He was conflating two different things: Compassionate Conservatism, indeed an innovation, and indeed a bad idea (as was McCain's hypercentrist "conservatism," and is Romney's hypermoderate "conservatism"), and the aggressive pseudoempathy of the Left which is quite old, but does indeed fluctuate, unlike greed, which remains constant.
I don't get you. Some of the best comments in this thread are yours, as are some of the dullest.
I see. The solution is more Statism. You, sir, are a genius and a creative thinker.
How about: no regulations, no bailouts. What??? Social Darwinism!!!Hitler It's not like that sort of environment would cause people to actually make an effort to actually make good decisions... It's just me being a Nazi by supporting the free market, like a good Nazi.
Do you even understand how a culture comes to embrace eating dog? Hint: Famine, Save Face, Save Face, Save Face! Either that, or Sadism. (And I'd like some stats for each country: dogs murdered and devoured per capita -- I'm sure you'll get right on that.)
As for being a "partner" a lot of muslims consider dog to be a dirty unclean animal.
Yes, Muslims are hateful bigots. Your point?
The rich want a system which will protect their already-acquired wealth and stave off any potential competitors. The powerful want a system which will preserve and enhance their power. Which is exactly what hyperpolitically-correct Socialism does.
Anarchocapitalism/Libertarianism is not good for the upper classes, which is why they never push Anarchocapitalism/Libertarianism. They push this shit instead...
Wouldn't it make more sense to ask the fashion industry, "beauty industry," and media to be slightly responsible and stop ruining young women's lives and health? No, government must step in and limit freedom!
"Internet freedom and innovation are at risk of being stifled by a new United Nations treaty that aims to bring in more regulation, Google's executive chairman Eric Schmidt has warned."
The UN can't do much about it because the UN is The US + The UK + France + The Soviet Union/Russia + China i.e. the "rich nations."
By the way, does anyone still give a shit about Tibet?
Actually, the fact that both the US and the Soviet Union had nukes had a little to do with it. Not as much as the UN, of course. Also, whenever you get a boner: great UN success!
You will be free. If you refuse to be free, you will be fined. If you refuse to pay the fine, you will be shot.
GOTV = GOT Democrat (i.e. Socialist) V
And the asshats who keep pushing GOTV know it, which is why they like to GOTV.
What's the point of spying on people if you're not using one of those nudovision contraptions. Silly Canadians.
He was conflating two different things: Compassionate Conservatism, indeed an innovation, and indeed a bad idea (as was McCain's hypercentrist "conservatism," and is Romney's hypermoderate "conservatism"), and the aggressive pseudoempathy of the Left which is quite old, but does indeed fluctuate, unlike greed, which remains constant.
I don't get you. Some of the best comments in this thread are yours, as are some of the dullest.
I see. The solution is more Statism. You, sir, are a genius and a creative thinker.
How about: no regulations, no bailouts. What??? Social Darwinism!!!Hitler It's not like that sort of environment would cause people to actually make an effort to actually make good decisions... It's just me being a Nazi by supporting the free market, like a good Nazi.
You too are telling people something they do not want to hear. Good luck with that.
You still haven't figured this out yet? Most people run on very ... not-very-good algorithms. That's why their conclusions are the way they are.
I agree. How much do you think the dickweed who wrote this book made?
Hey, I have a good idea for a new book title: "Pseudoscience, Propaganda, and Leftist Retards"
Do you even understand how a culture comes to embrace eating dog? Hint: Famine, Save Face, Save Face, Save Face! Either that, or Sadism. (And I'd like some stats for each country: dogs murdered and devoured per capita -- I'm sure you'll get right on that.)
As for being a "partner" a lot of muslims consider dog to be a dirty unclean animal.
Yes, Muslims are hateful bigots. Your point?
You think that's bad? He was born in Hawaii. Odds are, at some point, he has actually eaten Sperm. *shudder*
FTFY.
The rich want a system which will protect their already-acquired wealth and stave off any potential competitors. The powerful want a system which will preserve and enhance their power. Which is exactly what hyperpolitically-correct Socialism does.
Anarchocapitalism/Libertarianism is not good for the upper classes, which is why they never push Anarchocapitalism/Libertarianism. They push this shit instead...
The words... they fail.
Wouldn't it make more sense to ask the fashion industry, "beauty industry," and media to be slightly responsible and stop ruining young women's lives and health? No, government must step in and limit freedom!
"Internet freedom and innovation are at risk of being stifled by a new United Nations treaty that aims to bring in more regulation, Google's executive chairman Eric Schmidt has warned."
That's just crazy talk. Regulation is freedom!
I thought we were the Angles?
Ah yes, the world leaders are kindergartners theory of geopolitics.
I don't know. I'd ask Obama, but it would probably be racist.
Because what we've had until now has worked decently. You really want to play UN roulette? Do you feel lucky, punk?
The UN can't do much about it because the UN is The US + The UK + France + The Soviet Union/Russia + China i.e. the "rich nations." By the way, does anyone still give a shit about Tibet?
World War I started because everyone thought it was in their interest for it to start. Also, this.
Actually, the fact that both the US and the Soviet Union had nukes had a little to do with it. Not as much as the UN, of course. Also, whenever you get a boner: great UN success!
Oceania has never been at war.
Google is Google (and other crap like YouTube). If Google fucks up Google, who really cares. If the UN fucks up the Internet...