Is this message board always so short on liberals?

Perhaps most Dem sympathizers are just alienated by the total lack of debate quality on this forum, which is in large parts dominated by mindless Trump puppets, Russian propaganda bots and other retards who couldn't even correctly define words like "Constitution", "freedom" or "democracy", even if their lifes depended on it.
I saw you in another thread talking about facts. And when you got presented with them, you flodged out like a little bitch.
Ironic post is.................. Ironic
 
I saw you in another thread talking about facts. And when you got presented with them, you flodged out like a little bitch.
Ironic post is.................. Ironic
It is a tragedy that these mentally ill LibTards are allowed to vote.
 
Well, Rye Catcher . . . I'm more libertarian that conservative. In fact, I'm just Libertarian. But, as of right now, the GOP/Conservatives are far closer to the Libertarian ideals than the liberals/ leftists, whatever you want to call them. Not hard, now that the left have gone full on fascist, and dropped any pretense of their former ideals.

But, I'll say this to you and all other liberals on here: I respect you for being on this forum when you are not in control of it, and cannot simply cry to the mods to have people banned when they point out the flaws in your arguments.

That tells me you at least are not terrified of differing opinions. That brings you one step away from your fellow liberals. In what direction, I can't say, but any step away from that set is a step in the right direction. It certainly sets you apart, and I applaud you for it.

:clap2:
Libertarianism is a false flag game. It is based on Ayn Rand and her ideology, and sounds good to the few until they need the help of the many. Our democracy is on the defense, and anyone who has listened to Sen. Johnson's or Sen. Rand's comments are examples of Callous Conservatives.

It sound goods to the biddable people who are healthy, wealthy and not aged, infirm, and those who work and their pay check does not allow for putting money aside for their kids or in retirement.

The first sentence in the Libertarian Platform speaks to the Callous Conservatism, to wit:

"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others."
 
Libertarianism is a false flag game. It is based on Ayn Rand and her ideology, and sounds good to the few until they need the help of the many. Our democracy is on the defense, and anyone who has listened to Sen. Johnson's or Sen. Rand's comments are examples of Callous Conservatives.

It sound goods to the biddable people who are healthy, wealthy and not aged, infirm, and those who work and their pay check does not allow for putting money aside for their kids or in retirement.

The first sentence in the Libertarian Platform speaks to the Callous Conservatism, to wit:

"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others."
Clearly, you don’t have handle on the meaning of “callous.”
 
Thanks. Not sure most would agree. :)

Jets, I can agree to disagree with anyone, and in my mind, that doesn't make them bad or 14 other insidious names people tend to call other people on here. I do not know how you perceive it, but someone can make a very good point, then they throw it out the window by calling someone everything but an American, and swearing like he**. It almost makes me want to root for the other person, lol. One thing is for sure; it doesn't help get their point across, but magically, some people believe that it does!
 
I agree with RC regarding Libertarianism.
As he is prone to do, he overgeneralizes. Not just about Libertarianism as a political theory, but about so many other things.

He points to the Libertarian Platform and criticizes it. His objection leads me to wonder who is it he thinks SHOULD be “forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others”? I am not sure why anybody should be required to sacrifice their values.
 
Jets, I can agree to disagree with anyone, and in my mind, that doesn't make them bad or 14 other insidious names people tend to call other people on here. I do not know how you perceive it, but someone can make a very good point, then they throw it out the window by calling someone everything but an American, and swearing like he**. It almost makes me want to root for the other person, lol. One thing is for sure; it doesn't help get their point across, but magically, some people believe that it does!
Nicely stated
 
Libertarianism is a false flag game.
"False flag," meaning that it purports to stand for something, but actually has a hidden agenda. I look forward to reading you backing up that claim.
It is based on Ayn Rand and her ideology,
No.

Libertarianism pre-dates Rand and it will live long after the left has managed to put her and her works down the memory hole. Rand was a pro-capitalist, immigrant American patriot, not a libertarian. Her books decry the evils of socialism and bureaucracy and are quite prescient about modern times, though written in the fifties. But she does not advocate libertarianism.
and sounds good to the few until they need the help of the many. Our democracy is on the defense, and anyone who has listened to Sen. Johnson's or Sen. Rand's comments are examples of Callous Conservatives.
Such as? What are the two or three most callous comments that Johnson and Rand have made?
It sound goods to the biddable people who are healthy, wealthy and not aged, infirm, and those who work and their pay check does not allow for putting money aside for their kids or in retirement.
Before government decided to play Santa with other people's money, the aged, and infirm were taken care of by family and community.
The first sentence in the Libertarian Platform speaks to the Callous Conservatism, to wit:

"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty: a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and are not forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others."
What part of that is "callous?" Liberty? Individual sovereignty? Own lives? Not forced?

I suspect it is that lack of force that you object to. You fear that, in the absence of force, producers would not choose to support you non-producers in the lifestyle to which you would like to become accustomed. You are very correct about that. Take pipeline workers, for example.

Pipeline workers, start as unskilled labor, but with relatively high compensation. That high compensation is due to the fact that they must work long hours outdoors, often in harsh weather conditions, while separated from family and civilization. With persistence and willingness to learn, they can work up to six figures with no college at all.

No, such a person would not want to support you as you spend eight years living on student loan welfare changing majors with the latest trends in liberal thought. When you finally finish your useless degree, they don't want to pay you a universal basic income, while you "find yourself," or join ANTIFA.

Not that they can anyway, at this point. Biden ended their pipeline jobs on inauguration day, and is now perplexed at the rising price of gasoline.

I'd love to hear your justification for specifically taxing such a person so that you can sleep until noon, except on the day that the latest edition of GTA comes out. Then explain how they will pay those taxes without jobs.

Also, you forgot to support you claim that Libertarianism is a false flag game.
 
"False flag," meaning that it purports to stand for something, but actually has a hidden agenda. I look forward to reading you backing up that claim.

No.

Libertarianism pre-dates Rand and it will live long after the left has managed to put her and her works down the memory hole. Rand was a pro-capitalist, immigrant American patriot, not a libertarian. Her books decry the evils of socialism and bureaucracy and are quite prescient about modern times, though written in the fifties. But she does not advocate libertarianism.

Such as? What are the two or three most callous comments that Johnson and Rand have made?

Before government decided to play Santa with other people's money, the aged, and infirm were taken care of by family and community.

What part of that is "callous?" Liberty? Individual sovereignty? Own lives? Not forced?

I suspect it is that lack of force that you object to. You fear that, in the absence of force, producers would not choose to support you non-producers in the lifestyle to which you would like to become accustomed. You are very correct about that. Take pipeline workers, for example.

Pipeline workers, start as unskilled labor, but with relatively high compensation. That high compensation is due to the fact that they must work long hours outdoors, often in harsh weather conditions, while separated from family and civilization. With persistence and willingness to learn, they can work up to six figures with no college at all.

No, such a person would not want to support you as you spend eight years living on student loan welfare changing majors with the latest trends in liberal thought. When you finally finish your useless degree, they don't want to pay you a universal basic income, while you "find yourself," or join ANTIFA.

Not that they can anyway, at this point. Biden ended their pipeline jobs on inauguration day, and is now perplexed at the rising price of gasoline.

I'd love to hear your justification for specifically taxing such a person so that you can sleep until noon, except on the day that the latest edition of GTA comes out. Then explain how they will pay those taxes without jobs.

Also, you forgot to support you claim that Libertarianism is a false flag game.
Nice try, we can disagree emphatically, but the facts on civil rights, and equal rights, equal opportunities and equal justice are goals of the liberals, progressives and most Democrats.

As to the false flag comment, noted in italics, is used metaphorically.
 
Nice try, we can disagree emphatically, but the facts on civil rights, and equal rights, equal opportunities and equal justice are goals of the liberals, progressives and most Democrats.
Perhaps that is the goal. The method to achieve it is to rob earners of their earnings and to rob free people of their freedom. They have been doing that in earnest for about fifty years now, with little advancement of those goals. Which makes one wonder whether the taking of earnings and ending of liberty are actually the true goals and the lofty ideals quoted are - you know - false flags.
As to the false flag comment, noted in italics, is used metaphorically.
What?

This is why it is often such a waste of time to debate liberals. They debate in declarations, with no factual basis to present.

When you finally make a statement that could be prove or disproven by facts, you claim that that was "metaphorical." Libertarians either pretend to believe in liberty, and individual rights, or they actually believe in it. Which is it?
 
"False flag," meaning that it purports to stand for something, but actually has a hidden agenda. I look forward to reading you backing up that claim.

No.

Libertarianism pre-dates Rand and it will live long after the left has managed to put her and her works down the memory hole. Rand was a pro-capitalist, immigrant American patriot, not a libertarian. Her books decry the evils of socialism and bureaucracy and are quite prescient about modern times, though written in the fifties. But she does not advocate libertarianism.

Such as? What are the two or three most callous comments that Johnson and Rand have made?

Before government decided to play Santa with other people's money, the aged, and infirm were taken care of by family and community.

What part of that is "callous?" Liberty? Individual sovereignty? Own lives? Not forced?

I suspect it is that lack of force that you object to. You fear that, in the absence of force, producers would not choose to support you non-producers in the lifestyle to which you would like to become accustomed. You are very correct about that. Take pipeline workers, for example.

Pipeline workers, start as unskilled labor, but with relatively high compensation. That high compensation is due to the fact that they must work long hours outdoors, often in harsh weather conditions, while separated from family and civilization. With persistence and willingness to learn, they can work up to six figures with no college at all.

No, such a person would not want to support you as you spend eight years living on student loan welfare changing majors with the latest trends in liberal thought. When you finally finish your useless degree, they don't want to pay you a universal basic income, while you "find yourself," or join ANTIFA.

Not that they can anyway, at this point. Biden ended their pipeline jobs on inauguration day, and is now perplexed at the rising price of gasoline.

I'd love to hear your justification for specifically taxing such a person so that you can sleep until noon, except on the day that the latest edition of GTA comes out. Then explain how they will pay those taxes without jobs.

Also, you forgot to support you claim that Libertarianism is a false flag game.
There are videos on YouTube where Rand states that handicapped people are worthless; I’ve seen these videos.
She was a mentally ill piece of garbage.
 
There is nearly zero communication on this message board. It's a reflection of where we are as a country.


I communicate just fine with all intelligent, reasonable people here! The only ones whom you cannot communicate with are the ones posting 12 Trump-TDS threads based on fake news stories every day who thought it a crisis when Trump used a hurricane map with a mark on it, but are perfectly good with Biddum's 30% inflation, triple crime rate, empty grocery stores and war looming.
 
Or is the current administration and congress so difficult to defend that the liberals are waiting for the GOP to win, so they can go back to being the vocal critics?

Nothing wrong with that, I'm just wondering. I like it when liberals defend the indefensible.

Mods, if this should be in feedback, feel free to move it. It's a question about the board combined with politics, so I thought if I put it in feedback, it might get moved here.
While we may lack quantity of liberals, the liberals we have are of the highest quality, the most liberal, that could be found so what they lack in body count they make up for in stupidity.
 

Forum List

Back
Top