Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Legal Briefs

View
37 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

37. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 19, 2013, 07:19 RollinThundr
 
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.

This. I am not the most delicate talker but this is pretty much spot on. The system is completely and utterly broken, and We the People are no longer being heard, it's Now We the Apple, Telecoms, Big banks etc etc.

Both parties are at fault including those in both houses regardless of party affiliation. No budget in 6+ years while we spend spend spend, finger pointing by both parties because none of these assholes can apparently take any sort of responsibility for anything. Sounds like what I keep saying over and over. There is no such thing as teaching personal responsibility anymore because it's "not reality" as a couple have said, which is ludicrous but it is what it is.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 19, 2013, 04:31 InBlack
 
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.  
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 21:11 Sepharo
 
Stop watching TV news, doesn't even matter the station or bias, it's all sensational crap. Stick to facts and critical analysis of those facts from a variety of sources.  
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 21:06 Sepharo
 
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.

I guarantee that if we went through and added up every "Bush" on this forum since your reg date of May 5, 2009 you would be in the lead by far. Nobody even has to mention the guy and you're "OH YEAH "BLAME BUSH" AS ALWAYS".
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 21:03 RollinThundr
 
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.

No I'm a fiscal conservative who believes in limiting the government instead of the big bloated mess we have now across the board, and yes that includes the military not just social programs. If that's socialism these days well you people have redefined the term apparently.

The reason I don't at all like most liberals is a couple reasons, the majority of the gun grabbers and 2nd amendment haters are mostly liberal democrats, those who want to continually expand welfare are mostly liberal democrats, those who constantly play the race card when someone is critical of this administration are mostly liberal democrats. Those that still treat African Americans as victims based on skin color alone and think whites should feel guilt because they're white are pretty much all liberal democrats/educators Seeing the trend there?

For a party that decries how hateful republicans are, they sure do come off as pretty hateful and intolerant of anything or anyone that doesn't share their narrow minded views. It's pretty fucking infuriating actually.

I mean shit they cry FAUX NEWS FAUX NEWS, yet 85% of the pieces on MSNBC are all opinion based liberal bias with about 15% actual news thrown in there for good measure, yet Fox is labeled fake? Why? There's one conservative news station out of all of them, are democrats so threatened by a difference of opinion? It sure seems that way.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 19:45 Bodolza
 
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.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 19:26 RollinThundr
 
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?

Look, it's not rocket science, if you want to not be homeless you need to work, if you want success in life you need to apply yourself, no one is ever just going to hand you a house, or a job, you need to work at that shit. And part of that is being accountable for yourself, not blaming others for mistakes etc.

It is not the government's job to hand you a life on the backs of others.

It's extremely disappointing that the idea of that is lost on this generation of "where's my share" ME ME ME!

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.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 19:13 Bodolza
 
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?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 18:45 RollinThundr
 
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.

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.

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.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 18:34 Bodolza
 
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.

This comment was edited on Jun 18, 2013, 18:39.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 17:55 RollinThundr
 
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.

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. Being fucking accountable for yourself and your actions. I'm sorry if that's such a foreign fucking concept for some of you to understand and grasp. It's a concept I think is also lost on Obama, since all he does is blame everyone else for everything and has yet to take responsibility for a single thing now well into his 2nd term.

You can't blame Bush forever, keeping in mind democrats repealed the Glass Stegal act that set us on the path to recession to begin with. also Democrats were in full control of both houses for the last 2 years of Bush's term and the first 2 of Obama's, and shockingly? Things continued to get worse rather than better.

You liberals can't have it both ways, if the entire recession is entirely Bush's fault, why is it now not Obama's problem? When does he get any of the blame? Serious question there.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 17:48 RollinThundr
 
Mr. Tact wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 16:20:
RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:06:
Obama's constant assault on the Constitution during his presidency has been alarming, especially his attacks on the 2nd amendment.
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.

Normally I'd agree, I don't recall Bush ever drone striking US citizens however. I've said time and time again and again that Junior was also not a good president, and this Patriot act bullshit is flat out wrong regardless of which party is the current sitting president.

That being said however, I recall Obama stating he would have his AG strike any unconstitutional laws that came out of it while he was campaigning, and instead he's done the complete opposite.

I'd just like the media to pile on Obama as much as they piled on Bush for doing the exact same thing. That's all.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 16:57 Bodolza
 
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.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 16:20 Mr. Tact
 
RollinThundr wrote on Jun 18, 2013, 14:06:
Obama's constant assault on the Constitution during his presidency has been alarming, especially his attacks on the 2nd amendment.
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.
 
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 16:12 RollinThundr
 
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.

What disconnect is that? That government is far bigger and bloated than it should be? That's reality pal.

It's funny how many people you hear talk about we should take care of US, rather than give billions to other countries, that we should secure our borders, among many other things.

Yet we have morons like you and beamer who want nothing more than government to hand hold people through their entire lives. Dictate to them what they can and can't do, eat, drink etc.

It's truly sad to see how many indoctrinated idiots there are these days that think government needs to be this huge overseeing entity and that people aren't capable of doing things on their own.

I'm sure the majority of Americans also don't want the NSA recording their phone calls, however that's still happening isn't it? Funny that!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 16:05 RollinThundr
 
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.

Tell that to Harry Reid, considering he's had multiple budget proposals still sitting on his desk. Lets be honest here, if a republican president hadn't passed a budget in 6+ years we'd never hear the end of it. But because it's Obozo it's Congress' fault.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 15:55 Cutter
 
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.

Spot on. Those people have zero grasp on reality. It'd be funny if they weren't actually serious.

 
Avatar 25394
 
James Woods: Oh that's fun. That sounds like you had a fun time. Where would I fit in with the fun time, huh? Where does James Woods fit into the fun?
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 15:36 LArac
 
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.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 15:27 Bodolza
 
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.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 18, 2013, 15:00 RollinThundr
 
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.


You notice I mention people on both sides, both Dems and Republicans. Or was that point lost on you?

Pretending that their aren't those in power regardless if there's a D or R after their name don't want to go that route makes you out to be quite naive. It's about as intelligent to say that as it is for Beamer to continually state that being personally responsible for your own life isn't reality.

Look at all the scandals with this administration, most of which border on constitutionality to begin with. Wake the fuck up brother.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo