Spinning with glee, maybe. He's the one that removed every trace of meaningful opposition to Marxism from the Republican party and the conservative movement.
You are likely immune to arguments that oppose your dogma, so I mostly don't bother. Doesn't mean that I can't. When you are done reading the Bastiat that I linked before, ponder on Mr. Keen's writings:
Google "photos of detroit" if you want to see the real-world applications of Keen's ideas. Or replace "detroit" with any of dozens of rust-belt cities and towns. A widespread failure to comprehend this is what sealed Trump's victory.
If you don't understand the depth of your dogma, consider that what you call "industrial bribery" and "stealing" is merely the government taking slightly less than it said that it was going to. You should be fucking ashamed of yourself for perpetuating that moral inversion. But you aren't. You are smug, convinced that the latest fad in economics, what you call "free trade" without any comprehension of the irony, is the ultimate and final truth of the universe.
And if, a month ago, you imagined yourself to be a conservative who wanted government to get out of the meddling business, double shame on you.
I have some really bad news for you. A lot of Trump supporters have read Bastiat, can quote from several of his essays, and also do not consider themselves to be "conservatives" or "capitalists".
Also, we will fucking laugh in your face, because after everything we've been through recently, we find it hilarious that our opponents still think that we care about their disapproval.
P.S. Kevin D. Williamson, the author of that "article" should probably read more than just the title of Bastiat's works. Here is an essay that speaks directly to this line of reasoning. Oh, and both he and his editor should be ashamed of themselves. The first half of the article was incoherent gibberish that would have been dripping with red ink if I had handed it to even the laziest of my high school English teachers for proofing.
Putting a dullard in the White House is exactly 100 % backwards in that regard.
I agree. It was a disaster. But he'll be gone in 7 weeks.
We have before us a strong proof that capitalism is not a system that is fit to survive.
Indeed. It is time to return to free market economics. For the life of me, I can't imagine why we've been arguing between Karl Marx's two systems (communism and capitalism). The good news is that the world seems to have suffered under his ideas for long enough now, and we may finally be ready to flush his memory down the toilet.
For example, the idea that people have a duty to support themselves is backwards.
Your own fault really, for letting them prosper. If you wanted to be taken seriously, you should have cleaned your own house. Did you ever even try?
I burst out laughing when I got here. I'm sure we can get the Republicans to purge the people who say mean things right after the Democrats purge their cop killers, their terrorists and sympathizers, and the KKK.
Perhaps Putin is doing well in the polls not because his mythical hackers are doing it, but because we are still in the middle of an 18-month, 10+ billion dollar propaganda campaign that hoped first to prevent a Trump win, and, that having failed, is now spreading the idea that his win was not because of his populist/nationalist message, but the result of Russian hackers.
If half of the country genuinely believes that Trump's victory was the result of Russian interference, is it surprising really that Putin would do well in a poll of the most influential person of the year?
Here's the thing... alt-right is not a formal organization with dues and ID cards. The phrase doesn't even have a clearly defined meaning. There are lively debates going on about that right now. As far as I can tell, it refers to everyone willing to entertain right-leaning ideas that Bill Buckley condemned.
Basically, whenever the media doesn't like someone, they associate that person with David Duke. Not because anyone knows or cares what David Duke thinks, but because he's the go-to monster. But he's getting old, losing his smear value. Enter Richard Spencer... tomorrow's media boogey man.
A good fraction of Trump's voters are not ordinary conservatives, they are alt-right. That's hundreds of thousands of people at the least, and probably into the tens of millions. Compare that to the dozens of people at that conference.
So, while virtually everyone at that conference was alt-right, 99.99% of the alt-right was not there, and has no idea who Richard Spencer is.
I consider myself to be alt-right and have been for years, and if it wasn't for people condemning the actions at this conference, I probably never would have heard of this guy.
But as long as we are tarring whole groups with the brush of the craziest members contained in that group, we should probably have a chat about how the all Democrats are cop killers. Right? Right?
You run a newspaper in Imaginationland? That must be pretty cool.
The good news (for us) is that your buddies are going to have to learn how to falsify data without taxpayer funding. And figure out how to go to conferences in tropical luxury resorts without my tax dollars paying the bill.
(Did you catch that earlier? I said "cool" to a guy who lost his home to global warming.)
Obama doesn't even know his own field, much less ours. (See the recent Snowden/pardon story, and especially the comments.) And if we are really honest about it, formal language theory isn't really our field either, even if we use tools utilizing it every day (grep, lexx, gcc...).
If "regular language" was a call out, the credit belongs to his speechwriters for not cutting it out of the gobbledygook report that his tech advisers surely handed them with the recommendation. They (the speechwriters) wouldn't know a formal language if one bit them on the ass either.
Comments aside, these two were good awards. Very fitting, and honestly later than these ladies deserved. It almost makes up for him sullying the awards by giving the same thing to a bunch of entertainers and other Hollywood pukes who will be forgotten five minutes after they die.
LOL. It is always funny hearing the outsider's view of things. I imagine this is what you commies feel like when I talk about the Democrat party. Well, except that Reagan would clearly be electable today as a Republican (notice that everyone spent the last year or so praying for Ronnie to inspire Trump from beyond the grave), while JFK wouldn't even recognize today's Democrat party, much less have a chance of being nominated by it.
Oh, and before anyone says anything stupid, go take a hard look at JFK's economic policy proposals, then Reagan's, then Trump's. It won't take long. They are nearly identical, all three.
And Barry was wrong about the future of the party. The preachers never took over. Look at the candidates since that quote: Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney, Trump. Romney is the only one that might be the first choice of "the preachers", except that he is Mormon.
Buckley led a crusade to kick undesirables out of the conservative movement, and thus the Republican Party, which left the country club faction in charge. The evangelicals had a strong enough minority that any candidates couldn't be overtly hostile to their interests. But they have never had enough pull to get candidates that were more than just nominally religious.
Who were the undesirables? Goldwater and his supporters first, then nationalists, and then gradually anyone left who was more interested in winning than in losing politely.
At any rate, "the preachers" probably would have done a better job. One can only hope that a candidate selected by "the preachers" wouldn't have sat idly by while the cult of Moloch grew from a handful of dark adherents hiding in the shadows to the single most powerful force int he Democrat party.
Link me a video and a time offset of those words coming out of his mouth. This should be very quick, since you say he said it "several times" and it sounds like you have one specific instance already in mind.
Standard Trump disclaimer here. I'm not interested in people writing a quote that he allegedly said. I'm also not interested in a video of someone else saying that he said it. I'm also not interested in a video of Trump saying something else that you have misinterpreted.
But I'm not going to try to wiggle out on a technicality - I will accept similar constructions such as "it would be against the law for me to release my taxes" or "IRS regulations prohibit me from releasing my taxes" or potentially many other variations.
But I also won't accept things like "I can't" or "they tell me I can't" unless it is absolutely crystal clear that "they" are the government, and not his lawyers, accountants, advisers, etc.
What I mean by "which are neither his taxes nor his tax returns" is that while the audits are ongoing, his tax returns and tax documents don't exist in any meaningful sense. Think of an audit notice from the IRS as official notification that the IRS does not agree that the documents you provided constitute your tax return. The audit itself is the process that you and the IRS follow together to generate your actual return. For you and I, it is a nightmare. For someone like him, it is just another boring negotiation. With that in mind, the only documents that he could possibly provide are effectively nothing more than his opening offer.
(If you had a hard time following that, any middle school course on logic should be able to clarify for you the difference between X and not-X and why you should be careful not to confuse them.)
So, no goalposts moved. And I've asked literally dozens of people to show me the video where he says this (or that all mexican are rapists, or that he hates gays or women or...) and so far, lots of personal attacks. No even a single link yet. But you might just be The One that the whole liberal world has been waiting for!
I probably shouldn't taunt you too hard. Trump did a LOT of rallies, and I only had time to watch a tiny fraction of the hours and hours and hours of video he generated over the last 18 months. Maybe, somewhere out there beyond even the reach of Google, there is a video of him actually saying it.
The Progressive wing of the Republican party is scared right now. Control of the party has shifted back to the much larger Conservative wing. That civil war is probably not over yet, but so far it appears that the conservatives have dealt a decisive, probably fatal, blow.
Meanwhile, the civil war in the Democrat party is just now heating up and will probably reach the shooting phase soon.
Under these conditions, and in light of the election results - not just the on the federal level, but also state and local - no one is going to try anything as dumb as sneaking through a treaty. Certainly not while there are still plenty of undecorated lampposts in DC.
Someone on the radio this morning was saying that it would be better to remove the incentives to stay, making the wall moot. Essentially, if illegals were unable to get jobs, get housing, open a bank account, etc - they would all depart, for free.
But that would only stop the people who were crossing illegally for economic reasons. True, that is the bulk of the people crossing, but not necessarily the bulk of the problems caused by the open border. Think drugs, terrorists, cartels, etc.
Clever use of the "net immigration from Mexico" scam. I'm guessing that tricks a lot of people that aren't aware that many (most?) people crossing our southern border are OTMs - Other Than Mexican. Net immigration to/from Mexico isn't the issue, net immigration through Mexico is.
Be careful with your investments man. Be ready to protect yourself from a downturn on short notice.
I've been a big Trump fan ever since he promised to build a wall during the announcement of his candidacy. But I don't believe that the globalists are defeated yet, and there are literally trillions of dollars at stake.
In my opinion, the current highs in the markets are not organic; someone is blowing a bubble. The goal is probably to draw you in, then burn you out so that they can blame the pain on Trump.
I know it sounds paranoid, but keep in mind that Lincoln, Kennedy, Reagan, and Trump all advocated similar economic policies: America first and anti-globalist.
Slashdot Mirror
Spinning with glee, maybe. He's the one that removed every trace of meaningful opposition to Marxism from the Republican party and the conservative movement.
You are likely immune to arguments that oppose your dogma, so I mostly don't bother. Doesn't mean that I can't. When you are done reading the Bastiat that I linked before, ponder on Mr. Keen's writings:
http://www.debtdeflation.com/b...
Google "photos of detroit" if you want to see the real-world applications of Keen's ideas. Or replace "detroit" with any of dozens of rust-belt cities and towns. A widespread failure to comprehend this is what sealed Trump's victory.
If you don't understand the depth of your dogma, consider that what you call "industrial bribery" and "stealing" is merely the government taking slightly less than it said that it was going to. You should be fucking ashamed of yourself for perpetuating that moral inversion. But you aren't. You are smug, convinced that the latest fad in economics, what you call "free trade" without any comprehension of the irony, is the ultimate and final truth of the universe.
And if, a month ago, you imagined yourself to be a conservative who wanted government to get out of the meddling business, double shame on you.
I have some really bad news for you. A lot of Trump supporters have read Bastiat, can quote from several of his essays, and also do not consider themselves to be "conservatives" or "capitalists".
Also, we will fucking laugh in your face, because after everything we've been through recently, we find it hilarious that our opponents still think that we care about their disapproval.
P.S. Kevin D. Williamson, the author of that "article" should probably read more than just the title of Bastiat's works. Here is an essay that speaks directly to this line of reasoning. Oh, and both he and his editor should be ashamed of themselves. The first half of the article was incoherent gibberish that would have been dripping with red ink if I had handed it to even the laziest of my high school English teachers for proofing.
I don't see the problem.
root@maga:~# perl -e '(1+1)'
2
root@maga:~# perl -e '(2+"2")'
4
root@maga:~# perl -e '("3"+"Three")'
a suffusion of yellow
root@Trump:~#
Except of course, that Taiwan isn't merely Chinese, it is actually China. Do you even history, bro?
true
I agree. It was a disaster. But he'll be gone in 7 weeks.
Indeed. It is time to return to free market economics. For the life of me, I can't imagine why we've been arguing between Karl Marx's two systems (communism and capitalism). The good news is that the world seems to have suffered under his ideas for long enough now, and we may finally be ready to flush his memory down the toilet.
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."
LOL. Where have you been for the last year and a half? The President's future twitter ban is part of the ongoing tantrum.
The guys running gab are cackling with glee at the prospect of becoming the sole provider for the President's micro-updates.
Nice switch. "incite hatred" is not the same as "incite violence". Anything negative, even true things, can be said to "incite hatred".
Geert Wilders is currently on trial for allegedly violating a similar law. If that hasn't come to Canada yet, give it time.
http://www.breitbart.com/londo...
America is the only place in the world where it is legally permitted to criticize anyone and everyone.
See, for example: The creepy tyranny of Canada's hate speech laws
I burst out laughing when I got here. I'm sure we can get the Republicans to purge the people who say mean things right after the Democrats purge their cop killers, their terrorists and sympathizers, and the KKK.
Perhaps Putin is doing well in the polls not because his mythical hackers are doing it, but because we are still in the middle of an 18-month, 10+ billion dollar propaganda campaign that hoped first to prevent a Trump win, and, that having failed, is now spreading the idea that his win was not because of his populist/nationalist message, but the result of Russian hackers.
If half of the country genuinely believes that Trump's victory was the result of Russian interference, is it surprising really that Putin would do well in a poll of the most influential person of the year?
You keep saying "the senate! the senate!". Does your copy of the Constitution not include the 17th amendment?
Here's the thing... alt-right is not a formal organization with dues and ID cards. The phrase doesn't even have a clearly defined meaning. There are lively debates going on about that right now. As far as I can tell, it refers to everyone willing to entertain right-leaning ideas that Bill Buckley condemned.
Here is one discussion on reddit's /r/The_Donald: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_D...
Basically, whenever the media doesn't like someone, they associate that person with David Duke. Not because anyone knows or cares what David Duke thinks, but because he's the go-to monster. But he's getting old, losing his smear value. Enter Richard Spencer... tomorrow's media boogey man.
A good fraction of Trump's voters are not ordinary conservatives, they are alt-right. That's hundreds of thousands of people at the least, and probably into the tens of millions. Compare that to the dozens of people at that conference.
So, while virtually everyone at that conference was alt-right, 99.99% of the alt-right was not there, and has no idea who Richard Spencer is.
I consider myself to be alt-right and have been for years, and if it wasn't for people condemning the actions at this conference, I probably never would have heard of this guy.
But as long as we are tarring whole groups with the brush of the craziest members contained in that group, we should probably have a chat about how the all Democrats are cop killers. Right? Right?
Good work. An argument straight out of the manual
Well, if sg_oneil says that he's sure, that's good enough for me.
P.S. If you have specific information regarding members of the Trump administration being targeted for "suicide ", please contact the FBI immediately.
You run a newspaper in Imaginationland? That must be pretty cool.
The good news (for us) is that your buddies are going to have to learn how to falsify data without taxpayer funding. And figure out how to go to conferences in tropical luxury resorts without my tax dollars paying the bill.
(Did you catch that earlier? I said "cool" to a guy who lost his home to global warming.)
Obama doesn't even know his own field, much less ours. (See the recent Snowden/pardon story, and especially the comments.) And if we are really honest about it, formal language theory isn't really our field either, even if we use tools utilizing it every day (grep, lexx, gcc...).
If "regular language" was a call out, the credit belongs to his speechwriters for not cutting it out of the gobbledygook report that his tech advisers surely handed them with the recommendation. They (the speechwriters) wouldn't know a formal language if one bit them on the ass either.
Comments aside, these two were good awards. Very fitting, and honestly later than these ladies deserved. It almost makes up for him sullying the awards by giving the same thing to a bunch of entertainers and other Hollywood pukes who will be forgotten five minutes after they die.
LOL. It is always funny hearing the outsider's view of things. I imagine this is what you commies feel like when I talk about the Democrat party. Well, except that Reagan would clearly be electable today as a Republican (notice that everyone spent the last year or so praying for Ronnie to inspire Trump from beyond the grave), while JFK wouldn't even recognize today's Democrat party, much less have a chance of being nominated by it.
Oh, and before anyone says anything stupid, go take a hard look at JFK's economic policy proposals, then Reagan's, then Trump's. It won't take long. They are nearly identical, all three.
And Barry was wrong about the future of the party. The preachers never took over. Look at the candidates since that quote: Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney, Trump. Romney is the only one that might be the first choice of "the preachers", except that he is Mormon.
Buckley led a crusade to kick undesirables out of the conservative movement, and thus the Republican Party, which left the country club faction in charge. The evangelicals had a strong enough minority that any candidates couldn't be overtly hostile to their interests. But they have never had enough pull to get candidates that were more than just nominally religious.
Who were the undesirables? Goldwater and his supporters first, then nationalists, and then gradually anyone left who was more interested in winning than in losing politely.
At any rate, "the preachers" probably would have done a better job. One can only hope that a candidate selected by "the preachers" wouldn't have sat idly by while the cult of Moloch grew from a handful of dark adherents hiding in the shadows to the single most powerful force int he Democrat party.
Link me a video and a time offset of those words coming out of his mouth. This should be very quick, since you say he said it "several times" and it sounds like you have one specific instance already in mind.
Standard Trump disclaimer here. I'm not interested in people writing a quote that he allegedly said. I'm also not interested in a video of someone else saying that he said it. I'm also not interested in a video of Trump saying something else that you have misinterpreted.
But I'm not going to try to wiggle out on a technicality - I will accept similar constructions such as "it would be against the law for me to release my taxes" or "IRS regulations prohibit me from releasing my taxes" or potentially many other variations.
But I also won't accept things like "I can't" or "they tell me I can't" unless it is absolutely crystal clear that "they" are the government, and not his lawyers, accountants, advisers, etc.
What I mean by "which are neither his taxes nor his tax returns" is that while the audits are ongoing, his tax returns and tax documents don't exist in any meaningful sense. Think of an audit notice from the IRS as official notification that the IRS does not agree that the documents you provided constitute your tax return. The audit itself is the process that you and the IRS follow together to generate your actual return. For you and I, it is a nightmare. For someone like him, it is just another boring negotiation. With that in mind, the only documents that he could possibly provide are effectively nothing more than his opening offer.
(If you had a hard time following that, any middle school course on logic should be able to clarify for you the difference between X and not-X and why you should be careful not to confuse them.)
So, no goalposts moved. And I've asked literally dozens of people to show me the video where he says this (or that all mexican are rapists, or that he hates gays or women or...) and so far, lots of personal attacks. No even a single link yet. But you might just be The One that the whole liberal world has been waiting for!
I probably shouldn't taunt you too hard. Trump did a LOT of rallies, and I only had time to watch a tiny fraction of the hours and hours and hours of video he generated over the last 18 months. Maybe, somewhere out there beyond even the reach of Google, there is a video of him actually saying it.
Why complicate things?
18 USC 47 - Fraud and False Statements
The Progressive wing of the Republican party is scared right now. Control of the party has shifted back to the much larger Conservative wing. That civil war is probably not over yet, but so far it appears that the conservatives have dealt a decisive, probably fatal, blow.
Meanwhile, the civil war in the Democrat party is just now heating up and will probably reach the shooting phase soon.
Under these conditions, and in light of the election results - not just the on the federal level, but also state and local - no one is going to try anything as dumb as sneaking through a treaty. Certainly not while there are still plenty of undecorated lampposts in DC.
Someone on the radio this morning was saying that it would be better to remove the incentives to stay, making the wall moot. Essentially, if illegals were unable to get jobs, get housing, open a bank account, etc - they would all depart, for free.
But that would only stop the people who were crossing illegally for economic reasons. True, that is the bulk of the people crossing, but not necessarily the bulk of the problems caused by the open border. Think drugs, terrorists, cartels, etc.
Clever use of the "net immigration from Mexico" scam. I'm guessing that tricks a lot of people that aren't aware that many (most?) people crossing our southern border are OTMs - Other Than Mexican. Net immigration to/from Mexico isn't the issue, net immigration through Mexico is.
Be careful with your investments man. Be ready to protect yourself from a downturn on short notice.
I've been a big Trump fan ever since he promised to build a wall during the announcement of his candidacy. But I don't believe that the globalists are defeated yet, and there are literally trillions of dollars at stake.
In my opinion, the current highs in the markets are not organic; someone is blowing a bubble. The goal is probably to draw you in, then burn you out so that they can blame the pain on Trump.
I know it sounds paranoid, but keep in mind that Lincoln, Kennedy, Reagan, and Trump all advocated similar economic policies: America first and anti-globalist.