Why I Could Never Be GOP or Libertarian

[kaz]

Being a Marxist has that effect

You would think when your rhetoric isn't even working on Republican voters you'd alter your spin

Quite the reverse. Republicans when they can't convince me they are better than you go down over and over

And libertarianism is a small fringe wing of the GOP. Not even Republicans wanted Rand Paul more than rubio jeb Cruz kasich Christie. If libertarians can't convince Republicans good luck with the rest of us

You're the Republican, go suck Trump's dick, right wing nut job

No we are rino's remember?

You're a gun loving bible humping socon, RWNJ, own it

 

[Kosh]

Listening to everything the GOP and Libertarians have to say, I have to say I viamently disagree with the direction they want to take America. They are a very selfish group.

Paul Ryan, the father of a Republican budget initiative that seeks to destroy Medicare and Social Security has continually invoked the name of Ayn Rand as his philosophical mentor and guide. Many other Republicans have do so too. They are embracing a philosophy which, according to Ayn Rand herself, is one of selfishness and is against all forms of Spirituality. The question any thoughtful Americans must ask themselves is: “Is this the America we want?”

And how do they get evangelicals to go along with them is beyond me.

Its a very selfish every man for himself mentality.

And Libertarians don't believe in the Commons. What are the Commons?

The Commons are resources that are owned by all of us. That includes the Grand Canyon, oil rights, power companies, roads, public airwaves, schools, etc.

Here is how they think. Libertarians think if we all own the land on which our sheep graze, we will each add one too many sheep until we destroy the land for future generations. That We the People can't manage the commons.

Libertarians think that if one person owns the land and charged everyone else grazing fees, he would be more committed to preserving it for the future than a village of farmers.

I disagree.

Proof you are and always be a far left drone.

As you have just proven, you are not capable of any type of independent thought!

That's it? That's all you got? No wonder trump kicked the shit out of every one of your candidates. Think about it Kosh. Without any help from us liberals Republican voters overwhelmingly said no to Rand Paul, jeb bush, Ted Cruz, kasich, rubio, Christie and all the rest. Pretty telling.

You are not a liberal, you are a far left drone!

And what do you care about anything outside the far left religion?

Not like you will ever open your mind and look at anything beyond your debunked religion.

You voted for worse than Bush twice and now will vote for Clinton, who is worse than Bush.

Just like I bet you believed you actually believe you get a choice in your nominations..

 

[sealybobo]

Listening to everything the GOP and Libertarians have to say, I have to say I viamently disagree with the direction they want to take America. They are a very selfish group.

Paul Ryan, the father of a Republican budget initiative that seeks to destroy Medicare and Social Security has continually invoked the name of Ayn Rand as his philosophical mentor and guide. Many other Republicans have do so too. They are embracing a philosophy which, according to Ayn Rand herself, is one of selfishness and is against all forms of Spirituality. The question any thoughtful Americans must ask themselves is: “Is this the America we want?”

And how do they get evangelicals to go along with them is beyond me.

Its a very selfish every man for himself mentality.

And Libertarians don't believe in the Commons. What are the Commons?

The Commons are resources that are owned by all of us. That includes the Grand Canyon, oil rights, power companies, roads, public airwaves, schools, etc.

Here is how they think. Libertarians think if we all own the land on which our sheep graze, we will each add one too many sheep until we destroy the land for future generations. That We the People can't manage the commons.

Libertarians think that if one person owns the land and charged everyone else grazing fees, he would be more committed to preserving it for the future than a village of farmers.

I disagree.

Proof you are and always be a far left drone.

As you have just proven, you are not capable of any type of independent thought!

That's it? That's all you got? No wonder trump kicked the shit out of every one of your candidates. Think about it Kosh. Without any help from us liberals Republican voters overwhelmingly said no to Rand Paul, jeb bush, Ted Cruz, kasich, rubio, Christie and all the rest. Pretty telling.

You are not a liberal, you are a far left drone!

And what do you care about anything outside the far left religion?

Not like you will ever open your mind and look at anything beyond your debunked religion.

You voted for worse than Bush twice and now will vote for Clinton, who is worse than Bush.

Just like I bet you believed you actually believe you get a choice in your nominations..

Another reason I could never vote GOP

Donald Trump on Monday proposed punishing Americans if they don’t turn in their friends and neighbors for behaving suspiciously. “In San Bernardino, people knew what was going on, they knew exactly, but they used the excuse of racial profiling for not reporting it,” The presumptive GOP presidential nominee was presumably referring to unverified reports that a woman who lived near the mother of one of the San Bernardino shooters had noticed that the family received “quite a few packages within a short amount of time, and they were doing a lot of work out in the garage.” A man who claimed to be friends with this neighbor said she did not report the packages and the behavior to authorities because she “didn’t want to do any kind of racial profiling.”

In Trump’s America, however, that woman would face serious consequences. “We need to make sure every single person involved in this plan, including anyone who knew something, but didn’t tell us, is brought to justice,” “These people need to have consequences, big consequences.”

He also strayed slightly from the prepared remarks posted on his website, which read, “If it can be proven that somebody had information about any attack, and did not give this information to authorities, they must serve prison time.”

Trump’s proposal that Americans be forced to report their neighbors expands on an idea he’s been peddling since last year, when he told a crowd in South Carolina, “People move into a house a block down the road, you know who’s going in. You can see and you report them to the local police. Most likely you’ll be wrong, but that’s OK. That’s the best way. Everybody’s their own cop in a way.”

Those earlier remarks, however, stopped short of proposing that people be punished for not informing on their neighbors — a hallmark of some of the most brutal and deadly regimes in history, including Nazi Germany and Russia under Joseph Stalin.

Trump’s latest proposal was part of a speech during which he repeatedly vilified and attacked Muslims, as well as immigrants more generally.

 

[Contumacious]

Listening to everything the GOP and Libertarians have to say, I have to say I viamently disagree with the direction they want to take America. They are a very selfish group.

Paul Ryan, the father of a Republican budget initiative that seeks to destroy Medicare and Social Security has continually invoked the name of Ayn Rand as his philosophical mentor and guide. Many other Republicans have do so too. They are embracing a philosophy which, according to Ayn Rand herself, is one of selfishness and is against all forms of Spirituality. The question any thoughtful Americans must ask themselves is: “Is this the America we want?”

And how do they get evangelicals to go along with them is beyond me.

Its a very selfish every man for himself mentality.

And Libertarians don't believe in the Commons. What are the Commons?

The Commons are resources that are owned by all of us. That includes the Grand Canyon, oil rights, power companies, roads, public airwaves, schools, etc.

Here is how they think. Libertarians think if we all own the land on which our sheep graze, we will each add one too many sheep until we destroy the land for future generations. That We the People can't manage the commons.

Libertarians think that if one person owns the land and charged everyone else grazing fees, he would be more committed to preserving it for the future than a village of farmers.

I disagree.

Proof you are and always be a far left drone.

As you have just proven, you are not capable of any type of independent thought!

That's it? That's all you got? No wonder trump kicked the shit out of every one of your candidates. Think about it Kosh. Without any help from us liberals Republican voters overwhelmingly said no to Rand Paul, jeb bush, Ted Cruz, kasich, rubio, Christie and all the rest. Pretty telling.

You are not a liberal, you are a far left drone!

And what do you care about anything outside the far left religion?

Not like you will ever open your mind and look at anything beyond your debunked religion.

You voted for worse than Bush twice and now will vote for Clinton, who is worse than Bush.

Just like I bet you believed you actually believe you get a choice in your nominations..

Another reason I could never vote GOP

Donald Trump on Monday proposed punishing Americans if they don’t turn in their friends and neighbors for behaving suspiciously. “In San Bernardino, people knew what was going on, they knew exactly, but they used the excuse of racial profiling for not reporting it,” The presumptive GOP presidential nominee was presumably referring to unverified reports that a woman who lived near the mother of one of the San Bernardino shooters had noticed that the family received “quite a few packages within a short amount of time, and they were doing a lot of work out in the garage.” A man who claimed to be friends with this neighbor said she did not report the packages and the behavior to authorities because she “didn’t want to do any kind of racial profiling.”

In Trump’s America, however, that woman would face serious consequences. “We need to make sure every single person involved in this plan, including anyone who knew something, but didn’t tell us, is brought to justice,” “These people need to have consequences, big consequences.”

He also strayed slightly from the prepared remarks posted on his website, which read, “If it can be proven that somebody had information about any attack, and did not give this information to authorities, they must serve prison time.”

Trump’s proposal that Americans be forced to report their neighbors expands on an idea he’s been peddling since last year, when he told a crowd in South Carolina, “People move into a house a block down the road, you know who’s going in. You can see and you report them to the local police. Most likely you’ll be wrong, but that’s OK. That’s the best way. Everybody’s their own cop in a way.”

Those earlier remarks, however, stopped short of proposing that people be punished for not informing on their neighbors — a hallmark of some of the most brutal and deadly regimes in history, including Nazi Germany and Russia under Joseph Stalin.

Trump’s latest proposal was part of a speech during which he repeatedly vilified and attacked Muslims, as well as immigrants more generally.

The Libertarians repudiate the policies of a stasi state.

 

[WillowTree]

The Muslims terrorist wife was with him when he bought his ammo, she was with him when he scoped out the sites, she knew he was surveilling the gay bar. Are you saying she should have remained silent? You are an asshole sealybobo.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Listening to everything the GOP and Libertarians have to say, I have to say I viamently disagree with the direction they want to take America. They are a very selfish group.

Paul Ryan, the father of a Republican budget initiative that seeks to destroy Medicare and Social Security has continually invoked the name of Ayn Rand as his philosophical mentor and guide. Many other Republicans have do so too. They are embracing a philosophy which, according to Ayn Rand herself, is one of selfishness and is against all forms of Spirituality. The question any thoughtful Americans must ask themselves is: “Is this the America we want?”

And how do they get evangelicals to go along with them is beyond me.

Its a very selfish every man for himself mentality.

And Libertarians don't believe in the Commons. What are the Commons?

The Commons are resources that are owned by all of us. That includes the Grand Canyon, oil rights, power companies, roads, public airwaves, schools, etc.

Here is how they think. Libertarians think if we all own the land on which our sheep graze, we will each add one too many sheep until we destroy the land for future generations. That We the People can't manage the commons.

Libertarians think that if one person owns the land and charged everyone else grazing fees, he would be more committed to preserving it for the future than a village of farmers.

I disagree.

Proof you are and always be a far left drone.

As you have just proven, you are not capable of any type of independent thought!

That's it? That's all you got? No wonder trump kicked the shit out of every one of your candidates. Think about it Kosh. Without any help from us liberals Republican voters overwhelmingly said no to Rand Paul, jeb bush, Ted Cruz, kasich, rubio, Christie and all the rest. Pretty telling.

You are not a liberal, you are a far left drone!

And what do you care about anything outside the far left religion?

Not like you will ever open your mind and look at anything beyond your debunked religion.

You voted for worse than Bush twice and now will vote for Clinton, who is worse than Bush.

Just like I bet you believed you actually believe you get a choice in your nominations..

Another reason I could never vote GOP

Donald Trump on Monday proposed punishing Americans if they don’t turn in their friends and neighbors for behaving suspiciously. “In San Bernardino, people knew what was going on, they knew exactly, but they used the excuse of racial profiling for not reporting it,” The presumptive GOP presidential nominee was presumably referring to unverified reports that a woman who lived near the mother of one of the San Bernardino shooters had noticed that the family received “quite a few packages within a short amount of time, and they were doing a lot of work out in the garage.” A man who claimed to be friends with this neighbor said she did not report the packages and the behavior to authorities because she “didn’t want to do any kind of racial profiling.”

In Trump’s America, however, that woman would face serious consequences. “We need to make sure every single person involved in this plan, including anyone who knew something, but didn’t tell us, is brought to justice,” “These people need to have consequences, big consequences.”

He also strayed slightly from the prepared remarks posted on his website, which read, “If it can be proven that somebody had information about any attack, and did not give this information to authorities, they must serve prison time.”

Trump’s proposal that Americans be forced to report their neighbors expands on an idea he’s been peddling since last year, when he told a crowd in South Carolina, “People move into a house a block down the road, you know who’s going in. You can see and you report them to the local police. Most likely you’ll be wrong, but that’s OK. That’s the best way. Everybody’s their own cop in a way.”

Those earlier remarks, however, stopped short of proposing that people be punished for not informing on their neighbors — a hallmark of some of the most brutal and deadly regimes in history, including Nazi Germany and Russia under Joseph Stalin.

Trump’s latest proposal was part of a speech during which he repeatedly vilified and attacked Muslims, as well as immigrants more generally.

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

 

[sealybobo]

The Muslims terrorist wife was with him when he bought his ammo, she was with him when he scoped out the sites, she knew he was surveilling the gay bar. Are you saying she should have remained silent? You are an asshole sealybobo.

No I'm not saying that. Are you sure she knew what he was going to do? Then prosecute her.

Is buying ammo suspicious?

Was she really with him?

The Muslims terrorist wife was with him when he bought his ammo, she was with him when he scoped out the sites, she knew he was surveilling the gay bar. Are you saying she should have remained silent? You are an asshole sealybobo.

Yea, that's exactly what I'm saying you stupid ****. She should have kept quiet and it should be legal for a spouse to keep quiet when she knows her husband is going to go on a shooting rampage because of Spousal Privilege. Are you really that stupid?

You see honey, Trump is saying much more than what you think. Do you notice Trumpsters are always explaining what Trump meant? Fact is, we already do what you are talking about Neighbor of San Bernardino gunman indicted on terrorism charge

 

[emilynghiem]

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

Not the same at all.

 

[sealybobo]

Listening to everything the GOP and Libertarians have to say, I have to say I viamently disagree with the direction they want to take America. They are a very selfish group.

Paul Ryan, the father of a Republican budget initiative that seeks to destroy Medicare and Social Security has continually invoked the name of Ayn Rand as his philosophical mentor and guide. Many other Republicans have do so too. They are embracing a philosophy which, according to Ayn Rand herself, is one of selfishness and is against all forms of Spirituality. The question any thoughtful Americans must ask themselves is: “Is this the America we want?”

And how do they get evangelicals to go along with them is beyond me.

Its a very selfish every man for himself mentality.

And Libertarians don't believe in the Commons. What are the Commons?

The Commons are resources that are owned by all of us. That includes the Grand Canyon, oil rights, power companies, roads, public airwaves, schools, etc.

Here is how they think. Libertarians think if we all own the land on which our sheep graze, we will each add one too many sheep until we destroy the land for future generations. That We the People can't manage the commons.

Libertarians think that if one person owns the land and charged everyone else grazing fees, he would be more committed to preserving it for the future than a village of farmers.

I disagree.

Proof you are and always be a far left drone.

As you have just proven, you are not capable of any type of independent thought!

That's it? That's all you got? No wonder trump kicked the shit out of every one of your candidates. Think about it Kosh. Without any help from us liberals Republican voters overwhelmingly said no to Rand Paul, jeb bush, Ted Cruz, kasich, rubio, Christie and all the rest. Pretty telling.

You are not a liberal, you are a far left drone!

And what do you care about anything outside the far left religion?

Not like you will ever open your mind and look at anything beyond your debunked religion.

You voted for worse than Bush twice and now will vote for Clinton, who is worse than Bush.

Just like I bet you believed you actually believe you get a choice in your nominations..

Another reason I could never vote GOP

Donald Trump on Monday proposed punishing Americans if they don’t turn in their friends and neighbors for behaving suspiciously. “In San Bernardino, people knew what was going on, they knew exactly, but they used the excuse of racial profiling for not reporting it,” The presumptive GOP presidential nominee was presumably referring to unverified reports that a woman who lived near the mother of one of the San Bernardino shooters had noticed that the family received “quite a few packages within a short amount of time, and they were doing a lot of work out in the garage.” A man who claimed to be friends with this neighbor said she did not report the packages and the behavior to authorities because she “didn’t want to do any kind of racial profiling.”

In Trump’s America, however, that woman would face serious consequences. “We need to make sure every single person involved in this plan, including anyone who knew something, but didn’t tell us, is brought to justice,” “These people need to have consequences, big consequences.”

He also strayed slightly from the prepared remarks posted on his website, which read, “If it can be proven that somebody had information about any attack, and did not give this information to authorities, they must serve prison time.”

Trump’s proposal that Americans be forced to report their neighbors expands on an idea he’s been peddling since last year, when he told a crowd in South Carolina, “People move into a house a block down the road, you know who’s going in. You can see and you report them to the local police. Most likely you’ll be wrong, but that’s OK. That’s the best way. Everybody’s their own cop in a way.”

Those earlier remarks, however, stopped short of proposing that people be punished for not informing on their neighbors — a hallmark of some of the most brutal and deadly regimes in history, including Nazi Germany and Russia under Joseph Stalin.

Trump’s latest proposal was part of a speech during which he repeatedly vilified and attacked Muslims, as well as immigrants more generally.

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Did I say that? And I doubt that's the only reason you can not be a democrat.

 

[emilynghiem]

The Muslims terrorist wife was with him when he bought his ammo, she was with him when he scoped out the sites, she knew he was surveilling the gay bar. Are you saying she should have remained silent? You are an asshole sealybobo.

No I'm not saying that. Are you sure she knew what he was going to do? Then prosecute her.

Is buying ammo suspicious?

Was she really with him?

The Muslims terrorist wife was with him when he bought his ammo, she was with him when he scoped out the sites, she knew he was surveilling the gay bar. Are you saying she should have remained silent? You are an asshole sealybobo.

Yea, that's exactly what I'm saying you stupid ****. She should have kept quiet and it should be legal for a spouse to keep quiet when she knows her husband is going to go on a shooting rampage because of Spousal Privilege. Are you really that stupid?

You see honey, Trump is saying much more than what you think. Do you notice Trumpsters are always explaining what Trump meant? Fact is, we already do what you are talking about Neighbor of San Bernardino gunman indicted on terrorism charge

Exactly sealybobo that's why restrictions on guns also becomes problematic.

The solution may involve setting up a third level of law such
as Constitutional complaints to address general abuses of bullying or harassment,
disputes or conflicts of interest, or threats to public health and safety.
But don't punish this as civil or criminal level charges.
Keep it local to districts where they meet and decide on agreed standards and process,
like neighborhood ordinances on disturbances or nuisances,
and have a process of mediating conflicts to prevent escalation.

I"d recommend this through public schools and local police,
so communities get to know each other through the process of
deciding what standards and policies to enforce and sign on to live in their districts.
This process would help identify and weed out people with addictions,
abusive or criminal issues, so they can get special help or "accommodations"
to protect themselves and others from threats to safety health or security.

 

[sealybobo]

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

Not the same at all.

She's right. If you weren't such a tool, I'd be open to a 800 number where you can call and report someone for being suspicious. I have 2 people I know I would call and have them put on that list. But try suggesting this to a Republican and they'll go ape shit. They're ok as long as it is arab Americans sure but suggest to a white Republican that you want to be able to put white Americans on that no buy/no fly list and they'll lose it.

 

[sealybobo]

The Muslims terrorist wife was with him when he bought his ammo, she was with him when he scoped out the sites, she knew he was surveilling the gay bar. Are you saying she should have remained silent? You are an asshole sealybobo.

No I'm not saying that. Are you sure she knew what he was going to do? Then prosecute her.

Is buying ammo suspicious?

Was she really with him?

The Muslims terrorist wife was with him when he bought his ammo, she was with him when he scoped out the sites, she knew he was surveilling the gay bar. Are you saying she should have remained silent? You are an asshole sealybobo.

Yea, that's exactly what I'm saying you stupid ****. She should have kept quiet and it should be legal for a spouse to keep quiet when she knows her husband is going to go on a shooting rampage because of Spousal Privilege. Are you really that stupid?

You see honey, Trump is saying much more than what you think. Do you notice Trumpsters are always explaining what Trump meant? Fact is, we already do what you are talking about Neighbor of San Bernardino gunman indicted on terrorism charge

Exactly sealybobo that's why restrictions on guns also becomes problematic.

The solution may involve setting up a third level of law such
as Constitutional complaints to address general abuses of bullying or harassment,
disputes or conflicts of interest, or threats to public health and safety.
But don't punish this as civil or criminal level charges.
Keep it local to districts where they meet and decide on agreed standards and process,
like neighborhood ordinances on disturbances or nuisances,
and have a process of mediating conflicts to prevent escalation.

I"d recommend this through public schools and local police,
so communities get to know each other through the process of
deciding what standards and policies to enforce and sign on to live in their districts.
This process would help identify and weed out people with addictions,
abusive or criminal issues, so they can get special help or "accommodations"
to protect themselves and others from threats to safety health or security.

That's another good idea. You want to buy a gun? Pass a lie detector test and a drug test. Great idea Emily. But you can't just pick on arab Americans.

 

[emilynghiem]

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

Not the same at all.

Dear Maryland Patriot any such policy
that goes too far and starts depriving people of liberty without due process
gets objected to. That's the commonality.

We don't want to convict or punish people without proof,
so this has to be set up and done correctly where it is Constitutionally agreed.

What I suggest is better screening for mental and abuse issues.
This doesn't have to be punitive where it violates rights.
If everyone in a district agrees to certain nuisance ordinances
that require counseling and mediation to resolve complaints of abuse,
this can be agreed in advance where nobody in that district under
that policy loses rights, but all residents agree to a program they run themselves.
For screening out threats to public health and safety and resolving any disputes.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

Not the same at all.

Dear Maryland Patriot any such policy
that goes too far and starts depriving people of liberty without due process
gets objected to. That's the commonality.

We don't want to convict or punish people without proof,
so this has to be set up and done correctly where it is Constitutionally agreed.

What I suggest is better screening for mental and abuse issues.
This doesn't have to be punitive where it violates rights.
If everyone in a district agrees to certain nuisance ordinances
that require counseling and mediation to resolve complaints of abuse,
this can be agreed in advance where nobody in that district under
that policy loses rights, but all residents agree to a program they run themselves.
For screening out threats to public health and safety and resolving any disputes.

who pays for this "screening"

 

[emilynghiem]

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

Not the same at all.

Dear Maryland Patriot any such policy
that goes too far and starts depriving people of liberty without due process
gets objected to. That's the commonality.

We don't want to convict or punish people without proof,
so this has to be set up and done correctly where it is Constitutionally agreed.

What I suggest is better screening for mental and abuse issues.
This doesn't have to be punitive where it violates rights.
If everyone in a district agrees to certain nuisance ordinances
that require counseling and mediation to resolve complaints of abuse,
this can be agreed in advance where nobody in that district under
that policy loses rights, but all residents agree to a program they run themselves.
For screening out threats to public health and safety and resolving any disputes.

who pays for this "screening"

It depends on the people in each district.
I happen to live in Houston where I know spiritual healing volunteers
who would love to teach more people for free how to do this counseling.

Restitution for organized drug or gang crimes can be paid back to
the community to fund programs, including using seized properties
as centers providing services and creating jobs.

Some people may opt to screen through police training in communities
or school programs where I'd recommend teaching or offering conflict resolution.

Maryland Patriot anything is better than paying 50K a year per person
who ends up in jail because they had a drug or gang problem that people were avoiding.

Why not give school districts and citizens a tax break
for investing in a program that cuts their crime rate,
where they can divert money to their local school
instead of prisons that are eating up tons of resources.

The Democrats have long promised both prison reform,
mental health and health care to meet the demand; well,
here's our chance: by converting prison programs into
better mental and health care treatment, millions if not billions
of dollars saved can pay to create jobs in public health,
counseling and education to cut costs of disease and crime,
and make sure all citizens have equal knowledge
of Constitutional laws and procedures.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

Not the same at all.

Dear Maryland Patriot any such policy
that goes too far and starts depriving people of liberty without due process
gets objected to. That's the commonality.

We don't want to convict or punish people without proof,
so this has to be set up and done correctly where it is Constitutionally agreed.

What I suggest is better screening for mental and abuse issues.
This doesn't have to be punitive where it violates rights.
If everyone in a district agrees to certain nuisance ordinances
that require counseling and mediation to resolve complaints of abuse,
this can be agreed in advance where nobody in that district under
that policy loses rights, but all residents agree to a program they run themselves.
For screening out threats to public health and safety and resolving any disputes.

who pays for this "screening"

It depends on the people in each district.
I happen to live in Houston where I know spiritual healing volunteers
who would love to teach more people for free how to do this counseling.

Some people may opt to screen through police training in communities
or school programs where I'd recommend teaching or offering conflict resolution.

Maryland Patriot anything is better than paying 50K a year per person
who ends up in jail because they had a drug or gang problem that people were avoiding.

Why not give school districts and citizens a tax break
for investing in a program that cuts their crime rate,
where they can divert money to their local school
instead of prisons that are eating up tons of resources.

The Democrats have long promised both prison reform,
mental health and health care to meet the demand; well,
here's our chance: by converting prison programs into
better mental and health care treatment, millions if not billions
of dollars saved can pay to create jobs in public health,
counseling and education to cut costs of disease and crime,
and make sure all citizens have equal knowledge
of Constitutional laws and procedures.

any inpatient program is going to eat up 40 to 50k or more a year.
and, how would your idea assuming it was running at 110% have stopped this slaughter of innocent people.
if the unstable dont go for help on their own, then they wont get the help until after this type of thing happens.

 

[emilynghiem]

And this is the reason I can not be a democrat.
you think that racial profiling is more important an issue than the lives that were lost.
idiot.

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

Not the same at all.

She's right. If you weren't such a tool, I'd be open to a 800 number where you can call and report someone for being suspicious. I have 2 people I know I would call and have them put on that list. But try suggesting this to a Republican and they'll go ape shit. They're ok as long as it is arab Americans sure but suggest to a white Republican that you want to be able to put white Americans on that no buy/no fly list and they'll lose it.

sealybobo now we're on the same page or close enough!

But be careful, to be fair the Democrats are just as bad if not worse about forsaking DUE PROCESS.
Not just with gun laws, but with other overreaching regulations that both sides are yelling needs to be fixed:
the Democrats complain that bans on abortion would violate "substantive due process" for women
but totally ignored that when passing mandates penalizing taxpayers for not buying insurance.
So we lost liberty without any due process to prove we committed crimes or incurred
debts for which we owe "involuntary servitude" and seizing of our income by fines.

 

[emilynghiem]

Whoa Maryland Patriot
isn't this similar to saying Republicans can't believe in gun rights
where that is more important than the lives we lost?

Regulations that go "too far" and violate due process
are as much against the Constitution as violating the right to life freedom and security.

Why can't we agree on better procedures on how to screen out abusive or criminal
behavior upon first complaint WITHOUT violating due process for innocent persons doing nothing wrong?

There is a way to do this right, and PLENTY of ways of doing it wrong.
Trump's suggestions can become as unconstitutional as denying gun rights based on suspicion.

The reason sealybobo can't be a Republican is the inability to enforce
Constitutional checks as necessary to prevent abuses of the Second Amendment.

This is the same reason you and I have trouble with Democrats is
they are weak in Constitutional enforcement and keep
relying on party and politicians to defend their rights instead of Constitutional authority.

But unlike you I, as a Democrat but a Constitutionalist first, make it a point to interact
and work with my fellow Democrats in order to bridge that gap. If more people joined and worked with
Democrats on issues, maybe we'd work out the best way to
accomplish the goals but within the bounds of Constitutional laws and process.

I find it takes working with Greens, Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats,
all parties to put the best solutions together, and then figure out how to
reform Govt constitutionally to employ the most ethical, cost effective and sustainable solutions.

Instead of avoiding, we should embrace each other and collaborate
as the best means of checking and balancing against abuses or overreaches.

Not the same at all.

Dear Maryland Patriot any such policy
that goes too far and starts depriving people of liberty without due process
gets objected to. That's the commonality.

We don't want to convict or punish people without proof,
so this has to be set up and done correctly where it is Constitutionally agreed.

What I suggest is better screening for mental and abuse issues.
This doesn't have to be punitive where it violates rights.
If everyone in a district agrees to certain nuisance ordinances
that require counseling and mediation to resolve complaints of abuse,
this can be agreed in advance where nobody in that district under
that policy loses rights, but all residents agree to a program they run themselves.
For screening out threats to public health and safety and resolving any disputes.

who pays for this "screening"

It depends on the people in each district.
I happen to live in Houston where I know spiritual healing volunteers
who would love to teach more people for free how to do this counseling.

Some people may opt to screen through police training in communities
or school programs where I'd recommend teaching or offering conflict resolution.

Maryland Patriot anything is better than paying 50K a year per person
who ends up in jail because they had a drug or gang problem that people were avoiding.

Why not give school districts and citizens a tax break
for investing in a program that cuts their crime rate,
where they can divert money to their local school
instead of prisons that are eating up tons of resources.

The Democrats have long promised both prison reform,
mental health and health care to meet the demand; well,
here's our chance: by converting prison programs into
better mental and health care treatment, millions if not billions
of dollars saved can pay to create jobs in public health,
counseling and education to cut costs of disease and crime,
and make sure all citizens have equal knowledge
of Constitutional laws and procedures.

any inpatient program is going to eat up 40 to 50k or more a year.
and, how would your idea assuming it was running at 110% have stopped this slaughter of innocent people.
if the unstable dont go for help on their own, then they wont get the help until after this type of thing happens.

Dear Maryland Patriot
1. the spiritual healing I recommend for medical research actually CUTS the cost of
disease and crime by CURING THE CAUSE. for example curing schizophrenia
where the patients recover (over time), some no longer need medication,
and others can work and become independent again instead of staying
wards of the state stuck on medication for life
2. for pedophiles, schizophrenic patients and others who are in denial and won't seek help,
the first step has always been a family member or loved one seeking the spiritual help.
As long as one person or family member reaches out and starts the prayer/healing process,
eventually the person does come forward to get help.
The only blocks I've seen to this is when a family member REFUSES.
So that's where that family member denying medically proven help to a sick person
could be held financially or legally liable for damages as a deterrent.

If we could set up medically proven means of help,
then if anyone obstructs this, why not make them pay for the
medical care and all costs associated with that sick person.

We just need to prove it first by enough replicated research studies.
Believe me, once people find out, they WANT to get and share the help with others.
All the Christians who have found out this works to heal drug addiction, abuse,
cancer, diabetes, etc. naturally share it with others because it's free.
The only reason people don't is it isn't proven to them.

Even one of my atheist friends used it to get rid of chronic demons
and constant rage that finally got removed after he agreed to try this spiritual healing.
He hates it, but admits it helped and he no longer has that rage to fight every day.

 

[Kosh]

Listening to everything the GOP and Libertarians have to say, I have to say I viamently disagree with the direction they want to take America. They are a very selfish group.

Paul Ryan, the father of a Republican budget initiative that seeks to destroy Medicare and Social Security has continually invoked the name of Ayn Rand as his philosophical mentor and guide. Many other Republicans have do so too. They are embracing a philosophy which, according to Ayn Rand herself, is one of selfishness and is against all forms of Spirituality. The question any thoughtful Americans must ask themselves is: “Is this the America we want?”

And how do they get evangelicals to go along with them is beyond me.

Its a very selfish every man for himself mentality.

And Libertarians don't believe in the Commons. What are the Commons?

The Commons are resources that are owned by all of us. That includes the Grand Canyon, oil rights, power companies, roads, public airwaves, schools, etc.

Here is how they think. Libertarians think if we all own the land on which our sheep graze, we will each add one too many sheep until we destroy the land for future generations. That We the People can't manage the commons.

Libertarians think that if one person owns the land and charged everyone else grazing fees, he would be more committed to preserving it for the future than a village of farmers.

I disagree.

Proof you are and always be a far left drone.

As you have just proven, you are not capable of any type of independent thought!

That's it? That's all you got? No wonder trump kicked the shit out of every one of your candidates. Think about it Kosh. Without any help from us liberals Republican voters overwhelmingly said no to Rand Paul, jeb bush, Ted Cruz, kasich, rubio, Christie and all the rest. Pretty telling.

You are not a liberal, you are a far left drone!

And what do you care about anything outside the far left religion?

Not like you will ever open your mind and look at anything beyond your debunked religion.

You voted for worse than Bush twice and now will vote for Clinton, who is worse than Bush.

Just like I bet you believed you actually believe you get a choice in your nominations..

Another reason I could never vote GOP

Donald Trump on Monday proposed punishing Americans if they don’t turn in their friends and neighbors for behaving suspiciously. “In San Bernardino, people knew what was going on, they knew exactly, but they used the excuse of racial profiling for not reporting it,” The presumptive GOP presidential nominee was presumably referring to unverified reports that a woman who lived near the mother of one of the San Bernardino shooters had noticed that the family received “quite a few packages within a short amount of time, and they were doing a lot of work out in the garage.” A man who claimed to be friends with this neighbor said she did not report the packages and the behavior to authorities because she “didn’t want to do any kind of racial profiling.”

In Trump’s America, however, that woman would face serious consequences. “We need to make sure every single person involved in this plan, including anyone who knew something, but didn’t tell us, is brought to justice,” “These people need to have consequences, big consequences.”

He also strayed slightly from the prepared remarks posted on his website, which read, “If it can be proven that somebody had information about any attack, and did not give this information to authorities, they must serve prison time.”

Trump’s proposal that Americans be forced to report their neighbors expands on an idea he’s been peddling since last year, when he told a crowd in South Carolina, “People move into a house a block down the road, you know who’s going in. You can see and you report them to the local police. Most likely you’ll be wrong, but that’s OK. That’s the best way. Everybody’s their own cop in a way.”

Those earlier remarks, however, stopped short of proposing that people be punished for not informing on their neighbors — a hallmark of some of the most brutal and deadly regimes in history, including Nazi Germany and Russia under Joseph Stalin.

Trump’s latest proposal was part of a speech during which he repeatedly vilified and attacked Muslims, as well as immigrants more generally.

Notice how the far left reaches into the far left religious dogma to compare Trump to Hitler or Stalin when they vote for such things every time they vote far left.

The only reason and the only reason you would not vote for Trump is based on a letter and nothing else.

See how the far left votes for what they claim to hate, but all they hate is anything not far left!