ImageImageImageImageImage

Political Roundtable Part XXVI

Moderators: montestewart, nate33, LyricalRico

montestewart
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 12,669
And1: 4,942
Joined: Feb 25, 2009

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1181 » by montestewart » Sat Sep 7, 2019 7:24 pm

payitforward wrote:
Zonkerbl wrote:PIZZA NIGHT YAY

Wow, I had pizza last night too.

I think pizza should be free. People have a right to pizza. Don't you agree?

I don't know whether you've picked up on this, btw -- but I've noticed that abortion doctors are starting to unite around a platform that would make condoms illegal.

Clearly, people in favor of legal birth control are "anti-life." What's so strange is that they are also "anti-abortion," given the obvious fact that all effective forms of birth control prevent abortion. Who can explain this strange contradiction?

From what I’ve read, some people consider not having an orgasm to be murder too
User avatar
pancakes3
General Manager
Posts: 7,774
And1: 1,114
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1182 » by pancakes3 » Sat Sep 7, 2019 11:29 pm

i don't know how to process this

Read on Twitter
Bullets -> Wizards
User avatar
queridiculo
RealGM
Posts: 13,778
And1: 5,236
Joined: Mar 29, 2005
Location: Maximum Pain Zone
   

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1183 » by queridiculo » Sun Sep 8, 2019 9:04 am

I can only imagine the faux news **** storm had the previous president arranged a meeting with Taliban leaders on US soil, the week of the 9/11 anniversary no less.
verbal8
General Manager
Posts: 7,942
And1: 1,107
Joined: Jul 20, 2006
Location: Herndon, VA
     

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1184 » by verbal8 » Sun Sep 8, 2019 3:30 pm

queridiculo wrote:I can only imagine the faux news **** storm had the previous president arranged a meeting with Taliban leaders on US soil, the week of the 9/11 anniversary no less.


Other than his personal finances, has Trump been able to keep anything a secret?
daoneandonly
General Manager
Posts: 8,202
And1: 1,267
Joined: May 27, 2004
Location: Masalaland
 

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1185 » by daoneandonly » Mon Sep 9, 2019 11:19 am

doclinkin wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
In what way? The Progressive candidates say the word free more than most candidates say "the"


Free for who? Liberals and progressives tend to be more highly educated, more likely to have jobs, etc. Less likely to need help from the government. And people on social programs are unlikely to vote. So what is in it for the Progressives? You seem to think people are only voting for their own self interest. But then you agree with the sensible nature of what they want. That nobody should starve to death or be bankrupt from going to school or die from lack of health insurance.

So what is the argument? The government should do something to fix those problems. BUt yes, that costs money. So what is the point? Who should pay to make sure people who are4 struggling should get the care they need? Poor people who can't afford it in the first place?

It sounds like you are just repeating things you have heard without thinking about if you actually agree with them. WHy waste your time then? Just to get attention, I guess?


Not at all attention seeking kind sir. It's a matter of what should be "free" in question. Obviously nothing in life is free, but what should fall in the umbrella of rights and just handouts is where I'm driving at. Health insurance sure, but I have yet to hear any Democratic candidate come up with a fair and sustainable solution of how we achieve that. College is not a right, hence the onace should not be on the tax payer. Community college, sure, there's an argument for that, but is community college really that expensive where its breaking people's backs?

The fix is easy, have a flat tax, or at the very least, a 2 maybe 3 tier tax system where the deltas between the tiers are maybe 3%. is it really fair that a difference in income of $1000, hell even 5K, can put someone in the 22% threshold while the other still sits at 12? No, there shouldnt be these ridiculously imbalanced tiers that favor certain income brackets.

And AOC is the queen of self interest. She had a job that paid minimum wage because thats what it warrants with all due respect, yet she feels that job is entitled to more, and make no mistake she still has many friends in that field that she wants to hand these things out to.
daoneandonly
General Manager
Posts: 8,202
And1: 1,267
Joined: May 27, 2004
Location: Masalaland
 

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1186 » by daoneandonly » Mon Sep 9, 2019 11:22 am

Zonkerbl wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
dobrojim wrote:There is another party involved that you are completely ignoring, the would be mother.
Your position is that she should have no say in the matter, that the govt can, following your
beliefs, impose your will on them, whether that is what they believe or not.


Well its a matter of who you feel should get the say I suppose. The baby who did not do anything to be in the predicament, or the mother who did, should have been well aware that getting pregnant was a possibility. People who support funding PP have no issue with said mother using government money to take care of her body, that way shouldn't be okay either then under this premise.

Again, I've constantly only brought up abortion in the case of an accidental pregnancy, not rape, or the life is in danger.


Yeah you consistently deny that men have a role in unwanted pregnancies, that the woman is 100% responsible for the pregnancy. The man is also 100% responsible. If the man abandons her, the woman is entirely within her rights to terminate the pregnancy. Until you figure out a way to force men to raise the accidental baby.

It is 100% Margaret Atwood BS to force yourself on women and then point your finger at her and scream "whore! baby killer!"


Yet you focus on one of the posts where I just said mother, and ignore the numerous posts where I intentionally said Couples. You damn right men are just as responsible as the woman, and what? What's your argument? They too should have to pay up and be responsible, whether its for 18 years, or 9 months.
Ruzious
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 38,268
And1: 5,401
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1187 » by Ruzious » Mon Sep 9, 2019 12:04 pm

daoneandonly wrote:
doclinkin wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
In what way? The Progressive candidates say the word free more than most candidates say "the"


Free for who? Liberals and progressives tend to be more highly educated, more likely to have jobs, etc. Less likely to need help from the government. And people on social programs are unlikely to vote. So what is in it for the Progressives? You seem to think people are only voting for their own self interest. But then you agree with the sensible nature of what they want. That nobody should starve to death or be bankrupt from going to school or die from lack of health insurance.

So what is the argument? The government should do something to fix those problems. BUt yes, that costs money. So what is the point? Who should pay to make sure people who are4 struggling should get the care they need? Poor people who can't afford it in the first place?

It sounds like you are just repeating things you have heard without thinking about if you actually agree with them. WHy waste your time then? Just to get attention, I guess?


Not at all attention seeking kind sir. It's a matter of what should be "free" in question. Obviously nothing in life is free, but what should fall in the umbrella of rights and just handouts is where I'm driving at. Health insurance sure, but I have yet to hear any Democratic candidate come up with a fair and sustainable solution of how we achieve that. College is not a right, hence the onace should not be on the tax payer. Community college, sure, there's an argument for that, but is community college really that expensive where its breaking people's backs?

The fix is easy, have a flat tax, or at the very least, a 2 maybe 3 tier tax system where the deltas between the tiers are maybe 3%. is it really fair that a difference in income of $1000, hell even 5K, can put someone in the 22% threshold while the other still sits at 12? No, there shouldnt be these ridiculously imbalanced tiers that favor certain income brackets.

And AOC is the queen of self interest. She had a job that paid minimum wage because thats what it warrants with all due respect, yet she feels that job is entitled to more, and make no mistake she still has many friends in that field that she wants to hand these things out to.

No offense, but you are killing me with the kind of logic you're using. AOC is acting on self interest because she - at some point - might have had a minimum wage job, and she's trying to help poor people... because some of her friends are poor? Please think through the logic of what you're trying to say there. You seriously can't come to grips with the possibility that she's trying to do good? I don't agree with a lot of things she's said, but I don't find a need to question her motivations.
"Look, you never know when you may need to borrow a cup of sugar, maybe some milk or a handgun" - Dan C. from Texas
daoneandonly
General Manager
Posts: 8,202
And1: 1,267
Joined: May 27, 2004
Location: Masalaland
 

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1188 » by daoneandonly » Mon Sep 9, 2019 12:45 pm

Ruzious wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
doclinkin wrote:
Free for who? Liberals and progressives tend to be more highly educated, more likely to have jobs, etc. Less likely to need help from the government. And people on social programs are unlikely to vote. So what is in it for the Progressives? You seem to think people are only voting for their own self interest. But then you agree with the sensible nature of what they want. That nobody should starve to death or be bankrupt from going to school or die from lack of health insurance.

So what is the argument? The government should do something to fix those problems. BUt yes, that costs money. So what is the point? Who should pay to make sure people who are4 struggling should get the care they need? Poor people who can't afford it in the first place?

It sounds like you are just repeating things you have heard without thinking about if you actually agree with them. WHy waste your time then? Just to get attention, I guess?


Not at all attention seeking kind sir. It's a matter of what should be "free" in question. Obviously nothing in life is free, but what should fall in the umbrella of rights and just handouts is where I'm driving at. Health insurance sure, but I have yet to hear any Democratic candidate come up with a fair and sustainable solution of how we achieve that. College is not a right, hence the onace should not be on the tax payer. Community college, sure, there's an argument for that, but is community college really that expensive where its breaking people's backs?

The fix is easy, have a flat tax, or at the very least, a 2 maybe 3 tier tax system where the deltas between the tiers are maybe 3%. is it really fair that a difference in income of $1000, hell even 5K, can put someone in the 22% threshold while the other still sits at 12? No, there shouldnt be these ridiculously imbalanced tiers that favor certain income brackets.

And AOC is the queen of self interest. She had a job that paid minimum wage because thats what it warrants with all due respect, yet she feels that job is entitled to more, and make no mistake she still has many friends in that field that she wants to hand these things out to.

No offense, but you are killing me with the kind of logic you're using. AOC is acting on self interest because she - at some point - might have had a minimum wage job, and she's trying to help poor people... because some of her friends are poor? Please think through the logic of what you're trying to say there. You seriously can't come to grips with the possibility that she's trying to do good? I don't agree with a lot of things she's said, but I don't find a need to question her motivations.


No offense taken, you didn't say it in a rude way or call any names. Plus, we're on the same page on other forums here.

It's just a matter of agreeing to disagree. I think she felt entitled to "more" while she worked as a waitress/bartender, and that still sticks at her craw. That's her motivation in my opinion
User avatar
TGW
General Manager
Posts: 9,293
And1: 3,202
Joined: Oct 22, 2010

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1189 » by TGW » Mon Sep 9, 2019 12:59 pm

doclinkin wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
In what way? The Progressive candidates say the word free more than most candidates say "the"


Free for who? Liberals and progressives tend to be more highly educated, more likely to have jobs, etc. Less likely to need help from the government. And people on social programs are unlikely to vote. So what is in it for the Progressives? You seem to think people are only voting for their own self interest. But then you agree with the sensible nature of what they want. That nobody should starve to death or be bankrupt from going to school or die from lack of health insurance.

So what is the argument? The government should do something to fix those problems. BUt yes, that costs money. So what is the point? Who should pay to make sure people who are4 struggling should get the care they need? Poor people who can't afford it in the first place?

It sounds like you are just repeating things you have heard without thinking about if you actually agree with them. WHy waste your time then? Just to get attention, I guess?


That dude is a low-information one issue voter. Pay him no mind.
daoneandonly
General Manager
Posts: 8,202
And1: 1,267
Joined: May 27, 2004
Location: Masalaland
 

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1190 » by daoneandonly » Mon Sep 9, 2019 1:05 pm

TGW wrote:
doclinkin wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
In what way? The Progressive candidates say the word free more than most candidates say "the"


Free for who? Liberals and progressives tend to be more highly educated, more likely to have jobs, etc. Less likely to need help from the government. And people on social programs are unlikely to vote. So what is in it for the Progressives? You seem to think people are only voting for their own self interest. But then you agree with the sensible nature of what they want. That nobody should starve to death or be bankrupt from going to school or die from lack of health insurance.

So what is the argument? The government should do something to fix those problems. BUt yes, that costs money. So what is the point? Who should pay to make sure people who are4 struggling should get the care they need? Poor people who can't afford it in the first place?

It sounds like you are just repeating things you have heard without thinking about if you actually agree with them. WHy waste your time then? Just to get attention, I guess?


That dude is a low-information one issue voter. Pay him no mind.


Better to stand for something than be about nothing which you've proven your entire tenure on this forum.
User avatar
TGW
General Manager
Posts: 9,293
And1: 3,202
Joined: Oct 22, 2010

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1191 » by TGW » Mon Sep 9, 2019 1:12 pm

daoneandonly wrote:
TGW wrote:
doclinkin wrote:
Free for who? Liberals and progressives tend to be more highly educated, more likely to have jobs, etc. Less likely to need help from the government. And people on social programs are unlikely to vote. So what is in it for the Progressives? You seem to think people are only voting for their own self interest. But then you agree with the sensible nature of what they want. That nobody should starve to death or be bankrupt from going to school or die from lack of health insurance.

So what is the argument? The government should do something to fix those problems. BUt yes, that costs money. So what is the point? Who should pay to make sure people who are4 struggling should get the care they need? Poor people who can't afford it in the first place?

It sounds like you are just repeating things you have heard without thinking about if you actually agree with them. WHy waste your time then? Just to get attention, I guess?


That dude is a low-information one issue voter. Pay him no mind.


Better to stand for something than be about nothing which you've proven your entire tenure on this forum.


It's too early, dweeb. Go get breakfast first.
daoneandonly
General Manager
Posts: 8,202
And1: 1,267
Joined: May 27, 2004
Location: Masalaland
 

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1192 » by daoneandonly » Mon Sep 9, 2019 1:35 pm

TGW wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
TGW wrote:
That dude is a low-information one issue voter. Pay him no mind.


Better to stand for something than be about nothing which you've proven your entire tenure on this forum.


It's too early, dweeb. Go get breakfast first.


Breakfast, that was done 3 hours ago dweeb. I'm already 2 1/2 hours into work, and I don't b and moan about the salary i make at it, like Queen AOC and her progressive following.
dobrojim
RealGM
Posts: 13,366
And1: 1,221
Joined: Sep 16, 2004

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1193 » by dobrojim » Mon Sep 9, 2019 1:36 pm

doclinkin wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
In what way? The Progressive candidates say the word free more than most candidates say "the"


Free for who? Liberals and progressives tend to be more highly educated, more likely to have jobs, etc. Less likely to need help from the government. And people on social programs are unlikely to vote. So what is in it for the Progressives? You seem to think people are only voting for their own self interest. But then you agree with the sensible nature of what they want. That nobody should starve to death or be bankrupt from going to school or die from lack of health insurance.

So what is the argument? The government should do something to fix those problems. BUt yes, that costs money. So what is the point? Who should pay to make sure people who are4 struggling should get the care they need? Poor people who can't afford it in the first place?

It sounds like you are just repeating things you have heard without thinking about if you actually agree with them. WHy waste your time then? Just to get attention, I guess?


It's also been repeated many many times in this thread that the states that get the
most 'free' stuff, stuff they get via the generosity of the tax payers in other states,
are generally in the red states.

Who exactly are the freeloaders you (Da1)are so concerned about?
A lot of what we call 'thought' is just mental activity
dobrojim
RealGM
Posts: 13,366
And1: 1,221
Joined: Sep 16, 2004

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1194 » by dobrojim » Mon Sep 9, 2019 1:38 pm

payitforward wrote:
Zonkerbl wrote:PIZZA NIGHT YAY

Wow, I had pizza last night too.

I think pizza should be free. People have a right to pizza. Don't you agree?

I don't know whether you've picked up on this, btw -- but I've noticed that abortion doctors are starting to unite around a platform that would make condoms illegal.

Clearly, people in favor of legal birth control are "anti-life." What's so strange is that they are also "anti-abortion," given the obvious fact that all effective forms of birth control prevent abortion. Who can explain this strange contradiction?


every sperm is sacred
A lot of what we call 'thought' is just mental activity
Zonkerbl
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,901
And1: 1,729
Joined: Mar 24, 2010
       

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1195 » by Zonkerbl » Mon Sep 9, 2019 2:45 pm

daoneandonly wrote:
Zonkerbl wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:
Well its a matter of who you feel should get the say I suppose. The baby who did not do anything to be in the predicament, or the mother who did, should have been well aware that getting pregnant was a possibility. People who support funding PP have no issue with said mother using government money to take care of her body, that way shouldn't be okay either then under this premise.

Again, I've constantly only brought up abortion in the case of an accidental pregnancy, not rape, or the life is in danger.


Yeah you consistently deny that men have a role in unwanted pregnancies, that the woman is 100% responsible for the pregnancy. The man is also 100% responsible. If the man abandons her, the woman is entirely within her rights to terminate the pregnancy. Until you figure out a way to force men to raise the accidental baby.

It is 100% Margaret Atwood BS to force yourself on women and then point your finger at her and scream "whore! baby killer!"


Yet you focus on one of the posts where I just said mother, and ignore the numerous posts where I intentionally said Couples. You damn right men are just as responsible as the woman, and what? What's your argument? They too should have to pay up and be responsible, whether its for 18 years, or 9 months.


You don't understand the point I'm making at all. A lot of "accidental pregnancies" are when a guy gets a girl pregnant and then runs off. You proudly advocate for executing anyone who has an abortion (I mean, what else can you mean by screaming BABY KILLER all the time? if we're baby killers we deserve to be executed right? that's the dogwhistle you're using - KILL ALL ABORTIONISTS AND ABORTIONERS) without giving any thought to tracking down and executing the man who is responsible. You focus your hate for imaginary murder exclusively on women. Because you consider them property whose rights mean nothing compared to the rights of imaginary children who don't yet exist.
Comparing Rose to Wall is like asking which is a more impressive cat: A cheetah or a wolf? Dude, Wall ain’t no damn cat!
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 12,265
And1: 3,837
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1196 » by payitforward » Mon Sep 9, 2019 3:07 pm

dobrojim wrote:
payitforward wrote:
Zonkerbl wrote:PIZZA NIGHT YAY

Wow, I had pizza last night too.

I think pizza should be free. People have a right to pizza. Don't you agree?

I don't know whether you've picked up on this, btw -- but I've noticed that abortion doctors are starting to unite around a platform that would make condoms illegal.

Clearly, people in favor of legal birth control are "anti-life." What's so strange is that they are also "anti-abortion," given the obvious fact that all effective forms of birth control prevent abortion. Who can explain this strange contradiction?

every sperm is sacred

If only sperm could "just say no," all these problems would go away.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 12,265
And1: 3,837
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1197 » by payitforward » Mon Sep 9, 2019 3:16 pm

daoneandonly wrote:Breakfast, that was done 3 hours ago dweeb. I'm already 2 1/2 hours into work, and I don't b and moan about the salary i make at it, like Queen AOC and her progressive following.

You know... I have found over time that when impeccable logic & the overwhelming force of empirical fact fail to sway someone, the best thing to do is insult him. Don't you agree, you stupid twerp?
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 12,265
And1: 3,837
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1198 » by payitforward » Mon Sep 9, 2019 3:30 pm

payitforward wrote:
daoneandonly wrote:Breakfast, that was done 3 hours ago dweeb. I'm already 2 1/2 hours into work, and I don't b and moan about the salary i make at it, like Queen AOC and her progressive following.

You know... I have found over time that when impeccable logic & the overwhelming force of empirical fact fail to sway someone, the best thing to do is insult him. Don't you agree, you stupid twerp?

OTOH, it occurs to me that one might simply begin by calling names & then, if they don't produce the desired result, move on to employ logic & facts. Does that seem a better strategy, you dumbandlonely cretinous drooler?
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
dckingsfan
RealGM
Posts: 15,491
And1: 3,464
Joined: May 28, 2010

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1199 » by dckingsfan » Mon Sep 9, 2019 3:54 pm

daoneandonly wrote:Again, I've constantly only brought up abortion in the case of an accidental pregnancy, not rape, or the life is in danger.

So, if a women states they have been raped, don't want to be in the position of prosecuting the rapist (the messy part of the trial) then they should be able to get an abortion - no questions asked other than that one?

Of course you aren't (as stated previously). You will say, nope - she has to prove it. Yep, that will take more than a trimester.

And Zonk brings up a good point (as poorly as he could). What is the remedy for those getting an abortion? Jail? We already have had the failed prohibition, war on drugs, stupid on crime. You want to lock up a million or two women?

The problem with your argument is that there is no remedy. There is no intelligent way to enforce your "belief".
User avatar
pancakes3
General Manager
Posts: 7,774
And1: 1,114
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Political Roundtable Part XXVI 

Post#1200 » by pancakes3 » Mon Sep 9, 2019 3:58 pm

CBP is going out of their way to be cruel. Like, really far out of their way.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/460468-hundreds-of-bahamians-told-to-leave-evacuation-ship-report


and in the nothing-burger arena of self-dealing and emolument violations, USAF is "looking into" the practice of having Middle-East flights stopping at Turberry, Scotland for refuels and having flight crews stay at Trump's hotel during those refuel trips. On one hand, yes, those planes need to refuel, and Trump's hotel is within the allotted per-diem rates. On the other hand, there's no reason to stop in a Scottish airfield instead of some other airfield, traditionally the stops are in Spain, the airfield in question is operating at a loss and may be shut down, and Trump's property that relies on that airfield for traffic is also operating at a loss.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49633936
Bullets -> Wizards

Return to Washington Wizards