The 2nd Impeachment of (former) President Donald J. Trump (Page 8/9)
blackrams FEB 15, 07:07 PM

quote
Originally posted by cvxjet:

The republican party is now dead....LONG LIVE THE TRUMP!!!!! PARTY...(Noone is ever allowed to question trump- he always perfect! March with him or die!)

No guts whatsoever........



I'm curious, what flavor was that kool aid you drank? There are a lot of people that support most of what DJT did during his administration without actually liking the man. I don't believe any President ever fulfilled all the citizen's wants nor did any politician prior to this ever work so hard to fulfill his campaign promises.

No other president ever faced as much opposition. Hell, the Dems were trying to impeach him as he took office.

If, we want to hold folks responsible for everything that happened while they are in office, OK. Let's start with Obama and his lies, HRC and her lies and then move to Pelosi.
Edited: Almost forgot the Biden family. Yeah, I'll go with that. As a registered Dem, I'd love to find one I could support and trust. They just aren't out there.

Rams

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-15-2021).]

sourmash FEB 15, 08:00 PM
Red Drank, of course, comrade.

Tulsa Gabbard receives 2 delegates and absolutely destroyed Chlamydia Harris in the debates. She knocked her out of the primaries.

randye FEB 15, 08:09 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:


But on your list above:

"How do you reconcile small government with.......




Todd, like I said, NEVER allow a Leftist to frame the question.

His demand that "small government" be "reconciled" with anything on his list is a false premise and a nonsensical strawman.

It's a series of questions posed by someone with very poor ideological and political intellect and possessed of a cartoon-like impression of what he imagines conservative thought is.

We have already engaged his Leftist / SJW / Racist thoughts Ad nauseum in another thread, so his true beliefs are starkly evident by now.
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum6/HTML/126040.html


He's transparently and desperately seeking any imagined hypocrisy to prop up his statement:


quote
Originally posted by theBDub:

.....the right-wing is worse.

Leftists have some terrible ideas, but I definitely find them more ideologically consistent than Republicans,





Despite the biblical exhortation to "suffer fools gladly", I never have and never will and he is no exception.

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 02-15-2021).]

rinselberg FEB 15, 08:12 PM

The Gabbard with the gift of "Gab."


quote
Originally posted by sourmash:

Red Drank, of course, comrade.

Tulsa Gabbard receives 2 delegates and absolutely destroyed Chlamydia Harris in the debates. She knocked her out of the primaries.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-15-2021).]

williegoat FEB 15, 08:31 PM
I want to see Gabbard and Harris wrestle....in jello.....strawberry jello.....with cool whip.
(did I just say that out loud?)
randye FEB 15, 08:32 PM

quote
Originally posted by cvxjet:

The republican party is now dead....LONG LIVE THE TRUMP!!!!! PARTY...(Noone is ever allowed to question trump- he always perfect! March with him or die!)

No guts whatsoever........



You have become the PFF equivalent of a drunk heckler in a karaoke bar.
randye FEB 15, 08:36 PM

quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

I want to see Gabbard and Harris wrestle....in jello.....strawberry jello.....with cool whip.




I find it curious that you care what flavor the jello is....

Your participants would probably more enjoy their wrestling in a mixture of poi, chocolate pudding and curry.

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 02-16-2021).]

Wichita FEB 16, 12:01 PM
theBDub FEB 16, 01:29 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
My personal opinion... Democrats have changed so dramatically, that I really don't know what they actually represent. ~20 years ago, I was a Democrat. And they stood for basically someone who was fiscally conservative (as were most Republicans), but with an emphasis on compassion (e.g., working class people, and support for labor unions). Right now... I personally feel they are the party of crazy. Full-on Socialism, absurd spending... and other ideas that I can't even begin to list out because they're so many, and so ludacris.

But on your list above:

"How do you reconcile small government with a large military?"

I've always believed a strong and big military is important for a show of power... that is, as a deterrent. What I've learned over the past several years is that the military in general has become somewhat of an albatross. I go back to Eisenhower's speech on the Military Industrial Complex. You have pretty much every GS-15 civilian and O6 and higher retiring from Government and then coming back as a contractor to sell services and lobby their friend network. The military LEADERSHIP wants an even bigger military so that they can grow the number of Generals and Admirals, and so that others can get promoted, and continue the cycle. It's self-fulfilling. At the same time, we continue to do a lot of dumb **** ... producing modern-day Battleships (air craft carriers). Don't get me wrong, I love them... but why do we need 13? Air Craft carriers. I understand how it works... they are floating military basis. But our newest submarine is already a 20 year old design (Virginia class). China has a larger navy than we do, and they're focusing on speed and agility... while we're focusing on the ability to be out for 6+ months at sea. China is also working on hypersonic missiles and other technology that can have a greater impact. In the mean time, we're still producing M1 Abrams tanks... for what purpose? It takes in excess of 3 million dollars to build an M1 and deliver it somewhere. A $70k Hellfire air to surface missile from an F15 will more easily take out whatever it is that tank is looking to destroy, at a significantly lower cost. Every president, from Bush Jr to Trump, has voted to save that M1 tank plant for some reason. So... military needs to really rethink their strategy, they need to modernize, and they need to eliminate this massive lobbying / incestuous contract structure they have. And don't even get me started on MMT...


"How do you reconcile small government with drug laws?"

My brother died of a drug overdose, so I inherently have a dislike of drugs (never used them). The libertarian side of me agrees that there's no point in restricting the sale of marijuana. I don't presume for a second to admit that my feelings on drugs are rational, but I have no intention of ever voting for unrestricted drug use. I recognize I'm the one here in the wrong.


"How do you reconcile small government with oil and farming subsidies?"

I don't agree with farming subsidies... except for the situation when we were leveraging tariffs against China. At that point it made sense to do so in order to keep the pressure on China, and not hurt our own industry. That said, I don't like corn subsidy, or any other farming subsidies other than tax breaks. I'll admit though, I'm not at all familiar with the oil subsidies. Can you elaborate? I'm not aware of them?


"How do you reconcile small government with abortion laws?"

The libertarian aspect would say "hands off my body." But the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" comes into play, and because I believe life begins at the heartbeat... I personally believe at that point that it's no longer "just" the pregnant woman's body. There's plenty of time for a woman to get an abortion before the heartbeat (which is roughly 6-8 weeks).



Firstly, thanks for answering. Despite claims indicating otherwise, I'm not framing an argument in bad faith.

Re: Military
It sounds to me that you think a strong military is important to enable a smaller government, but that the current instantiation is a bit of a bastardization of that concept. Do I have that right? I can appreciate the idea. So many of our allies are allies simply because of our military presence in their countries. Decrease the military too much, and you lose your power, and not just as a deterrent to attack.

Re: Drugs
I'm a proponent of full legalization of all drugs, because I don't believe in the government telling me what I can and can't put in my body. I'm fine with the FDA ensuring "purity" of drugs as a realistic necessity to avoid companies putting out tar and not being responsible for it. You and I differ on this, and I totally get why. I'm sorry that happened to your brother. I've lost friends to drugs, but they didn't die, just... weren't my friends anymore.

Re: Subsidies
Really the question is in regard to all subsidies, but I hit on those two since it's a big deal for the republicans around me. There is a part of me that understands "paternal libertarianism," or essentially coaxing desired behavior out of specific taxes and subsidies. Like cigarettes are bad, but we don't want to outlaw them, let's just tax them so heavily that people don't buy them. Or maintaining domestic production of oil is really important for international relations, so we should subsidize production as a matter of national security. But it just never fully sits right with me. Bailouts, subsidies, specific taxes, all the same messy cronyism from my perspective. Let free trade fly, let the free market dictate prices.

Re: Abortion
It really comes down to when you think that life has more right to live than the potential parent has a right to bodily autonomy. It's a deeply personal issue, it's not anything I'd like to debate at the moment, but it's definitely another side of big government (especially at the extremes).


At the end of the day, it's not that I can't understand conservative thought. I'm pretty damn close to it, to be honest. I just don't understand this notion that somehow liberals don't have some foundation, and conservatives do. Both liberals and conservatives have some misaligned ideas. Liberals being against gun ownership has never made sense to me, for example. It's just emotion. But I do find them a bit more consistent, in that they at least don't shy away from saying they're all about a bigger government. From where I sit, conservatives want a smaller government, but have a bunch of "except A, B, and C" attached to it.
theBDub FEB 16, 02:25 PM

quote
Originally posted by randye:


Todd, like I said, NEVER allow a Leftist to frame the question.

His demand that "small government" be "reconciled" with anything on his list is a false premise and a nonsensical strawman.

It's a series of questions posed by someone with very poor ideological and political intellect and possessed of a cartoon-like impression of what he imagines conservative thought is.

We have already engaged his Leftist / SJW / Racist thoughts Ad nauseum in another thread, so his true beliefs are starkly evident by now.
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum6/HTML/126040.html




Speaking of a strawman, you continue to completely misrepresent and mislabel my beliefs. You can't get out of your own head long enough to see that the political spectrum is a lot deeper than two independent dots.