xÞx;1652350 said:
Exactly as now? you have no complaints about any part of it?
Paulie said:
So you don't support it as written.
Make up your mind.
Perhaps I misunderstood you. Or vice versa, who knows. I support literal interpretation of the constitition, but the 16th happens to be one I don't agree with. It's not a perfect document, my man.
xÞx said:
What definition are you using of '{R}ight, since you define yourself as a classical liberal/libertarian?
Paulie said:
I don't use definitions with this shit dude
xÞx said:
You can't define what you mean? There are no definitions for your words?
Then your words are meaningless and I'll thank you to not interrupt the discussion anymore.
I lean right economically.
What the **** do you WANT from me, the ******* WIKIPEDIA version of my beliefs?
Come on!
I hold views from each side of the aisle, but I most closely identify myself with Classical liberals. Which in today's political society means, at least as far as
I'm concerned, "Libertarian-leaning conservative".
My words are meaningless unless I define them by SOMEONE ELSE'S definition of them.
Ok dude. Whatever you say. Way to be a free-thinker.
I gave you my political compass, with my percentages of how I lean on each of the main issues.
If all of what I've disclosed about myself is not good enough for you to DEFINE me, then yes, this discussion is over. Because if that is that case, your type is EXTREMELY annoying.