 
Who is being coerced to do what when health care is administered to undocumented immigrants?

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Healthcare is a service. It has to be paid for somehow. If government is saying someone has to provide a service with or without payment, then that means that paying customers have to cover the expense somehow. In the meantime, what if the only provider available in an area doesn't want to provide the service? If it is government enforced, that is coercion.

In short, the policy is state coercion if the provider of care would normally refuse service.
 
She was demonized by Fox. You claimed only conservatives were demonized by the media, never liberals. How about Obama? Maxine Waters? Tell me again media corporations only demonize conservatives.

Look at the big picture, kid. Journalism is a liberal arts. Most journalists are liberals. Business is conservative. All corporations are conservative because they only exist to do one thing: Make money. Some will waver a bit, but the main goal is always the money. "The Media" is a business. If a business leans left, then it's for profit. If it leans right, then it's for profit. There's a reason why Fox is number one and both CNN and MSNBC are fighting it out for number two. It's because of what they are providing to their customers. CNN and MSNBC are splitting the business, Fox has a monopoly niche.

The big picture is that the journalists are useful idiots of woke capitalism. The corporations like social liberalism because it divides the working class by identity groups. As long as the working class is divided, they maintain their power.

Since most journalists are SJW types without as much emphasis on class consciousness, they serve well in the divisiveness of social liberalism.

So yes, it's about money, but it's also about division.
 
That's because only states have done it and the Feds haven't. It'd have to be done at the Federal level.


Umm, that's the point of cleaning the gene pool. How can we clean the gene pool if the dumbasses don't remove themselves from it? How come you are advocating a Nanny State?

I only support aspects of a nanny state when other factors somewhat demand it. Again, if the welfare state was limited to what you mentioned earlier, I wouldn't have a problem with your position.

In short, I'm not an idealist. I focus on policies that fit into whatever the current system is. Every policy has to be examined with the respect of how it interacts with other policies. The problem with idealism is that it doesn't take as comprehensive of a look at things.
 
This is one of your more asinine posts. Sadly, it’s not the most.

Do we need to discuss the length of time in human generations it would take to remove the ‘drug gene’ from the gene pool?

It depends on how good the heroin is.

In behavioral psych studies rats had a small electrode connected to the pleasure center of their brains. When a light went on they had a choice between pushing a lever for food or pushing a lever a small electric stimulus to their pleasure center. The rats invariably would rather receive the electric stimulus than eat even to the point of starvation. Murder is immoral, but people are free to end their lives.

This is in keeping with Albert Camus' famous question in "The Myth of Sisyphus": "There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy. All the rest— whether or not the world has three dimensions, whether the mind has nine or twelve categories—comes afterwards."

You Nanny State Closet Liberals want to save people from themselves. I say they must act like adults and save themselves if they want to do so.
 
It depends on how good the heroin is.

In behavioral psych studies rats had a small electrode connected to the pleasure center of their brains. When a light went on they had a choice between pushing a lever for food or pushing a lever a small electric stimulus to their pleasure center. The rats invariably would rather receive the electric stimulus than eat even to the point of starvation. Murder is immoral, but people are free to end their lives.

This is in keeping with Albert Camus' famous question in "The Myth of Sisyphus": "There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy. All the rest— whether or not the world has three dimensions, whether the mind has nine or twelve categories—comes afterwards."

You Nanny State Closet Liberals want to save people from themselves. I say they must act like adults and save themselves if they want to do so.

Could not agree more with that sentence.
 
Back
Top