• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Exclusive: Senator Warren to endorse Clinton, sources say

matchlight said:
News flash: Neither you nor anyone who shares your views is my "bud." Forget the "we"--you do not speak for me.
Click to expand...
Oh my my my. Im so intimidated.

And your assertion that everyone is either a statist or an anarchist is sophomoric tripe. Sounds like something the resident commie in my dorm years ago might have bleated, imagining it was profound, as he wiped the pizza grease from his fingers into his scraggly beard.
Click to expand...
Cool story.

I will continue use the word statist to describe un-American specimens who support the very kind of concentration of government power the Constitution was so carefully designed to prevent.
Click to expand...
Thats funny. Because wasnt the Constitution designed to give central authority to a state? You know tossing out that ****ty "articles of confederation"?

On occasion, I will also call these dopes collectivists,
Click to expand...
Ohh my my my. Collectivists! More ****ty buzzwords!

pseudo-liberals, totalitarians, and commies, all of which describe them well.
Click to expand...
Commies! Everywhere!

They loathe our system of government as it was intended to be. They want this country, which they don't much like, to be "fundamentally transformed" into something unrecognizable as America.
Click to expand...
Lets get down to brass tax. Essentially what your rant has come down to is: "if you believe in a social welfare state or a state that is larger than what I believe I'm gonna call you un-American, a commie, a fake liberal, and the founding fathers wouldn't like you, because I know exactly what kind of role the state and what policies 200+ year old dead guys would do in modern day America".
 
iguanaman said:
You are far too late for that. America was "fundamentally transformed" and at its best under the "New Deal" 80 years ago and that is again becoming the metric we are shooting for. We tried the alternative and it has led to ruin. This is the fundamental reason for the collapse of the GOP, they have nothing but failure and are unable to change course.
Click to expand...

I'd say you and people who share your views are the ones who are running behind. It's hard to imagine why anyone today would want to be associated with tired collectivist policies from the days of Franklin Roosevelt, especially considering that those policies may well have had the paradoxical effect of aggravating and prolongingthe Great Depression. I thought so-called progressives wanted to craft new, imaginative policies for the future, not to fall back on failed policies from the past.
 
matchlight said:
I didn't know there was a brass tax in this country. When was it implemented, I wonder?
Click to expand...
Essentially what your rant has come down to is: "if you believe in a social welfare state or a state that is larger than what I believe I'm gonna call you un-American, a commie, a fake liberal, and the founding fathers wouldn't like you, because I know exactly what kind of role the state and what policies 200+ year old dead guys would do in modern day America".
 
matchlight said:
I'd say you and people who share your views are the ones who are running behind. It's hard to imagine why anyone today would want to be associated with tired collectivist policies from the days of Franklin Roosevelt, especially considering that those policies may well have had the paradoxical effect of aggravating and prolongingthe Great Depression. I thought so-called progressives wanted to craft new, imaginative policies for the future, not to fall back on failed policies from the past.
Click to expand...

The failed policies of supply-side Reaganomics are what we are leaving behind. We no longer will be content with just growing the fortunes of the 1%. The policies of the new deal created our great middle class and they will serve to renew them to their former glory. We will complete FDR's New Bill of Rights too.
 
Last edited:
TheDemSocialist said:
New flash bud. We are all "statists". Unless you are an anarchist. Just some ****ty buzzword conservatives like to use.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. It's more conservatives being at war with the dictionary.

1) Find a word
2) Demonize the word (so badly that it's actual meaning gets distorted)
3) Paste word on adversary
4) Do an unearned victory dance​

Quite possibly one of the most ignorant and irritating forms of debate styles to have to face.
 
matchlight said:
Considering the singular insight into all matters you have so often demonstrated on these forums, which of us lesser lights should even hope to grasp what you do?

As for Pocohontas, she faked being an Indian to get herself admitted to law school. She's a damned liar, just like her fellow faux-Indian leftist, Ward "Little Eichmanns" Churchill.
Click to expand...

That lie doesen't sell anymore. All the dopes that might buy it already did and are more the fools for it.
 
iguanaman said:
The failed policies of supply-side Reaganomics are what we are leaving behind. We no longer will be content with just growing the fortunes of the 1%. The policies of the new deal created our great middle class and they will serve to renew them to their former glory. We will complete FDR's New Bill of Rights too.
Click to expand...

Complete? I hadn't heard about any "New Bill of Rights" even being started. There's a little thing called the Constitution of the U.S. standing in the way.

You seem enraptured with tired collectivist economic ideas from eighty or ninety years ago. The Soviet Union that so many American leftists of the 1920's and '30's found so inspirational failed. I realize that makes the leftists of today sulky, but that's how it is. The policies of the New Deal did nothing whatever to create a middle class, which had existed in the U.S. since long before the 1930's. Those policies served mainly to create a Great Depression that was deeper and longer than it otherwise would have been.
 
washunut said:
Talk about an unbalanced ticket. Two women from the Northeast. Two people who worked in the administration. My guess is the senator from Ohio.
Click to expand...

IKR? It's like we're never gonna get any moar males in the White House again evar! Think of the males!!
 
matchlight said:
Complete? I hadn't heard about any "New Bill of Rights" even being started. There's a little thing called the Constitution of the U.S. standing in the way.

You seem enraptured with tired collectivist economic ideas from eighty or ninety years ago. The Soviet Union that so many American leftists of the 1920's and '30's found so inspirational failed. I realize that makes the leftists of today sulky, but that's how it is. The policies of the New Deal did nothing whatever to create a middle class, which had existed in the U.S. since long before the 1930's. Those policies served mainly to create a Great Depression that was deeper and longer than it otherwise would have been.
Click to expand...

Nothing has or will stand in our way in the quest for true liberty and freedom. The new Bill of Rights (also called the 2nd Bill of Rights)that follow defines that freedom that all Americans are entitled to.
See if you can tell me how many we have fulfilled so far.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[3] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
Click to expand...
 
iguanaman said:
Nothing has or will stand in our way in the quest for true liberty and freedom. The new Bill of Rights (also called the 2nd Bill of Rights)that follow defines that freedom that all Americans are entitled to.
See if you can tell me how many we have fulfilled so far.
Click to expand...

That's quite a list. Would you mind answering, as best you can, the following question that applies to each of your demands--To be provided by whom? I get that you want many things and have convinced yourself that you somehow have a 'right' to those things, but those things don't exist in nature, some other man has to first produce them for you to demand them. What of his rights? Or do you simply not care?
 
Fletch said:
That's quite a list. Would you mind answering, as best you can, the following question that applies to each of your demands--To be provided by whom? I get that you want many things and have convinced yourself that you somehow have a 'right' to those things, but those things don't exist in nature, some other man has to first produce them for you to demand them. What of his rights? Or do you simply not care?
Click to expand...

Roads don't exist in nature, who produces them? Govt. does. thru taxation. We already have granted most of these rights. We feed the hungry, heal the sick and put roofs over the homeless and yet there are more millionaires every year. Your pathos is overdone. There is more than enough for all to have these basic rights and have plenty left over for $20 million yachts for the 1%. too.
 
iguanaman said:
Roads don't exist in nature, who produces them? Govt. does. thru taxation. We already have granted most of these rights. We feed the hungry, heal the sick and put roofs over the homeless and yet there are more millionaires every year. Your pathos is overdone.
Click to expand...

BUt no one claims to have a 'right' to roads. Not even you. But you demand "The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation" Tell me, how does that work? Do you get to choose where you work and what you make? If I own a shop, I must employ you? Whether I need you or not and whether you are qualified or not? There is a reason your list of demands has gone unfulfilled since FDR--its a fantasy.
 
Fletch said:
BUt no one claims to have a 'right' to roads. Not even you. But you demand "The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation" Tell me, how does that work? Do you get to choose where you work and what you make? If I own a shop, I must employ you? Whether I need you or not and whether you are qualified or not? There is a reason your list of demands has gone unfulfilled since FDR--its a fantasy.
Click to expand...

So if roads disappeared tomorrow no one would complain?
It means the right to a decent living wage for work done. It also means if there are no jobs you will be taken care until there is. The word "demand" is yours alone. They are rights to strive for not demands.
 
Last edited:
MrT said:
You have evidence of the judge issuing a statement on behalf of the group? Or a statement from the judge indicating his bias to a rational individual?

No.

But please, if you still feel that being apart of a group that includes the phrase, "La Raza" in its name is enough to disqualify the judge - you go ahead and file the motion so that you can suffer the censure consequences instead of Trump's attorneys.
Click to expand...

:eek:t
What if a black man was under trial and the judge's parents used to be card carrying, cross burning KKK members.

The liberal press would be all over it screaming BIAS.

This judge gives free legal aid to illegals and is a member of La Raza, and yet some dim witts are saying it has ZERO bearing?...:bs
 
matchlight said:
The Belle of Benghazi and Pocohontas are birds of a feather. It would be fitting to have those two statist liars on the same ticket.
Click to expand...

They are also 2 people that will be effecting your life in meaningful ways for the next decade or so so keep up the name calling. It will make it even more painful for you to bear.
 
Funny when you talk about roads as if they are still a dirt path. A road in L.A. City can easily cost 1 million dollars a mile.

Remember when you continue gutting the business community, you don't have the resources to get the permits due to all the regulations.
 
RetiredNSmilin said:
:eek:t
What if a black man was under trial and the judge's parents used to be card carrying, cross burning KKK members.

The liberal press would be all over it screaming BIAS.

This judge gives free legal aid to illegals and is a member of La Raza, and yet some dim witts are saying it has ZERO bearing?...:bs
Click to expand...

That is right. It has "zero bearing" and anyone who thinks it does is wrong. that's how out of touch with reality you really are. Racism is no longer tolerated in America, even Paul Ryan agrees. I might be time to pack up the computer and take up golf or fishing, it is a lot more relaxing than this.
 
washunut said:
Talk about an unbalanced ticket. Two women from the Northeast. Two people who worked in the administration. My guess is the senator from Ohio.
Click to expand...

Agree its not likely to be Warren. Disagree it would be a Senator from Ohio. I doubt the Dems would compromise their most excellent chance to take back the senate by exposing themselves to a Republican governor being in position to appoint a Republican replacement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom