Liberal Forum

peepee » 02 Nov 2022, 6:47 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 6:47 am

...try fighting an army of truly free people who WANT to fight with an army of your 'collectivist' slaves, monetary ignoramus...

economics was designed to engage in psychological class warfare within the species lasting until extinction event. That is the dirty little secret that comes with faith nobody ever knew.

FOS » 02 Nov 2022, 8:41 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 8:41 am

Bv is trying to argue jews don't dominate Hollywood? Lol...ignore this retard

 

...the [unaudited] people who control the issuance of money, etc., 'dominate hollywood' and everything else, authoriTARDian dummy... [and monetary ignoramus] ...      
 

SJConspirator » 02 Nov 2022, 8:43 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 8:43 am

..sacrificing all to preserve their childish fantasy of being the ultimate rugged individualist.

 

...stooooooooopid f@cks [and monetary ignoramuses] and their 'ism   jism'!..       

peepee » 02 Nov 2022, 8:58 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 8:58 am

:drool:  

...the [unaudited] people who control the issuance of money, etc., 'dominate hollywood' and everything else, authoriTARDian dummy... [and monetary ignoramus] ...   ;)   :wave:  
 

Free trade marketing isn't free at the cost of sacrificing one's biological time to perform as scripted type cast people historically forward in current events ancestrally practiced in every society demanding total allegiance to chain 0f command gets the privileges those sacrificing biological time to feel larger than genetically connected as eternally separated now.

The only problem conservatives have is worthless pos democrats.
 

SJConspirator » 02 Nov 2022, 8:13 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 8:13 am

did you just call me ignorant, you **** jerk?

Im sure there were a few Jews in Hollywood who went “off the reservation”.  I still believe there was a concerted effort to shape the culture of a whole country using mass entertainment, centered in Hollywood, organized largely by Jews

"Ignorant" is damning your act with faint praise, clown.

does the name Napoleon Hill ring any bells?

Im sure there were a few Jews in Hollywood who went “off the reservation”.  

A few?

6 of the Hollywood 10 were jews.

 I still believe there was a concerted effort to shape the culture of a whole country using mass entertainment, centered in Hollywood, organized largely by Jews

**** facts...they occlude your Vision Thing, Ye.

 

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 8:50 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 8:50 am

I am a Conservative and a life long Republican. I do not like the platform of the Libertarians, mainly because I do not believe in legalizing drugs.  I like what the Constitutional Party stands for on paper, but it seems to be run by total idiots. I constantly evaluate the different parties (just like I constantly evaluate different search engines) but the Republican platform and those who are members align most closely with how I want America to be lead.

People who call Republicans "intellectually lazy" are just disgruntled.  They are angry because most of us Republicans do not hold their world view or the same vision for our country.   They tend to be radical socialists and collectivists.  I have no interest in any of that ****.  I don't want to align myself with people of that vision. They want more  government, more government control over what I have, what I do, what I say, what I like, where I go and how I live.  They offer nothing at all compelling for me to switch from being a Republican to whatever party they envision themselves leading.

disembodied 'government control' is meaningless. A d4cent government should control some people and not others. 

For example I'm sure you would like a lot of government control over murderers.

But our government doesn't do that.and Republicans don't make that happen either...cause they tend to agree that government should not control black people

regardless you are still approaching this from the perspective of what you thinknyou would personally want without really considering what works...what is sustainible..what could make a people thrive or perish. 

that is the sort of self defeating individualist mindset sj was referring to.

FOS » 02 Nov 2022, 9:07 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 9:07 am

disembodied 'government control' is meaningless. A d4cent government should control some people and not others. 

For example I'm sure you would like a lot of government control over murderers.

But our government doesn't do that.and Republicans don't make that happen either...cause they tend to agree that government should not control black people

regardless you are still approaching this from the perspective of what you thinknyou would personally want without really considering what works...what is sustainible..what could make a people thrive or perish. 

that is the sort of self defeating individualist mindset sj was referring to.

ha ha ha ha ha ha, not even close to a good deception. Your we mentality silenced your instinctive brain navigating space limited to mutually evolving forward now in plain sight while you define life in planed levels of significance to humanity's soul purpose as intellectually designed from within ancestry here.

SJConspirator » 02 Nov 2022, 8:55 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 8:55 am

So, you don’t like government control, but you want the government telling me what to put in my body?

When it comes to recreational drugs, I do see an overriding reason to prohibit this.  Let me ask you this - do you really believe that meth and fentanyl are the "height" of addictive drugs?  Do you think that's the worst we have seen or will have to deal with?  Let me be **** clear about this - it's not!  You haven't seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what the chemists will be developing to addict and control huge populations.  You haven't seen **** when it comes to what China, Iran, N. Korea, Russia even perhaps the US is working on that can instantaneously addict, kill or control large populations at a time.

In a society where drugs are forbidden, it will be much harder to get that society addicted and controlled by chemicals than in a society that has already primed to accept and embrace recreational drug use.  Dopers are obviously blind to this.  Low and some average IQ people are also blind to this.  Why are you so stupidly blind to this?
 
 

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 9:53 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 9:53 am

When it comes to recreational drugs, I do see an overriding reason to prohibit this.  Let me ask you this - do you really believe that meth and fentanyl are the "height" of addictive drugs?  Do you think that's the worst we have seen or will have to deal with?  Let me be **** clear about this - it's not!  You haven't seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what the chemists will be developing to addict and control huge populations. 

In a society where drugs are forbidden, it will be much harder to get that society addicted and controlled by chemicals than in a society that has already primed to accept and embrace recreational drug use.  Dopers are obviously blind to this.  Low and some average IQ people are also blind to this.  Why are you blind to this?
 

don't need chemicals to get addicted to hope now isn't eternity, faith eternal life comes from beyond ancestrally timed apart here, charity of ethical treatment to compliers of deniers directing social outcomes for next 5 generations arriving here each great great grandchild forward.

FOS » 02 Nov 2022, 9:07 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 9:07 am

disembodied 'government control' is meaningless. A d4cent government should control some people and not others.

For the most part, no argument from me there.

For example I'm sure you would like a lot of government control over murderers.

Personally, I would rather leave the fate of captured murders to the victim's family, and only to the government if victims do not have a family.

But our government doesn't do that.and Republicans don't make that happen either...cause they tend to agree that government should not control black people

You sort of jumped the shark here.  Are we talking about the fate of captured murders or black people in general?  That's a pretty random jump with the insertion of "black people" on your part there.  I don't believe there should be any racial distinctions made in how laws are to be enforced. 

regardless you are still approaching this from the perspective of what you thinknyou would personally want without really considering what works...what is sustainible..

No.  I am looking at this from both the perspective of what I would want and what works.  As for what is indefinitely sustainable - I don't really care.  Nothing is indefinitely sustainable.  Trying to find perfection when humans are imperfect beings is impossible.

that is the sort of self defeating individualist mindset sj was referring to.

Just because I tend to be an individualist doesn't mean that I am against all forms of groups, organizations, or even governments. I am not an anarchist and believe that anarchy is the least sustainable state of being for large groups of people.
 
 
 

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 9:53 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 9:53 am

When it comes to recreational drugs, I do see an overriding reason to prohibit this.  Let me ask you this - do you really believe that meth and fentanyl are the "height" of addictive drugs?  Do you think that's the worst we have seen or will have to deal with?  Let me be **** clear about this - it's not!  You haven't seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what the chemists will be developing to addict and control huge populations.  You haven't seen **** when it comes to what China, Iran, N. Korea, Russia even perhaps the US is working on that can instantaneously addict, kill or control large populations at a time.

In a society where drugs are forbidden, it will be much harder to get that society addicted and controlled by chemicals than in a society that has already primed to accept and embrace recreational drug use.  Dopers are obviously blind to this.  Low and some average IQ people are also blind to this.  Why are you so stupidly blind to this?

Outlawing drugs did nothing to stave off the opioid epidemic.  The Sacklers made fortunes as they addicted and killed million of people.

Big pharma is more dangerous than street dealers and cartels, I agree with that much
 

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 10:19 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 10:19 am

For the most part, no argument from me there.

Personally, I would rather leave the fate of captured murders to the victim's family, and only to the government if victims do not have a family.

You sort of jumped the shark here.  Are we talking about the fate of captured murders or black people in general?  That's a pretty random jump with the insertion of "black people" on your part there.  I don't believe there should be any racial distinctions made in how laws are to be enforced. 

No.  I am looking at this from both the perspective of what I would want and what works.  As for what is indefinitely sustainable - I don't really care.  Nothing is indefinitely sustainable.  Trying to find perfection when humans are imperfect beings is impossible.

Just because I tend to be an individualist doesn't mean that I am against all forms of groups, organizations, or even governments. I am not an anarchist and believe that anarchy is the least sustainable state of being for large groups of people.

well I am glad that you are immediately able to agree that these other 'collective' concerns are valid. I think many conservatives would struggle with that. 

as far as the black example is concerned...there is a serious epidemic of catch and release for black criminals and a failure to adjust policies based on radically different racial circumstances. Conservatives are at least complicit in that and increasingly so (since say the days of stop and frisk which everyone seems to agree is too racist to do now)...Indeed the conservatives seem to be willing to revere the Communist MLK as some hero because he said something about judging people as individuals. 

Why can't you get white people to use the subway? Because white people are terrified of the insane *** that frequent the subway. So we don't get to have nove things like public transportation to alleviate urban traffic...and nobody is willing to tackle that problem because it is judging people as a group....which conservatives can't do...

SJConspirator » 02 Nov 2022, 10:34 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 10:34 am

Outlawing drugs did nothing to stave off the opioid epidemic.  The Sacklers made fortunes as they addicted and killed million of people.

 

Actually outlawing drugs and enforcing those laws did stave off the epidemic of drug addiction - you're just wrong about that.  As for the invention of drugs - no one is going to stop that - it's going to happen. But, if there is one thing government is responsible for, it is to make sure that our country is not destroyed or taken over by ANY MEANS, including destruction of its population by foreign powers through addicting our population to various chemicals.
 

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 10:19 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 10:19 am

For the most part, no argument from me there.


Personally, I would rather leave the fate of captured murders to the victim's family, and only to the government if victims do not have a family.


You sort of jumped the shark here.  Are we talking about the fate of captured murders or black people in general?  That's a pretty random jump with the insertion of "black people" on your part there.  I don't believe there should be any racial distinctions made in how laws are to be enforced. 


No.  I am looking at this from both the perspective of what I would want and what works.  As for what is indefinitely sustainable - I don't really care.  Nothing is indefinitely sustainable.  Trying to find perfection when humans are imperfect beings is impossible.


Just because I tend to be an individualist doesn't mean that I am against all forms of groups, organizations, or even governments. I am not an anarchist and believe that anarchy is the least sustainable state of being for large groups of people.
 
 
 

Killing in self defense of another trying to remove oneself isn't murder.

eliminating a lifetime to remove competition for same goal, adapting to time occupying space here, is. Nature sustains a civil code between predator and prey, eat the lifetimes unable to defend themselves, it is mercy killing so those able to adapt perpetual balancing don't become over burdened taking care of others that won't, don't, can't, unable to fend for themselves.

I was always able to fend for myself physically and mentally remaining in focus of how and why I existed in the first place. Not so much for humanity though..

In a democracy of one person one vote, the odds favor human rights activists conquering time and space intellectually contextually within laws ordering compliance to "We believe" 4 to 1 victory against self reliant ancestors.

anyone wish to debate instinctive awareness of original sin?

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 9:53 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 9:53 am

When it comes to recreational drugs, I do see an overriding reason to prohibit this.  Let me ask you this - do you really believe that meth and fentanyl are the "height" of addictive drugs?  Do you think that's the worst we have seen or will have to deal with?  Let me be **** clear about this - it's not!  You haven't seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what the chemists will be developing to addict and control huge populations.  You haven't seen **** when it comes to what China, Iran, N. Korea, Russia even perhaps the US is working on that can instantaneously addict, kill or control large populations at a time.

In a society where drugs are forbidden, it will be much harder to get that society addicted and controlled by chemicals than in a society that has already primed to accept and embrace recreational drug use.  Dopers are obviously blind to this.  Low and some average IQ people are also blind to this.  Why are you so stupidly blind to this?

   

....the opinion of a stooooooooooooooopid ^^^^ f@ck who's gone his whole life focusing on the puppet$, never the puppetma$ter$... shaddup, you f@cking fool, and worry about what goes in YOUR body...others will do the same...       
 

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 10:58 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 10:58 am

But, if there is one thing government is responsible for, it is to make sure that our country is not destroyed or taken over by ANY MEANS, including destruction of its population by foreign powers through addicting our population to various chemicals.

   

...it's already been 'taken over', you f@cking fool...you'd know this if you weren't a monetary retard... wordle..   

peepee » 03 Nov 2022, 4:47 am » wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2022, 4:47 am

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 9:53 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 9:53 am

When it comes to recreational drugs, I do see an overriding reason to prohibit this.  Let me ask you this - do you really believe that meth and fentanyl are the "height" of addictive drugs?  Do you think that's the worst we have seen or will have to deal with?  Let me be **** clear about this - it's not!  You haven't seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what the chemists will be developing to addict and control huge populations.  You haven't seen **** when it comes to what China, Iran, N. Korea, Russia even perhaps the US is working on that can instantaneously addict, kill or control large populations at a time.

In a society where drugs are forbidden, it will be much harder to get that society addicted and controlled by chemicals than in a society that has already primed to accept and embrace recreational drug use.  Dopers are obviously blind to this.  Low and some average IQ people are also blind to this.  Why are you so stupidly blind to this?

:rolleyes:   :drool:  

....the opinion of a stooooooooooooooopid ^^^^ f@ck who's gone his whole life focusing on the puppet$, never the puppetma$ter$... shaddup, you f@cking fool, and worry about what goes in YOUR body...others will do the same...  :loco:   :rofl:   :wave:  
 

peepee » 03 Nov 2022, 4:50 am » wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2022, 4:50 am

Skans » 02 Nov 2022, 10:58 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 10:58 am

But, if there is one thing government is responsible for, it is to make sure that our country is not destroyed or taken over by ANY MEANS, including destruction of its population by foreign powers through addicting our population to various chemicals.

:rofl:   :clap:  

...it's already been 'taken over', you f@cking fool...you'd know this if you weren't a monetary retard... wordle..  ;)  

your vernacular mind trained after birth is the social replacement of your brain evolving from your fertilized cell keeping your body aware to your proportionate self occupying space while eternally separated lifetime here now as specifically occupying space as any reproduction had, has, or will have when alive.

FOS » 02 Nov 2022, 1:59 am » wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022, 1:59 am

THe republican party is basically all grifters acting in bad faith.

The sad and pathetic part…the RePuKES keep saying they will “cut taxes” (their favorite issue, never mind immigration or “rolling back abortion rights / privileges”) yet the avg working peon is paying 25-30% of measly wages in COMBINED federal, state, and local. 

This is only slightly lower than what European peons pay and Europeans get much better social services.

Conservative retards always say they will cut “federal taxes” when it’s actually STATE and LOCAL taxes becoming more and more burdensome.

After you remove non-discretionary expenses 75% of the country have nothing to save (or are in debt from “unforeseen” expenses e.g.car breaks down that follow a Poisson distribution of occurrence).
 

LowIQTrash » 03 Nov 2024, 3:29 am » wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2024, 3:29 am

The sad and pathetic part…the RePuKES keep saying they will “cut taxes” (their favorite issue, never mind immigration or “rolling back abortion rights / privileges”) yet the avg working peon is paying 25-30% of measly wages in COMBINED federal, state, and local. 

This is only slightly lower than what European peons pay and Europeans get much better social services.

Conservative retards always say they will cut “federal taxes” when it’s actually STATE and LOCAL taxes becoming more and more burdensome.

After you remove non-discretionary expenses 75% of the country have nothing to save (or are in debt from “unforeseen” expenses e.g.car breaks down that follow a Poisson distribution of occurrence).
 

I guess the tv tells you what your daily script will be. Lol