Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
If Only, He could have gone to a "sanctuary city".Only that Libtard Jesus would.Yes, I have a question. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?
But not all of them have guaranteed fair wages, right? Don't you care about them?No need to expand it; it already covers, all Americans.Yes, I have a question. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?Our federal Constitution applies to the People of our Republic. Any questions?No. It isn't. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?Yes, that is the Only reason. Our social Contract already applies to all Americans.No. That's not the only reason. In fact, it probably doesn't even make the list of reasons. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?
Surely we can do more, right?rights involve the law; we have social justice; it is socialism.No. That law is not socialism. We have individual rights not group rights.The law is socialism. Any law is a limit on natural rights. We are managed, all the time; either by morals, laws, or culture.You are not making any sense. You advocate pareto optimal which is based on micromanagement. I am arguing that we don't need to be micromanaged. This is independent of the fact that we have laws. Yes, we have laws. So what?just more right wing fantasy? we have laws. any laws, gains say your contention.There is no need to micromanage anyone. That is what you are effectively doing when you advocate pareto optimal. We're all adults here. We don't need to be micromanaged.
fair is relative. minimum standards are ok as a social safety net.But not all of them have guaranteed fair wages, right? Don't you care about them?No need to expand it; it already covers, all Americans.Yes, I have a question. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?Our federal Constitution applies to the People of our Republic. Any questions?No. It isn't. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?Yes, that is the Only reason. Our social Contract already applies to all Americans.
of course; we should be striving for a more perfect Union of States.Surely we can do more, right?rights involve the law; we have social justice; it is socialism.No. That law is not socialism. We have individual rights not group rights.The law is socialism. Any law is a limit on natural rights. We are managed, all the time; either by morals, laws, or culture.You are not making any sense. You advocate pareto optimal which is based on micromanagement. I am arguing that we don't need to be micromanaged. This is independent of the fact that we have laws. Yes, we have laws. So what?just more right wing fantasy? we have laws. any laws, gains say your contention.
That does not sound like the good of general welfare for all. Shame on you.fair is relative. minimum standards are ok as a social safety net.But not all of them have guaranteed fair wages, right? Don't you care about them?No need to expand it; it already covers, all Americans.Yes, I have a question. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?Our federal Constitution applies to the People of our Republic. Any questions?No. It isn't. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?
Can I count on you to support redistribution of wealth?of course; we should be striving for a more perfect Union of States.Surely we can do more, right?rights involve the law; we have social justice; it is socialism.No. That law is not socialism. We have individual rights not group rights.The law is socialism. Any law is a limit on natural rights. We are managed, all the time; either by morals, laws, or culture.You are not making any sense. You advocate pareto optimal which is based on micromanagement. I am arguing that we don't need to be micromanaged. This is independent of the fact that we have laws. Yes, we have laws. So what?
That is one of the dumbest OPs I have ever read. And that includes rderps political threads and gunos flame threads. Congratulations.Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.
Thanks. Given that socialism intentionally defies examination, it is understandable that you have never made these connections.That is one of the dumbest OPs I have ever read. And that includes rderps political threads and gunos flame threads. Congratulations.Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.
Lol, maybe because it isn't reality?Thanks. Given that socialism intentionally defies examination, it is understandable that you have never made these connection.That is one of the dumbest OPs I have ever read. And that includes rderps political threads and gunos flame threads. Congratulations.Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.
Nope. It isn't a new observation.Lol, maybe because it isn't reality?Thanks. Given that socialism intentionally defies examination, it is understandable that you have never made these connection.That is one of the dumbest OPs I have ever read. And that includes rderps political threads and gunos flame threads. Congratulations.Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.
sure it does; you merely don't understand any of the concepts. a rising minimum wage tide lifts all wage boats.That does not sound like the good of general welfare for all. Shame on you.fair is relative. minimum standards are ok as a social safety net.But not all of them have guaranteed fair wages, right? Don't you care about them?No need to expand it; it already covers, all Americans.Yes, I have a question. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?Our federal Constitution applies to the People of our Republic. Any questions?
sure; we already have death and taxes.Can I count on you to support redistribution of wealth?of course; we should be striving for a more perfect Union of States.Surely we can do more, right?rights involve the law; we have social justice; it is socialism.No. That law is not socialism. We have individual rights not group rights.The law is socialism. Any law is a limit on natural rights. We are managed, all the time; either by morals, laws, or culture.
Really? Those people still seem to be struggling mightily to me. Are you sure we shouldn't redistribute some wealth?sure it does; you merely don't understand any of the concepts. a rising minimum wage tide lifts all wage boats.That does not sound like the good of general welfare for all. Shame on you.fair is relative. minimum standards are ok as a social safety net.But not all of them have guaranteed fair wages, right? Don't you care about them?No need to expand it; it already covers, all Americans.Yes, I have a question. Would you like to expand the social contract for the general welfare of all Americans?
That doesn't seem like it is enough. Can I count on you for more?sure; we already have death and taxes.Can I count on you to support redistribution of wealth?of course; we should be striving for a more perfect Union of States.Surely we can do more, right?rights involve the law; we have social justice; it is socialism.No. That law is not socialism. We have individual rights not group rights.
we already have. poor is relative. the right wing wants, no minimum wage for our First World economy and labor force.Really? Those people still seem to be struggling mightily to me. Are you sure we shouldn't redistribute some wealth?sure it does; you merely don't understand any of the concepts. a rising minimum wage tide lifts all wage boats.That does not sound like the good of general welfare for all. Shame on you.fair is relative. minimum standards are ok as a social safety net.But not all of them have guaranteed fair wages, right? Don't you care about them?No need to expand it; it already covers, all Americans.
still trying solve simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, simply for the sake of public morals.That doesn't seem like it is enough. Can I count on you for more?sure; we already have death and taxes.Can I count on you to support redistribution of wealth?of course; we should be striving for a more perfect Union of States.Surely we can do more, right?rights involve the law; we have social justice; it is socialism.
If you like your poverty, you can keep your poverty.still trying solve simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, simply for the sake of public morals.That doesn't seem like it is enough. Can I count on you for more?sure; we already have death and taxes.Can I count on you to support redistribution of wealth?of course; we should be striving for a more perfect Union of States.Surely we can do more, right?
I don't believe it has been enough. You need to aim higher.we already have. poor is relative. the right wing wants, no minimum wage for our First World economy and labor force.Really? Those people still seem to be struggling mightily to me. Are you sure we shouldn't redistribute some wealth?sure it does; you merely don't understand any of the concepts. a rising minimum wage tide lifts all wage boats.That does not sound like the good of general welfare for all. Shame on you.fair is relative. minimum standards are ok as a social safety net.But not all of them have guaranteed fair wages, right? Don't you care about them?