Liberal Forum

Technocrat » 27 Jul 2014 2:51 am » wrote:There is a recent story in the news about a nurse who claimed Ebola was a coverup for government experiments. It just goes to show that being a nurse doesn't mean you're smart. Or sane. If people that stupid can be a nurse...

Most of the time I have to put the IV in myself, those nurses like bed pan missed college when they were there. I guess they thought just attending classes was good enough.

Cannonpointer » 12 Aug 2014 1:10 am » wrote: No, queer, that is free enterprise - man's natural estate. Free enterprise is what happens whenever no dictators are stopping it.

CAPITALISM is what happens when a state sets up and licenses and polices an exchange, you retard.

Contrary to what a child molester like you prarttles, you immoral ****, billions of anonymous doillars, available only to privileged insiders, do not "naturally" accumulate, you **** retarded gay parrot.

"Capitalism" is not defined by government control, as I showed from the definition. Pure Capitalism is free market.

The psychotic using the troll dictionary again.

And man doesn't have a single "natural state." Rape and pillage is some men's natural state.

So a small government is necessary to maintain order and defend the group.

RichClem » 12 Aug 2014 7:31 am » wrote:


And man doesn't have a single "natural state." Rape and pillage is some men's natural state.

So a small government is necessary to maintain order and defend the group.

No **** Sherlock that's exactly why we have regulations that you cry about.

onlyaladd » 12 Aug 2014 7:54 am » wrote: No **** Sherlock that's exactly why we have regulations that you cry about.

What do the words "small government" mean, moonbat?

How many pages of federal regulations are there?

Cannonpointer » 12 Aug 2014 1:10 am » wrote:

That's best described as Crony Capitalism or Socialism, which are closely related.

Neither of which I support.

Both of which Democrats and liberals espouse under certain broad parameters.


Alternative energy.

Goldman Sachs, Fannie Mae.

GM bailout.

Public-private "partnerships."

Low income housing.

"Targeted" tax cuts.

The IMF and World Bank.

To cite just a few.

golfboy » 18 Jul 2014 7:57 am » wrote:I get a kick out of idiots like Cannon that obviously don't know a socialist or capitalist economic system is.
Amazing.

Yes, yes - the little queer "gets a kick" out of watching his dad be humiliated over his ,multiple definitions of socialism. Mind you, this little *** gooey has not and will not take a stand on what the definition is - he likes to play fast and loose, and never pin himself down to a position he KNOWS he's incompetent to defend.

Gooey comes into threads to spam them with **** attacks that don't even critique the post they are attacking, much less take an actual stand. He's a weasel.

Checkmate Gooey - you lose.

RichClem » 12 Aug 2014 8:48 am » wrote:
That's best described as Crony Capitalism or Socialism, which are closely related.

Neither of which I support.

Yes, moron - just rename it and then you don't own it. When YOUR DOG DOES IT, moron, you get stuck with it. You don't get to say the dog "just wasn't himself" that day, retard.

And yes, moron, both dems and repukes play ball with ALL of wallstreet, because that's where the money is, asswipe.

RichClem » 12 Aug 2014 7:31 am » wrote:
"Capitalism" is not defined by government control, as I showed from the definition. Pure Capitalism is free market.

Oh, look. Liar Pants Larry is BACK to say there IS A DEFINITION. A couple of pages back, capitalism and socialism were NEBULOUS terms.
This queer just cannot take a position and stand there for two minutes without all the conjob peepee dance ****.

Cannonpointer » 21 Sep 2014 8:20 pm » wrote: Oh, look. Liar Pants Larry is BACK to say there IS A DEFINITION. A couple of pages back, capitalism and socialism were NEBULOUS terms.
This queer just cannot take a position and stand there for two minutes without all the conjob peepee dance ****.

Yes, moonbat, there is a definition.

But both it and Socialism in reality are on a scale of degree in application in the real world.

That's so simple, even a psychotic might understand it.

Only Richclem would argue that because some people have nasty natural states, it follows there should be tiny and ineffective government, unable to prevent those people from causing the majority harm. Who will prevent those people from abusing everyone if not regulations? LOL.

WISHES AND RAINBOWS! THE INVISIBLE HAND!! GOOD WILL!!

Cannonpointer » 21 Sep 2014 8:13 pm » wrote: Yes, yes - the little queer "gets a kick" out of watching his dad be humiliated over his ,multiple definitions of socialism. Mind you, this little *** gooey has not and will not take a stand on what the definition is - he likes to play fast and loose, and never pin himself down to a position he KNOWS he's incompetent to defend.

Gooey comes into threads to spam them with **** attacks that don't even critique the post they are attacking, much less take an actual stand. He's a weasel.

Checkmate Gooey - you lose.

Golf and I and anyone with half an ounce of common sense know that you'll babble in psychotic deceit without ever admitting the most obvious fact in front of your face.

It takes a truly, deeply, psychopathically dishonest troll like you to claim I "defend" the parts of Singapore I most strongly oppose, like its socialistic housing sector.

RichClem » 21 Sep 2014 9:15 pm » wrote:
Golf and I and anyone with half an ounce of common sense know that you'll babble in psychotic deceit without ever admitting the most obvious fact in front of your face.

It takes a truly, deeply, psychopathically dishonest troll like you to claim I "defend" the parts of Singapore I most strongly oppose, like its socialistic housing sector.

Ohm yes, queer - you "oppose" them, BUT.

It's always, BUT.

You minimize, mitigate, lie, and when you cannot trick anyone, you finally say, "Hey, I'm against that part, BUT..."

**** you, police state boy.

Cannonpointer » 21 Sep 2014 8:13 pm » wrote: Yes, yes - the little queer "gets a kick" out of watching his dad be humiliated over his ,multiple definitions of socialism. Mind you, this little *** gooey has not and will not take a stand on what the definition is - he likes to play fast and loose, and never pin himself down to a position he KNOWS he's incompetent to defend.

Gooey comes into threads to spam them with **** attacks that don't even critique the post they are attacking, much less take an actual stand. He's a weasel.

Checkmate Gooey - you lose.

And Cannon is reduced again to his homosexual insults.
You lose.

Cannonpointer » 21 Sep 2014 9:22 pm » wrote: Ohm yes, queer - you "oppose" them, BUT.

It's always, BUT.

You minimize, mitigate, lie, and when you cannot trick anyone, you finally say, "Hey, I'm against that part, BUT..."

**** you, police state boy.

Here, in clear, simple English. I cite Singapore as a good example of Economic freedom relative to almost all the rest of the world.

Note that I don't write one single word about its social policies.


Note that I am not endorsing every single one of its economic policies. I reject its socialistic housing policies, for example.

I endorse those economic policies that, shazzam, I support, and criticize those I do not.

Regarding its strict and often authoritarian policies, I hope it moves quickly toward greater freedom, as it is doing gradually.

And I strongly support the way it has allowed its citizens to greatly increase their prosperity over time.

Only a psychotic could bungle that, and you will with your usual verbose and dishonest babbling.

RichClem » 21 Sep 2014 9:15 pm » wrote:
Golf and I and anyone with half an ounce of common sense know that you'll babble in psychotic deceit without ever admitting the most obvious fact in front of your face.

It takes a truly, deeply, psychopathically dishonest troll like you to claim I "defend" the parts of Singapore I most strongly oppose, like its socialistic housing sector.

Why would it surprise anyone that a fellow who blows himself up in outrage defending Joe "Bully Of The Senate" McCarthy would also defend a fascist police state?

BOTTOM LINE: He's "against" whatever fascist **** he cannot lie out of existence or defend with weak-*** excuses. You have to beat his lying *** into a mud hole to get him to even admit any of this stuff - and when you finally beat a confession out of the lying, craven sleazebag, he just says. "Oh, I' m against THAT part" - and goes RIGHT back to prattling in favor of a police state.

"Oh, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THAT PART - Now, leme tell you about the most freedomy country EVER!"

Cannonpointer » 20 Dec 2014 1:54 am » wrote: Why would it surprise anyone that a fellow who blows himself up in outrage defending Joe "Bully Of The Senate" McCarthy would also defend a fascist police state?

Why would it surprise anyone you'll babble in psychotic rage and/or lie through your teeth?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

RichClem » 20 Dec 2014 7:58 am » wrote:
Why would it surprise anyone you'll babble in psychotic rage and/or lie through your teeth?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Um, because I've never been known to do that?

You, OTOH, are a committed bloviator and bluff artist. Wll, not so much an artist as a hack.

Cannonpointer » 20 Dec 2014 8:50 am » wrote: Um, because I've never been known to do that?

You, OTOH, are a committed bloviator and bluff artist. Wll, not so much an artist as a hack.

Onward Socialism, moonbat.

RichClem » 20 Dec 2014 2:43 pm » wrote:
Onward Socialism, moonbat.

You just cannot get over your crush on Singapore, can ya, statist?

I'll keep standing for the restoration of the republic, starting with the currency. That's what conservatives do, proggy.

You go ahead and keep carrying your torch for socialism. I don't want someone as stupid as you on my team, anyway.

Str8tEdge » 18 Jul 2014 11:41 pm » wrote: Q.1. What is economic freedom?
Economic freedom is the fundamental right of every human to control his or her own labor and property.

That leaves out Singapore.

The people are not allowed to own property in Singapore.

In an economically free society, individuals are free to work, produce, consume, and invest in any way they please.

That leaves out Singapore. Their citizens are told by government how uch they can wager in a casino. They are not allowed to purchase bubble gum. They are told where they must invest their retirement savings and their health care savings, and how they must spend them.

If they contract an STD, they are not allowed to use theor own funds to be treated in the state run health care system.

In economically free societies, governments allow labor, capital and goods to move freely, and refrain from coercion or constraint of liberty beyond the extent necessary to protect and maintain liberty itself.

That leaves out Singapore. The government controls the labor union, which is an actual government department. It controls the largest single share of the market, and its agents dole out street canings to anyone caught chewing bubble gum.