• 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!

Rashida Tlaib says she's only wearing a mask because of a 'Republican tracker' near her

Better an obedient member of society that thus shows care for others than just themselves rather than anti-society, self-serving anarchist that only believe in themselves and cares nothing for others.

Hmm… was that (bolded above) the reason for Talib removing her mask (unless republicant observers are present)?
 
So the great mask lie is exposed once again lending credence to those who say mask are politics not science and that they are meant to condition society and instill government discipline not stop covid. Also a good way to drive another wedge into America. Wear a mask you're a good American. Don't wear a mask you're a stupid Trump supporter and should die anyway. Marxist need an enemy within to ultimately purge.


"Squad" member Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., was caught on camera saying she was only wearing a mask because she was being tailed by a "Republican tracker.


Ah. Fox news. How cute.
 
So the great mask lie is exposed once again lending credence to those who say mask are politics not science and that they are meant to condition society and instill government discipline not stop covid. Also a good way to drive another wedge into America. Wear a mask you're a good American. Don't wear a mask you're a stupid Trump supporter and should die anyway. Marxist need an enemy within to ultimately purge.


"Squad" member Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., was caught on camera saying she was only wearing a mask because she was being tailed by a "Republican tracker.


If this is true, this changes everything!
 
Issue is these Marxist demanding we wear mask have different motives than public health. The motive is obedience. The mask has become a symbol, a way of saying I'm an obedient member of society and anyone without a mask is marked as an enemy of the state.
It’s all about “obedience”?

Do people really believe this?
 
Issue is these Marxist demanding we wear mask have different motives than public health. The motive is obedience. The mask has become a symbol, a way of saying I'm an obedient member of society and anyone without a mask is marked as an enemy of the state.
Do people really think these people are Marxist?
 
Yep, which was my point.

That depends on what one views as a mask requirement. She seems to consider wearing them for show as being a requirement.

That is a rather odd way to form the question. If masks are not required then what, exactly, is being refused?


That being your point, then you agree it was OK for Tlaib to wear the mask for show? Or, you think she should not have done so?

Stop. You know that I meant the requirement be of at least a local govt requirement. Did she violate any such mask requirement?

Do you support people whom refuse to wear a mask when required?
 
So you admit it’s not science it’s politics.


No. Those who care about others as a society will more often consider science a foundation of truth by which to make decision. Those who care more about themselves over others and society will more likely consider politics as a foundation of their own truth by which to make decision.
 
Hmm… was that (bolded above) the reason for Talib removing her mask (unless republicant observers are present)?


You can't prove that Tlaib only has a mask when Rep observers are present. Your premise is false. Or, please clarify.
 
That being your point, then you agree it was OK for Tlaib to wear the mask for show? Or, you think she should not have done so?

Stop. You know that I meant the requirement be of at least a local govt requirement. Did she violate any such mask requirement?

Do you support people whom refuse to wear a mask when required?

No, and I do not support wearing a mask for show (turning useless mask wearing into a political show?).
 
Boy, the righties are surely straining to find something to be outraged about.

I mean, never, ever, ever would a conservative news outlet use a pic of Tlaib without a mask and publish misleading or false information to accompany it.

"Pictured, the liberal Congressional Representative and AOC associate, Rashida Tlaib, heading into a hospital to visit sick children and not wearing a mask"

🤣
 
The reality is in practice there's very little difference and socialism is Marxist "lite" and much like a political gateway drug.

This isn’t true. Lenin and his party murdered nearly all of their political opponents, and this included people who believed in more practical and less authoritarian versions of Marxism.
 
The reality is in practice there's very little difference and socialism is Marxist "lite" and much like a political gateway drug. Remember that the Soviet Union called themselves socialist.

USSocialist R

Even Republicans support government intervention in the economy.


The difference is this. When a Democrat uses the government to do something useful it’s called socialism. When a Republican uses government to favor their political base it’s called right and proper, an exception, a one time deal. Support for capitalism. Support for industry. And so on. It’s never been an argument over the utility of the government; it’s always about who gets government help.
 
This isn’t true. Lenin and his party murdered nearly all of their political opponents, and this included people who believed in more practical and less authoritarian versions of Marxism.
The inevitable eventual result of government taking more and more power. Venezuela is a good example.
 
Even Republicans support government intervention in the economy.


The difference is this. When a Democrat uses the government to do something useful it’s called socialism. When a Republican uses government to favor their political base it’s called right and proper, an exception, a one time deal. Support for capitalism. Support for industry. And so on. It’s never been an argument over the utility of the government; it’s always about who gets government help.
Generally I'm anti subsidies but farming would be an exception. We can't allow ourselves to become dependent on other countries for food.
 
Generally I'm anti subsidies but farming would be an exception. We can't allow ourselves to become dependent on other countries for food.

Marxist! Socialist! It won’t be long before you start sending your pay check to the re-election campaigns of the “Squad”!
 
The reality is in practice there's very little difference and socialism is Marxist "lite" and much like a political gateway drug. Remember that the Soviet Union called themselves socialist.

USSocialist R

Socialism is not the dirty thing you think it is. If you have full-on, state controlled everything, then yes you are in trouble. I live in Canada and I feel completely free to express myself as I choose. We have strong socialism-style systems here, mixed with a strong capitalist-style system. Things that are outside a private individual's ability to carry out (like maintaining a military, provide healthcare, build large scale infrastructure) are done by pooling the resources of society. These resources are however supplied by enacting business in a capitalist system. It's a hybrid model of sorts, and works well enough for us. Nothing is perfect and it could do with improvements, but a hybrid model of socialism can work in free and open countries.
 
Socialism is not the dirty thing you think it is. If you have full-on, state controlled everything, then yes you are in trouble. I live in Canada and I feel completely free to express myself as I choose. We have strong socialism-style systems here, mixed with a strong capitalist-style system. Things that are outside a private individual's ability to carry out (like maintaining a military, provide healthcare, build large scale infrastructure) are done by pooling the resources of society. These resources are however supplied by enacting business in a capitalist system. It's a hybrid model of sorts, and works well enough for us. Nothing is perfect and it could do with improvements, but a hybrid model of socialism can work in free and open countries.
Canada has socialist programs but is not as of yet full on socialists.
 
Canada has socialist programs but is not as of yet full on socialists.
'as yet'?

Because a country adopts one portion of a model doesn't mean it's going to inevitably go full on to adopt that model fully. No serious person in western civilization thinks that full socialism is going to work. I know there are some on these boards that espouse that idea, but I'd just say they aren't serious thinkers. A mix of capitalism and socialism works very well for many countries.
 
'as yet'?

Because a country adopts one portion of a model doesn't mean it's going to inevitably go full on to adopt that model fully. No serious person in western civilization thinks that full socialism is going to work. I know there are some on these boards that espouse that idea, but I'd just say they aren't serious thinkers. A mix of capitalism and socialism works very well for many countries.
I would say a mix of capitalism with social programs can work well. They can also spiral quickly out of control. As we speak Americans are turning down work because social programs make it economically advantageous to stay home.
 
I would say a mix of capitalism with social programs can work well. They can also spiral quickly out of control. As we speak Americans are turning down work because social programs make it economically advantageous to stay home.


17M people have become employed from a low point in Apr of 2020 and continues to climb. You have no evidence of any significance to back up what you say. BTW, what social programs do you think we should terminate, if any?
 
17M people have become employed from a low point in Apr of 2020 and continues to climb. You have no evidence of any significance to back up what you say. BTW, what social programs do you think we should terminate, if any?
Low point was covid shutdown. As that ended jobs became available. Many decided they were better off with not paying rent, extended unemployment, food stamps, WIC, Medicaid food banks etc etc. These programs went on far too long and as help wanted signs sprung up like weeds. We should be much farther along in economic recovery than we are.
 
Back
Top Bottom