Rigged Nomination

the nation is moving in the direction of what you hate: organized power in the hands of the people and socialism.
Marxists love power in their own hands and prison camps for the people.

Capitalism is all but over and you cling with all the standard, worn out objections and defenses.
Wishful thinking.

Quote: The world economy is “moderately free,” with another rise in economic liberty leading to a fourth annual global increase, according to the editors of the 2016 Index of Economic Freedom, released today by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. The world average score of 60.7 is the highest recorded in the 22-year history of the Index.

Article: http://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2016/press-releases/THF-2016-Index-Overview.pdf

It's all but over.
Repeating your statement won't make it come true.
 
Werbung:
I had a separate moderator login and a participant login and the moderator login never posted so no one knew who the moderator was. That way I could enforce the rules without being vilified.
Does this guy ever stop whining and crying for help? lol
 
No adult discussion. I proved your article is a lie and that you have no evidence that Bernie is a communist
Of course you did no such thing.

Quote about the United Packinghouse Workers from the Congressional investigation:

Mr. Stripling. Did the Communists eventually take over the leader-
ship?

Mr. Williams. Yes ; they did. In 1943, as early as February, at our
first convention to establish the international union, the Communists
got strong enough at that particular time to be able to put into office
such people as they desired. That was in the international capacity of
our union.

Link: https://archive.org/stream/investigationofu17unit/investigationofu17unit_djvu.txt
 
Not at all. If you were to read the articles I posted,
1) Does the Constitution Party support free enterprise? 2) Do you support more government intervention and regulation? Let's watch Old_Trapper 70 run from my questions.

Nah. Your looking at your keyboard after you get through playing with your dog.
We know you've been in a long term relationship with a baboon, my question is: Does it participate in a three way with you and wrinkly old Bernie?
 
1) Does the Constitution Party support free enterprise? 2) Do you support more government intervention and regulation? Let's watch Old_Trapper 70 run from my questions.

Two kinds of people I never run from,. liars, and cowards. And from what I have seen you are both.

First off, just what to you is "free enterprise"? Is it not the right to own your own business, and run it the way you want to?

Now, government intervention, and regulation. Here again we get to the concept your ignorant ass cannot accept, that of the social compact. If your business needs to have a road built in order for it to prosper, who pays for it? Who maintains it? Not you for certain. If you need electricity who builds the power lines? Water? How about the fire department? Police? And the list goes on.

"Free enterprise" is a concept that is not without limitations, and it certainly is not free. However, once again I will demonstrate just how ignorant you are:

https://fee.org/articles/the-myth-of-scandinavian-socialism/

"In the Scandinavian countries, like all other developed nations, the means of production are primarily owned by private individuals, not the community or the government, and resources are allocated to their respective uses by the market, not government or community planning.

While it is true that the Scandinavian countries provide things like a generous social safety net and universal healthcare, an extensive welfare state is not the same thing as socialism. What Sanders and his supporters confuse as socialism is actually social democracy, a system in which the government aims to promote the public welfare through heavy taxation and spending, within the framework of a capitalist economy. This is what the Scandinavians practice.

In response to Americans frequently referring to his country as socialist, the prime minister of Denmark recently remarked in a lecture at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government,

I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.

The Scandinavians embrace a brand of free-market capitalism that exists in conjunction with a large welfare state, known as the “Nordic Model,” which includes many policies that democratic socialists would likely abhor.

For example, democratic socialists are generally opponents of global capitalism and free trade, but the Scandinavian countries have fully embraced these things. The Economist magazine describes the Scandinavian countries as “stout free-traders who resist the temptation to intervene even to protect iconic companies.” Perhaps this is why Denmark, Norway, and Sweden rank among the most globalized countries in the entire world. These countries all also rank in the top 10 easiest countries to do business in."
 
Two kinds of people I never run from,. liars, and cowards.
Then why did you run like a bitch from my questions? All your words fail to obscure your cowardice. Instead of babbling on about Scandinavia try answering the questions with a yes or no. Or are you afraid you'll expose yourself again as a clownish fraud?

Who am I kidding? You'll never answer with a yes or no. You're too scared. lol

More questions for you to cower from: Do you support free trade? Do you support an extensive welfare state?
 
Then why did you run like a bitch from my questions? All your words fail to obscure your cowardice. Instead of babbling on about Scandinavia try answering the questions with a yes or no. Or are you afraid you'll expose yourself again as a clownish fraud?

Who am I kidding? You'll never answer with a yes or no. You're too scared. lol

More questions for you to cower from: Do you support free trade? Do you support an extensive welfare state?


Lord, you are one stupid ass. You are not even able to grasp that the answer is there. Now, what do you mean by "free enterprise"? I assure you it is different then that of the Constitution Party which is why you ignored this part of the party platform:

"The Constitution Party is opposed to public-private partnerships and is for a return to the true “free enterprise” system that once made our nation great and economically prosperous"

Now, I quite well understand how an idiot like you expects all things can be answered "yes", or "no", that is the simpletons way. However, that is not the case here. Do you build the roads in your State that you enjoy driving on, or does society do so? Did you supply your own water, or does society provide it for you? And the list goes on. So, even though you are too simple to comprehend what a society is, or even what "free enterprise" was in the time of the Founders, here is what I said before:

"Not at all. If you were to read the articles I posted, and you never do even though you think you know so much about everything, you would see where both can coexist under what is called the "Social Compact". In the society you envision, and others like you, every one is on his own, and there is no need for a neighbor to help another. Your house burns down, tough shit. You get robbed, lay there and die as long as you are not a "burden" on others. "

Now, to stupify once again the mindless one you are, I do NOT support "free trade" save for one situation, and that is where the business enters into the agreement without government involvement, and at its own risk. Government is not there to protect one from bad business deals.

Then we have to deal with what is "extensive". The Founders gave land to church's for missionary purposes in Indian Territory. The First Congress passed a law providing free health care for the poor. The original tax system was based on the idea that only the wealthy would pay taxes. Free education was a given. Corporations were limited both in scope, and political involvement. So, when one discusses socialism one must consider all aspects of socialism, not just those that appeal to you limited intellect. To dismiss every aspect of socialism is irrational, and would be the basis of absurdity. There are many aspects of socialism that could aid the country in promoting a better life for all, and we should not ignore those on the basis of some paranoid ignorance thinking it would lead to communism:




    • "To preserve the peace of our fellow citizens, promote their prosperity and happiness... are objects calling for the efforts and sacrifices of every good man and patriot." --Thomas Jefferson: to Rhode Island Assembly, 1801.
And once again the parrot will mindlessly say "You didn't answer my questions".
 
I know you are mentally challenged so I knew you couldn't answer a few simple questions. However, you did say "There are many aspects of socialism that could aid the country in promoting a better life for all". Of course someone who supports the Constitution Party wouldn't embrace socialism. So thanks for again exposing yourself as a contemptible phony. Good job!

The Founders gave land to church's for missionary purposes in Indian Territory. The First Congress passed a law providing free health care for the poor. The original tax system was based on the idea that only the wealthy would pay taxes. Free education was a given. Corporations were limited both in scope, and political involvement.
Evidence for any of this?

Countries with only minimal government involvement in the economy (public utilities, public roads, basic police services) are not considered socialist. Obviously.

What is so complicated about these questions: Does the Constitution Party support free enterprise? Do you support more government intervention and regulation? Why are you so afraid of answering with a yes or no? Most people could answer them in a moment. Are you a complete dunce or are you trying to hide something?
 
Last edited:
I know you are mentally challenged so I knew you couldn't answer a few simple questions. However, you did say "There are many aspects of socialism that could aid the country in promoting a better life for all". Of course someone who supports the Constitution Party wouldn't embrace socialism. So thanks for again exposing yourself as a contemptible phony. Good job!

Evidence for any of this?

Countries with only minimal government involvement in the economy (public utilities, public roads, basic police services) are not considered socialist. Obviously.
He loves the only the rich payed tax thing. Individuals paid no tax it was all expirt trade based but to him as po folks just didn't do this, it was all just the evil rich. Trap has an interesting take on a handful of things from way back when that he's cobbled his utopia from.
 
He loves the only the rich payed tax thing. Individuals paid no tax it was all expirt trade based but to him as po folks just didn't do this, it was all just the evil rich.
In the early years of the American republic we had excise taxes on spirits which hurt small farmers and working folk who liked to drink. Tariffs can benefit wealthy manufacturers and hurt ordinary consumers.

Trap has an interesting take on a handful of things from way back when that he's cobbled his utopia from.
Instead of interesting I'd say incoherent and dishonest.
 
I have come across more than one person who says Bernie owes the party an apology, instead of the other way around. They say he split the vote. I guess they are ignoring the fact that the nomination was rigged, and he had every right to be angry (but even then he towed the party line and threw in for Hillary).

I'd love to hear from one Hillary supporter that this kind of tactic is not okay (I won't hold my breath).
First, you're owed an apology by those who trampled on your thread.
I'm not a Hillary supporter, but I will give you a somewhat decent response.
Rigging is what career politicians do between lies, but given that Bernie threw his support behind Hillary after the fact shows good character on his part.
I wonder if Hillarys' character would shine likewise were the tables turned?

Thank you,

Yeh Yah
 
In the early years of the American republic we had excise taxes on spirits which hurt small farmers and working folk who liked to drink. Tariffs can benefit wealthy manufacturers and hurt ordinary consumers.

Instead of interesting I'd say incoherent and dishonest.
First part quite so
Second part, I was being polite : )
 
I know you are mentally challenged so I knew you couldn't answer a few simple questions. However, you did say "There are many aspects of socialism that could aid the country in promoting a better life for all". Of course someone who supports the Constitution Party wouldn't embrace socialism. So thanks for again exposing yourself as a contemptible phony. Good job!

Thanks to you for not being able to refute anything I said. Not unusual for those obsessed with perverted sex, and not reality.

Evidence for any of this?

Plenty of it if you were interested, or intelligent enough, to want to know it.

Countries with only minimal government involvement in the economy (public utilities, public roads, basic police services) are not considered socialist. Obviously.

What is so complicated about these questions: Does the Constitution Party support free enterprise? Do you support more government intervention and regulation? Why are you so afraid of answering with a yes or no? Most people could answer them in a moment. Are you a complete dunce or are you trying to hide something?

Just what is so complicated about explaining what you mean by "free enterprise"? Even a freaking idiot, of which you are supreme, could explain that if they knew anything about what they were speaking of. However, you just parrot what you heard from some right wing whacko without doing any research of your own.

Now, since you once again have strayed off the road of intellectual discussion, please explain why building roads, public utilities, etc., are NOT socialist?

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/16353-everyday-socialism-american-style-is-happening-now
 
Werbung:
Back
Top