NATION

PASSWORD

The 2012 Three Ring Circus AKA The US Presidential Election

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Who do you want to win?

President Barack Obama
423
42%
Governor Mitt Romney
180
18%
A third party candidate
185
18%
Who cares and/or I ain't American
75
7%
It doesn't matter as the Mods are gonna launch their coup any time now and I for one welcome our Modly overlords
146
14%
 
Total votes : 1009

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 111674
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Farnhamia » Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:16 pm

Alien Space Bats wrote:
Sane Outcasts wrote:
Totally called it:


There we have it, Romney has decided the best course of action is not just to own up to the comments, but to say they are a reflection of his campaign message. I'm don't think he wants his message to be "I don't care about half the country", but I don't know what other message his remarks could "reflect".

He really doesn't have a choice; it's not like he can "unsay" what he said at Marc Leder's house in May - he'd break his Etch-a-Sketch trying.

Still, there may be a little wriggle room. He can say something like this:

"That 47% number I gave - I meant Democrats, not people who don't pay taxes. If it seemed like I was saying that Obama's supporters were all those people out there who don't pay taxes, that wasn't what I meant. What I meant is that most Democrats don't pay taxes, while most Republicans do. Are there Republicans who don't pay taxes? Sure. The military - they're almost all Republicans, and they don't pay taxes on combat pay, nor should they. Senior citizens don't pay taxes on most of their Social Security, and that's a benefit they earned - so obviously I don't mean them, either.

"But Democrats as a group are selfish. They want government to give them free stuff, which is why they're Democrats. They tax good, hard-working Republicans and independents to get the money they need to pay for the stuff they want because they don't want to work for a living - that's what 'tax and spend' is all about. They'll never vote for me because I'm not going to giver them free stuff. They're takers, and they think they deserve to take what they need from everybody else because they think that society owes it to them, because they see themselves as victims.

"The rest of us - hard-working, self-reliant Republicans and independents - we're society's makers. Without us, society would collapse. The Democrats - the takers - they'll tax us to death and strangle society until its gone, and then sit in the ruins and cry because there's nothing left to take. We makers - we Republicans - we have to save the Nation for the next generation by defeating them. We have to stop government from giving them free stuff and make the Democrats - the takers - start working for themselves. That's going to be hard on them, make no mistake about it. They're going to scream, they're going to protest, they're going to riot, and who else knows what they'll do. But we have to stand strong, and see the change through. We have to force the takers, the Democrats, to fend for themselves, if not for their own good then so there's something left for the future, for our children. We have to tell people: 'You want a roof over your head? Earn it. You want food? Earn it. You want health care? Earn it. You want college? Work your way through, or find a way to get by without it, the way our parents and grandparents did. Nothing is free, and what we makers, we Republicans, have is not yours to take. We earned it, it's ours, and if you want something for yourself, you'll just have to go work to get it, like everybody else."

Yeah, that would make the political world explode. But it's pretty much the only course left for Mitt Romney at this point.

And then he's off to some gulch in Colorado to wait while the world burns. Him and Paul Ryan and Rand Paul and his old man and maybe a few other "makers" like Trump and Sandy Weill and that Cathy fellow who makes chicken sandwiches and Jamie Dimon. Yeah.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:28 pm

Alien Space Bats wrote:
The Emerald Dawn wrote:Rasmussen has Romney winning by 2, as of the 17th. That *has* to be a psychotic delusion.

Rasmussen's normalization model assumes that the turnout on November 6th will be 37.6% Republican, 33.3% Democrat, and 29.1% Independent.

EDIT: If you were to normalize the Gallup Organization's data using Rasmussen's model, you'd rate the race this way:

Romney - 49.1%
Obama - 45.0%
Undecided - 5.9%

So, essentially, Romney up by 4.9%.

Well, that certainly ruined my day.
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Wamitoria
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18852
Founded: Jun 28, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wamitoria » Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:30 pm

Norstal wrote:
Alien Space Bats wrote:Rasmussen's normalization model assumes that the turnout on November 6th will be 37.6% Republican, 33.3% Democrat, and 29.1% Independent.

EDIT: If you were to normalize the Gallup Organization's data using Rasmussen's model, you'd rate the race this way:

Romney - 49.1%
Obama - 45.0%
Undecided - 5.9%

So, essentially, Romney up by 4.9%.

Well, that certainly ruined my day.

It's still a psychotic illusion. Even during the Republican rout in 2010, turnout was equal for Republicans and Democrats.
Wonder where all the good posters went? Look no further!

Hurry, before the Summer Nazis show up again!

User avatar
Geilinor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41328
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Geilinor » Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:51 pm

Alien Space Bats wrote:
The Emerald Dawn wrote:Rasmussen has Romney winning by 2, as of the 17th. That *has* to be a psychotic delusion.

Rasmussen's normalization model assumes that the turnout on November 6th will be 37.6% Republican, 33.3% Democrat, and 29.1% Independent.

EDIT: If you were to normalize the Gallup Organization's data using Rasmussen's model, you'd rate the race this way:

Romney - 49.1%
Obama - 45.0%
Undecided - 5.9%

So, essentially, Romney up by 4.9%.

Rasmussen's turnout numbers are garbage. We have more registered Democrats than Republicans, and personal freedoms are at stake here, with the Republican social platform.
Last edited by Geilinor on Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Member of the Free Democratic Party. Not left. Not right. Forward.
Economic Left/Right: -1.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

User avatar
Dude Ranch
Secretary
 
Posts: 40
Founded: Dec 08, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Dude Ranch » Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:54 pm

I am not of voting age yet, being 16 years old, but I would vote for Obama.

I would not vote for Romney. That said, the reason is based on his characteristics. He seems untrustworthy, fraudulent, and overall repulsive as the man trying to run this country.

Also, the infighting between these two different parties is really getting old. To the teenage brain, it just tells me that the politicians you older people vote for just can't get anything done. It is rather hopeless to watch for a guy like me, still trying to grab a handle of what politics really is. America just seems like a very divided country, and that isn't good for the next generation. I don't want to clean up after your people's messes, get something done and don't only think about yourselves. Think of the ones that come after you as well.
Last edited by Dude Ranch on Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Left/Right -1.38
Libertarian/Authoritarian -0.41

User avatar
North California
Minister
 
Posts: 2088
Founded: Nov 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby North California » Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:55 pm

Wikkiwallana wrote:
North California wrote:Romney is a crony-capitalist who will increase the debt with more wars abroad, continue the drug war, erode civil liberties, and implement "Romneycare". He is bought by Wall Street. Will regulate firearms.

Obama is a corny-capitalist who has increased (and will) increased the debt with more wars abroad, continue the drug war, erode civil liberties, and has implemented "Obamacare". He is bought by Wall Street. Will regulate firearms.

Face it, Romney and Obama are both the same, and electing either of them would be the equivalent of electing George W. Bush to a third term.

We've heard this about a thousand times, and it's still no more true than the first time.


I'm supporting the Libertarian Party. It's high time we had a president who resonated with the people and wasn't bought by massive corporations.

See, these two sentences are complete contradictions of each other.

End the bailouts,

They're already over and paid back.

end the wars,

Have you not paid attention to the fact that this is already being done?

legalize marijuana, abortion, and gay marriage; repeal the Patriot Act, repeal the NDAA, close Guantanamo, repeal Obamacare,

1. Presidents can't write legislation.
2. Obama is already working on all of those that are good ideas, except Marijuana

and get America back on track.

The thing keeping America off track right now is Congress, not the President.

Gary Johnson 2012!

No.


We still have a military presence in Iraq... and we are still in Afghanistan. And we are bombing 16 year old kids in Yemen. Doesn't sound like the war is over to me...

I love it that all the anti-war people shut up when its a Democrat that is fighting the war.

Also... let me know when General Electric, BP, General Motors, Bank of America, Solyndra, and the oil companies actually get their shit together and fix things to prove that the bailout worked, and that they won't screw up again in the future.

Bailout does nothing but temporarily keep the company afloat, help drive competitors out of business, and it gives no incentive to the company to improve its ways, because it knows that it can fuck up as many times as it wants, because the government will bail it out again.
I am a staunch supporter of Austrian Theory economics as defined by Ludwig von Mises, and I consider myself to be a libertarian and I support Ron Paul Gary Johnson. Basically, I am a capitalist revolutionary
Economic Left/Right: 6.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.92

Everyone should watch this video

Factbook

Got a US-themed nation, and need a flag? This is the place

American Nationalist. Yet, anti-American government

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:13 pm

North California wrote:Also... let me know when General Electric, BP, General Motors, Bank of America, Solyndra, and the oil companies actually get their shit together and fix things to prove that the bailout worked, and that they won't screw up again in the future.

Solyndra wasn't given a bail out.

Look at how GM is doing.

North California wrote:Bailout does nothing but temporarily keep the company afloat, help drive competitors out of business, and it gives no incentive to the company to improve its ways, because it knows that it can fuck up as many times as it wants, because the government will bail it out again.

You don't know what a bailout is, do you?
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Wamitoria
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18852
Founded: Jun 28, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wamitoria » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:17 pm

Dude Ranch wrote:I am not of voting age yet, being 16 years old, but I would vote for Obama.

I would not vote for Romney. That said, the reason is based on his characteristics. He seems untrustworthy, fraudulent, and overall repulsive as the man trying to run this country.

Also, the infighting between these two different parties is really getting old. To the teenage brain, it just tells me that the politicians you older people vote for just can't get anything done. It is rather hopeless to watch for a guy like me, still trying to grab a handle of what politics really is. America just seems like a very divided country, and that isn't good for the next generation. I don't want to clean up after your people's messes, get something done and don't only think about yourselves. Think of the ones that come after you as well.

The problem is that the parties have fundamentally different viewpoints on what government should do. One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses.

It's not as simple as "just get along."
Wonder where all the good posters went? Look no further!

Hurry, before the Summer Nazis show up again!

User avatar
Geilinor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41328
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Geilinor » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:18 pm

Wamitoria wrote:
Dude Ranch wrote:I am not of voting age yet, being 16 years old, but I would vote for Obama.

I would not vote for Romney. That said, the reason is based on his characteristics. He seems untrustworthy, fraudulent, and overall repulsive as the man trying to run this country.

Also, the infighting between these two different parties is really getting old. To the teenage brain, it just tells me that the politicians you older people vote for just can't get anything done. It is rather hopeless to watch for a guy like me, still trying to grab a handle of what politics really is. America just seems like a very divided country, and that isn't good for the next generation. I don't want to clean up after your people's messes, get something done and don't only think about yourselves. Think of the ones that come after you as well.

The problem is that the parties have fundamentally different viewpoints on what government should do. One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses.

It's not as simple as "just get along."

That's where the Libertarian Party comes in. I wouldn't vote for them when I turn 18, but at least they support both economic and social freedom. True libertarians/classical liberals are out there. The American two-party system can't survive with "One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses".
Last edited by Geilinor on Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Member of the Free Democratic Party. Not left. Not right. Forward.
Economic Left/Right: -1.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

User avatar
Third Mexican Empire
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1209
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Third Mexican Empire » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:19 pm

Wamitoria wrote:
Dude Ranch wrote:I am not of voting age yet, being 16 years old, but I would vote for Obama.

I would not vote for Romney. That said, the reason is based on his characteristics. He seems untrustworthy, fraudulent, and overall repulsive as the man trying to run this country.

Also, the infighting between these two different parties is really getting old. To the teenage brain, it just tells me that the politicians you older people vote for just can't get anything done. It is rather hopeless to watch for a guy like me, still trying to grab a handle of what politics really is. America just seems like a very divided country, and that isn't good for the next generation. I don't want to clean up after your people's messes, get something done and don't only think about yourselves. Think of the ones that come after you as well.

The problem is that the parties have fundamentally different viewpoints on what government should do. One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses.

It's not as simple as "just get along."

That is the best summation of the two parties I've heard in a long time

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:21 pm

Geilinor wrote:That's where the Libertarian Party comes in. I wouldn't vote for them when I turn 18, but at least they support both economic and social freedom. True libertarians/classical liberals are out there. The American two-party system can't survive with "One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses".

Libertarianism is one of the worst philosophies I've heard of.
Last edited by Mavorpen on Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Evraim
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6148
Founded: Dec 29, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Evraim » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:34 pm

Wamitoria wrote:The problem is that the parties have fundamentally different viewpoints on what government should do. One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses.

It's not as simple as "just get along."

Salut monsieur hyperbole. :roll: :lol:

Mavorpen wrote:Libertarianism is one of the worst philosophies I've heard of.

That would be a statement of values, I think.
Last edited by Evraim on Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Corporate Councils
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1205
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Corporate Councils » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:39 pm

Mavorpen wrote:Libertarianism is one of the worst philosophies I've heard of.


Libertarianism in itself isn't a terrible philosophy, and people out there like Ron Paul do offer an important voice of dissension to many things, it just so happens that most contemporary libertarians are shaped by some pretty virulent anti-government/society schools of thought. There is also a worrying number of "libertarians" out there who are very rich and powerful and who rightly see the government as a threat to their great private power or their capability to acquire wealth, regardless the societal costs (ex. the Koch Brothers).

The idea of personal liberties is an important one, but the issue with libertarianism is when the liberties of a select few threaten the liberties of the greater public.

I also imagine that a party that is anti-government in nature might not do a great job at running a government.

User avatar
The Nuclear Fist
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33214
Founded: May 02, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The Nuclear Fist » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:40 pm

Corporate Councils wrote:people out there like Ron Paul do offer an important voice of dissension to many things,

Ron Paul is scum.
[23:24] <Marquesan> I have the feeling that all the porn videos you watch are like...set to Primus' music, Ulysses.
Farnhamia wrote:You're getting a little too fond of the jerkoff motions.
And you touch the distant beaches with tales of brave Ulysses. . .
THE ABSOLUTTM MADMAN ESCAPES JUSTICE ONCE MORE

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:41 pm

Corporate Councils wrote:Libertarianism in itself isn't a terrible philosophy

No, it is.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Corporate Councils
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1205
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Corporate Councils » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:49 pm

The Nuclear Fist wrote:
Corporate Councils wrote:people out there like Ron Paul do offer an important voice of dissension to many things,

Ron Paul is scum.


Of which I am well aware, but I do believe that there does need to be that obnoxious politician out there who takes it upon himself/herself to challenge everything that anybody does (again, I know that Ron Paul dosen't exactly fit that bill, but I can't think of any prominent politician who does, so close enough I suppose) in order to keep people intellectually honest.

For the same reason, it's why I like Justice Scalia. Though I disagree with a majority of his rulings and opinions, I appreciate the fact that he hires clerks with diametrically opposing political views in order to provide himself with an honest voice of dissension.

*Edit* Just discovered that he's given up the practice in recent years, so I guess I'll redact the nice things I just said about him.
Last edited by Corporate Councils on Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Yumyumsuppertime
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 28799
Founded: Jun 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yumyumsuppertime » Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:53 pm

Libertarianism is the ultimate in "looks good on paper". If everyone has enough freedom, then the marketplace will take care of the hard workers, lazy types will either learn to work or starve, and the poor and disabled will be taken care of by the charity that people can afford to give now that they don't have to pay so much in taxes.

Except that there is no possible way to make that work in real life. Each black and white premise, when placed into the real world, will immediately be encompassed and consumed by the grey.

User avatar
Wamitoria
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18852
Founded: Jun 28, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wamitoria » Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:23 pm

Evraim wrote:
Wamitoria wrote:The problem is that the parties have fundamentally different viewpoints on what government should do. One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses.

It's not as simple as "just get along."

Salut monsieur hyperbole. :roll: :lol:

Only a little bit, that's the fucked up part.
Wonder where all the good posters went? Look no further!

Hurry, before the Summer Nazis show up again!

User avatar
Wamitoria
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18852
Founded: Jun 28, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wamitoria » Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:24 pm

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:Libertarianism is the ultimate in "looks good on paper". If everyone has enough freedom, then the marketplace will take care of the hard workers, lazy types will either learn to work or starve, and the poor and disabled will be taken care of by the charity that people can afford to give now that they don't have to pay so much in taxes.

Except that there is no possible way to make that work in real life. Each black and white premise, when placed into the real world, will immediately be encompassed and consumed by the grey.

There's always centrist and left-libertarianism.
Wonder where all the good posters went? Look no further!

Hurry, before the Summer Nazis show up again!

User avatar
Wikkiwallana
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22500
Founded: Mar 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wikkiwallana » Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:23 pm

North California wrote:
Wikkiwallana wrote:We've heard this about a thousand times, and it's still no more true than the first time.



See, these two sentences are complete contradictions of each other.


They're already over and paid back.


Have you not paid attention to the fact that this is already being done?


1. Presidents can't write legislation.
2. Obama is already working on all of those that are good ideas, except Marijuana


The thing keeping America off track right now is Congress, not the President.


No.


We still have a military presence in Iraq... and we are still in Afghanistan. And we are bombing 16 year old kids in Yemen. Doesn't sound like the war is over to me...

I love it that all the anti-war people shut up when its a Democrat that is fighting the war.

Also... let me know when General Electric, BP, General Motors, Bank of America, Solyndra, and the oil companies actually get their shit together and fix things to prove that the bailout worked, and that they won't screw up again in the future.

Bailout does nothing but temporarily keep the company afloat, help drive competitors out of business, and it gives no incentive to the company to improve its ways, because it knows that it can fuck up as many times as it wants, because the government will bail it out again.

Auto industry employment is better than it was pre-crash, and has steadily been growing since federal investment.
TARP has generated a positive ROI.

If you want predictions of the future, go talk to a psychic, because I refuse to do the impossible.
Proud Scalawag and Statist!

Please don't confuse my country for my politics; my country is being run as a parody, my posts aren't.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Xenohumanity wrote:
Nulono wrote:Snip
I'm a pro-lifer who runs a nation of dragon-men...
And even I think that's stupid.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

User avatar
Wikkiwallana
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22500
Founded: Mar 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wikkiwallana » Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:25 pm

Geilinor wrote:
Wamitoria wrote:The problem is that the parties have fundamentally different viewpoints on what government should do. One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses.

It's not as simple as "just get along."

That's where the Libertarian Party comes in. I wouldn't vote for them when I turn 18, but at least they support both economic and social freedom. True libertarians/classical liberals are out there. The American two-party system can't survive with "One wants the government to help everyone and the other only believes that government should be used to give advantages to rich people and fetuses".

Too bad they ignore positive liberties.
Proud Scalawag and Statist!

Please don't confuse my country for my politics; my country is being run as a parody, my posts aren't.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Xenohumanity wrote:
Nulono wrote:Snip
I'm a pro-lifer who runs a nation of dragon-men...
And even I think that's stupid.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

User avatar
Yumyumsuppertime
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 28799
Founded: Jun 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yumyumsuppertime » Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:26 pm

Wamitoria wrote:
Yumyumsuppertime wrote:Libertarianism is the ultimate in "looks good on paper". If everyone has enough freedom, then the marketplace will take care of the hard workers, lazy types will either learn to work or starve, and the poor and disabled will be taken care of by the charity that people can afford to give now that they don't have to pay so much in taxes.

Except that there is no possible way to make that work in real life. Each black and white premise, when placed into the real world, will immediately be encompassed and consumed by the grey.

There's always centrist and left-libertarianism.


Neither of which are especially well-represented by the Libertarian Party.

User avatar
Aryavartha
Diplomat
 
Posts: 732
Founded: Jan 16, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Aryavartha » Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:41 pm

Wamitoria wrote:I'll be watching FOX the minute the race is called.


well, the last time - there was this Fox guy announcing the winner, while the text at the bottom was "blah blah BILL AYERS blah blah" - prompting Jon Stewart to say "guys its over, he's already the president, cut it out" or something like that.
Last edited by Aryavartha on Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Nightkill the Emperor
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 88776
Founded: Dec 28, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Nightkill the Emperor » Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:13 pm

Hi! I'm Khan, your local misanthropic Indian.
I wear teal, blue & pink for Swith.
P2TM RP Discussion Thread
If you want a good rp, read this shit.
Tiami is cool.
Nat: Night's always in some bizarre state somewhere between "intoxicated enough to kill a hair metal lead singer" and "annoying Mormon missionary sober".

Swith: It's because you're so awesome. God himself refreshes the screen before he types just to see if Nightkill has written anything while he was off somewhere else.

Monfrox wrote:
The balkens wrote:
# went there....

It's Nightkill. He's been there so long he rents out rooms to other people at a flat rate, but demands cash up front.

User avatar
Corporate Councils
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1205
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Corporate Councils » Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:23 pm

Nightkill the Emperor wrote:On a lighter note.


+1

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Duvniask, Emotional Support Crocodile, Kitsuva, Picairn, Upper Ireland

Advertisement

Remove ads