InBlack wrote on Jun 19, 2013, 04:31:
A lot of what RollinThundr actually says makes sense, you just have to ignore the flame/troll parts. I consider myself fairly left leaning in my political views, but a firm constitution should be the basis of every democratic state and whats being done in the US (by both parties) is definitely wrong. Obama fucked up, the democrats fucked up. Big Time. The two party system is broken and the US is no longer a proper democracy, there is very little actual representation of the people from what little I can gleam from the outside. The corporations and lobbyist groups are the players now, no one gives a shit whats best for the guy on the street.
RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 18:45:
It's called discussion, all I hear often is these threads is BUSH BUSH BUSH, news flash, Junior hasn't been president now for a term and a half, and things have arguably gotten worse not better.
Bodolza wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 19:45:RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 19:26:
There's a difference between social services for those who can't work or vets who have served this country or are disabled etc. However if you as a person are totally capable of working and would rather go the welfare route, than I'm sorry but I have very little respect for you.
I'm not saying abolish social services, they certainly serve a purpose.
So you are a socialist.
I find that to be a perfectly reasonably response, that also happens to be in line with what the majority of people I know believe - including liberals. To me, the valid discussions is the size and focus of those social services and government protections. Maybe if we didn't always have to cut through all the rhetoric, posturing and inflammatory language to get there first, we could actually have those discussions.
RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 19:26:
There's a difference between social services for those who can't work or vets who have served this country or are disabled etc. However if you as a person are totally capable of working and would rather go the welfare route, than I'm sorry but I have very little respect for you.
I'm not saying abolish social services, they certainly serve a purpose.
Bodolza wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 19:13:RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 18:45:
Those who don't have no one to blame but themselves for not being successful. It's really not that difficult to grasp. No one is going to hand you a life, go out and fucking make one for yourself.
I'm not talking about being successful. I'm talking about living. As in not dying, cause that's what happens when you take away the social safety net - people die. Literally. That's the natural conclusion to libertarian ideology. Social Darwinism. Is that what you support?
RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 18:45:
Those who don't have no one to blame but themselves for not being successful. It's really not that difficult to grasp. No one is going to hand you a life, go out and fucking make one for yourself.
Bodolza wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 18:34:RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 17:55:
See this is where I disagree, when I was growing up, I was taught that when I did something wrong it was my fault, when I did something right, I was commended for that. It's called having a little personal responsibility, when they say pull yourself up from the bootstraps, that's what they're talking about.
We'll all know the definition of the term. This is a perfect example of the disconnect from reality. You think everyone should take personal responsibility. Great. Reality is that people don't. Now what do you do?
My brother is a hardcore libertarian, and I've had this conversation with him many times. His answer to the question is at least straight forward and ideologically sound: if the people can't or won't take on all the responsibility for themselves, then they can die in the streets. I'm thankful that most of American society doesn't agree with him.
And why do you keep bringing up Obama and Bush? I haven't mentioned either of them once.
RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 17:55:
See this is where I disagree, when I was growing up, I was taught that when I did something wrong it was my fault, when I did something right, I was commended for that. It's called having a little personal responsibility, when they say pull yourself up from the bootstraps, that's what they're talking about.
Bodolza wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 16:57:RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 16:12:
What disconnect is that? That government is far bigger and bloated than it should be? That's reality pal.
No, that is not the disconnect. Let me point out the relevant quote to you, since you seem to seem to have missed it:Beamer wrote:
The strongest tenant for most libertarians is the concept of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.
Personally, I find that to be completely ridiculous and not based in reality...
I'd also add that I think that many libertarians have the same unrealistic basis for their philosophy that the socialists have. The system they believe in depends on individuals acting in the best interest of themselves and their community, but time and time again it's been shown that enough people will do neither, and completely screw it up for those who might.
Mr. Tact wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 16:20:RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:06:Claiming the current administration's "assault" is worse than previous administrations is your partisan politics slipping out. It's simply more of the same. It like the people who suddenly think the debt is a big deal. If you haven't been complaining about the debt for decades, I don't want to hear it.
Obama's constant assault on the Constitution during his presidency has been alarming, especially his attacks on the 2nd amendment.
RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 16:12:
What disconnect is that? That government is far bigger and bloated than it should be? That's reality pal.
Beamer wrote:
The strongest tenant for most libertarians is the concept of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.
Personally, I find that to be completely ridiculous and not based in reality...
RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:06:Claiming the current administration's "assault" is worse than previous administrations is your partisan politics slipping out. It's simply more of the same. It like the people who suddenly think the debt is a big deal. If you haven't been complaining about the debt for decades, I don't want to hear it.
Obama's constant assault on the Constitution during his presidency has been alarming, especially his attacks on the 2nd amendment.
Bodolza wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 15:27:LittleMe wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:49:
RollinThundr's comment didn't read as a strawman argument to me. On the contrary your post reads like meaningless nonsense, because that's exactly what both parties are endorsing whole heartedly.
I would agree with the idea that there are those in government that have totalitarian leanings, and that there are people in this country who support that, but I'd also counter that they are both the minority in government, and among the populace. I do not currently believe that the majority of Americans want a totalitarian regime, nor do I believe, or have I seen any evidence that many politicians on either side, do not support most of the principals in the Constitution. It's certainly not part of either party's platform.
Also, neither of you still have yet to address the issue originally being discussed.
LArac wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 15:36:
Only because they used EMAIL a little to much and are afraid their own will get read.
The details will become only government emails need it in a year or so.
When the NSA stuff hit many Congress Things were worried as they know what they do, and what they have on phones.
The few that knew it was going on, I am sure has used that against many of the rest.
Should not have every happened, but we stopped being Free a long time ago, about time the public start understanding what they have allowed to be taken away.
Now about the Budget Congress can not seem to pass, we hear nothing.
Boner loves this shit, he can blame others even though he knew from the Bush Era it was happening, and does not have to do his job.
Do not pay any one in Congress until they pass a "real" budget, perhaps starting by halving Corporate Welfare which out does Social by many Billions would be a start. But Congress Rep. Dem. or NEO will never cut back the welfare to those who bribe them.
Bodolza wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:23:
You've also completely failed to address the issue being discussed, which is the libertarian disconnect from reality.
LittleMe wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:49:
RollinThundr's comment didn't read as a strawman argument to me. On the contrary your post reads like meaningless nonsense, because that's exactly what both parties are endorsing whole heartedly.
Bodolza wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:23:RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:06:
Oh for sure, but just giving up our rights because some in power want to go the totalitarian route isn't the answer either.
Lord forgive me for responding to TrollinThundr, but here we go.
This is a classic straw-man argument. Neither side supports this. Who on this board, or anywhere else, advocates doing nothing when rights are taken away? Even those that support the governments monitoring program say it's because it (debatably) follows due process as established in the Constitution. Do you really only see conservatives upset at government monitoring? Are you aware that the ACLU, who's entire mission is to uphold the constitution, is perceived as a leftist organization? Why do you insist on constantly saying stupid stuff like this?
You've also completely failed to address the issue being discussed, which is the libertarian disconnect from reality.