Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I figured it was only a matter of time until this thread devolved into another trip beatdown thread.

∞∞∞ wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

Except we're not the ones attempting to kill the 2nd amendment, or rioting in the streets and attempting to change the rules when we don't get our way. Swing and a miss. Try again.

How 'bout gerrymandering, denying people the right to vote, shrinking the powers of incoming electees, stealing Supreme Court seats, sowing the seeds of doubt in the press, demonizing certain Americans, undermining investigative processes, valuing money and corporate interests over fellow Americans, and not seriously taking foreign interference on elections?

And that's just the attack on democracy; we can state the attacks on liberty if you want.

But hey, I'm sorry that shattered window really undermines your view of democracy.

Sounds like Illinois.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

kalm wrote:

89Hen wrote:Besides, who is a bigger threat to this country?

1. Old people who think the founding fathers had most of this figured out correctly 200+ years ago.

2. Young people that think they've actually figured out a way for socialism to succeed on a large scale.

Holy biased question, Batman!

Unless...I suppose you’re an anarchist who believes in no laws other than the constitution and zero advancement of society....

Sorry you don't like it.

89Hen wrote:

kalm wrote:
Holy biased question, Batman!

Unless...I suppose you’re an anarchist who believes in no laws other than the constitution and zero advancement of society....

Sorry you don't like it.

It’s not that I don’t like it but we can’t even settle on a definition of what socialism is and yet here you are reducing it to a binary question when socialism wasn’t hardly a concept at the writing of the constitution.

kalm wrote:

89Hen wrote: Sorry you don't like it.

It’s not that I don’t like it but we can’t even settle on a definition of what socialism is and yet here you are reducing it to binary question when socialism wasn’t hardly a concept at the writing of the constitution.

Don't stop him, he's on a roll.

∞∞∞ wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

Except we're not the ones attempting to kill the 2nd amendment, or rioting in the streets and attempting to change the rules when we don't get our way. Swing and a miss. Try again.

How 'bout gerrymandering, denying people the right to vote, shrinking the powers of incoming electees, stealing Supreme Court seats, sowing the seeds of doubt in the press, demonizing certain Americans, undermining investigative processes, valuing money and corporate interests over fellow Americans, and not seriously taking foreign interference on elections?

And that's just the attack on democracy; we can state the attacks on liberty if you want.

But hey, I'm sorry that shattered window really undermines your view of democracy.

What in the living fuck!?! Most of those were and still are mastered my the democrats!
Take a look at Maryland Congressional districts for Allah's sake!

Grizalltheway wrote:

kalm wrote:
It’s not that I don’t like it but we can’t even settle on a definition of what socialism is and yet here you are reducing it to binary question when socialism wasn’t hardly a concept at the writing of the constitution.

Don't stop him, he's on a roll.

kalm wrote:

89Hen wrote: Sorry you don't like it.

It’s not that I don’t like it but we can’t even settle on a definition of what socialism is and yet here you are reducing it to a binary question when socialism wasn’t hardly a concept at the writing of the constitution.

The only reason we can't settle on the definition is that the left wants to pretend they've come up with new definition so as to not appear to be proponents of it.

∞∞∞ wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

Except we're not the ones attempting to kill the 2nd amendment, or rioting in the streets and attempting to change the rules when we don't get our way. Swing and a miss. Try again.

How 'bout gerrymandering, denying people the right to vote, shrinking the powers of incoming electees, stealing Supreme Court seats, sowing the seeds of doubt in the press, demonizing certain Americans, undermining investigative processes, valuing money and corporate interests over fellow Americans, and not seriously taking foreign interference on elections?

And that's just the attack on democracy; we can state the attacks on liberty if you want.

But hey, I'm sorry that shattered window really undermines your view of democracy.

There is a lot to unpack here. So let me start with:

Gerrymandering

See: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... 5f94b6b283

denying people the right to vote

This is interesting. The DNC rigged the primary system for HRC. How about the Black panther Party intimidating voters?

demonizing certain Americans

See: basket of deplorables

valuing money and corporate interests

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abscam. There are plenty of Democrats that have been bribed or corrupted by industry. This is one of my favorite examples: https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... -need.html or https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... story.html

not seriously taking foreign interference on elections

See: Obama administration not doing anything when it found out about Russian interference



You get where i'm going with this. You have got to stop thinking the Democrats are the only ones that play by the rules. IMO, we can't have an honest discussion until you agree that the Democrats are as corrupt ass the GOP. You act like the Democratic Party doesn't engage in nefarious or "un-democratic" activities.

89Hen wrote:

kalm wrote:
It’s not that I don’t like it but we can’t even settle on a definition of what socialism is and yet here you are reducing it to a binary question when socialism wasn’t hardly a concept at the writing of the constitution.

The only reason we can't settle on the definition is that the left wants to pretend they've come up with new definition so as to not appear to be proponents of it.

Capitalism and socialism are economic terms neither of which shows up in the constitution (to go back to your post in question).

We are a mixed market economy like all of the rest of the developed world.

Socialism is just a big scary word.......

kalm wrote:

89Hen wrote: The only reason we can't settle on the definition is that the left wants to pretend they've come up with new definition so as to not appear to be proponents of it.

Capitalism and socialism are economic terms neither of which shows up in the constitution (to go back to your post in question).

We are a mixed market economy like all of the rest of the developed world.

Socialism is just a big scary word.......

There are LOTS of words that aren't in the Constitution. I'd guess there are more words that aren't in it, than are in it. The basic tenet of capitalism is a free market. It's people like Trip (and apparently you) that think that because the word "capitalism" isn't in the Constitution that we shouldn't be "stuck" with it.

89Hen wrote:

kalm wrote:
Capitalism and socialism are economic terms neither of which shows up in the constitution (to go back to your post in question).

We are a mixed market economy like all of the rest of the developed world.

Socialism is just a big scary word.......

There are LOTS of words that aren't in the Constitution. I'd guess there are more words that aren't in it, than are in it. The basic tenet of capitalism is a free market. It's people like Trip (and apparently you) that think that because the word "capitalism" isn't in the Constitution that we shouldn't be "stuck" with it.

I'm perfectly fine with capitalism. I believe in the upward mobility, competition, and innovation it creates when regulated properly and democratic.

kalm wrote:I'm perfectly fine with capitalism. I believe in the upward mobility, competition, and innovation it creates when regulated properly and democratic.

This.

For some reason they think regulatory protections and better benefits is "socialism."

∞∞∞ wrote:

kalm wrote:I'm perfectly fine with capitalism. I believe in the upward mobility, competition, and innovation it creates when regulated properly and democratic.

This.

For some reason they think regulatory protections and better benefits is "socialism."

You act like these don’t exist.

∞∞∞ wrote:

kalm wrote:I'm perfectly fine with capitalism. I believe in the upward mobility, competition, and innovation it creates when regulated properly and democratic.

This.

For some reason they think regulatory protections and better benefits is "socialism."

89Hen wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote: This.

For some reason they think regulatory protections and better benefits is "socialism."

They can only work in Iceland.

Who said this...

I think capitalism and socialism work in a cycle. Capitalism naturally turns into socialism and socialism naturally turns into capitalism, and each has its benefits and its flaws. Right now, I think that the US is in a natural transition from capitalism to socialism (and each system works within the Constitution). For you and I, the concept of socialism is very taboo. For our grandchildren, the concept of capitalism might be very taboo. It's all relative to the mindset of the society at the time.

AZGrizFan wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote: This.

For some reason they think regulatory protections and better benefits is "socialism."

You act like these don’t exist.

I appreciate the United States because it's truly better than most societies, past and present.

It can be better though, both in terms of social justice and economic mobility. Other societies have implemented great ideas to achieve such items and there's no shame in emulating them.

89Hen wrote:Who said this...

I think capitalism and socialism work in a cycle. Capitalism naturally turns into socialism and socialism naturally turns into capitalism, and each has its benefits and its flaws. Right now, I think that the US is in a natural transition from capitalism to socialism (and each system works within the Constitution). For you and I, the concept of socialism is very taboo. For our grandchildren, the concept of capitalism might be very taboo. It's all relative to the mindset of the society at the time.

Me. And?

∞∞∞ wrote:It can be better though, both in terms of social justice and economic mobility. Other societies have implemented great ideas to achieve such items and there's no shame in emulating them.

You just love to tiptoe, don't you?

89Hen wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote:It can be better though, both in terms of social justice and economic mobility. Other societies have implemented great ideas to achieve such items and there's no shame in emulating them.

You just love to tiptoe, don't you?

I really don't have time to list everything...again.

It's not like I haven't made my views perfectly clear over the years.

I recall you still haven't answered if a woman should be charged with murder for an abortion...

∞∞∞ wrote:

89Hen wrote: You just love to tiptoe, don't you?

I really don't have time to list everything...again.

It's not like I haven't made my views perfectly clear over the years.

I recall you still haven't answered if a woman should be charged with murder for an abortion...

You have made them perfectly clear, but then you turn around and deny your true colors.

Abortion out of left field?

∞∞∞ wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
You act like these don’t exist.

I appreciate the United States because it's truly better than most societies, past and present.

It can be better though, both in terms of social justice and economic mobility. Other societies have implemented great ideas to achieve such items and there's no shame in emulating them.

There is if its going to bankrupt us. Until we’re not the world’s policeman anymore your blatherings are moot.

We live in a society that has a faction that wants to tear down our economic system. And those factions have to be defended against by men with guns. Who’s going to do it? Socialists like you, dipshit trip? You, one-nut klammy? The US has a greater responsibility than you can even fathom. You have the luxury of not knowing what capitalists know. That socialism’s demise, while tragic (in your eyes) has saved millions of lives. And capitalism’s existence, while grotesque and imperfect, greatly improves lives. You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want a capitalist economy. You need a capitalist economy. Capitalists use words like free market, private ownership, competition...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent making something. You use 'em as a punchline. Capitalists have neither the time nor the inclination to explain themselves to dipshits who rise and sleep under the blanket of the very free market prosperity capitalism provides, then question the manner in which capitalism provides it! True Americans would rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, we suggest you pick up a textbook and take an economics class. Either way, we don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

89Hen wrote:Abortion out of left field?

Just revealing your hypocrisy about the tip-toe claim. Maybe one day you'll answer the question...

∞∞∞ wrote:

89Hen wrote:Abortion out of left field?

Just revealing your hypocrisy about the tip-toe claim. Maybe one day you'll answer the question...

Yes, after the 16th week.