Supreme Court Rejects Campaign Spending Limits

Are you serious? Do you not listen to anything I say? [sigh...] And you're another one who supports the "Mixed" economy... A Free Market Economy would preclude the possibility of government crawling in bed with unions, corporations and yes, even religion. It's your "Mixed" market economy that allows, rewards and encourages, those groups to get in bed with goverment and politicians.

Some of the people in your conservative camp wish to use their religious beliefs--enshrined in law--to restrict the rights of their fellow Americans. Your wild-ass assumptions about me are as vague and disjointed as ever, but thanks for playing.
 
Werbung:
Some of the people in your conservative camp wish to use their religious beliefs--enshrined in law--to restrict the rights of their fellow Americans.

You do realize that some of the people in your camp wish to use their political beliefs to restrict, and even violate, the rights of fellow Americans... Right?
 
Are you suggesting that YOU know what I believe better than I do? Next you'll be telling me what God wants me to do with my life, right?

HOPEFULLY , GOD will recognize YOU , since he is your creator, and direct you accordingly if you will allow him to do so!! In the meantime I will suggest some good things for you to try! GOD BLESS
 
You do realize that some of the people in your camp wish to use their political beliefs to restrict, and even violate, the rights of fellow Americans... Right?

I don't have a camp, sorry. And as far as I know I do not advocate restricting anyone's legal rights on the basis of my religious beliefs. Got an example?
 
HOPEFULLY , GOD will recognize YOU , since he is your creator, and direct you accordingly if you will allow him to do so!! In the meantime I will suggest some good things for you to try! GOD BLESS

Thank you, gosh, it's so nice that I have permission from you to practice my God-given free-will.
 
I don't have a camp, sorry. And as far as I know I do not advocate restricting anyone's legal rights on the basis of my religious beliefs. Got an example?
I said political, you said religious.

You need an example? Do you support the forced redistribution of wealth for any purpose - Welfare, SS, Health Care, etc.?
 
What economic style do you think we should have if not a "mixed" economy?

Without specific definitions I couldn't possibly prescribe or proscribe an "economic style" other than honesty and compassion. There have been whole cultures that didn't have any "econimic style", maybe we should focus less on style and more on substance.
 
Without specific definitions I couldn't possibly prescribe or proscribe an "economic style" other than honesty and compassion. There have been whole cultures that didn't have any "econimic style", maybe we should focus less on style and more on substance.

There are only 3 possibilities, Planned economies, Laissez Faire economies and "Mixed" economies, which are, as it suggests, a mix of freedoms and controls.
 
I said political, you said religious.

You need an example? Do you support the forced redistribution of wealth for any purpose - Welfare, SS, Health Care, etc.?

Oh yes, the Ayn Rand wannabe's. Might is Right, power and self-aggrandizement are the highest goals to which humans can aspire. Sorry, I don't buy it. You seem to subscribe to the concept that a person deserves all the money and power they can accumulate no matter how they get it. You insistenly campaign for the right of money, the protection of money, the sanctity of money, money appears to be what you worship. Life is just a commodity to be used to gain MONEY, though you cloak it in the terms of personal freedom. You seem to have no concept of a social contract. It puzzles me, Gen, but if that's what you believe then so be it.

I give away as much money as I can, there are so many people who are desperate that when I have more money than I need I just can't keep it in bags or banks. Silly me, I think people are more important than money.

You keep trying to put me into some religio/politico group when in point of fact I belong to none of them. If you were to accurately pigeonhole me you'd have to go back more than 1000 years to St. Francis and Friars Minor.

Politics is all about money and power, it's about the legal abuse of those things, it's about getting those things and keeping others from getting those things. It's sort of a cross between public masturbation and a shark feeding frenzy: them that's got flaunting it and the sharks in a frenzy to get it.
 
There are only 3 possibilities, Planned economies, Laissez Faire economies and "Mixed" economies, which are, as it suggests, a mix of freedoms and controls.

A few years ago I had another Ayn Rand wannabe telling me that there were only two choices: capitalism and communism. Do you realize that some indigenous people's had no concept for money? Have you ever heard of the Pacific Northwest Native American's "potlatch"? People have viewed wealth as something to share in some cultures, but we "modern" people only view it as our just desserts. Your insistent mantra of greed masquerading as freedom to exploit others doesn't appeal to me.
 
Oh yes, the Ayn Rand wannabe's.

You didn't answer my question.

Do you support the forced redistribution of wealth for any purpose - Welfare, SS, Health Care, etc.?

A simple yes or no will suffice. Please, try answering without emotional appeals, arguing against strawmen, red herrings and other logical fallacies.
 
You need an example? Do you support the forced redistribution of wealth for any purpose - Welfare, SS, Health Care, etc.?

I guess it's all in how you word it isn't it? :rolleyes:

You must really be against the "forced redistribution of wealth" that goes to the U.S. military. About a trillion dollars a year are spent on that money pit.

I remember just a few months back when people were asking how we'd pay for a healthcare plan that would cost a trillion dollars over the next ten years, and I thought, just cut 10% off our "defense" and it's paid for.
 
Werbung:
A few years ago I had another Ayn Rand wannabe telling me that there were only two choices: capitalism and communism.
You insist on employing ad hominems, red herrings, appeals to ridicule and other logical fallacies to avoid answering my questions, that's a shame. I had hoped you would be able to have a civilized discussion but perhaps I was expecting too much.
 
Back
Top