Should All Elected Officials Sign a Pledge That They Support America First

[Correll]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, we have a $20 trillion debt. How do you propose we balance the budget?

CANDIDATE A: That's simple, Wolf. We just need to Put America First!

(wild applause)

Discussing philosophical differences between candidate is a completely valid topic.

That it is removed from direct specific policies does not change that.

YOu have not addressed your actual position on the idea of whether an American leader should put American interests first.

 

[g5000]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, health insurance costs are still rising. Deductibles are too high. What do you propose we do to solve this pressing problem which is crushing the middle class.

CANDIDATE A: Repeal ObamaCare!

(wild applause)

MODERATOR: And then what?

CANDIDATE A: Put America First!

(wild applause, cheering, hoots, orgasms)

Do you agree or disagree that elected American official SHOULD put American Interests first?

I believe our elected American officials should balance the budget, which can be achieved simply by banning all tax expenditures and raising the Social Security and Medicare eligibility ages to 70 and index them to 9 percent of the population going forward.

I believe our elected American officials should abolish the federal income tax and replace it with the Fair Tax.

I believe our elected American officials should repeal ObamaCare and allow us to buy our health insurance the same way we buy our auto, home, and life insurance.

And I can write pages and pages of reasons why these are the best options for America going forward.

Shall I go on, jingo-boi? Or am I putting you to sleep?

 

[Correll]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, health insurance costs are still rising. Deductibles are too high. What do you propose we do to solve this pressing problem which is crushing the middle class.

CANDIDATE A: Repeal ObamaCare!

(wild applause)

MODERATOR: And then what?

CANDIDATE A: Put America First!

(wild applause, cheering, hoots, orgasms)

Do you agree or disagree that elected American official SHOULD put American Interests first?

Yes . Everyone agrees! That's like saying "are you against teen pregnancy ?" . Of course ! BUt the real question is what are people doing to help America . Other than slinging slogans . Which does nothing .

No, everyone does not agree.

G5000 does not. Neither does CLayton.

They find such thinking offensive and jingoistic.

This is part of a deep underlying divide between liberals and conservatives.


LIberals are more universal or global in their perspective. They are more concerned with Fairness to outsiders.

Conservatives want to take care of our own and advance out interests, even IF it might be at the expense of others.

 

[Timmy]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, we have a $20 trillion debt. How do you propose we balance the budget?

CANDIDATE A: That's simple, Wolf. We just need to Put America First!

(wild applause)

Discussing philosophical differences between candidate is a completely valid topic.

That it is removed from direct specific policies does not change that.

YOu have not addressed your actual position on the idea of whether an American leader should put American interests first.

Do u have examples of where they ain't putting America first?

 

[g5000]

Yeah, I'm a liberal.

A liberal who is pro-life.

A liberal who wants to replace the income tax with the Fair Tax.

A liberal who is pro gun.

A liberal who wants to ban tax expenditures.

A liberal who wants to repeal ObamaCare and allow us to buy our health insurance the same way we buy our home, auto, and life insurance.

A liberal who wants to raise the retirement age.

BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

If You Aint Fer Us, Yer Agin Us!™

 

[Correll]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, health insurance costs are still rising. Deductibles are too high. What do you propose we do to solve this pressing problem which is crushing the middle class.

CANDIDATE A: Repeal ObamaCare!

(wild applause)

MODERATOR: And then what?

CANDIDATE A: Put America First!

(wild applause, cheering, hoots, orgasms)

Do you agree or disagree that elected American official SHOULD put American Interests first?

I believe our elected American officials should balance the budget, which can be achieved simply by banning all tax expenditures and raising the Social Security and Medicare eligibility ages to 70 and index them to 9 percent of the population going forward.

I believe our elected American officials should abolish the federal income tax and replace it with the Fair Tax.

I believe our elected American officials should repeal ObamaCare and allow us to buy our health insurance the same way we buy our auto, home, and life insurance.

And I can write pages and pages of reasons why these are the best options for America going forward.

Shall I go on, jingo-boi? Or am I putting you to sleep?

YOu should answer my question.

This thread is more about underlying philosophies and intentions then policy specifics.

Your resistance to telling the truth is very telling. As is your made up word, "jingo-boi".


Do you agree or disagree that elected American official SHOULD put American Interests first?

 

[g5000]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, health insurance costs are still rising. Deductibles are too high. What do you propose we do to solve this pressing problem which is crushing the middle class.

CANDIDATE A: Repeal ObamaCare!

(wild applause)

MODERATOR: And then what?

CANDIDATE A: Put America First!

(wild applause, cheering, hoots, orgasms)

Do you agree or disagree that elected American official SHOULD put American Interests first?

Yes . Everyone agrees! That's like saying "are you against teen pregnancy ?" . Of course ! BUt the real question is what are people doing to help America . Other than slinging slogans . Which does nothing .

No, everyone does not agree.

G5000 does not.

Please explain which of my policies are not America First policies.

Dumbass.

 

[Correll]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, we have a $20 trillion debt. How do you propose we balance the budget?

CANDIDATE A: That's simple, Wolf. We just need to Put America First!

(wild applause)

Discussing philosophical differences between candidate is a completely valid topic.

That it is removed from direct specific policies does not change that.

YOu have not addressed your actual position on the idea of whether an American leader should put American interests first.

Do u have examples of where they ain't putting America first?

When you get to specifics, confirmation bias, in group bias, wishful thinking will lead them to argue that their policies are betting for America in the long run or indirectly.

BUT, you can see by the deep offense they are taking, (clayton, g5000) that they find the idea offensive.

I think that, eventually, g5000 will admit it.


Clayton would too, except he always runs away when challenged.

 

[Correll]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, health insurance costs are still rising. Deductibles are too high. What do you propose we do to solve this pressing problem which is crushing the middle class.

CANDIDATE A: Repeal ObamaCare!

(wild applause)

MODERATOR: And then what?

CANDIDATE A: Put America First!

(wild applause, cheering, hoots, orgasms)

Do you agree or disagree that elected American official SHOULD put American Interests first?

Yes . Everyone agrees! That's like saying "are you against teen pregnancy ?" . Of course ! BUt the real question is what are people doing to help America . Other than slinging slogans . Which does nothing .

No, everyone does not agree.

G5000 does not.

Please explain which of my policies are not America First policies.

Dumbass.

Please answer my question.

 

[Manchester]

That's a pretty tiny expense. And a pretty small "hit" for America compared to all the other far larger issues.

400 usd dollars for every man woman and child in the country doesn't seem that small to me. And besides, if America is coming first then giving Israel laser guided bombs to kill people who throw stones sounds like overkill to me when Michigan still has lead water pipes.

Edit: Deaths by Islamic terrorism are tiny, they rank below todlers with guns, bees and slipping in the bath but the US spends how much on that? A trillion a year was it?

Fair enough.

Americans killed by filthy medieval sub humans are extremely offensive to Americans and we respond strongly, even if it is a "small number".


SO, what is it about that one tenth of one percent that offends you so much that you feel the need to respond strongly?

So you spew forth some dehumnaising Geobbels style rehtoric but what you are saying is that the sensibilites of the American people should be pandered to and not the actual national interests?

What offends me is it's money that America needs, every right winger on here screams that america is going down the pan, so why arm another nation on the other side of the globe when its already armed to the teeth already. You know that argument about welfare being damaging as it just makes poor folks not want to get up and work for themselves, well is Israel paid for it's own damn bombs maybe it would learn the value of them>?

Dehumanizing sub human animals who kill us, works for me.

No healthy nation or group is going to ignore their members being brutally murdered by outsiders.

I'm not sure what part of that you have a problem with.


I'm not sure what it is about the situation re Israel and their enemies that makes me so much more sympathetic to Israel and not so much their enemies.

Is it that I know so many jews? Or that during the Cold War the Arabs were more friendly with the SOviets?

Maybe disgust at the way, as I was growing up, that the Arabs would keep starting wars, lose them, then whine about it?

Or the terrorism tactics of the Arabs?

Whatever.

It's worked for every despot and warmonger in history, if you like being in that company then good for you.

Arabs being friends with communists? I don't remember the Soviets getting an open arms welcome in Afghan.

 

[g5000]

He won't go along with my jingoism! He must be a ******* commie bastard!

"I've got one that can see!"

 

[g5000]

MODERATOR: Candidate A, health insurance costs are still rising. Deductibles are too high. What do you propose we do to solve this pressing problem which is crushing the middle class.

CANDIDATE A: Repeal ObamaCare!

(wild applause)

MODERATOR: And then what?

CANDIDATE A: Put America First!

(wild applause, cheering, hoots, orgasms)

Do you agree or disagree that elected American official SHOULD put American Interests first?

Yes . Everyone agrees! That's like saying "are you against teen pregnancy ?" . Of course ! BUt the real question is what are people doing to help America . Other than slinging slogans . Which does nothing .

No, everyone does not agree.

G5000 does not.

Please explain which of my policies are not America First policies.

Dumbass.

Please answer my question.

You are doing an OUTSTANDING job of demonstrating the evil of loyalty oaths.

Keep it up!

 

[Correll]

400 usd dollars for every man woman and child in the country doesn't seem that small to me. And besides, if America is coming first then giving Israel laser guided bombs to kill people who throw stones sounds like overkill to me when Michigan still has lead water pipes.

Edit: Deaths by Islamic terrorism are tiny, they rank below todlers with guns, bees and slipping in the bath but the US spends how much on that? A trillion a year was it?

Fair enough.

Americans killed by filthy medieval sub humans are extremely offensive to Americans and we respond strongly, even if it is a "small number".


SO, what is it about that one tenth of one percent that offends you so much that you feel the need to respond strongly?

So you spew forth some dehumnaising Geobbels style rehtoric but what you are saying is that the sensibilites of the American people should be pandered to and not the actual national interests?

What offends me is it's money that America needs, every right winger on here screams that america is going down the pan, so why arm another nation on the other side of the globe when its already armed to the teeth already. You know that argument about welfare being damaging as it just makes poor folks not want to get up and work for themselves, well is Israel paid for it's own damn bombs maybe it would learn the value of them>?

Dehumanizing sub human animals who kill us, works for me.

No healthy nation or group is going to ignore their members being brutally murdered by outsiders.

I'm not sure what part of that you have a problem with.


I'm not sure what it is about the situation re Israel and their enemies that makes me so much more sympathetic to Israel and not so much their enemies.

Is it that I know so many jews? Or that during the Cold War the Arabs were more friendly with the SOviets?

Maybe disgust at the way, as I was growing up, that the Arabs would keep starting wars, lose them, then whine about it?

Or the terrorism tactics of the Arabs?

Whatever.

It's worked for every despot and warmonger in history, if you like being in that company then good for you.

Arabs being friends with communists? I don't remember the Soviets getting an open arms welcome in Afghan.

It works for every group that has ever had enemies.

YOu also seem to miss that I specifically limited my ire to those who actually killed Americans.

THough I would be happy to extend that to those who support killing of Americans.

 

[Correll]

He won't go along with my jingoism! He must be a ******* commie bastard!

"I've got one that can see!"

YOur insistence that America FIrst is "jingosm" makes your position clear.

WHy won't you clearly state it for Timmy, who doesn't believe me about it?

You do not believe that it is right for elected officials or America to pursue it's interests if they conflict with others.


Do you?

 

[Correll]

Do you agree or disagree that elected American official SHOULD put American Interests first?

Yes . Everyone agrees! That's like saying "are you against teen pregnancy ?" . Of course ! BUt the real question is what are people doing to help America . Other than slinging slogans . Which does nothing .

No, everyone does not agree.

G5000 does not.

Please explain which of my policies are not America First policies.

Dumbass.

Please answer my question.

You are doing an OUTSTANDING job of demonstrating the evil of loyalty oaths.

Keep it up!

YOu are doing an outstanding job of showing that you are against putting American interests first, but are afraid to admit it.

 

[g5000]

People who like loyalty oaths want to be part of a Hive Mind, and are not only opposed to independent thinking, they fear it.

That's about as Un-American as it gets, boys and girls.

 

[Hum Dinger]

By not renouncing their 'Norquist Pledge' all congressional Republicans were in violation of their congressional oath:

'I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.'

Furthermore, the threat of not raising the credit ceiling was a violation of the 14th amendment, which is a violation of their oath of office:

'The validity of the public debt of the United States … shall not be questioned.’

So it's pretty clear that Congressional Republicans don't take their oath of office seriously. So what would another oath or pledge mean to anyone?

 

[g5000]

Yes . Everyone agrees! That's like saying "are you against teen pregnancy ?" . Of course ! BUt the real question is what are people doing to help America . Other than slinging slogans . Which does nothing .

No, everyone does not agree.

G5000 does not.

Please explain which of my policies are not America First policies.

Dumbass.

Please answer my question.

You are doing an OUTSTANDING job of demonstrating the evil of loyalty oaths.

Keep it up!

YOu are doing an outstanding job of showing that you are against putting American interests first, but are afraid to admit it.

Come on slogan-boi. I asked to you point out which of my policies are not putting American interests first.

Go ahead, coward. Try it.

 

[g5000]

By not renouncing their 'Norquist Pledge' all congressional Republicans were in violation of their congressional oath:

'I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.'

Furthermore, the threat of not raising the credit ceiling was a violation of the 14th amendment, which is a violation of their oath of office:

'The validity of the public debt of the United States … shall not be questioned.’

So it's pretty clear that Congressional Republicans don't take their oath of office seriously. So what would another oath or pledge mean to anyone?

Speaking of Hive Minds and being unable to think independently, did you ever read the Norquist pledge?

Did you notice something odd about it?

I've pointed it out before. If you are lucky, someone in the hive will PM you.

Or you can search for "Norquist" and my username.

 

[Correll]

People who like loyalty oaths want to be part of a Hive Mind, and are not only opposed to independent thinking, they fear it.

That's about as Un-American as it gets, boys and girls.

So you equate loyalty to the group as opposing and fearing independent thinking...


And you wonder why people doubt your loyalty to the group.