What if coffee were like ObamaCare?

[Rob Roy]

i'll keep that in mind next time you're talking about how blacks want "special rights" and calling the president a mullato.

You said "blacks". I said ALL people should have the same rights and none should have special rights that force others to associate with them. Denying a persons right to peacefully disassociate from others seems like a bad policy. Why do you want to control people so much?

You've called Obama "black" when he is mixed race or "mullato". You can't argue on topic very well, but you're pretty good at stupid insults and shape shifting.

 

[UncleBuck]

You said "blacks". I said ALL people should have the same rights and none should have special rights that force others to associate with them. Denying a persons right to peacefully disassociate from others seems like a bad policy. Why do you want to control people so much?

You've called Obama "black" when he is mixed race or "mullato". You can't argue on topic very well, but you're pretty good at stupid insults and shape shifting.

if i call the president black, it is because he self-identifies that way.

he does not call himself by an antiquated racial slur that only racist old men like you would label him with.

 

[canndo]

Libertarians (and libertarians) support civil litigation. Libertarians (and libertarians) are not anarchists, we recognize and embrace the need for laws and government, we just don't want the all powerful, preemptive government you seem so fond of. History is littered with government run amok preempting stuff.

You support civil litigation, but you are not interested in having a government capable of arranging the structure for that litigation nor the means to enforce decisions. You are for small government, Dems are for "large" government, republicans are for "their" government and I am for "enough" government.

No one wants an "all powerful, preemptive government". I know a bit of history, now can you point to a successful long lasting libertarian society?

 

[Rob Roy]

if i call the president black, it is because he self-identifies that way.

he does not call himself by an antiquated racial slur that only racist old men like you would label him with.

Using your logic, J-Roc is black. Come to think of it he probably can rap better than the mixed race tyrant.

 

[UncleBuck]

Using your logic, J-Roc is black. Come to think of it he probably can rap better than the mixed race tyrant.

your rebuttal is a fictional canadian television character?

go clean your fucking room, rob.

 

[Rob Roy]

your rebuttal is a fictional canadian television character?

go clean your fucking room, rob.

No my rebuttal was nuanced. Clearly a person can "identify" as what ever they want to, that doesn't give them those traits though. For instance you often pose as an intelligent person....ahem.

 

[UncleBuck]

my rebuttal was nuanced

and cited a fictional canadian TV character.

spooner would be proud.

 

[schuylaar]

actually the democrat party dominates that category.

1968 democrat party convention chicago.

"Segregation Forever"?

yeah, it's not new shit, its been around for a while.

i guess ya'll forgot about robert byrd. senator, democrat, racist, klansman.

not racist at all.

Protip: Heister Clymer was a DEMOCRAT, John Geary was a Republican

i could continue, but what bother?

democrats rarely accept the truth.

how many times do we have to go over this?..1850's dems were markedly different as were repubs..kynes you're too smart to keep bringing this into debate..i expect more from you as you have the intelligence unlike your brethren..

 

[ginwilly]

You support civil litigation, but you are not interested in having a government capable of arranging the structure for that litigation nor the means to enforce decisions. You are for small government, Dems are for "large" government, republicans are for "their" government and I am for "enough" government.

No one wants an "all powerful, preemptive government". I know a bit of history, now can you point to a successful long lasting libertarian society?

The closest example in recent history would be the US pre-FDR. For today, we would have to break it down into categories of economic freedom, personal liberties, etc. Using the metrics of a more hands off government, Ireland is moving in that direction, as are Lithuania, Uruguay, Portugal. Hong Kong has long been held as a symbol for economic freedom. The Baltic countries did the opposite of Keynesian and are thriving. Canada is actually very libertarian concerning social issues.

Now let's do the other side. Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, USSR, Libya, Sudan...any country with Sharia Law.

 

[schuylaar]

You support civil litigation, but you are not interested in having a government capable of arranging the structure for that litigation nor the means to enforce decisions. You are for small government, Dems are for "large" government, republicans are for "their" government and I am for "enough" government.

No one wants an "all powerful, preemptive government". I know a bit of history, now can you point to a successful long lasting libertarian society?

canndo..i have to laugh..when they say "small government" that means no rules or regulations, period..otherwise, wouldn't we just be somalia?

 

[UncleBuck]

The closest example in recent history would be the US pre-FDR. For today, we would have to break it down into categories of economic freedom, personal liberties, etc. Using the metrics of a more hands off government, Ireland is moving in that direction, as are Lithuania, Uruguay, Portugal. Hong Kong has long been held as a symbol for economic freedom. The Baltic countries did the opposite of Keynesian and are thriving.

Now let's do the other side. Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, USSR, Libya, Sudan...any country with Sharia Law.

shall we also do a comparison between countries who are thriving with universal health care, and the government mechanisms they put in place that make it work so much better than ours?

or does your flimsy, retarded, factually moronic comparison stop when it stops suiting your silly worldview?

edit - i was really hoping we could also look at how norway pays and trains their teachers as well, if you were so inclined to have an actual look at actual facts, instead of just bleating about muslims and marxism.

 

[schuylaar]

shall we also do a comparison between countries who are thriving with universal health care, and the government mechanisms they put in place that make it work so much better than ours?

or does your flimsy, retarded, factually moronic comparison stop when it stops suiting your silly worldview?

edit - i was really hoping we could also look at how norway pays and trains their teachers as well, if you were so inclined to have an actual look at actual facts, instead of just bleating about muslims and marxism.

i will say one reason is zero immigration and everybody looks like everybody else; the "happyiest place on earth" is denmark..again zero immigration, everyone looks like everyone else..is that what it takes to have a utopian society?

EDIT: hitler would have been proud.

 

[UncleBuck]

i will say one reason is zero immigration and everybody looks like everybody else; the "happyiest place on earth" is denmark..again zero immigration, everyone looks like everyone else..is that what it takes to have a utopian society?

EDIT: hitler would have been proud.

hitler was just protecting REAL GERMANY from the multicultural wasteland of bullshit.

one thing was for sure about nazi germany, ginwilly wouldn't have had to worry about any racists spitting in the food of those they were racist against.

 

[ginwilly]

canndo..i have to laugh..when they say "small government" that means no rules or regulations, period..otherwise, wouldn't we just be somalia?

Is that what we mean? Do you really believe this? If I wanted to pay a hooker to polish my knob while playing online poker and getting high in my own home, my only choice is Somalia? Seriously, I can't play online poker in North Korea, Iran or the US. Does me having a problem with this mean I'm an anarchist?

So you support the Patriot Act? UEGIA? Citizens United? It's OK to be against government overreach and still support a functioning government.

 

[ginwilly]

hitler was just protecting REAL GERMANY from the multicultural wasteland of bullshit.

one thing was for sure about nazi germany, ginwilly wouldn't have had to worry about any racists spitting in the food of those they were racist against.

Comparing me to Hitler now? let's go back and see what caused this? Oh yeah, I destroyed another of your silly arguments about the altruism of your party. Keep it up man, I'm sure nobody notices things like this.

 

[UncleBuck]

Comparing me to Hitler now? let's go back and see what caused this? Oh yeah, I destroyed another of your silly arguments about the altruism of your party. Keep it up man, I'm sure nobody notices things like this.

i'm just stating that racist food spitters, aka the reason why you oppose civil rights, wouldn't have been a concern for you in nazi germany.

this has nothing to do with your attempts at historical revisionism or odd double standards when it comes to taking lessons from other nations about how to provide health care or education in the most effective way possible.

and who are you trying to convince that you "destroyed" anything, apart from accurate historical analysis?

 

[Dr Kynes]

how many times do we have to go over this?..1850's dems were markedly different as were repubs..kynes you're too smart to keep bringing this into debate..i expect more from you as you have the intelligence unlike your brethren..

actually no, that is a pervasive meme, but it is NOT fact. read the party platforms through the years, and youll discover that on every major issue, the republicans have stayed consistent while the dems have thrashed about blindly looking for a purpose, except on race, where they were, are, and will continue to be Anti-Negro.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/platforms.php#axzz2hy1BkFba

they just play by a new strategy, telling blacks and other minorities that they NEED democrats to help them.

 

[ginwilly]

UB certainly not you dude. When you are proven wrong on the reg here, you just start using RACIST!! and start a new thread talking about someone who just destroyed your failed logic. It's become predictable and boring. So no, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. That's a big waste of time. I've seen you destroyed many many times by many many different posters, but I have never seen you man up and admit it even once.

 

[UncleBuck]

UB certainly not you dude. When you are proven wrong on the reg here, you just start using RACIST!! and start a new thread talking about someone who just destroyed your failed logic. It's become predictable and boring. So no, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. That's a big waste of time. I've seen you destroyed many many times by many many different posters, but I have never seen you man up and admit it even once.

again, who are you trying to convince?

you just got done trying to tell me that it was the federal government who was in charge of jim crow laws (hint: it was actually the states) and that civil rights (which you oppose because you are totally not racist) was not decided on geographical lines.

all i did was mention how STATES became subject to preclearance by the feds and now you are talking about how you "destroyed" me.

it's clear at this point that you are only trying to convince yourself, since you won't convince me or anyone else with your fake history.

 

[UncleBuck]

actually no, that is a pervasive meme, but it is NOT fact. read the party platforms through the years, and youll discover that on every major issue, the republicans have stayed consistent while the dems have thrashed about blindly looking for a purpose, except on race, where they were, are, and will continue to be Anti-Negro.

except all of your totally cool pictographic history ended 50 years shy of present day.

whereas i was able to put together a very nice pictorial from within the last decade or two showing how racist the republican party has become.

deal with it, bircher. you are now the party of racism, and all your racist, conservative buddies herew on rollitup continuously prove the point.