Wake Up, America!

[Perknose]

The Republic is now officially one year older. It's been an oft-times rocky ride, none more rocky than these days, but no matter how shaky, the Union still stands, bent beyond belief and back but not completely broken.

I love my country, not for it's many, many, many depredations, but for the ideals on which it was founded, that ALL men are created equal, and that our government, supposedly of the people, by the people, and for the people, is here to promote the general welfare of its citizens, every single one, no exceptions.

I refuse to give up my perhaps naieve belief that we can do better, be better, and that, in the long arc of history, despite the recent ascendancy of this clown college collection of angry, small-minded ignoramuses, WE WILL.

And so it is, on this "day after," I present to you one of our glorious native sons paying a birthday tribute to yet another one. For no one of us is more American than these two.

Little Richard is a shining exemplar of that most American of music, rock 'n roll!

And Muhammad Ali sacrificed years at the height of his boxing powers standing up for what he believed in.

It doesn't get more American that that.

 

[dphantom]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, yes I agree you small minded types will be a footnote in our great history. Where we can again include all peoples of all persuasions and ideas in a civil debate.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

[dank69]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, yes I agree you small minded types will be a footnote in our great history. Where we can again include all peoples of all persuasions and ideas in a civil debate.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I look forward to you not using the demon socialist roads anymore, or anything else our socialist policies have made available to muppets like you.

 

[glenn1]

I look forward to you not using the demon socialist roads anymore, or anything else our socialist policies have made available to muppets like you.

More like I look forward to you learning the difference between rivalrous/non-rivalrous and excludable/non-excludable goods and why a person can support governments building roads (a non-rivalrous, non-excludable good) while simultaneously saying government shouldn't be in the space of "universal healthcare" (a rivalrous/excludable good).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excludability

 

[dank69]

More like I look forward to you learning the difference between rivalrous/non-rivalrous and excludable/non-excludable goods and why a person can support governments building roads (a non-rivalrous, non-excludable good) while simultaneously saying government shouldn't be in the space of "universal healthcare" (a rivalrous/excludable good).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excludability

I replied to a post about socialism. Neither of us said anything about excludability.

 

[IronWing]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, .

Obama was term limited; he left office as was his duty under the Constitution. You didn't get rid of anyone. Also, Obama was a moderate conservative. Even self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders isn't a socialist, more of a moderate liberal.

 

[fskimospy]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, yes I agree you small minded types will be a footnote in our great history. Where we can again include all peoples of all persuasions and ideas in a civil debate.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Hahaha, 'once we get rid of people who think like you we can again include people of all persuasions and ideas in debate'.

That's some solid unintentional irony right there.

 

[Jaskalas]

"universal healthcare" (a rivalrous/excludable good).

It's like you don't understand the word Universal. Excludable? You're right in that I don't foresee us covering 100% of the costs, but the benefit of subsidy to lower costs would be universal. Just like we don't buy you a car so that you can use the roads. Society covers the millions of dollars to build it, you still pitch in thousands for your own use of the road.

How did you imagine it works? What, you and your family have never seen a doctor in your lives, never taken a prescription drug? No one was born in a hospital? The... service of healthcare cost reduction seems pretty universally used and non-rivalrous, non-excludable to me.

 

[fskimospy]

More like I look forward to you learning the difference between rivalrous/non-rivalrous and excludable/non-excludable goods and why a person can support governments building roads (a non-rivalrous, non-excludable good) while simultaneously saying government shouldn't be in the space of "universal healthcare" (a rivalrous/excludable good).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excludability

Roads are most certainly rivalrous and excludable. Non-rivalrous goods are ones where your usage in no way affects other people's ability to use it, like television. When other people use roads however it most certainly affects your ability to use them, that's what traffic is. They are also obviously excludable goods as well, otherwise toll booths wouldn't exist. So now that we know roads are both excludable and rivalrous do you no longer support the government funding them or have you come around on universal health care? Haha.

Before you start using these terms you should make sure you understand them.

 

[Thebobo]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, .

We? Mighty ignorant to not know about term limits.

 

[glenn1]

Roads are most certainly rivalrous and excludable. Non-rivalrous goods are ones where your usage in no way affects other people's ability to use it, like television. When other people use roads however it most certainly affects your ability to use them, that's what traffic is. They are also obviously excludable goods as well, otherwise toll booths wouldn't exist. So now that we know roads are both excludable and rivalrous do you no longer support the government funding them or have you come around on universal health care? Haha.

Before you start using these terms you should make sure you understand them.

Very few things are perfectly non-rivalrous except abstract goods (like civil rights) but we don't generally consider things which could be rivalrous at a certain capacity like courts, fire department, or roads for obvious reasons. Would you no longer support the government funding police because they can't respond to every crime or the EEOC because it can't investigate all possible complaints of discrimination? It's also folly to include toll roads because either the government itself is imposing the toll (which means the excludability to the degree it exists is a choice made by the government) or a private road which the government didn't fund anyway. The idea that roads are in any way "socialist" is stupid, they're in no way about the precepts of socialism in its original meaning (government ownership of the means of production) or more modern "expanded" meaning of a redistributionist social welfare state.

 

[a777pilot]

walk away

 

[fskimospy]

Very few things are perfectly non-rivalrous except abstract goods (like civil rights) but we don't generally consider things which could be rivalrous at a certain capacity like courts, fire department, or roads for obvious reasons.

Who is this ‘we’? What people generally do is consider things either MORE rivalrous or LESS rivalrous, they don’t just declare things that are obviously rivalrous as suddenly not.

Would you no longer support the government funding police because they can't respond to every crime or the EEOC because it can't investigate all possible complaints of discrimination?

Not sure what you’re trying to argue against here.

It's also folly to include toll roads because either the government itself is imposing the toll (which means the excludability to the degree it exists is a choice made by the government) or a private road which the government didn't fund anyway.

It seems to be greater folly to consider something non-excludeable when it is not only excludeable, it functions in this way across the world on a daily basis.

What you said about roads being non-rivalrous and non-excludeable is just simply and obviously wrong on its face. It’s total nonsense.

The idea that roads are in any way "socialist" is stupid, they're in no way about the precepts of socialism in its original meaning (government ownership of the means of production) or more modern "expanded" meaning of a redistributionist social welfare state.

This is nonsense. Socialism didn’t focus on roads because they were already for the most part socialized, not because socialists wouldn’t consider community ownership of transportation infrastructure to be socialist.

 

[fskimospy]

walk away

I genuinely hope you do. Anyone who still considers themselves a Republican at this point needs to take a long look at themselves and what they’ve become.

Modern American conservatism has been going off the rails for a long time now but even considering the downward spiral I think the average Republican ten years ago would look at themselves now and feel ashamed of what they’ve become.

 

[brycejones]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, yes I agree you small minded types will be a footnote in our great history. Where we can again include all peoples of all persuasions and ideas in a civil debate.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Still drunk from yesterday? Or just the usual projection?

 

[zinfamous]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, yes I agree you small minded types will be a footnote in our great history. Where we can again include all peoples of all persuasions and ideas in a civil debate.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I think you would be more comfortable in Burma.

or maybe Kyrgyzstan.

 

[Moonbeam]

Good golly, Muhammad Ali, nice.

 

[whm1974]

What is this neo-marxist term that the right keeps sneering at folks who aren't even close to being a Marxist?

 

[umbrella39]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, yes I agree you small minded types will be a footnote in our great history. Where we can again include all peoples of all persuasions and ideas in a civil debate.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Pst. Live births assure that your post is just the grandiose turds being flung out of the diaper of an idiot...

You won't even be a footnote...

 

[SP33Demon]

Perk, once "liberals" (very generalized term I know and many different forms) can get over their defective genetic programming of experiencing a Fight or Flight response in their brains' fear centers (insula, amygdala) will this country grant your wish to "be better". It's not a secret who's trying to censor, prevent free speech (see University of WI liberals in action) b/c their unevolved amygdalas and insulas got triggered. From the USC study:

For the study, the neuroscientists recruited 40 people who were self-declared liberals. The scientists then examined through functional MRI how their brains responded when their beliefs were challenged.
...
“Political beliefs are like religious beliefs in the respect that both are part of who you are and important for the social circle to which you belong,” said lead author Jonas Kaplan, an assistant research professor of psychology at the Brain and Creativity Institute at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. “To consider an alternative view, you would have to consider an alternative version of yourself.”

Would you agree that considering an alternative view takes intelligence and is a trait of higher-IQ people?

The study found that people who were most resistant to changing their beliefs had more activity in the amygdala (a pair of almond-shaped areas near the center of the brain) and the insular cortex, compared with people who were more willing to change their minds.
...
“Understanding when and why people are likely to change their minds is an urgent objective,” said Gimbel, a research scientist at the Brain and Creativity Institute. “Knowing how and which statements may persuade people to change their political beliefs could be key for society’s progress,” she said.

So for society's progress, people stop getting fearfully triggered please. I know it's not something liberals (and probably some conservatives too though I doubt much less since we are K-selected, not r) can control but now that it's out there as a fact, at least try to contain emotions when presented with an opposing viewpoint. It's not life and death or Fight/flight to consider another viewpoint, even if it's conservative. I'm perfectly willing to debate liberals since I live with one and not get emo about it and challenge each other on why we believe x or y.

A good start would be accepting that belief systems evolve as more facts are presented. Look at our belief systems on slavery, gold vs fiat currencies, population bomb fears (i.e. there won't be enough resources for everyone on earth by x date), lending standards for homes, etc. All of these beliefs have changed in the past 100 years. Liberals will have to either evolve and learn to consider opposing viewpoints or their kids probably will since some of their current agenda is unsustainable (e.g. sjw behavior like in the video I linked, identity politics like BLM, free-everything-for-everyone, 50 different imaginary genders). Normal voters aren't going to take such a party seriously when it's espousing crap like that and then refusing to even debate what they believe without getting triggered and/or trying to censor/shut down the views of what triggered their amygdala's.

I'd posit that most high-iq liberals are capable of defeating this brain defect by simple training - start reading conservative news sites. And this is coming from someone who voted Obama in 2008 and was all about Gore in 2000 (yes I may have suffered a mild case of this defect in the past). Hell I routinely check the Left's MSM (CNN/MSNBC/Huffpo) to see what they're spinning and see if any of it makes sense from an objective point of view. It also provides a broader view of a topic instead of just an echo-chamber-like view that never gets challenged or evolves b/c of the ostrich-head-in-the-sand behavior.

 

[fskimospy]

Perk, once "liberals" (very generalized term I know and many different forms) can get over their defective genetic programming of experiencing a Fight or Flight response in their brains' fear centers (insula, amygdala) will this country grant your wish to "be better". It's not a secret who's trying to censor, prevent free speech (see University of WI liberals in action) b/c their unevolved amygdalas and insulas got triggered. From the USC study:

Would you agree that considering an alternative view takes intelligence and is a trait of higher-IQ people? The study continues:

So for society's progress, stop getting fearfully triggered please. I know it's not something they can control but now that it's out there as a fact, at least try to contain emotions when presented with an opposing viewpoint. It's really not life and death to consider another viewpoint, even if it's conservative. I'm perfectly willing to debate liberals since I live with one and not get emo about it and challenge each other on why we believe x or y.

A good start would be accepting that belief systems evolve as more facts are presented. Look at our belief systems on slavery, gold vs fiat currencies, population bomb fears (i.e. there won't be enough resources for everyone on earth by x date), lending standards for homes, etc. All of these beliefs have changed in the past 100 years. Liberals will have to either evolve and learn to consider opposing viewpoints or their kids probably will since some of their current agenda is unsustainable (e.g. sjw behavior like in the video I linked, identity politics like BLM, free-everything-for-everyone, 50 different imaginary genders). Normal voters aren't going to take such a party seriously when it's espousing crap like that and then refusing to even debate what they believe without getting triggered and/or trying to censor/shut down the views of what triggered their amygdala's. I'd posit that most high-iq liberals are capable of defeating this brain defect by simple training - start reading conservative news sites. And this is coming from someone who voted Obama in 2008 and was all about Gore in 2000. Hell I routinely check the Left's MSM to see what they're trying to push onto their readers like CNN/MSNBC/Huffpo. It also provides a broader view of a topic instead of just an echo-chamber-like view that never gets challenged or evolves b/c of the ostrich-in-the-sand behavior.

Were you looking into a mirror when you made this post? lol.

Your response to finding out your argument was wrong is to start throwing juvenile insults and bragging about how much you can squat. It would be great if we had some more conservatives on here that were willing to examine their own viewpoints critically. Unfortunately you're clearly too afraid of looking or feeling stupid to do so.

 

[sandorski]

Once we get rid of you socialists and neo-marxists like we did your previous president, yes I agree you small minded types will be a footnote in our great history. Where we can again include all peoples of all persuasions and ideas in a civil debate.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

"We" is not "Me".

 

[SP33Demon]

Were you looking into a mirror when you made this post? lol.

Your response to finding out your argument was wrong is to start throwing juvenile insults and bragging about how much you can squat. It would be great if we had some more conservatives on here that were willing to examine their own viewpoints critically. Unfortunately you're clearly too afraid of looking or feeling stupid to do so.

So you admit you get triggered by my posts. Do you fear me when I bring a different viewpoint to the table? Does your amygdala light up like the 4th of July like the liberals' brains in the USC study? I'm betting yes. Are you in a Fight or Flight state just reading this? /chortle

 

[fskimospy]

So you admit you get triggered by my posts. Do you fear me when I bring a different viewpoint to the table? Does your amygdala light up like the 4th of July like the liberals' brains in the USC study? I'm betting yes. Are you in a Fight or Flight state just reading this? /chortle

Haha, thank you for the excellent example of what you do when confronted with a different viewpoint.

Sometimes I really do wonder if you're a parody poster designed to make conservatives look dumb. It's hard to imagine anyone has this little self awareness.

 

[WelshBloke]

So you admit you get triggered by my posts. Do you fear me when I bring a different viewpoint to the table? Does your amygdala light up like the 4th of July like the liberals' brains in the USC study? I'm betting yes. Are you in a Fight or Flight state just reading this? /chortle

Dude. He's pointing and laughing at you.