Argumentum ad populum
Regardless, liberal socialism is simply illogical as their views on property conflict and must undermine each other leaving both rather nonexistent in any sort of foundation or meaning. In practice what appears to happen is the public side of the equation gets stronger as the system ages, while the private side becomes more of an illusion than anything else. As it stands all around the world all that is really left of the private side of the equation is renting.
Good to know. Although I feel as I'm not being insulting personally. My stance on Libertardism is just that - empty rhetoric made by disillusioned Rethuglicons who seem to have a deep hatred of the poor, the sick and the needy. They seriously believe in a non-governmental interfering system that allows for free reign without any recourse to civil, ethical and constitutional law other by what they cheery pick as being fit for the rest of society. I am not mocking Henrin's beliefs. I simply cannot see them as being viable for the common good. I see the ideologies (or lack thereof) of Libertardianism as being no ideologies at all. Henrin has yet to produce a substantiated argument for why I should take his beliefs seriously when he says nothing more than catch phrases and buzz words. It's not just him nor am I personally attacking him for his political beliefs upon which he has every right to express. My experiences has been with many Libertardians that they cannot or will not (for some odd reason) validate their arguments with common sense, for example, on how a lack of taxes will somehow form a coalition of voluntaryism.
I meant no offense to no one.
You were working with it a few pages ago. Remember when the people and their wishes were important in all of this? :lol: The contradictions keep rolling.
Actually, social liberalism is quite simply about finding a balance between these things. One has never been necessarily held as more important than the other and that's where you seem to get things wrong. Like with all ideologies, liberalism examines the best way to govern and makes decisions based a large array of factors (including culture, religion, rights held by the people, obligations of the state etc.).
That's what makes it an ideology and why liberals can and do disagree with each other quite regularly. In contrast, libertarianism, as you have displayed it on this forum for 5 years, is basically "I don't like no gub'mint!". That's not an ideology of any sort, Henrin. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news. :shrug:
I'm against welfare as I feel it is a personal decision that one makes on who they desire to offer assistance or if they wish to offer assistance at all.
You of all people should know I can't admit what I was doing there.
That is simply what they say, but again, you can't balance two competing forces without them leaving each other in ruin. It simply doesn't work on any logical basis.
Not sure if I understand that.
I won't argue that welfare is an abused governmental program full of holes in need of fixing. However, it does not make those who truly need it as being helpless or hopeless as many Libertardians will have me to believe. You simply cannot generalize people who are on some form of governmental assistance as being second-class, or in many cases, non-citizens. I used to work with homeless people to find housing, health and dental care, even some form of employment in order to achieve a better quality of life. Many were not looking for a handout or to be dependent but suffered from mental and/or physical illnesses that limited their ability to function as a "normal" adult human being. So why, for example can you as a Libertardian deny such individuals the opportunity for a better quality of life in good conscience?
A governor whose parents are Indian, surrounded by blacks and whites, signing a bill to remove a symbol of hatred 50 years after it was put there by a government that had just 2 years earlier enforced segregation. Gay marriage is now legal in all 50 states and my Cuban wife just made me tamales. What a time to be alive.
I would love to see what change taking this flag down will have on their life in any sort of way. :lol:
Doesn't Nikki Haley know what she did here? The Republicans are all racists. As Joe Biden said, they want to put blacks back in chains. Haley blew it. I wonder if the GOP will toss her out now. Not share their racist code words with her anymore. I wonder if the left will support her the next time she runs for office.
He's not providing two strict choices. He's questioning what difference it makes to leave it up if it makes no difference to take it down.
And that shows your complete lack of empathy and utter failure to see the need for such.
The need to remove the flag was what exactly?
The left will never support her regardless of what she does.
Feelings....That's the only thing that matters to the hard left.
Feelings....That's the only thing that matters to the hard left.
I think I can say with confidence that the "left" STRONGLY supports Nikki Haley signing this bill.
So... you're wrong.
Think they'll support her next time she runs for office?
I'm actually more curious if the right will support her after this.
Well, they should.
I think I can say with confidence that the "left" STRONGLY supports Nikki Haley signing this bill.
So... you're wrong.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?