Mueller turns up the heat on impeachment

[annabenedetti]

nope,that's your misinterpretation of my response

Can't misinterpret it, you're just pretending you meant something else.

mueller volunteered to serve and to be deployed to Vietnam


the scenario with my son was very different

It's not a stretch to think this country will be in another war in the Middle East or elsewhere. Wouldn't that be a consideration during enlistment?

 

[Town Heretic]

This is why liberals are so dangerous.They characterized vast swaths of people according to their own insecurities, racism and fear,

Reduced to its essence, that is indistinguishable from, "I know you are but what are we?" lain:

Meanwhile, the polling of Trump's supporters, what they respond to and find value in is clear. They fear the immigrant, they fear the Muslim, they fear displacement and they respond to and with angry rhetoric.

The dangerous part is when they get over their surprise and begin legislating away freedom to control those who they hate.

Scratch them and they bleed paranoia and conspiracy theory. Though to be fair to Stripe, he isn't exactly a supporter, in that he cannot vote here and isn't a part of our republic.

Democracy. :sigh:

Scratch them harder and you see their contempt for the people.

 

[Stripe]

:rotfl:

Do you not see that's exactly what you're doing?

Perhaps. :idunno:

The difference being I don't advocate regulations that undermine freedom.

Liberals hate liberty. The think societies are saved by making more rules.

 

[Stripe]

Reduced to its essence, that is indistinguishable from, "I know you are but what are we?"

Nope.

Meanwhile, the polling of Trump's supporters, what they respond to and find value in is clear. They fear the immigrant, they fear the Muslim, they fear displacement and they respond to and with angry rhetoric.

Nope.

Scratch them and they bleed paranoia and conspiracy theory.

Nope.

Though to be fair to Stripe, he isn't exactly a supporter, in that he cannot vote here and isn't a part of our republic.

To be fair, I don't vote anywhere and wouldn't there even if I could.

And you want to overturn your republic.

We see your contempt for people.

 

[Stripe]

The problem is democracy. The symptom is that personality and party come before policy.

We don't debate the merits of an idea based on its worth; we argue based on whose side said the thing.

 

[annabenedetti]

Perhaps. :idunno:

No perhaps about it. You "characterized vast swaths of people" as characterizing vast swaths of people. :chuckle:

 

[ok doser]

Can't misinterpret it, you're just pretending you meant something else.

sorry anna you can and you did

you thought i was responding to the plight of the person in your story

i wasn't

i was responding to your propensity for posting emotional stories to get a response, stories that too often turn out to be fake news

It's not a stretch to think this country will be in another war in the Middle East or elsewhere. Wouldn't that be a consideration during enlistment?

it certainly is, which is why i'm happy to see that he's taking an instructor's position nearby - he'll be within a half day's drive for the next three years instead of all the way across the country (or out in the middle of the Pacific)

 

[annabenedetti]

sorry anna you can and you did

you thought i was responding to the plight of the person in your story

i wasn't

i was responding to your propensity for posting emotional stories to get a response, stories that too often turn out to be fake news

Nice essay on historical revisionism, but terrible punctuation.

it certainly is, which is why i'm happy to see that he's taking an instructor's position nearby - he'll be within a half day's drive for the next three years instead of all the way across the country (or out in the middle of the Pacific

Hopefully he won't be in a position someday where he might have to consider conscientious objection.

 

[ok doser]

The problem is democracy.

the problem is universal suffrage - there's nothing wrong with democracy, per se - the ancient Greeks had a system that worked just fine

but they would have laughed you out of the Aegean if you had proposed universal suffrage

 

[ok doser]

Nice essay on historical revisionism, but terrible punctuation.

it's more important for you to win the point than understand what i'm telling you? :sigh:

Hopefully he won't be in a position someday where he might have to consider conscientious objection.

hopefully, but i don't see that happening

i steered him into the safest place in the military that i could - he's a highly trained, highly specialized tech who works in the bowels of one of the most effectively defended floating platforms in the military

 

[Town Heretic]

Nope.

And you have a peculiar habit of confusing declaration with argument. Here's how to unhorse that sort of thing.

You wrote:

This is why liberals are so dangerous.They characterized vast swaths of people according to their own insecurities, racism and fear,

What I'd written is that a lot of Trump's supporters are "angry and fearful." You went even larger with an unqualified "liberals" then used "fear," followed by "insecurities and racism," an echo of my noting religious bigotry (fear of and contempt for the Muslim--a lot like the way WASPs felt about Catholics a long time ago) and my earlier note about fear of displacement, which is rooted in insecurity.

That's a pretty dead center "I know you are but what am I?" response, unless you don't understand what that means.

Nope.

Self-evidently mistaken as both the president and many of his supporters mistrust and would deny Muslims entry into this country.

Nope.

Self-evidently true as you ran to legislation unnamed and a proffer that liberals would use it to strip freedom from citizens. That's both paranoid and conspiracy theory.

And you want to overturn your republic.

Not even a little true.

We see your contempt for people.

I want to trust them with a one man, one vote. That's trust, not contempt. Meanwhile, you...well, you can't hide in plain sight, Stripe. Your trust is as self-evident as your pluralization.

 

[Stripe]

And you have a peculiar habit of confusing declaration with argument. Here's how to unhorse that sort of thing.You wrote: What I'd written is that a lot of Trump's supporters are "angry and fearful." You went even larger with an unqualified "liberals" then used "fear," followed by "insecurities and racism," an echo of my noting religious bigotry (fear of and contempt for the Muslim--a lot like the way WASPs felt about Catholics a long time ago) and my earlier note about fear of displacement, which is rooted in insecurity. That's a pretty dead center "I know you are but what am I?" response, unless you don't understand what that means. Self-evidently mistaken as both the president and many of his supporters mistrust and would deny Muslims entry into this country.Self-evidently true as you ran to legislation unnamed and a proffer that liberals would use it to strip freedom from citizens. That's both paranoid and conspiracy theory.Not even a little true.

Nope.

I want to trust them with a one man, one vote. That's trust.

Nope.

You want them to vote according to your plans and if they don't, you want rules to control them.

Giving men voting is giving them sugar. Saccharin-sweet and rotting to the core.

It doesn't matter who people vote for when both choices are death.

 

[Town Heretic]

Nope.

Nope (see prior).

Nope.

Nope (see prior).

You want them to vote according to your plans and if they don't, you want rules to control them.

Nope (see prior).

Giving men voting is giving them sugar. Saccharin-sweet and rotting to the core.

Nope (see prior).

It doesn't matter who people vote for when both choices are death.

Or hamsters.

 

[Stripe]

Nope (see prior).Nope (see prior).Nope (see prior).Nope (see prior).Or hamsters.

Nope.

You are demonstrably voting for death no matter which way you go.

You just happen to side with the baby killers who are open about their agenda.

 

[Stripe]

Nope.

You are demonstrably voting for death no matter which way you go.

You just happen to side with the baby killers who are open about their agenda.

And this is the end of democracy: a society that votes, but votes for the greater of two evils.

It's where democracies have died in the past and it's where all of them are headed until liberty intervenes.

Anyone who thinks they are free because they can vote is blind.

 

[Town Heretic]

Nope.

Nope (see prior).

You are demonstrably voting for death no matter which way you go.

Stuff and nonsense.

You just happen to side with the baby killers who are open about their agenda.

Nope, but which baby killers are you talking about? There are pro-choice voices in the Republican Party, just as there is a pro-life section of the Democratic Party.

I'm disappointed you didn't address the hamster issue though.

 

[Town Heretic]

And this is the end of democracy: a society that votes, but votes for the greater of two evils.

Who gets to decide when that happens?

Anyone who thinks they are free because they can vote is blind.

Anyone who thinks they are free without the vote might as well be.

 

[Stripe]

Nope (see prior).

Nope.

Stuff and nonsense.

Except that a central plank of the party you will vote for is "reproductive rights."

That's lawyer talk — another sign of a mature democracy — for baby killing.

So stuff and nonsense and objective fact. :idunno:

There are pro-choice voices in the Republican Party, just as there is a pro-life section of the Democratic Party.

Assertion sans evidence. There isn't a single political entity in any party in the whole world that opposes baby killing.

Want to prove me wrong? Show me its Web site. :up: Start with the so-called pro-life Democrats. :thumb: Show me its policy platform, or if it doesn't have one, the policies of its leaders.

We'll wait.

 

[Town Heretic]

Nope.

Nope (see my prior).

Except that a central plank of the party you will vote for is "reproductive rights."

Nope. I don't vote for a party. I vote for candidates.

That's lawyer talk

It's the product of an education, to be sure.

Assertion sans evidence.

Democrats for Life (linked) of America (DFLA) is a 501(c)(4) American political advocacy nonprofit organization that seeks to elect pro-life Democrats and to encourage the Democratic Party to oppose euthanasia, capital punishment and abortion.

Republicans for Choice is an American political action committee (PAC) composed of members of the United States Republican Party who support abortion rights.

Or you could look within the parties on the topic. Pew has a bit. There's a substantial percent of both to be found. Here's a link on the topic from Pew reflecting the numbers/percentages: link.

21% of Democrats favored making abortion illegal in most or all cases, with 15% of self-declared liberals within the party holding that same line. On the Republican side, 36% favored legal in some or all cases, while that figure went to 29% of self-identifying conservatives.

 

[Stripe]

Nope (see my prior).

No thanks. And nope.

I don't vote for a party. I vote for candidates.

That's nice.

It's the product of an education, to be sure.

Yeah. You need at least four years of college to convince yourself that "reproductive rights" is a real issue.

(linked)

Democrats for Life of America congratulates Governor John Bel Edwards for his integrity and courage by signing Louisiana’s legislation to prohibit abortion once a heartbeat is detected. Governor Edwards is a leader for the “pro-life-for-the-whole-life” movement.[/quote] Except for the life before instruments can detect a heartbeat. You could look within the parties on the topic. Why? :AMR: Did you utterly misunderstand what I said? 21% of Democrats favored making abortion illegal in most or all cases, with 15% of self-declared liberals within the party holding that same line. On the Republican side, 36% favored legal in some or all cases, while that figure went to 29% of self-identifying conservatives. Put those statistics down before you do yourself an injury.