ilovefuzz.com

D.o.S. wrote:

Faldoe wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:This country is so far to the right by any make or metric that statement actually makes no sense.

Give me examples.

Health care, the death penalty, the rights of corporations, the general delineation of the public and private sectors, the powers of the police state, Climate change. Pick a topic, look at the worldwide spectrum, and you will find the USA's public policies to the Right of the mean.

'Centrist' American politics are Right wing politics, generally speaking. This is about as arguable as "the sun rises in the East" and isn't really something that needs examples unless you've never been exposed to a single iota of the developed world's political leanings.

Dude, you don't need to be condescending. And I'm going to guess you do so as to try and make your point have more weight.

It is true in terms of relation to other developed nations.

I think you missed my point though. Issues get lumped together which shouldn't be and so you're either to one side or the other with issues and stances that don't necessarily need to be together.

I have a personal interest in not having anyone who would repeal the ACA in office. As that would literally kill 3/4 of my family off.

Faldoe wrote:
Dude, you don't need to be condescending.

You've read D.o.S.'s posts before, right?

Chankgeez wrote:

Faldoe wrote:
Dude, you don't need to be condescending.

You've read D.o.S.'s posts before, right?

I don't find DOS condescending… there is still too much hope in the way he says stuff… I don't think he has lost all hope yet.. on the other hand, ya'll have to prove me wrong.

D.o.S. isn't necessarily "condescending". I was joking a little. He's just a passionate man.

I'm not very sure how much difference a head of state can still make anywhere,
once they get thru with TTIP it will be even less,
but I'm damn sure about

please USA, not The Donald, NOT THE DONALD!!!

http://static.currentaffairs.org/2016/0 ... presidency

Cue conspiracy theorists:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... story.html

Faldoe wrote:Dude, you don't need to be condescending. And I'm going to guess you do so as to try and make your point have more weight.

It is true in terms of relation to other developed nations.

I think you missed my point though. Issues get lumped together which shouldn't be and so you're either to one side or the other with issues and stances that don't necessarily need to be together.

Not trying to be condescending so much as repeating the obvious gets grating.

As someone who's personal politics lie somewhere along the description of 'socialist libertarian' I agree very much with your last point.

Have we discussed this possiblity yet?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuDTidbziZI[/youtube]

D.o.S. wrote:

Faldoe wrote:Dude, you don't need to be condescending. And I'm going to guess you do so as to try and make your point have more weight.

It is true in terms of relation to other developed nations.

I think you missed my point though. Issues get lumped together which shouldn't be and so you're either to one side or the other with issues and stances that don't necessarily need to be together.

Not trying to be condescending so much as repeating the obvious gets grating.

As someone who's personal politics lie somewhere along the description of 'socialist libertarian' I agree very much with your last point.

Socialist Libertarian is a party I think I could join
Although I prefer Libertarian Socialist


If I see one more idiotic post from my redneck friends like "we need a leader who will follow the constitution" I am gonna hurl.
1. I don't believe they have read it.
2. It's not that great even if you have.
3. Some of our best leaders (By rushmore standards) Ignored it.
4. It's such a bad document we have an entire court system dedicated to interpreting it.
5. The people who wrote it were a-holes. (being an a-hole doesn't mean you can't contribute something to the world, just something to take into consideration when you value a piece of paper more than people)

D.o.S. wrote:

Faldoe wrote:Dude, you don't need to be condescending. And I'm going to guess you do so as to try and make your point have more weight.

It is true in terms of relation to other developed nations.

I think you missed my point though. Issues get lumped together which shouldn't be and so you're either to one side or the other with issues and stances that don't necessarily need to be together.

Not trying to be condescending so much as repeating the obvious gets grating.

As someone who's personal politics lie somewhere along the description of 'socialist libertarian' I agree very much with your last point.

hbombgraphics wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:

Faldoe wrote:Dude, you don't need to be condescending. And I'm going to guess you do so as to try and make your point have more weight.

It is true in terms of relation to other developed nations.

I think you missed my point though. Issues get lumped together which shouldn't be and so you're either to one side or the other with issues and stances that don't necessarily need to be together.

Not trying to be condescending so much as repeating the obvious gets grating.

As someone who's personal politics lie somewhere along the description of 'socialist libertarian' I agree very much with your last point.

Socialist Libertarian is a party I think I could join
Although I prefer Libertarian Socialist


If I see one more idiotic post from my redneck friends like "we need a leader who will follow the constitution" I am gonna hurl.
1. I don't believe they have read it.
2. It's not that great even if you have.
3. Some of our best leaders (By rushmore standards) Ignored it.
4. It's such a bad document we have an entire court system dedicated to interpreting it.
5. The people who wrote it were a-holes. (being an a-hole doesn't mean you can't contribute something to the world, just something to take into consideration when you value a piece of paper more than people)

Whats the possible solution? New Constitution? Despite being assholes, they managed to create a pretty important and so far lasting document towards personal freedom. Native Americans actually had some influence as well and it's modled off the Iroquois League.

You think having a court to interpret it is a bad thing? Times change and so situations may arise that the initial authors of the doc didn't anticipate.

I didn't say having a court was a bad thing,
What I said was that you can't have your major goal to be a president that will uphold the constitution
when there are many many grey areas in the document itself that need a court to discern,

Point wasn't to throw out the existing document but to illustrate that it is merely a piece of paper that provides some fame work for our country.

Klansman David Duke is now endorsing Trump.

hbombgraphics wrote:I didn't say having a court was a bad thing,
What I said was that you can't have your major goal to be a president that will uphold the constitution
when there are many many grey areas in the document itself that need a court to discern,

Point wasn't to throw out the existing document but to illustrate that it is merely a piece of paper that provides some fame work for our country.

Ahh, I thought because of number 2 on your list you were suggesting something else.

Chankgeez wrote:Klansman David Duke is now endorsing Trump.

I'm sure that's a good look.