- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
- Messages
- 120,954
- Reaction score
- 28,531
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Then you shouldn't have said it. :shrug:
You do not even make sense. And you two really need to get a room.
Then you shouldn't have said it. :shrug:
You do not even make sense.
Rather strange construction in a society based on individual liberty. Do you think that was a mistake?
If we once had such a society, that day is long dead and buried. But the modern libertarian romantic fiction of what we were is just that - a romantic fiction that might as well be King Arthur and his noble knights. We no longer live in that world with those realities. You either adapt to the changing world or you die and are eaten.
On the contrary; I make perfect sense. You simply have no idea what the words you type actually mean, apparently:
No - you tried to squeeze in your personal cause celebre - the progressive income tax - in your rant about SC decisions and precedent. You were talking about the roof leaking but then decided to scream about the basement at the same time because its part of the house. Its almost a pathological obsession with you that you cannot even control or moderate.
Haymarket's stock response to uncomfortable counterpoints is to claim it doesnt make sense. He might well be right. rational thought and logic really are not sensible to those whose positions tend to be emotionally grounded.
I have no doubt that there is a point that makes sense to you somewhere in your own mind.
And refusal to own up to his own words. Even now, as I present them back to him in full.
And refusal to own up to his own words. Even now, as I present them back to him in full.
More psychobabble. its you you cannot control your desire to demand the wealth of others. we merely ask to be left alone and to merely pay the same rate as others. You demand we pay a higher rate than you do. Yo are not even willing to apply your own demands on yourself, that is hypocrisy
You seem to have a fundamental lack of understanding about where our laws come from. We live in a representative democracy and it is our elected representatives who pass the laws you seem to loathe about taxation.
Apparently, what you delude yourself into believing my words mean , are not what my words mean. But if you want to follow Alice down the rabbit hole, be my guest.
our laws come from various things--pandering to the masses is one source. and in a society where quantity often trumps quality, that is a given
personal responsibility is anathema to the left. they outsource that to the government
While mocking antiquated, mythical notions of things like "individual liberty," yes.
Again with the smug, self righteous snobbery painting yourself as the informed elite above the unwashed masses. This is indeed pathological with you.
Then you should have written what you actually wanted to say -- whatever that is -- because what your words mean is plain as day. You said if we ever lived in a society based on individual liberty -- and that was probably a myth -- that world is dead and gone and people like me who think we do need to get with the times. There's no other way to read your words. Your problem.
do you pretend to be a psychologist as well as a patriot?
Actually what I said was
If we once had such a society, that day is long dead and buried. But the modern libertarian romantic fiction of what we were is just that - a romantic fiction that might as well be King Arthur and his noble knights. We no longer live in that world with those realities. You either adapt to the changing world or you die and are eaten.
Yes, and this was in response to my statement that ours is a society based on individual liberty. (How this is a controversial statement is entirely beyond me. Didn't you claim to be a school teacher at some point?)
Of course, the problem is that it's YOU who made a "Frankenstein monster" out of what I said and are now projecting that failing onto me. It would be better for you simply to admit it, but you're obviously all in.
Why you persist in totally and completely twisting this is only for you to know.
Can you tell me how a society is supposedly founded on individual liberty but keeps some of its people in a condition of slavery which is a basic denial of any sort of liberty?
You want to believe the hype instead of the reality because the hype serves your modern purposes better than the reality does.
Can you tell me how a society is supposedly founded on individual liberty but keeps some of its people in a condition of slavery which is a basic denial of any sort of liberty?
Then it is as I said, and you deny we're a society founded on individual liberty.
Whew. We've got that one settled. Of course, it was clear when you posted it the first time, but at least now you've manned up to it. Yet, you're most likely still going to try to deny it somehow.
two different points here that can exist together without contradicting each other
1- America gave some of its people a bit more individual liberty than other societies did -
2- American denied some of its people even a tiny bit of liberty keeping them in slavery while proclaiming pious platitudes about equality and liberty for all
The America that existed at that time, for both groups, is dead and gone and not returning. So for modern libertarians to wallow in this idea of America being founded on liberty is not as clear cut or as self evident as some would have it appear. The reality is not the hype. And the reality does not make for good bumper sticker cliches.